Tatarigamilla on tapana maalata synkkiä, ehkä realistisiakin näkemyksiä. Ihan varmasti Ukraina on kovilla. Kaikesta huokuu, että 2025 lopussa kehässä on kaksi ruhjottua.
Spoilerin takana pitkä teksti joka pohjustaa twiittiä
Rauhansuunnitelma on selvästi eräänlainen hätähuuto Zelenskyltä. Tämän kun takaatte, niin ryssä väsähtää lopussa. Raakaa työtä se on, eikä mitään hokkuspokkusta. Vähän samaan tapaan kuin dieeteissä, odotetaan mullistavia "syö pelkästään porkkanoita poikittain" -juttuja, vaikka perusasioihin keskittyminen tuo tulokset.
Olisi toki hienoa, jos suunnitelman osana olisi se, että Budanov vetelee leijulaudalla Kremliin, heittää Putinin mattoon ja uutena keisarina käskee joukot pois Ukrainasta. Mutta luultavasti tuota odotellesa täytyy keskittyä olemaan vahvempi, kestävämpi ja nokkelampi kuin vastustaja.
Spoilerin takana pitkä teksti joka pohjustaa twiittiä
President Zelensky is seeking security guarantees as part of Ukraine's ongoing effort to join NATO. While few expect this request to result in a positive answer, the reality is that Ukraine urgently needs security assurances to end the war and ensure its survival. This isn’t mere rhetoric to grab your attention - it’s an invitation to an honest discussion about why Zelensky is pushing for a new security framework - and why it must be taken seriously.
Some of these points may echo earlier discussions, but they need to be repeated to understand the full picture. No matter how optimistic some portray the situation, or talk about great Ukraine after the victory, it doesn't resolve the problem. Admitting the problem and discussing it is the first step to a solution.
Let’s take a hard look at the potential consequences if Ukraine freezes the conflict without securing firm guarantees.
First, consider the economic and demographic problems of post-war Ukraine. The country has lost ~18% of its territory, including important agricultural and industrial regions in the south and east. Even in areas under Ukrainian control near the frontline, land remains unsafe due to extensive minefields. Sea ports like Mariupol and Berdyansk are occupied, and large industrial facilities, akin to Azovstal are destroyed.
Demographically, the situation is even worse. Before the war, Ukraine already faced one of the worst population trends in Europe. The Ptoukha Institute for Demography estimates that only around 29 million people lived in government-controlled areas at the start of 2024 - which is down from 45 million before the 2014 Russian invasion and Crimea’s annexation.
The war has accelerated the exodus of younger Ukrainians, particularly women and children, leaving behind an aging population. Adding to this, hundreds of thousands of veterans will return home, many of whom will require physical and psychological support. Managing this social, economic, and political burden without security guarantees would be a monumental task for any state forced to have high military spending, let alone Ukraine, with GDP per capita almost 5 times less than Greece. Additionally, without firm security guarantees and a concrete long-term plan, the likelihood of people returning from abroad remains slim.
Lack of guarantees will multiply the factor of instability, with fears of another Russian invasion driving more citizens to flee once borders fully reopen. The resulting uncertainty would deter post-war investments, as high-security risks and social instability would create an unattractive environment for any serious economic engagement.
Politically, Ukraine will also enter a period of uncertainty and risks. While Zelensky remains a unifying figure in wartime, internal tensions, which are often invisible to the Western audience are mounting, creating an increasingly toxic political atmosphere. A stalled war, millions displaced, lost territories, and a crippled economy hardly set the stage for calm and easy elections. As Ukraine enters a period of intense political competition, accusations of military failures are likely to dominate the discourse. It will be a test of Ukraine’s ability to preserve national unity across political lines.
Some argue that immigration could help address the problem, but what exactly would draw immigrants to Ukraine, where the average monthly salary is between $500 and $700, in a country ravaged by post-war problems and facing the constant threat of another Russian invasion? Especially when far more attractive opportunities are available within the EU.
Many Western partners assure Ukraine that aid will ensure that it won't happen, but how reliable are these statements, given the history of similar statements akin to "Will support Ukraine as long as it takes" in today’s realities? Democracies operate on election cycles, and promises of long-term support can quickly become an object of shifting political winds. As elections approach, Ukraine could find itself a target of political debate, with opposition asking why their nations should prioritize foreign aid over pressing domestic issues like healthcare, education, or economic problems. In such an environment, the commitment to Ukraine is unstable and can't be trusted.
The same applies to military aid for Ukraine. While Russia will keep rebuilding its forces, Ukraine will primarily depend on its own, much smaller domestic production and increasingly uncertain Western support, which will use peace as an excuse to diminish its aid
Russia, despite facing similar challenges, holds a significant advantage by being larger in most metrics, allowing it to better absorb these problems. Its vast resources, particularly oil and gas, offer economic leverage to soften the post-war problems. Moreover, Russia is likely to see some sanctions bypassed thanks to inconsistent enforcement. Under these conditions, it may only be a matter of time before Russia rebuilds a force large enough to deliver a decisive blow to Ukraine. Meanwhile, democratic Ukraine, without solid security guarantees, faces a far bleaker scenario.
Current peace proposals essentially send the same message: no guarantees for Ukraine, but a demand to cede territory and abandon aspirations of joining the Western alliance. In other words, nearly 30 million people are being sacrificed because the West is too weak and unwilling to make bold, risky decisions that could shape a better future.
Some of these points may echo earlier discussions, but they need to be repeated to understand the full picture. No matter how optimistic some portray the situation, or talk about great Ukraine after the victory, it doesn't resolve the problem. Admitting the problem and discussing it is the first step to a solution.
Let’s take a hard look at the potential consequences if Ukraine freezes the conflict without securing firm guarantees.
First, consider the economic and demographic problems of post-war Ukraine. The country has lost ~18% of its territory, including important agricultural and industrial regions in the south and east. Even in areas under Ukrainian control near the frontline, land remains unsafe due to extensive minefields. Sea ports like Mariupol and Berdyansk are occupied, and large industrial facilities, akin to Azovstal are destroyed.
Demographically, the situation is even worse. Before the war, Ukraine already faced one of the worst population trends in Europe. The Ptoukha Institute for Demography estimates that only around 29 million people lived in government-controlled areas at the start of 2024 - which is down from 45 million before the 2014 Russian invasion and Crimea’s annexation.
The war has accelerated the exodus of younger Ukrainians, particularly women and children, leaving behind an aging population. Adding to this, hundreds of thousands of veterans will return home, many of whom will require physical and psychological support. Managing this social, economic, and political burden without security guarantees would be a monumental task for any state forced to have high military spending, let alone Ukraine, with GDP per capita almost 5 times less than Greece. Additionally, without firm security guarantees and a concrete long-term plan, the likelihood of people returning from abroad remains slim.
Lack of guarantees will multiply the factor of instability, with fears of another Russian invasion driving more citizens to flee once borders fully reopen. The resulting uncertainty would deter post-war investments, as high-security risks and social instability would create an unattractive environment for any serious economic engagement.
Politically, Ukraine will also enter a period of uncertainty and risks. While Zelensky remains a unifying figure in wartime, internal tensions, which are often invisible to the Western audience are mounting, creating an increasingly toxic political atmosphere. A stalled war, millions displaced, lost territories, and a crippled economy hardly set the stage for calm and easy elections. As Ukraine enters a period of intense political competition, accusations of military failures are likely to dominate the discourse. It will be a test of Ukraine’s ability to preserve national unity across political lines.
Some argue that immigration could help address the problem, but what exactly would draw immigrants to Ukraine, where the average monthly salary is between $500 and $700, in a country ravaged by post-war problems and facing the constant threat of another Russian invasion? Especially when far more attractive opportunities are available within the EU.
Many Western partners assure Ukraine that aid will ensure that it won't happen, but how reliable are these statements, given the history of similar statements akin to "Will support Ukraine as long as it takes" in today’s realities? Democracies operate on election cycles, and promises of long-term support can quickly become an object of shifting political winds. As elections approach, Ukraine could find itself a target of political debate, with opposition asking why their nations should prioritize foreign aid over pressing domestic issues like healthcare, education, or economic problems. In such an environment, the commitment to Ukraine is unstable and can't be trusted.
The same applies to military aid for Ukraine. While Russia will keep rebuilding its forces, Ukraine will primarily depend on its own, much smaller domestic production and increasingly uncertain Western support, which will use peace as an excuse to diminish its aid
Russia, despite facing similar challenges, holds a significant advantage by being larger in most metrics, allowing it to better absorb these problems. Its vast resources, particularly oil and gas, offer economic leverage to soften the post-war problems. Moreover, Russia is likely to see some sanctions bypassed thanks to inconsistent enforcement. Under these conditions, it may only be a matter of time before Russia rebuilds a force large enough to deliver a decisive blow to Ukraine. Meanwhile, democratic Ukraine, without solid security guarantees, faces a far bleaker scenario.
Current peace proposals essentially send the same message: no guarantees for Ukraine, but a demand to cede territory and abandon aspirations of joining the Western alliance. In other words, nearly 30 million people are being sacrificed because the West is too weak and unwilling to make bold, risky decisions that could shape a better future.
Rauhansuunnitelma on selvästi eräänlainen hätähuuto Zelenskyltä. Tämän kun takaatte, niin ryssä väsähtää lopussa. Raakaa työtä se on, eikä mitään hokkuspokkusta. Vähän samaan tapaan kuin dieeteissä, odotetaan mullistavia "syö pelkästään porkkanoita poikittain" -juttuja, vaikka perusasioihin keskittyminen tuo tulokset.
Olisi toki hienoa, jos suunnitelman osana olisi se, että Budanov vetelee leijulaudalla Kremliin, heittää Putinin mattoon ja uutena keisarina käskee joukot pois Ukrainasta. Mutta luultavasti tuota odotellesa täytyy keskittyä olemaan vahvempi, kestävämpi ja nokkelampi kuin vastustaja.
HUR:n yksiköt vapauttivat miehittäjiltä Vovtšanskin laitevalmistustehtaan
Erittäin vaikean ja onnistuneen operaation tuloksena HUR:n yksiköt vapauttivat täysin Vovtšanskin laitevalmistustehtaan alueen ja tuhosivat kaikki miehittäjät tehtaan rakennuksista.
Operaation suorittivat HUR:n erikoisryhmät: "Stugna", "Paragon", RDK, "Junger", BDK, "Terror".
HUR:n sotilaat suorittivat järjestelmällisen tehtaan rakennusten puhdistuksen, käyden jatkuvasti lähitaisteluita vihollisen kanssa tiiviisti rakennetussa ympäristössä. Joissakin tapauksissa ukrainalaiset erikoisjoukot joutuivat käsikähmään vihollisen kanssa.
Venäläiset olivat muuttaneet tehtaan propagandistiseksi "linnakkeeksi", puolustusta johti erittäin motivoituneita ja ammattitaitoisia yksiköitä, mukaan lukien 45. prikaatin erikoisjoukot ilmavoimista (Kubinka, Moskova).
️ Lisäksi ukrainalaisia tiedustelijoita vastaan käytettiin jatkuvasti suuria määriä tykistöä, isku-dronien itsemurhalentokoneita, KAB-pommeja ja raskaita liekinheittimiä "Solntsepyok".
Vihollisen raivokkaasta vastarinnasta huolimatta HUR:n sotilaat onnistuivat tuhoamaan vihollisen, ottamaan vankeja ja kasvattamaan vaihdettavien sotavankien määrää.
️ Tehtaan alue siirrettiin Ukrainan asevoimien hallintaan kaikkien 30 rakennuksen puhdistuksen jälkeen.
Kunnia Ukrainalle!
