Latest news with #KyivPost
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion - Time is not on Russia's side in Ukraine
Who is winning, Ukraine or Russia? And whose prospects are better in the long run? In other words, whose side is time on? The Quincy Institute's Anatol Lieven states matter-of-factly that, 'as everyone now seems to agree, time is on Russia's side.' But is it? At one time, everyone also agreed that the Ukraine War would be over in a few weeks — an alert to the perils of groupthink. And now, as then, the reality is rather more complicated. As with everything, there are two opposing schools of thought: the optimists who think Ukraine will prevail and the pessimists who bet on Russia. The bottom-line pessimist case is based on numbers. Russia's population, economy and military-industrial complex are much bigger than Ukraine's. The numbers will therefore decide ultimate outcomes, even though Russian battlefield losses are exceptionally high and its economy has been battered by sanctions and Vladimir Putin's anti-consumerist economic policies. Expert analysts Collin Meisel and Mathew Burrows explicitly adopt this approach in a piece titled, 'Russia Can Afford to Take a Beating in Ukraine.' 'Whether Russia can maintain its ability to reconstitute and even grow its forces as its war in Ukraine progresses remains uncertain,' they write. 'More certain is its advantage over Ukraine in terms of total population, with nearly four times as many people and roughly 18.9 million males aged 20–39 relative to Ukraine's fewer than five million males of that age. Russia can lose three times as many troops as Ukraine and still suffer less in relative terms.' It is hard to argue with numbers. It is easy to argue with what they do or do not imply. After all, numbers alone are a poor predictor of victory. The U.S. should have prevailed in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, but it didn't. France should have won in Algeria and Vietnam, but it didn't. Imperial Russia should have won the Crimean War and the Russo-Japanese War, but it didn't. And the ancient Greeks and, later, Alexander of Macedon should never have defeated the Persian Empire, but they did. Clearly, there's more to the story than numbers of men, money and materiel. Leadership, morale, tactics, strategy, quality of weapons and other unquantifiable factors play an important — perhaps even decisive — role. Germany under both Kaiser Wilhelm and Hitler stupidly violated Otto von Bismarck's guiding foreign-policy principle of avoiding a two-front war. Both suffered defeat as a result. Seen in this light, a Russian victory is anything but a sure bet. And the fact that the war has dragged on for so long is perhaps evidence of the futility of relying exclusively on numbers. But can the numerically challenged Ukrainians possibly prevail? Many, especially front-line soldiers, think they can. Stefan Korshak, senior defense correspondent at the Kyiv Post, recently summarized the argument made by one such officer, Robert Brovdi. 'Russia is mobilizing about 30–32,000 soldiers a month, and [the Ukrainian Armed Forces] is killing about 20,000 soldiers a month,' he writes. 'This makes the [Ukrainians'] task easy to grasp in very clear terms: Kill or wound 10,000 to 12,000 more Russian soldiers a month. Do that, all Russian offensives collapse in short order. Keep it up, the Russian army global morale cracks. Keep it up some more, you can bring down the Russian government.' Can Ukraine pull this off? Brovdi, thinks so. He points to the Ukrainians' four drone brigades. 'The solution is mathematically simple,' he writes. 'More drone pilots, more drone brigades … Absent more drones and more operators, the alternative is to make the existing ones more efficient. By Brovdi's calculation, if the drone units in the field now increase kill rates by 15 percent across the board, by whatever means, then in four months a critical mass of Russian casualties would be reached.' Brovdi estimates that Ukraine could reach 35,000 monthly Russian casualties by August. Brovdi agrees that it's ultimately about numbers — Ukraine needs to kill more Russians than Russia can mobilize. But getting to that point isn't just about the number of soldiers or weapons Ukraine can produce. It is about the quality of the drones and the ability of Ukrainian soldiers to use them efficiently. So, who is right, the optimists or the pessimists? Assuming that Meisel, Burrows and Brovdi are correct in their analysis, we may conclude that, at a minimum, it's a tie — which, given the disparity of resources and Putin's hopeless hope of destroying Ukraine, actually translates to a minor Ukrainian victory. At a maximum, Brovdi's calculations nullify Meisel and Burrows' conclusions and portend a possible Russian collapse — or a major Ukrainian victory. Time may just be on Ukraine's side. Alexander J. Motyl is a professor of political science at Rutgers University-Newark. A specialist on Ukraine, Russia and the USSR, and on nationalism, revolutions, empires and theory, he is the author of 10 books of nonfiction, as well as 'Imperial Ends: The Decay, Collapse, and Revival of Empires' and 'Why Empires Reemerge: Imperial Collapse and Imperial Revival in Comparative Perspective.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
5 days ago
- Business
- The Hill
Time is not on Russia's side in Ukraine
Who is winning, Ukraine or Russia? And whose prospects are better in the long run? In other words, whose side is time on? The Quincy Institute's Anatol Lieven states matter-of-factly that, 'as everyone now seems to agree, time is on Russia's side.' But is it? At one time, everyone also agreed that the Ukraine War would be over in a few weeks — an alert to the perils of groupthink. And now, as then, the reality is rather more complicated. As with everything, there are two opposing schools of thought: the optimists who think Ukraine will prevail and the pessimists who bet on Russia. The bottom-line pessimist case is based on numbers. Russia's population, economy and military-industrial complex are much bigger than Ukraine's. The numbers will therefore decide ultimate outcomes, even though Russian battlefield losses are exceptionally high and its economy has been battered by sanctions and Vladimir Putin's anti-consumerist economic policies. Expert analysts Collin Meisel and Mathew Burrows explicitly adopt this approach in a piece titled, 'Russia Can Afford to Take a Beating in Ukraine.' 'Whether Russia can maintain its ability to reconstitute and even grow its forces as its war in Ukraine progresses remains uncertain,' they write. 'More certain is its advantage over Ukraine in terms of total population, with nearly four times as many people and roughly 18.9 million males aged 20–39 relative to Ukraine's fewer than five million males of that age. Russia can lose three times as many troops as Ukraine and still suffer less in relative terms.' It is hard to argue with numbers. It is easy to argue with what they do or do not imply. After all, numbers alone are a poor predictor of victory. The U.S. should have prevailed in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, but it didn't. France should have won in Algeria and Vietnam, but it didn't. Imperial Russia should have won the Crimean War and the Russo-Japanese War, but it didn't. And the ancient Greeks and, later, Alexander of Macedon should never have defeated the Persian Empire, but they did. Clearly, there's more to the story than numbers of men, money and materiel. Leadership, morale, tactics, strategy, quality of weapons and other unquantifiable factors play an important — perhaps even decisive — role. Germany under both Kaiser Wilhelm and Hitler stupidly violated Otto von Bismarck's guiding foreign-policy principle of avoiding a two-front war. Both suffered defeat as a result. Seen in this light, a Russian victory is anything but a sure bet. And the fact that the war has dragged on for so long is perhaps evidence of the futility of relying exclusively on numbers. But can the numerically challenged Ukrainians possibly prevail? Many, especially front-line soldiers, think they can. Stefan Korshak, senior defense correspondent at the Kyiv Post, recently summarized the argument made by one such officer, Robert Brovdi. 'Russia is mobilizing about 30–32,000 soldiers a month, and [the Ukrainian Armed Forces] is killing about 20,000 soldiers a month,' he writes. 'This makes the [Ukrainians'] task easy to grasp in very clear terms: Kill or wound 10,000 to 12,000 more Russian soldiers a month. Do that, all Russian offensives collapse in short order. Keep it up, the Russian army global morale cracks. Keep it up some more, you can bring down the Russian government.' Can Ukraine pull this off? Brovdi, thinks so. He points to the Ukrainians' four drone brigades. 'The solution is mathematically simple,' he writes. 'More drone pilots, more drone brigades … Absent more drones and more operators, the alternative is to make the existing ones more efficient. By Brovdi's calculation, if the drone units in the field now increase kill rates by 15 percent across the board, by whatever means, then in four months a critical mass of Russian casualties would be reached.' Brovdi estimates that Ukraine could reach 35,000 monthly Russian casualties by August. Brovdi agrees that it's ultimately about numbers — Ukraine needs to kill more Russians than Russia can mobilize. But getting to that point isn't just about the number of soldiers or weapons Ukraine can produce. It is about the quality of the drones and the ability of Ukrainian soldiers to use them efficiently. So, who is right, the optimists or the pessimists? Assuming that Meisel, Burrows and Brovdi are correct in their analysis, we may conclude that, at a minimum, it's a tie — which, given the disparity of resources and Putin's hopeless hope of destroying Ukraine, actually translates to a minor Ukrainian victory. At a maximum, Brovdi's calculations nullify Meisel and Burrows' conclusions and portend a possible Russian collapse — or a major Ukrainian victory. Time may just be on Ukraine's side. Alexander J. Motyl is a professor of political science at Rutgers University-Newark. A specialist on Ukraine, Russia and the USSR, and on nationalism, revolutions, empires and theory, he is the author of 10 books of nonfiction, as well as 'Imperial Ends: The Decay, Collapse, and Revival of Empires' and 'Why Empires Reemerge: Imperial Collapse and Imperial Revival in Comparative Perspective.'
Scottish Sun
27-05-2025
- Politics
- Scottish Sun
Britain will be wiped off the map with nukes unless it stops helping Ukraine, warns Putin's guru ‘Professor Doomsday'
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) BRITAIN will be taken off the map with nuclear weapons unless it stops helping Ukraine, mad Vladimir Putin's guru dubbed Professor Doomsday has warned. Sergei Karaganov, 72, has chillingly warned that it's "vital" for Russia to use the war in Ukraine as a way to defeat the whole of Europe. 7 Russian Yars intercontinental ballistic missile launchers appeared in Russia's Victory Day parade last year Credit: AFP 7 Nuclear cloud the Soviet Tsar Bomb test - the likes of which Russia is threatening Britain with Credit: East2West 7 Sergei Karaganov, aka Professor Doomsday, an advisor to Putin Credit: East2West 7 And unless Britain stops aiding Ukraine, the UK "won't exist" after a nuclear attack, he threatened. Professor Doomsday has exposed what Putin's actual aims in Ukraine could be after reports emerged that Russia is readying a 50,000-strong force on Kharkiv's border. Karaganov said on a Russian government-owned TV channel: "We need to strengthen nuclear deterrence by any means." Moscow must therefore "increase the reality of the use of nuclear weapons, and restore the fear of nuclear war," he warned. Professor Doomsday added that the "European question, unfortunately, cannot be resolved in a relatively peaceful way" and that a peace deal would "postpone this solution and get the same thing in a few years". He went on to warn that Russia wants to "make [Europe] run" and give the continent to the realisation that "the next wave of strikes will fall on their territory". Karaganov also said that a "traditional game" from Britain is "pitting Ukraine against Russia" and that if it continues, "there will be no Britain" He said: "What they're doing is madness - but Britain is a small country. 'They're gambling on a world war - what's going to happen to them? 'I'm not saying it will be terrible for everyone, but just that they won't exist anymore." Devastating British Storm Shadow missiles could soon be used by Ukraine to blitz Putin's forces deep inside Russia His terrifying words come as Donald Trump is reported to be weighing sanctions against Putin to force him to the table for peace talks. Despite the sanctions threat and the US President branding mad Vlad as "absolutely CRAZY," the pair have agreed to a prisoner swap. The swap was announced on Tuesday by Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov, who praised Don as "a man who wants results". The Putin puppet added that the prisoner swap was agreed in the midst of negotiations on ending the bloody war in Ukraine which he says European nations are trying to "sabotage". Sources have revealed to the Kyiv Post that Trump is "seriously considering" lifting all restrictions on how Ukraine uses weapons against Russia. And soon, Britain's state-of-the-art Storm Shadow missiles could be used by Ukraine to blitz targets deep inside Russia, the German Chancellor indicated. 7 Britain gave the green light for Storm Shadows to be used inside Russia in November 2024 7 A car burning after strikes over the weekend in Odesa 7 The aftermath of Russian strikes on Sumy earlier this month Ukraine's key backers - including Germany, France, the UK and the US - have lifted restrictions on where the weapons they donate can be used, Germany's Merz said. He said last Monday: "There are no longer any range restrictions on weapons delivered to Ukraine - neither by the British nor by the French nor by us nor by the Americans. "This means that Ukraine can now defend itself, for example, by attacking military positions in Russia… With very few exceptions, it didn't do that until recently. It can now do that." In November last year, the US authorised Ukraine to use American long-range missiles called ATACMS against targets inside Russia. In the same month, Britain gave the green light for Ukraine to fire our Storm Shadow missiles at Russia. Britain's bunker-busting Storm Shadow rockets are a nightmare for enemies as they are capable of dodging air defences. The £800,000 missiles - already being fired within Ukraine - use GPS to precisely hit targets, and can travel at 600mph. Meanwhile Zelensky has said there is "currently no indication" that mad Vlad is "seriously considering" peace in war-torn Ukraine - despite numerous calls and meetings with the US. The brave Ukrainian leader added that instead, there is "ample evidence" that a new offensive is being prepared. Zelensky's words of warning come after a weekend-long exchange of long-range cross-border drone attacks between Russia and Ukraine. The brave Ukrainian leader added that instead, there is "ample evidence" that a new offensive is being prepared. And German Chancellor Friedrich Merz also revealed he anticipates a drawn-out war in Ukraine due to Russia's reluctance to reach peace. He said at a joint press conference with Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo: "Wars typically end because of economic or military exhaustion on one side or on both sides and in this war we are obviously still far from reaching that [situation]. "So we may have to prepare for a longer duration."
Time Magazine
27-05-2025
- Politics
- Time Magazine
What Germany's Green Light for Ukraine to Strike Inside Russia Means for the War
Germany has given Ukraine the green light to strike targets inside Russia using long-range weapons supplied by Berlin, in a decision that signals a notable hardening of Western resolve as the war grinds on. The shift, announced by Chancellor Friedrich Merz, lifts longstanding restrictions on the range of German-delivered missiles and aligns Berlin with some of Kyiv's other allies, including the UK and France. 'We will do everything in our power to continue supporting Ukraine,' Merz said in a statement on social media platform X on Monday. While it remains unclear whether Germany will be providing Ukraine specifically with Taurus missiles, as Kyiv previously requested, Merz confirmed that Ukrainian forces are no longer bound by geographic limits when using German systems. 'Ukraine can now also defend itself by attacking military positions in Russia,' the Chancellor said. The Kremlin condemned the move. Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told state media it was 'a rather dangerous decision' and warned it would undermine ongoing efforts to reach a political settlement. "If such decisions are made, they will absolutely go against our aspirations to reach a political settlement and the efforts being made within the framework of the settlement," he said. The shift marks a departure from Merz's predecessor, Olaf Scholz, who had resisted sending long-range weaponry to Ukraine, citing fears of Russian escalation. In a visit to Kyiv in December last year, Scholz reiterated his refusal, even as Germany unveiled a military aid package worth €650 million. By contrast, Merz sought to emphasize unity among Ukraine's Western allies. 'There are no longer any range restrictions on weapons delivered to Ukraine, neither by the British nor by the French nor by us nor by the Americans,' the Chancellor highlighted at a press conference on Monday. A government official later told Reuters that the announcement was not a change in policy, since Merz's administration, in office since May 6, had never imposed such limits. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is expected to visit Berlin for a meeting with Merz on Wednesday, May 28. While Berlin's position has now shifted, the U.S. is yet to confirm whether it has lifted all restrictions on long-range missile supplies to Ukraine. According to the Kyiv Post, two senior officials said that whilst some restrictions were still in place, President Donald Trump was 'seriously considering' lifting these. The report said that these were under review by Trump, and that he 'believes that the current status quo does not serve our common interests of bringing Russia to the [negotiation] table.' Former President Joe Biden had lifted some restrictions on long-range missiles. In November 2024, less than two weeks after he lost the presidential race to Trump, Biden authorized the use of ATACMS missiles in strikes on Russian territory. Ukraine has since used these weapons to hit targets in the Bryansk region and other parts of western Russia. Chancellor Merz's decision to lift similar restrictions could bolster Ukraine's ability to strike deep inside Russian territory. In November, the Ukrainian military used British long-range Storm Shadow missiles. Military sources told Sky News that strikes using the missiles were 'very successful," hitting targets in the Kursk region. The announcement from Merz comes at a moment of heightened uncertainty over a possible ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine. Last week, President Trump held what he called 'excellent' calls with both Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky in which he said that negotiations between the two countries will begin immediately. But within days, Russia launched its largest attack on its neighbor since the start of the war, killing 12 people, including three children in a barrage of 367 drones and missiles. Trump, posting on TruthSocial, condemned the attack as "needlessly killing a lot of people' and called Putin "absolutely crazy." The President also criticized Zelensky, saying that the Ukrainian President 'is doing his country no favors by talking the way he does. Everything out of his mouth causes problems, I don't like it, and it better stop.'
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
27-05-2025
- Politics
- First Post
Trump considering new sanctions on Russia, removing all limits on Ukraine's weapons: Reports
Amid frustration with Vladimir Putin's rejection of peace offers and continued attacks, US President Donald Trump is considering imposing new sanctions on Russia and removing all limits on Ukraine's use of weapons in the war, according to reports. read more In a sign of growing frustration with Russian leader Vladimir Putin, US President Donald Trump is considering imposing new sanctions on Russia and removing all limits on Ukraine's use of weapons in the war, according to reports. The developments come at a time when Trump has increasingly expressed frustration with Putin over continuous rejection of peace proposals, dismissal of peace talks, and increasing missile and drone attacks in recent days that have killed dozens in Ukraine. Trump on Sunday said Putin has 'gone absolutely crazy' and has no idea 'what the hell' happened to him. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Trump further said, 'I'm not happy with what Putin is doing. He's killing a lot of people, and I don't know what the hell happened to Putin.' Hours after Trump's remarks, Putin launched the largest aerial attack on Ukraine so far with 257 missiles and drones that killed at least 12 people and injured dozens. Since last weekend before the Trump-Putin call, Russia has launched around 1,000 missiles and drones and have killed dozens in Ukraine. Trump considering new sanctions on Russia: Report Trump is considering imposing new sanctions on Russia out of frustration with Putin's lack of will to make peace in Ukraine, according to Wall Street Journal. The newspaper reported that new sanctions are unlikely to include banking sanctions and it is also possible that Trump may not decide to impose sanctions at all. If Trump walks back on sanctions again, it would be the latest instance of him issuing empty threats that don't mean nothing. So far, Trump has not put any pressure on Putin despite the Russian leader rejecting every ceasefire proposal, peace offer, and defying Trump's personal calls to curtail attacks on civilians and come to the negotiating table. Instead, Trump has rewarded Russia by accepting Putin's demands and opening talks for a bilateral reset. Trump has also continued to trash Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the defender, for seeking to buy air defence systems and calling Putin names. The Journal reported that the purpose of sanctions would be to pressure Putin into coming to the negotiating table. The newspaper further reported that Trump is also getting tired from the lack of any meaningful progress in peace talks and may decide to end efforts altogether — he has already ended the erstwhile shuttle diplomacy. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The end of mediation efforts would play into Putin's hands. One of the main reasons behind prolonging the conflict with participation in low-level peace talks is to tire out Ukraine's supporters. Trump considering removing limits on Ukraine's use of weapons: Report Kyiv Post has reported two senior Western officials as saying that Trump is 'seriously considering' removing all limits on Ukraine's use of Western weapons. The development comes a day after German Chancellor Friedrich Merz announced that Germany, the United States, and the United Kingdom had decided to remove restrictions on Ukraine's use of Western long-range weapons. 'All the previously imposed restrictions —whether already eased or not— are currently under the review as President [Trump] believes that the current status-quo does not serve our common interests of bringing Russia to the [negotiation] table,' one official told Kyiv Post. If Trump actually green-lights the removal of all limits, it would mean that Ukraine could hit any target anywhere in Russia with Western weapons. Jorge Rivero, a US-based Russia-Ukraine specialist, told Kyiv Post that the relaxation would allow Ukraine to 'target military installations within Russian territory, including airbases responsible for launching Geran-2 drones and strategic bombers that have conducted sustained strikes against Ukrainian cities'. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Rivero further said, 'This policy shift could further authorize Ukrainian forces to engage Russian command and control nodes, as well as logistical arteries deep inside Russia, with precision-guided munitions." So far, Ukraine was allowed to use Western weapons up to a certain range inside Russia. It was only in the final weeks of his presidency that previous US President Joe Biden allowed Ukraine to use Western weapons inside Russia. To be sure, Trump has not neither donated nor sold any weapon to Ukraine so far. Instead, he has trashed Zelenskyy for wanting to buy Patriot air defence systems that are critical to taking down Russian missiles. The Kyiv Post further reported an official as saying that Trump would finalise the decision on the issue as well as next phase of support to Ukraine after the administration's meetings with German officials this week. German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul is expected to visit the Washington DC this week. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Wadephul on Monday said that that Putin 'doesn't want peace, he wants to continue the war, and we cannot allow him to do that'. He sounded hopeful that the Trump administration would be onboard with the next round of sanctions being prepared by European countries.
