Ukraine rebel-held Donetsk sees 'heavy fighting'

[frigidmagi]

BBC

Heavy fighting has erupted in a suburb of the rebel stronghold of Donetsk, in eastern Ukraine, local officials say.

There are reports of civilian casualties as government forces battle to retake the city from pro-Russia separatists, the city council said.

Reports say powerful blasts and shooting were heard in the city.

Ukrainian government forces have made steady gains in recent weeks, encircling Donetsk and another rebel stronghold, Luhansk.

Power cuts
"As of 17:00 (14:00 GMT), there are active military hostilities going on in the Petrovksy district of Donetsk," Donetsk city council said on Tuesday, quoted by Ukraine's Unian news agency.

Electricity has been cut in some parts of the district after shells hit substations in the area, Unian added.

It said that gunfire - including heavy weapons - could also be heard in other parts of the city.

Eastern Ukraine has been unstable since rebels declared independence from the authorities in Kiev in April.

A picture shows a burnt buildings in the village of Maryinka, a suburb of Donetsk in eastern Ukraine, on 5 August 2014.

Civilians have bore the brunt of fighting in recent days, with many homes and buildings damaged in cross fire
At least 1,500 people, both civilians and combatants, are believed to have been killed and thousands more injured since Ukraine's new government sent in troops to put down the insurrection in the regions of Donetsk and Luhansk.

The rebels have since been pushed back to their strongholds in the two cities of the same name, though other pockets of resistance remain.

Separately on Tuesday, Russia called for an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council over the humanitarian situation in Ukraine, Russia's Itar-Tass news agency reports.

It comes after the UN revealed that the number of people fleeing the war in eastern Ukraine to other parts of the country had jumped from 2,600 to 102,600 inside two months.

An armed pro-Russian separatist stands guard at a checkpoint in the settlement of Yasynuvata outside Donetsk, 5 August 2014.

Russian forces have been accused of helping the separatists with rocket barrages, a claim Moscow denies
The figures for early June to early August coincide with a sharp increase in fighting between pro-Russian separatist rebels and security forces.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has also ordered his government to prepare retaliatory measures against the latest round of Western sanctions imposed, local news agencies report.

Russia, which annexed Ukraine's Crimea region in March, has been accused of arming the rebels and has been targeted by US and EU sanctions. Russia denies the accusations.

In a sign of increasing tensions, Ukrainian defence spokesman Andriy Lysenko on Tuesday condemned Russia's plans to carry out military exercises in southern Russia, calling it "a provocation".

He said Russia had massed some 45,000 troops along its shared border with Ukraine.

The sooner this is over the better. That said I doubt Putin would be insane enough to invade the Ukraine. While yes, NATO forces would not pour in to fight him, if he did so, he could expect massive economic action at a time when the Russian economy is not very robust. Additionally you would and could expect to see NATO forces funneling in equipment and training in order to bleed the Russian Army. I'm very sure that both Americans and Poles just for example would be gleefully embrace the idea of making the Russians bleed for once.

[Lys]

Some days ago President Obama was speaking, apparently off the cuff, and implied that Putin wasn't acting rationally. Marina immediately commented that if Putin weren't rational Kiev would be on fire. He hasn't invaded Ukraine because a rational cost-benefit analysis doesn't come in favour of doing so (much to the disappointment of war nerds everywhere). Conversely, he hasn't withdrawn support from the rebels or seriously attempted to broker a deal because the rational cost-benefit analysis doesn't come out in favour of doing so either. Keep in mind here that Putin's primary concern is Putin not Russia, so while it's debatable whether supporting the rebels is in Russia's long term interest, it is definitely in Putin's long term interest.

Though I have to say, if Russia did invade the Ukraine I doubt there would be much of an opportunity to bleed the Russians. The Ukranian military is utterly incapable of standing up to the Russian one. I believe there were leaked communiques from the Ukranian top brass from around the time when Russia annexed the Crimea to the tune of, "There's approximately jack and shit that we can do if Russian tanks start rolling across the border." I doubt the war would last a month, and the Russians would only take parts of the Ukraine that they can actually hold, letting go of the rest. There'd be nothing to funnel weapons and training to unless Putin screwed up and tried to annex a part of Ukraine with not enough Russians, resulting in a Ukrainian uprising there.

I've heard it speculated that Russia probably would have invaded if the pro-Russia secessionist movement had been stronger. It seems that, for a very rough estimate, less than two thirds of Russians in the Eastern Ukraine are for it. Look at it this way, the areas that are in revolt are around 90% Russian, which that means they can have a majority of the population in support. However there are very large areas that are around 70% Russian, but with only two thirds of those in favour of seceding that's not quite enough to have a majority. For areas where the Russian population forms a majority but not a supermajority it's even worse. The end result is the Luhansk and Donetsk People's Republics are really tiny and don't really have much in the way of momentum in their favour. Thus from the Russian perspective it looks like the parts of Ukraine that they can actually hold outside Crimea are very small, and thus not worth fighting a war over. Conversely had it looked like there was a big slice of pie to be had, they might have gone for it.

[frigidmagi]

The Iraqi Army didn't stand up to well to us either. There's more than one way to bleed an army and the Russians don't have the economy to absorb the damage we do. There's really only one way to tell however. Additionally we really don't have much dependable data on how much popular support the rebels have, frankly though it doesn't seem to be a mass movement of any real weight.

[Lys]

The point I was making is that I don't think the Russians would be occupying the parts of Ukraine that don't want them there. For the Russian military to bleed they have to be shot at, and if they win the conventional war quickly, and don't put themselves in a situation that results in having to fight an unconventional war, then they're not going to be doing any bleeding unless NATO decides to go in and do it themselves. That it looks like the areas where they wouldn't have to fight an unconventional war to occupy are pretty small is likely much the reason why they haven't gone across the border.

Anyway, to illustrate what I meant by Putin doing what is good for Putin. Before this all started his approval rating was somewhere around 60%. That is pretty good actually, but Russian polling may not be the most reliable, so actual approval may have been lower. Either way though, since then his approval rating has climbed somewhere north of 80%, which is a damn solid improvement. The war in the Donbas has been bad for Ukraine and possibly bad for Russia, but it's definitely been good for Putin.

[LadyTevar]

The article didn't mention how this new flareup is affecting those trying to clean up the plane crash.