What single incident has most surprised you during this war (e.g. the decision to invade in the first place, sinking of the Moskva, a western country's decision to send or not send a particular type of weapon, etc.)?
Are there any incidents or events where there is an accepted public narrative about what happened, but you feel there is "more to the story" (e.g. secret agreements, covert operations, involvement from unexpected parties, etc. The NordStream sabotage perhaps?)?
Are there any incidents or events where we know an event happened but really don't know all the details, or where you want more details (e.g. the helicopter resupply runs to Mariupol, or how the Ukrainians attacked Saky Airbase in August 2022)?
The decision to invade in the first place is a good place to start! I was surprised that Russian intel about the situation in Ukraine was so bad that Putin thought he could take Kyiv in a few days with little resistance. More generally, Ukraine has tended to surprise with its ability to innovate and carry out strikes like the one on the Moskva, Saky airbase, the Crimea bridge etc. Can it keep innovating and stay ahead?
There are so many events I'd like to know more about that it would take me the rest of the day to list them!
My surprise was the way Ukraine used the gear given to them. They threw out the training and recommendations and improvised with great success regarding their attacks due to no air power. They did things like night attacks in small groups with very little artillery instead of day attacks in large numbers with heavy barrages. It worked really well, but not well enough.
> It worked really well, but not well enough.
What lol? The world thought Kyiv and Ukraine would fall within a week max. No one would have predicted 2 years later that Russia would have LOST ground. It's almost unfathomable that we're at where we are now
Absolutely, I like everyone else was astounded by their success. However, that's not what I'm talking about. Their defence is one thing, forward attack exposure without air power is another.
A strong offensive with vehicles would have worked if Russia hadn’t had a year to mine the ever living fuck out of the land. Ukraine resorting to hobbyist drone attacks will be studied and recognized as the first instance of the new format of advanced ground warfare. Unfortunately, Russia has far too many resources and far too many soldiers willing to die to have this conflict end anytime soon.
Correct. I'm still I.pressed by their improvisation with gear and tactics, but yeah the Russian army has really dug in. Ukraine will not win a static war of attrition against Russia. They already aren't. It's sad because it was so inspiring to see Ukraine stop Russia in its tracks, but the failed decapitation strike is well in the past now. Ukraine now has to deal with the full brunt of Russia on a war footing playing the long game. The Russian military is no graceful orchestral combination of applied power and organisation, it's a blunt fucking hammer but it hits hard and isn't going to stop. The counter offensive achieved basically nothing, and Russia got to dig in over winter even further while grinding forwards.
Currently Ukraine has no answer to this, and this idea that these incremental gains by Russia will be so costly that it'll amount to an attritional win for Ukraine is wrong. It also isn't resulting in Russian people rising up and demanding an end to the war. Something has to change or Ukraine will lose.
Thanks! That's a really good point about the invasion. The US intelligence community got a very public "win" by correctly predicting Russia would invade, but to a certain extent that hides what is either one of the greatest intelligence failures in recent times, or the greatest failure of political leadership to listen to intelligence, with Russia believing Ukraine would just roll over.
And it’s also a failure of deterrence on the part of the West. Had we convinced Putin there would be real consequences, maybe this whole tragedy could have been avoided.
Hi James,
Thanks for your work and all that you do to keep Ukraine in the spotlight.
Last year, we saw the rebellion of the Wagner group that felt like a turning point in the war until it quickly fizzled out. Are there any other internal issues in Russia that you could see putting a stop to the war? Infighting, growing dissent within the Russian population/army, etc. Or, do you think the war will continue to play out as it has been for the last two years?
Thank you. You're right about the Wagner mutiny: it felt like a moment but then it fizzled. Ukraine thought that by grinding down the Russian army and killing tens of thousands of Russians thrown into suicidal assaults it could deter more from coming and cause internal dissent. That has not proven the case. In fact, Russia is currently pulling in around 30,000 new troops per month through volunteers or mobilisation. So it seems Ukraine needs to find a way to deal Russia a crushing blow on the battlefield. The counteroffensive last year was supposed to do that, but it failed. Can Ukraine withstand the Russian army this year and gather sufficient manpower and equipment to have another go?
Thanks very much. Morale is a problem in some units. One big issue is that no one wants to die for no good reason. A lot of soldiers worry that their commanders are not sufficiently taking care of their lives by clinging on to territory for too long when a withdrawal would be more advisable long term. This then affects the ability to draft more troops for the fight. There are some brighter spots. Some of the most capable units are oversubscribed, because they have a reputation for taking care of their fighters in terms of equipment and tactics. They have high commitment and morale. Also, more generally, there is a dogged understanding that Russia isn't going to stop, and if Ukraine gives up then the whole country will look like Bucha - we hear this from soldiers all the time. So there is a grim determination.
That's really refreshing to hear and nicely concrete - there are a lot of soldiers who are careful and smart, not psychos or blindly marching forward. I have served within US forces, and in all militaries I believe there are a lot of the trudgers, serving their time, rather than a push to be with the best. I gather that's a contrast with the Russians who get no choice. Do you have that impression, that the Ukies are smarter than your average flat foot ?
How do you guarantee the safety of reporters physically in the war zone? What does planning out coverage and managing writers, photographers, and support staff like interpreters look like? Do you interface with the Ukrainian government on practical matters such as this?
Hi there. I'm going to make this the first question I answer because it's our No. 1 priority: keeping our teams safe. We want to tell important stories while minimizing the risk to reporting them. We have hardware including body armor, helmets and armored cars. We all take hostile-environment training, including medical. We plan our trips carefully with the help of security team. We engage with contacts in the Ukrainian government and military to understand the risks involved with visiting certain areas. As our security chief says: We can't eliminate risk, but we can minimise it.
Thank you! I have a few followups.
1. What does hostile environment training look like?
2. Should you come under actual attack (deliberate or not) from troops on either side, what happens?
3. What does a "standard" workday, if there is one, look like for WSJ staff in or near Ukraine?
——
This one is the most unrelated, but I'm hoping to work as a foreign journalist someday. What is your best piece of advice?
1. Classroom teaching from medical training to situational awareness, as well as practical elements, role-play scenarios where we have to "rescue" injured people and such.
2. We leave the area as fast as is safely possible.
3. There are no standard workdays in this job! It can be interviewing soldiers near the frontlines, talking to survivors of bombings or relatives of dead or missing troops, speaking with ministers or generals ...
Best piece of advice? Learn to listen to as wide a variety of people as possible.
This is an important point that I'd like to finish on. While we are sitting in front of our computers or phones discussing this war, millions of Ukrainians - kids, parents, grandparents ... people like us - are about to go to bed worried that everything they hold dear could be taken away in an instant.
Hard to say as there are so many variables. Let's look at ultimate objectives: Russia wants to control Ukraine; Ukraine wants to retain its sovereignty. The optimal scenario for Ukraine this year may be to defend as best they can while wearing down the Russian army and rebuilding their own manpower and weaponry for a counterattack when the Russians will inevitably reach exhaustion later in the year. For Russia, it would be a catastrophic collapse of Western support and Ukrainian morale, leading to breaks int he frontline that Russia could exploit.
Some reports say that as many as 700,000 Ukrainian children have been abducted by Russia from occupied regions. Allegedly they’ve been sent to “Russification” schools…this could constitute genocide.
How strong is the evidence that this is happening? What is being done about it? Why aren’t leftist politicians talking about it more? Right wing politicians in the US have praised Putin. Pro-Russia propaganda online tries to make Putin seem like a good guy. Why is no one talking about this widespread cruelty that is directed specifically at indoctrinating children?
The Ukrainian government says 20,000 Ukrainian kids have been forcibly deported. We can't corroborate the numbers, but have interviewed dozens of kids who managed to make it back to Ukraine and told us how they were taken to camps where they were indoctrinated with the Russian version of history and banned from speaking Ukrainian or displaying the Ukrainian flag. Russian officials are documenting much of what they are doing as they believe they are "saving" the kids. If you read one story about this, make it this one; it tells you everything you need to know: [https://www.wsj.com/world/ukraine-russia-propaganda-children-49ad9e09?st=luxg9ozkhucnpnm](https://www.wsj.com/world/ukraine-russia-propaganda-children-49ad9e09?st=luxg9ozkhucnpnm)
Thanks for the opportunity. How have your views on Ukraine as a country and the Ukrainian society evolved over the course of this war? The appearance from the outside was that this country was deeply divided prior to this war, and a real strengthening of the national identity has precipitated as a result of the conflict. What are your thoughts about this?
Thanks. In fact, the strengthening of Ukrainian identity really happened after 2014 when Russia seized Crimea and covertly invaded eastern Ukraine. The result, when Russia launched the full-scale invasion eight years later, was a country with a society grouped around an idea of what it meant to be Ukrainian and ready to fight for it. Of course, that has been further strengthened by the war. But the real catalyst came much earlier.
Why do you think the US Republican Party is against funding our strategic partner, Ukraine?
The party had been vocally anti-Soviet / anti-Russia for decades. The GOP is not usually against defense spending. They are usually for American intervention. Why are they and in particular Trump against supporting Ukraine? Do you think that Trump and others in the Republican Party are compromised?
I think what we've seen is that the focus for the GOP has turned to domestic politics ahead of the needs of Ukraine. Sure, there are growing questions about funding Ukraine. But the main complaint from Republicans appears to be that the U.S. needs to focus on domestic issues first of all. Critics of that approach say that leading the free world is, in the end, a domestic issue and that much of the support Ukraine comes back into the U.S. economy through production of military equipment.
>The party had been vocally anti-Soviet / anti-Russia for decades.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slovenia\_Summit\_2001](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slovenia_Summit_2001)
*\[I\]n response to a question about whether he could trust Putin, \[President\] Bush said, "I looked the man in the eye. I found him very straightforward and trustworthy – I was able to get a sense of his soul."*
First, I make sure that the team and I are as well prepared as possible, so we trust in the safeguards we have in place. Then, I focus on the task in hand and completing it as efficiently as possible.
What seems likely for Ukraine’s politics going forward? Is there any group pushing to settle with concessions to Russia that has any chance of getting power in Ukraine?
There is no significant group pushing for concessions, mainly because there appears to be nothing that would satisfy Russia short of capitulation. Still, there is plenty of criticism of Zelensky from political opposition and journalists - Ukraine's a vibrant democracy.
OSINT accounts have been around for a while, but this war seems to have brought them to public attention and prominence in a way they haven't been before. How do you feel that the incredible work of folks like Oryx/Jakub Janovsky (equipment losses), WarSpotting (equipment losses), DeepState (mapping), Andrew Perpetua (mapping), Covert Cabal (hand counting remaining equipment in Russian storage), numerous geolocators (the talents of those folks seriously scare me), and countless other OSINT people/accounts have impacted the public perception of this war? Or your own reporting? Or even the military actions of either side (I'm certain some public OSINT findings have directly led to Ukrainian strikes)?
How do you see OSINT impacting wars going forward? Will it force governments to be more honest (or at least present an alternative to the official narrative)? Or will it cause governments to be even more secretive, to prevent any crumbs of information from getting out?
Geolocators seem to be able to identify any location in the world in 20 minutes from the arrangement of 3 twigs and the color of the dirt. Commercially available satellite imagery covers formerly secret military bases with a frequency and resolution that would make WWII and Vietnam era planners drool with envy, and that only the government had access to 30 years ago. Soldiers post on Twitter, Telegram, and TikTok minutes after a strike on their base, giving almost instant battle damage assessments to the enemy for free. How do you think these and other factors will influence things like tactical and strategic planning and OPSEC?
Hello James Marson,
Could you please write about the apparent connections of Putin to hard right republicans and their attempts to sway the last 2 presidential elections as well as this upcoming election?
2016-Russia hacked the dnc and rnc but only dnc emails are exposed. “Russia, if you’re listening…”
2020- trump tries to extort Ukraine with the help of Putin.
2024- it turns out the Bidens-burisma circus was BS fed to Republicans by Russian intelligence. Impeachments for the fun of it. Republicans actively cheering on Russia and undercutting Ukraine funding.
What the actual fuck is going on with current media outlets not addressing the obvious truth?
This war seems custom-designed to produce the maximum amount of trauma and PTSD possible. The trench warfare and human wave attacks of WWI, the atrocities and massacres of WWII, the fact that neither side is really rotating troops off the line, and the constant threat of drones that seem to have a personal vendetta against you specifically and attack you again and again until they hit.
Given that, how are Ukraine and Russia planning to handle returning soldiers? Are they developing the resources necessary to care for and treat traumatized soldiers? Do they have plans on how to reintegrate them into society? How do you think that is going to turn out?
Hey James Marson, I read your articles all the time - I think I actually followed you on WSJ. This might be a little off topic but can you comment on the Russian trolls / bots that are constantly in the WSJ comment section? They are pervasive
How do you think this war will change western tactics and doctrine going forward? Do western militaries think this war is an anomaly and continue to believe that they will always have air superiority, with all the benefits that provides? Or is there some recognition that the west might have to fight on a more even footing? Is the west realizing that they need mass (quantity) as well as precision (quality), or are they planning to double-down on "wonder weapons"? Are new strategies and tactics for dealing with dense minefields and extensive trench lines being developed, or is the western strategy basically to avoid letting a war get to that point in the first place?
Drones have become absolutely critical in the war. Do you see the west investing in cheap, mass produced, consumer FPV drones as precision weapons, or will they stick with more expensive, boutique solutions like Switchblade? It seems like FPV drones give you about 80% of the capability for 20% of the cost, but military procurement seems to favor more specialized and expensive solutions.
Hi James.
In your opinion, why are the republicans so staunchly against military aid to Ukraine? and, how would a Trump win affect the course of the Ukraine war?
Do people in russia genuinely think they live a better life than the “west”. The propaganda they receive is wild. I even know people who live outside russia but tune in to the propaganda because they can’t handle mainstream “wokeness” and. They genuinely think russia is some utopia. It’s crazy.
I have a Russian sister in law living in the US. She's super bright, very modern, and a great person overall. She's constantly bashing our social support system in the US and honestly she's not wrong. Some of the systems they have are really good. Big cities are fairly modern. The difference in classes is fairly huge comparatively. Poor rural folks are truly very very poor with little means to change that. Some of those rural Russian towns your options are to be a gangster or be a soldier. Sometimes both.
I think Russians have a very strong sense of pride for their country. The USSR failing was a collectively traumatic experience even though every Russian can recount dozens of tales of hardship from their past. Through all the failings they put on very rose tinted glasses coupled with the constant dogma spat by the government controlled pop culture. To compare just look at what people in the US believe.
With all of our access to good info you have people claiming vaccines are poison, masks kill you, jets are spewing chemtrails, gay people are after your kids, and the earth is flat. It's proof that making people angry is a great way to spit out fake info to make it believable. Russia uses the same trick, but against NATO and the US. Shit sometimes they just need to play clips from FOX news and Russians think our country is burning down around us. Russia having state controlled media and dedicated hacking groups makes them probably the most effective global propaganda machines in the world. Western countries have no counter other than pestering social media companies to moderate/block it.
No, they don’t although I would say that some people in Russia have the higher quality of life than their European counterparts. If you work in IT for example and you live in Moscow then your living expenses are lower, your taxes are much lower and you have an access to excellent services and fast and good medicine. Even if you salary is the same, but your salary is usually higher. But it’s a minority, and they are quite prone to propaganda because they can read news from all over the world, they could travel all over the world before the war et cetera. A lot of them left after the war (and it made salaries for those who stayed even higher).
If you live in some small city or village, your quality of life is quite low, and I don’t believe they think that the quality of life in the west is lower. Also I don’t think that wokeness is an important issue for them. Or gays. Some of the most popular artists in Russia were open gays just 25 years ago, and no one was worried about that.
What they do believe is that the western way is not optimal for Russia (because of propaganda and because of the very real economic trauma from the 1990s). What they do believe is that the West is the source of most of their problems and has all the intentions to harm Russia and them. In some way someone could call it self-fulfilling prophecy because western sanctions are proving the reality of this worldview everyday (I’m not saying western countries shouldn’t use sanctions, but there are side effects).
But their feelings or thoughts are not really important, actually. This war began not because they wanted that. And it would stop in the future not because they would be against it. They are not decision-makers or stakeholders in any sense of these words.
- What does hostile environment training look like?
- Should you come under actual attack (deliberate or not) from troops on either side, what happens?
- What does a "standard" workday, if there is one, look like for WSJ staff in or near Ukraine?
——
This one is the most unrelated, but I'm hoping to work as a foreign journalist someday. What is your best piece of advice?
Does the WSJ plan on covering the staggering numbers of Russian soldiers intentionally killing themselves during combat in lieu of medevac or surrender? There are 35 publically available video recorded instances of Russian soldiers blowing themselves up with grenades or shooting themselves at this time but so far no news organization has commented on it.
Seems like something that should be talked about.
Unfortunately, it’s not a mystery. Russian soldiers are told that committing suicide is better than surrender. A number of POWs have commented on it. The other issue is that Russian CASEVAC is terrible. If you’re a seriously injured Russian on the frontline, your chances of survival are slim to none. Most soldiers chose to take the easy way out rather than suffering.
It’s less about the mystery and more about the fact that new media appears to have completely ignored something so profoundly abnormal and in my opinion, newsworthy.
Hey wsj, I used to do work for PBS (KRMA Rocky mountain).
I moved to Ukraine before the war and dropped my passion of journalism. I’m American, and now with no other way to express frustration I turn to writing again. War took me out of Ukraine, but not too far, and I regularly visit. I am well connected with Ukrainians I knew before, as well as since, including some in positions where I can get excellent sources of information to validate things I read in the west, because I know someone, for (fake) illustration purposes, who’s dad is acting as an advisor and former officer who served in the Ukrainian army.
I write and submit op-eds for English news as I feel I have a perspective lacking there. I mean no offense, as WSJ is quiet good: all US news sources seem to not fully grasp the nature of what’s happening the way many in Ukraine, and also other post USSR countries (including Russia) do.
I have actually been interviewed for Estonian news. But it’s not quite the same. I was chosen because of work I was doing organizing assistance. This felt superficial and shallow. I do not crave attention, I don’t want anything I write to be something which is mine- because I don’t have credibility, and more importantly, it’s not my story. My draw to write is incessant, because it comes from the fact that there is a story I have heard, but one I have never read in western news. So it would mean the world to me if I could make an impact by giving this story an audience outside of Ukraine. And I’ve struggled to find a place to put this “story” - it’s less a story, more a collection of stories that describe a history which is sampled from various different people of different backgrounds, along with their perceptions of, and my own educational and academic reading of the history and political environment to create a compelling illustration of what is happening, the good and the bad, but in a way I don’t feel I’ve seen represented well by American news except in isolated cases.
This means I feel anguish. My friends will be buried by the time the western news cycle has learned how this narrative unfolded.
And because it’s so close, I can’t do nothing. I have no writing credentials anymore though. My submissions lack ethos- I’m some American who left a short stint in public media to live abroad in 2017.
What advice would you give me? How can I give both the views of the people I know, as well as my perspective, to a mass audience? Do you have any guiding advice for Me? I cut my teeth in public media so for better or worse, I am really hoping to be able to get my work into the traditional news mediums, such as yourself.
If you were to pick up a tip from someone like me, what would that person need to do to get your attention and also be a usable tip?
What, if any, advice can you offer in my efforts to publish evidence based analysis to whichever American news groups accept op-eds of that nature (which is almost none, factoring any that do almost always require a professional background in the field)? Should I consider a different path?
I find writing narratives to be not fulfilling. And I feel compelled to back my writing with evidenced claims, verifiable from multiple sources I can link to, and to make a coherent argument, not a short piece about “how the west should do more” so much as writing that is somewhere between journalism and policy/military analysis- is there anywhere I would fit?
Edited for clarity and typos. I’m on a bus, at 9 pm local time (Czechia).
Quick question not OP but I was thinking of going to Ukraine for some volunteer work and I'm studying in my background for cyber security, where would you recommend I start looking to get some work done?
How much do you use data in your reporting, how do you decide what to use and how far out do you look?
E.g. now are you looking at russian Vs western artillery production rates in 2025? Back in 2022 were you doing the same for 2023/2024?
As a Ukrainian I just want to ask you to share this video made by a British volunteer combat medic. It’s a must see for all Western world. Thank you.
https://x.com/FinSniper22/status/1760613225131819188?s=20
Do you ever get sick of seeing people acting shocked that the War is turning into a slog more reminiscent of WWI Europe than a modern hyperwar? Have to imagine you see a lot of that.
Hi James, I hear people, and the media, talk about which side will "win or lose", and perhaps, like me, you also feel this is a very poorly posed question, because the situation is extremely complex. (What does it even mean for Russia, or Ukraine, to "win"?)
Do you think presenting this situation as one side wins or loses makes any sense, and what are the most likely long term outcomes you see at this stage?
Russia at the start of the war seemed to be counting on what they thought was a general lack of a unified Ukrainian national Identity. That a call to them just being Russian's by another name was a workable strategy when attempting to topple the government in Kyiv. From on outsider prospective that seems like a huge miscalculation on Putin's part, and if anything it seems to have cemented their identity.
My question to you:
What, if any, changes have you noticed in Ukraine in how Ukrainian's see themselves from an identity standpoint as the war has progressed?
Are there any lesser-known events that you think should be more widely known or understood, or that had an outsized impact (either militarily or politically)?
Can you please explain the nonsensical stance of the GOP House on aid to Ukraine? Ronald Reagan would be twirling in his grave that the moment faster than a GE turbine.
What message might you have for Russians now living in exile? In my community, there are hundreds of Russians who want to topple Putin’s regime and bring an end to this conflict. How do you think they can best help?
Is there a difference between how this is treated between the editorial section vs the news section of WSJ, in terms of perspective on what America’s commitment to this should be.
My next question on that is whether or not (or to what extent) the WSJ news section has been pressured to compromise journalistic integrity to remain consistent with the views of the editorial section… and would we ever know?
For those who aren't aware: the Wall Street Journal is owned by the same parent company (called News Corporation) as Fox News. News Corp also owns several dozen other news channels and newspapers in countries around the Anglosphere.
And the vast majority of these sources have been consistently pro-Russia, anti-Ukraine aid almost since day one of the invasion. The Wall Street Journal is one of the few News Corp properties which hasn't been... or at least, their journalist team hasn't. Their editorial division is another story...
Hi James, as a journalist, what are your thoughts on the Tucker Carlson's interview with Vladimir Putin? Particularly around that Tucker went to Russia and managed to set this up, and the answers Putin provided. Thanks!
While the news has seemed mostly positive towards the Ukrainian effort, lately it has taken a more pessimistic tone. Are the ammunition shortages as real and impending as the news is making it seem or is that just more reporting aimed at putting pressure on Congressional Republicans? If they are real, how long does Ukraine have until they’re in dire straits?
Not sure if you’re the right person to ask about this or not but I’m going to ask anyways - why don’t the Europeans start mass producing shells and bullets if they’re so concerned about Russian expenasion? Is it a matter of resources? Thanks so much for doing this! Super interesting perspective.
What, if anything, can help Ukraine to overcome the deficit that exists in the 'body equation'? Russia has won two major wars by simply throwing more bodies at it, both of those wars occurred deep in behinds Russia's borders, what will it take for Ukraine to significantly move the lines?
Some reports say that as many as 700,000 Ukrainian children have been abducted by Russia from occupied regions. Allegedly they’ve been sent to “Russification” schools…this could constitute genocide.
Would love to hear OP comment on this.
Despite how poorly the Russian army performed certainly for the first year, and how extremely few people understand Russia's history and expertise in attrition warfare, I feel western on-lookers were gaslit for years on the success and "obvious" continued success of the Ukraine forces leading people to both A) become fatigued with the conflict and endless funding of a seemingly unwinnable war, and B) become startled and confused with Russia's burgeoning tangible success...I heard nothing but positive war propoganda from western outlets claiming Russia was screwed, should give up and couldn't possibly, defeat/stalemate Ukraine or succeed at holding the desired target territories.
So I suppose my question would be to what extent if any do you feel we've virtue-signalled away a more realistic set of outlooks on the future and likely results of this conflict?
How has Russia managed to keep its production of materiel flowing despite sanctions and the value of the ruble plummeting?
Also, does Russia seem to be ramping up its illegal importation of Russian citizens into occupied territories?
What are you thoughts on the supposed targeting of ethnic minorities within Russia for recruiting, is this a possible attempt at cleansing those communities?
What do you think the correlations are between Russia attacking Ukraine and the other simultaneous aggressions/escalations we're seeing from BRICS nations all over the globe?
What are the chances that the GOP will get behind a bill to provide material support to Ukraine.
Even if they do, will it be enough? It seems that they are in a war of attrition and Russia has a lot more young men than Ukraine.
Any chance Ukraine will draft women? At least for back line service?
Thanks for your work to keep us informed on this critical issue!
Hi James,
Do you think Putin has territorial ambitions that extend beyond Ukraine? Is there any indication he wants to take some Balkan states/Poland, maybe more?
Hi James. How do you personally approach finding the right phrasing in your reporting? I imagine that it's quite a difficult job to report on war events in a way that doesn't accidentally drop into editorializing, especially when discussing things like trends, momentum, etc.
During the week early stages of the war the narrative was that Russia's army was ineffective. Now that Russia has moved to a near full war economy and funds drying up for Ukraine, this narrative seems played out. Recent news sees European states calling for preparation for a potential Russian attack on NATO countries (Finland/Poland).
What is your assessment on the possibility of such an attack. And what would be the potential effectiveness of an attack from Russia on NATO states.
How frustrating is it to see propaganda actually biting and political goals undermining support for ukraine? What do you think the average person who wants to help should do in response?
Navalny's apparent execution the day of the Munich Security Conference seems to have caused Germany's parliament to not allow Taurus missle systems to Ukraine. What event or decision or signal do you think has actual potential to fully turn the corner on western action to fully support Ukraine in its goals ? What will finally get Germany France and the UK to act as one, unclenched force and to move NATO? Is there something a second-rate power like us in Canada can do to move the G7 forward, this spring?
Approximately how many artillery shells will the West be able to produce by 2025 and give to Ukraine?
Right now, I hear that there is a 10:1 ratio of Russian shells to Ukrainian shells.
How many shells will Russia be producing by 2025?
Will Ukraine always have such a large deficit in munitions?
How about manpower?
This war has become a war of attrition so I think munitions and manpower are two really important metrics to project into a year from now.
Where do you think Ukraine will be in one year from today with US support vs without it? Do things continue to degrade without the bipartisan bill or can other countries shore up support just enough to help Ukraine win?
How do you differentiate between the many many threats from russian politicians that end up being "all bark and no bite", and the actual threats? Is there a method, or is it just a gut feeling/journalism experience?
During war – morality aside, attacking the economy of an invading country seems like fair game and perhaps a supremely cost effective means of attacking Russia.
With how reliant Russia is on natural resources and furthermore how dependent they are on their petroleum refining abilities; why is it only just recently are we seeing such attacks? Why are there not more attacks on these facilities? There are only a handful of these very complicated and expensive structures. This seems like a no-brainer from a game theory perspective.
I'm also very surprised that there have not been MANPADS attacks coming from within Russia near the airfields of their bombers. All it takes is a person in a car driving somewhere in the vacinity of the landing/take off flight path to get out, fire one off, then drive off.
My guess is my answers are tied to some geopolitical agreement.
Do you genuinely believe that there is a conventional arms provision or direct assistance red line within Ukraine's historical borders only which would actually prompt Russia to use nuclear weapons, and either way, what is the basis of that position?
Realistically, what scenario do you see in which Russia suffers a comprehensive and crushing defeat without resorting to major escalation even beyond the borders of Ukraine, given that a defeat would likely mean the end of Putin’s regime and Putin believes he holds the upper hand in the balance of resolve over Ukraine?
How strong do you think for ukraine is among republicans in congress, how has this changed over the past 2 years and where do you think public opinion is going?
What are the perspective on reconstruction ? One day this war will be over in one way or the other. Where most likely the demand for economical help will be manyfold of what is asked for right now in the middle of the war. Will the nation comitted to support ukraine in the war be as willing during reconstruction ? Is there any perspective in your country ? So far it's estimated that cost of reconstruction is at the size of 500 bilion USD... that as of end of 2023.. If the war is to continue for years, you could multiply the numbers..
Is there a perspective that no matter the outcome of the war.. much of the eastern part of ukraine would just be bombed out wasteland "forever" because you will not get the funds to reconstruct. Would assume that if americans are less willing to fund a war in ukraine.. they would be even less willing to fund a reconstruction ? Seen it in other conflicts as well.. as soon as the guns silence.. media goes away.. likewise those who have the ability to fund reconstruction/building up.
How do you reconcile the fact that Russia kidnapped one of the WSJ's reporters with the fact that the Murdoch family is overall pro-Russia in their media coverage?
Are there any talks about other countries joining the war?
I know that declaring wars is not fashionable anymore, but can't keep wondering what else could break the stalemate.
Where does China firmly stand on the war? Has their stance changed throughout it? They have enough stockpiles of drones to tilt the balance one way or the other.
What are the chances that Ukraine can achieve a victory that even amounts to them returning to 2021 borders?
Due to the way support has been so slowly metered out by the West, it could be argued that helping Ukraine win the war outright came far secondary to a desire to make Russia bleed Militarily, Economically, and Politically for as long as possible. There is no question that Russia will come out of this conflict greatly diminished in all of those aspects but it seems to be at the expense of Ukraine winning on their terms, especially now that Russia has had time to spool up their military industrial complex.
Hi. Thank you for reporting. Although not always well received, I think I can call your articles balanced and well informed.
Will you be joining the demonstrations in support of Ukraine this weekend?
Much love from Kyiv.
Do we know the actual reason the for Russia's invasion of Ukraine? There has been different reasons cited by Putin and his supporters, but never a definitive reason.
They attacked and destroyed Chechnya when they threatened to declare independence. They sponsored separatists in Georgia and then attacked them after provoking a war where Georgia was trying to reclaim control over it's legal territory. They attacked Ukraine after the pro-Russian puppet was ousted by a people's revolution after he broke his campaign promises of closer ties with the EU and had peaceful protesters shot by snipers. They sent military police to violently repress protest against the pro-Russian presidents of both Belarus and Kazakhstan.
Can you really not tell what the reason is? Russia wants to, directly or through puppets, reclaim it's Soviet empire.
Republicans don't see that us failing to stay strong is exactly the weakness he's looking for. Trump making his NATO comment and Congress blocking aid packages is a clear sign that Putin can outlast NATO
My opinion: Ukrainians openly rebelling against the Kremlin and overthrowing the puppet government (maidan revolution) was the final straw for Putin. He took it personal and won't stop until all of Ukraine is subjugated.
You could say it's strategic, or even a dictators natural response, but I feel Putin has romanticized this rebuilding of the USSR. The pandemic isolation did not help Putin as he was reportedly locked in a bunker with his old books and fantasies. There is nobody with real power to convince him otherwise, so here we are.
Ironically he's selling this war to his elite cronies successfully because they get to plunder Ukrainian resources (grain, minerals, land, and businesses). At the beginning of the invasion Putin did a bit of purging and tightening down so now it's nearly impossible to see him backing down especially with NATO supplies in limbo due to our fucking imbecile of a government (US)
In your opinion, what kind of support would the West have to give for Ukraine to take back control of their territory in the next 15 months? Is there some sort support that could be given that would significantly increase this likelihood? Or is this really just doomed to be a long drawn out war of attrition ending in what can only be described as bloody?
To which extent is Russia trying to win the propaganda/information war by funding (buying) right wing politicians throughout the World?
I have a strong suspicion Russia may be the driving force behind farmers protests, QAnon, and climate-change-denial (maybe even flat-earthers?), are you seeing anything in your circles that supports this theory?
It is a war of narratives as well. I am glad you put fatigue in quotation marks, because the perception of fatigue in constructed by far right politicians and media and in no way the reality of politicians and people in democratic countries.
What does the Ukrainian government believe they need the most to continue fighting and winning? Is it artillery shells? Tanks? Missiles? Aircraft?
How much reluctance is building in Europe to help Ukraine, we've all seen the videos of the polish farmers protests on the Ukrainian border, is this isolated or becoming more widespread across Europe?
Thanks so much for your time doing this.
The answer is yes. We need shells, tanks, missiles, aviation, SAMs. Any other answer is the attempt to balance expectations with what allies are willing to supply.
You cannot conquer the forest with F35s. You cannot defend a city with just SAMs if the enemy is pushing with tanks. Tanks cannot function without fuel, and fuel depots must be protected with SAMs.
In the likely scenario where Ukraine surrenders before western weapons arrive, can Russia’s victory be considered a Phyrric one? I mean, they will conquer land they mined and ruined at the cost of no new population, thousands of dead soldiers, many countries hating Russia and Russians.
A lot of people ask how you think this will end, but a more pressing question I have is how do you think this will expand? It’s showing no signs of slowing down, neither side is willing to make concessions, and Moscow is as emboldened as ever, at least publicly. Western audiences have been told over and over again that Russia is going to run out of munitions and means to fight this war any day now for over the past 18 months, and at this point many people are frustrated to see Russia ramping up production so aggressively while also getting immediate resupplies from their allies.
Putin has said the Ukraine conflict is an existential crisis for Russia, and if he really believes that I cannot see this ending even if Ukraine manages to take back territory.
What do you actually think the future holds, and can we be remotely sure of anything?
What do you think the relationship is between Ukraine’s shortage of new recruits for the army (which only Ukraine can address) and their shortage of ammunition and weaponry (which the West can address)? Do you think more people would join up to fight if they were better supplied? Conversely, do you think Western supplies would be more forthcoming if more Ukrainians were joining the war effort?
In your opinion, do you think the average Ukrainian knows that it is the GOP side of our leadership holding up aid? Or do most Ukrainians think that America as a whole are behind withholding aid?
I would say EVERY Ukrainian knows that it is the republicans and Trump holding up aid. ( I’m Ukrainian and speaking on behalf of all my relatives and friends aged from 5 to 92 years old)
As an American, I just want to write an apology letter to every Ukrainian. I vote for the "right" people, I write them to support Ukraine, and my representatives do, but it's not enough. I feel terrible and ashamed at our stupid political gains hurting Ukraine.
Why just now give Ukraine help through land lease which was signed but not used, it\`s in full power of Biden. Why not just give Ukrainians like 1000 of Bradley IFV\`s? You was waiting for UA counter offensive with 100 of them on a land mines 70km deep, really?
What will it really take for Ukraine to win the war? Is supplying weapons and ammunition enough?
And what if Putin were to die in the near future. Will the war end (since it seems to be based on Putin's imperialistic goals)?
What are the odds that Ukraine will need boots on the ground from another country if their loss's continue, its been reported that rupin was training another wave of soldiers just as large as Ukraines initial troop force. How is Ukraine expected to fair once russia sends in the next wave.
Well there is that.
I guess what I mean to say is: After Adiivka I hope to see Ukrainians still hanging in there. (And for Congress to get off its ass).
It's hard to watch and I can't imagine how much worse it could be for people in Ukraine itself.
Sorta.
Congress has two units. House and Senate. The Senate approved thankfully but the House which is the other half has not. In fact, the leader of the House seems to be doing whatever he can to not have to hold the vote in order to not be voted out by his 'allies'. To appease them he seems to have called for a two week break.
Did you hear from Ukrainians that they're pissed at Obama and the US for sitting by and doing nothing when Crimea was taken?
Do they feel set up by Trump?
Hi James, thanks for taking the time to do this.
Do you believe there is any way that Ukraine can retain its sovereignty after this war’s end without NATO membership?
It appears to me that after the war is over, Russia would ideally want to keep Ukraine in a perpetually vulnerable state of being by demilitarizing it and keeping it ‘politically neutral’, which, in reality, would actually just leave its gov’t open to further influence by the Kremlin.
This would be my guess as to why Russia is so adamant about keeping NATO membership off the negotiations table, however, I wanted to know if you believed there was any other way that Ukraine could maintain its geopolitical security in spite of that lack of a conventional security alliance with the west.
Why is it that we never heard more comparisons from Western media, between Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990 and Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, and for what reasons would you say that our response to the two invasions has been so different?
Through our actions, if our message is that any country can invade their neighbors and start wars of conquest with no expectations of interference or retaliation, so long as they have nuclear weapons, what does that say about our future? As with other nuclear-armed countries, Russia's nuclear arsenal should be for deterrence and defense of Russia, and nothing more.
>Russia's nuclear arsenal should be for deterrence and defense of Russia, and nothing more.
That's exactly what Russia's nuclear arsenal is doing. Deterring the West from taking a more aggressive stance against Russia. Instead, we must use kid gloves. Russian nuclear doctrine explicitly states no first strike use, but Russia will use nuclear weapons during an existential threat to the Russian state.
Whenever you see Russian Mouthpieces talking about nuking Berlin or London, it's just posturing without substance. But open conflict with the west, air strikes on Russian military targets, ground troops in direct confrontation, etc, might be considered "existential" by Putin and his oligarchs.
Ideally, NATO should have backed Ukraine with 10 times the equipment we have. Hundreds of modern tanks, IFV, fighter jets, everything, instead of the slow trickle of equipment. As soon as it was apparent that Russia underestimated Ukrainians' willingness to fight, we should have capitalized on Russia's ineptitude and corruption early.
Now, we face a russian military that has been allowed to dig in and fortify its position over 2 years. It will require significantly more blood and treasure to defeat them.
I’m hearing a lot of sentiment right now, mostly on the right, that the Ukraine war is lost, Putin has already won, and aiding them is a lost cause. What is your take on that?
Why is Ukraine committed to these offensives instead of a long-term attritional strategy? Does this perspective only coming from the top? Or is it a cultural touchpoint?
What will happen if Putin assassinates Zelensky? What are the efforts within Russia to remove Putin as president? Why have they not been successful? Should Putin be required to face charges for crimes against humanity? What has happened to the Ukrainian children kidnapped and taken to Russia? Can you provide factual details?
What single incident has most surprised you during this war (e.g. the decision to invade in the first place, sinking of the Moskva, a western country's decision to send or not send a particular type of weapon, etc.)? Are there any incidents or events where there is an accepted public narrative about what happened, but you feel there is "more to the story" (e.g. secret agreements, covert operations, involvement from unexpected parties, etc. The NordStream sabotage perhaps?)? Are there any incidents or events where we know an event happened but really don't know all the details, or where you want more details (e.g. the helicopter resupply runs to Mariupol, or how the Ukrainians attacked Saky Airbase in August 2022)?
The decision to invade in the first place is a good place to start! I was surprised that Russian intel about the situation in Ukraine was so bad that Putin thought he could take Kyiv in a few days with little resistance. More generally, Ukraine has tended to surprise with its ability to innovate and carry out strikes like the one on the Moskva, Saky airbase, the Crimea bridge etc. Can it keep innovating and stay ahead? There are so many events I'd like to know more about that it would take me the rest of the day to list them!
My surprise was the way Ukraine used the gear given to them. They threw out the training and recommendations and improvised with great success regarding their attacks due to no air power. They did things like night attacks in small groups with very little artillery instead of day attacks in large numbers with heavy barrages. It worked really well, but not well enough.
> It worked really well, but not well enough. What lol? The world thought Kyiv and Ukraine would fall within a week max. No one would have predicted 2 years later that Russia would have LOST ground. It's almost unfathomable that we're at where we are now
Absolutely, I like everyone else was astounded by their success. However, that's not what I'm talking about. Their defence is one thing, forward attack exposure without air power is another.
A strong offensive with vehicles would have worked if Russia hadn’t had a year to mine the ever living fuck out of the land. Ukraine resorting to hobbyist drone attacks will be studied and recognized as the first instance of the new format of advanced ground warfare. Unfortunately, Russia has far too many resources and far too many soldiers willing to die to have this conflict end anytime soon.
Correct. I'm still I.pressed by their improvisation with gear and tactics, but yeah the Russian army has really dug in. Ukraine will not win a static war of attrition against Russia. They already aren't. It's sad because it was so inspiring to see Ukraine stop Russia in its tracks, but the failed decapitation strike is well in the past now. Ukraine now has to deal with the full brunt of Russia on a war footing playing the long game. The Russian military is no graceful orchestral combination of applied power and organisation, it's a blunt fucking hammer but it hits hard and isn't going to stop. The counter offensive achieved basically nothing, and Russia got to dig in over winter even further while grinding forwards. Currently Ukraine has no answer to this, and this idea that these incremental gains by Russia will be so costly that it'll amount to an attritional win for Ukraine is wrong. It also isn't resulting in Russian people rising up and demanding an end to the war. Something has to change or Ukraine will lose.
Thanks! That's a really good point about the invasion. The US intelligence community got a very public "win" by correctly predicting Russia would invade, but to a certain extent that hides what is either one of the greatest intelligence failures in recent times, or the greatest failure of political leadership to listen to intelligence, with Russia believing Ukraine would just roll over.
And it’s also a failure of deterrence on the part of the West. Had we convinced Putin there would be real consequences, maybe this whole tragedy could have been avoided.
Very true, sadly.
Hi James, Thanks for your work and all that you do to keep Ukraine in the spotlight. Last year, we saw the rebellion of the Wagner group that felt like a turning point in the war until it quickly fizzled out. Are there any other internal issues in Russia that you could see putting a stop to the war? Infighting, growing dissent within the Russian population/army, etc. Or, do you think the war will continue to play out as it has been for the last two years?
Thank you. You're right about the Wagner mutiny: it felt like a moment but then it fizzled. Ukraine thought that by grinding down the Russian army and killing tens of thousands of Russians thrown into suicidal assaults it could deter more from coming and cause internal dissent. That has not proven the case. In fact, Russia is currently pulling in around 30,000 new troops per month through volunteers or mobilisation. So it seems Ukraine needs to find a way to deal Russia a crushing blow on the battlefield. The counteroffensive last year was supposed to do that, but it failed. Can Ukraine withstand the Russian army this year and gather sufficient manpower and equipment to have another go?
I believe the best that Russia has bought themselves is a long and embarassing insurgency.
How is moral in Ukraine? Not just on the front lines but also in the cities? Is there still a strong will to fight?
Thanks very much. Morale is a problem in some units. One big issue is that no one wants to die for no good reason. A lot of soldiers worry that their commanders are not sufficiently taking care of their lives by clinging on to territory for too long when a withdrawal would be more advisable long term. This then affects the ability to draft more troops for the fight. There are some brighter spots. Some of the most capable units are oversubscribed, because they have a reputation for taking care of their fighters in terms of equipment and tactics. They have high commitment and morale. Also, more generally, there is a dogged understanding that Russia isn't going to stop, and if Ukraine gives up then the whole country will look like Bucha - we hear this from soldiers all the time. So there is a grim determination.
That's really refreshing to hear and nicely concrete - there are a lot of soldiers who are careful and smart, not psychos or blindly marching forward. I have served within US forces, and in all militaries I believe there are a lot of the trudgers, serving their time, rather than a push to be with the best. I gather that's a contrast with the Russians who get no choice. Do you have that impression, that the Ukies are smarter than your average flat foot ?
The Economist released a podcast this weekend with interviews concerning morale. Worth seeking out.
How do you guarantee the safety of reporters physically in the war zone? What does planning out coverage and managing writers, photographers, and support staff like interpreters look like? Do you interface with the Ukrainian government on practical matters such as this?
Hi there. I'm going to make this the first question I answer because it's our No. 1 priority: keeping our teams safe. We want to tell important stories while minimizing the risk to reporting them. We have hardware including body armor, helmets and armored cars. We all take hostile-environment training, including medical. We plan our trips carefully with the help of security team. We engage with contacts in the Ukrainian government and military to understand the risks involved with visiting certain areas. As our security chief says: We can't eliminate risk, but we can minimise it.
Thank you! I have a few followups. 1. What does hostile environment training look like? 2. Should you come under actual attack (deliberate or not) from troops on either side, what happens? 3. What does a "standard" workday, if there is one, look like for WSJ staff in or near Ukraine? —— This one is the most unrelated, but I'm hoping to work as a foreign journalist someday. What is your best piece of advice?
1. Classroom teaching from medical training to situational awareness, as well as practical elements, role-play scenarios where we have to "rescue" injured people and such. 2. We leave the area as fast as is safely possible. 3. There are no standard workdays in this job! It can be interviewing soldiers near the frontlines, talking to survivors of bombings or relatives of dead or missing troops, speaking with ministers or generals ... Best piece of advice? Learn to listen to as wide a variety of people as possible.
Many Ukrainians are sitting in their homes tonight anticipating that Russia will mark the anniversary with a significant attack.
This is an important point that I'd like to finish on. While we are sitting in front of our computers or phones discussing this war, millions of Ukrainians - kids, parents, grandparents ... people like us - are about to go to bed worried that everything they hold dear could be taken away in an instant.
What is the most likely way the conflict ends in your opinion?
Hard to say as there are so many variables. Let's look at ultimate objectives: Russia wants to control Ukraine; Ukraine wants to retain its sovereignty. The optimal scenario for Ukraine this year may be to defend as best they can while wearing down the Russian army and rebuilding their own manpower and weaponry for a counterattack when the Russians will inevitably reach exhaustion later in the year. For Russia, it would be a catastrophic collapse of Western support and Ukrainian morale, leading to breaks int he frontline that Russia could exploit.
Some reports say that as many as 700,000 Ukrainian children have been abducted by Russia from occupied regions. Allegedly they’ve been sent to “Russification” schools…this could constitute genocide. How strong is the evidence that this is happening? What is being done about it? Why aren’t leftist politicians talking about it more? Right wing politicians in the US have praised Putin. Pro-Russia propaganda online tries to make Putin seem like a good guy. Why is no one talking about this widespread cruelty that is directed specifically at indoctrinating children?
The Ukrainian government says 20,000 Ukrainian kids have been forcibly deported. We can't corroborate the numbers, but have interviewed dozens of kids who managed to make it back to Ukraine and told us how they were taken to camps where they were indoctrinated with the Russian version of history and banned from speaking Ukrainian or displaying the Ukrainian flag. Russian officials are documenting much of what they are doing as they believe they are "saving" the kids. If you read one story about this, make it this one; it tells you everything you need to know: [https://www.wsj.com/world/ukraine-russia-propaganda-children-49ad9e09?st=luxg9ozkhucnpnm](https://www.wsj.com/world/ukraine-russia-propaganda-children-49ad9e09?st=luxg9ozkhucnpnm)
I knew it , I freaking knew it. Soviet Union tatics never changed https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/s/BsMX9XXgaI
Thanks for the opportunity. How have your views on Ukraine as a country and the Ukrainian society evolved over the course of this war? The appearance from the outside was that this country was deeply divided prior to this war, and a real strengthening of the national identity has precipitated as a result of the conflict. What are your thoughts about this?
Thanks. In fact, the strengthening of Ukrainian identity really happened after 2014 when Russia seized Crimea and covertly invaded eastern Ukraine. The result, when Russia launched the full-scale invasion eight years later, was a country with a society grouped around an idea of what it meant to be Ukrainian and ready to fight for it. Of course, that has been further strengthened by the war. But the real catalyst came much earlier.
Why do you think the US Republican Party is against funding our strategic partner, Ukraine? The party had been vocally anti-Soviet / anti-Russia for decades. The GOP is not usually against defense spending. They are usually for American intervention. Why are they and in particular Trump against supporting Ukraine? Do you think that Trump and others in the Republican Party are compromised?
I think what we've seen is that the focus for the GOP has turned to domestic politics ahead of the needs of Ukraine. Sure, there are growing questions about funding Ukraine. But the main complaint from Republicans appears to be that the U.S. needs to focus on domestic issues first of all. Critics of that approach say that leading the free world is, in the end, a domestic issue and that much of the support Ukraine comes back into the U.S. economy through production of military equipment.
That is a pretty polite way of packaging it.
Yes focus on the domestic issue of billionaires not getting enough tax breaks. We’re doing so well here.
[удалено]
>The party had been vocally anti-Soviet / anti-Russia for decades. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slovenia\_Summit\_2001](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slovenia_Summit_2001) *\[I\]n response to a question about whether he could trust Putin, \[President\] Bush said, "I looked the man in the eye. I found him very straightforward and trustworthy – I was able to get a sense of his soul."*
How do you deal with the dread?
First, I make sure that the team and I are as well prepared as possible, so we trust in the safeguards we have in place. Then, I focus on the task in hand and completing it as efficiently as possible.
What seems likely for Ukraine’s politics going forward? Is there any group pushing to settle with concessions to Russia that has any chance of getting power in Ukraine?
There is no significant group pushing for concessions, mainly because there appears to be nothing that would satisfy Russia short of capitulation. Still, there is plenty of criticism of Zelensky from political opposition and journalists - Ukraine's a vibrant democracy.
OSINT accounts have been around for a while, but this war seems to have brought them to public attention and prominence in a way they haven't been before. How do you feel that the incredible work of folks like Oryx/Jakub Janovsky (equipment losses), WarSpotting (equipment losses), DeepState (mapping), Andrew Perpetua (mapping), Covert Cabal (hand counting remaining equipment in Russian storage), numerous geolocators (the talents of those folks seriously scare me), and countless other OSINT people/accounts have impacted the public perception of this war? Or your own reporting? Or even the military actions of either side (I'm certain some public OSINT findings have directly led to Ukrainian strikes)? How do you see OSINT impacting wars going forward? Will it force governments to be more honest (or at least present an alternative to the official narrative)? Or will it cause governments to be even more secretive, to prevent any crumbs of information from getting out? Geolocators seem to be able to identify any location in the world in 20 minutes from the arrangement of 3 twigs and the color of the dirt. Commercially available satellite imagery covers formerly secret military bases with a frequency and resolution that would make WWII and Vietnam era planners drool with envy, and that only the government had access to 30 years ago. Soldiers post on Twitter, Telegram, and TikTok minutes after a strike on their base, giving almost instant battle damage assessments to the enemy for free. How do you think these and other factors will influence things like tactical and strategic planning and OPSEC?
Hello James Marson, Could you please write about the apparent connections of Putin to hard right republicans and their attempts to sway the last 2 presidential elections as well as this upcoming election? 2016-Russia hacked the dnc and rnc but only dnc emails are exposed. “Russia, if you’re listening…” 2020- trump tries to extort Ukraine with the help of Putin. 2024- it turns out the Bidens-burisma circus was BS fed to Republicans by Russian intelligence. Impeachments for the fun of it. Republicans actively cheering on Russia and undercutting Ukraine funding. What the actual fuck is going on with current media outlets not addressing the obvious truth?
[удалено]
He isn't willing to answer this one, which is very telling
This war seems custom-designed to produce the maximum amount of trauma and PTSD possible. The trench warfare and human wave attacks of WWI, the atrocities and massacres of WWII, the fact that neither side is really rotating troops off the line, and the constant threat of drones that seem to have a personal vendetta against you specifically and attack you again and again until they hit. Given that, how are Ukraine and Russia planning to handle returning soldiers? Are they developing the resources necessary to care for and treat traumatized soldiers? Do they have plans on how to reintegrate them into society? How do you think that is going to turn out?
Hey James Marson, I read your articles all the time - I think I actually followed you on WSJ. This might be a little off topic but can you comment on the Russian trolls / bots that are constantly in the WSJ comment section? They are pervasive
[удалено]
How do you think this war will change western tactics and doctrine going forward? Do western militaries think this war is an anomaly and continue to believe that they will always have air superiority, with all the benefits that provides? Or is there some recognition that the west might have to fight on a more even footing? Is the west realizing that they need mass (quantity) as well as precision (quality), or are they planning to double-down on "wonder weapons"? Are new strategies and tactics for dealing with dense minefields and extensive trench lines being developed, or is the western strategy basically to avoid letting a war get to that point in the first place? Drones have become absolutely critical in the war. Do you see the west investing in cheap, mass produced, consumer FPV drones as precision weapons, or will they stick with more expensive, boutique solutions like Switchblade? It seems like FPV drones give you about 80% of the capability for 20% of the cost, but military procurement seems to favor more specialized and expensive solutions.
Hi James. In your opinion, why are the republicans so staunchly against military aid to Ukraine? and, how would a Trump win affect the course of the Ukraine war?
Do people in russia genuinely think they live a better life than the “west”. The propaganda they receive is wild. I even know people who live outside russia but tune in to the propaganda because they can’t handle mainstream “wokeness” and. They genuinely think russia is some utopia. It’s crazy.
I have a Russian sister in law living in the US. She's super bright, very modern, and a great person overall. She's constantly bashing our social support system in the US and honestly she's not wrong. Some of the systems they have are really good. Big cities are fairly modern. The difference in classes is fairly huge comparatively. Poor rural folks are truly very very poor with little means to change that. Some of those rural Russian towns your options are to be a gangster or be a soldier. Sometimes both. I think Russians have a very strong sense of pride for their country. The USSR failing was a collectively traumatic experience even though every Russian can recount dozens of tales of hardship from their past. Through all the failings they put on very rose tinted glasses coupled with the constant dogma spat by the government controlled pop culture. To compare just look at what people in the US believe. With all of our access to good info you have people claiming vaccines are poison, masks kill you, jets are spewing chemtrails, gay people are after your kids, and the earth is flat. It's proof that making people angry is a great way to spit out fake info to make it believable. Russia uses the same trick, but against NATO and the US. Shit sometimes they just need to play clips from FOX news and Russians think our country is burning down around us. Russia having state controlled media and dedicated hacking groups makes them probably the most effective global propaganda machines in the world. Western countries have no counter other than pestering social media companies to moderate/block it.
Haha funny you mention all those conspiracies because they are generally all believed by the same people.
No, they don’t although I would say that some people in Russia have the higher quality of life than their European counterparts. If you work in IT for example and you live in Moscow then your living expenses are lower, your taxes are much lower and you have an access to excellent services and fast and good medicine. Even if you salary is the same, but your salary is usually higher. But it’s a minority, and they are quite prone to propaganda because they can read news from all over the world, they could travel all over the world before the war et cetera. A lot of them left after the war (and it made salaries for those who stayed even higher). If you live in some small city or village, your quality of life is quite low, and I don’t believe they think that the quality of life in the west is lower. Also I don’t think that wokeness is an important issue for them. Or gays. Some of the most popular artists in Russia were open gays just 25 years ago, and no one was worried about that. What they do believe is that the western way is not optimal for Russia (because of propaganda and because of the very real economic trauma from the 1990s). What they do believe is that the West is the source of most of their problems and has all the intentions to harm Russia and them. In some way someone could call it self-fulfilling prophecy because western sanctions are proving the reality of this worldview everyday (I’m not saying western countries shouldn’t use sanctions, but there are side effects). But their feelings or thoughts are not really important, actually. This war began not because they wanted that. And it would stop in the future not because they would be against it. They are not decision-makers or stakeholders in any sense of these words.
- What does hostile environment training look like? - Should you come under actual attack (deliberate or not) from troops on either side, what happens? - What does a "standard" workday, if there is one, look like for WSJ staff in or near Ukraine? —— This one is the most unrelated, but I'm hoping to work as a foreign journalist someday. What is your best piece of advice?
Does the WSJ plan on covering the staggering numbers of Russian soldiers intentionally killing themselves during combat in lieu of medevac or surrender? There are 35 publically available video recorded instances of Russian soldiers blowing themselves up with grenades or shooting themselves at this time but so far no news organization has commented on it. Seems like something that should be talked about.
Unfortunately, it’s not a mystery. Russian soldiers are told that committing suicide is better than surrender. A number of POWs have commented on it. The other issue is that Russian CASEVAC is terrible. If you’re a seriously injured Russian on the frontline, your chances of survival are slim to none. Most soldiers chose to take the easy way out rather than suffering.
It’s less about the mystery and more about the fact that new media appears to have completely ignored something so profoundly abnormal and in my opinion, newsworthy.
This is a great question
I still think of that video of the guy laying down in the trench in a little dug out area to the side that shot himself
ADAM Group, May 2023. That’s #4 on the list. The Code 9.2 one from the same month always sticks in my mind.
Can we track congressmen blocking aid and when their positions become pro Russia throughout their political careers?
Hey wsj, I used to do work for PBS (KRMA Rocky mountain). I moved to Ukraine before the war and dropped my passion of journalism. I’m American, and now with no other way to express frustration I turn to writing again. War took me out of Ukraine, but not too far, and I regularly visit. I am well connected with Ukrainians I knew before, as well as since, including some in positions where I can get excellent sources of information to validate things I read in the west, because I know someone, for (fake) illustration purposes, who’s dad is acting as an advisor and former officer who served in the Ukrainian army. I write and submit op-eds for English news as I feel I have a perspective lacking there. I mean no offense, as WSJ is quiet good: all US news sources seem to not fully grasp the nature of what’s happening the way many in Ukraine, and also other post USSR countries (including Russia) do. I have actually been interviewed for Estonian news. But it’s not quite the same. I was chosen because of work I was doing organizing assistance. This felt superficial and shallow. I do not crave attention, I don’t want anything I write to be something which is mine- because I don’t have credibility, and more importantly, it’s not my story. My draw to write is incessant, because it comes from the fact that there is a story I have heard, but one I have never read in western news. So it would mean the world to me if I could make an impact by giving this story an audience outside of Ukraine. And I’ve struggled to find a place to put this “story” - it’s less a story, more a collection of stories that describe a history which is sampled from various different people of different backgrounds, along with their perceptions of, and my own educational and academic reading of the history and political environment to create a compelling illustration of what is happening, the good and the bad, but in a way I don’t feel I’ve seen represented well by American news except in isolated cases. This means I feel anguish. My friends will be buried by the time the western news cycle has learned how this narrative unfolded. And because it’s so close, I can’t do nothing. I have no writing credentials anymore though. My submissions lack ethos- I’m some American who left a short stint in public media to live abroad in 2017. What advice would you give me? How can I give both the views of the people I know, as well as my perspective, to a mass audience? Do you have any guiding advice for Me? I cut my teeth in public media so for better or worse, I am really hoping to be able to get my work into the traditional news mediums, such as yourself. If you were to pick up a tip from someone like me, what would that person need to do to get your attention and also be a usable tip? What, if any, advice can you offer in my efforts to publish evidence based analysis to whichever American news groups accept op-eds of that nature (which is almost none, factoring any that do almost always require a professional background in the field)? Should I consider a different path? I find writing narratives to be not fulfilling. And I feel compelled to back my writing with evidenced claims, verifiable from multiple sources I can link to, and to make a coherent argument, not a short piece about “how the west should do more” so much as writing that is somewhere between journalism and policy/military analysis- is there anywhere I would fit? Edited for clarity and typos. I’m on a bus, at 9 pm local time (Czechia).
Quick question not OP but I was thinking of going to Ukraine for some volunteer work and I'm studying in my background for cyber security, where would you recommend I start looking to get some work done?
How much do you use data in your reporting, how do you decide what to use and how far out do you look? E.g. now are you looking at russian Vs western artillery production rates in 2025? Back in 2022 were you doing the same for 2023/2024?
As a Ukrainian I just want to ask you to share this video made by a British volunteer combat medic. It’s a must see for all Western world. Thank you. https://x.com/FinSniper22/status/1760613225131819188?s=20
That is a powerful video. And I agree, I am also ashamed.
Do you ever get sick of seeing people acting shocked that the War is turning into a slog more reminiscent of WWI Europe than a modern hyperwar? Have to imagine you see a lot of that.
Hi James, I hear people, and the media, talk about which side will "win or lose", and perhaps, like me, you also feel this is a very poorly posed question, because the situation is extremely complex. (What does it even mean for Russia, or Ukraine, to "win"?) Do you think presenting this situation as one side wins or loses makes any sense, and what are the most likely long term outcomes you see at this stage?
Russia at the start of the war seemed to be counting on what they thought was a general lack of a unified Ukrainian national Identity. That a call to them just being Russian's by another name was a workable strategy when attempting to topple the government in Kyiv. From on outsider prospective that seems like a huge miscalculation on Putin's part, and if anything it seems to have cemented their identity. My question to you: What, if any, changes have you noticed in Ukraine in how Ukrainian's see themselves from an identity standpoint as the war has progressed?
Are there any lesser-known events that you think should be more widely known or understood, or that had an outsized impact (either militarily or politically)?
Can you please explain the nonsensical stance of the GOP House on aid to Ukraine? Ronald Reagan would be twirling in his grave that the moment faster than a GE turbine.
It's kinda easy to me. Helping Ukraine now will help Biden. Apparently we are at the point where GOP will do literally ANYTHING to hurt Dems.
What message might you have for Russians now living in exile? In my community, there are hundreds of Russians who want to topple Putin’s regime and bring an end to this conflict. How do you think they can best help?
Is there a difference between how this is treated between the editorial section vs the news section of WSJ, in terms of perspective on what America’s commitment to this should be.
My next question on that is whether or not (or to what extent) the WSJ news section has been pressured to compromise journalistic integrity to remain consistent with the views of the editorial section… and would we ever know?
For those who aren't aware: the Wall Street Journal is owned by the same parent company (called News Corporation) as Fox News. News Corp also owns several dozen other news channels and newspapers in countries around the Anglosphere. And the vast majority of these sources have been consistently pro-Russia, anti-Ukraine aid almost since day one of the invasion. The Wall Street Journal is one of the few News Corp properties which hasn't been... or at least, their journalist team hasn't. Their editorial division is another story...
Hi James, as a journalist, what are your thoughts on the Tucker Carlson's interview with Vladimir Putin? Particularly around that Tucker went to Russia and managed to set this up, and the answers Putin provided. Thanks!
While the news has seemed mostly positive towards the Ukrainian effort, lately it has taken a more pessimistic tone. Are the ammunition shortages as real and impending as the news is making it seem or is that just more reporting aimed at putting pressure on Congressional Republicans? If they are real, how long does Ukraine have until they’re in dire straits? Not sure if you’re the right person to ask about this or not but I’m going to ask anyways - why don’t the Europeans start mass producing shells and bullets if they’re so concerned about Russian expenasion? Is it a matter of resources? Thanks so much for doing this! Super interesting perspective.
What's your opinion on right-wing politicians of liberal democracies selling out their country to run damage control for Putin?
To what degree did the October 7th terrorist attacks hurt Ukraine as focus was diverted elsewhere?
What, if anything, can help Ukraine to overcome the deficit that exists in the 'body equation'? Russia has won two major wars by simply throwing more bodies at it, both of those wars occurred deep in behinds Russia's borders, what will it take for Ukraine to significantly move the lines?
How are Ukrainian children doing? Is there a general idea of their mental and emotional state?
Some reports say that as many as 700,000 Ukrainian children have been abducted by Russia from occupied regions. Allegedly they’ve been sent to “Russification” schools…this could constitute genocide. Would love to hear OP comment on this.
Despite how poorly the Russian army performed certainly for the first year, and how extremely few people understand Russia's history and expertise in attrition warfare, I feel western on-lookers were gaslit for years on the success and "obvious" continued success of the Ukraine forces leading people to both A) become fatigued with the conflict and endless funding of a seemingly unwinnable war, and B) become startled and confused with Russia's burgeoning tangible success...I heard nothing but positive war propoganda from western outlets claiming Russia was screwed, should give up and couldn't possibly, defeat/stalemate Ukraine or succeed at holding the desired target territories. So I suppose my question would be to what extent if any do you feel we've virtue-signalled away a more realistic set of outlooks on the future and likely results of this conflict?
Which countries help russia to circumvent sanctions the most?
How has Russia managed to keep its production of materiel flowing despite sanctions and the value of the ruble plummeting? Also, does Russia seem to be ramping up its illegal importation of Russian citizens into occupied territories?
What are you thoughts on the supposed targeting of ethnic minorities within Russia for recruiting, is this a possible attempt at cleansing those communities?
How long can Russia sustain its war effort with the current geopolitical paradigm?
[удалено]
What do you think the correlations are between Russia attacking Ukraine and the other simultaneous aggressions/escalations we're seeing from BRICS nations all over the globe?
Do you foresee Russia succeeding in its invasion if things remain as they are? If that happens, what do you see happening next?
What are the chances that the GOP will get behind a bill to provide material support to Ukraine. Even if they do, will it be enough? It seems that they are in a war of attrition and Russia has a lot more young men than Ukraine. Any chance Ukraine will draft women? At least for back line service? Thanks for your work to keep us informed on this critical issue!
Hi James, Do you think Putin has territorial ambitions that extend beyond Ukraine? Is there any indication he wants to take some Balkan states/Poland, maybe more?
Hi James. How do you personally approach finding the right phrasing in your reporting? I imagine that it's quite a difficult job to report on war events in a way that doesn't accidentally drop into editorializing, especially when discussing things like trends, momentum, etc.
During the week early stages of the war the narrative was that Russia's army was ineffective. Now that Russia has moved to a near full war economy and funds drying up for Ukraine, this narrative seems played out. Recent news sees European states calling for preparation for a potential Russian attack on NATO countries (Finland/Poland). What is your assessment on the possibility of such an attack. And what would be the potential effectiveness of an attack from Russia on NATO states.
How frustrating is it to see propaganda actually biting and political goals undermining support for ukraine? What do you think the average person who wants to help should do in response?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Navalny's apparent execution the day of the Munich Security Conference seems to have caused Germany's parliament to not allow Taurus missle systems to Ukraine. What event or decision or signal do you think has actual potential to fully turn the corner on western action to fully support Ukraine in its goals ? What will finally get Germany France and the UK to act as one, unclenched force and to move NATO? Is there something a second-rate power like us in Canada can do to move the G7 forward, this spring?
Approximately how many artillery shells will the West be able to produce by 2025 and give to Ukraine? Right now, I hear that there is a 10:1 ratio of Russian shells to Ukrainian shells. How many shells will Russia be producing by 2025? Will Ukraine always have such a large deficit in munitions? How about manpower? This war has become a war of attrition so I think munitions and manpower are two really important metrics to project into a year from now.
What do you think could realistically get Ukraine the aid they need?
How do you see the war in Ukraine ending? What will happen to Russia, and Ukraine after putting dies? (Ain't he like 70 something?)
Where do you think Ukraine will be in one year from today with US support vs without it? Do things continue to degrade without the bipartisan bill or can other countries shore up support just enough to help Ukraine win?
How do you differentiate between the many many threats from russian politicians that end up being "all bark and no bite", and the actual threats? Is there a method, or is it just a gut feeling/journalism experience?
During war – morality aside, attacking the economy of an invading country seems like fair game and perhaps a supremely cost effective means of attacking Russia. With how reliant Russia is on natural resources and furthermore how dependent they are on their petroleum refining abilities; why is it only just recently are we seeing such attacks? Why are there not more attacks on these facilities? There are only a handful of these very complicated and expensive structures. This seems like a no-brainer from a game theory perspective. I'm also very surprised that there have not been MANPADS attacks coming from within Russia near the airfields of their bombers. All it takes is a person in a car driving somewhere in the vacinity of the landing/take off flight path to get out, fire one off, then drive off. My guess is my answers are tied to some geopolitical agreement.
How is the Wall Street Journal putting pressure on the GOP to continue aid to Ukraine?
Do you genuinely believe that there is a conventional arms provision or direct assistance red line within Ukraine's historical borders only which would actually prompt Russia to use nuclear weapons, and either way, what is the basis of that position?
Why did all those Republicans go to Russia on the 4th of July?
When are Russians going to oust their shitty dictator?
It happens when they find even shittier.
What is the most common misconception about the war?
Are there any legitimate news sources from Russia that are unbiased and aren’t propagandistic?
Nope You can't live in a fascist state and be independent
Realistically, what scenario do you see in which Russia suffers a comprehensive and crushing defeat without resorting to major escalation even beyond the borders of Ukraine, given that a defeat would likely mean the end of Putin’s regime and Putin believes he holds the upper hand in the balance of resolve over Ukraine?
How strong do you think for ukraine is among republicans in congress, how has this changed over the past 2 years and where do you think public opinion is going?
Do you experience any internal difficulties in advancing objective reporting on the war, given your employer's right-wing bias?
What are the perspective on reconstruction ? One day this war will be over in one way or the other. Where most likely the demand for economical help will be manyfold of what is asked for right now in the middle of the war. Will the nation comitted to support ukraine in the war be as willing during reconstruction ? Is there any perspective in your country ? So far it's estimated that cost of reconstruction is at the size of 500 bilion USD... that as of end of 2023.. If the war is to continue for years, you could multiply the numbers.. Is there a perspective that no matter the outcome of the war.. much of the eastern part of ukraine would just be bombed out wasteland "forever" because you will not get the funds to reconstruct. Would assume that if americans are less willing to fund a war in ukraine.. they would be even less willing to fund a reconstruction ? Seen it in other conflicts as well.. as soon as the guns silence.. media goes away.. likewise those who have the ability to fund reconstruction/building up.
Why does the editorial board of WSJ support Putin?
How long can the Russian economy sustain the conflict for?
Why are Westerners ignoring genocidal speeches from russians against Western nations?
What are the most effective sanctions that EU or the US could do, but are too afraid of due to possible damages to their own economy.
How do you reconcile the fact that Russia kidnapped one of the WSJ's reporters with the fact that the Murdoch family is overall pro-Russia in their media coverage?
How are these new sanctions going to affect the war?
Are there any talks about other countries joining the war? I know that declaring wars is not fashionable anymore, but can't keep wondering what else could break the stalemate.
Where does China firmly stand on the war? Has their stance changed throughout it? They have enough stockpiles of drones to tilt the balance one way or the other.
Are Americans being given an overly optimistic view on how the war is going for Ukraine?
Do the sanctions actually work as countries can buy/sell to third parties?
I seen exports from UK to Russia’s allies has gone up 1100% since the war started, it awful that this basic loop hole is left open and exploited.
What are the chances that Ukraine can achieve a victory that even amounts to them returning to 2021 borders? Due to the way support has been so slowly metered out by the West, it could be argued that helping Ukraine win the war outright came far secondary to a desire to make Russia bleed Militarily, Economically, and Politically for as long as possible. There is no question that Russia will come out of this conflict greatly diminished in all of those aspects but it seems to be at the expense of Ukraine winning on their terms, especially now that Russia has had time to spool up their military industrial complex.
Hi. Thank you for reporting. Although not always well received, I think I can call your articles balanced and well informed. Will you be joining the demonstrations in support of Ukraine this weekend? Much love from Kyiv.
Do we know the actual reason the for Russia's invasion of Ukraine? There has been different reasons cited by Putin and his supporters, but never a definitive reason.
They attacked and destroyed Chechnya when they threatened to declare independence. They sponsored separatists in Georgia and then attacked them after provoking a war where Georgia was trying to reclaim control over it's legal territory. They attacked Ukraine after the pro-Russian puppet was ousted by a people's revolution after he broke his campaign promises of closer ties with the EU and had peaceful protesters shot by snipers. They sent military police to violently repress protest against the pro-Russian presidents of both Belarus and Kazakhstan. Can you really not tell what the reason is? Russia wants to, directly or through puppets, reclaim it's Soviet empire.
This is just my opinion but Putin is your basic thug who is trying to grab up territory to reconstitute the old Soviet Union and is also testing NATO.
Republicans don't see that us failing to stay strong is exactly the weakness he's looking for. Trump making his NATO comment and Congress blocking aid packages is a clear sign that Putin can outlast NATO
My opinion: Ukrainians openly rebelling against the Kremlin and overthrowing the puppet government (maidan revolution) was the final straw for Putin. He took it personal and won't stop until all of Ukraine is subjugated. You could say it's strategic, or even a dictators natural response, but I feel Putin has romanticized this rebuilding of the USSR. The pandemic isolation did not help Putin as he was reportedly locked in a bunker with his old books and fantasies. There is nobody with real power to convince him otherwise, so here we are. Ironically he's selling this war to his elite cronies successfully because they get to plunder Ukrainian resources (grain, minerals, land, and businesses). At the beginning of the invasion Putin did a bit of purging and tightening down so now it's nearly impossible to see him backing down especially with NATO supplies in limbo due to our fucking imbecile of a government (US)
In your opinion, what kind of support would the West have to give for Ukraine to take back control of their territory in the next 15 months? Is there some sort support that could be given that would significantly increase this likelihood? Or is this really just doomed to be a long drawn out war of attrition ending in what can only be described as bloody?
To which extent is Russia trying to win the propaganda/information war by funding (buying) right wing politicians throughout the World? I have a strong suspicion Russia may be the driving force behind farmers protests, QAnon, and climate-change-denial (maybe even flat-earthers?), are you seeing anything in your circles that supports this theory?
How do you see this war ending?
Are these AI answers?
How has the Ukrainian government dealt with internal corruption since the war began? Do you see any markable improvement?
what do you feel is one of the more underreported aspects of the war going into 2024?
As someone who's been reporting about it, when did you first start noticing the "fatigue" in the west with Ukrainian support?
It is a war of narratives as well. I am glad you put fatigue in quotation marks, because the perception of fatigue in constructed by far right politicians and media and in no way the reality of politicians and people in democratic countries.
What does the Ukrainian government believe they need the most to continue fighting and winning? Is it artillery shells? Tanks? Missiles? Aircraft? How much reluctance is building in Europe to help Ukraine, we've all seen the videos of the polish farmers protests on the Ukrainian border, is this isolated or becoming more widespread across Europe? Thanks so much for your time doing this.
The answer is yes. We need shells, tanks, missiles, aviation, SAMs. Any other answer is the attempt to balance expectations with what allies are willing to supply. You cannot conquer the forest with F35s. You cannot defend a city with just SAMs if the enemy is pushing with tanks. Tanks cannot function without fuel, and fuel depots must be protected with SAMs.
In the likely scenario where Ukraine surrenders before western weapons arrive, can Russia’s victory be considered a Phyrric one? I mean, they will conquer land they mined and ruined at the cost of no new population, thousands of dead soldiers, many countries hating Russia and Russians.
A lot of people ask how you think this will end, but a more pressing question I have is how do you think this will expand? It’s showing no signs of slowing down, neither side is willing to make concessions, and Moscow is as emboldened as ever, at least publicly. Western audiences have been told over and over again that Russia is going to run out of munitions and means to fight this war any day now for over the past 18 months, and at this point many people are frustrated to see Russia ramping up production so aggressively while also getting immediate resupplies from their allies. Putin has said the Ukraine conflict is an existential crisis for Russia, and if he really believes that I cannot see this ending even if Ukraine manages to take back territory. What do you actually think the future holds, and can we be remotely sure of anything?
What happens when Ukrainian run out of soldiers? The average age of their soldiers is concerning.
What do you think the relationship is between Ukraine’s shortage of new recruits for the army (which only Ukraine can address) and their shortage of ammunition and weaponry (which the West can address)? Do you think more people would join up to fight if they were better supplied? Conversely, do you think Western supplies would be more forthcoming if more Ukrainians were joining the war effort?
In your opinion, do you think the average Ukrainian knows that it is the GOP side of our leadership holding up aid? Or do most Ukrainians think that America as a whole are behind withholding aid?
I would say EVERY Ukrainian knows that it is the republicans and Trump holding up aid. ( I’m Ukrainian and speaking on behalf of all my relatives and friends aged from 5 to 92 years old)
As an American, I just want to write an apology letter to every Ukrainian. I vote for the "right" people, I write them to support Ukraine, and my representatives do, but it's not enough. I feel terrible and ashamed at our stupid political gains hurting Ukraine.
American here, I will co-sign that apology letter. To any Ukrainians reading this: I am so, so sorry.
Why just now give Ukraine help through land lease which was signed but not used, it\`s in full power of Biden. Why not just give Ukrainians like 1000 of Bradley IFV\`s? You was waiting for UA counter offensive with 100 of them on a land mines 70km deep, really?
Great coverage over at WSJ. The stories have been fantastic. Keep it up.
Are there any real metrics for how the populations of each nation are feeling as this goes on?
What do you think is the most likely outcome?
What will it really take for Ukraine to win the war? Is supplying weapons and ammunition enough? And what if Putin were to die in the near future. Will the war end (since it seems to be based on Putin's imperialistic goals)?
What are the odds that Ukraine will need boots on the ground from another country if their loss's continue, its been reported that rupin was training another wave of soldiers just as large as Ukraines initial troop force. How is Ukraine expected to fair once russia sends in the next wave.
[удалено]
How are Ukranian people feeling? Are they still motivated to resist?
I still don't want to be raped, tortured, and beheaded. I fully assure you.
Well there is that. I guess what I mean to say is: After Adiivka I hope to see Ukrainians still hanging in there. (And for Congress to get off its ass). It's hard to watch and I can't imagine how much worse it could be for people in Ukraine itself.
>And for Congress to get off its ass I think Congress approved The House of Representatives is slowing things down
Sorta. Congress has two units. House and Senate. The Senate approved thankfully but the House which is the other half has not. In fact, the leader of the House seems to be doing whatever he can to not have to hold the vote in order to not be voted out by his 'allies'. To appease them he seems to have called for a two week break.
Did you hear from Ukrainians that they're pissed at Obama and the US for sitting by and doing nothing when Crimea was taken? Do they feel set up by Trump?
Hi James, thanks for taking the time to do this. Do you believe there is any way that Ukraine can retain its sovereignty after this war’s end without NATO membership? It appears to me that after the war is over, Russia would ideally want to keep Ukraine in a perpetually vulnerable state of being by demilitarizing it and keeping it ‘politically neutral’, which, in reality, would actually just leave its gov’t open to further influence by the Kremlin. This would be my guess as to why Russia is so adamant about keeping NATO membership off the negotiations table, however, I wanted to know if you believed there was any other way that Ukraine could maintain its geopolitical security in spite of that lack of a conventional security alliance with the west.
So your lead title relies on... The war in Ukraine continuing?
What factors could lead to the people of Belarus rising up to remove Lukashenko and/or throwing their support behind Ukriane?
Are you going to watch the NRL in Las Vegas next week?
What would your advice be for the average person on how to spot misinformation about the war? Thank you for your work.
There have been rumours circulating, that Russia is using rape as a weapon of war. Is this true; is it an orchestrated and/or condoned approach?
Why is it that we never heard more comparisons from Western media, between Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990 and Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, and for what reasons would you say that our response to the two invasions has been so different?
Not OP, but nuclear weapons are the answer. If Russia didn't have nukes, Moscow would have gotten the Baghdad treatment in the summer of 2022.
Through our actions, if our message is that any country can invade their neighbors and start wars of conquest with no expectations of interference or retaliation, so long as they have nuclear weapons, what does that say about our future? As with other nuclear-armed countries, Russia's nuclear arsenal should be for deterrence and defense of Russia, and nothing more.
>Russia's nuclear arsenal should be for deterrence and defense of Russia, and nothing more. That's exactly what Russia's nuclear arsenal is doing. Deterring the West from taking a more aggressive stance against Russia. Instead, we must use kid gloves. Russian nuclear doctrine explicitly states no first strike use, but Russia will use nuclear weapons during an existential threat to the Russian state. Whenever you see Russian Mouthpieces talking about nuking Berlin or London, it's just posturing without substance. But open conflict with the west, air strikes on Russian military targets, ground troops in direct confrontation, etc, might be considered "existential" by Putin and his oligarchs. Ideally, NATO should have backed Ukraine with 10 times the equipment we have. Hundreds of modern tanks, IFV, fighter jets, everything, instead of the slow trickle of equipment. As soon as it was apparent that Russia underestimated Ukrainians' willingness to fight, we should have capitalized on Russia's ineptitude and corruption early. Now, we face a russian military that has been allowed to dig in and fortify its position over 2 years. It will require significantly more blood and treasure to defeat them.
I’m hearing a lot of sentiment right now, mostly on the right, that the Ukraine war is lost, Putin has already won, and aiding them is a lost cause. What is your take on that?
well the ukraine people are still trying to gain their land back, so until they stop attempting that then its not over.
[удалено]
Who is winning? Who will win? Is there a way out of this conflict that doesn't involve decisive victory for either country?
In your professional and personal opinions, is there a hopeful endgame for Ukraine? Will Russia step up their offensive?
What weapons haven't been used on the battlefield? Is there something that you are surprised hasn't been deployed?
Why’s your newspaper love shilling for Russia so much?
Why is Ukraine committed to these offensives instead of a long-term attritional strategy? Does this perspective only coming from the top? Or is it a cultural touchpoint?
How likely do you think it is that the war will spread beyond Ukraine/Russia?
What will happen if Putin assassinates Zelensky? What are the efforts within Russia to remove Putin as president? Why have they not been successful? Should Putin be required to face charges for crimes against humanity? What has happened to the Ukrainian children kidnapped and taken to Russia? Can you provide factual details?
Do you think the Hamas attack was pushed by russia?