That certainly sounds bad, especially the fact that Russia has so much production that they can even increase their stockpiles.
So, according to that article, Europe produces perhaps 50-100 Taurus missiles per year and 50-100 Storm Shadow missiles per year. How many of them can be stockpiled and are in stockpiles, when they are also needed in Ukraine?
Unfortunately, Europe has been slow with rearmament. However, I donât know how much so-called groundwork has been done for increasing missile production. So, what production volumes can actually be achieved in, say, 2025 and 2026? And are there finally enough orders in place so that the production staff doesnât have to sit idly by?
Itâs quite difficult to say who the current US considers its allies. Perhaps something can be inferred from who they vote with in UN votes:
As a European, I wouldnât count on the United States for anything. On the contrary, according to The Economistâs article, Trumpâs officials are frustrated because EU countries are helping Ukraine maintain its independence:
Consider a scenario where Russia somehow manages to conquer Ukraine, either through some kind of coup or militarily. If the armies of those two countries were to combine, what chances would the rest of Europe have to defend itself?
Quite an interesting question from Kastehelmi, why did Merz bring up the destruction of the Crimean Bridge with Tauruses?
At least the Kremlin issued a statement that critical transport infrastructure must not be attacked. Conversely - is everything else okay?
â Before, when Scholz was asking for permission from the Kremlin, Taurus would not have been allowed to be used for anything without it making Germany a party to the war in Russiaâs rhetoric.
Missiles could indeed be used to strike the bridge, which Kastehelmi describes as Ukraineâs âeternal project,â but he questions its significance.
â Why does the leader of Europeâs largest country want to bring up the destruction of such a single bridge at this stage of the war? It no longer has the same significance it once did.
A Taurus âstrike against any Russian facility of critical transport infrastructure⊠all of this would be regarded as direct participation of Germany in hostilities,â foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told journalists.
On Thursday in Paris, the United States presented its proposal for achieving a ceasefire to representatives from Europe and Ukraine, Bloomberg reported, based on European official sources.
The US proposal would freeze the war along the current front lines. Russia would be allowed to keep the territories it has occupied, and Ukraine would not be admitted to NATO. At the same time, the United States is preparing to ease sanctions targeting Russia if an agreement is reached.
The Paris negotiations were attended by French President Emmanuel Macron, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, as well as high-ranking officials from France, Germany, and Britain.
The United States would like to see a comprehensive ceasefire come into effect in the coming weeks. European leaders will gather next week in London to continue discussions.
According to one Bloomberg source, this is not a final solution, and European countries do not intend to recognize the territories occupied by Russia as part of Russia. In the opinion of Europeans, providing security guarantees to Ukraine is a condition for the durability of any ceasefire agreement.
According to Rubio, Ukraineâs desire for security guarantees is understandable, but he stated that negotiations have not yet reached that level.
Such a proposal once again brings to mind the appeasement of Nazi Germany. It didnât work then, and it wouldnât work now either. More would follow in the coming years. Hitler was not satisfied when he got a piece of Czechoslovakia, nor would Putin be satisfied with the currently occupied territories.
So, such a proposal can be wiped with oneâs ass, it has no other use.
These are also precisely the conditions that Trump has been known to advocate since last autumn. It shouldnât come as a surprise to anyone. Hopefully, the EU and Ukraine can maintain a functional defense and wonât be forced to yield to these conditions.
This is starting to look like Finlandâs treatment after the Continuation War. The aggressor would get to keep the territories it conquered. War reparations would be paid to the aggressor. The only difference is that the reparations would be paid through the aggressorâs ally. Next, probably the president of the losing side would be imprisoned and the political leadership would otherwise be changed and the state forced to be âneutralâ.
Is Europe watching from the sidelines again? Not from this couch, at least!
Somewhere it was stated that any security guarantees provided by the USA would not practically differ from NATO security guarantees, and from Russiaâs perspective, they would be the same as Ukraineâs NATO membership. Therefore, the USA would not provide security guarantees, just as it would not provide NATO membership.
When will the reconstruction begin? There should be something to rebuild on; at this rate, and with Europeâs and the USâs spinelessness, one shouldnât dream much of reconstruction. Or should one perhaps build after Russia has turned the whole country to dust?
I canât really understand these âreconstructionâ talks.
Here is a quote from the latest ISW article, which is at least partly familiar, of course.
Russia continues its demands for extensive territorial concessions from Ukraine, even though progress in peace negotiations is not considered likely in the near future. According to the Kremlin, the areas occupied or demanded by Russia belong to it inseparably, and there is no room for compromise â or so they are at least trying at this stage. At the same time, the Russians have increased the scale of armored attacks, especially in the Zaporizhzhia (ZaporiĆŸĆŸja) region, but Ukraineâs defense has successfully repelled the attacks. Ukrainian forces have even advanced partly along the front lines.
Russia is increasingly using armed drones, which are suspected of spreading prohibited chemical agents in violation of international agreements. Threats against Europe have also intensified as Russia seeks to undermine Western support for Ukraine â however, despite this, Ukraine has made slight progress in cooperation with the United States, for example, in finalizing a mineral agreement. European defense industry is strengthening, which also supports Ukraineâs defense in the long term.
Key Takeaways:
Russian officials continue to reiterate Russian President Vladimir Putinâs non-negotiable demands for extensive territorial concessions from Ukraine while noting that ongoing peace negotiations are unlikely to achieve results quickly.
Russian forces recently conducted a roughly battalion-sized mechanized assault across a wide front in western Zaporizhia Oblast, representing an inflection in recently observed Russian mechanized assault tactics.
The Kremlin is adopting increasingly threatening rhetoric towards Europe aimed at preventing Europe from supporting Ukraine and defending itself.
Russia is increasingly adapting its drones to facilitate chemical weapons strikes against the frontline and rear areas of Ukraine â in violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), of which Russia is a signatory.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky reported that the United States and Ukraine are making progress towards signing a bilateral mineral deal.
European countries continue to increase their domestic defense production, including in support of Ukraine.
Ukrainian forces recently advanced near Toretsk. Russian forces recently advanced in Kursk Oblast and near Kupyansk, Toretsk, Pokrovsk, Novopavlivka, and Velyka Novosilka and in western Zaporizhia Oblast.
The âUkraine Reconstruction Committeeâ has been meeting regularly for a couple of years now, with a Finnish representative also involved, as well as company representatives; for example, a YIT representative has participated in several meetings. Reconstruction is, in a way, ongoing all the time, as the damage from each missile strike is immediately sought to be repaired.
In the big picture, since thereâs no sign of peace, it might sound premature, but it seems that even if peace doesnât come, only a âfrozen conflict,â the border would remain in its current locations, and the Ukrainian side would begin to be reconstructed by the EU as soon as possible.
Reconstruction locks in the situation, meaning it would be increasingly difficult to conquer more of the Ukrainian side and bomb it if the EU has rebuilt the infrastructure. Reconstruction also strengthens Ukraine economically, which simultaneously means militarily.
Regarding Russiaâs information operations.
It just came to mind when these pseudonyms are also circulating here, who only criticize Ukraineâs alliesâŠ
European joint long-range missile project: European Long-Range Strike Approach (ELSA) cruise missile project.
It was reported in 7/2024 that Germany, Poland, Italy, and France joined. If I remember correctly, subsequently the UK, Netherlands, and Sweden also joined.
The goal was apparently a mass-producible, ground-launched missile with a range of 1000-2000 km. So, the closest existing one could be the French MdCN, which they could start modifying, taking into account all the lessons learned from the war in Ukraine.
I canât quickly find any new news about this by googling. Iâm just wondering what the timeline for this could be? And what kind of production volumes are we talking about? Ukraine itself has already developed at least two long-range missiles (Peklo and Bar) during the war, so one would think that even Europeâs largest countries could achieve something in a year or even two. Of course, Ukraine has better motivation now.
Previously, the British had their own long-range development project (perhaps still do) with a minimum production target of 240 missiles per year. If all participating (7?) countries could reach even that with this new missile, Europe would produce a good number of these annually. Of course, since they quickly cost at least 4-5 million euros apiece, the money for increasing Europeâs missile stockpiles must also come from somewhere.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has declared a temporary ceasefire, reports Reuters news agency.
It begins today at 7 PM Russian time and ends the day after tomorrow, on the 21st, at midnight.
Putin says he expects Ukraine to follow Russiaâs example. In his opinion, Ukraineâs actions during the ceasefire will show Ukraineâs readiness for a peaceful resolution.
Putin also notes that Russian forces must be ready to repel any potential violations of the ceasefire and possible provocations by Ukraine.
What do you think, how many minutes will pass from the start of the âceasefireâ before it is reported to the great leader that âUkraine is blatantly violating the ceasefireâ?
