Episode 10-4-22

Hi friends! Hope everyone is doing well! There’s a lot to cover, but if you haven’t already, please sign up for email notifications. (It’s FREE. Unless you choose to subscribe and support what I’m doing. It’s $5 per month, and you can cancel at any time. Here are three reasons why you should.) The View from the Front by Stan R. Mitchell is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. We’ll start this edition with the war in Ukraine. We discussed in the last edition that Ukrainian forces were surrounding the city of Lyman, and that Putin had told Russian forces to hold at all costs. I shared the image below in the previous episode: Shortly after publishing that episode, Putin ordered the retreat of Russian forces to prevent them from being captured. And since that announced retreat, you can see from the link below just how much progress Ukraine has made since Friday. The Washington Post described the news in an article as follows: Zelensky said the town of Lyman, which Russian troops used as a key logistics hub in Ukraine’s eastern Donetsk region since their arrival this spring, was completely “cleared of the Russian occupiers” as of midday local time, the Defense Ministry said on Twitter. The president’s statement came a day after the Russian Defense Ministry acknowledged it had been forced to withdraw troops from Lyman “to more advantageous lines.” Ukraine not only shocked analysts in the eastern part of the country in the Donbas region, with its seizure and breakthrough of Lyman, it also caused ripples of excitement when news broke that a breakthrough had occurred in the south; in the region of Kherson. Here’s a look at what the breakthrough looked like, according to quite a few pro-Ukrainian analysts on social media. (Please note: these are from sources who are not unbiased, but the information aligns with numerous sources that I trust. And I trust this information enough to share it here.) The goal is to achieve an encirclement, as was done last week at Lyman. (See below.) So far, the Institute for the Study of War hasn’t updated its maps to reflect the latest advances. Their maps are currently reflecting shorter thrusts by Ukraine. But mainstream media such as The New York Times are now reporting the breakthroughs. In Retreat on Ukrainian Fronts, Russia Shows Signs of Disarray Russia’s Defense Ministry acknowledged on Monday that Ukrainian tank units had penetrated its line of defense in part of the region (of Kherson), a fertile part of southern Ukraine that Russian forces seized in the first weeks of the war. … Russia’s troops are in a precarious position in the Kherson Region. The bulk of the Kremlin’s forces are deployed west of the broad Dnipro River, in and around the city of Kherson, while their supplies and logistical support are mostly on the river’s east bank. Ukrainian forces have largely destroyed the crucial bridges needed to continue to supply troops with ammunition and equipment. Though the Russians are well dug in after many months in control of the territory, a concerted attack could tax their limited supply lines and possibly force — and complicate — a retreat across the river. At this point, very little — if anything — is going Russia’s way. So, Putin has again worked hard to scream about the threat of using a nuclear weapon, in the hopes of backing down the West. And while I really wanted to not discuss this over-the-top ultimatum, events have simply given me no choice. So we begin with this article from The New York Times, which sums up the situation nicely. Russia’s Small Nuclear Arms: A Risky Option for Putin and Ukraine Alike For all his threats to fire tactical nuclear arms at Ukrainian targets, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia is now discovering what the United States itself concluded years ago, American officials suspect: Small nuclear weapons are hard to use, harder to control and a far better weapon of terror and intimidation than a weapon of war. … The primary utility, many U.S. officials say, would be as part of a last-ditch effort by Mr. Putin to halt the Ukrainian counteroffensive, by threatening to make parts of Ukraine uninhabitable. … The targets could be a Ukrainian military base or a small city. … Still, the risks for Mr. Putin could easily outweigh any gains. His country could become an international pariah, and the West would try to capitalize on the detonation to try to bring China and India, and others who are still buying Russian oil and gas, into sanctions they have resisted. Attempting to flesh out some of the same lines of thinking, Axios discussed some of the options Putin might take, as well as their consequences. U.S. grapples with risk of nuclear war over Ukraine If Putin does use nuclear weapons, he could seek a "demonstration effect" — perhaps by detonating a nuclear weapon over the Black Sea or in the Arctic — or deploy a smaller-yield "tactical" nuclear weapon on the battlefield, says Andrea Kendall-Taylor of the Center for a New American Security. The U.S. would not likely go nuclear in response, but it could conduct a conventional military strike on Russian soil — perhaps targeting the site or unit behind the Russian launch — and pursue non-military steps like permanently seizing Russian central bank reserves, Kendall-Taylor says. … Retired general Ben Hodges, who commanded U.S. forces in Europe, has said if Russia conducts a nuclear attack in Ukraine, the U.S. could destroy Russia's Black Sea Fleet. Stating the obvious here perhaps, but both of these would be horrendous consequences for Russia. And then I wanted to share one third and final thing regarding Putin possibly using nuclear weapons, because this is just so informative. The Atlantic published a long, in-depth piece on the threat of Russia using nuclear weapons. WHAT IF RUSSIA USES NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN UKRAINE? First, the article explains there will be a lot of warning time. According to Pavel Podvig, the director of the Russian Nuclear Forces Project and a former research fellow at the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, now based in Geneva, the long-range ballistic missiles deployed on land and on submarines are Russia’s only nuclear weapons available for immediate use. If Putin decides to attack Ukraine with shorter-range, “tactical” nuclear weapons, they will have to be removed from an Object S site—such as Belgorod-22, just 25 miles from the Ukrainian border—and transported to military bases. It will take hours for the weapons to be made combat-ready, for warheads to be mated with cruise missiles or ballistic missiles, for hydrogen bombs to be loaded on planes. The United States will most likely observe the movement of these weapons in real time: by means of satellite surveillance, cameras hidden beside the road, local agents with binoculars. Presumably, at a minimum, once these actions are seen, some phone calls will be made to government officials. Possibly even military commanders. But if the U.S. can’t stop them from being used, the U.S. will humiliate Russia almost immediately. Such responses include, according to the article: The number of Ukrainian casualties should determine the severity of the American response—and any escalation should be conducted solely with conventional weapons. Russia’s Black Sea fleet might be sunk in retaliation, and a no-fly zone could be imposed over Ukraine, even if it meant destroying anti-aircraft units on Russian soil. And that is the response based solely on the weaker/softer side. All of this leads me to continue to believe that Putin is bluffing. He’s the loudmouth bully on the playground, who’s finally been beaten up after running his mouth the entire school year, and while his classmates laugh and point, he’s now threatening to run home and get a knife to use. But it’s all a lie because the bully knows if he pulls a knife — or even brings it to school — he’ll end up in juvenile or jail; and that’s best case scenario. So, while I mig… This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit stanrmitchell.substack.com/subscribe