Russia Attacks Ukraine - 23 Feb 2022 #11

[Dotta]

This info about rare earth metals in Ukraine is really interesting.

"Why are rare earth metals so important?

Because they change the properties of alloys.
For example,
just as a pinch of spice can dramatically change the taste of a dish,
a pinch of neodymium added to the alloy of magnets changes them and gives them more power.

Thanks to this,
magnets used in electric motors release more energy.

What other industries and economies use resources located in Ukraine?

We have uranium there.
Its main supplier was the Soviet Union,
and then after its collapse – Russia.

Because of the ongoing conflict,
it is better for these resources to be outside the war zone.

Uranium is located in the Kirovohrad region and in the central part of Ukraine,
which is close to the front.

There is also titanium there –
a metal of incredible strength.

Some transport planes have titanium floors and can carry heavy tanks without any support.

It is a light metal with great strength.
It is certainly a strategic raw material.

In addition,
there are deposits of lithium.

It is urgently sought after because it allows the transition from traditional lead batteries to lithium ones.

They are smaller, lighter, and many devices must be powered by electricity to maintain systems in our personal computers or smartphones.

Dysprosium, one of the rare earth metals,
is used in lasers.

Europium is used in the production of LED lighting, smartphone screens and other displays.

The use of these raw materials is wide
and Ukraine is a kind of treasury,
still active and undeveloped,
which has deposits known for years.

However,
they require advanced technology of exploitation
and processing into a raw material for industry."

Kijów traci bogactwa. "70 proc. wszystkich zasobów mineralnych Ukrainy"

Donald Trump miał zażądać prawa do eksploatacji nawet 50 proc. zasobów metali ziem rzadkich w Ukrainie. Wołodymyr Zełenski odrzucił tę propozycję. Według niego nie uwzględniała ukraińskich interesów. Niestety...

www.o2.pl

 

[SouthAussie]

.
British Army 'absolutely ready' if ordered to deploy to Ukraine

I think if the UK goes in, there is a good chance that Canada and Australia will follow. I know we are both already providing military support with money and weapons - and have boots on the ground. Australia has Operation Kudu and Canada has been training AFU (Armed Forces Ukraine) in UK, Poland, and Latvia.

Canadian donations and military support to Ukraine
Operation Kudu

 

[Simply Southern]

This is a very good summation of the situation.

The reality is that Russia currently holds a huge amount of Ukraine's territory. A huge question moving forward is how to send a "no more" message to Putin. Nato borders do appear to be a deterrent against Putin invading those countries. But there are countries and regions left that Putin covets that are not in Nato.

The European and NATO nation's need to build stronger military. Some spend less than1.5 GNP. The only thing dictators understand is military force. Protection and strong borders cost money, BIG money.

Putin is not stupid. He is fully aware of the lack of military resources and lack of willingness to fund. Last weeks NATO conference (televised) was shocking, the number of countries saying we just don't have any money maybe in a couple of years. When the US made clear we will no longer fund 2/3 of Ukraine war, many are very upset.

Russia, China, Iran have very strong militaries. They have great fire power, land, sea and air. They will take full advance of weaker countries.

All my opinion only ....

How much do Nato members spend on defence?

Nato expects 23 of its 32 members to have met the target of spending 2% of GDP on defence in 2024.

www.bbc.com

 

[Simply Southern]

I’ve never heard of a country being forced to give its assets to the US in exchange for protection. That sounds like something a gang of mercenary criminals would demand, JMO. Everything is a business deal with some people. No ethics or diplomacy, just highway robbery.

I hope Americans realize that if Russia is allowed to keep the stolen land, they will continue to invade other European countries. Norway will be next because Russia wants access to their ports.

The US is supposed to try to be the good guys, like our permanent allies. Russia has never been an ally of the US.

The US is offering military protection AFTER the war ends in exchange for mineral rights. They certainly don't have to except the offer. Ukraine can certainly seek long term military protection from other countries.

Ukraine is not a NATO Nation. There is no legal or binding contract to protect them. NATO is providing funding, arms, planes ect as a Goodwill mission. I do believe in the US has a clear understanding of the risk of invasion of other European countries. We had a very strong conversation at the NATO council. The US encouraging countries to contribute more to military funding. The US will always give more than their fair share, but with so many world threats we can't fund everything.

The US has been the good guys, we provided three hundred billion dollars of taxpayer money.

Just my opinion...

 

[Simply Southern]

.
British Army 'absolutely ready' if ordered to deploy to Ukraine

I think if the UK goes in, there is a good chance that Canada and Australia will follow. I know we are both already providing military support with money and weapons - and have boots on the ground. Australia has Operation Kudu and Canada has been training AFU (Armed Forces Ukraine) in UK, Poland, and Latvia.

Canadian donations and military support to Ukraine
Operation Kudu

As per the article.....
Earlier this week Keir Starmer said that he was ready and willing to send British troops to Ukraine to help guarantee its security, should there be a ceasefire.

But so far he too is unclear as to what they might be asked to do.
......
2,500 troops is a good start, but it will take thousands
It will take highly trained pilots, drone operators, medical personnel, etc
They will need a fully operational military base
A full functioning military Air Base
They need air and naval support
They'll need to restore communication systems
They need to secure the nuclear reactor and reinforce the damage
They'll need intelligence

The US would have to go in built a air base, a military base, build a fully functioning hospital, and fully equip and maintain. You're talking a trillion dollars or more. It's not just sending in troops it's huge infrastructure cost.

The US has experienced, we protected Germany after the world war.

Moo

 

[indicolite22]

I’ve never heard of a country being forced to give its assets to the US in exchange for protection. That sounds like something a gang of mercenary criminals would demand, JMO. Everything is a business deal with some people. No ethics or diplomacy, just highway robbery.

I hope Americans realize that if Russia is allowed to keep the stolen land, they will continue to invade other European countries. Norway will be next because Russia wants access to their ports.

The US is supposed to try to be the good guys, like our permanent allies. Russia has never been an ally of the US.

IMO it's about the justification to follow Russia's example: invade and/or annex new territories, based on whatever pretext (or just because you can) and disregard international laws. Trump openly named a few US targets. The lands in question are rich with natural resources. This can happen when the worst of humanity gets into leadership positions.

 

[SouthAussie]

When the US made clear we will no longer fund 2/3 of Ukraine war, many are very upset.

There is a site called Ukraine Support Tracker. Europe has, in fact, funded more support to Ukraine than anyone else.
The US provided a huge surge in funds in the latter part of 2024 ... before Pres Biden's term was up. And has funded to various degrees throughout.

Yes, the US has provided a lot of money. But it looks like it hasn't funded 2/3 of the Ukraine support ... despite what may be thought.
By the time the current allocations are all allocated, the US will have funded about 46% of the Ukraine support. Which is still a lot of money that will be sorely missed. But I think it is good to get the facts right so the American people understand how Europe has been trying very hard to help Ukraine and its people.

Ukraine Support Tracker - A Database of Military, Financial and Humanitarian Aid to Ukraine

The Ukraine Support Tracker lists and quantifies military, financial and humanitarian aid promised by governments to Ukraine.

www.ifw-kiel.de

 

[Amonet]

I believe some EU countries, particularly Baltic ones, have also been giving a lot more money as a % of their GDP to Ukraine. They know that protecting Ukraine is akin to protecting themselves. Some other EU countries probably feel more like the US does that they're not as close to the war or the effects of it.

I'm also understanding what SimplySouthern has said about the US getting mineral rights in return for support they've given and any they might continue to give. But I'd be a lot happier about it if Ukraine wasn't losing a huge percentage of their minerals to Russia and then half of what's left to the US, and then what % will the EU want? In that sense Trump has a point that Ukraine could have just made a deal with Putin to give him what he wanted in return for Putin not bombing his country to smithereens and killing so many soldiers and civilians.

If it hadn't been for the war, Ukraine likely would have invited a lot of Western companies in to dig up the resources and Ukraine would have benefited far more. As it is, they will barely benefit from their natural resources, as so many other countries now feel entitled to them as the price of the somewhat lacklustre support that has been given to enable Ukraine to not lose more territory to Putin. It might be the realistic way forward, but I don't have to 100% like it.

 

[Dotta]

From my country's MSM

"Zelensky was presented with a new contract.
The controversial provision disappeared.

Trump administration has presented Kiev with an updated agreement on investments in Ukrainian mineral deposits.

The new version of the document,
from which some parts have been removed,
aims to facilitate cooperation and avoid conflicts.

The document has been adapted to Ukrainian law,
which increases the chances of its acceptance.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s aides are urging him to accept the new proposal,
which could help maintain U.S. support.

The updated agreement removes controversial provisions,
such as the jurisdiction of New York courts,
which was one of the main concerns of the Ukrainian side.

According to Axios,
the Ukrainian side did not hide its disappointment that the initial draft did not contain any security guarantees.

These concerns were addressed by the US President's national security adviser, Mike Waltz, who explained the US approach to the matter on Thursday.

'We have presented Ukraine with a proposal for joint investment in its economy and natural resources,
which would make us its strategic partner in the future.

This is the best form of security guarantee it can receive -
much more valuable than further supplies of ammunition',
Waltz said."

Pokazali Zełenskiemu nową umowę. Zniknął kontrowersyjny zapis

Portal Axios informuje, że administracja Donalda Trumpa przedstawiła Kijowowi zaktualizowaną umowę dotyczącą inwestycji w ukraińskie złoża mineralne. Nowa wersja dokumentu, z której usunięto niektóre fragmenty...

wiadomosci.wp.pl

 

[SouthAussie]

There are apparently 4 hindrances to the US getting rights to Ukraine minerals.

Sounds as if the new proposal may go some way to overcoming the first hindrance. But another big hindrance may be that Ukraine already has a partnership (since 2021) with the EU ... to include “activities along the entire value chain of both primary and secondary critical raw materials and batteries.” (Link)

• Any deal will have to be in accordance with Ukraine’s laws .... “Subsoil belongs to Ukrainians under the constitution”
• Very little clarity on the exact quantity and quality of the mineral resources .... They remain underexplored and little extraction is happening right now.
• Ukraine already has a deal to extract these resources with the European Union. A ‘strategic partnership on raw materials’ was signed between the EU and Ukraine in July 2021, months before Russia’s invasion on February 24, 2022.
• A significant portion of these minerals are in areas under Russian occupation currently .... “Russian forces, which have already seized a fifth of Ukraine including reserves of rare earths, are now little more than 4 miles from the Shevchenko lithium deposit”

Why US wants Ukraine’s minerals, 4 reasons it will have trouble getting them

Trump Wants Ukraine Mineral Resources: What are critical minerals, and how much of these does Ukraine possess? Why does the US want them? How much can one country be allowed to use another's natural resources? We explain.

indianexpress.com

 

[Rita7]

Russia has never been an ally of the US.

RSBM
Russia (the Soviet Union) and the US were allies during the WWII,
along with Great Britain and China. They are known as the "Big Four."

 

[musicaljoke]

I’ve never heard of a country being forced to give its assets to the US in exchange for protection. That sounds like something a gang of mercenary criminals would demand, JMO. Everything is a business deal with some people. No ethics or diplomacy, just highway robbery.

I hope Americans realize that if Russia is allowed to keep the stolen land, they will continue to invade other European countries. Norway will be next because Russia wants access to their ports.

The US is supposed to try to be the good guys, like our permanent allies. Russia has never been an ally of the US.

Absolutely! Protection in exchange for half the mineral rights is called extortion and is considered illegal under international law. It is widely recognized as a criminal act that violates the principles of sovereignty and can be prosecuted under various international conventions and treaties.

 

[Simply Southern]

There is a site called Ukraine Support Tracker. Europe has, in fact, funded more support to Ukraine than anyone else.
The US provided a huge surge in funds in the latter part of 2024 ... before Pres Biden's term was up. And has funded to various degrees throughout.

Yes, the US has provided a lot of money. But it looks like it hasn't funded 2/3 of the Ukraine support ... despite what may be thought.
By the time the current allocations are all allocated, the US will have funded about 46% of the Ukraine support. Which is still a lot of money that will be sorely missed. But I think it is good to get the facts right so the American people understand how Europe has been trying very hard to help Ukraine and its people.

View attachment 565325

Ukraine Support Tracker - A Database of Military, Financial and Humanitarian Aid to Ukraine

The Ukraine Support Tracker lists and quantifies military, financial and humanitarian aid promised by governments to Ukraine.

www.ifw-kiel.de

United States is the largest single source country. This does NOT include NATO, of which US funded 300billion. Combining all of Europe (27 Countries) we're still giving the lions share. Also, noted US largest donator of weaponry. Break it down 27 countries and it's a small percent.

Tracker does NOT include NATO funding.
"This excludes aid organizations donations to neighboring countries such as Moldova or Poland. We consequently do not include support extended between fellow NATO members.3 Official refers to aid that is provided by government entities
or public sector institutions, such as national governments, ministries, or public agencies. As such, we
do not count donations by private individuals, companies, churches, non-governmental organizations
(NGOs), or international organizations such as the United Nations.4
Direct support refers to aid activities that provide goods, services, or financial resources to Ukraine."

All above from quoted tracker.

 

[Simply Southern]

I believe some EU countries, particularly Baltic ones, have also been giving a lot more money as a % of their GDP to Ukraine. They know that protecting Ukraine is akin to protecting themselves. Some other EU countries probably feel more like the US does that they're not as close to the war or the effects of it.

I'm also understanding what SimplySouthern has said about the US getting mineral rights in return for support they've given and any they might continue to give. But I'd be a lot happier about it if Ukraine wasn't losing a huge percentage of their minerals to Russia and then half of what's left to the US, and then what % will the EU want? In that sense Trump has a point that Ukraine could have just made a deal with Putin to give him what he wanted in return for Putin not bombing his country to smithereens and killing so many soldiers and civilians.

If it hadn't been for the war, Ukraine likely would have invited a lot of Western companies in to dig up the resources and Ukraine would have benefited far more. As it is, they will barely benefit from their natural resources, as so many other countries now feel entitled to them as the price of the somewhat lacklustre support that has been given to enable Ukraine to not lose more territory to Putin. It might be the realistic way forward, but I don't have to 100% like it.

An example was provided at yesterday White House press conference.
From presser

Ukraine has a large aluminum manufacturing plant with severe damage and is inoperable. The US has historically been the largest purchaser. US would fully restore to operation.Ukraine wouldn't receive 50% and US 50%. Enabling US to recoup cost of security to the country, also providing opportunity for other private entities or Ukrainian government to restore other manufacturing. This would provide immediate jobs for Ukrainian. Opportunities for families to return to a secure environment with potential employment. Creates immediate income upon completion for the Ukrainian government.

My opinion only...
Ukraine population has dropped to 26 million article up thread. (Less than the 36 million in California). Most families women and children have relocated to other countries. Many thousands to include troops, women, children, the elderly have died. Three years and Russia takes more and more territory. It's a no win. Russian will continue to fight, continuing to bring in foreign actors, with pay.

In my humble opinion, another year or maybe less there will be no available, able body Ukrainians to fight.

 

[Simply Southern]

Absolutely! Protection in exchange for half the mineral rights is called extortion and is considered illegal under international law. It is widely recognized as a criminal act that violates the principles of sovereignty and can be prosecuted under various international conventions and treaties.

I know of no international law on renting/selling mineral rights. Companies, private individuals and governments own mineral rights world wide. Example Exxon, Coal companies own large amounts of mineral rights in South Africa, companies worldwide and private individuals own rights to gold, silver, salt, oil, gas, etc.
I was shocked, years ago, upon learning my DH grandparents home in WVA, mineral rights were owned by The Rockefellers. Apparently when the coal companies built the homes and resold, they maintain the mineral rights.
All my opinion

 

[musicaljoke]

I know of no international law on renting/selling mineral rights. Companies, private individuals and governments own mineral rights world wide. Example Exxon, Coal companies own large amounts of mineral rights in South Africa, companies worldwide and private individuals own rights to gold, silver, salt, oil, gas, etc.
I was shocked, years ago, upon learning my DH grandparents home in WVA, mineral rights were owned by The Rockefellers. Apparently when the coal companies built the homes and resold, they maintain the mineral rights.
All my opinion

Yes, the proper way would be for the US to enter into an agreement with the Ukraine in which the US would purchase minerals for a price determined by the Ukrainian government. With those funds, the Ukrainian government could purchase defence equipment according to their needs, from any supplier that they wished. This is a normal exchange of commerce which recognizes the sovereignty of the Ukraine.

This is not the same as making an arrangement with a third party, ie, Russia, and then offering protection to the Ukraine in exchange for half the mineral rights. That set-up would be extortion. And that is why the US allies are so sickened by the recent US led events.

 

[Simply Southern]

@musicaljoke

Yes, they can develop a plan for future security, however, it's my understanding Ukraine wants the US security and who wouldn't. So far I've only heard an offer for 24k troops from a European country.

Moo... I think the US should walk away from any mineral dealings with Ukraine and allow Zelenskyy to develop a plan that serves the needs of his citizens for future development and security. Zelenskyys negative comments towards the US are turning me against any deal and open the door for years long complaining.

I don't think NATO is in a position to commit to long-term security for Ukraine. Many NATO countries currently are deployed to the Red Sea, protecting commerce shipping from the Houthi and other global threats.

As to negotiations to end the war.... Zelenskyy certainly has an opportunity to negotiate an end on his own accord, without US involvement. Over the past 3 years, I've seen no effort on his part to bring an end to war.

All my opinion only... Hoping to see peace soon

 

[Amonet]

I haven't seen any signs of Putin wanting peace either, except that he pretty much has what he went in for.

I think it's more complicated for Ukraine. I can understand that Zelensky wanted to fight to retain more of the country. I think a lot of people outside Ukraine are angry and upset that Putin's going to walk away with massive gains from this war, no black mark against his name, and Ukraine has given everything to retain just half of their own country.

I had this silly idea that Putin should be forced to exit the majority of Ukraine, leave them alone for self determination, and only then should Russia be welcomed back to the world, having lost more than they'd gained.

Of course Ukraine does deserve peace. They've lost so much, been through so much, and they need to be able to rebuild. They also need to be able to feel safe in national security terms. I think they deserve our praise and thanks for trying to hold off Russia, and I think all the countries that contributed support deserve praise.

 

[SouthAussie]

And to think that just 3 years ago - om 24 February 2022 - Russia invaded Ukraine. Causing death, destruction and mayhem. Leaving Ukraine in a place where it is fighting for its life, its well being, and its future.

Ukraine has lost about 20,000 of its children. Taken by Russia to be 're-educated'. Despite all diplomatic efforts, Ukraine has only been able to get about 1,000 of those children back.

Ukraine's search for children it says have been deported, indoctrinated and 'Russified' by Moscow

Of the 20,000 Ukrainian children identified by Kyiv as being cases of 'deportation' or 'forced population transfer,' only 1,032 have been repatriated, despite various diplomatic efforts.

www.lemonde.fr

 

[acutename]

The European and NATO nation's need to build stronger military. Some spend less than1.5 GNP. The only thing dictators understand is military force. Protection and strong borders cost money, BIG money.

Putin is not stupid. He is fully aware of the lack of military resources and lack of willingness to fund. Last weeks NATO conference (televised) was shocking, the number of countries saying we just don't have any money maybe in a couple of years. When the US made clear we will no longer fund 2/3 of Ukraine war, many are very upset.

Russia, China, Iran have very strong militaries. They have great fire power, land, sea and air. They will take full advance of weaker countries.

All my opinion only ....

How much do Nato members spend on defence?

Nato expects 23 of its 32 members to have met the target of spending 2% of GDP on defence in 2024.

www.bbc.com

I just wonder how long Russia would cease fire. seems they could restart a war any time. When I see all the bombed out destroyed buildings and rubble and think about the deaths- such a waste of everything.