Why All-Out War is Good, Actually

How's your anxiety these days? Mine's a motherfucker. Rumors of nuclear war, PTSD, and a coffee addiction are not a fun combination.

Which is why I'm hoping the rumored "big news" out of Moscow come May 9th - V-E Day - will be a general mobilization. Brutal as it's been, the Russo-Ukrainian war thus far really has been a "special military operation" and not a formal war. This is a logistical as much as legal distinction, because it means the Kremlin cannot call up reservists or directly conscript new soldiers.  Should Putin declare "a state of war" on or before the big Red Square celebrations planned for next week, that all changes as the entire Russian society will be placed on a war footing. Going all-in on Donbass, which will succeed no matter how many Polish BMPs Zelensky can get.

And that's a good thing. The terrible logic of this war from the beginning has been a conventional Russian victory - however that can defined and spinned by the siloviki - is better for the world than continued Ukrainian success. Because nukes. Many American and other Western talking heads and political class suckpuppets have bemoaned that the 4000+ nuclear warheads in the Russian arsenal puts Europe and the US in a sort of hostage situation, where NATO air forces can't just roll in and carpet bomb Russian forces without suffering actual consequences in London and DC.

Somewhere in Baghdad, people are muttering, "See how you like it..."

There's been talk recently, which I am not linking to, about a possible deployment of tactical nukes against Ukraine to clear the current impasse in Donbass. Exaggerated and ridiculous talk but still alarming, as such an escalation besides the horror and suffering immediately in Ukraine would breach the global nuclear taboo that has persisted since 1945. Once Russia uses nukes in a conflict, that sets a precedent for US and Chinese (and Israeli) nuclear forces that amounts to, "Hey, we can do this now." Which will either translate into many tactical deployments as the Great Powers go about beating on weaker countries or - and who knows the odds on this anymore - an escalation to a strategic exchange as NATO "cannot let this go unanswered" or whatever other idiot excuse for annihilating the Northern Hemisphere.

But, should Putin declare All-out War on Ukraine, the possibility of a tac nuke goes way down:

If Putin declares a mobilization on May 9, that would almost certainly indicate a deferral of possible WMD use. More Russian soldiers in Ukraine means more of them exposed to potential WMD fallout. And conquering Ukraine, if parts of it are devasted by WMD, makes no sense.

Michael Kofman, one of the few to predict the war who isn't a hysterical neocon, talked about this a week ago. He argues that current Russian forces, once the Donbass Offensive is done, is a "spent force" that cannot prosecute further military operations against Ukraine - let alone other neighboring countries, despite the yelpings of Polish and Baltic reactionaries. Kofman also makes the point that such a mobilization would commit Putin to maximalist war aims - the total Kyiv regime change that initally failed - and that could prove politically untenable.

There's an inevitable argument that invading Ukraine in the first place made no sense so Putin might still pull the nuclear trigger, but Anatol Lieven makes a good point that while reckless and ruthless, Putin is not insane. His miscalculations are still rational. So here's hoping he doubles down conventionally, or just pulls a "mission accomplished" while the Donbass offensive stalemates, instead of trying to shock and awe the world one last time before that cancer gets him.

UPDATE 2:59PM: A rare good Twitter thread on the costs versus benefits of doing a Bush-In-His-Flightsuit victory lap rather than whole-hog mobilization.

Loosed Upon the World

Two weeks ago, if you told me Ukraine would still be resisting the Russian invasion and Zelensky would still be alive, I'd have laughed in your face. In fairness, I laughed at the prospect of an invasion of this scale up until the morning of February 24th. The idea was simply too stupid across every dimension - tactically, strategically, and politically. I like to think I've so far been vindicated on that analysis, the Russian tactics of shock and awe have stupidly abandoned any sense of modern logistics and led to a whole new genre of internet video: tank theft! Strategically, Putin has stupidly reinvigorated NATO and even inspired Germany to start arming itself again. And politically, this has galvanized the once waning opposition movement within Russia, to say nothing of how it's compromised Vova's position among his fellow siloviki in the Kremlin.

It was all so obviously stupid from the start. And it happened anyway.

And while how it's been happening has been even more of a surprise, how it ends still looks written in stone. A Russian military victory, followed by occupation and insurgency. Putin's very own Iraq quagmire, right on the border and fed by NATO weapons shipments. Hundreds of thousands dead, a nuclear superpower destabilized for a generation, and Ukraine a breeding ground for all the worst sorts of throat-slitters.

Though you wouldn't think it, to judge by every anglophone corner of the internet. Between r/worldnews and Facebook memes, there is a popular certainty Russia is losing the war and will soon be driven from the Ukrainian plains, to allow the sacred sunflowers to grow. Or something. While the conspiratorial may be inclined to see this total domination of the propaganda space to be the works of some three-letter-agency, I think it's genuinely organic. Millions of people throwing moral support to Ukrainians, who despite the sins of the Azov Battalion really are defending their homes from an aggressive invasion. Much like Iraqis or Afghans or Vietnamese or Yemenis or...

And it helps the blue and gold flag memes that Russia's performance - so far - has been so blitheringly incompetent. Michael Kofman, one of the few commentators to have predicted war, has gone on numerous social media threads about both logistical failures and the bizarre way Russia has abandoned their own combined arms doctrine, opting for slap-dash "special ops" zipping in, getting overstretched, and either captured or killed by even Ukrainian militia. Russian soldier morale, already not the highest among armies, has reportedly been sinking faster than the ruble. The way things look - the way they're made to look - is Ukraine only needs to hold out through another week or two of bombardments until either mass desertion renders Russian forces combat ineffective or Vova suffers a palace coup by generals upset that even their own are dying in this stupid war.

Serious question: when was the last time an American General died in battle? I can't think of any since the Civil War - maybe, since Confederates don't count.

A lesson everyone should have learned from Syria is light infantry craft matters. The Kurdish YPG demonstrated this over and over against Islamic State. Ukrainian regular military and militia have demonstrated it over and over again. But light infantry can only do so much against heavy armor, especially when Russia can afford to keep throwing men and material into the Ukraine meatgrinder. For all their bravery, a Ukraine that doesn't reach some ceasefire deal with the invaders is looking at the decimation of Kyiv (which might be happening as you read this) followed by an occupation and insurgency.

Here's how an insurgency works: think about everyone in your entire extended family. All of them, from the old yia-yias to the bouncing new babies to the middle-aged failures. Now kill two thirds of them. Of those, a third died bad. Like basement and power drill bad. In exchange, you maybe get the occupiers to back off for a while. In rare cases, the occupiers leave because the political situation among their bosses no longer allows for the costs of the occupation. That usually takes a few changes in the political leadership or maybe a new generation reaching age of majority. Also, for this thought experiment, you are not one of the guerillas. You just live in the occupied territory. The guerrillas lose more.

A bad deal for Ukraine. And every neighboring country. And it's the big plan inside the Beltway:

The ways that Western countries would support a Ukrainian resistance are beginning to take shape. Officials have been reluctant to discuss detailed plans, since they’re premised on a Russian military victory that, however likely, hasn’t happened yet. But as a first step, Ukraine’s allies are planning for how to help establish and support a government-in-exile, which could direct guerrilla operations against Russian occupiers, according to several U.S. and European officials.

NATO will not engage Russia directly. Which is a good thing, no matter how many schools and hospitals get shelled into rubble. But NATO will keep an unconventional war simmering in occupied Ukraine, nominally to bleed Russia, but also empowering the worst factions within Ukraine. Thoughtful, democratic types make for poor guerillas and Langley never arms Marxist rebels no matter who they're fighting. All this proposed support is going to the Azov Battalion and fellow travelers, because arming the Afghan Mujahideen worked out so well.

Except now, the Great Powers quagmire with militant reactionaries is in the middle of "civilized" Europe. The blowback coming from Putin's stupid war is going to make Paris 2015 look like harsh language.

Oh Shit

Putin is having his Bush Goes to Baghdad moment. Whether this is shock and awe to break off those breakaway regions or a prelude to a Ukraine-wide military occupation, it both amounts to the same thing: thousands dead and the weakness of the Russian state exposed (counter-intuitively) by it's massive violent demonstration.

I remember Stan Goff making this point in late 2004 (can't dig up the old Counterpunch/Beast article, may only be on Wayback now). That the US invading Iraq in 2003 was because they couldn't bring any other measures to bear, that US hegemony had already degraded to the point that soft power didn't work. Short-term, the US military defeated the Iraqi military but then a decade of occupation only managed to produce a corrupt government-in-name-only and the Islamic State.

That's the Russo-Ukraine War trajectory. Swift Russian tactical victory followed by long, grinding decline. It's already a domestically unpopular operation (which will probably fluctuate back and forth, people can forgive any atrocity if it achieves "victory") and has now effectively shut Russia out of the global economy with the all but stated death of Nord Stream 2. Now, the US faced a huge backlash for the Iraq adventure but the US in 2003 was also at it's hyperpower peak. Russia today has been under 8 years of Crimea sanctions and last I checked has a negative birth rate. Holding the threat of invasion was getting dialogue with the US and EU but now that's done. In trying to make Russia great again, Putin just set them on the path to being North Korea.

Anatol Lieven has been one of the war skeptics to still honestly assess what a war might be like. And he doesn't mince words:

The European Union would impose greatly intensified sanctions that would do vast damage to an already troubled Russian economy; the Nord Stream gas pipeline would be abandoned; Russia would be forced into almost complete dependence on China; parts of the Ukrainian army would fight very hard, and might inflict heavy Russian casualties; and if it occupies large new territories, Russia would face the challenge of ruling not the pro-Russian populations of the Donbas and Crimea, but significant numbers of infuriated and rebellious Ukrainians.

That the Siloviki running the Kremlin would take a look at all of this and decide Operation Ukrainian Freedom is better than it's coy brinksmanship of the past year is testament to Neocon-level idiot hubris, an air of desperation over maintaining their own power domestically, or likely both.

And, living on a different continent, this would all be so much background noise - the usual misery of the universe - if not for all the Acela corridor ghouls now salivating to arm Ukraine. Maybe that's why I'm rambling all over the place, because waking up to "War's on," in the one country that sabre-rattles the most at Russia, calling this "Our Sudetenland!" while forgetting Our Haditha means living in the crossfire of two sclerotic oligarchies, always threatening to sock each other in the goshdarn teeth while the ice caps continue melting.