Russia's EMP hits Ukraine

 

Nine months into the war between Russia and Ukraine, and to say it has been topsy turvy would be an understatement. Russia began the attack on Ukraine with a five-pronged assault, which was clearly aimed at forcing the Ukrainian government into a quick capitulation on Russian terms. However, Russia picked the wrong time of the year to go on the offensive which, when combined with western anti-armor missiles and satellite intelligence proved to be the impediments to Russia's victory.

Russia's war on Ukraine has been akin to "what not to do" when invading a foreign country. A very crucial mistake by the Russian military was forgoing an air campaign against Ukraine's air force, air defence units and critical infrastructure like the bridges over the Dnieper River. The winter weather in February meant   Russian armor and mechanized infantry, along with truck-borne supply lines, were road-bound and sitting ducks for Ukraine's newly acquired shoulder-fired anti-armor missiles.  

Things quickly bogged down, and in short order Russia was having to conduct fighting withdrawals around Kiev, Sumy, Kharkov and areas. The undermanned gamble turned into the undermanned being exposed. New lines of defence were shortened to give out numbered Russian troops a fighting chance at holding what they had left. Unfortunately, even that was too much ground for them to defend, and subsequent withdrawals were needed in Kherson and Kharkiv. Essentially, this was a military disaster born of political strategy rather than sound military strategy. It has all the hall marks of Russian President Putin's thinking at the time - treat Ukraine nicely as they are brother Slavs and brotherly nations. So much for brotherly love. 

That brings us too today. Having crossed the Dnieper River, and feeling safe there, Russians have dug in to defend their land bridge to Crimea. On the Donetsk/Lugansk fronts the Russians and Ukrainians are trading moistly fruitless attacks all along the front. Ukraine appears to be transferring freed up units from the Kherson front to the Zaporozhye front. It appears they are preparing an assault aimed at taking back Melitopol and Mariupol, thus severing Russia's land bridge to Crimea, and gaining their access back to the Azoz Sea. It is a tall order, especially as winter begins to set in, but being audacious hasn't tied the hands of Ukrainian commanders so far. 

The Russians, for their part, seem to be considering doing what they ought to have done in the first place - an air campaign. The "Coalition of the Willing" bombed Iraq for 30 days before sending a single unit into the fray. Now Russia is doing the same in retrospect - having already suffered the losses which an air campaign is meant to avoid. The interesting part of Russia's strategy has been targeting Ukraine's electrical system. As of this date, the Ukrainian government claims 50% of its electrical systems have been destroyed. Replacement parts to rebuild these systems can take up to ten months to manufacture. It's a recipe for disaster for Ukraine.

Every person that lives in a country with harsh winter understands that without energy you cannot sustain life. It doesn't end there. Ukraine can evacuate its population to Europe, but what it can't do is save its infrastructure. Namely, without heat all the plumbing, water and sewer, will freeze solid over the winter. Homes will be ruined, businesses will be destroyed, water and sewer plants will be left useless, and Ukraine will become a ghost land. What the Russian missile campaign has managed to do is roughly the equivalent of an EMP strike without the nuclear detonation. If Russia continues its campaign to completely destroy Ukraine's power system, and in the process destroys the infrastructure necessary for modern life, then the result is the country of Ukraine is a vast, vacant land with no ability to reconstitute itself without Russia.

Furthermore, the tens of millions of Ukrainians that will have no choice but to evacuate Ukraine will flood Europe, which is already desperately rationing power for its own citizens, resulting in an economic shock to Europe and possibly the world. The effect on the battlefield will be just as devastating. Troops will lack the basics to heat and feed themselves. Supply lines for just the basics will stretch across Ukraine and into Europe - a recipe for disaster. Many people in the general public do not understand just how close to the abyss Ukraine is right now. Not unlike Russia in the early days of the conflict, people see Ukraine as walking over the Russians. However, not unlike Russia in the early days of the war, Ukraine is becoming overstretched given the collapse of its infrastructure and the march of "General Winter".

A number of sources have been suggesting that Russia has given Ukraine an ultimatum: Get to the negotiation table by the end of November or have the last of your electrical infrastructure destroyed. Effectively, get to the negotiation table or have your country sent back to stone ages. A daunting choice indeed. Ukraine has apparently responded to this strategy with a kamikaze-like strategy of its own - missile strikes on the Russian controlled nuclear plant at Zaporozhye which, if the plant is damaged, would have the effect of a nuclear strike with deadly radiation spreading over the region - including Russia. When it gets down to it, both countries are upping the ante to a nuclear war without the nukes. This is where it's at with nine days left in November as Ukraine begins to slowly freeze over.

War in North Korea?

I said some time ago (years actually) that the United States is facing two choices: war with China; or surrender of its position as global financial king. Two stark choices with no grey area. Why? That answer is a little more complicated.

Since the Berlin Wall fell in the 90's the Chinese have adopted a deliberate policy to out play the Americans at their own game - capitalism. Essentially, the Chinese are mimicking the path the US took to super power status. Firstly, they became very disciplined and kept their cost of production of goods and services to the bare bone, thereby capturing the lion's share of global manufacturing trade. Secondly, they stayed out of wars. Security for China became a gradual building of their military capabilities without the expense of fighting wars in the process. Thirdly, they became a lender to nations all over the world, thus spreading their political and economic influence to the point they are indispensable. Much like the early American policies of industrialization, free trade, open seas, and non-interventionism. Now China is what the US used to be, and the US has become what the British Empire was. We all know what happened to the Empire.

China's dominant financial position globally has allowed it to lead in the development of BRICS, Eurasia, and its own version of the IMF. In other words, the Chinese, along with Russia have turned the world economic, and therefore political, order on its head. The US is now attempting to pivot. US encouragement of Britain exiting the EU is a good example. The US is  desperately trying to  create a viable trading bloc to counter Eurasia/BRICS. It is apparent that their answer is a British Commonwealth 2.0 -  ie: US, Canada, Britain, Australia, etc. In a strange little clue, former Vice-President Biden, after making his final remarks on the make election loss, whispered "God save the Queen" as he walked from a still live mike. The truth is that no combination of countries can stand up to the resources, demographics, etc of the combined Eurasia/BRICS.

The US has had some successes putting dents in BRICS though. Most notably in South America. The pro-Russian leaderships in Brazil and Argentina have been replace by more western oriented leaders. Also, the President of South Africa is under intense pressure to resign, including resignation of his finance minister. So far that hasn't worked, and South Africa has a new finance minister. While these are victories for the US, and have somewhat stymied the Chinese/Russian momentum, they are no where near enough to hobble Eurasia.

The real dent in the Eurasian shield, however, must be made in China. That brings us North Korea - China's proverbial guard dog on its southern border. Trump has offered the Chinese a carrot and stick approach on North Korea. If the Chinese denuclearize North Korea the US will offer it better trade terms and not label it a currency manipulator.(which is closer to blackmail, because either you are a currency manipulator or you aren't) The Chinese, having just seen the stick approach offered to Russia in Syria, are taking the Americans seriously. They have a mutual defence pact with North Korea, as does Russia. An attack on one is an attack on all. That's why 150,000 Chinese troops have been moved to the border with North Korea. Russia has also stockpiled troops on its small border with North Korea. They are there to defend North Korea should it be required, and not to stem refugees as the western media has been playing it.

Meanwhile the Americans are moving a carrier strike group to the shores off North Korea. In addition, new intelligence has a total of two other aircraft carriers joining the group within the next ten days - about the time joint US/South Korean forces finish their massive annual war games. The US also has positioned massive air power at its various bases throughout the region.

The question is: Will all this result in war. The answer is yes. It is not a matter of North Koreas nuclear program, or Syria's "rabid dictator", or Russia's "meddling" in Europe, or China's "sea grab" in the South China Sea. No it's not any of these things. They are just stuff to spin to get the US people worked up and scared. The reason is Empire - either there will be one or their won't. The US simply cannot allow itself to lose at the economic game it set up. The only way to stop that is to create a world war that defeats China and Russia, but mostly China. After that, if there is a world left, the US will redraw the economic rules once again to keep them on top. While China and Russia stockpile gold, either to underpin their currencies or to pay for a major war, the US maintains the same course of ruinous debt, now even moving to strip the only real safeguards from their securities markets - a safeguard designed to stop a repeat of the Great Depression. So, if you've been thinking the world has been on its head, and kind of crazy the last while, well that's a reasonable interpretation of the chaos caused by the moves underway.

Nobody can say with certainty what will happen when the "Great American Armada" approaches North Korea. Traditionally, armadas haven't faired well in this kind of scenario. The North Koreans did give a bit of a hint though. During their massive military parade to honour the "Day of the Sun" the speaker stated North Korea will use its "own style" of nuclear war if necessary. One has to interpret that as an unconventional use of nuclear weapons. It may well be that the missiles and launching platforms paraded last weekend are a bit of a ruse. North Korea is well adept at deception. It may well be something far simpler, which the US may not be able to neutralize easily with their own missiles. Perhaps tunneling or submarines acting as delivery vehicles, rather than missiles. After all, how hard would it be for North Korea to retrofit some of its subs with a nuclear war head making them the delivery vehicles. A sub only has to get so close off shore to detonate itself and destroy an American city without launching a single missile. Ditto for the American Armada. A sub close by detonates and takes the works down. Three aircraft carriers is a real tempting target for them. So are we heading for war in North Korea, and elsewhere? The answer is yes. Unfortunately, the Americans are unable to accept the consequences of being economically outplayed, and are willing to take the whole house down with them. My sole hope is that technological superiority on one side or the other will prevent total waste being wrought over our planet.

Russia's Battle Plan

As the last 3 weeks have ground on it has become clear that Russia's primary objective in Ukraine is two-fold: Firstly it is to over throw the over throwers in Ukraine; ans secondly it is territorial. For the last three weeks the Russians have applied a "Chinese water torture" type of strategy. They could have occupied Crimea and captured or destroyed the Ukrainian ships and garrisons there within a day if they wanted to. Instead they slowly enveloped the bases, blockaded the ships, and reinforced - at a snail's pace. What does that do? It prolongs the suffering. Instead of a quick execution, the Russians are in effect torturing Ukraine. They are destabilizing the country and at the same time paralyzing the West.

The point of this post is how what will be the territorial objectives of Russia in Ukraine and how will they execute. There has been a great amount of spin from both sides about Ukraine's unity. One side says there is total unity, and the other says the country is divided along linguistic lines. Below are some maps that give you an idea how Ukraine breaks down geographically:

The 2004 election:

 

The 2006 election:

The 2007 election:

The trend is pretty clear, Ukraine is a country divided at least politically. Then consider the linguistic breakdown of Ukraine:

It's very clear that Ukrainians are divided politically by the language of origin. That goes along way in explaining why the first act of the new Ukrainian parliament was to remove Russian as an official language of Ukraine.

Not as important as territory, but still an important factor to the Russians, is the booty that an invasion of Ukraine can yield. Here is a look at the industrial assets of Ukraine:

Mines,oil, gas fields, and coal:

  

 You will note that the vast majority of Ukraine's developed natural resources are in the east and southeast of Ukraine.

Nuclear facilities:

You will note here that 75% of Ukraine's nuclear generation capabilities are located in the east and south east of Ukraine - while the disabled Chernobyl is just in the western boundary.

Then consider the military defence of Ukraine. Even its military commands are broken down in a similar fashion:

Bottom line - Ukraine is divided along linguistic, political, economic, and even military command lines.

The Ukrainian military forces are laid out:

Ukrainian military bases are laid out:

Ukrainian Air Defense bases are laid out:

Ukraine's highway system:

Although Ukraine's military is somewhat spread through the country, most of its strategic forces are located in the western portion of the country. This could better preserve them from immediate Russian attack in the east and southeast, but leaves the both very vulnerable to quick Russian occupation.

Strategically, militarily, economically and politically Ukraine is exposed to occupation and separation in its south and east. The question is whether Russia will decide to take these areas to support its goal of territorial buffer zones with the West. The logical conclusion, given Russia's military and political moves is yes. 

The first move was securing the Crimea. This takes care of a number of issues for Russia. Firstly, it allows Russia to transfer the S-300 and 400 air superiority missile systems into Crimea, bringing all of south east Ukraine into their range. That allows Russia to clear Ukrainian skies of any airborne threats - such as planes, helicopters, and missiles of all types. Russia achieves immediate air superiority. Taking the Crimea, and blockading the majority of Ukraine's fleet in port, clears the way for amphibious operations against areas like Odessa that would otherwise be compromised by a large naval presence. Finally, Crimea flanks eastern Ukraine, creates a second front, and gives the Russians a secure start line for a southern invasion. Therefore, I see Crimea as a necessary piece in the invasion puzzle, and not as a "crown jewel" that Russia has craved to own.

The second move has been positioning and battle drilling troops along Ukraine's eastern border. For a military that has not seen conflict of any serious scope for a generation, preparation is crucial to success. Military reports indicate that Russian airborne forces have been deployed in Crimea and along the eastern Ukraine border. The strength reported is divisional, and is likely the 7th Guards Airborne Division normally situate in the Moscow area. Also, light armored personal carriers (APC's) and tanks, designed for the airborne to be dropped with them, have been sighted on transport trains headed into the area, and on the roads - also headed to the eastern Ukraine border. This element is crucial. 

There are a number of bridges in south east Ukraine that would need to be secured prior to advancing armor and infantry arriving. If the Russians don't secure these, an advance could get bogged down behind rivers. Expect to see airborne drops east of Odessa all the way to just north of Crimea, and along the Dnipro River which separates eastern and western Ukraine. This will serve the dual purpose of securing bridges for advancing troops and trapping elements of the Ukrainian military placed in the east for defence.

Armor will be a big factor in this action, as will APCs. Ukraine has vast plains suited perfectly for fast tank warfare and fast moving mechanized infantry. The Russians have moved vast numbers of tanks and APC's to the eastern border. Look for the Russians to send armor columns to Kharkov, Donetsk,  Luhansk,  Zaporizhia, Dnipropetrovsk, Poltava, and possibly Kiev. 

The south east Ukraine will see more artillery, air, mechanized infantry, marine and airborne operations. The geography of the area, and the closeness to naval and air bases in Crimea, make these options ideal for the capture of Odessa and the south east.

The occupation of east and south east Ukraine will take less than a week. When it's over everything will have changed. Ukraine, on top of its already dire economic circumstance, will have lost a vast majority of its natural resources. Its electric power grid will be significantly diminished. It will be land locked and half the size it was. Its military will be either destroyed or captured. Its civilian population will be in a state of chaos, and the Russians will likely achieve their goal of removing this group from power. That could allow them to leave.

Or, they could stay. If the Russians stayed they would have created a land locked buffer zone between them and NATO. Significantly, they would surround what's left of Ukraine on three sides - making it permanently weak. In addition, they would completely control the Black Sea, and solidify themselves between Turkey and the rest of NATO. 

Economic sanctions are not a factor in this equation. Russia has the lowest debt ratio to GDP of any of the actors, and any of its moves will cause chaos in western economies beyond the scale Russia could be affected. It is not the oligarchs in Russia that decide if Putin stays or goes. It's the other way around. Banking on this would be wishful thinking. Whether Russia stays or goes in Ukraine depends on whether it wants to re-position strategically or whether it wants to alter the world economic order at this time. Personally, I lean to a Russian occupation of the east and south east, with some areas choosing to join Russia permanently. An occupation gives Russia so many tools to influence world events that it is almost irresistible to the chess playing bunch down at the Kremlin.