Attacks and counterattacks continue with Russia stalled but still wreaking havoc with civilian targets. Below is a discussion of the argument that not a few people believe is the “cause” of the war, namely NATO rather than Russia.
Supporting Effort #1—Kharkiv City (Russian objective: Defend ground lines of communication (GLOCs) to Izyum and prevent Ukrainian forces from reaching the Russian border)
Russian forces did not make any confirmed territorial advances on the Kharkiv Axis on July 22. The Derhachi City Council reported that Ukrainian forces engaged in positional battles near Tsupivka, Dementiivka, Velyki Prokhody, and in the Kozacha Lopan-Zolochiv direction north of Kharkiv City.[14] Russian Telegram channel Rybar claimed that a Russian reconnaissance group conducted a ground assault near Udy, 5 km from the Russian border northwest of Kharkiv City, but ISW cannot currently verify this claim.[15] Russian forces conducted an airstrike on Verkhnii Saltiv, 35 km east of Kharkiv City along the Siverskyi Donets River.[16] Russian forces also continued shelling Kharkiv City and the surrounding settlements.[17]
www.understandingwar.org/...
Subordinate Main Effort—Southern Kharkiv, Donetsk, Luhansk Oblasts (Russian objective: Encircle Ukrainian forces in Eastern Ukraine and capture the entirety of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, the claimed territory of Russia’s proxies in Donbas)
Russian forces did not conduct any confirmed ground attacks toward Slovyansk and shelled settlements to the southeast and southwest of Izyum on July 22. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian forces shelled Dolyna, Dibrovne, Bohorodychne, Adamivka, Mykilske, Kurulka, Mazanivka, and Krestychne, all to the northwest of Slovyansk, and conducted aerial reconnaissance north of Barvinkove in Velyka Komyshuvakha.[6]
Russian forces continued unsuccessful ground attacks east of Siversk on July 22. The Ukrainian General Staff stated that Russian forces tried and failed to advance westward of Verkhnokamyanka to Verkhnokamyanske and continued to fight southeast of Siversk in Ivano-Darivka.[7] Russian forces also conducted air and artillery strikes on Ukrainian positions in settlements from the northeast to southeast of Siversk.[8]
Russian forces conducted ground attacks toward Bakhmut from positions to the east and continued limited ground assaults south of Bakhmut on July 22. Russian sources claimed that troops of the Wagner Private Military Company (PMC) occupied the southern part of Pokrovske, less than 5 km east of Bakhmut.[9] The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian troops are also attempting to advance towards Bakhmut from the Stryapivka-Soledar area to the northeast and the territory of the Vuhledar Power Plant to the south.[10] Russian forces continued artillery strikes directly on Bakhmut and surrounding settlements to support ongoing ground offensives.[11]
Russian forces conducted a limited ground attack directly northwest of Donetsk City on July 22. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Ukrainian troops repelled a Russian attempt to advance from Vesele to Vodyane, about 10km northwest of the western outskirts of Donetsk City.[12] Russian forces continued to fire at Ukrainian positions along the Avdiivka-Donetsk City line of contact and in the direction of the Zaporizhia Oblast border.[13]
www.understandingwar.org/...
Supporting Effort #2—Southern Axis (Russian objective: Defend Kherson and Zaporizhia Oblasts against Ukrainian counterattacks)
Russian forces conducted limited unsuccessful offensives in Kherson Oblast on July 22. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian forces unsuccessfully attempted to advance in the Mala Seidemynukha-Andriivka and Davydiv Brid-Bilohirka directions, both near the Kherson-Mykolaiv Oblast border.[18] Russian Telegram Channel Rybar confirmed that Ukrainian forces still maintain a bridgehead on the Inhulets River near Lozove on July 22.[19] Russian forces continued focusing on defending previously occupied positions and preventing Ukrainian offensive actions along the Southern Axis and continued conducting artillery strikes on settlements along the Kherson-Mykolaiv and Kherson-Dnipropetrovsk Oblast borders and settlements on the Zaporizhia Oblast frontline.[20] Russian forces launched missile strikes on civilian infrastructure in Mykolaiv City and Apostolove in Dnipropetrovsk Oblast and airstrikes near Potomkyne and Prechystivka.[21] Ukraine’s Southern Operational Command reported on July 22 that Russian forces are mining roads and the banks of the Inhulets River in the areas bordering Snihurivka and Zelenodolsk, suggesting that Russian forces may be preparing for a possible Ukrainian counteroffensive in the area.[22]
Ukrainian forces are continuing to threaten Russian logistics strongholds along the Southern Axis. Ukraine's Southern Operational Command reported that Ukrainian forces destroyed five Russian strongholds and two Russian ammunition depots in the Zelendolsk and Skadovsk areas of Kherson Oblast on July 22.[23] However, ISW cannot confirm rumors about a Ukrainian encirclement of Russian forces near Vysokopillya as of this publication.[24]
Ukraine’s Main Intelligence Directorate (GUR) published footage on July 22 of the July 20 Ukrainian strike on Russian military assets at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) in occupied Enerhodar, Zaporizhia Oblast.[25] GUR’s footage shows strikes on a Russian BM-21 Grad and anti-air transport among the NPP's water coolers and Russian personnel tents roughly 350 meters from the nearest nuclear cell block.[26] GUR reported that the strikes killed three Russian personnel and wounded 12 others.[27] Images of the strikes’ aftermath show devastation at the former tent site with no damage to the surrounding NPP facilities.[28]
www.understandingwar.org/...
Paul Poast discusses a theory of causes for the war, highlighting the Mearshimer hypothesis which does have some adherents.
This is going to be a LONG thread (with lots of links to other threads). In it, I want to:
- Recap John's argument
- Share where I agree with it
- Share where I disagree with it
- Show that Offensive Realism offers a better explanation
To begin, let's recap Mearsheimer's argument on the causes of the Ukraine-Russian War.
He claims that since NATO/EU are dominated by USA/W. Europe, and (particularly w/ NATO) were formed primarily to counter the USSR during the Cold War, Russia is going to be angry by them encroaching on its neighborhood (i.e. former Soviet Republics)
Now, you might think this is all just academic/ivory tower opining. But then there's this 😬 👇
Having laid out his argument (and why it matters), do I agree with any of it?
Yes, I agree with some key parts of it.
Finally, I like that John's argument takes seriously the point made long ago by Bob Jervis that while states might view their own actions as benign (i.e. "hey, NATO expansion is good, right?"), others will not perceive them that way. Unroll available on Thread Reader
That is where I agree with Mearsheimer.
Where do I disagree? I disagree on some key points.
...eastern expansion of NATO was far from "imposed" or even "pushed" by the United States or NATO. It was desired by the Eastern Europeans (we'll come back to this).
In fact, THEY often had to take measures to PUSH the USA/NATO, not the other way around.
...scholars and analysts have LONG viewed Ukraine-Russia relations as holding the greatest potential for conflict in post-Cold War Europe.
Such views well predate NATO expansion.
What these three points suggest to me is that, at most, NATO expansion exacerbated an already tense situation.
But it didn't CAUSE the situation to be tense or carry the potential for conflict.
So if the Ukraine-Russian War is not caused by NATO expansion, then what explains it?
Given the above facts, I actually think a better explanation can be found in Mearsheimer's earlier work.
As Mearsheimer himself will acknowledge, the core ideas of Offensive Realism don't start with him. Indeed, they date back to World War I and the work of G. Lowes Dickinson Unroll available on Thread Reader
Dickinson, looking at the onset of World War I in Europe, put forward the argument that the war was caused by the inherent desire of states to seek supremacy over one another Unroll available on Thread Reader
Mearsheimer fleshed out key elements of Dickinson's claims, namely giving it a focus on regional domination.
According to his theory of Offensive Realism, the ideal situation for any country in international politics is that it dominates its region of the world and make sure that no other country dominates that region. This is the only way to safeguard their interests.
Mearsheimer's model for this theory is not Russia, but the United States. See Manifest Destiny + Monroe Doctrine
But Russia also followed behavior consistent with this theory, most notably during the Cold War.
But Russia was eventually unable to sustain that regional dominance. It was willing, but not able. Maintaining the empire and domination of Warsaw pact countries proved too costly (in a variety of ways, including economic) to maintain.
But just because it stopped, doesn't mean that it couldn't start again. That is what offensive realism predicts and, more importantly, that is what many in the Eastern European countries feared.
So the states in Central and Eastern Europe, fully understanding that Russia would again seek regional dominance, wanted to safeguard their sovereignty and autonomy before it was too late.
The solution? Gain
@NATO membership!
As the above quote by Clinton from the 1990s makes clear, US officials understood the risk: Russia is going to seek dominance of the region again and expanding NATO eastward, especially into the Former Soviet Republics, could create a security risk for the USA.
What does this all mean? It means that if there is any faulting NATO, it is in not expanding NATO *fast enough* and *far enough*. Once the Baltics were in, bringing in Ukraine needed to follow.
@SeanDEhrlich made this point the other day Unroll available on Thread Reader
In sum, Offensive Realism, as described by Mearsheimer in his "Tragedy of Great Power Politics", explains well Russia's behavior over the past century, including today: like all great powers, it seeks to dominate its region. That is ultimately the cause of the current war.
[END]
• • •