What people DO is much more important than what they Say. Especially when you’re talking about an entity that lies as freely as the Russian government does. This is a curious bit of news, then. Why would Russia go to the trouble of closing border crossings.

Don’t know, but here’s some Idea Fuel:

A) A formal round of mobilization is indeed coming, and they want to limit the ability of their citizens to flee westward.

B) OR - in more conventional times, this would be an indicator that they are planning to attack Finland or the Baltics - suspend traffic to prioritize military movement.

C) Propaganda. It would fit into a larger pattern of simple, escalatory bluster that you’re SUPER SERIOUS and might invade. But there hasn’t been any kind of detectable troop and mass materiel build up reported that would suggest invasion.

If it’s C), well it’s a bit of a ham fisted way to go about it. There are lazier ways to rattle sabres.

If it’s B) That’s nuts. It’s broadly and credibly thought that attacking NATO directly in 2026 is an idea even too insane for this Kremlin to consider. A fresh and clear eyed NATO force that’s had time to prepare - even if Trump does his job and refuses American participation - is way more than capable of obliterating the current version of the Russian army. The Baltic fleet and Kaliningrad would be destroyed in a couple days. The attacking Russian forces might have some success in the tiny Baltics, but the Poles and Finns might bilaterally decide this is full scale war, that the war is not limited to Ukraine. And that, regardless of what the rest of NATO does, and regardless of Trump’s inevitable ‘this-isn’t-our-war’ spin, that the war is coming and better to fight it now while you’re relatively strong and Russia is relatively weak. Better to fight an inevitable war of survival on someone else’s territory, rather than your own.

Even in a reduced state, Russia might be able to take much of tiny Estonia and Latvia temporarily, but Finland and Poland are well-prepared forces, and territorially complete fantasies given Russia’s inability to make serious inroads in just right-next-door Ukraine. Doing so - would also dispel any delusions that this war is about “internal” politics of trying to force regime change in Ukraine, but Russia has no intention of attacking NATO. It would confirm there are no limits to the war for Putin - this is the entire enchilada, the full restoration of the Russian Empire or bust. It would become impossible for serious minded people to consider this war as a contained thing drawing to it’s conclusion. Unserious, Russian funded agents in the West like AfD, Front Nationale, Farage, Fico, Nowacki etc would say what they always say - and should, rightly, be ignored as the paid stooges that they are.

So - if you accepted that attacking NATO is a bridge too far, then you’re back to A) - that this is still about Russia’s goals in Ukraine and suggests pending internal mobilization.

Further mobilization is a very dangerous move for the Russians. They have an uncontrllable bleed going on in Ukraine. They are unable to move foward, drones are decimating their infilrtration tactics, and their standoff terror bombing is VERY expensive. The Ukrainians are keeping the efficiency of those attacks pretty low in the big picture, while increasing their own attack capabilities agains russian oil & gas facilities creating shortages that are now fully impossible to hide from civilians.

The thing about mobilizations is that they take time. If you need troops today, you needed to start training them 6 months ago. Even in the world of simple brutality that is Russia, they have to make these new recruits combat effective, or they’ll die even faster than the ones being turned into noodle soup by drones. There will be unrest if they do a broad mobilization now. No question. And there will be MORE unrest of this next crop of low functioning grunts is plucked from the higher rungs of the socioeconomic ladder than the backwater useless mouths, ne’er do wells and desperate paycheque chasers that went before them. In short - the recruitment targets will be harder to achieve, and if you’re sane - which is not a given - you need to outfit and train this round of soldier slaves properly enough to make an actual difference than compared to what’s happening today.

That’s a very, very long shot. Nothing from Russia’s performance over the last two years suggests that another 150-200k troops is going to make a lick of difference. It’s just another 3-6 months worth of casualties to gain another destroyed town or two. But - it at least would answer the question ‘why close the Western borders’.

Another round of mobilization would also mean this war continues for a couple more years. During which, Russia will be absorbing daily drone attacks, air defense assets will continue to dwindle, even worse gas shortages, high risk of economic collapse, continued high inflation, and a spiderweb of spreading shortages of anything that needs to be transported.

Pay attention to this one - somehow in Russia’s plans, this makes sense. But it also might trigger a war-ending reaction at home.

What do you think? Let’s have a chin wag.

  • kolmaskommentoija@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 天前

    the Poles and Finns might bilaterally decide this is full scale war, that the war is not limited to Ukraine.

    If they attack us, Baltics, or Poland, it is an escalation to a full scale war. No way any of us border countries would not immediately get NATO involved, as that is the reason for any of us to have joined it. Which then would get all of us border countries involved, at least (and involving us finns, would then involve the other Nordics as well), even if NATO would suddenly crumble immediately. Alone we would all be just easier targets, one by one, and none, who knows what it means to be attacked by Russia, wants that.

    • TwinkleToes@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      13 小时前

      Totally. That’s why I don’t think he actually intends to go through with it - even if wanted to, enough of the high functioning members of his team understand it’s suicide. Poland and Finland would no doubt see war as an inevitability at that point, and would likely conculde that teaching them a lesson now is the only option while Russia is relatively weak/distracted and they are relatively strong.

      And the air war that Russia is using for stand off terror attacks is INCREDIBLY resource intensive. It’s costing Russia billions to kill a handful of innocent people every day. Those assets, including the crews, are expesnive and the aircraft are essentially irreplaceable, with finite lifespans before you consider losses.

      Russia essentially has a three part strategy at this point:

      Push small infiltration teams into soft areas. Hope they live long enough to encourage organized resistance to fall back to the next line of defense.

      Stand off terror bombing.

      Keep doing 1 & 2 until they give you something to make it stop.

      The problem with #1 is that your policy is Infestation. But - like bugs, mice or rats, you can kill t

  • bluGill@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 天前

    Russia is moving forward. They average about 3 square km/day. At the expense of about 300 more people than they recruit every day. They can sustain this rate for another year is my best guess.

    Russia does not need 6 months to train new recruits. Many only get 2 weeks - why invest more in someone you expect to die in the first day of fighting anyway? To train troops to NATO standards needs 6 months - but NATO doesn’t like it when their boys die so they give them lots of training on how to avoid that (and also orders that avoid it - some deaths in war are inevitable, but NATO avoids it, part of that is better training).

    Mobilization however is something Russians might not stand for. Most of the troops are not coming from the big cities. There is fear that the average citizen will rise up - at risk of their own life - and take out Putin if he mobilizes troops. Hard to say if this will happen, but it is realistic that it could. Expect lots of dead “normal people” if this happens, but they have the numbers to win if they don’t care about their own life.

    • TwinkleToes@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      14 小时前

      They are moving forward more slowly than any territorial invasion in the last 2,000 years. And put cruelty aside - they DO actually need to train these forces if they want them to make a difference.

      Guys who were driving cabs, changing tires or working backoffice IT jobs 2 weeks ago are not effective infantry forces. They aren’t coordinated, can’t maneuver, aren’t professional by any definition. They are, in a word, ineffective. Effective assault forces require ground and air support, vehicles, supporting fire, engineering, logistics, food, shelter - And Training. Just grabbing more bodies while ignoring everything else you need for a strategic offensive just means those unqualified cosplayers die faster than the last batch did.

      They don’t care about life - that’s obvious. But that lack of emapthy doesn’t translate into military effectiveness. If it did, the zerg rush of convicts and slack jawed cheque-chasers in years 2 & 3 of the war would have been more successful. And THOSE low functioning grunts at least had the rudiments of mechanized infantry, artillery & air support and mass. Anyone caught up in the next round of mobilization won’t have those benefits AND their economic productivity is harder to replace.

      Numbers matters less and less than effectiveness as this war goes on. Current attrition rates are 8:1 or more since russia pissed away their Soviet hardware inheritance and started relying on tiny infiltration teams and standoff terror bombing. Doesn’t matter how cruel Russia is to their own - it won’t make ‘normal’ people into effective assault forces in the face of the pure grinding hell on earth they’re being mushed into.

      • bluGill@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 天前

        They have the numbers. It is questionable if the people will actually group together with enough cohesion to actually pull things off, though. More likely, most of them will not and so an effort will fail. History is full of examples of people in small groups trying to do something, but they couldn’t get enough numbers to pull anything off. But occasionally, a group got large enough to actually pull off a major change.

        • massacre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 天前

          Are you saying Russia has the numbers to defeat NATO let alone a single NATO country? By definition that’s a conventional war. Russia can’t even defeat Ukraine after 3 years and they they have 140M to Ukraine 40M population and had a standing army multiple times the size and stockpiles of munitions.

          I stand by my statement.

          • bluGill@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            23 小时前

            I’m saying the Russian people have the numbers to defeat the Russian government.

            If you understood that line to be about NATO vs Russia, Russia has no chance.

            • massacre@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              19 小时前

              OK, thanks for clarifying! Then yes I wholesale agree… and it seems like there’s a tipping point if they keep forcing people into the meat grinder, but living in the US I am saddened by the apathy of people on the whole and our tolerance for bullshit.

  • vorpuni@tarte.nuage-libre.fr
    link
    fedilink
    Français
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 天前

    Probably more mobilization, people in the big cities are probably also seeming to be more worried so if even rumors of it start they may actually try to leave. For now from what I’ve seen and heard, they didn’t feel like they were involved.

    • TwinkleToes@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 天前

      I thought about this a lot too. Mobilization seems the most likely, and even the idea of it accomplishes other internal goals of maybe flushing out and exposing anyone planning organized resistance. If you encourage resistors to leave…well…often they leave. Then you have a chance to catch them in transit, or make them advance their plans ahead of schedule which would greatly reduce the chances of a successful uprising later.

  • Delta_V@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 天前

    Could be propaganda for domestic consumption. Hyping an external threat to induce a rally around the flag.

  • FaceDeer@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 天前

    It’s possible that it’s a bluff at getting ready for another round of mobilizations. If Putin thinks that Ukraine is at a breaking point and is relying on Russia also being at a breaking point then doing things that make it seem like Russia’s ready to draw this out a lot longer might force them to the table.

    I don’t think Ukraine actually is at a breaking point, but Putin might think so - I seriously doubt he’s getting good intel from his underlings.

  • Estiar@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 天前

    The way they see it, the Putin Government must stay in power at all costs. Mobilization is a way to extend that time, because once the war ends everything else in the Russian economy falls apart. So I can see more mobilization, but of course it’s preserving a fleeting status quo by mortgaging the future