All Things Russia & Ukraine

[CU88]

Every now and then I open a post of a "blocked" member; and immediately remember why I blocked them...

[old salt]

Leading questions in today's Pentagon briefing about a potential E-W partition of Ukraine, based on Russian concentration of forces, so far & anticipated. Adm Kirby talking around it, but not dismissing it.

Expect future questions about Zelensky & govt relocating W & how soon could US &/or NATO/coalition of the willing, deploy forces sufficient to hold a W enclave & airspace. A coalition of the US with Poland & Romania for land, air & sea access to move forces & suppiles could do it. Other willing coalition nations could join. NATO could formally remain at arms length. Willing members could join. Additional NATO forces could deploy to Poland & Romania to enhance their defense.

It would hinge upon what air bases/airports are still operable in the W ?

If a cease fire, Putin might settle for holding everything E of Kyiv in the N & Odessa to Transnistria in the S, & E of the Dnieper river, in between.
Ukraine could end up in a partitioned limbo like Syria & the Balkans.

Edited to amplify with further musings.

[seacoaster]

The House just voted on a resolution in support of Ukraine, which includes the provision that the US “will never recognize or support any illegitimate Russian-controlled leader or government installed through the use of force.”

Three GOP Congressmen voted against it: Gosar of AZ, Massie of Kentucky, and Matt Rosendale of Montana.

[Brooklyn]

The House just voted on a resolution in support of Ukraine, which includes the provision that the US “will never recognize or support any illegitimate Russian-controlled leader or government installed through the use of force.”

Three GOP Congressmen voted against it: Gosar of AZ, Massie of Kentucky, and Matt Rosendale of Montana.

Hmmm ~ makes we wonder about Donetsk & Luhansk since both voluntarily voted to secede from Ukraine and consider themselves free republics.

[Dip&Dunk]

Leading questions in today's Pentagon briefing about a potential E-W partition of Ukraine, based on Russian concentration of forces, so far & anticipated. Adm Kirby talking around it, but not dismissing it.

Expect future questions about Zelensky & govt relocating W & how soon could US &/or NATO/coalition of the willing, deploy forces sufficient to hold a W enclave & airspace. A coalition of the US with Poland & Romania for land, air & sea access to move forces & suppiles could do it. Other willing coalition nations could join. NATO could formally remain at arms length. Willing members could join. Additional NATO forces could deploy to Poland & Romania to enhance their defense.

It would hinge upon what air bases/airports are still operable in the W ?

If a cease fire, Putin might settle for holding everything E of Kyiv in the N & Odessa to Transnistria in the S, & E of the Dnieper river, in between.
Ukraine could end up in a partitioned limbo like Syria & the Balkans.

Edited to amplify with further musings.

??? US & Poland? But NATO would stay at arms length? Uh, no. It does not work that way.

[DocBarrister]

Leading questions in today's Pentagon briefing about a potential E-W partition of Ukraine, based on Russian concentration of forces, so far & anticipated. Adm Kirby talking around it, but not dismissing it.

Expect future questions about Zelensky & govt relocating W & how soon could US &/or NATO/coalition of the willing, deploy forces sufficient to hold a W enclave & airspace. A coalition of the US with Poland & Romania for land, air & sea access to move forces & suppiles could do it. Other willing coalition nations could join. NATO could formally remain at arms length. Willing members could join. Additional NATO forces could deploy to Poland & Romania to enhance their defense.

It would hinge upon what air bases/airports are still operable in the W ?

If a cease fire, Putin might settle for holding everything E of Kyiv in the N & Odessa to Transnistria in the S, & E of the Dnieper river, in between.
Ukraine could end up in a partitioned limbo like Syria & the Balkans.

Edited to amplify with further musings.

There is absolutely no way Putin will ever get an agreement to hold half of Ukraine. Can I imagine a scenario where Ukraine may agree to surrender a slim sliver of land covering Odessa, Crimea, Kherson, and Southeastern Ukraine (the “land bridge” between Russia and the Crimea)? Maybe, but I doubt Putin would ever settle for such a meager prize. He wants regime change in Ukraine.

It’s pretty clear now that Russia will not be able to militarily conquer all of Ukraine or even half of Ukraine. Russia won’t be able to afford maintaining an occupation force of tens of thousands of troops. Even if Ukraine’s armed forces are degraded into a guerrilla insurgency, they could easily inflict hundreds of casualties a day against the Russians. Right now, U.S. intelligence is estimating close to a thousand Russian deaths a day in Ukraine, which is mind boggling considering that the U.S. lost fewer than 3,000 American troops in Afghanistan over two decades.

So, Putin is now in a situation where he cannot “win” militarily.

That is the most dangerous situation of all.

I think, old salt, that after years of expressly or implicitly praising Putin, you have to concede that his invasion was a catastrophic blunder that will not end well for him or Russia.

Let’s just hope there is something left of Ukraine by the time all of this is over.

DocBarrister

[runrussellrun]

Every now and then I open a post of a "blocked" member; and immediately remember why I blocked them...

Too bad, youll miss this interesting read. Someone, has been asking , all along..........anyone actually READ the actual sanctions.....put the PHONE down.

https://www.dailyposter.com/biden-admin ... oligarchs/

As Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine has sparked demands for a financial crackdown on dictators and their oligarch networks, the Biden administration is proposing to waive punishments for a scandal-ridden bank amid revelations that it had been providing resources to autocrats and their financial cronies — reportedly including Russian oligarchs that the Biden administration is promising to target.

The administration’s proposed waiver for the global investment bank Credit Suisse — whose donors delivered more than $100,000 to President Biden’s campaign — could shield a bank linked to those oligarchs as the war in Ukraine rages, after Biden last night used his State of the Union address to promise a crackdown.

“We are joining with our European allies to find and seize your yachts, your luxury apartments, your private jets,” he declared. “We are coming for your ill-begotten gains.”

Lawmakers in the European Parliament are considering adding Switzerland’s financial sector to a dirty money blacklist in response to the new revelations about Credit Suisse.



Two Senate Democrats have asked the Biden administration to withdraw its waiver proposal. Whether or not the administration now heeds that call will test whether the Ukraine conflict is prompting a more antagonistic regulatory posture toward financial institutions that have enabled oligarchs from rogue nations.
A Scandal-Plagued Bank

At issue is a January proposal from Biden’s Labor Department to waive punishments against Credit Suisse for defrauding investors who financed a fishing project in Mozambique, which the bank pleaded guilty to last year, as well as for “knowingly and willfully” aiding wealthy clients in tax evasion for multiple decades through 2009.

In light of the convictions, the bank is required to obtain a waiver in order to retain an investment classification that allows it to continue managing — and profiting from — American workers’ retirement savings.

Since then, new reporting has alleged that Credit Suisse has aided criminals and financed the luxury assets of oligarchs, raising additional questions about the Biden administration’s proposal to let the bank off the hook.

One month after the Labor Department proposed such a waiver, the Financial Times reported that “Credit Suisse has securitised a portfolio of loans linked to its wealthiest customers’ yachts and private jets, in an unusual use of derivatives to offload risks associated with lending to ultra-rich oligarchs and entrepreneurs.”

The newspaper reported that the bank had reported losses on its yacht- and jet-related loans because of sanctions against Russian oligarchs. After a first round of sanctions in 2018, Credit Suisse declared its commitment to “remain highly committed to Russia,” and Reuters reported that it had been extending financing to two Putin-linked oligarchs. In recent days, many Russian oligarchs have continued to roam free on yachts and jets, escaping American authorities and moving towards countries that don’t have extradition agreements with the U.S.

On March 1, as the U.S. and E.U. were rolling out new sanctions on Russian oligarchs, the Financial Times reported that Credit Suisse had told investors to “destroy documents relating to its richest clients’ yachts and private jets, in an attempt to stop information leaking about a unit of the bank that has made loans to oligarchs who were later sanctioned.”

Meanwhile, in late February, a leak of the account information of more than 18,000 Credit Suisse clients revealed that the bank had been managing money for “clients involved in torture, drug trafficking, money laundering, corruption and other serious crimes,” according to reporting by The Guardian.

“Credit Suisse’s misconduct prosecuted over the years should have disqualified it from pension and investment management privileges supposedly reserved only for good actors,” said Bartlett Naylor of the watchdog group Public Citizen, which criticized the bank’s first waiver in 2015. “Now, details of its rogues list of tax evaders sharpens the case.”

Credit Suisse declined The Daily Poster’s request for comment.

In response to the most recent leaks, the bank has denied any wrongdoing. After Russia invaded Ukraine, Credit Suisse also announced that it will stop accepting some Russian bonds as collateral for debt, and will stop financing commodities trades involving Russia.
Previously Let Off The Hook

When Credit Suisse pleaded guilty to fraud last year, it risked losing its status as a Qualified Professional Asset Manager (QPAM), a required classification for banks to manage — and profit from — the lucrative retirement fund industry.

When QPAM was originally created 40 years ago, lawmakers included a major stipulation for banks seeking the designation: They must avoid felony convictions.

While that isn’t an especially high bar, Credit Suisse has struggled to meet it.

In 2014, when the Justice Department found that Credit Suisse had aided its clients in dodging tax enforcement, by falsifying documents for them or helping them hide assets in offshore accounts, Credit Suisse found itself on the verge of losing its QPAM status.

But the Obama Labor Department let the bank off the hook. Despite protests from financial watchdogs and lawmakers, including Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), the Obama administration granted Credit Suisse a waiver, allowing the bank to retain its QPAM status.

Credit Suisse wasn’t the only bank to receive such a waiver from the Obama administration. Under Labor Secretary Tom Perez, many major banks received such waivers.

In December 2016, a group of lawmakers sent a letter to Perez asking for a hearing on “recent proposals to let five megabanks with a history of criminal misconduct to continue managing assets of U.S. pension funds.” The letter noted that in 2015, the department had granted waivers to four of those banks without convening a public hearing.

After Perez issued the original waiver for Credit Suisse and then became chairman of the Democratic National Committee, the bank’s donors delivered more than $1 million worth of donations to Democratic politicians and groups. Perez is now running for Maryland governor, and has vacuumed in more than $200,000 of campaign donations from the financial sector, according to data compiled by the National Institute for Money in Politics.

The Labor Department under Obama did deny a handful of requested waivers, but those denials were the exception rather than the rule. Between 1997 and 2014, the department granted waivers to all 23 firms that sought them, according to reporting from Pensions and Investments.

[old salt]

Leading questions in today's Pentagon briefing about a potential E-W partition of Ukraine, based on Russian concentration of forces, so far & anticipated. Adm Kirby talking around it, but not dismissing it.

Expect future questions about Zelensky & govt relocating W & how soon could US &/or NATO/coalition of the willing, deploy forces sufficient to hold a W enclave & airspace. A coalition of the US with Poland & Romania for land, air & sea access to move forces & suppiles could do it. Other willing coalition nations could join. NATO could formally remain at arms length. Willing members could join. Additional NATO forces could deploy to Poland & Romania to enhance their defense.

It would hinge upon what air bases/airports are still operable in the W ?

If a cease fire, Putin might settle for holding everything E of Kyiv in the N & Odessa to Transnistria in the S, & E of the Dnieper river, in between.
Ukraine could end up in a partitioned limbo like Syria & the Balkans.

Edited to amplify with further musings.

??? US & Poland? But NATO would stay at arms length? Uh, no. It does not work that way.

Coalition of the willing. NATO members can act independently, outside of NATO.
Poland was with us in Iraq. NATO was not.
Pressure is building for US military intervention. You could hear it in today's Pentagon presser.
Initial reports were that the Soviet legacy equipment donated or sold included Migs & Ukrainian pilots were in Poland to get them.
Then the NATO SecGen visited Poland & the story changed.

[old salt]

I think, old salt, that after years of expressly or implicitly praising Putin, you have to concede that his invasion was a catastrophic blunder that will not end well for him or Russia.

Let’s just hope there is something left of Ukraine by the time all of this is over.

Agree, it was a catastrophic blunder that will not end well for Putin & Russia.
Don't underestimate or take lightly the damage that Putin can do to make it a bad ending for all.
Whatever it takes to get a cease fire & start negotiations -- the sooner the better.
...or there won't be anything left of Ukraine by the time this is all over.

Putin does not need to occupy or pacify the entire country.
He can surround Kyiv, Kharkiv, Obessa & Mariupol & pound them to rubble from the air & with long range fires,
a la Grozny & Aleppo.

[Farfromgeneva]

Every now and then I open a post of a "blocked" member; and immediately remember why I blocked them...

Every time I open it up I feel like this:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qjE6qrYyE6Q

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detai ... en-in-vain

On january 29th The Economist wrote that Russia would survive the economic consequences of a war with Ukraine, at least in the short term. Its central bank held $600bn in currency reserves, we noted, “more than enough to weather sanctions”. That now looks much less certain. On February 26th, two days after Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, went to war, Western governments imposed severe measures on Russia. Most painfully, they are cutting off the central bank’s access to that stash of reserves. That will make it harder for the central bank to support the rouble, to offer foreign-currency liquidity to Russian banks under sanctions themselves and to make or receive foreign-currency payments for Russian companies.

Over the past five years Mr Putin had moved to insulate the Russian economy against sanctions. As well as building up reserves, he had partly “de-dollarised” them (see chart) by increasing holdings of other currencies. Dollars were sold in favour of the yuan and euro. Moving assets from the sanction-happy America to China, its ally, and to Europe, which depended on it for energy, was one of the main building blocks of Mr Putin’s “fortress economy”.

But as well as America, Britain, Canada, the EU, Japan and Switzerland have also agreed to squeeze Russia’s access to its reserves. In June 2021 around 7% of Russia’s foreign currency was stored in America, 12% in France, 10% in Germany and 10% in Japan. Assuming the same proportions now, around $400bn of Mr Putin’s war chest could be subject to sanctions. (Stopping access to the $300bn held in securities will also require the co-operation of financial intermediaries.)

Putin took these steps because he knew Biden would win the election 5 years ago.

[old salt]

Putin took these steps because he knew Biden would win the election 5 years ago.

Are those your words or from the Economist article (behind paywall) ?

[a fan]

How hard is Obama laughing at Putin now?

The 80s called, and all that. After over a decade of trying to explain how things work in the 21st century, all while getting blowback from the sadly large number of American conservatives who hate their fellow Americans who have a stupid D by their names so much that they were unable to see what Obama saw——a feckless and weak Russian who spent all his country’s money on making up for Putins small d*ck.

We’re supposed to understand putin. We do. He’s an idiot and a liar who forgot why the Soviet Union failed—-it went broke blowing money on arms used to try and control its own people.

Putin made the EXACT same blunder all over again just one decade later. I asked this before, and I’ll ask again: What the heck does Putin need sub bases for? Or airstrips in Syria? What he actually needs is a functioning economy. He didn’t get one. So he’s F’ed.

And Biden is outplaying Putin on the field of battle right now . Would you want to fit a plane in Ukraine right now? All those stingers on the ground? We’ll see if Biden can keep it up, and outplay him throughout. Who knows?

Which leaves two questions:

1. Is Zelensky smart enough to say he wants no part of nato? That’s the face saving move for Putin. In its place, like so many other countries—-the US can give them defensive weapons. Fake problem solved.

2. What will Putin do as he is embarrassed in front of the world? That part scares the hell out of me.

[Peter Brown]

How hard is Obama laughing at Putin now?

The 80s called, and all that. After over a decade of trying to explain how things work in the 21st century, all while getting blowback from the sadly large number of American conservatives who hate their fellow Americans who have a stupid D by their names so much that they were unable to see what Obama saw——a feckless and weak Russian who spent all his country’s money on making up for Putins small d*ck.

We’re supposed to understand putin. We do. He’s an idiot and a liar who forgot why the Soviet Union failed—-it went broke blowing money on arms used to try and control its own people.

Putin made the EXACT same blunder all over again just one decade later. I asked this before, and I’ll ask again: What the heck does Putin need sub bases for? Or airstrips in Syria? What he actually needs is a functioning economy. He didn’t get one. So he’s F’ed.

And Biden is outplaying Putin on the field of battle right now . Would you want to fit a plane in Ukraine right now? All those stingers on the ground? We’ll see if Biden can keep it up, and outplay him throughout. Who knows?

Which leaves two questions:

1. Is Zelensky smart enough to say he wants no part of nato? That’s the face saving move for Putin. In its place, like so many other countries—-the US can give them defensive weapons. Fake problem solved.

2. What will Putin do as he is embarrassed in front of the world? That part scares the hell out of me.

Did I miss an announcement that Putin lost this war? There are several folks here who are convinced (or trying to convince themselves?) that Putin is losing (and Biden winning?). Ayfkm? Where do you guys get this stuff?

Just tonight comes word that Russia is about to seize Mariupol with commandos headed to Odessa next.

How can anyone claim anything about Ukraine with a shred of confidence? I just don’t get that.

In times like these, the best decision is to sit back some. You can hope things turn out the way you want, but man, to claim it’s happening when the news is at best spotty seems extremely premature.

[RedFromMI]

Another interesting Twitter thread, this time about the effect of sanctions on the Russian air travel system:

By Jan Nedvidek

I work in the aviation sector, and I can tell you that for all intents and purposes Russian aviation has - at best - about three weeks before it’s show over.

One aspect is the fact that airspace available to Russian aircraft is very, very limited now. However, there is more:

Very few aircraft are actually owned by airlines, and instead most are owned by lessor companies, most of which are Irish. Under the sanctions regime, the view in the legal community is that those leases have to be terminated, otherwise Irish companies will be criminally liable.

More importantly: Russian operators are unable to effect insurances. Without those, no national aviation authority will allow access to its airspace. This would in effect mean the end of Russian operators flying internationally.

Furthermore, despite the presence of some Sukhois, Ilyushins and Antonovs, the bulk of aircraft operated in Russia is still Boeing and Airbus. Those use CFM, GE and Rolls Royce engines.

All these manufactures have cut off access to repair manuals without which the aircraft and engines cannot be serviced. They have also issued a global ban on servicing in other countries, so that Russian aircraft cannot be flown abroad for maintenance.

They have also stopped the supply of spare parts. From talking to our clients, I understand most airlines keep about a 2 or 3 weeks worth of spares supplies.

What does this mean? Russia will be in effect cut off from international travel, perhaps with the notable exception of China. It will be more isolated than the USSR, and even domestic journeys will be severely limited.

Sanctions - if drafted well - do work.

We can probably expect that some international operators will continue to operate some flights, perhaps to Istanbul or Dubai. But we’re talking about going from 100s of cross-border flights to perhaps 6 or 7. Why so few?

Europe is relatively unique in having an ‘open sky’. Provided an airline meets certain criteria, it can fly as many flights it wants within European airspace. Other countries don’t always have this, and the number of flights and airports pairs (routes) between them is regulated.

Unless, say, Turkey enters into an open sky agreement with Russia, which surely is unthinkable in the circumstances, the number of flights going to Turkey will be heavily suppressed by regulation.

It’s also worth noting that even if someone very clever managed to find a way - and I am sure there are plenty of fellow lawyers in law offices all over Russia thinking very hard about this - there is literally no way for Russian entities to make international payments.

They therefore won’t even be able to refuel or pay for airport charges. Even China would have to accept either a cash payment the yuans held by the Russian Central Bank or some form of extended credit, both of which are very unlikely.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Putin took these steps because he knew Biden would win the election 5 years ago.

Are those your words or from the Economist article (behind paywall) ?

Take a guess. Putin went in because of Biden and he obviously planned ahead.

[a fan]

Did I miss an announcement that Putin lost this war? There are several folks here who are convinced (or trying to convince themselves?) that Putin is losing (and Biden winning?). Ayfkm? Where do you guys get this stuff?

From paying attention. You should try it sometime. Fly one of your planes in Ukraine, Pete, if you think that's such good idea.

What's Putin going to do, Pete? Wipe out the entire population? Yep. He can do that. But then what?

There isn't a winning move for Putin. There is only an exit to save face. Will Zelensky give him this out?

Everyone hopes so......

[old salt]

How hard is Obama laughing at Putin now?

The 80s called, and all that. After over a decade of trying to explain how things work in the 21st century, all while getting blowback from the sadly large number of American conservatives who hate their fellow Americans who have a stupid D by their names so much that they were unable to see what Obama saw——a feckless and weak Russian who spent all his country’s money on making up for Putins small d*ck.

We’re supposed to understand putin. We do. He’s an idiot and a liar who forgot why the Soviet Union failed—-it went broke blowing money on arms used to try and control its own people.

Putin made the EXACT same blunder all over again just one decade later. I asked this before, and I’ll ask again: What the heck does Putin need sub bases for? Or airstrips in Syria? What he actually needs is a functioning economy. He didn’t get one. So he’s F’ed.
He inherited a functioning military with nucs. He did not inherit a functioning economy.
So he did what he knows -- he built a security state.

And Biden is outplaying Putin on the field of battle right now . Would you want to fit a plane in Ukraine right now? All those stingers on the ground?
Stingers only work if you can see the target & soon enough to take the shot. We’ll see if Biden can keep it up, and outplay him throughout. Who knows?

Which leaves two questions:

1. Is Zelensky smart enough to say he wants no part of nato? If he is, we won't let him. NATO in Ukraine is our goal. Always has been. That’s the face saving move for Putin. In its place, like so many other countries—-the US can give them defensive weapons. Fake problem solved.

2. What will Putin do as he is embarrassed in front of the world? That part scares the hell out of me.STFB

Did I miss an announcement that Putin lost this war? There are several folks here who are convinced (or trying to convince themselves?) that Putin is losing (and Biden winning?). Ayfkm? Where do you guys get this stuff?

Just tonight comes word that Russia is about to seize Mariupol with commandos headed to Odessa next.
They walked into Kherson virtually unopposed, as they did in Crimea 8 yrs ago.

How can anyone claim anything about Ukraine with a shred of confidence? I just don’t get that.
They heard it from a Ukrainian on MSNBC. Loaner Polish Migs & our magnetic pulse weapon.

In times like these, the best decision is to sit back some. You can hope things turn out the way you want, but man, to claim it’s happening when the news is at best spotty seems extremely premature.

[old salt]

Did I miss an announcement that Putin lost this war? There are several folks here who are convinced (or trying to convince themselves?) that Putin is losing (and Biden winning?). Ayfkm? Where do you guys get this stuff?

From paying attention. You should try it sometime. Fly one of your planes in Ukraine, Pete, if you think that's such good idea.

What's Putin going to do, Pete? Wipe out the entire population? Yep. He can do that. But then what?

There isn't a winning move for Putin. There is only an exit to save face. Will Zelensky give him this out?
I first hope that Zelensky survives long enough to make an offer Putin will accept.

Everyone hopes so......

[Typical Lax Dad]

Lithuania’s Prime Minister via The Economist:


All this was bound to happen. Vladimir Putin’s war on Chechnya did not serve as a wake-up call for the West in 1999. Neither did the Kremlin’s cyber-assault on Estonia in 2007, its war on Georgia in 2008, the illegal annexation of Crimea, nor the start of its military aggression against Ukraine in 2014—all of which Russia denies. Numerous, blatant assassinations of “inconvenient” witnesses, opponents and journalists rang alarm bells, especially when carried out on European soil. But Western leaders pressed the snooze button time and again.

Western democracies introduced sanctions and expelled spooks disguised as diplomats. We expressed concern and condemned—sometimes, in the strongest possible terms—Russia’s habitual acts of aggression. We rebuked violations of the territorial integrity of independent states by Russia or its proxies. Many thought this would somehow suffice as a face-saving alternative to real action that would be costly for our economies and that might provoke the aggressor.

The West continued to do too little, too late. We blacklisted officials but we kept building pipelines. We introduced sanctions but turned a blind eye to the companies circumventing them. Western politicians danced with Mr Putin (some of them literally) and retired to chair the boards of Russian companies. These firms funded the Kremlin’s arms race and diverted billions to Mr Putin’s entourage.

The West allowed Mr Putin’s people to keep their fortunes in Western banks and spend them on Western education for their kids, villas and penthouses in Western resorts for their wives and five-star holidays with their mistresses on Western rivieras. All the while the Kremlin decried the rotten decadence and moral degradation of the West. Pecunia non olet: money doesn’t smell. Or perhaps, to the contrary—Russian money smelled too good.

We cared too much about separating sports and politics, or culture and politics—and too little about separating freedom of speech and propaganda, political correctness and hard-headed analysis. “Crisis in Ukraine”, “Russia begins military aggression”, “Ukraine-Russia war”—these were the major taglines just a week ago.

No, the crisis is not in Ukraine—it is in Russia, and it has been deepening for decades. Russia’s aggression began long ago, and not just against Ukraine. The Kremlin used energy as a means of political pressure and employed cyber-attacks, hostile propaganda, proxy wars and, eventually, missiles. What we witness now is not the Ukraine-Russia war but the continuation of Russia’s war against Ukraine that started in 2014. It was de facto declared on the entire West in December 2021, when Mr Putin issued his ultimatums.

In Lithuania we saw Russia’s influence spreading dangerously and a coalition of dictators being built. The West has not recognised the legitimacy of Alexander Lukashenko, who claims he once again won an election in Belarus in 2020. Rather he stole the election and cracked down in a draconian way on the peaceful protests that followed. He had Mr Putin’s backing and now he is complicit in Russia’s aggression. I struggle to understand why Western politicians and media still refer to Mr Lukashenko as the president of Belarus. At the same time we saw that the opposition was being systematically wiped out of elections in Russia—but the West never dared to question Mr Putin’s legitimacy out loud. Democracies die in silence, they say. In silence, too, dictatorships grow.

As Russia massed its troops on Ukraine’s border the West tried to come to an agreement with Mr Putin. But diplomacy is impossible with a pathological liar who gives promises he never means to keep. The West hoped to negotiate a way out of this war, but negotiations work only when both sides want peace.

For a democratic leader, human life is more precious than anything else. For a dictator, no human sacrifice is too great a barrier to ambition. Russia’s neighbours, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Poland, have been trying to explain this for a long time. At times we have been ridiculed as solely focused on this issue. We kept warning that dictators only understand the language of brutal power—be it economic, or better yet, military—and take anything other than that as a sign of weakness that encourages them, and does not deter them. We have warned of growing security threats not just to our region but also to the eu and nato—and of the need to strengthen our defence.

It does not make me happy that countries in my region were right to warn others of the Russian threat. I wish we had been proven wrong instead. But what cheers me is that Ukraine is fighting back more successfully than many—except Ukrainians themselves—believed it ever could. I am also relieved that the West has awoken. It is too late to save the 14,400 Ukrainians estimated to have perished in Donbas between April 2014 and December 2021, but it is not too late to help Ukraine save its sovereignty and to protect Western civilisation.

I am proud that we are witnessing unprecedented unity among disparate democracies. I am also proud that our support to Ukraine and response to Russia is of unparalleled proportions, swifter than ever. At last we are investing more in our own security as we realise that neutrality is tantamount to self-deception.

It is crucial that we do not press the snooze button now. We must continue, increase and expedite lethal aid to Ukraine. We must disconnect all Russian banks, not just some, from swift to achieve the full effect of sanctions now—not after a year. And all the economic sanctions we impose on Russia must be imposed on Belarus too. The regime there assists Mr Putin and we need to prevent Russia from circumventing sanctions by using Belarus.

As history unfolds before our eyes, I am glad that an increasing number of countries are choosing to be on the right side of it. I urge all those around the world who still hesitate to join us while it still matters. And when Ukraine and democracy win this war, I hope that the West will never fall asleep again. Thank you for your miscalculation, Mr Putin!7