What do you think are acceptable exit conditions for [the Ukraine] war?

The Ukrainian economy has already contracted enough that it would be considered a collapse after a period of sustained growth between 1999 and 2008, and intermittent growth afteward; however, Ukraine is being sustained by external support (not just military but economic and humanitarian aid) while Russia is getting aid from no one. (Ostensibly China is giving aid to Russia but I guarantee that behind the scenes they are extracting concessions that will further erode the long term economic and political viability of the Russian Federation in its current extents.) While I’ll agree Ukraine has played a good social media game that underplays the horrific effects this invasion has had on their population (including the outright abduction of children and child-bearing-age women who are no doubt intended to be used to bolster the native Russian population with an infusion of youth), the idea that the sanctions have had no impact on Russian citizens is a fabrication; Russia has very little in the way of native commercial industries and was enormously dependent upon Western goods, nor did it ever maintain large stockpiles of goods to sustain it for years of international sanctions.

Furthermore, while there are a lot of refugees who will eagerly return to Ukraine when and if it returns to a state of relative peace, Russia has lost hundreds of thousands of people in just the last few years who are almost certainly never going to return, notwithstanding that it was already in such catastrophic demographic collapse that it makes nations like Italy and Japan look viable in comparison. The only reason that Russia doesn’t look worse than these countries is because the average lifespan is so low compared to the longer lived older adult populations in other developed nations. I think there is reason to have confidence that in a post-conflict scenario the Ukraine could recover with a Marshall Plan-style aid program, Russia has no such support and no real reason anyone would invest beyond the ability to extract natural resources.

@LSLGuy’s characterization of Putin’s Russia as a nihilistic power is on point: Russia no longer has the military power to dominate even a relatively weak neighbor, much less a power like Poland or Germany; it no longer has the industrial might to even support its military and energy extraction industries; and it no longer holds much appeal for nations who once shoveled money at it in exchange for cheap oil and gas (and does not have the means to deliver it in bulk even if it found willing customers). Like an aging prostitute, all Russia has left to sell are cheap tricks and unprocessed natural resources at a fraction of the ‘pennies on the dollar’ that it was previously selling. Russia does, however, have the world’s second largest (presumably still somewhat functional) nuclear arsenal; an active bioweapons and radiotoxins program that, while not a strategic threat is clearly being deployed on an assassination basis with little reserve; and a pretty effective cyberwarfare and propaganda ops program. All Putin can really do to buoy Russia is to threaten everyone else, even nations that were previously neutral and that posed essentially no threat in order to amplify the impression to the Russian population that their nation is under siege. Putin is a master troll but he’s never had any long term plan beyond “Fuck around and find out,” and while that hasn’t gone as quickly catastrophic as many prophesied in the opening weeks of the Ukraine invasion, there is really no way that the Russian military is going to become stronger or more capable, while the Ukrainians are constantly asking for and now receiving increasingly more capable weapons and training along with a highly motivated mostly volunteer military with cultural memory of the wrongs done to Ukraine during the Soviet era.

Stranger

I will do my goddamndest to use this word the next time I play Scrabble.

Compromise: No one is happy, but no one is bad as hell.

Oof. An analysis I read a couple days ago was that most of the eggs in Russia’s international trade basket was oil and gas. Now that they’ve proved themselves an unreliable source, their former trade partners have found other sources or moved away from the petro-teat all together and they’re pretty well screwed.

Russia also has significant industrial mineral resources, particularly
platinum, cobalt, nickel, as well as phosphate, boron, gypsum, molybdenum, and copper, and one of the world’s last producers of asbestos. (It is also one of the major exporters of uranium due to having large concentrations of high grade ore, although it lacks the ability to produce enough enriched material to export fuel-grade uranium oxide.) However, all of these materials require extensive industrial capacity to extract and refine that Russia can no longer develop internally. In the post-Cold War environment Russia migrated to being a petrostate economy, which is ironic because it was the fall of petroleum prices that contributed manifestly to the collapse of the Soviet Union. Insofar as Russia was ever an industrial economy (mostly military hardware and materiel) its capacity for any industrial production has essentially disappeared, and its agricultural yield is limited by the seasonality of being at such high latitude.

Stranger

Yup. I’ve stated this a number of times. Putin thought that Trump would be re-elected. The war plans where already in place, and even though Trump was not re-elected, Putin pulled the trigger. Probably also not realizing just how bad and corrupt the Russian military is.

Trump tried to extort Zelenskyy. Zelenskyy told him to 'f off. That ANYONE wouldn’t kiss Trumps… ring is huge to Trump. Trump would have blocked any help to Ukraine in any way he could just out of spite.

In terms of answering the title question, any agreement that the two sides agree to is acceptable.

If a man breaks into his ex-wife’s home, with the intent of sexually assaulting her, it’s her choice whether to run away, fight, negotiate, or give in. If she wants to fight, you should give her what help you can in that endeavor but - ultimately - it’s her choice since she’s the one who is going to suffer and who best knows how different levels of suffering are relative to one another, for herself.

And, likewise, if she wants to negotiate then the terms of that negotiation are up to her.

This isn’t to say that society can’t later throw the guy in jail or refuse to deal with him, just that - in the moment of the crime and in a world without strong laws and police - it makes the most sense to defer to the victim.

So, that all said, I wouldn’t necessarily put too much stock on the conditions that Ukraine is putting out into the world.

It’s likely that they’re going to try and negotiate something. And, in negotiation, you’re going to enter negotiations with a wild ask. Like, you see a vase for $5000 and you say, “I’ll give you $50”. You’re not saying that you’re unwilling to buy the vase for anything more than $50, you’re simply starting the process of negotiation and signaling how wild you feel the other side’s ask is. Yes, $50 is a crazy price but so was $5000. If they’re going to be silly then so are you.

In the case of the war, negotiations aren’t going to truly begin until the writing starts to show up on the wall for one of the sides (or for the situation in general). And until we get to that moment, everything is just posturing. It’s an updated starting bid that never goes to the second round of negotiation.

Right now, the West is signaling upcoming supply issues (whether that’s true or a deceit, I have no opinion). Russia has some unknowable archive of armaments, created over the last half century that could kaput at any moment or continue to stretch on for five more years - depending on how gung-ho the Soviets were on stockpiling.

I expect that Russia is currently banking on being able to stretch their artillery and bullet supplies out long enough that they’re ready to pounce if Ukraine does suddenly run out of munitions. So they’re not really ready to negotiate.

Ukraine is hoping that the supply lines will just continue ramping up and that, ultimately, they’re going to be able to wipe out the invaders and then Zelenskyy is going to copy Operation Wrath of God and chase down the Russian high ups, mercilessly, until they’ve all been shot through both eyes.

But, quite plausibly, they’ll both just continue to stalemate and chew through their young, male workforce.

Right now, things could go all directions. It’s not yet time to negotiate for real.

And now, that having been said…

While Kiev was negotiation the Minsk accords, they were receiving intelligence that Russia was moving troops into place for an incursion - back in August, 2014. They signed the agreement and, within a few days (I believe) were back to fighting because Russia had crossed the border.

So, posturing or not, there is some sense to saying that you won’t negotiate while Putin is the ruler of Russia. An agreement is only as meaningful as the parties are willing to abide by it. If there’s no reason to think that Putin will accept his concessions then the whole thing was meaningless.

Until Russia has a President who respects his agreements, there really can’t be any negotiation. The only reason you might, anyways, if Russia is in such a poor position than they aren’t a risk, anyways.

You don’t just “give” somebody a military’s worth of arms. Those will be useless rust in 5 years unless you also give them ammo to practice shooting, training on how to use it, fuel to practice with, spare parts, etc. And for a lot of poorer countries, you need to pay for their troops too.

Ukraine was poor on the way to becoming middle-class when Russia trashed it. It’ll be poor until / unless a new Marshall Plan rebuilds it. Whether that’s funded by the West or by Russian reparations is a separate question. Either way it’s a necessary, but far short of sufficient condition for Ukraine to defend itself in the future.


Russia is still moving a sizeable amount of oil and gas via unscrupulous 3rd parties. As is Iran. Said another way, their white-market business has collapsed. Their black-market business is booming.

The margins aren’t as good, but if / when they can move enough volume, they can get enough money.

As posters here and professional commentators elsewhere have said, their oil industry is suffering from ongoing industrial collapse; their production machinery is breaking down. As is Venezuela’s. And Iran’s. Which industrial problems will eventually stanch their ability to supply the black market and that’ll stanch their ability to earn hard currency. But that time is years to a decade in the future.

Said another way: They are not limited by the supply of raw material in the ground. There’s enough there to fund a much more lavish national treasury than they have today. They are limited by their ability to extract and export it. And the longer the West keeps our boot on their neck the more limited they will be and become. And vice versa; they’re recover quickly if let up for air even briefly.


The word comes from Cory Doctorow’s blog post on predatory tech firms. Worth a read in its own right, and the more you use his template to look at the rest of world, the more you’ll see the shoe fits. Tiktok’s enshittification | Cory Doctorow’s craphound.com


Exactly.

Which brings us to scenario 6 for how this ends:

  1. An isolationist yahoo is elected US president in 2024 and summarily cuts Ukraine off at the knees and maybe even walks away from NATO. To the loud cheering of a sizeable portion of the propaganda-besotted segment of our electorate.

That’s the one that scares me. Just like when Trump wouldn’t commit to Article V of the NATO treaty.

Let us not forget titanium, which the USA used to build the SR-71s.

But even then, no agreement can really be trusted. Even if this president is being honest, we have no way of knowing if the next will honor the agreement. That’s the problem with the Strongman Model of governing. By their very nature, the Strongman does not feel constrained by anything outside of his own power.

We don’t just need a Russian president we can trust: we need a Russian society we can trust. A society that will tell the next president to get bent if he decides to unilaterally abrogate the peace treaty. And we won’t have such a Russian society any time soon.

I would say that if Ukraine depends upon having Nice Guys running the USA and Russia, they are in trouble.

From articles I have read, Trump’s refusal to recognize article V was the point at which Canadian diplomats began to advise the Canadian government that they should no longer assume that the U.S. is a stable international partner.

I would believe they have made plans to provide for themselves if such a person is elected to the US Presidency again.

Crap…I cut that out while editing the list, but yes, Russia is the world’s biggest exporter of titanium. (China produces more but exports less.) Titanium was not only critical for the SR-71 (and the A-12 ‘Oxcart’) but also for the case of the the Minuteman 2/3 Stage 2 SR19, as well as various other components on Cold War aircraft and launch vehicles where the special temperature and corrosion resistance properties of titanium are crucial, and since it could not be purchased from the Soviet Union it had to be sourced through intermediaries (primarily Canada). In modern military aircraft, the use of titanium is common, and it serves in critical components on the F/A-18, F-22, F-35 and the UH-60 ‘Black Hawk’. (The V-22 ‘Osprey’ development deliberately avoided dependence upon titanium components specifically because of sourcing concerns.)

Stranger

I feel that making a regime change in Moscow a goal is a really bad idea. Especially if stated as a public goal.

The best goal would be for Russia to withdraw back to the pre-2014 border and pay reparations for the damage it has inflicted to Ukraine. But realistically, Ukraine is not going to be able to force Russia to accept those terms and it would be a serious escalation if the United States or other countries tried to push Russia into accepting them.

So a realistic goal would be to see Russia withdraw back to the 2021 border.

I would tend to feel that any settlement that included a prohibition on Ukraine joining NATO would be nothing more than a temporary ceasefire . Russia has repeatedly shown it will violate any agreement it makes with another country when it feels strong enough to do so. So Russia’s word is worthless in diplomacy. The only thing that will lead to a long term peace is if Ukraine remains strong enough to fight off another Russian invasion and that’s going to require alliances with other nations.

From your own link:

Bolding mine. How else are we supposed to read that? What message is Putin supposed to take from that? Is there any other way to hold someone to account for war crimes without either killing them or putting them on trial?

The elephant in the negotiations room that no one is talking about is the sanctions. That’s the only reason Russia has for conceding to any conditions proposed by Ukraine. And Ukraine has little or no say in that matter.

You need literally every single country in NATO to agree.

I have 31 responses, and can’t individually respond to them all. So let me clarify:

  1. Putin is a monster, and guilty of plenty of war crimes and other crimes.
  2. My ideal outcome in Ukraine is Crimea and the Donbas back in Ukrainian hands, Putin dead, and Russia with new leadership willing to break with the fabulist vision of greater Russia Putin has been pushing.
  3. Accusing me of being an appeaser or peacenik is hilarious. I have been a solid hawk on Russia forever. I argued on this board for maintaining a military that could fight a two front war. I was arguing for pushing NATO countries to live up to their military spending promises, against many on this board. And I was the one warning that the Nordstream 2 pipeline would give Putin the leverage he needed to start a war in Europe. The main fight against me on this board for years was that I was warmonger, a ‘neocon’, etc. I think my bona fides for defense of the west stand on their own.

All that said, there has to be an element of realpolitik here. How far can Putin be pushed before he pushes the nuclear button? And are we willing to see a detonation in Europe? Of course, we may have already crossed that Rubicon, and there might be no way this ends now short of a nuclear exchange. Maybe there is no negotiating with Putin at all, because there is just no overlap between his minimum requirements and Ukraine’s. And of course, Putin cannot be trusted, so any agreement would have to have iron-clad means to ensure compliance.

My gut feeling is that Ukraine might be able to push Russia back out of the areas its taken recently, and if Russia’s military is weakened to the point where Putin has no options left, he might negotiate a peace if he can spin it in a way that allows him to stay in power. I worry that if he loses the Donbas and Crimea as well, there will be no way to spin the 2022 invasion as anything but a colossal failure and monumental error in judgement, and Putin won’t survive it. And obviously option #4 is something he would fight to the death before submitting.

I think demanding complete surrender and war crimes tribunals ends with Putin hiding in a bunker and potentially firing off nukes. #3 has a risk of that, but perhaps not as great, but would result in huge extra loss of life on all sides. #1 is unacceptable to everyone on our side.

One reason you don’t want wars to start is because they are highly chaotic and can lead to errors that expand the war. We saw that in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and the Gulf wars. The best way to avoid war is to build a military atrong enough that no one dares. Europe forgot that lesson. Now we have to deal with the consequences in a realistic way. Once a war has started, the goal should be to end it as quickly as possible while meeting your war aims. Because as long as the war is going, shit happens and events can spiral put of control.

In the meantime, there is China watching the west deplete its inventories of weaponry while it eyes Taiwan. The sooner we get done with Ukraine, the sooner we can focus on the threat from China, which is ultimately larger than the threat from Russia. Now that Russia has used up its giant cold war inventory of weaponry, it’s just another second-rate military power with a military budget 1/10 the size of the U.S. The invasion of Ukraine was its last gasp, while China’s power is rising.