NATO Pledges Urgent Support for Ukraine’s Battered Infrastructure

Yves here. Below is yet another example of continuing Collective West delusion. As most regulars know well, the US and Western weapons stocks have been badly run down over the course of the Ukraine war, to the degree that some NATO members have said they can’t provide more due to the need to have enough for self defense. US and NATO efforts to increase output have had very limited success even as Russia has ramped up its military production greatly and has even been improving the design of some weapons based on battlefield experience.

In addition, Russia has always assigned vastly greater priority to air defense systems over manned aircraft due to the latter being impractical and unduly costly relative to its great territorial expanse. Russia as a matter of doctrine has also preferred layered offensive missiles to fighters and bombers.

Russia slowly and systematically denuded Ukraine’s air defenses by attacks on the electrical grid, which initially targeted electrical distribution (as in relatively easy to repair), to force Ukraine to burn through its air defense missiles. Russia has also been targeting air defense assets but this has been an opportunistic affair. Russia, as chronicled particularly well by John Helmer, has been increasingly striking Ukraine’s electrical production. This much less easily remedied reduction in output comes as Ukraine and Europe face a particularly cold winter. Bear in mind that the increased demand on an already wobbly electrical system can produce more breakage.

Hence the sense of urgency from the US/NATO side. Not only is Ukraine suffering an intensifying front-line crisis, with Russia pushing the line of contact westward and a steadily increasing pace and Ukraine desertions rising, but it faces an internal crisis if power output over the low temperature months is closer to worst case scenarios (only 4 hours of power a day) than most hope. That means more Ukrainians attempting to leave, an accelerating economic collapse as business find it difficult to function, and of course, impaired military output and (probably) logistics.

So NATO intends to magic some new air defenses to Ukraine.

One additional point about the infrastructure: NATO is correct to insinuate or even state that Russia seems to have become more bloody-minded about the conduct of the war than before. I am not sure whether taking out electrical production was part of the plan when the grid attacks started. This may be the result of a more bloody-minded attitude as Ukraine has made attacks into Crimea and Russia that targeted civilians (the Crocus city hall terrorism had Ukraine fingerprints all over it). But it could also be Russia recognizing that Western countries don’t make the old Soviet standard electrical generation equipment that Ukraine uses. As we can see from the difficultly for US/NATO members to get out of their underwear to simply produce more 155 mm artillery shells, they would not set up factories just to build a large number of only-for-Ukraine electrical generation components over a few years and then have to cut output to close to zero. So Russia may have worked out that it wrecks Ukraine’s grid, it owns Ukraine as the only party that could/would restore critical parts of Ukraine’s production.

But there is another aspect to Russia’s increased willingness to wreck Ukraine infrastructure. As reader Maxwell Johnson noted in comments on Sputnik 2.0? Oreshnik and the Western Military Capabilities Gap:

I visited the Yuzhmash plant in 1993, when visiting Dnepropetrovsk on business (now Dnipro, but probably will revert to Dnepropetrovsk within the next few years). It is (was?) a huge sprawling Soviet facility. If the reports of its total destruction by a single non-nuclear missile are true, that’s remarkable.

Military aspects aside, I think the real significance of this strike on Yuzhmash is that the Russians are finally taking their gloves off. One of the reasons for Russia’s relative restraint in this conflict has been their desire to limit damage to key UKR infrastructure. There are plenty of tasty morsels in UKR that well-connected Russian oligarchs would love to get their hands on, and Yuzhmash is (was?) quite possibly the crown jewel of UKR industry. Putin’s decision to take it out sends a message that Russia will fight to the bitter end, even if it means laying waste to all of UKR. It reminds me of the British sinking of the French fleet in 1940; from that point onwards, the Germans knew that the British truly intended to fight it out:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Mers-el-K%C3%A9bir

Now to the main event. As a Western messaging outlet, RFE/RL simply reports NATO’s concerns and fond wishes.

By RFE/RL. Cross posted from OilPrice

  • NATO members have agreed to prioritize protecting Ukraine’s infrastructure from ongoing Russian attacks.
  • Russia continues to target Ukrainian cities and energy facilities with drones and missiles, causing civilian casualties and power outages.
  • Explosions were reported in the Russian port city of Novorossiisk, a key hub for oil exports and military operations.

NATO members have agreed to make protecting Ukraine’s infrastructure a top priority, alliance chief Mark Rutte said on December 4, as Russia continues to pound Ukrainian cities and towns with drone and missile strikes.

Speaking to reporters ahead of the second day of a meeting of foreign ministers from the 32-member military alliance, Rutte said the gathering discussed providing Ukraine with enough air defense systems to protect its infrastructure against Russian attacks.

“There was a clear agreement around the table last night that to help Ukraine, particularly with its infrastructure, has to be a priority,” Rutte said.

“I’m confident that allies will follow up in the coming days and weeks in making sure that whatever they can supply to Ukraine will be supplied.”

Russia has been targeting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure for the third winter in a row, causing casualties and hampering the supply of electricity to thousands of civilians.

Early on December 4, Russian drones attacked the northern Cernihiv region, damaging several houses in a village, regional governor Vyacheslav Chaus said on Telegram.

In the central region of Vinnytsya, debris from a falling drone set a house on fire in the Haysyn district, partially destroying it, Ukraine’s State Emergencies Service said on December 4.

Separately, the Ukrainian Air Force said Russia launched a guided air missile and 50 drones at targets in Ukraine.

Ukrainian air defense systems shot down 29 drones in nine regions — Kyiv, Kharkiv, Poltava, Sumy, Chernihiv, Khmelnytskiy, Ternopil, Mykolayiv, and Donetsk — the air force said, adding that 18 drones were neutralized after their navigation systems were jammed using Ukraine’s electronic warfare capabilities.

Separately, strong explosions were reported overnight in Russia’s Black Sea port of Novorossiisk, one of the main hubs for Russian oil exports and an important military port that hosts part of Russia’s Black Sea fleet.

An air alert was announced and Novorossiisk Mayor Andrei Kravchenko called on residents to take shelter because of a drone attack.

Neither Ukraine nor Russia have so far commented on the explosions.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

38 comments

  1. Ignacio

    It is pretty certain that, for instance, France, will rush to support Ukraine with everything available.

    Not to mention that South Korea, non-NATO member, will also go in 100%.

    Reply
  2. The Rev Kev

    When the Ukraine collapses, I am looking forward to a statement from all these NATO clowns saying-

    ‘The war situation has developed not necessarily to Ukraine’s advantage.’

    In spite off all that is going on, they are going with denial and magical thinking as a way to cope and are leading all their listeners down a garden path. Sort of like what the Democrats did with their followers the past several months. So how did that work out? Frankly this is a case where Yves’s introduction was far more informative and interesting than the post itself.

    Reply
    1. ilsm

      RFE/RL is propaganda outlet.

      Has been since the commercials in the 1950’s about a burly Red Army soldier axing a radio………

      My oldest memory of TV

      Reply
      1. Yves Smith Post author

        RFE/RL is not Making Shit Up. It is blandly re-reporting what NATO officials are saying. The delusion is coming from the highest levels, not the stenographers.

        Reply
    2. WillD

      Like the statement of ‘advancing rearwards’. They have to avoid negative words at all costs, to maintain the illusion and stiff upper lip!

      Reply
  3. William Beyer

    A dumb question, perhaps. With a billion drones in the air over Ukraine, why have we not seen even alleged before/after pics of the damage at Yuzhmash? Not that we’d necessarily believe them, but still.

    Reply
    1. ambrit

      I read somewhere that the factory in question was built underground. Alas, Googlemaps does not supply adequate photographic evidence to prove or disprove my assertion.

      Reply
    2. Ignacio

      One possible reason is that the not the Ukrainians, neither the CW, want this to be seen publicly as proof of escalation dominance by Russia. The Russians almost certainly have made their own assessment and do not bother to show. Those who need to know already do know. If I was able to think this in two minutes anybody can. So, somehow dumb question.

      Reply
    3. PlutoniumKun

      There are satellite photos available and have been discussed on various fora online. You’ll find them on any search.

      They don’t seem to show much visible damage, but that’s not necessarily a surprise given the nature of the plant (lots of massively built structures) and the ‘probable’ nature of the warheads, which seem likely to have been intended for causing deep damage to underground storage areas and may or may not have been dummys.

      There are some anomalies in the published photos which has led to the usual discussions on whether they have been tampered with or altered in some ways. People believe what they want to believe, whatever photos show. Russia hasn’t supplied any satellite imagery so far as I’m aware and is keeping fairly quiet about what exactly was targeted and what they think was hit/destroyed. It is clear that there were no big secondary explosions, which you’d expect if (as some claim) weapons storage facilities were targeted and hit.

      The reality is that without knowing exactly what Russia’s intention was with the attack (in terms of causing physical damage) and without detailed on the ground surveys of the ‘real’ damage to the plant (aerial photos can only tell so much), the best everyone can do is make educated guesses. The very small number of genuinely technically knowledgeable and genuinely independent analysts out there are generally (so far as I can see) as unsure as everyone else. Only the Russians and Ukrainians (maybe) have a clear idea and they aren’t telling. If anyone online or in the media claims to ‘know the real truth’, then that’s a very good indicator that they don’t.

      Reply
      1. Yves Smith Post author

        Larry Johnson has said he has a reliable contact in the area who confirmed that Yuzhmash had been reduced to dust, as some Twitter accounts had reported.

        Reply
        1. Who Cares

          Yuzhmash is too big for that to happen with this missile.
          What others have reported is that (a significant) part of the complex that was in use has been dusted to at least floor -4.

          Reply
    4. Who Cares

      The biggest is that the Russians don’t care and the Ukrainian/West side would want to cover up damage done (as to reduce the amount of information flowing to both Russia and their own news cycle).

      Further the damage on the surface is fairly modest. The warheads themselves were just lugs of metal so no explosions the moment enough resistance (or a timer/height trigger triggered) occurred. Any surface building would have had their windows blown out from the vaporized ceiling/floor rapidly expanding while having a fairly small hole in the ceiling. Holes directly in the ground are bigger due to the material initially having no way to expand except upwards. It are the underground workshops that got really damaged with them containing the expanding super heated vapor. And the rumors are that they managed to get the workshops four deep, it just is that that doesn’t show on a satellite photo.

      Reply
  4. ambrit

    As is tradition, Russia has decided to employ the ‘wiles’ of one of their mightiest assets; General Winter.
    The Germans were once noted for their adherence to the theory and practice of Realpolitik. Lately, one could characterize NATO, EU, and German practice as “Traumpolitik.”
    Stay safe.

    Reply
  5. JohnA

    The US Patriot air defence system has not proved to be particularly effective. This has, however, not deterred Sweden from boasting recently that they have just signed a contract to spend huge sums on the Patriot system for its own defence.
    Meanwhile, Swedish media continue to parrot western propaganda. Dagens Nyheter, equivalent to The Guardian in England, wrote in its leader column today 5 December, [my translation] “Dissatisfaction is growing in Russia. Food and housing costs are becoming increasingly expensive as all the money is being swallowed by the military. If the west continues to support Ukraine, Putin is going to lose the war”.

    Reply
    1. ilsm

      Check and see if Sweden gets a part of the production as in new plant and manufacturing technology……

      That is usually the deal.

      For example, Poland has a new patriot related production facility in Warsaw.

      Reply
  6. AG

    As Western delusions go:
    There is a new peace memo out in Germany signed by 38 VIPs.
    Aside from the obvious that nobody wants WWIII and any more deaths, I am referring in the secondary to the underlying military assumptions. How do such Germans seriously want to negotiate with the Russians. They rely totally on US-leadership and military intelligence. And thus their entire information fabric and understanding are built on that Atlanticist concept of superiority which they claim to reject. Both the recent GREENPEACE study which stated that NATO has 10 times more of anything than Russia and these benign assumptions of superiority are product of the same lack of expertise.

    The same initiators wrote the peace memo of Febr. 2023 which I complained about a few weeks ago. It claimed 50.000 dead Ukrainian civilians. If it was not mind-boggling a figure then, it should be now with officially 45.000 dead in Gaza. What if now someone gets the idea to compare: Are the Russians then committing genocide? And there goes your peace initiative. I tried to tell those people then but of course that was futile. Instead of trusting UN numbers they preferred US Armed Forces. Well good look with multipolarity then.

    https://www.nachdenkseiten.de/?p=125690

    “APPEAL OF THE 38

    One minute to twelve – Prevent a major European war!

    Russia’s war against Ukraine, which violates international law, has been raging for over 1000 days. People are dying every day, Ukraine is being destroyed more and more. At the front, the Ukrainian army is under pressure; there is a lack not only of weapons, but also of soldiers, and the Russians are gaining ground. There is no end to the deaths in sight.

    The last-minute decision by US President Biden to authorize attacks on Russia with missiles supplied by the USA has initiated a new escalation stage. Great Britain and France have now followed suit. This increases the risk for the whole of Europe extremely. Germany could become the new battlefield.

    Biden had refused to take this step in the past in order, as he himself emphasized, to avoid a third world war. Does that no longer apply?

    Instead of doing everything possible to ease the highly dangerous situation, the CDU, FDP and Greens now want to supply Ukraine with Taurus missiles. This would enable Zelenskyj to attack targets deep in Russia with pinpoint accuracy. Since these missiles have to be programmed by Bundeswehr soldiers, the delivery of the Taurus would be almost like a declaration of war by Germany on the nuclear power Russia. It would most likely result in a military response from Russia.

    We are in perhaps the most dangerous phase of this war. Our primary duty should be to avoid a catastrophe for our country and all people in Europe. Germany may not currently have a government capable of acting, but at least it has a parliament capable of acting. We appeal to all political actors: Let us forget our differences and act together to prevent the worst!

    It is high time that German politicians pushed for de-escalation and an immediate ceasefire followed by peace negotiations. As is envisaged, for example, by the peace plan of Brazil and China, supported by Switzerland, among others.

    Neither side can and will win the war in Ukraine. If the guns do not fall silent soon, we all risk losing together. Never since the end of World War II has the danger of nuclear war in Europe been as great as it is now. We must avert it before it is too late.

    Reply
    1. ISL

      I recommend you read the Genocide Convention if you want to learn why many dead civilians do not equal genocide.

      In Iraq, the US, with its European partners (in crime), killed around a million Iraqis, but it was not genocide. Or consider Libya. War crimes, yes, genocide, no.

      But then again, the West (including Europe) has claimed teaching a second language in China is genocide ( “cultural!!”), while Germany gives citizenship to immigrants who stand ready to commit genocide in Israel. The blanket is off the naked emperor – the West cares not a whit about international law, human rights, or genocide. Why should the Global South listen?

      Side note, (the collapsing Ukrainian lines) says Russia is winning the attrition warfare (look at the lines), and given its strategic depth, functional AAD, and hypersonic weapons, will “win” a nuclear war, whatever win means. My SWAG is Russia is winning, which means the only peace plan is unconditional Western surrender. Today’s Western peace plans are to quiet their publics while continuing to funnel funds into the MICC (and decrease social spending).

      Reply
  7. HH

    The U.S. is not going to stop behaving stupidly until it gets punched in the nose. This will probably happen in the western Pacific. The Ukraine war has effectively been decided and will be memory holed shortly. Ideologues cannot be defeated by reason, only by force.

    Reply
    1. ilsm

      A couple of DPRK divisions rolling down BRI to kick the US’ jihadis out of Syria may do the trick…..

      They are no longer a threat to US/fake democracy on the Korean Peninsula.

      Reply
    2. vidimi

      That’s my thinking, too. If NATO gets the all-in war with Russia it seeks, China might prop up Russian forces in the East but mostly they will take to dismantling the US presence in the Pacific, opening up a new front.

      Reply
    3. ChrisFromGA

      It does seem that operation Assad must Go 2.0 was timed to distract/compensate for the imminent implosion of project Ukraine.

      The Nelson sweeps weeks ratings are in, and the Zelensky sit-com stunk up the joint. Time to bring back a classic …

      Reply
  8. Paul Greenwood

    I had to laugh when you said Russia prioritised AD over manned aircraft. !!!!!!! US is thousands of miles away from Europe whereas Russia is in Europe.

    Russia has aircraft with huge range to cover its airspace whereas U.S. and NATO need refuelling tankers. USSR built Tu-95 with counter-rotational props to extend range without refuelling whereas B-52s require refuelling

    Everyone laughed when Australia bought F-35s because they cannot cover Australian borders having such a limited range of operation

    Russia is a land mass which protects from invasion from West. Watch „White Tiger“ on YouTube to comprehend the Threat IS From The West

    ZAPAD

    Reply
    1. Yves Smith Post author

      Sorry, this is not correct. Russia has the most effective and largest air defense network. That was developed specifically out of the recognition that defending the land mass of Russia adequately with manned aircraft was unnecessarily expensive as well as less effective. Many many military experts have made this comment casually, as in it is widely accepted.

      Reply
      1. Polar Socialist

        Yes. Russia is a continental power, and Air Force has always been there understood as supporting the land war – it has no independent role (with the exception of strategic bombers). Russian Air Force doesn’t do air campaigns nor does it do air superiority.

        In WW2 the air space on East Front was 6 times bigger than the operational area of the 8th AF. It’s was impossible to have enough planes to have air superiority everywhere at the same time, so in the Soviet/Russian thinking you only achieve it locally for the duration of the ground operations.

        This is why the Soviet/Russian armed forces have always had to take care of their own air defense, which has led to the networked, layered system we have witnessed. It’s worth pointing that almost half of the Soviet fighters belonged to the Air Defense Areas, not Air Force. They were part of the layered air defense of cities and industrial areas.

        Reply
      2. ilsm

        True and Russia evolved/practiced air defenses over North Vietnam from 1965 to 1973.

        The North Vietnamese applied a small mix of interceptors but the SAM’s and ground fires were the main fires.

        I think the interceptors were introduced to get the USN/AF to devote F-4’s to headline catching “MiG sweeps”, which got a lot of headlines but were not worth the cost of not performing other missions and “overhead”. Think Chuck Yaeger in his P-51!

        USAF “lessons” from Vietnam affected investments; so many F-16’s and “stealth”. USAF does not like the slow A-10 except where there are no air defenses like Iraq/Syria.

        I spent a little time in NORAD post 1972. The fighters were for long range intercept, USSR had a relatively small bomber force, point defenses were Nike/SAMs. By late 1970’s NORAD phased out purpose built interceptors, F-102/104/106, for F-4 and F-16 while its CONUS ground surveillance withered taken over by FAA, by 9/11/2001 the radars on Montauk Pt had been mothballed.

        Patriot is an awful expensive system to shoot down attack fighter bombers, but cheaper and more plentiful than THAAD. Army has some short range interceptors ,newer ones built around air intercept missiles.

        Russia has demonstrated how to do layered air defense. They seem to be learning.

        I suspect the Army THAAD/Patriot is overly expensive and logistically burdened sort of like USN aircaft carriers and Aegis defenses.

        Reply
      3. Paul Greenwood

        I have not gainsaid Russian Air Defence at all. I merely stated that the implication was inherent in your statement that Russia lacked air power even though VVS is second largest air force globally

        Then again in WW2 Britain had the world’s only Air Defence Network with radar and Observer Corps and Ops Rooms and Fast Response interception. It still had a large air force and four- engined bombers which Germany and USSR lacked

        Russian Air Defence is not however as impenetrable as portrayed since it needs AWACS and OTH radars to detect terrain hugging missiles like Taurus and Storm Shadow. It needs to be able to knock out NATO planes like Rivet Joint which AD systems cannot.

        We were actually different over nuance. I did not accept Russia was limited to passive defence with AD but had offensive capability through its VVS which is why USAF keeps away and in Syria moves well away from SU-57

        Reply
        1. Yves Smith Post author

          No, this is ENTIRELY your straw man. I said Russian doctrine gave primacy to air defense systems in air defense over manned aircraft and also preferred layered missiles in offense. Russian artillery and missiles have done VASTLY more damage to Ukraine than dropping bombs from aircraft. Experts commented on how expensive the largely futile Israel attempt to strike Iran was due to its heavy reliance on airplanes. Larry Johnson has said that manned planes are well on their way to becoming the cavalry.

          Reply
    1. Skip Intro

      Not as much as was made destroying it. Rebuilding isn’t governed by MMT, it is austerity all the way.

      I think Europe must be getting particularly desperate to prevent the population of Ukraine from departing for the warmth of the west.

      Reply
    2. Paul Greenwood

      That is an obvious Yes. Once USA ponies up the funds it will be a go. How about say Congress voting through $750 billion funded through a Wealth Tax Levy of 10% on US assets >$50million ?

      After Ukraine US could rebuild Iraq, Syria, Gaza, Libya, Yemen, Lebanon

      Reply
    3. MFB

      The best way to make money out of reconstruction is to take the money and not do anything for it. If you recycle 1% of the money back to the politicians who gave you the money, you get to keep it.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *