1/ Elon Musk has too large an audience to simply ignore this, and others have eloquently told him to fuck off already (which I'm here for) but I'd like to go point by point and explain why his ideas are misguided and impractical.
2/ "Redo elections of annexed regions under UN supervision."
First, it's just insane to poll people in an active and contested warzone, even during a ceasefire.
The UN observers aren't staying forever. What happens to voters who vote the 'wrong' way after one side wins?
3/ Second, what exactly is Elon Musk picturing here?
Hypothetically the referendum happens and comes back with Donetsk voting to join Russia 53%/47% with UN observers reporting intimidation and irregularities at 26% of voting places.
What the fuck do we do with that?
4/ Third and most importantly, the premise here is that Russia is entitled to any territory it can partially/temporarily hold, if it can get local residents who haven't fled to vote a their way in a referendum while their army controls the streets.
That's not how anything works.
5/ "Crimea formally a part of Russia as it has been"
Even the Istanbul negotiations, which Putin never truly backed but which American isolationists love to point to, did not go this far and instead fudged the question of Crimean ownership.
6/ Setting aside the historical dubiousness of Elon Musk's claim, this isn't the middle ages or a game of Crusader Kings III.
You don't just get to keep any illegally annexed territory you can point to a historical claim for.
7/ "Water supply to Crimea assured"
The idea that Ukraine has to not only cede its sovereign territory to Russia but also agree to provide it with guaranteed infrastructure services in perpetuity feels a bit rich, but compared to the other items on the list it's almost quaint.
8/ "Ukraine remains neutral"
This is the one that really gets my goat.
What does "neutral" mean, exactly?
No NATO?
No EU?
Ukraine is in neither right now and Putin is ceaselessly referring to it as a puppet of the West regardless.
No western trainers or equipment?
9/ So is Ukraine's 'neutrality' to be judged on a Putin's paranoia weighted curve?
Does Ukraine have to check every economic and foreign policy move it makes with the Kremlin first, in case it makes Vova nervous?
10/ The right to freely enter into international treaties and alliances is a pivotal determinant of sovereignty. Foreign policy is, almost universally, the primary and defining characteristic of a national executive.
Why does Ukraine defending itself mean it loses this right?
11/ More fundamentally, in what way does any of the above reflect a remotely sane balance of concessions reflecting where the two sides are today?
If absolutely everything goes Ukraine's way in Musk's scenario Russia merely leaves with a formal right to Crimea, losing nothing.
12/ Now let's look at this from Ukraine's point of view.
Let's assume that somehow, referendums conducted at Russian gun-point all yield solid "stay in Ukraine" results that Russia actually honours (bahaha).
Where does that leave Ukraine?
13/ They will have:
- Formally ceded Crimea forever;
- Pledged to supply Crimea with water, forever;
- Pledged to remain 'neutral' to Putin's satisfaction in perpetuity, presumably removing the NATO and EU ascension commitments in their own constitution.
14/ What do they get in exchange?
A battered, exhausted and humiliated Russian army is allowed to retreat with dignity to rearm, retrain and resupply until the next time Putin or his successor feels the need to remind his people that WE WON WWII by restarting this shit.
No.
15/ Bonus: Mr Musk is now questioning the election integrity of his own twitter poll, which I note wasn't even conducted at Russian gunpoint.
Perhaps he could bring in some UN observers?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
From the largely anecdotal evidence coming in so far about Russian mobilization:
1⃣ They are not sticking to Putin's publicly stated target of 300k. Just vacuuming up men in the provinces;
2⃣ They are not exclusively targeting reservists and veterans;
3⃣ They are actively using call-ups as a tool of repression, punishing protesters with draft cards.
4⃣ They are recruiting more aggressive in the rural oblasts and ethnic enclaves than in St. Peter and Moscow, perhaps trying to maintain the illusion this can be a costless war.
5⃣ The Russian state is woefully unprepared and far too disorganized to competently orchestrate something on this scale.
6⃣ The Russian army is making it up as it goes along when it comes to how to arm, train, house, feed and utilize these people.
The "Putin had no choice but to escalate" line assumes that mobilizing people's children into an increasingly hopeless meatgrinder in Ukraine is somehow less dangerous to his regime than announcing victory and pulling the troops back.
I guess that's possible, but I'm sceptical.
Again, as I always stress, there is absolutely no need for the official line from Moscow to reflect reality in any way.
If he can sell the country on Jewish Zelensky being a secret Nazi and Russia only having lost 5600 troops since February, he can sell a retreat as a win.
If his address this morning had claimed that the entire Special Military Operation was an elaborate faint / maskirovka buying time to evacuate good Russian people from the Donbas before NATO Nazis overran them, Solovyov and the other propogandists would have sold it. I promise.
No doubt Chomsky, Hitchens and Mearsheimer are all penning pieces condemning North Korean aid shipments for not allowing Russia to offer all its territory southwest of Volgograd, a pledge of perpetual neutrality, and immediate demilitarization, in exchange for Ukrainian mercy.
Here, I'll get them started with a summary paragraph:
"When confronted with a military superpower like Ukraine, a corruption laden and militarily incompetent minor regional player like Russia cannot truly resist, and continued fighting only needlessly prolongs the suffering."
"I'm not on any side, but I am on the side of peace - and if the cause of peace requires Russia to make some minor territorial concessions like giving Ukraine a landbridge to Georgia and Kazakhstan, then they should resist their North Korean masters and do it."
We can infer from their refusal to sell directly that China is sensitive about being seen to directly arm Russia's invasion.
There is simply no way to hide the providence of tens of thousands of Chinese artillery shells, even if you put them in Korean boxes.
Even setting aside the considerable allied HUMINT and SIGINT, I promise you if truck loads of Chinese shells turn up at the front lines, Russian soldiers will take photos and upload them to Telegram, VK and OndaKlassniki.
1/ Interesting point here about how the Russian military is paid.
A system of low base pay supplementrd by a web of bonuses awarded through an impenetrable and capricious bureaucracy is terrible, but extremely on brand for a regime built on corruption and nepotism.
2/ The less automaticity there is in a system, the more opportunities there are for corruption, nepotism and extortion.
If you are part of approving or processing someone else's income, that gives you power.
Doubly so when the process is opaque, complex and arbitrary.
3/ In peacetime, when the actual effectiveness of the military barely matters, this system enriches officers and military bureaucrats all the way up the chain of command while allowing them to reward their toadies and punish rivals.