The responsibility for escalation is not on the US. We did not invade Russia. If Putin escalates that is all on him. NATO countries have never placed millions of troops on their borders like Russia did pre-invasion, so the idea that escalation would be NATOs fault is laughable. Maybe he should stop shelling cities indiscriminately.
You are completely delusional. Yet another important aspect resulting from NATO expansion: Missile trajectory flight times. True, there are other NATO members close to Russia's borders, but not as close as Ukraine. If missiles were launched at Moscow from Mid to Eastern launch sites in Ukraine, the flight times would be in minutes. With adoption of hypersonic tech, the flight times are reduced yet again. This is a genuine security concern for the Russians and is the basis for the argument presented by John Mearsheimer that Ukraine should be a neutral, independent nation (as much as is feasible), benefiting from the economies of both the EU and Russia, and a buffer between NATO and Russia. But of course, the U.S. elites ( Kagan, Nuland, Blinken, etc.) that determine its aggressive imperialist foreign policy will never accept such a logical solution. Because their plan is to use Ukraine as a proxy to weaken Russia, break it's economy (BTW, that's not working) and then conquer Russia. They plan to do the same thing to China, using Taiwan as a proxy. The problem with these grand Neocon empire plans? The U.S. economy is in serious trouble, 30 trillion in debt, hyperinflation, political unrest with no true solution in sight, sanction backfires, and many other internal-rot problems. The U.S. empire has made one overextended, painful blunder after another for decades, and these attempts to fight with Russia and China will be the last of its blunders before it collapses. As it is with all empires, they rise, become delusional about the extent of their power, and they fall. The risk now, in a nuclear warfare scenario, is when this empire falls, it will take the entire planet with it.
NATO already gone too far...it is their fault..even i am big fan of Ukraine, i still think NATO made wrong moves for years now...all controlled by USA...
@@andrehunter1295 Mearsheimer completely ignores Ukraine's right to self-determination. He only sees the world from the point of view of geopolitics where smaller countries are just pawns on a chess board.
Mobilisation does not automatically give Putin a tick for winning in Ukraine unless he is thinking of carrying on the war for years - something that would be unpopular in Russia. Conscripted military personnel need equipment, logistics, training, leadership plus money. There will be old Soviet equipment in storage, but apart from that his resources are limited. Russia’s GDP is about the same as Canada’s, and shrinking, so the ability to suddenly deploy a large modern military just is not there.
Good point. The benefits of mobilisation is way off in time, if at all possible. One question here is how well informed Putin is *now* about the state of his forces. (He clearly didn't have a totally accurate picture before the invasion, though the greater failure of information was sure wrt Ukranian sentiments.) I've been really uneasy about these western predictions of declaration of war and mobilisation of Victory Day. Now I'm much less so, because it just doesn't make sense. Except maybe if planned as a short-lived PR move, ie the goal would be a national rallying NOT actually building up and using a greater military capability (which would take years to gain). But IF he does this, then he would be in a hurry to end to war.
Russia's GDP is rather less than Canada's. Before the war started it was about the same as Florida's; it will be less now. Anything close to full mobilisation will hugely damage an already withering Russian economy. They can't sustain the war they have now, let alone a full mobilisation.
@@malcaniscsm5184 As a Canadian, I have to point out that, while you are correct in terms of nominal GDP, in terms of purchasing power parity Russia is closer to France in real GDP.
I am always interested in hearing multiple perspectives on the Ukrainian war. Your analysis is thoughtful and balanced. Keep it up and your audience will grow. Thank you
I think the entire premise of this video relies on the idea that it’s Putin’s war and the rest of Russia is against it. This is the exact opposite of what the American Ambassador to Russia had said, list also includes Angela Merkel and pretty much every international relations expert says. If anything Putin is losing popularity for ‘not going hard enough’ in Ukraine. Also think he’s jumping the gun on calling this war a victory for Ukraine. Russia only has 150,000 troops in Ukraine and with that they have taken and held territory that’s responsible for 80% of Ukraines GNP, this includes major ports, nuclear plants and industries. The 300,000 partially mobilized are yet to arrive so it’s too early to say what’s going to happen but if we were bet on this I think Ukraine has about 5% chance of winning this militarily. The stated objective of US is not to beat Russia but to weaken Russia. “This has united entire Russia across the political spectrum, from the most pro-western liberal elites to the knuckle draggers in the deepest recesses of the Kremlin, Ukraine joining NATO is the brightest of red lines for all Russians.” Former US Ambassador to Russia after 2008 NATO Bucharest Summit. “Russia will never allow it (Ukraine Joining NATO) and it will lead to war”. Angela Merkel commenting on the same Summit.
Not much anymore after september, after they do mobilization but still remain in special operation mode. And no win even with it. And no acceptance of defeat too. Its either win in any form like taking Donbass or lose of powe
He’s desperate but he is also trying to leverage support eliciting Palestine …. Which has currency…..it is a Russian version of trump’s “we have bad ppl too”……plus I would not be surprised Russians are somehow helping Bibi along with GOP
@@ptonpc yes. After angering Serbia, they now did it with Israel. I am mulling over the way they might anger Hungary. With Orban it will be very difficult but Lavrov might just find a way 😁
@@ptonpc Not even considering the fact that Israel holds licencing rights over a lot of anti-tank and anti-air tech and now might be much more hesitant in stopping NATO countries sending a few of I don't know Spike LR or NLOS systems mounted on IMVs over. Expecting Russians can just shittalk Israel that would just take it in the ass was a unwise idea, because the whole Israeli defense policy is based on punishing any threat, however small, it is called the "fighting between wars" policy.
Would love if you did updates on these early topics following the rapid changes over the recent months, Ukraines gains on the grounds, gas pipe destroyed, mobilisation etc
You are right but there are some caveats to consider though: 1) Low fertility rate (the same or similar to the one of the West) means that making a general mobilization will hurt Russian families WAY MORE than in the past. It is NOT “I give one of my sons to the nation, to mother Russia”, it is (for most families) “I give MY ONLY SON to mother Russia” and that could be intolerable. In poor countries the young are the only hope. 2) Related: Russia (as well as the West) is a country of old people and old people don’t build the future. And Russia is not quite open to (not ethnic Russian) immigration. Losing their youth (whether to war or emigration) has a compounding cost that has no fixing, no matter what. 3) Old people are MAINLY the supporter or (old) Putin: all these old people’s need to be happy is some food, a minimal pension (the already quite miserable one), barely some healthcare, some old TV where they can entertain themselves until they finally die. YOUNG people, on the other hand, have way more aspirations and dreams: THEY SAW the quality of life of the West, they have seen and consumed western media and art, they know that life is more than a bowl of meager food, they saw technologies that can improve their life quality, etc. Young people won’t settle with a Russian flag as consolation for their misery. 4) Related: Thus, Putin supporters (oligarchs, honchos, “voters” etc.) are getting older and not precisely brighter, they may control the buttons but sooner than later the younger wolves will be scratching the doors to see who’s weak and who’s dying. 5) This war will make current Russian akin to that of Yeltsin's times: this is something that NOT EVEN old Russians will forgive because (as I mentioned) that would make hard to maintain even their meager livelihood. Young people won’t be able to provide either. The whole social fabric will enter a crisis. Patriotism doesn't fill stomachs. 6) Related: weapons don’t fix themselves, they don’t repair themselves, the equipment maintenance is expensive, NUCLEAR WEAPONS do need maintenance too: the whole barking (but no bite) could be harder to believe. You can’t have a failed economy and at the same time keep a huge army and functioning arsenal. At best what you could do is make your whole country a concentration camp a la North Korea but even then, that doesn’t give you technology or the numbers.
Your first point is exactly the same as Chy-na is facing as a result of their long time "one child" policy. That created overprotective parents who spoiled their only child. They even have a name for this, "Little Emperor Syndrome". Only the "losers" join the PLA which itself is nothing but a CCP armed force divided by factional distrust. Everything action has consequences and that's why a solid understanding of history is so important but yet history is so ignored or twisted by propaganda.
All your other points make great sense. Even North Korea's regime could NOT exist without under the table help from Chy-na. I've read that Putin's heroes are Stalin and Peter the Great. Stalin aside, Peter the Great also had imperialist expansion ideas but he knew how primitive the entire Russian nation was and Russia would go nowhere without "Westernization". He seems far more tuned into building up the people's lot in life which in turn benefits the nation/empire as a whole. Putin on the other hand, along with his Korrupt KGB Kronies, are more interested in maintaining mega billionaire lifestyles which need harsh population control to keep the cash coming into their korrupt pockets. Its really a mafia operation from top to bottom. They operate in the same manner like peas in a pod.
Imagine China's two neighbours are both the same, failed North Korea and failed Russia. Their blackness of night compared with all the lights on across Western Europe and North America. Both neighbours starving and defenceless.
Its interesting that you can listen to this several months later and its still mostly relevant, thing yas just been grinding on with more death and suffering
A great analysis. I agree with 100% of the things said. I miss two point however. 1. Using nukes in ukraine will not improve the tacitical situation much. Of course you can use them to hit ukranian cities. But this will not reduce their capability to resist. It will just piss everyone off really bad. Normally you use tactical nukes to hit large enemy troop concentration. Ukraine has making sure since the beginning of the war that they do not provide these kind of targets, they disperse their forces. Because these would also be a good target for the russian airforce. They can use them to create a break trough to advance, but than they will face counter attacks on their supply lines like in the north. And they will end up in a worse position than now. You kind of brushed at the topic. There is a non written but till very powerful ban on using nuclear weapons since 1945. No nuclear power ever used them. This is not out of some ethics. It simple game theory. If you use nuclear weapons against a non nuclear country all other countries wil be like: "I need nukes or this can happen to me, too." This would lead to a much more wide spread of these weapons. And by so decreasing the tactical and strategical advantage of having them, while increasing the risk of nuclear war dramatically. And after all: Most people, goverments included like to live. So it is an overall loss for all nuclear powers. If russia does that, not only is it likely for NATO to directly engage conventionally. Russia will also face retaliation from india and china. These will just be economical but, will hit hard. And no: China and russia are not allies. If you believe that you need to look deeper than propaganda press conferences. 2. I struggle to see how bringing in conscripts in ukraine will win the war. A press channel of Wagner Group declared they need 800.000 soldiers to win the war. This is comming down to a 20 soldiers per 1000 citiziens theory of a study from RAND. So congrats they have learned basic math now. However this is a equation used for a country that offers minimal civilian resistance. Everyone thinking this applies to ukraine has not been paying attention. They would need more, much more. And they need to be equipped and trained, which leads to the next desaster. Even now russia send in soldiers with rifles out of world war 2. On paper russia has 10.000 tanks in reserve but nobody modernized or maintained them since 1990. So good luck on making them combat ready under sanctions. For example the modern target optics in the T72 is made in france. They can not equip their troops properly. Next thing is training level. We see that even their professianls troops lack training. Their conscript struggle at basic infantry skills. And there is no active reserve in russia like it is in NATO countries. The term "reserve" means that you finsihed your military service after 2013. You did not receive any training since then. Expecting these unifromed civilians to figth the ukrainian army and later an insurgency is outrigth stupid. The russian could just shoot them themselfs. Same result, quicker done. And increasing troop number will increase the strain on logistics. They struggle to supply their 150k troops now. The thought they could supply 4 times that number is ridicolous. And rigth now russia looses about 1 billion per year of their reserves. This willincrease cost by a factor of 3 or 5. Putin could pay for it for a year maybe. If ukrain decide to figth longer than this, what then? He can' t borrow money due to sanctions.
Using small tactical nukes is still option for putin but only goal would be scare tactic to stop and divide western allies. Not enough for nuclear war but powerfull message
There is the problem of radiation too. It spreads like wild fire. The us of nukes could force NATO to intrrvine for the sake of there own defense. For example, during Chernobyl, there was talk of radiation spreading to the water supply of neighbor countries. Also, the radiation would spread to the troops who have to move through the front lines. Say they use tactical nukes in donbas. Their troops would be exposed as well, which would piss off the families in Russia. Also, say they nuke Kiev. Seems like the city is living underground, so how effective could that be? It's not really practical but honestly this entire war wasn't practical from the start.
"logical explanation" Unfortunately these dictatorships are not logical. With the propaganda machine they have, they can brain wash their people into anything.
This analysis really resonated with me. It was unbiased, non-emotional, objective and logical. Makes a lot of sense without being sensational. Great video!
Anders Puck Nielsen is a Military analyst at the Defense Academy Centre for Maritime Operations in Denmark, and used to be Commanding Officer of the DIANA-class patrol boats for the Royal Danish Navy, so not really the usual UA-camr, but a highly knowable analyst in his field, and as far away from network journalism as you can possible get.
Andres, you have a mastery of understanding of the Russian mindset and of the ongoing issues in the Russo-Ukrainian War. Thank you for this thoughtful piece.
Thank you for your well thought out analysis. This is a breath of fresh air after all the none-sense being spread by both the pro Russian and pro Ukrainian talking heads.
I think your priorities and their order is a good representation. A question is: Can "Putin Keep power in Russia" if Putin does not achieve "Winning in Ukraine"? Losing the war in Ukraine may cause Putin to be ousted. I doubt if the world (USA and Ukraine mostly) can allow Russia to look like they won the war (consider China-Taiwan and Russian re-invading other countries)
A very interesting analysis. Putin could, indeed, spin defeat as a victory back home ('We've consolidated our annexation of Crimea, ensured the neutrality of Ukraine and wiped out the Azov 'Nazis' in Donbas' etc.). However, if he thinks that everything will then go back to normal with sanctions lifted and Russia welcomed back into the fold of international relations, he's very much mistaken. With Putin at the helm, Russia's economic decline and political isolation will continue and Russians will begin to question the wisdom of the 'special operation' when their standard of living drops further long after a ceasefire has been declared. Moreover, I feel it's unlikely that what Putin (even in 'defeat') would consider the minimum concessions from Ukraine would be what Zelensky is willing to concede in what would be a genuine victory. Putin might well create his own 'off-ramp', but Zelensky may be the one to blow it up!
Mark, you're not necessarily looking at this right. We've given up on the Russians, but they have given up on us too. They don't want to return to the status quo. They want a Eurasian bloc.
man we need their oil and gas so bad in Europe, if Russia call the soldiers back, says they are sorry,send Putin in retirement and pay something to Ukraine to rebuild, we'll become best buddies again in no time...
@@watchlover7750 I believe Europe would probably do trade again if Putin is gone, but hopefully learn from the mistakes and reduce dependency on Russian oil and gas, but I don't believe the Russians won't send Putin to retirement. Russia will shift more towards the east, China and India are happy to do trade with Russia but it's gonna be bad for Russia becoming a puppet state of China, not sure if this goes well in the long run.
I think that this is the last chance that Russia has to push back on the west. Russia is going to loose oil revenue to the point that they will have effectively no purchasing power outside the country. Russia, even if they put everything into building a military, just doesn't have the economy to do so for very long (if at all).
Russia has huge natural reserves. When all is said and done those have become marginalized on the international market. And if that comes true and is sustained because the mayor buyers have shifted to other sources and greener sources then he is in the same state as the GDR was before the wall came down. Everything spent on military or, in Russia's case, taken by oligarchs and the industry in shambles. Putin has neglected the normal economy because he could substitute it by purchasing consumer goods from the west. Once he has no more money and is sanctioned the country will fall back. And it is to be seen how that works out. My bet is that with his grip on the media and suppression forces there will be no October revolution against Tzar Vladimir. He will die some day like Stalin and, hopefully, more reasonable forces come into power.
@@TommyTCGT wow, and you bring so much insight and so many fantastic counter-arguments to back up your critic, we must most certainly believe you right away and flee on others channels.... Or not......
Easiest subscription of my life after discovering this channel. You cut through all the bullshit and provide insightful commentary and analysis much better than the talking heads in mainstream media and even other UA-cam channels.
I think I can fill you in. The US will not allow Russia to win in Ukraine. There's USA advisors on the ground in Ukraine. If you have been paying attention, things are going worse for Russia right now. Did you really think Ukraine took out Russia's best ship by themselves? there's more and more high tech from the USA in Ukraine with a lot more on the way. It's hard to get exact numbers but I'm thinking somewhere between 20 and 30,000 Russian soldiers have been sent home in boxes so far. It's only going to get worse from there.
I think Anders underestimates the ability of Putin to be crushed in Ukraine and claim total victory and say that it was "exacly what they were aiming for". 🤣🤣
Mass mobilization also means mass armament, and I don't think Russia has the arms to do it if the last few months is any indication. Besides lack of quality equipment, it takes time to organize civilians into an army, and it looks like their existing military is already near maximum effort just maintaining a debilitating stalemate in Ukraine right now.
Russia still has a huge supply of captured weapons from WW2. They imported a mind boggling amount of Mosin-Nagant rifles (and ammo) of various types to the US after 1991. But they still have the bulk of the captured automatic rifles and machine-guns plus the captured ammo. The ammo is probably close to worthless by now based on how careless they operate in other aspects. But say they did issue them out, what kind of slapped together contraption type army would they have?? It would certainly be a disorganized cannon fodder army for starters. It would be no better than Hitler's Volkssturm rabble army.
@@LuvBorderCollies Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics. It doesn't matter how many weapons you have, Russia cannot supply its army without overseas assistance, and even China isn't going to be seen to supply Russia with the means to start WW3. Ukraine has proven that even the Russian regular army *as it stands* cannot self-sustain, and once it runs out of basic supplies it becomes a leaderless gang of rapists and murderers who cannot stand up to disciplined resistance. The only thing Putin can really do is flood the East with conscripts in a short-term 'surge' and hope to overwhelm local defences... but they *already tried that once* when Ukraine didn't have entrenched defences all throughout the West. All Ukraine has to do is withdraw in orderly fashion, and watch the conscripts die and starve.
We need an update on this topic. Now that Putin has begun his partial mobilization your prediction that he would prefer to accept defeat and withdraw is shown to be wishful thinking, at least so far. It seems his calculus is that defeat is worse for him holding power than mobilization. It is possible that you did not get all the factors in your simplified set of three. Putin see himself as a hero of Russia and wants to reconstitute the Soviet Union, as a true hero would. This is the reason he invaded in the first place. I think this pride of his is very near the top of the list, which makes his acceptance of defeat something that will have to be forced on him in a big way, perhaps beyond his ability to spin as success to his country and certainly to himself.
APN actually talks about the mobilisation in one of his latest videos ('Mobilisation, referenda, nuclear weapons'?) as a move forced on him by the hardliners , ultra-nationalists (but it's stil officially 'partial' mobilisation) Side note , as long as one day Putin said the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest tragedy of 20th century, recently he evoked the figure of tsar Peter the Great and his empire ...
Mr. Nielsen, thanks for your well considered content. Your knowledge a d thinking is really good. I’ve seen about three of your videos now and they are all excellent. You seriously earned my sub. Thank you again.
He is. He’s not stupid and he’s very smart. I don’t mean that he’s a good person. If he was really crazy we would already all be dead. There have been sooo many things that could have gone wrong and nothing happened.
Don’t let it cause you stress. Putin, his Generals and all the people who have got mega rich hanging onto his coattails all have their wealth and assets in the west, you wouldn’t firebomb a house when you knew your pension pot was inside.
@@andrehunter1295 his notion is that none of the former Soviet republics have any self determination. And we should have sold off all those newly formed democracys too Russia in the long run, Too buy the peace for our selfs. Sry I am not a impressed by the professor.
Russia has already been defeated in Ukraine. They just haven't admitted it yet. Half there tanks are gone and they may not admit it until all there tanks are gone and still then they may not admit it.
Another well thought out and presented analysis. It’s so much better than the hysterical hand wringing we get from network shows. Recommend this to all.
Anders Puck Nielsen is a Military analyst at the Defense Academy Centre for Maritime Operations in Denmark, and used to be Commanding Officer of the DIANA-class patrol boats for the Royal Danish Navy, so not really the usual UA-camr, but a highly knowable analyst in his field, and as far away from network journalism as you can possible get.
Yes, there is no exit strategy for a dictator, he cant just go and retire in his palace on the black sea. Apparently Putin was obsessed with the killing of Qadafi and watched the video over and over again.
Well, that's true for almost all founding fathers of countries (Yeltsin obviously doesn't count). They are the best at holding power, because otherwise they couldn't have been the founding father.
If you knew what Putin is really against, you would side with him.if the US is to control the globe unopposed you can expect a tyrannical one government world which would make PRC look like a kindergarten, you will live a dystopian existence, the people pushing this agenda have already started testing things to come, covid was an exercise in mass population control, next will be digital currency. What humanity needs is a multi polar world, because if there's only 1 power and its hijacked it leaves humanity in peril.
I appreciate your logical explanation... but everyone was saying that invading Ukraine was so utterly dumb and self-destructive that Putin wouldn't do it. And yet he went ahead anyway. Never underestimate stupidity!
Putin himself will never except defeat he never has in the past .he will twist it all around to make a defeat a victory. You are right ..and Russia has only just begun I mean even if he wins Ukraine he is not going to arrive to the borders of Moldova. Estonia Latvia etc and just tell his troops well boys the jobs done we will all head on home now . Putins dream has always been to claw back all the states that once belonged to Russia. Use nukes? of course he would and why would he own them if only to look at them for the next 20 years . Putins like a cornered cat .. he is not going to back down. I mean to say financialy he's already starting to go broke. Putins a man with nothing to lose. I don't think though putin could take all the other states with the rag tag outdated conventional army he has now .Nato combined would put putins army all in the grave before lunchtime, if they wanted too. His nukes are his only real ace card that he has left. Although I think a coup via his own people towards him will bring him down in the nor to distant future.
If you think Putin is stupid, you're underestimating your enemy which is a dangerous mistake. Case in point, look at Putin's colossal miscalculation about Ukraine and where it got him.
Mobilization could be worse, declaration of war means Ukraine can atack russian soil, as well. Anyway, this analysis is the best one and a real challenge for the dissection in pretty good comments I saw here. Again, well done.
Som altid en god forklaring! One question, lets for a moment assume that western deliveries of weapons to Ukraine, results in an ukrainian counter-attack, and that Donetsk and Luhansk, and possibel even Crimea is at risk of falling... What will then be the most likely result for Putin? Will he accept that he might lose those territories? Or will he have to escalate futher? Luhansk and Donetsk are not as I understand it, particular important to Putin or the Russians, but Crimea and particular Sevastapol are a "Hero"-city, and are close to sacret places in Russian understanding.
But the question is: how could he escalate? It is very hard to see a way for him to escalate that would both be possible, and in any way have any positive outcomes for him. Can't really mobilise - would create instability (and be too slow anyway). Can't use nukes. Already practically blockading the coast - will not become more able to do this. Has already declared the airspace closed - again, will not become more able to enforce this. Can't cut UA off from the West without engaging Poland/Romania => direct conflict with NATO Could use chemical weapons - but the negatives would outweigh the positives. The only feasible escalation I could see is intense bombing of cities. Which would mean many dead Ukrainians, but not really any gains for Russia. So what he could do is bomb Kharkiv, Mikolajev or Odessa to smithereens and then accept a "victory" of internationally guaranteed Russian access to Crimea for 25 or 50 years. He has destroyed ukro-nazis' high command (the city bombed to rubble - Russian propaganda can surely find something or someone to celebrate as the most horrid devil being taken out*), and he secured Crimea for decades to come! Hurray! * From a propaganda angle he could probably use Mariupol for this. Blow up the steelworks in some spectacular fashion, declare victory, withdraw from Donbas and negotiate Crimea over the next 20 years. There's probably some other place (in the Donbas) that could also serve as this "victory" - I just know too little about RU propaganda to be able to pinpoint it. From a propaganda angle, Odessa would also work well for this, unfortunately.
@@Asptuber I am honestly not sure how much more he can escalete, in practical terms, but I would assume that he has a lot of options. What the russians mostly need right now, is infantry, and there are ways for them to get that. Also while it has not been really a big part of this conflict, in ways that were talked about earlier, there are options for mercenary troops... Low quality sure, but arguably better than nothing, and unlike the russian conscribts, mercenaries from Africa, or India or whereever those may be recruited, would not have family in Ukraine. It is a long shot, I know, and unlikely... But it is an option.
Sevastapol mostly holds strategic value as a black sea naval base, but if Russian naval losses keep up at their current rate that might make it a much less bitter pill to swallow, since there'll barely be a navy to station there.
@@hedgehog3180 No, Sevastapol is a something of a "holy" city in russian understanding. The Crimean war, and WW2 had significant battles fought over it, and something around 2 mio russians died defending and retaking the city... It is not only important strategically, it is very significant for russian military culture.
@@MrBandholm Great job at contradicting for nothing. The main reason IS geostrategic. It IS the current harbor of the Black Sea fleet, which has monstruous implications. THEN there are historical regions, for sure. Noone was saying the contrary....
Putin's future will be interesting. How does he spin fighting Ukraine to a stalemate, two new NATO countries on Russia's border, and economic sanctions that will cripple Russia for decades? How is this better?
@@pax6833 The average Russian and oligarchs will remember the good times before February 24, 2022. The average N. Korean doesn't have any good times to remember, so it was easier for Kim.
@@JMAssainatorz Oh, yes it is. At least for Putin's generation (which is where his support lies). But that withstanding I am more optimistic than Olga P. We could read the nuclear saber-rattling as being mostly for domestic consumption, as a way to build up to the heroism of preventing ww3.
@@JMAssainatorz Majority of Russian population is old enough to remember how devastating it was. It is not so much about the fact itself, but the way how it happened and its outcome. Russians call the end of Soviet Union "razval" - breakdown, collapse, demolition from inside. Another often used wording is "prosrali sojuz" - those in charge screwed it, waisted potential, made things worse etc. At first under Putin things started to turn better. Any other Russian president could afford ending up worse than he started, but not Putin. Any outcome of the conflict that reminds 1991 will be impossible to sell as a victory. Hmm, can Russians really think "hooray, we became the 2. Iran, but we got Donbas!"?
@@UnipornFrumm Putin certainly doesn't believe in (or even give lip service to) economic equality, so I wouldn't call him a communist. Fascist nationalist seems closer.
1:40 - One way of looking at it, is by announcing the US wants to see Russia's military crippled is that those around Putin see that he is playing into the US hands. If the US said that their goal was to keep Russia from taking any land, then Putin is free to throw away 1/4 of his military but as long as he gets land, he "beat the United States". But now, even if Russia takes the Donbass region, he is seen as giving the US exactly what it wants, a weakened military. Edit: The rest of your video basically says this but in a lot more detail.
I think you are right that a lot of these statements are actually very calculated messages to Russia also in view of possible (secret) negotiations that will inevitably have to take place at some point.
Super yacht news gives good insight into the unreal wealth of Putin's "friends", who are mostly KGB buddies. The "buddies" owe all their wealth to Putin, so to keep their unbelievably lavish lifestyles they have to support Vlad or disappear. They control all the infrastructure, minerals, basically anything worth anything. So if Vlad goes down, they are hanging on a thin string. Vlad's right hand man picked to cover for him during his cancer surgery does NOT have a support base at all, unlike Putin however undeserved it is.
I have a friend in Ukraine who says that unfortunately he is next on the list of people who will be conscripted due to the losses their army is suffering. His mental state is understandably pretty bad. He has no option but to go to war and has always hated the thought of fighting. Trying to flee is incredibly hard, though he told me he knows of a few that made it out. He says there are countless stories doing the rounds within Ukraine of guys who tried to run, were caught and got sent straight to the front. He doesn't feel that they can win based on what he hears daily on the ground. The railway systems are constantly being bombed, seemingly more so than I have heard about. I've known this guy for 4 years now, he's a very talented musician and was always very upbeat. Last time I communicated with him it felt like talking to a guy depressed and coming to terms with the fact that he will not see his next birthday. He has no children to leave behind but many like him do. I feel incredibly guilty sitting here writing this from the comforts of living in the UK, and all I can think about is how every time I see a video like this we spur on a war that is going to kill so much good in Ukraine. Time for dialogue and a proper agreement, otherwise there isn't going to be a Ukraine left.
your friend misinforms you (intentionally or out of ignorance). at the moment, the first wave of mobilization is still going on, at least in my region (Kyiv). From the first days I stood in line at the military registration and enlistment office and wait until they call me. In the Kyiv region, there are more people who want than the available weapons (we are talking about heavy weapons, since they can simply issue a machine gun to everyone, but they cannot win the war). Perhaps in other areas the picture is different. But believe me, no one will grab and send immediately to the front without training. Sounds like complete nonsense.
Yeah there is something fishy here. Ukraine has more volonteers for the war than they need. Of course the Ukrainian Army is going to take a motivated soldier over an unmotivated one if they have the possibility. It sounds like you didn't watch the video, a frozen conflict is a win for Russia or maybe you are just rooting for Russia?
Im grateful for your analysis but to declare Putin being a try patriot is like declaring Hitler a patriot. As a german born after WW II I wouldn’t agree with such a view of an egotistical nationalistic brutal ruler, as he is harming his “beloved” country.
Putin doesn't see it as harming. He believes he is doing what he must to ensure the future of Russia as he knows his demographics won't support a large war in the future.... attack in order to protect... IMO
@@Ben-ry1py You could describe Putin as a 'patriot' if you think that Putin thinks that what he's doing is good for his country. He may well believe that because he has every incentive to believe that because his acts have been exceptionally good for himself and his allies. Not so good for the rest of the country though, and increasingly worse. I will believe he is a patriot when I see him doing something that is good for Russia but NOT good for HIM at the same time. I haven't seen that yet. Otherwise there really is no difference in this respect between him and people like Hitler. That's why I think the comment about Putin being a patriot was so wrong.
@@klapsigaarenbasgitaar1931 I hear that, but I disagree. I believe Putin believes this war was necessary to expa6and protect Russia. Remember, he thought Ukraine would roll over when he invaded. Given his mafia mentality, giving up is devastating. He can be Russia's worst enemy and not know it. He's a relic of the past, but still controls a rathe6large country. I believe that Putin wants Russia to expand it's power, but he miscalculated badly and it's not a simple thing for a dictator to loose a was he started.
I'd say Putin is a "patriot" to his own idea what that means. He also takes great influence from Stalin and Peter the Great. It all morphs into a view Putin sees as a way to gather support from the masses while he and his criminal cronies stuff their pockets with billions every year. How does a low end KGB guy become worth $92 billion? That's just one of Putin's old buddies. He has a lot more and they all hang together or they will hang separately.
Very nice video: thank you. However, I disagree on mobilization resulting in victory over Ukraine. Not enough trained men, equipment. To achieve victory by number you also need a very mild resistance and Ukraine resistance is incontestably fierce
Very interesting. However, I think money is a factor here, in particular Putin's own fortune and that of his cronies. Also consider Putin's physical and mental health.
I think Putin will announce they have annexed the regions they control atm, and then also say any attacks in those regions as attacks on Russia proper and say they will escalate as needed.
I´m still waiting for the use of chemical weapons. In fact wondering why they are not used by Russia until now (as in Syria). The first use would be on the occupied territories on Russian troops/people as an excuse (remember that Ukraine has these "chemical factories" as seen some weeks ago on Fox News)...
I would go along with all this if it were not for fact that Putin was crazy enough to attempt an invasion in the first place. He also thought nothing of a chemical attacks on UK soil that also affected bystanders. Actually the Russian regime thought that it was quite funny.
Putin is not logical. The poison attacks, including not just the Skripals, but also Alexander Litvinenko, were done to show Putin's power. The people who were killed had already defected to the UK. There was nothing to gain by killing them except to show Russia's strength and abilities.
That alone is not mass Mobilisation and unlikely to help. Calling a war would give Putin addition powers but the Russians are generally apathetic to fighting for Ukraine (they like the idea of getting Ukraine but don’t see it as something worth fighting for at all costs) Putins problems isn’t a lack of people alone, his problem is deeply systematic- remember this army is the reformed army after their disappointing performance in 2008. It’s clear that corruption has corrupted the army to a point that it will take years to fix, assuming that’s even possible because Putin doesn’t know how to rule without corruption. At this stage sending more soldiers to Ukraine is just Russia finding out the answer to the age old question “what is maximum no. of Russian soldiers that can be killed by a single howitzer 777”? Demographically Russia is not doing well either, asking families to send their only son to the front will it be popular. Add to this that the “best and brightest” have been steadily leaving Russia for the past decade as well as the 300000 that have left due to this war and you get a sense of just how bad things really are. This was Russias last gasp, and it’s a gamble that will not pay off.
Seen it for a very outside position and perspective, I can notice some "aggressive alliance that is made for be a pain in the ars to Russia", it may not be an existential threat but is definitely for undermine Russia's regional power, and just to clarify I'm not supporting Russia's acts, I just pointing the obvious.
I'm still missing a discussion of the russian leadership's ideology, which clearly is incompatible to almost the rest of the world. An outcome like the one outlined here may eventually overcome the present crisis, but it would also mean the can gets kicked further down the road - until next time? In other words, how could their ruling ideology be challenged? This ought to be a global discussion, and why not through the UN?
Right. Putin can now see how ineffectual his military is. Any withdrawal will be followed by an attempted strengthening of his military. And their ideology is fascism with a kleptocratic power structure. The best way I can think to counter them is to call them out publicly for their lying and for their atrocious behavior. Make it impossible for other countries to deny. And then do everything we can to get the Russian people good information. We could also work at buying off the oligarchs to help us since they’re non-ideological.
The UN is toothless as Russia sits in the security council. And yes Russia will try again, the only chance for Ukraine is to defeat Russia now and become part of the west (EU/NATO) to put it out of reach from Russia.
'The Tzar has the ears of a goat!' That old Slavic folk tail is apt here. It is not the Tzar's fault it is his bad advisors. He will claim it is General's fault, so hopefully a pull out after he purges the Army brass.
Thank you Anders for this commentary and analysis I think your views are well thought out. Someone once said that the truth has a certain ring to it, and that’s what I hear when you speak .
@@klapsigaarenbasgitaar1931 I have a good friend who grew up in the Soviet Union, he said the Russian people have been brainwashed by the gov. Media for so long its hopeless . At least here [ USA ] we have multiple choices for information, you choose .
@@kenboydart You are right! Whatever they say about 'main stream media', which I think is a misleading concept introduced by opponents of free press, we should cherish the options we have in the West and support those platforms that are having a hard time because of a loss of income in the digital age.
Regardless of what happens next, Putin' himself will be enshrined in Russian history as the leader of the worst two military failures in modern day history - Battle of Mariupol and Battle of Kyiv (not to mention the loss of the Moskva). On the other hand, Ukraine has gained an international respect and admiration that no one could have ever imagined. For Putin, it's already a loose/loose situation, he has shamed his county militarily, and set his country back decades of economic prosperity.
Your ability to simply and logically explain complex systems is very special.
The responsibility for escalation is not on the US. We did not invade Russia. If Putin escalates that is all on him. NATO countries have never placed millions of troops on their borders like Russia did pre-invasion, so the idea that escalation would be NATOs fault is laughable. Maybe he should stop shelling cities indiscriminately.
You are completely delusional. Yet another important aspect resulting from NATO expansion: Missile trajectory flight times. True, there are other NATO members close to Russia's borders, but not as close as Ukraine. If missiles were launched at Moscow from Mid to Eastern launch sites in Ukraine, the flight times would be in minutes. With adoption of hypersonic tech, the flight times are reduced yet again. This is a genuine security concern for the Russians and is the basis for the argument presented by John Mearsheimer that Ukraine should be a neutral, independent nation (as much as is feasible), benefiting from the economies of both the EU and Russia, and a buffer between NATO and Russia. But of course, the U.S. elites ( Kagan, Nuland, Blinken, etc.) that determine its aggressive imperialist foreign policy will never accept such a logical solution. Because their plan is to use Ukraine as a proxy to weaken Russia, break it's economy (BTW, that's not working) and then conquer Russia. They plan to do the same thing to China, using Taiwan as a proxy. The problem with these grand Neocon empire plans? The U.S. economy is in serious trouble, 30 trillion in debt, hyperinflation, political unrest with no true solution in sight, sanction backfires, and many other internal-rot problems. The U.S. empire has made one overextended, painful blunder after another for decades, and these attempts to fight with Russia and China will be the last of its blunders before it collapses. As it is with all empires, they rise, become delusional about the extent of their power, and they fall. The risk now, in a nuclear warfare scenario, is when this empire falls, it will take the entire planet with it.
NATO already gone too far...it is their fault..even i am big fan of Ukraine, i still think NATO made wrong moves for years now...all controlled by USA...
It's one of the most common excuses when you do something wrong, someone else made me do it.
People should see some videos from Professor John Mearsheimer, he warned about this scenario we now see for years.
And he was right about everything.
@@andrehunter1295 Mearsheimer completely ignores Ukraine's right to self-determination. He only sees the world from the point of view of geopolitics where smaller countries are just pawns on a chess board.
I like Anders’ use of the decision chart, and combined with his detailed analysis in constructing the chart, it’s very persuasive.
@Peter Isherwell Did you watch a different video?
Mobilisation does not automatically give Putin a tick for winning in Ukraine unless he is thinking of carrying on the war for years - something that would be unpopular in Russia. Conscripted military personnel need equipment, logistics, training, leadership plus money. There will be old Soviet equipment in storage, but apart from that his resources are limited. Russia’s GDP is about the same as Canada’s, and shrinking, so the ability to suddenly deploy a large modern military just is not there.
Good point. The benefits of mobilisation is way off in time, if at all possible. One question here is how well informed Putin is *now* about the state of his forces. (He clearly didn't have a totally accurate picture before the invasion, though the greater failure of information was sure wrt Ukranian sentiments.)
I've been really uneasy about these western predictions of declaration of war and mobilisation of Victory Day. Now I'm much less so, because it just doesn't make sense. Except maybe if planned as a short-lived PR move, ie the goal would be a national rallying NOT actually building up and using a greater military capability (which would take years to gain). But IF he does this, then he would be in a hurry to end to war.
They can't even feed their soldiers at the moment.
Russia's GDP is rather less than Canada's. Before the war started it was about the same as Florida's; it will be less now. Anything close to full mobilisation will hugely damage an already withering Russian economy. They can't sustain the war they have now, let alone a full mobilisation.
@@malcaniscsm5184 As a Canadian, I have to point out that, while you are correct in terms of nominal GDP, in terms of purchasing power parity Russia is closer to France in real GDP.
And this is why the US is threatening to bleed Russia white if they keep fighting.
I am always interested in hearing multiple perspectives on the Ukrainian war. Your analysis is thoughtful and balanced. Keep it up and your audience will grow. Thank you
10 months later, and this still stands. Great analysis
aaaaaaaand it's gone
10 months more and it’s gone😂
@@cl8804did not stand for very long😂
@@MemeManiaYT 2 years later and the 3 day operation still going lmao what’s your point 🤡
Watching this several months on and it still holds up. Really good analysis
Very accurate and prescient on September 04, I might add.
I think the entire premise of this video relies on the idea that it’s Putin’s war and the rest of Russia is against it. This is the exact opposite of what the American Ambassador to Russia had said, list also includes Angela Merkel and pretty much every international relations expert says. If anything Putin is losing popularity for ‘not going hard enough’ in Ukraine.
Also think he’s jumping the gun on calling this war a victory for Ukraine. Russia only has 150,000 troops in Ukraine and with that they have taken and held territory that’s responsible for 80% of Ukraines GNP, this includes major ports, nuclear plants and industries. The 300,000 partially mobilized are yet to arrive so it’s too early to say what’s going to happen but if we were bet on this I think Ukraine has about 5% chance of winning this militarily.
The stated objective of US is not to beat Russia but to weaken Russia.
“This has united entire Russia across the political spectrum, from the most pro-western liberal elites to the knuckle draggers in the deepest recesses of the Kremlin, Ukraine joining NATO is the brightest of red lines for all Russians.” Former US Ambassador to Russia after 2008 NATO Bucharest Summit.
“Russia will never allow it (Ukraine Joining NATO) and it will lead to war”. Angela Merkel commenting on the same Summit.
Not much anymore after september, after they do mobilization but still remain in special operation mode. And no win even with it. And no acceptance of defeat too. Its either win in any form like taking Donbass or lose of powe
"Anybody can be nazis" - well, it seems that Lavrov has chosen to include the Israeli nazis. Not a wise move.
He’s desperate but he is also trying to leverage support eliciting Palestine …. Which has currency…..it is a Russian version of trump’s “we have bad ppl too”……plus I would not be surprised Russians are somehow helping Bibi along with GOP
Especially since Israel was still being friendly to Russia.
@@ptonpc yes. After angering Serbia, they now did it with Israel. I am mulling over the way they might anger Hungary. With Orban it will be very difficult but Lavrov might just find a way 😁
@@ptonpc Not even considering the fact that Israel holds licencing rights over a lot of anti-tank and anti-air tech and now might be much more hesitant in stopping NATO countries sending a few of I don't know Spike LR or NLOS systems mounted on IMVs over. Expecting Russians can just shittalk Israel that would just take it in the ass was a unwise idea, because the whole Israeli defense policy is based on punishing any threat, however small, it is called the "fighting between wars" policy.
@@huskytail It will be interesting to see how they do it 🤣
Would love if you did updates on these early topics following the rapid changes over the recent months, Ukraines gains on the grounds, gas pipe destroyed, mobilisation etc
You are right but there are some caveats to consider though:
1) Low fertility rate (the same or similar to the one of the West) means that making a general mobilization will hurt Russian families WAY MORE than in the past. It is NOT “I give one of my sons to the nation, to mother Russia”, it is (for most families) “I give MY ONLY SON to mother Russia” and that could be intolerable. In poor countries the young are the only hope.
2) Related: Russia (as well as the West) is a country of old people and old people don’t build the future. And Russia is not quite open to (not ethnic Russian) immigration. Losing their youth (whether to war or emigration) has a compounding cost that has no fixing, no matter what.
3) Old people are MAINLY the supporter or (old) Putin: all these old people’s need to be happy is some food, a minimal pension (the already quite miserable one), barely some healthcare, some old TV where they can entertain themselves until they finally die. YOUNG people, on the other hand, have way more aspirations and dreams: THEY SAW the quality of life of the West, they have seen and consumed western media and art, they know that life is more than a bowl of meager food, they saw technologies that can improve their life quality, etc. Young people won’t settle with a Russian flag as consolation for their misery.
4) Related: Thus, Putin supporters (oligarchs, honchos, “voters” etc.) are getting older and not precisely brighter, they may control the buttons but sooner than later the younger wolves will be scratching the doors to see who’s weak and who’s dying.
5) This war will make current Russian akin to that of Yeltsin's times: this is something that NOT EVEN old Russians will forgive because (as I mentioned) that would make hard to maintain even their meager livelihood. Young people won’t be able to provide either. The whole social fabric will enter a crisis. Patriotism doesn't fill stomachs.
6) Related: weapons don’t fix themselves, they don’t repair themselves, the equipment maintenance is expensive, NUCLEAR WEAPONS do need maintenance too: the whole barking (but no bite) could be harder to believe. You can’t have a failed economy and at the same time keep a huge army and functioning arsenal. At best what you could do is make your whole country a concentration camp a la North Korea but even then, that doesn’t give you technology or the numbers.
As I know, Russians captured and moved to Russia ~160k children as a "refugee" from the eastern part of Ukraine...
Usually I hate these book-long comments, but you brought up some good points.
Your first point is exactly the same as Chy-na is facing as a result of their long time "one child" policy. That created overprotective parents who spoiled their only child. They even have a name for this, "Little Emperor Syndrome". Only the "losers" join the PLA which itself is nothing but a CCP armed force divided by factional distrust.
Everything action has consequences and that's why a solid understanding of history is so important but yet history is so ignored or twisted by propaganda.
All your other points make great sense. Even North Korea's regime could NOT exist without under the table help from Chy-na. I've read that Putin's heroes are Stalin and Peter the Great. Stalin aside, Peter the Great also had imperialist expansion ideas but he knew how primitive the entire Russian nation was and Russia would go nowhere without "Westernization". He seems far more tuned into building up the people's lot in life which in turn benefits the nation/empire as a whole.
Putin on the other hand, along with his Korrupt KGB Kronies, are more interested in maintaining mega billionaire lifestyles which need harsh population control to keep the cash coming into their korrupt pockets. Its really a mafia operation from top to bottom. They operate in the same manner like peas in a pod.
Imagine China's two neighbours are both the same, failed North Korea and failed Russia. Their blackness of night compared with all the lights on across Western Europe and North America.
Both neighbours starving and defenceless.
Merci!
Thanks! Glad you found the video useful.
Impressive. On March 2023 this analysis fits perfectly with what has been happening in the last 12 months.
"Comrade. Our advance has stalled on every front and we had to retreat from key positions but you have 5 days to win this war."
Or 5 days to start the war officially.
Its interesting that you can listen to this several months later and its still mostly relevant, thing yas just been grinding on with more death and suffering
Thank you for making these videos, I don't know why I don't see you on DW, CNN, and big channels giving your points of view.
At least he´s on the major danish news channels
Hes not on big news networks because he actually knows what hes talking.
He makes too much sense and he will be contrary to the media's message. So, we can't have facts or logic messing up the narrative.
UA-cam is a fairly big channel and he's on it already
A great analysis. I agree with 100% of the things said. I miss two point however.
1. Using nukes in ukraine will not improve the tacitical situation much. Of course you can use them to hit ukranian cities. But this will not reduce their capability to resist. It will just piss everyone off really bad. Normally you use tactical nukes to hit large enemy troop concentration. Ukraine has making sure since the beginning of the war that they do not provide these kind of targets, they disperse their forces. Because these would also be a good target for the russian airforce. They can use them to create a break trough to advance, but than they will face counter attacks on their supply lines like in the north. And they will end up in a worse position than now.
You kind of brushed at the topic. There is a non written but till very powerful ban on using nuclear weapons since 1945. No nuclear power ever used them. This is not out of some ethics. It simple game theory. If you use nuclear weapons against a non nuclear country all other countries wil be like: "I need nukes or this can happen to me, too." This would lead to a much more wide spread of these weapons. And by so decreasing the tactical and strategical advantage of having them, while increasing the risk of nuclear war dramatically. And after all: Most people, goverments included like to live. So it is an overall loss for all nuclear powers. If russia does that, not only is it likely for NATO to directly engage conventionally. Russia will also face retaliation from india and china. These will just be economical but, will hit hard. And no: China and russia are not allies. If you believe that you need to look deeper than propaganda press conferences.
2. I struggle to see how bringing in conscripts in ukraine will win the war. A press channel of Wagner Group declared they need 800.000 soldiers to win the war. This is comming down to a 20 soldiers per 1000 citiziens theory of a study from RAND. So congrats they have learned basic math now. However this is a equation used for a country that offers minimal civilian resistance. Everyone thinking this applies to ukraine has not been paying attention. They would need more, much more. And they need to be equipped and trained, which leads to the next desaster.
Even now russia send in soldiers with rifles out of world war 2. On paper russia has 10.000 tanks in reserve but nobody modernized or maintained them since 1990. So good luck on making them combat ready under sanctions. For example the modern target optics in the T72 is made in france. They can not equip their troops properly.
Next thing is training level. We see that even their professianls troops lack training. Their conscript struggle at basic infantry skills. And there is no active reserve in russia like it is in NATO countries. The term "reserve" means that you finsihed your military service after 2013. You did not receive any training since then. Expecting these unifromed civilians to figth the ukrainian army and later an insurgency is outrigth stupid. The russian could just shoot them themselfs. Same result, quicker done.
And increasing troop number will increase the strain on logistics. They struggle to supply their 150k troops now. The thought they could supply 4 times that number is ridicolous.
And rigth now russia looses about 1 billion per year of their reserves. This willincrease cost by a factor of 3 or 5. Putin could pay for it for a year maybe. If ukrain decide to figth longer than this, what then? He can' t borrow money due to sanctions.
Using small tactical nukes is still option for putin but only goal would be scare tactic to stop and divide western allies. Not enough for nuclear war but powerfull message
If Russia uses Nuke it's just a straight death wish to whole Russia nation.
There is the problem of radiation too. It spreads like wild fire. The us of nukes could force NATO to intrrvine for the sake of there own defense. For example, during Chernobyl, there was talk of radiation spreading to the water supply of neighbor countries. Also, the radiation would spread to the troops who have to move through the front lines. Say they use tactical nukes in donbas. Their troops would be exposed as well, which would piss off the families in Russia. Also, say they nuke Kiev. Seems like the city is living underground, so how effective could that be? It's not really practical but honestly this entire war wasn't practical from the start.
@Dapper Canuck Hahahahahahaha! Hahahah... no, you weren't serious, were you? Hahahahah!
@Dapper Canuck 🤣🤣🤣 okay, projecting putin boy
I really appreciate your logical explanation on strategic choices.
"logical explanation"
Unfortunately these dictatorships are not logical. With the propaganda machine they have, they can brain wash their people into anything.
People should see some videos from Professor John Mearsheimer, he warned about this scenario we now see for years.
And he was right about everything.
This analysis really resonated with me. It was unbiased, non-emotional, objective and logical. Makes a lot of sense without being sensational. Great video!
Its not American news, emotions and sensations has nothing to do with a analysis 😉
Anders Puck Nielsen is a Military analyst at the Defense Academy Centre for Maritime Operations in Denmark, and used to be Commanding Officer of the DIANA-class patrol boats for the Royal Danish Navy, so not really the usual UA-camr, but a highly knowable analyst in his field, and as far away from network journalism as you can possible get.
Imponerende - passer jo indtil videre fuldstændigt på situationen, som den udspiller sig her i september 2022
Enjoyed your great analysis! liked and subscribed
Solid analyse Anders. Du gør det godt!
Andres, you have a mastery of understanding of the Russian mindset and of the ongoing issues in the Russo-Ukrainian War. Thank you for this thoughtful piece.
Thank you for your well thought out analysis. This is a breath of fresh air after all the none-sense being spread by both the pro Russian and pro Ukrainian talking heads.
Maybe you should watch less tv.
People should see some videos from Professor John Mearsheimer, he warned about this scenario we now see for years.
And he was right about everything.
@@klapsigaarenbasgitaar1931 it's YT , not TV :)
@Andre Hunter I don't think prof.J.M. would speak about his country as if it were a bargaining chip.
How does this man not have more subscribers?
I think your priorities and their order is a good representation.
A question is: Can "Putin Keep power in Russia" if Putin does not achieve "Winning in Ukraine"?
Losing the war in Ukraine may cause Putin to be ousted.
I doubt if the world (USA and Ukraine mostly) can allow Russia to look like they won the war (consider China-Taiwan and Russian re-invading other countries)
A very interesting analysis. Putin could, indeed, spin defeat as a victory back home ('We've consolidated our annexation of Crimea, ensured the neutrality of Ukraine and wiped out the Azov 'Nazis' in Donbas' etc.). However, if he thinks that everything will then go back to normal with sanctions lifted and Russia welcomed back into the fold of international relations, he's very much mistaken. With Putin at the helm, Russia's economic decline and political isolation will continue and Russians will begin to question the wisdom of the 'special operation' when their standard of living drops further long after a ceasefire has been declared. Moreover, I feel it's unlikely that what Putin (even in 'defeat') would consider the minimum concessions from Ukraine would be what Zelensky is willing to concede in what would be a genuine victory. Putin might well create his own 'off-ramp', but Zelensky may be the one to blow it up!
💩
Mark, you're not necessarily looking at this right.
We've given up on the Russians, but they have given up on us too. They don't want to return to the status quo. They want a Eurasian bloc.
man we need their oil and gas so bad in Europe, if Russia call the soldiers back, says they are sorry,send Putin in retirement and pay something to Ukraine to rebuild, we'll become best buddies again in no time...
How about Putin war crime? Do you think sanction will be lifted?
@@watchlover7750 I believe Europe would probably do trade again if Putin is gone, but hopefully learn from the mistakes and reduce dependency on Russian oil and gas, but I don't believe the Russians won't send Putin to retirement. Russia will shift more towards the east, China and India are happy to do trade with Russia but it's gonna be bad for Russia becoming a puppet state of China, not sure if this goes well in the long run.
Your Analysis is so good. Shame that your channel is so underrated
I think the same, this guy should have million of views
🎯
maybe bc this channel is basically a CIA bot
using CCN to calculate the outcome of the war? nah it's not a good analysis...
Best analysis I've seen on the Ukraine conflict. Well done and thank you!
I think that this is the last chance that Russia has to push back on the west. Russia is going to loose oil revenue to the point that they will have effectively no purchasing power outside the country. Russia, even if they put everything into building a military, just doesn't have the economy to do so for very long (if at all).
Russia has huge natural reserves. When all is said and done those have become marginalized on the international market. And if that comes true and is sustained because the mayor buyers have shifted to other sources and greener sources then he is in the same state as the GDR was before the wall came down. Everything spent on military or, in Russia's case, taken by oligarchs and the industry in shambles. Putin has neglected the normal economy because he could substitute it by purchasing consumer goods from the west. Once he has no more money and is sanctioned the country will fall back. And it is to be seen how that works out. My bet is that with his grip on the media and suppression forces there will be no October revolution against Tzar Vladimir. He will die some day like Stalin and, hopefully, more reasonable forces come into power.
Everything you said turned up to be true. Great work.
Super analyse. Rigtig godt, Anders!
Load of baloney. Try the Saker, SouthFront or Moon of Alabama.
@@TommyTCGT wow, and you bring so much insight and so many fantastic counter-arguments to back up your critic, we must most certainly believe you right away and flee on others channels....
Or not......
@@TommyTCGT
Parroting Kremlin talking points makes you a free thinker, I'm told.
Russian troll
Great video! Thanks for sharing, very happy to have found your channel.
Easiest subscription of my life after discovering this channel. You cut through all the bullshit and provide insightful commentary and analysis much better than the talking heads in mainstream media and even other UA-cam channels.
Thanks. Glad you like it. :-)
I'm really impressed both by your presentation of the information and the reasoning behind the information. Very well done.
Love these videos. Can you do one examining the position of NATO and their red lines?
I think I can fill you in. The US will not allow Russia to win in Ukraine. There's USA advisors on the ground in Ukraine. If you have been paying attention, things are going worse for Russia right now. Did you really think Ukraine took out Russia's best ship by themselves? there's more and more high tech from the USA in Ukraine with a lot more on the way. It's hard to get exact numbers but I'm thinking somewhere between 20 and 30,000 Russian soldiers have been sent home in boxes so far. It's only going to get worse from there.
People should see some videos from Professor John Mearsheimer, he warned about this scenario we now see for years.
And he was right about everything.
This is an amazing video and channel. I'm subscribing!
Great work, as an American, I appreciate the balance view you present. Better than the talking heads in media, lol.
Have a look at Perun on YT.
Being well informed is only possible with people like Anders Puck Nielsen and various panels.
he is actually a frequent guest in a danish tv program covering the war!
He is an absolute jem and I am so glad to have found him...🤔thank UA-cam??🤔🤔
"think he's going to do both!" made me spit out my coffee lmao. Something about the deadpan way you delivered it
Another great analysis, and very comforting that you and your colleagues at "Forsvarsakademiet" have such great insight, keep the good work up.
Great analysis. I’m looking forward to your next episodes. Keep going.
I think Anders underestimates the ability of Putin to be crushed in Ukraine and claim total victory and say that it was "exacly what they were aiming for". 🤣🤣
What a good grasp on Putin's point of view, and the situation overall. Thank you Anders.
Mass mobilization also means mass armament, and I don't think Russia has the arms to do it if the last few months is any indication. Besides lack of quality equipment, it takes time to organize civilians into an army, and it looks like their existing military is already near maximum effort just maintaining a debilitating stalemate in Ukraine right now.
Russia still has a huge supply of captured weapons from WW2. They imported a mind boggling amount of Mosin-Nagant rifles (and ammo) of various types to the US after 1991. But they still have the bulk of the captured automatic rifles and machine-guns plus the captured ammo. The ammo is probably close to worthless by now based on how careless they operate in other aspects.
But say they did issue them out, what kind of slapped together contraption type army would they have?? It would certainly be a disorganized cannon fodder army for starters. It would be no better than Hitler's Volkssturm rabble army.
@@LuvBorderCollies Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics. It doesn't matter how many weapons you have, Russia cannot supply its army without overseas assistance, and even China isn't going to be seen to supply Russia with the means to start WW3. Ukraine has proven that even the Russian regular army *as it stands* cannot self-sustain, and once it runs out of basic supplies it becomes a leaderless gang of rapists and murderers who cannot stand up to disciplined resistance.
The only thing Putin can really do is flood the East with conscripts in a short-term 'surge' and hope to overwhelm local defences... but they *already tried that once* when Ukraine didn't have entrenched defences all throughout the West. All Ukraine has to do is withdraw in orderly fashion, and watch the conscripts die and starve.
A lot to admire in this excellent analysis, in agreement and disagreement.
We need an update on this topic. Now that Putin has begun his partial mobilization your prediction that he would prefer to accept defeat and withdraw is shown to be wishful thinking, at least so far. It seems his calculus is that defeat is worse for him holding power than mobilization. It is possible that you did not get all the factors in your simplified set of three. Putin see himself as a hero of Russia and wants to reconstitute the Soviet Union, as a true hero would. This is the reason he invaded in the first place. I think this pride of his is very near the top of the list, which makes his acceptance of defeat something that will have to be forced on him in a big way, perhaps beyond his ability to spin as success to his country and certainly to himself.
APN actually talks about the mobilisation in one of his latest videos ('Mobilisation, referenda, nuclear weapons'?) as a move forced on him by the hardliners , ultra-nationalists (but it's stil officially 'partial' mobilisation)
Side note , as long as one day Putin said the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest tragedy of 20th century, recently he evoked the figure of tsar Peter the Great and his empire ...
Mr. Nielsen, thanks for your well considered content. Your knowledge a d thinking is really good. I’ve seen about three of your videos now and they are all excellent.
You seriously earned my sub.
Thank you again.
Excellent summation, unfortunately it labours under the assumption that Putin is , sane, healthy and logical in his thinking..........
How's Biden doing?
I definitely have my doubts about his mental state. And if he IS terminally ill, that changes his calculus. He’ll have less to lose.
He is. He’s not stupid and he’s very smart.
I don’t mean that he’s a good person.
If he was really crazy we would already all be dead. There have been sooo many things that could have gone wrong and nothing happened.
@@shamus2198 Doing fine. Diapers and pudding.
This still checks out 10 days later. That makes you a stinking unicorn, Anders. Well done.
It always makes me happy to see analysis that using nukes is unlikely since that has been causing me stress recently.
Don’t let it cause you stress. Putin, his Generals and all the people who have got mega rich hanging onto his coattails all have their wealth and assets in the west, you wouldn’t firebomb a house when you knew your pension pot was inside.
People should see some videos from Professor John Mearsheimer, he warned about this scenario we now see for years.
And he was right about everything.
@@andrehunter1295 his notion is that none of the former Soviet republics have any self determination. And we should have sold off all those newly formed democracys too Russia in the long run,
Too buy the peace for our selfs.
Sry I am not a impressed by the professor.
Finally some no nonsense talk about what to expect! Great and many thanks
Russia has already been defeated in Ukraine. They just haven't admitted it yet. Half there tanks are gone and they may not admit it until all there tanks are gone and still then they may not admit it.
😂😂😂
Best video I have seen on this topic so far.
Another well thought out and presented analysis. It’s so much better than the hysterical hand wringing we get from network shows. Recommend this to all.
A lot more thoughtful and nuanced than the crap we typically see from mainstream media, especially American mainstream media, left and right.
@@stanh24 Fear drives views. Insightful commentary isn't so helpful for around the clock coverage.
Anders Puck Nielsen is a Military analyst at the Defense Academy Centre for Maritime Operations in Denmark, and used to be Commanding Officer of the DIANA-class patrol boats for the Royal Danish Navy, so not really the usual UA-camr, but a highly knowable analyst in his field, and as far away from network journalism as you can possible get.
Excellent. Thank you. Now let's see!
Thank you for enumerating the various possibilities and for analysing their probabilities and consequences.
Brilliant Anders
Some of the most cogent and thoughtful analysis I’ve seen. He understands Putin’s true motive, which is to stay in power. All else is secondary.
You're absolutely right, all else is secondary (which this analysis doesn't really say unfortunately)
Yes, there is no exit strategy for a dictator, he cant just go and retire in his palace on the black sea. Apparently Putin was obsessed with the killing of Qadafi and watched the video over and over again.
Well, that's true for almost all founding fathers of countries (Yeltsin obviously doesn't count). They are the best at holding power, because otherwise they couldn't have been the founding father.
If you knew what Putin is really against, you would side with him.if the US is to control the globe unopposed you can expect a tyrannical one government world which would make PRC look like a kindergarten, you will live a dystopian existence, the people pushing this agenda have already started testing things to come, covid was an exercise in mass population control, next will be digital currency.
What humanity needs is a multi polar world, because if there's only 1 power and its hijacked it leaves humanity in peril.
Interesting. Qadafi must be an example that makes all despots nervous.
I'd be interested on if Anders has the same perspective or has more insight on this topic.
I appreciate your logical explanation... but everyone was saying that invading Ukraine was so utterly dumb and self-destructive that Putin wouldn't do it. And yet he went ahead anyway. Never underestimate stupidity!
Putin himself will never except defeat he never has in the past .he will twist it all around to make a defeat a victory. You are right ..and Russia has only just begun I mean even if he wins Ukraine he is not going to arrive to the borders of Moldova. Estonia Latvia etc and just tell his troops well boys the jobs done we will all head on home now . Putins dream has always been to claw back all the states that once belonged to Russia. Use nukes? of course he would and why would he own them if only to look at them for the next 20 years . Putins like a cornered cat .. he is not going to back down. I mean to say financialy he's already starting to go broke. Putins a man with nothing to lose.
I don't think though putin could take all the other states with the rag tag outdated conventional army he has now .Nato combined would put putins army all in the grave before lunchtime, if they wanted too. His nukes are his only real ace card that he has left.
Although I think a coup via his own people towards him will bring him down in the nor to distant future.
I think it´s safe to say that stupidity drives evil.
Intelligence has it's limits. Stupidity knows no bounds.
Actually in a debate on the 22nd or 23rd with Peter Viggo, Anders *did* correctly predict the invasion.
If you think Putin is stupid, you're underestimating your enemy which is a dangerous mistake. Case in point, look at Putin's colossal miscalculation about Ukraine and where it got him.
Phenomenal work Anders
Anders, are you able to enlighten us about the political stability in the Kremlin, and the growing speculation of a coup brewing?
Would you do a video about Transnistria?
Mobilization could be worse, declaration of war means Ukraine can atack russian soil, as well.
Anyway, this analysis is the best one and a real challenge for the dissection in pretty good comments I saw here. Again, well done.
Ukraine is already attacking Russian soil. Or 'someone' is. Fuel and weapons depots have been struck.
@@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368 - Yes, but as you said 'someone'. Nobody claim the atacks because there is no 'declaration of war'.
I really like your insights, Tak.
Today is 11-May, two days after 9-May-2022.
I believe your analysis is closer to current development. Keep up the great job👍
Thanks for sharing this outstanding Analysis of the current situation, and the impacts.
Som altid en god forklaring!
One question, lets for a moment assume that western deliveries of weapons to Ukraine, results in an ukrainian counter-attack, and that Donetsk and Luhansk, and possibel even Crimea is at risk of falling... What will then be the most likely result for Putin? Will he accept that he might lose those territories? Or will he have to escalate futher?
Luhansk and Donetsk are not as I understand it, particular important to Putin or the Russians, but Crimea and particular Sevastapol are a "Hero"-city, and are close to sacret places in Russian understanding.
But the question is: how could he escalate?
It is very hard to see a way for him to escalate that would both be possible, and in any way have any positive outcomes for him.
Can't really mobilise - would create instability (and be too slow anyway).
Can't use nukes.
Already practically blockading the coast - will not become more able to do this.
Has already declared the airspace closed - again, will not become more able to enforce this.
Can't cut UA off from the West without engaging Poland/Romania => direct conflict with NATO
Could use chemical weapons - but the negatives would outweigh the positives.
The only feasible escalation I could see is intense bombing of cities. Which would mean many dead Ukrainians, but not really any gains for Russia.
So what he could do is bomb Kharkiv, Mikolajev or Odessa to smithereens and then accept a "victory" of internationally guaranteed Russian access to Crimea for 25 or 50 years. He has destroyed ukro-nazis' high command (the city bombed to rubble - Russian propaganda can surely find something or someone to celebrate as the most horrid devil being taken out*), and he secured Crimea for decades to come! Hurray!
* From a propaganda angle he could probably use Mariupol for this. Blow up the steelworks in some spectacular fashion, declare victory, withdraw from Donbas and negotiate Crimea over the next 20 years. There's probably some other place (in the Donbas) that could also serve as this "victory" - I just know too little about RU propaganda to be able to pinpoint it. From a propaganda angle, Odessa would also work well for this, unfortunately.
@@Asptuber I am honestly not sure how much more he can escalete, in practical terms, but I would assume that he has a lot of options.
What the russians mostly need right now, is infantry, and there are ways for them to get that. Also while it has not been really a big part of this conflict, in ways that were talked about earlier, there are options for mercenary troops... Low quality sure, but arguably better than nothing, and unlike the russian conscribts, mercenaries from Africa, or India or whereever those may be recruited, would not have family in Ukraine.
It is a long shot, I know, and unlikely... But it is an option.
Sevastapol mostly holds strategic value as a black sea naval base, but if Russian naval losses keep up at their current rate that might make it a much less bitter pill to swallow, since there'll barely be a navy to station there.
@@hedgehog3180 No, Sevastapol is a something of a "holy" city in russian understanding.
The Crimean war, and WW2 had significant battles fought over it, and something around 2 mio russians died defending and retaking the city...
It is not only important strategically, it is very significant for russian military culture.
@@MrBandholm Great job at contradicting for nothing. The main reason IS geostrategic. It IS the current harbor of the Black Sea fleet, which has monstruous implications. THEN there are historical regions, for sure. Noone was saying the contrary....
I’m so happy. You saved me from a boring day at work. I’m just listening to some smart dude give analysis into this war
Putin's future will be interesting. How does he spin fighting Ukraine to a stalemate, two new NATO countries on Russia's border, and economic sanctions that will cripple Russia for decades? How is this better?
Given all the BS he told to justify the invasion, he’ll come up with a BS reason why it’s a victory not a defeat.
Kim Ill Sung did it
@@pax6833 The average Russian and oligarchs will remember the good times before February 24, 2022. The average N. Korean doesn't have any good times to remember, so it was easier for Kim.
@@poopyanalbumhole The sanctions are a response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, so sanctions are Russia's fault.
I respect the old fashioned professor style explanation without too much graphics and videos
Thanks, my analysis is the same, Putin will End the war & say he prevented WW3
That would be to good to be true. You can only do this stunt ones. It is a spent idea after dissolution of the Soviet Union.
@@olgap. Thats not quite in recent memory though for many a russian?
@@JMAssainatorz Oh, yes it is. At least for Putin's generation (which is where his support lies).
But that withstanding I am more optimistic than Olga P. We could read the nuclear saber-rattling as being mostly for domestic consumption, as a way to build up to the heroism of preventing ww3.
@@JMAssainatorz Majority of Russian population is old enough to remember how devastating it was. It is not so much about the fact itself, but the way how it happened and its outcome. Russians call the end of Soviet Union "razval" - breakdown, collapse, demolition from inside. Another often used wording is "prosrali sojuz" - those in charge screwed it, waisted potential, made things worse etc. At first under Putin things started to turn better. Any other Russian president could afford ending up worse than he started, but not Putin. Any outcome of the conflict that reminds 1991 will be impossible to sell as a victory. Hmm, can Russians really think "hooray, we became the 2. Iran, but we got Donbas!"?
That is unfortunately a very likely scenario.
Thank you for this level headed analysis
As a russian I'd like to note that Putin is anything but a patriot
he is a hard core comunist
@@UnipornFrumm Putin certainly doesn't believe in (or even give lip service to) economic equality, so I wouldn't call him a communist. Fascist nationalist seems closer.
He is a gangster leader.
THANK YOU 🙏 of all the news media from countless sources YOU make the MOST sense out of this situation by far. 👏👏👏👏
1:40 - One way of looking at it, is by announcing the US wants to see Russia's military crippled is that those around Putin see that he is playing into the US hands. If the US said that their goal was to keep Russia from taking any land, then Putin is free to throw away 1/4 of his military but as long as he gets land, he "beat the United States". But now, even if Russia takes the Donbass region, he is seen as giving the US exactly what it wants, a weakened military.
Edit: The rest of your video basically says this but in a lot more detail.
I think you are right that a lot of these statements are actually very calculated messages to Russia also in view of possible (secret) negotiations that will inevitably have to take place at some point.
Super yacht news gives good insight into the unreal wealth of Putin's "friends", who are mostly KGB buddies. The "buddies" owe all their wealth to Putin, so to keep their unbelievably lavish lifestyles they have to support Vlad or disappear. They control all the infrastructure, minerals, basically anything worth anything. So if Vlad goes down, they are hanging on a thin string.
Vlad's right hand man picked to cover for him during his cancer surgery does NOT have a support base at all, unlike Putin however undeserved it is.
Super Yacht News ua-cam.com/users/eSysmanSuperYachtsvideos
Enlightening analysis. Very nice. Thanks
I have a friend in Ukraine who says that unfortunately he is next on the list of people who will be conscripted due to the losses their army is suffering. His mental state is understandably pretty bad. He has no option but to go to war and has always hated the thought of fighting. Trying to flee is incredibly hard, though he told me he knows of a few that made it out. He says there are countless stories doing the rounds within Ukraine of guys who tried to run, were caught and got sent straight to the front. He doesn't feel that they can win based on what he hears daily on the ground. The railway systems are constantly being bombed, seemingly more so than I have heard about.
I've known this guy for 4 years now, he's a very talented musician and was always very upbeat. Last time I communicated with him it felt like talking to a guy depressed and coming to terms with the fact that he will not see his next birthday. He has no children to leave behind but many like him do. I feel incredibly guilty sitting here writing this from the comforts of living in the UK, and all I can think about is how every time I see a video like this we spur on a war that is going to kill so much good in Ukraine. Time for dialogue and a proper agreement, otherwise there isn't going to be a Ukraine left.
God Bless this friend of yours. The problem is that he is already in a war, not going to a war. You have displayed a true friendship to him.
your friend misinforms you (intentionally or out of ignorance). at the moment, the first wave of mobilization is still going on, at least in my region (Kyiv). From the first days I stood in line at the military registration and enlistment office and wait until they call me. In the Kyiv region, there are more people who want than the available weapons (we are talking about heavy weapons, since they can simply issue a machine gun to everyone, but they cannot win the war). Perhaps in other areas the picture is different. But believe me, no one will grab and send immediately to the front without training. Sounds like complete nonsense.
Yeah there is something fishy here. Ukraine has more volonteers for the war than they need. Of course the Ukrainian Army is going to take a motivated soldier over an unmotivated one if they have the possibility. It sounds like you didn't watch the video, a frozen conflict is a win for Russia or maybe you are just rooting for Russia?
Excellent informed analysis.
Im grateful for your analysis but to declare Putin being a try patriot is like declaring Hitler a patriot. As a german born after WW II I wouldn’t agree with such a view of an egotistical nationalistic brutal ruler, as he is harming his “beloved” country.
I agree that was a mistake.
Putin doesn't see it as harming. He believes he is doing what he must to ensure the future of Russia as he knows his demographics won't support a large war in the future.... attack in order to protect... IMO
@@Ben-ry1py You could describe Putin as a 'patriot' if you think that Putin thinks that what he's doing is good for his country. He may well believe that because he has every incentive to believe that because his acts have been exceptionally good for himself and his allies. Not so good for the rest of the country though, and increasingly worse. I will believe he is a patriot when I see him doing something that is good for Russia but NOT good for HIM at the same time. I haven't seen that yet. Otherwise there really is no difference in this respect between him and people like Hitler. That's why I think the comment about Putin being a patriot was so wrong.
@@klapsigaarenbasgitaar1931 I hear that, but I disagree. I believe Putin believes this war was necessary to expa6and protect Russia. Remember, he thought Ukraine would roll over when he invaded.
Given his mafia mentality, giving up is devastating. He can be Russia's worst enemy and not know it. He's a relic of the past, but still controls a rathe6large country. I believe that Putin wants Russia to expand it's power, but he miscalculated badly and it's not a simple thing for a dictator to loose a was he started.
I'd say Putin is a "patriot" to his own idea what that means. He also takes great influence from Stalin and Peter the Great. It all morphs into a view Putin sees as a way to gather support from the masses while he and his criminal cronies stuff their pockets with billions every year. How does a low end KGB guy become worth $92 billion? That's just one of Putin's old buddies. He has a lot more and they all hang together or they will hang separately.
💥
Brilliant analysis!
Very nice video: thank you. However, I disagree on mobilization resulting in victory over Ukraine. Not enough trained men, equipment. To achieve victory by number you also need a very mild resistance and Ukraine resistance is incontestably fierce
I found your channel today, I love it. I am now subscribed.
Very interesting. However, I think money is a factor here, in particular Putin's own fortune and that of his cronies. Also consider Putin's physical and mental health.
Spot on.
I think Putin will announce they have annexed the regions they control atm, and then also say any attacks in those regions as attacks on Russia proper and say they will escalate as needed.
Excellent analysis. The chart really helped in understanding.
I´m still waiting for the use of chemical weapons. In fact wondering why they are not used by Russia until now (as in Syria). The first use would be on the occupied territories on Russian troops/people as an excuse (remember that Ukraine has these "chemical factories" as seen some weeks ago on Fox News)...
Thanks for your analysis.
I would go along with all this if it were not for fact that Putin was crazy enough to attempt an invasion in the first place. He also thought nothing of a chemical attacks on UK soil that also affected bystanders. Actually the Russian regime thought that it was quite funny.
The invasion wasn't irrational for an ultranationalist like putin, but he acted on bad information.
Putin is not logical. The poison attacks, including not just the Skripals, but also Alexander Litvinenko, were done to show Putin's power. The people who were killed had already defected to the UK. There was nothing to gain by killing them except to show Russia's strength and abilities.
Thanks, Puck. I hope you’re right!
FYI: Putin has already committed conscripts to the war.
What, you mean he lied? Who could possibly have seen that coming.
That alone is not mass Mobilisation and unlikely to help. Calling a war would give Putin addition powers but the Russians are generally apathetic to fighting for Ukraine (they like the idea of getting Ukraine but don’t see it as something worth fighting for at all costs) Putins problems isn’t a lack of people alone, his problem is deeply systematic- remember this army is the reformed army after their disappointing performance in 2008. It’s clear that corruption has corrupted the army to a point that it will take years to fix, assuming that’s even possible because Putin doesn’t know how to rule without corruption. At this stage sending more soldiers to Ukraine is just Russia finding out the answer to the age old question “what is maximum no. of Russian soldiers that can be killed by a single howitzer 777”? Demographically Russia is not doing well either, asking families to send their only son to the front will it be popular. Add to this that the “best and brightest” have been steadily leaving Russia for the past decade as well as the 300000 that have left due to this war and you get a sense of just how bad things really are. This was Russias last gasp, and it’s a gamble that will not pay off.
Probably the most accurate analysis so far!
Seen it for a very outside position and perspective, I can notice some "aggressive alliance that is made for be a pain in the ars to Russia", it may not be an existential threat but is definitely for undermine Russia's regional power, and just to clarify I'm not supporting Russia's acts, I just pointing the obvious.
People should see some videos from Professor John Mearsheimer, he warned about this scenario we now see for years.
And he was right about everything.
Excellent and Outstanding Analysis!!!
I'm still missing a discussion of the russian leadership's ideology, which clearly is incompatible to almost the rest of the world. An outcome like the one outlined here may eventually overcome the present crisis, but it would also mean the can gets kicked further down the road - until next time? In other words, how could their ruling ideology be challenged? This ought to be a global discussion, and why not through the UN?
Right. Putin can now see how ineffectual his military is. Any withdrawal will be followed by an attempted strengthening of his military.
And their ideology is fascism with a kleptocratic power structure. The best way I can think to counter them is to call them out publicly for their lying and for their atrocious behavior. Make it impossible for other countries to deny.
And then do everything we can to get the Russian people good information.
We could also work at buying off the oligarchs to help us since they’re non-ideological.
The UN is toothless as Russia sits in the security council. And yes Russia will try again, the only chance for Ukraine is to defeat Russia now and become part of the west (EU/NATO) to put it out of reach from Russia.
What a great channel you have, subscribed!
'The Tzar has the ears of a goat!' That old Slavic folk tail is apt here. It is not the Tzar's fault it is his bad advisors. He will claim it is General's fault, so hopefully a pull out after he purges the Army brass.
Thank you Anders for this commentary and analysis I think your views are well thought out. Someone once said that the truth has a certain ring to it, and that’s what I hear when you speak .
No offence but that's what a lot of Russians think when they watch the news....
@@klapsigaarenbasgitaar1931 I have a good friend who grew up in the Soviet Union, he said the Russian people have been brainwashed by the gov. Media for so long its hopeless . At least here [ USA ] we have multiple choices for information, you choose .
@@kenboydart You are right! Whatever they say about 'main stream media', which I think is a misleading concept introduced by opponents of free press, we should cherish the options we have in the West and support those platforms that are having a hard time because of a loss of income in the digital age.
Regardless of what happens next, Putin' himself will be enshrined in Russian history as the leader of the worst two military failures in modern day history - Battle of Mariupol and Battle of Kyiv (not to mention the loss of the Moskva). On the other hand, Ukraine has gained an international respect and admiration that no one could have ever imagined. For Putin, it's already a loose/loose situation, he has shamed his county militarily, and set his country back decades of economic prosperity.