With invitation and by assistance of @UKRinOSCE today I have had a high honour and privilege to speak on behalf of Ukraine at #OSCE Annual Security Review Conference. These are major ideas voiced in prepared remarks.
European security architecture has been destroyed by all-out unprovoked/unjustified RU aggression against UA. Europe lost its status as one of most peaceful continents in world and now is arena of major interstate war of magnitude unseen since 1945.
Russian all-out war against Ukraine is not totally unexpected for those who for some time tracked Russian foreign policy trajectory - or better to say how Russia foreign policy progressively deteriorated into outright militarized revisionism.
Limited aggressions against its neighbors, disregard for arms control agreements/confidence building measures, rearmament/military demonstrations – there are the things that int comm has witnessed and with some exceptions turned a blind eye with negative consequences.
Now UA-RU all out war is in 5th month – though many people expected that Kyiv would fall in max 96 hours. UA pol nation using its own arsenal of heavy weaponry and West equipment like ATGMs/grenade launchers and MANPADs shattered RU original plan and made RU to limit its goals.
Russians were forced out of Northern Ukraine, Mykolayiv region and outskirts of Kharkiv. However difficult it was to endure first Russian blow Ukraine performed superbly well paving way from gloomy predictions to hope that justice would prevail.
But as war switched from suburbs of Kyiv to settlements and plains of Eastern Ukraine we should not fall into complacency. Otherwise weariness would replace alertness. And instead of unity of opinion we would see emerging cracks in countries’ perspectives to Ukraine-Russia war.
We should be especially cautious with regards to increasing calls for ceasefire or even peace here and now – at the price of Ukrainian territorial integrity. Though in itself peace is the ultimate goal of Ukraine present calls for peace are questionable at best.
Those calling for ceasefire when RU troops occupy 20% of UA/continues its creeping frontal advances in Donbas cannot explain what would prevent RU from breaching new agreements. Minsk 1/2 agreements should be a warning for those calling for ceasefire for the sake of ceasefire.
OSCE countries cannot indefinitely buy fake sense of normalcy at the expanse of Ukrainian territorial integrity/sovereignty and fundamental principles.
Peace-loving OSCE countries should not repeat its past mistakes being distracted and allowing Russia to consolidate gains before launching new round of dismemberment of Ukraine.
To bring really lasting peace Europe must return to basics – learning one more time importance of true balance of power which must underpin any diplomatic efforts.
This all out war was made possible because locally balance of power had been progressively favoring revisionist RU and all UA pleas to preemptively strengthen us were largely unheard. Hope this mistake would not be repeated again at this crucial moment of Ukraine-Russia war.
This war some time ago has turned into war of attrition at battlefield and war of exhaustion more broadly. And Ukraine can’t definitely endure this confrontation on its own – nobody could as it’s biggest regional war since 1945 with unprecedented consumption of material.
Military its largely artillery vs artillery contest with little of contact warfare where ATGMs might make a difference. UA needs more of long-range fires that would make it possible to interdict RU reinforcements/follow-on echelons before they might make any difference at front.
Ukraine also needs long-range fires to target Russian C2 nodes, logistics and conduct effective counter battery fight. And in this case no precision can substitute mass – quantity is quality of its own in case of artillery.
Only this way Ukraine can at least stabilize front-line fully with many lives saved. But to enhance Ukrainian negotiation position front-line stabilization is not enough – Ukraine needs to conduct at least one major counteroffensive.
Only counteroffensive can deal a decisive physical/psychological blow to already humiliated Russian army. Only through strengthening of Ukraine proper conditions can be created to implement OSCE core principles in practice.
More broadly Ukraine needs consistent financial and economic aid to endure. Hope nobody doubts ability of more than 50% of world GDP Western countries represent to confront meager Russian share of GDP which is progressively shrinking.
Bottom line is the following one – Russia must not be allowed to out-wait other peace-loving OSCE countries in this war. And that’s why this is not a time for hesitation – it’s time for those OSCE countries which cherish peace to redouble its efforts in support of Ukraine.
There should be no cracks for Russia to exploit. Only consistency and resolve translated in constant flow of heavy weaponry and financial assistance to Ukraine can bring this war to such a conclusion that would favor the cause of peace and security all over the world.
And special words of thanks and appreciation for @PLinOSCE for their bold and innovative chairmanship in @OSCE this year under conditions of RU all-out unjustified/unprovoked large-scale aggression against UA. @usosce @GER_OSCE @CanadaOSCE @UKOSCE

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Mykola Bielieskov

Mykola Bielieskov Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @MBielieskov

Jun 11
It’s better for Biden Administration not to broach the topic what has/has not been done by UA before 24.02.22 to prepare country for all-out war despite US warning. Reason? - unpleasant issue of US underperformance given its intelligence miscalculations would come to the fora.
US approach before 24.02.22 was a kind of paradox - clear warning of impending all-out war but lack of preemptive strengthening of UA for self defence and under conditions when basics of world order might be questioned by RU. Reason for it - wrong US intelligence assessments.
Basically we can say that UA defence/security forces by its fierce resistance compensated not only miscalculations of UA state policy (to say opposite would be lie) but also US miscalculations based on the wrong assessment that in army against army contest UA has zero chances.
Read 7 tweets
Jun 10
Some people question wisdom of UA Severodonetsk salient stubborn defence given the flank threat to GLOC leading to salient. In critics’ view it’s better for UA forces to withdraw to shorten frontline and not to risk forces in salient that much.
First UA mil leadership proved its ability to assess situation/risk and respond with necessary forces when Bakhmut-Lysychansk GLOC was at risk at the end of May after RU forces threatened it from Popasna salient despite some gloomy predictions that Severodonetsk fate is sealed.
Second, RU would try to take Severodonetsk no matter what given political considerations. It creates conditions for UA to degrade RU in close combat where RU advantage in firepower is negated somewhat. Plus all possible RU angles of attack are well known - so no surprise effect.
Read 5 tweets
Jun 1
It’s 100% clear from Biden NYT column is that US is going to provide UA with enough firepower to exhaust RU offensive capabilities and make switch to defence along whole frontline. And it’s a reflection of consensus in US gov that RU shall not be allowed to crush UA militarily.
What is less clear whether US gov supports UA liberation of occupied territories by force and with proper amount of US supplied firepower - despite Biden assertion that US is not going to press UA to make territorial concessions in the course of possible negotiations with RU.
My guess that Biden Admin thinks that exhausting RU offensive capabilities and making them switch to defence with supply of M270/M142 would be enough to strengthen UA negotiation position.
Read 4 tweets
May 31
IMHO people pay disproportionate attention to Severodonetsk salient - in terms of larger implications. Under most negative scenario that RU swiftly takes control of salient (which is highly unlikely) it lacks resources to turn this local success in larger one with deep strikes.
UA rebuffed attempts to cut Bakhmut-Lysychansk GLOC. This fact along with staunch resistance in Severodonetsk mean that swift RU takeover of salient is unlikely - what is possible under most negative scenario is UA withdrawal with fighting to shorten frontline.
Such methodical withdrawal battle done by UA even under most negative conditions would mean that RU would be left with less forces to turn local success around Severodonetsk salient into operational one.
Read 5 tweets
May 27
RU strategy now - exploit propensity for compromise/diplomacy among some Western elites to undermine UA readiness to fight which in turn would undermine decisive Western elites in readiness to aid UA which in turn would compel UA to compromise under RU terms.
UA strategy now - not to allow RU to play out differences among Western elites and instead to fight RU as fiercely as before. By this UA provides arguments to decisive part of Western elite which aids Ukraine and disciplines those in West who stand for compromise no matter what.
Currently we are at bifurcation point where slightest UA indecisiveness might aid those in West who stand for compromise/diplomacy with Russia and undermine those in West who staunchly stand for aiding UA to prevail in this all-out war with RU.
Read 4 tweets
May 27
With regards to Severodonetsk salient there is no easy or risk free option for UA. 1. Currently UA tries to exhaust RU offensive thrust with fire and rushed reinforcements - before RU cut GLOCs betw Bakhmut and Lysychansk. But it’s difficult as RU keep GLOCs under fire control.
Option 2 for UA is orderly withdrawal from Severodonetsk salient. UA has experience of orderly withdrawal in case of Debaltsevo salient in Feb 2015. UA forces were withdrawn by field roads as main road was cut by RU forces. Again such withdrawal is to be done under RU shelling.
Option 3 is to turn Severodonetsk/Lysychansk in another Mariupol and exhaust RU with urban warfare accumulating resources nearby to strike when RU forces are decimated. Though another Mariupol would be politically risky thing for UA political leadership.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(