The price of war for Ukraine: Why Russia is so aggressive in launching missile defense systems and attacking power grids? Comment on the letter of A. Zlatev to the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense

Mr. Zlatev and his partner, a local osteopath, got into the arms dealing business. The New York Times obtainedcontract documents and other records to show how the deal was done. It’s in a legal gray area that tries to skirt the arms-export rules of other countries.

“Time is of the essence,” the pair recently wrote to Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense. They said that they were going to sell arms to Ukraine.

Over the course of a year, the US and its allies have sent more than $50 billion to the military of Ukranian. The Pentagon is putting the US defense industry on war-footing, embarking on the biggest increase in bullet production in decades, and trying to build up its own arsenals to keep up with the world.

Patriot air defense systems could intercept a large number of Russia’s missiles and attack drones – although Ukraine already claims a high success rate; on Monday, for example, it said 30 out of 35 missiles had been stopped. NATO’s best technology will be put to use to help Ukraine win the war or at least hold Russia back.

As Ukraine races to shore up its missile defenses in the wake of the assault, the math for Moscow is simple: A percentage of projectiles are bound to get through.

The question is, how far away from the Russian inventories will such a bombardment deplete? and whether Russia will resort to older, less accurate, and equally powerful missiles.

Some of that inventory was dispatched this week. But Russia has recently resorted to using much older and less precise KH-22 missiles (originally made as an anti-ship weapon), of which it still has large inventories, according to Western officials. They weigh in at 5.5 tons and are designed to take out aircraft carriers. A KH-22 was responsible for the dozens of casualties at a shopping mall in Kremenchuk in June.

The S-300 air defense missile was changed by the Russians into an offensive weapon. Their speed makes them difficult to intercept and they have devastated Zaporizhzhia and Mykolaiv. But they are hardly accurate.

Russia’s attacks on Ukraine’s power grid are targeting the entire population, casting people into darkness and cold, and pushing the US closer to sending the Patriot missile defense system long sought by Ukraine’s government.

He told CNN’s Richard Quest that this was the “first time from the beginning of the war” that Russia has “dramatically targeted” energy infrastructure.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said on Tuesday that Ukraine needed “more” systems to better halt missile attacks. “These air defense systems are making a difference because many of the incoming missiles (this week) were actually shot down by the Ukrainian air defense systems provided by NATO Allies,” he said. It’s important that they don’t all be shot down, so there is a need for more.

The US has seen “some evidence” that the Iranian drones have already experienced numerous failures, according to the deputy undersecretary of defense for policy.

Ukraine’s allies understand this need. General Mark Milley, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said ahead of the meeting in Belgium that the US would look for air defense options that would help the Ukrainians.

Ukraine’s wish-list – circulated at Wednesday’s meeting – included missiles for their existing systems and a “transition to Western-origin layered air defense system” as well as “early warning capabilities.”

Speaking after the Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting, he said such a system would not “control all the airspace over Ukraine, but they are designed to control priority targets that Ukraine needs to protect. There are short-range low-altitude systems, medium-range medium altitude systems, and high altitude systems, and it is a mix of these.

Western systems are beginning to trickle in. The first unit of the US National Advanced Surface to Air Missile System (NASAM), which is based in Germany, will be arriving soon according to the Ukrainian Defense Minister.

These items are not off the shelf. The IRIS-T had to be manufactured for Ukraine. Western governments don’t have enough inventories of such systems. And Ukraine is a very large country under missile attack from three directions.

The War Between Russia and the Middle East: CNN Perspectives on Iran’s Arms Program in the War on Crimea and its Implications for NATO

Ukraine’s senior military commander, General Valerii Zaluzhnyi, tweeted Tuesday his thanks to Poland as “brothers in arms” for training an air defense battalion that had destroyed nine of 11 Shaheeds.

He said Poland had provided the Ukranian government with equipment to destroy drones. There were reports last month that the Polish government bought Israeli equipment and was transferring it to the Ukrainian government.

Frida Ghitis is a world affairs columnist and a former CNN producer and correspondent. She is a weekly opinion contributor to CNN, a contributing columnist to The Washington Post and a columnist for World Politics Review. The views expressed in this commentary are her own. CNN has more opinion on it.

Now, CNN has reported Iran is about to start sending even more – and more powerful – weapons to Russia for the fight against Ukraine, according to a western country closely monitoring Iran’s weapons program.

The strengthening relationship between Moscow and Tehran has drawn the attention of Iran’s rivals and foes in the Middle East, of NATO members and of nations that are still – at least in theory – interested in restoring the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, which aimed to delay Iran’s ability to build an atomic bomb.

The epicenter of a global conflict has beenUkraine, a place that connects to every country, every life. Russia’s aggression – its Iranian drones, civilian targets, and weaponization of hunger – has already taken a global toll, lowering worldwide living standards and raising international tensions.

If Russia is allowed to win, the world would be a place of turmoil with less freedom, less peace and less prosperity.

For that reason, Ukraine received massive support from the West, led by the United States. The war in Ukraine reinvigorated NATO, even bringing new applications for membership from countries that had been committed to neutrality. It also helped reaffirm the interest of many in eastern European states – former Soviet satellites – of orienting their future toward Europe and the West.

Much of what happens today far from the battlefields still has repercussions there. The US accused Saudi Arabia of helping Russia fund the war by increasing oil revenues when the oil- producing nations decided to slash production last month. (An accusation the Saudis deny).

The Story of the US Aid Crisis to Ukraine: How the Far-Right Parties Are Trying to Stop Gaetz and Gosar

Israel is reluctant to relinquish its defensive systems because it could use them for its own defense. Hamas has its own rockets in the south and Hezbollah has missiles in the north.

There is the effect of military aid. It’s a completely different scale, but CNN reported last month the US is running low on some weapons systems and munitions it provides to Ukraine. Look for that storyline to become part of the US aid debate after Republicans take control of the House of Representatives next month and promise more scrutiny of US aid for Ukraine.

Higher prices not only affect family budgets and individual lives. When they come with such powerful momentum, they pack a political punch. Political leaders in many countries are being put on the defensive due to inflation caused by the war.

Last week, Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz introduced a bill to end US support for Ukraine, a measure supported by a handful of far-right lawmakers including Lauren Boebert, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Paul Gosar. GOP sources, however, have told CNN that it’s only a small group of Republican lawmakers who are against funding aid to Ukraine.

The U.S. Patriot System and the Russian Threat on Nuclear Security: The Defense Secretary says Ukraine is preparing to leave the War on the Crossroads

Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III could approve a directive as early as this week to transfer one Patriot battery already overseas to Ukraine, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. Final approval would go to President Biden.

The White House, Pentagon and State Department were not willing to comment on details of the transfer, which would be one of the most advanced weapons the U.S. has provided.

There are still many questions about the transfer of the system and where the soldiers would be stationed in order to train them.

In a speech to the Group of 7 nations on Monday, Mr. Zelensky thanked the countries for their continued support but listed financing for weapons first among his requests.

There are no deep stockpiles of missiles in the Pentagon or in the U.S. that would be available for transfer to Ukraine, similar to how the US provided a large quantity of weapons to the country.

It requires a relatively large number of personnel to be trained, according to CNN’s Barbara Starr and Oren Liebermann, who were first to report the US is close to sending the system to Ukraine.

Zakharova said at a meeting in Moscow that many experts had questioned the rationality of the step which could lead to an increase in the conflict and the US army being dragged into combat.

The Patriot system is expensive and complicated and requires intensive training for the multiple people it takes to operate it, but could help the country guard against Russian attacks that have left millions without power.

The Pentagon press secretary was asked Thursday about the warnings from Russia about the Patriot system. Those comments wouldn’t affect US aid to Ukraine, claimed Gen. Pat Ryder.

“I find it ironic and very telling that officials from a country that brutally attacked its neighbor in an illegal and unprovoked invasion … that they would choose to use words like provocative to describe defensive systems that are meant to save lives and protect civilians,” Ryder told reporters.

He said that despite Russia’s threats about nuclear weapons, there has been no detected change in Russia’s nuclear posture, but Putin’s rhetoric “is by itself reckless and dangerous.”

In what may be a no less subtle message than calling the Patriot deployments provocative, Russia’s defense ministry shared video of the installation of a “Yars” intercontinental ballistic missile into a silo launcher in the Kaluga region for what Alexei Sokolov, commander of the Kozelsky missile formation, called “combat duty as planned.”

The man is Petraeus. It’s possible that Putin could order Russian tactical nuclear weapons to be used in Ukraine, Peter, and we’re concerned about that possibility. He would be making an incredibly bad decision, as the use of those weapons would result in Russia being in a worse position than it was before they were used.

Commander Alexander Khodakovsky, the leader of a Russian militia in the eastern part of the country, said on state TV this week that Russia could not defeat the NATO alliance in a conventional war.

The Ukraine problem in the 21st century: NATO, NATO, the British Ministry of Defense, and Striking Donetsk (Russia)

Unlike smaller air defense systems, Patriot missile batteries need much larger crews, requiring dozens of personnel to properly operate them. The United States will now have to deal with daily attacks from Russia as a result of the long training process for the missile batteries.

Zelensky rejected the idea that Ukraine should not want to regain territory lost to Russia in the 21st century and instead wants to regain areas that it has been under Russian control since the beginning of the year.

In an interview with France 24, the NATO Secretary General says that the alliance is still trying to help Ukraine and make sure that NATO doesn’t escalate the war.

The recent Makiivka strikes highlight how Russian military practices contribute to its high casualty rate, according to the British Ministry of Defense.

“You load the ammunition and you cross your fingers and hope it’s gonna fire or when it lands that it’s gonna explode,” said the official, speaking to reporters.

Russia has large quantities of arms and ammunition that are close to their troops and well within range of enemy weaponry. Large depots should be broken up and scattered and they should be located far behind enemy lines, even within Russian territory, which western powers have declared off-limits to Ukrainian strikes.

Striking Donetsk. The mayor of the area that has been controlled by Russian-backed separatists says a serious attack has begun by the Ukrainians.

The Russian War on Everybody: What It Means for You and What the West Needs to do to Stop Russia and Put Ukraine on a Death Row

Editor’s Note: Keir Giles (@KeirGiles) works with the Russia and Eurasia Programme of Chatham House, an international affairs think tank in the UK. He wrote “Russia’s War on Everybody” And What it Means for You.” His views are his own in this commentary. Read more opinion on CNN.

The narrative that any event that Russia dislikes will ensure that the Third World War is guaranteed has been highly effective in shaping US and Western behavior.

That said, we should not underestimate Putin. He thinks that the Russians can outsuffer the Europeans, Americans, and Ukrainians in the same way Napoleon and Hitler out-suffered them. And the US and our NATO and western allies and partners need to do all that we can, as quickly as we can, to enable Ukraine and prove Putin wrong.

In doing so, the West has played along with the Kremlin’s pretense that it is not at war, only waging a “special military operation.” In effect, it has protected Russia from the consequences of its own aggression.

The result is a disastrous example of other aggressive powers. It says nuclear weapons allow you to wage genocidal wars of destruction against your neighbors, because other nations don’t intervene.

If that’s not the message the US and the West want other aggressor states around the world to receive, then supply of Patriot should be followed by far more direct and assertive means of dissuading Moscow.

The first headline deliverables are the Patriot missile systems. They are considered to be the US’s “gold standard” of air defense. NATO guard them and they require the personnel that operate them to be properly trained.

More precision weapons are vital: they ensure Ukraine hits its targets, and not any civilians remaining nearby. And it means Ukraine does not go through the hundreds or thousands of shells Russia appears to burn through as it blanket bombards areas it wants to capture.

The new deal will likely include the supply of guidance kits, or Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs), which Ukraine can use to bolt on to their unguided missiles or bombs. This will increase their accuracy and the rate in which Kyiv’s forces burn through ammunition. A lot of the $1.8 billion is expected to fund munitions replacements and stocks.

The U.S. is Getting Closer to the Red Line: The Prospects for World War II. Ukrainian Aid, Support, and Defense

But Moscow is struggling to equip and rally its conventional forces, and, with the exception of its nuclear forces, appears to be running out of new cards to play. China and India have joined the West in open statements against the use of nuclear force, which has made that option even less likely.

Western analysts say Russia has complained about these deliveries many times, but there has been little response to the crossing of what would have been seen as red lines.

I agree. The Biden administration has a consistent drumbeat of aid, and a huge $45 billion package is in the works. The message is simple: Ukraine is receiving as much aid as Washington can provide, short of boots on the ground, and that aid will not stop.

Whatever the truth of the matter, Biden wants Putin to hear that headline figures in the billions are a sign of Russia’s strength, to push the European partners to help more and to make Ukraine’s resources seem limitless.

This is trickier. The likely new Speaker of the Congress, Kevin McCarthy, has warned the Biden administration that they will not get a blank check from the new Republican House of Representatives.

The remnants of the Trumpist “America First” elements of that party have echoed doubts about how much aid the US should really be sending to the edges of eastern Europe.

Realistically, the bill for the slow defeat of Russia in this dark and lengthy conflict is relatively light for Washington, given its near trillion-dollar annual defense budget.

Zelensky is attempting to remind the Republicans of the seriousness of the war in Ukraine and how a Ukrainian victory would lead to a Russian invasion of that country and potentially drag the US into a war.

He is an inspiring rhetorician, and as a former reality TV star turned unexpected president, is the embodiment of how Putin has turned ordinary Ukrainians into wartime heroes.

The US has supplied Ukrainians with armored vehicles, such as MRAP vehicles and utility vehicles. The US also paid for the refurbishment of Soviet-era T-72 tanks.

Biden affirmed the new commitment in a telephone call with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on Thursday. Germany is sending new fighting vehicles and a defense system to defend against Russian air attacks.

The Russian Army isn’t ready to give up: The deadly attacks on Ukrainian servicemen and rockets during the Makivka shooting spree

Zelensky wanted those systems because it will allow the military to target Russian missiles at higher altitudes than they have been able to before.

Editor’s Note: David A. Andelman, a contributor to CNN, twice winner of the Deadline Club Award, is a chevalier of the French Legion of Honor, author of “A Red Line in the Sand: Diplomacy, Strategy, and the History of Wars That Might Still Happen” and blogs at Andelman Unleashed. He was a correspondent for CBS News in Europe and Asia. The views expressed in this commentary are his own. View more opinion at CNN.

Shortly after midnight on New Year’s Day, a Ukrainian strike on the occupied city of Makiivka killed dozens of troops, with Russia’s Ministry of Defense claiming its soldiers’ cell phone use exposed their location.

It is telling that days after the deadliest known attack on Russian servicemen, President Vladimir Putin called for a temporary ceasefire, citing the Orthodox Christmas holiday. The move was rightly dismissed by Ukraine and the US as a cynical attempt to seek breathing space amid a very bad start to the year for Russian forces.

Russian officials said that four Ukrainian-launched HIMARS rockets hit the vocational school where its forces were housed, apparently adjacent to a large arms depot. (Another two HIMARS rockets were shot down by Russian air defenses).

The satellite-guided HIMARS — short for High Mobility Artillery Rocket System — currently have a range of 80 kilometers. Despite repeated pleas, a longer-range 300- kilometer helicopter is yet to be authorized. The Biden administration worried that the longer-range system could lead to an increase in hostilities.

Chris was a Senior fellow for the Defense Program at the Center for New American Security in Washington and told me that Russia failed to break up their large arms depots because of the reality that their forces cannot communicate adequately.

Other experts have the same view. “Bad communications security seems to be standard practice in the Russian Army,” James Lewis, director of the Strategic Technologies Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), told me in an e-mail exchange.

The troops killed in Makiivka appear to have been conscripts, part of a larger picture of Russian soldiers getting shipped to the front lines with little training and sub-standard equipment.

Indeed, a number of the most recent arrivals to the war are inmates from Russian prisons, freed and transferred immediately to the Ukrainian front. It would be appealing to prisoners used to years of isolation with little or no contact with the outside world to be able to use cell phones.

A Primer on the Makiivka Attack and the Defense Effort of the Ministry of Defense in Ukraine, as Spoken by Semyon Pegov

As the Makiivka attack proves, the Russian military’s errors are becoming so blatant that they are being looked at as a betrayal by the military establishment.

Semyon Pegov, who blogs under the alias WarGonzo and was personally awarded the Order of Courage by President Vladimir Putin at the Kremlin two weeks ago, attacked the Ministry of Defense for its “blatant attempt to smear blame” in suggesting it was the troops’ own use of cell phones that led to the precision of the attack.

He questioned how the Ministry of Defense could be “so sure” that the location of soldiers lodging in a school building could not have been determined using drone surveillance or a local informant.

The deputy defense minister was “butcher” of Mariupol, replaced by a four-star general, in a reorganization of the ministry a month earlier. The location of the arms depot, adjacent to the Makiivka recruits, would likely have been on Mizintsev’s watch.

Still, Putin-favorite Sergei Shoigu remains defense minister — as recently as Saturday, before the Makiivka attack, telling his forces in a celebratory video: “Our victory, like the New Year, is inevitable.”

A top Ukrainian national security official says Russia is preparing for a large-scale military intervention in Ukraine, possibly as soon as the next few weeks.

Oleksiy Danilov, secretary of the National Security and Defense Council, told Sky News in an interview that these are defining months in the war.

“Not just on land, but on the sea and in air as well,” Natalia Humeniuk, head of the United Coordinating Press Center of Security and Defense Forces of the South of Ukraine, said on national television.

“During the week, military representatives from the two countries will practice joint planning of the use of troops based on the prior experience of armed conflicts in recent years,” the ministry said in a statement.

The Arms of Europe: Why does the US need so much war? How European policy makers face a long-term ammunition crisis in the coming months

The UK and German defense ministers both said that the Leopard 2s and Challenger 2s would be provided to Ukranian by the end of March. And on January 26, Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh said that deliveries of the Abrams tanks will take “months.”

On January 30, US President Joe Biden reiterated that Washington would not send its F16 fighter jets to Ukraine, and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has also said that he does not envisage providing warplanes to Kyiv.

Due to the sensitivity of the information, it is not possible to get an exact number of weapons held by individual nations. Multiple European defense and security sources have told CNN that there are serious concerns about the amount of Europe’s war materiel that is not being replaced. CNN reported late last year that even the United States, the world’s top military seller, is struggling to keep up with demand.

Much of that strain is being shouldered by American defense contractors. As the US re-armes, there are questions about whether it will be enough. As Ukraine prepares for a much-anticipated spring offensive in the coming weeks, the US is still years away from reaching its expected level of increased weapons production.

How we got here: Decades of budget cuts across Europe have led to policy makers keeping a deliberately low stock on the assumption that there would not be a land war that could swallow up ammunition at similar levels to World War I or II, experts said.

“The combination of no immediate threat and the financial pressures on European governments over the past couple of decades led to a conspiracy of dressing the shop window while letting the stockroom empty out,” said Nick Witney, senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations.

The looming ammunition crisis has, however, revealed that policymaking is often based on convenient assumptions of the best-case scenario. Taking no action is often cheaper than taking action.

How open-source is the war in Ukraine? Cherevaty, Kirby, Bergen, Putin, Brussels, Zilensky

A spokesman for the armed forces, Col. Serhiy Cherevaty, said on Ukrainian television that soldiers need to keep their focus on building defensive lines. But he also said that part of the reason for the order a day earlier barring civilians, including aid workers, from entering the city was to keep military operations secret.

The strategic value for either Moscow or Kyiv is not offered by Bakhmut as a prize. Its significance comes more from the amount of blood spilled to claim it.

“Even if Bakhmut were to fall, it would not have a strategic impact on the overall war,” said the National Security Council spokesman, John Kirby. “I would go so far as to say it won’t even have necessarily a strategic impact on the fighting in that part of the country.”

In Brussels, Western officials deflected questions about whether Ukraine would win its campaign to secure still more powerful weapons to use against its Russian enemy.

Petraeus: All of those technologies have proven very important, and the Ukrainians have demonstrated enormous skill in adapting various technologies and commercial applications to enable intelligence gathering, targeting and other military tasks.

The American defence secretary said he had no announcement to make today after being asked in Brussels if fighter jets had been discussed.

Peter Bergen is CNN’s national security analyst, a professor of practice at Arizona State University and a vice president at New America. View more opinion on CNN.

Bergen: Is this the first truly open-source war? The war in Ukraine is being fought in part on social media by Zelensky; commercial overhead satellites capture Russian battle groups moving around in real-time, and the social media accounts of Russian mercenaries in the Wagner Group document what they are doing.

Petraeus: I think the Biden Administration has led NATO and the rest of the western world very impressively in responding to the Russian invasion – providing enormous quantities of arms, ammunition, and other material and economic assistance. Helping to impose economic, financial and personal sanctions on Russia. (And I offer this, noting that I am not a member of a political party and was very critical of the decision to withdraw from Afghanistan and the way the withdrawal was conducted.)

Petraeus: It is not Russia. Russia lost the Battles of Kharkiv as well as the Battles of Kyiv, Sumy, and Chernihiv, and failed to take the rest of Ukraine’s southern coast.

It has lost what it had gained in Kharkiv province. And it has had to withdraw its only forces west of the Dnipro River in Kherson province because the Ukrainians made the vital bridge connections to those forces impassable, took out the headquarters and logistics sites supporting those forces, and isolated them from the rest of the Russian elements east of the river.

The side that has the most well-trained and well-equipped forces will make the biggest gains. My bet is that Ukraine will do that.

But, again, these are just hints of what the future of war between advanced powers would be. In a conflict like that, the intelligence, surveilance and recuperative systems would be incomparably more capable, while the precision weapons would have vastly greater range, speed and power.

This war is the first of its kind in the context that includes the widespread presence of smart phones, internet connections and other internet sites.

What do we really need to do to prevent wars in the early 20th century? Analytical reports on Russian unmanned missions in the 21st century

And there would incomparably greater numbers of vastly more capable unmanned systems (some remotely piloted, others operating according to algorithms) in every domain – not just in the air, but also at sea, sub-sea, on the ground, in outer space, and in cyberspace, and operating in swarms, not just individually!

I recall an adage from the Cold War days that said if it can be seen, it can be hit and if it can be killed. In truth, we didn’t have the surveillance assets, precision munitions and other capabilities needed to truly “operationalize” that adage in those days. In the future, however, just about everything – certainly every platform, base and headquarters – will be seen and thus be susceptible to being hit and destroyed (unless there are substantial defenses and hardening of those assets).

It underscores that we need to transform our forces and systems. We must deter future conflict by making sure that we don’t have to worry about whether our capabilities are good enough, or if we are willing to work with them, and also by ensuring that competition among great powers does not turn into conflict.

Petraeus: This question gets at one of the ironies of the situation. Putin set out to make Russia great again. The greatest thing he has done is make NATO great again; with two very capable, historically neutral powers (Finnish and Sweden) seeking NATO membership, increased defense spending by NATO members, most notably Germany, and augmentation of NATO forces in the Baltic states and eastern Europe.

NATO’s description of its suffering from brain death was put forward by the French President, but thanks to Putin this is no longer the case.

All of this and more is what Petraeus had to say. The list is long, including poor campaign design; wholly inadequate training (what were they doing for all those months they were deployed on the northern, eastern, and southern borders of Ukraine?); poor command, control, and communications; inadequate discipline (and a culture that condones war crimes and abuse of local populations); poor equipment (exemplified by turrets blowing off of tanks when fires ignite in them); insufficient logistic capabilities; inability to achieve combined arms effects (to employ all ground and air capabilities effectively together); inadequate organizational architecture; lack of a professional noncommissioned officer corps; a top-down command system that does not promote initiative at lower levels and pervasive corruption that undermines every aspect of their military – and the supporting military-industrial complex.

How does Russia really help the war in Ukraine? Commentary on Petraeus’s “How Ukraine War Ends Bergen Ctpr”

It is still led by a dictator who has a lot of grievances and revanchist views that undermine his decision-making.

You know Stalin’s observation, “Quantity has a quality all its own.” Will the larger Russia population make a difference to the war in Ukraine in the long term?

Petraeus: It could if everyone of Russia was brought together by Putin. Since Putin seems to be afraid of how the country might respond to full mobilization, the Mobilizations have been partial. In fact, more men left the country than were reported to the stations, because of the latest call up of reserves.

Nonetheless, it is estimated that as many as 300,000 new recruits and mobilized reservists are being sent to the frontlines, with up to 100,000-150,000 more on the way. And that is not trivial – because quantity does, indeed, matter.

Ukrainians know what they are fighting for, and Russians don’t, but many of them are from ethnic and sectarian minorities in the Russian Federation.

Source: https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/14/opinions/petraeus-how-ukraine-war-ends-bergen-ctpr/index.html

The West Wing of the White House: Is Putin Really Ready to Join the War? A Thought Reflection on the Security and Security of the United States

I know, having spent time in the West Wing of the White House, it’s easier to second-guess from the inside than it is from the outside. But there are some additional capabilities (advanced drones, even longer-range precision munitions, fighter aircraft, and additional air defense and counter-drone capabilities) that I would like to see us provide sooner rather than later.

Eventually, for example, Ukraine is going to have to transition from eastern bloc aircraft (e.g., MiG-29s) to western ones (e.g., F-16s). There just aren’t any more MiGs to provide to them, and they reportedly have more pilots than aircraft at this point.

So, we might as well begin the process of transition, noting that it will take a number of months, regardless, to train pilots and maintenance personnel. All that said, again, I think the Administration has done a very impressive job and proven to be the indispensable nation in this particular situation – with important ramifications for other situations around the world.

Russian President Vladimir Putin thinks that Russia can out-suffer others just like it out-suffered Napoleon’s army and Hitler’s Nazis.

The force that Putin sends into the toughest battles is the quasi-privateWagner Group. Should mercenaries be used as a tactic, many of whom are convicts?

Russia has done things with mercenaries that are innovative and inhumane, as it entails throwing soldiers into battle as cannon fodder and with little or no concern for their survival.

The tactics and practices that foster the development of well-trained, disciplined, capable and cohesive units that have trust in their leaders and soldiers on their left and right are not what these are.

Source: https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/14/opinions/petraeus-how-ukraine-war-ends-bergen-ctpr/index.html

How Ukrainian War Ends: What Can The Chinese Think About Invasion of Taiwan? How Does the Moskva Sinking Reshape the Chinese?

Bergen: What are the lessons of Ukraine for the Chinese if they were to stage an invasion of Taiwan, which would not be over a neighboring land border but over a 100-mile body of water? Does the sinking of the Moskva, the flagship of Russia’s Black Sea navy, reshape how the Chinese might think about this question?

The target of such an operation would be supported by major powers, with substantial economic, financial, and personal sanctions and export controls, as well as a population willing to fight for its survival.

Petraeus: I think it is. The first war in which smartphone and social media have been widely used has taken place. The result is unprecedented transparency and an extraordinary amount of information available – all through so-called “open sources.”

That said, in the short term, having failed to take control of Kyiv and replace President Zelensky with a pro-Russian figure, Putin is seeking to expand the area of Ukraine controlled by Russian forces. Particularly in the southeastern part of Russia, and to solidify Russian control over the provinces that connect Russia with Crimea in the so-called land bridge, so that Russia does not have to rely solely on the Kerch Strait Bridge for connection with Crimea.

Beyond that, I believe we will see Ukrainian forces that are much more capable than the Russians at achieving the kind of combined arms effects that I described earlier and that thus enable much more effective offensive operations and can unhinge some of the Russian defenses. The Ukrainian forces don’t have time to train on the new western tanks and other systems until the spring or summer.

Source: https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/14/opinions/petraeus-how-ukraine-war-ends-bergen-ctpr/index.html

What Does Defense Manufacturing Tell Us About the Interaction of Ukraine with Russia and the United States in Iraq? An Analysis of Scranton, Pennsylvania,

Bergen: In 2003, at the beginning of the Iraq War, you famously asked a rhetorical question: “Tell me how this ends?” For the war in Ukraine: How does this end?

Petraeus: I think it ends in a negotiated resolution, since Putin knows that the war is unsustainable on the battlefield and on the home front, where Russia has taken many times the losses of the USSR in Afghanistan.

Also when Ukraine reaches the limits of its ability to withstand missile and drone strikes, getting a Marshall-like plan (developed by the US and G7) to help rebuild the country, and gaining an ironclad security guarantee (either NATO membership or, if that is not possible, a US-led coalition guarantee).

A factory just off the President Biden Expressway in downtown Scranton, Pennsylvania, is making the future arsenal ofUkraine’s war effort.

To meet that demand, the Scranton plant is undergoing a massive expansion, fueled by millions of dollars in new defense spending from the Pentagon. It’s investing in new high-tech machinery, hiring a few dozen additional workers and will eventually shift to a 24/7 schedule of constant production.

“It’s certainly ramped up over the last year. As we bring in more modern equipment, it’ll be able to ramp up even further,” said Todd Smith, senior director of General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems, which operates the plant for the Army.

The Pentagon has allocated roughly $3 billion alone to buy munitions overseas from allies and to ramp up production at home. There is some money that will go toward the production of 155 millimeter artillery shells.

Bush told CNN the Army intends to double the production of Javelin anti-tank missiles, make roughly 33% more Guided Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (GMLRS) surface-to-surface medium-range missiles a year, and produce each month a minimum of 60 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles – which were “almost not in production at all,” according to Bush.

The US had previously told the Ukraine it needed 500 of them every day to defend against Russian ground and air assaults.

The director of Russia Studies said that the US will benefit from investments made in defense industrial production, but the question is if they were made late to affect what would happen in the conflict.

The war in Europe has left the US with a lot of work to do as it rebuilds its own supplies, which some experts think is dangerously low.

Jones told CNN that the US runs out of long range missiles within a week of a conflict in the Pacific.

The Pentagon is working to be as fast as possible. Part of that effort involves changing the way it structures work order for the country’s large defense contractors. It’s difficult for industry partners to plan for the future because the military often works off year-to-year contracts.

If the Air Force takes what it has allotted in budget and shifts it to a different pet platform, no defense company will be able to start making weapons.

The State of the War in the Middle East and the U.S. Armed Forces: Milley, McCarthy, and the House of Representatives

America’s top general, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley echoed the same sentiment in a press conference on Tuesday, saying the international community “will continue to support Ukraine” until Russian President Vladimir Putin “ends his war of choice.”

The US commitment to Ukraine is a topic of great interest back home. A poll published in December found that support for US aid to Ukraine was falling among Republicans, and there were other concerns such as a GOP Congress cutting US assistance to Ukraine at a time when the rate of weapons production could make the most difference on the battlefield.

And though then-House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy suggested in October that Republicans could slow funding for Ukraine if they took majority control, sources said he has since walked back his comments privately to reassure senior defense hawks in the House.

Bush said in a year the production rates in the US will be much higher than they are now. While the US hopes the conflict in Ukraine is over by then, Bush is pretty sure the military and industrial base will be able to handle anything that might happen.