Considering
the "what ifs" and "then whats" of a direct
Russian intervention in the Donbass
4
June, 2014
It
has been my recurrent effort on this blog to try to explain the
likely reasons why Russia has not intervened so far in the war
between Banderastan and Novorosiia. I notice that those who see
signs of "betrayal" or "sellout" by Putin are
long on accusations but very short on specifics. Unlike the
excellent article which I recently posted as a "must read",
the folks who are busy accusing Putin of betrayal stop at the very
short term: send guns, send men, impose a no-fly zone, strike this or
that unit, etc. Fine. And then what? It is that "then what?"
which our armchair patriots systematically shy away from. Besides
"then what?" the other issue which these armchair
strategists shy away from is "what if?". What if the
Bandera freaks really open up with everything they have, out of spite
or out of retaliation, and what if they really flatten Kramatorsk,
Slaviansk or an entire neighborhood of Donetsk? What if the dead at
this point turn from tens or hundreds into the many thousands? Those
who mistakenly believe that the junta forces have already used
"massive artillery strikes" should look up the concept
"огневой вал" which is often translated as
"artillery barrage" which, while not incorrect, does not
even begin to convey the meaning that it has in Russian military
doctrine. Rather than to give figures, just take a look at these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIpW7BuaPZ4
(shows Ukrainian training)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UNsqONPtGo
(shows various systems)
My
point is this: the Ukrainians have the systems needed to *really*
flatten a town and they are trained to do so. So what if they do
that? Then what?
Of
course, Russia has the means to rapidly destroy the Ukrainian
artillery units in the Donbass, but that would mark yet another
escalation of the conflict. Then what?
Or
what if the US orders Poroshenko to "request" the
protection of NATO? And what if NATO does something really dumb like
the initial deployment of the 82nd Airborne to Saudi Arabia as part
of Desert Shield? Why do I call "Desert Shield" really
dumb? Because unbeknown to the American public, the 82nd AB was put
into a very dangerous situation: this light infantry force was
deployed as a "tripwire" force meaning that if the Iraqis
crossed into the KSA they would have to engage the 82nd and that
meant attacking the USA. Brilliant? Hardly. The 82nd is a light
infantry force which has zero change against the large Iraqi tank
formations. The *hope* on the US side was that US airpower would be
enough to stop the Iraqis. And it was just that - hope. Years
later, I think it was Dick Cheney who was asked by a reporter what
would have happened if US airpower would not have been enough to
deter Saddam and if the 82nd had been butchered. You know what he
replied? "We would have had no other option to to use our
nuclear weapons". So finally the truth came out: the White
House was ready to take the risk sacrifice the 82nd AB and it was
"hoping" that the US would not have to use nukes. I don't
know about you, but seeing Imperial leaders "hoping" not to
use nukes really scares me.
So
what if Obama (whose Administration must have an average IQ lower
then George Bush Senior one's by at least 20 points!) puts down a
"tripwire" force along the Dniper and what if the
Ukrainians organize combat operation or even military strikes from
behind this tripwire force? Then what?
One
more example? Sure!
It
is not unreasonable to suspect that maybe 15%-20% of the folks living
in the Donbass/Novorossia region are not pro-Russian at all and that
they support the junta. This is a big area with, if I recall
correctly, something in the range of 7 million people living in the
Donetsk-Lugansk region, so even 10% of 7 million is still 700'000
people supporting Kiev. From these 700'000 let's take on 10% capable
of fighting (70'000) and let us assume that only 1/4 of them would be
actually willing to seriously fight. That is still 17'500 men
willing to fight in just two region of a much bigger south-eastern
Ukraine. That is way more than the IRA ever had in its ranks. That
is even more than Hezbollah has today!
Speaking
of the IRA - remember how the Brits deployed in Northern Ireland to
officially restore peace and security? (If not, see the "Operation
Banner" entry on Wikipedia for a quick refresher). That also
seemed like a no brainer at that time. It turned into a prolonged
nightmare.
I
could multiply such examples ad nauseam but you get my point: unlike
some of our wannabe strategists, Putin and his Russian Security
Council members have to consider the full-spectrum of possible "what
ifs" and "then whats" before taking a decision to
intervene. And I haste to add that a covert intervention is
dangerous too: if, so far, Kiev has failed to capture a single
Russian "agent" or "operator" this does not mean
that this might not happen and that would be a political disaster for
Russia. And if you think that the SBU could not catch itself in
broad daylight you are right - except that in this case the
Ukrainians would just be the arm of the US CIA/NSA who, you can be
sure of that, are the one using all their formidable means to locate
any Russian covert activity in the Ukraine.
I
won't even address the comments of some lunatics who are seriously
suggesting that Russian should nuke London or any other such
stupidities. I conclusion I will just say this: like it or not,
there is a consensus in Russia right now that a direct intervention
would be a huge mistake. As for covert aid, we can only speculate
about it, but I do notice that the Novorossiia Defense Forces seem to
regularly "find" "abandoned" weapons just of the
type which they need most. As to those who constantly demand a
Russian intervention in the Donbass I will say this: unless you can
support your calls for intervention with all the appropriate "what
ifs" and "then whats" - don't bother posting them here
as you are only making yourself look amateurish and irresponsible.
If you are such a hero - grab a gun and go fight yourself, but don't
tell others when/how they should die.
The
Saker
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.