I have been
happy to speak with my friends who have asked me what I thought about the situation overseas. It is an honor, although admittedly bittersweet, to be consulted with on every instance when people are shooting each other, but it was my life’s work, so I really don’t mind.
Anyway, a few questions that I have been asked and my immediate take on those FAQs referencing the situation between Russia and Ukraine.
Q: Do the Ukrainians have a chance?
A: No. Not even a little bitty one. I am impressed with the coverage that they are getting, in fact I think they have been able to capture the world’s attention, sympathy, hearts and minds. I think that this will be useful in the developing insurgency, and surely there will be one of those. But arming civilians or making Molotov cocktails, enlisting A-lister Ukrainians, singing great patriotic songs- verses an armored force that also has air superiority- only has one outcome.
The big reason that Russia will win, is that Mr. Putin cannot afford to lose. Asserting regional dominance doesn’t work out at all if that little kid you used to pick on in high school knocks out all of your teeth. He will double/triple down, if necessary.
Q: Will NATO or the US help the Ukrainians?
A: Nope. At least in terms of boots on the ground, or fly over and bomb. The sanctions are embarrassingly light handed and hurt the West/ US as much as they do the Russians, if not more. Ukraine has been helped as much as the US was willing to do under the heading of “deterrence”, and now that the Russians are undeterred, we will not re-inter. The US main effort right now in terms of the war there is to save face politically, and to build resolve in the other neighboring NATO countries.
Mr. Biden is going to sit this one out. Unless the heroic defenders of Ukraine so move the US populace that US military involvement will guarantee his re-election, and then the B52s will launch, and the 82d Division will jump in tomorrow morning. If this is not assured, then we’ll keep up with the Ukrainians on the news.
Q: How is the war going for the Russians?
A: Really not too bad, despite what we’ve heard. Their approach has been systematic, and their invasion plan really more complicated and demanding than ours during Iraq 2.0. I think it was one of those plans that really looked good on paper and was likely used in tabletop exercises/ wargames to great effect. But, truthfully the scheme of attack was unnecessarily complicated and naturally difficult to manage. I have heard that they have had issues with coordination and logistics, and that is not surprising or unexpected.
There are a few things to watch. The first is the protest in the Russian homeland, the next is if Mr. Putin releases authority to use some of the nastier weapons, like Chemicals etc., the third if the Russian narrative starts to speak about the two eastern provinces as what the objective was all along and forgets about regime change. Those are indicators, with a few other fine ones, that will show that the war is not going well in the minds of Mr. Putin.
The Russian military does not emphasize flexibility or initiative, and I would say that the individual training is really fairly poor. But they were outside of the capital in 2 days, so things cannot be going that poorly for them.
Q: Will the Russians stop at Ukraine, or turn and invade somewhere else?
A: I think this is it for the Russians. Not because they would prefer to necessarily, but the Russians are having some growing pains and are going to be embarrassed some by this action. I’d say if they are going to take on the hitters that can really bring the smoke; they need to spend some time in the gym first.
Also, there is an issue of “culmination”, in that the culmination point is that point in time and space were one’s resources are consumed to the point where one cannot keep going. Like the distance till empty gauge on an automobile. If the DTE on your auto says 400 miles, it’s probably smart money to get some gas in 325 miles or so, earlier if there is snow on the ground, traffic jam, etc. When the Russians are finished with Ukraine, they are not going to have enough left in the tank to think about invading someplace else and will need time to fill up again before they drive any farther. I also doubt they will try anything with US forces on the ground, and if they did, they’ll wait until we’ve left. Unless Putin is unhinged.
Q: Is Putin unhinged?
A: Possibly. There have been a few things published, certainly at his direction, that would indicate so. He is either slipping, or he is wishing the West to think that he is the craziest inmate in the prison yard. What captured my interest is that immediately prior to the invasion, he recognized the independence of the eastern Provinces, which I considered a shrewd move.
In doing so, he recognized those allied with the Russians, and simplified his approach; intending simply to support his own in the eastern Ukraine. Militarily, he could move into those provinces, which somewhat legitimized the military action- if it was solely limited to the eastern provinces. The very next day, his focus changed from supporting the provinces to full invasion and regime change. My question is why would he attempt to forecast the limited, and then opt for the unlimited? He is either simply gauging the response from the West, or he is literally changing his mind. If he is gauging response, and acting, this is merely baiting- if he is changing his mind on a whim, well…..
Q: What is the possibly of WW3?
A: I doubt that it is likely, given what has been said above. The Russians of yesteryear had incredible resources, and a mindset that did not hesitate to consume resources- even human resources in the form of casualties- which they tended to shrug off. I see indicators that Putin is fearful of NATO involvement, and my mind this moment thinks that he is trying to be careful in dodging such a commitment. However, if he does mobilize more formations beyond necessary to complete his operation in the Ukraine, he has something further on his mind, and NATO is right there locally, in the Balkans and Poland. If he threatens NATO, I believe we’ll fight. Really we have to.
Q: Will there be a draft in the US?
A: No. Most of the country is too fat. In fact, just less than three quarters of US citizens ages 18-32 are unqualified for military service, and obesity is one of the major disqualifications. If we get to participate in WW3, and mobilization of the country is necessary, our first enlistee needs to be Jenny Craig.
Q: What is the best course(s) of action for the Ukrainians?
A: Double down on strategic communications to generate world sympathies. If they do not gain troops by generating this position, they may possibly generate resources. They have done this well to date.
My impression is that the Ukrainians are trying to defend every inch of ground, and that is not productive in this situation. They must have an understanding of their own culmination point, husband their resources, especially those close to the border with Poland.
When the Russians overrun the country, I think that it is important to form a Ukraine government in exile, as France did during WW2. In my view, the chief executive, the Ukrainian De Gaulle, should already be in place in Poland or someplace out of reach.
Cultivate and plan the insurgency in place. The Russian troop requirement for security is nearly ten times more intensive than those required for a conventional invasion. Conventional forces are ill equipped to turn itself into a police force- we know this so well. Tanks and planes have little use in this context. Nation building? Huh. We know, and he knows as well as we, that this is the great equalizer. If the insurgency is planned now, it stands a much better chance of being homogeneous, and not fractionalized, which is always a risk.
My parting thoughts on the current situation is that I am reluctant to tangle with the Russians, but not because I am fearful of them. The way that I see it, is that such a conflict that is stepped off between Russian peoples and NATO would approach the need for mobilization beyond the volunteer military resources, and the repercussions to readiness would take a couple of decades to live down. Total mobilization of the US means a draft, and a draft so constructed with such a limited pool, that the group eligible would be unfairly targeted. Many exemptions would be sought and granted, and with the liberal exemption policy the draft would only produce a group of military personnel that would be more harmful and dangerous than helpful. Mostly, though- because the US citizen cares more about his or her cause than his or her country, and the division of the country is such that a draft would generate more violence inside this nation state, instead of where it was intended. Mandatory service is not possible until we have a public consensus.