Russians are simultaneously more and less stupid than they seem to be at the same time. They are really run by the intelligence services, and they often “test narratives” to see how messaging goes over with the populations. They use deliberate ‘repeaters’, messengers and role players within their sociey to gague themes to try and advance their goals. You see public figures following their scripts consistently, from froth-mouthed apocalyptic lunatics like Solovyev and Medvedev threatening to end the world, down to malcontent grunt Z-Bloggers like Girkin muttering tactical level failures, acting as a release valve for the failings of the state ‘not going far enough’. The ones who are allowed to speak on an ongoing basis are sanctioned to do so, for reasons that make sense to the FSB.
Until recently, any public talk of even ACKNOWLEDGING, much less ending the SMO/ aka “War” would get you locked up for discrediting the army. Now, they are starting to seep out war-ending off-ramp strategies. This is the first time I’ve seen one around the idea that the war should be stopped “for the good of the economy”. That sounds more high minded than verboten military or moral alternatives like “we’re losing” or “it’s the humane thing to do”. At any rate, it’s at least tolerated public dialogue that explicitly talks of ending the war. None of these narrative tests are accidental - some are outbursts, where the messager is locked up or killed - but this is different in that it’s from a named public figure.
Having them say “it’s for the good of the economy” allows them to at least try to avoid the humiliation of a completely stalled front that they have been unable to move substantially for nearly two years. It ignores their invasion’s absolute failure, doesn’t acknowledge that maybe little brother ukraine isn’t an inherently inferior race, or that the entire country ackshually belongs to Rusia, because - reasons - and doesn’t have a right to exist. It doesn’t even mention NATO as the REAL reason why they aren’t vacationing in Kyiv today.
It’s all a colossal tragedy, of course. But putting that aside - it’s both funny and somewhat pathetic that this is where they’re at more than four years in having squandered their entire soviet inhertiance on a petty 20th century revenge project led by an overpromoted gangster ghoul. But - it’s also a good thing that they’re openly talking about how to exit an aggressive war of invasion while being WELL short of their goals of conquest.
Will be interesting to see if this “for the economy” theme persists as a face-saving tactic. What do you think?
Okay, prepare for some ignorant questions from someone who is rooting for Ukraine but doesn’t know the specifics as well as you do.
The war is destroying Russia’s economy. Got it. What about the Ukrainian economy? Has international help and the seizing of Russian oligarch’s money really helped that much? How have they been able to survive?
Am not remotely qualified to answer that formally. But - this a website, so I’ll give it a go anyways, with that caveat. Behold - the rantings of a confessed meatball.
In short - Ukraine’s wartime population has fallen by probably at least 10m people. That’s very, very bad. And it’s demographics are very bad, because people don’t tend to have kids during genocidal wars, as you’re waiting to see what happens before you commit yourself to having kids. How many will return to Ukraine? Who knows. It really depends on what Russia does over the coming decade plus. If it remains a credible menace, then Ukraine will continue to suffer. If it collapses into a rump state of St. Petes and Moscow down to Rostov, but loses the Caucasus and anything past the Urals, Ukraine may end up the dominant eastern european power in the region.
In some cases, industrial societies stay permanently altered after war. In some cases, the soldiers come home and there’s a massive industrial and baby boom as they…well…come home and put their minds into pursuits other than war. I don’t think this will be the case in Ukraine though, because this has frankly been an old-man’s war, on both sides. Ukraine has not recruited people under 25 and russia has done it’s own internal ethnic cleansing to ship useless mouths, including old men in many cases, to be liquidated on the premise of being redeemed for good ukrainian land.
Permanent damage to Ukraine has been done, but - they’ve survived as a sovreign state and Russia has blown it’s wad. This was a 1,000 year project of enslavement, cruelty and subjugation, but it appears the Russians will have to find another way if they’re stupid enough to try and spread their corrosive influence back over Ukraine again.
Europe has refused to give Ukraine of the seized ‘oligarch money’ you’re referring to. It’s frozen, and some of the interest I THINK has been provided, but the principal amounts haven’t been touched. Belgium have, in particular, been obstructionist assholes on this matter. This is a total guess, but I think that they have held this money as a last reserve, KNOWING that Russia will never pay a dime of actual reparations, and that this will have to be given in lieu.
They’ve survived with direct & indirect financial and material assistance. PURL initiative, many rounds of funding, Rammstein group, recent EU 60B “loan” that got freed up when Orban was voted out of Hungary. Unblocked grain corridor early in the war to resume exports through the Black Sea to the Mediterranean.
When the war ends, Ukraine will become the greatest rebuilding infrastructure project in the world for a decade or more. Lucrative contracts will come in to reconstruct an EU-aligned Ukraine rich in broken things, agricultural goods and mineral wealth, especially battery-essential lithium deposits in the east that are central to Russia’s motives for the invasion in the first place: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shevchenko_deposit
It just depends what side of the Donbas battle lines those deposits end up. Russia is just starting to unravel militarily now. They may not be able to reconquer lost territories in the conventional way, if you look at their failed counteroffensive in Kherson and Zaporhizia in 2023, but - their strategy seems like it might be to make Russian occupation untenable. They have increased the range and depth of their drone strikes, have started to (finally) hit Moscow and other big cities, and can probably deny Russia any benefits of exploiting occupied land indefinitely. That’s another conversation for another thread.
TL:DR - Instead of liberating stolen land directly, make the Russians leave. If the Russian state wobbles after this massive defeat, then opportunity to reclaim Donbas and Crimea may present themselves over time while Russia is going through post-Putin convulsions. Emphasis on “May”. Ukraine surviving as a viable, sovreign, EU aligned state is far more than most serious minded people could have predicted in 2022. It has the chance to rebuild itself from the sclerotic mess that the USSR left behind, just like Poland, Romania and the Czechoslovakians did.
The Ukrainian economy is in tatters and Ukraine is relying on foreign aid to survive.
But unlike Russia Ukraine is receiving foreign aid.
Also Russia has to produce or buy all of their military equipment, Ukraine is receiving considerable amounts from allies for free.
Also, Ukraine is fighting for survival, so there’s a much higher pain tolerance. Russia is not fighting for survival and despite all the propaganda Russians know this.
So, yeah, if Ukraine didn’t receive any foreign help they’d be in a worse spot than Russia. But they do receive lots of help both for altruistic and geopolitical reasons. Russia receives little to none.
One point to add the other folks didn’t mention- Ukraine’s military industry has blossomed giving them a new potential for income as their shores look to them for sourcing drone tech and manufacture. Multiple euro groups setting up production there.
No doubt. They have become THE most advanced drone fighting force in the world. An entire, vital industry created from the crucible of war.
This sudden drone epiphany is in some ways similar to the early 20th century, the Age of the Battleship when heavy metal naval ships were still considered the ultimate expression of power, but then the advent of aircraft as highly cost effective ship killers emerged with torpedo and dive bombers. You can build a LOT of planes and bombs/torpedoes for a fraction of the cost of producing a naval vessl. It quickly became clear that planes kill ships much better than ships do. And then the sudden rush into aircraft carriers over gunboats, if your country was rich enough to do it.
Repulse and Prince of Wales were the most advanced British warships of their day, and were sunk by Japanese aircraft in hours. Same as Yamato. There had been lots of examples prior, like Bismarck & the battle of Taranto where it became clear that relatively cheap planes - including obsolete biplanes - were able to kill VERY expensive naval captial ships. Similarly, drones have proven to be the effective counter to mechanized infantry, tanks and artillery that anti-naval aircraft were to traditional capital ships.
Drones at scale have a MUCH lower barrier to entry, and Ukraine are now the experts.