news

for russia and ukraine, the temporary increase in troops is nothing more than using up some of their remaining "internal strength". but exhausting their vitality is not necessarily a good thing.

text | haishangke

according to cctv news, russian president vladimir putin signed a presidential decree on september 16 local time to increase the strength of the russian armed forces to 2.389 million, of which 1.5 million are military personnel.

russian president vladimir putin: information

coincidentally, just before putin issued the presidential decree, ukraine's new foreign minister sibiga said at the "yalta strategy conference" held in kiev that ukraine's military problem must be solved.

"currently, there are about 1 million ukrainian men of military age abroad, 300,000 of whom are in poland," sibiga's words imply the need to increase troops!

01

putin issued a presidential decree to expand the personnel establishment of the russian armed forces. in hai shu's opinion, it seems unexpected, but it is actually reasonable.

the reason why this is "unexpected" is that after russia launched the "special military operation" in february 2022, it specifically stated that no russian conscripts went abroad to participate in the war. in other words, russia only recognized that those who participated in the "special military operation" were mercenaries in the russian army, or simply wagner mercenaries. those who cooperated with the russian army in the war were the donbass militia.

but as the war went on, russia began to recruit new soldiers in september 2022, and the rumor that it was "the first local mobilization of about 300,000 people since world war ii" spread like wildfire.

in september 2022, the conscripted personnel went to donetsk for training. image: global times

after that, the number of russian armed forces began to expand.

in december 2023, the russian armed forces establishment strength increased to 2,209,130 ​​people, of which the number of military personnel increased from 1.027 million to 1.32 million.

now, another 180,000 military personnel have been added. what does this mean?

although putin did not explicitly say that the purpose of increasing troops was to defeat the ukrainian army on the russian-ukrainian front, russia also took such an important measure while increasing troops:

about 20,000 tanks, armored vehicles and artillery pieces were unsealed.

no wonder kazakh president zakhaev recently said when receiving visiting german chancellor scholz that "russia is invincible."

in august this year, german chancellor scholz (left) visited kazakhstan and met with kazakh president zakhaev

hai shu believes that kazakhstan does not stand on russia's side on the issue of the russian-ukrainian conflict, but rather stands on a relatively neutral position. this is why what zakhaev said to scholz is more valuable for reference.

don't think that most of the tanks and armored vehicles that russia has unsealed are old goods that may have been sealed in the last century. war is ultimately a contest between these equipment.

how many weapons can the west provide to ukraine to fight against russia and share the consumption?

even if russia does not have much production capacity at present, it has inherited the "steel torrent" of the past. once it starts flowing, how can ukraine deal with it? at least it needs several times more ammunition to have a chance of winning the war, right? however, does ukraine have so much ammunition?

02

ukraine seems to have simply left the issue of ammunition to the west.

what the zelensky government is currently calculating is how many troops it has.

there are many middle-aged and elderly people in the ukrainian army

sibega was telling the truth.

after the outbreak of the russian-ukrainian conflict, ukrainian refugees fled westward in large numbers, with poland being the first stop. although the ukrainian authorities took measures to allow only the elderly, women and children to leave the country, and not adult men to leave the country, and launched a large-scale conscription, after all, before the conflict, many ukrainians were overseas, and many ukrainian men fled at the beginning of the conflict.

now, zelensky's side is keeping these ukrainians in mind, some of whom even have "dual citizenship".

hai shu also observed that sibiga raised the issue of overseas ukrainians at the "yalta strategic conference" held in kiev.

when zelensky attended the yalta strategic conference, he also mentioned that even in some areas of kursk, the russian territory captured by the ukrainian army, the russian army is facing a rapid counterattack. it is quite difficult for the ukrainian army to hold its position and prevent the russian army from making significant achievements.

zelensky

in fact, the name "yalta strategic conference" sounds strange.

yalta is a place name located in the crimean peninsula. at the end of world war ii, in february 1945, then-us president franklin roosevelt, british prime minister churchill and soviet council chairman stalin met in yalta to discuss the fight against fascism and the distribution of post-war benefits among the allies. at that time, yalta belonged to the crimean autonomous republic under the russian soviet federative socialist republic within the soviet union.

after world war ii, crimea was changed to crimea oblast. in 1954, under the leadership of khrushchev, within the soviet union, crimea oblast was transferred from russia to ukraine.

in other words, yalta did not belong to ukraine at the time of the yalta conference during world war ii.

so, what is the purpose of holding the "yalta strategy conference" in kiev today, and what is it trying to achieve? in fact, it is worth pondering.

03

if we look at the problem from the perspective of big history, then -

does a conference named "yalta" without russia's attendance have no practical significance?

at the moment of the russia-ukraine conflict, both the "ukraine peace summit" and the "yalta strategic conference" seem a bit strange.

of course, ukraine hopes that the west will continue to support it in its fight against russia - from ukraine's perspective, the biggest worry is of course the policy changes that may result from the us election;

the west, especially the united states, hopes to see russia constrained...

these are all reasons for holding similar meetings.

if we want to stop the conflict, end the phenomenon of "the bones of the dead are still the lover in the dream" as soon as possible, and reduce the number of deaths, the best way is to force russia and ukraine to sit down at the negotiation table. however, will this happen in the short term?

hai shu wants to say that for russia and ukraine, the temporary increase in troops is nothing more than using up some of their remaining "internal strength". but exhausting their vitality is not necessarily a good thing. an early peace talk is the time to give hope to their respective countries and nations, and it is also a good thing for the world, right?

i just don't know whether russia and ukraine can realize this at the same time in the shortest possible time! if they can't reach an agreement, they will have to fight...