8

In recent weeks, the US has warned of the amassing of Russian troops ("100,000 soldiers", although if you read the specific claims it's more like 50,000 and even that's not quite verified) near the Russia-Ukraine border. Russia is reported as claiming it is conducting military exercises near the border, but with much much fewer troops.

Now, obviously, states conduct military exercises, and those are often close to the relevant theaters of operations. My question is: How frequently has Russia, in the past, conducted military exercises or otherwise amassed troops on a comparable scale near its borders with neighbor states?

I realize the question is a bit tricky because the scale of the Russian activities is itself contested, but still - large-scale, tens-of-thousands of troops.

The motivation is to understand how out-of-the-ordinary - if at all - the recent reported military build-up by Russia actually is.

einpoklum
  • 8,549
  • 28
  • 65
  • 7
    I don't have an answer to your question, except to note that i can't recall Russia doing this for a while. But I want to point out that 'military exercise' is a diplomatic euphemism (no matter what nations). Large movements of troops and arms are always either (a) a direct threat of military action or (b) an explicit show of force; calling it an 'exercise' is just being coy. Note that if Russia merely wanted a training exercise, they could hold it anywhere from Moscow to Kamchatka without raising anyone's hackles. Doing it on their Western border is at best theater and at worst staging. – Ted Wrigley Feb 05 '22 at 13:42
  • 3
    On reflection, I'll note that the US and South Korea did yearly joint military 'exercises' near the border of North Korea from 1997 to 2018 (and possibly at other times I'm unaware of), and China does 'exercises' in the East China Sea and (I believe) near the border with India. It's hardly an uncommon practice... – Ted Wrigley Feb 05 '22 at 14:20
  • NATO had some military 'exercises' in the Black Sea befor, so this could be some kind of response. – convert Feb 05 '22 at 14:48
  • @TedWrigley: Of course large exercises also serve as threats, or covers for invasion, but just like you noted - if US and SK hold the n'th annual military exercise near NK, one does not then assume an invasion is imminent. – einpoklum Feb 05 '22 at 17:13
  • 1
    @einpoklum: No interested nation can afford to assume that an invasion is *not* imminent; ignoring that assumption might (in and of itself) trigger an invasion. Let's not give in to naïveté. – Ted Wrigley Feb 05 '22 at 20:56
  • One thing comes to mind is: what diplomatic initiatives have been launched by Russia in this context? When, to take an example, Russia officially demanded withdrawal of NATO to 1997 lines, was this something they asked before these maneuvers? Right as the maneuvers started? Only in response to US/Europe questions about these maneuvers? I.e. if you make a lot of demands right next to some big maneuvers then that's somewhat different than if you are quietly doing the same maneuvers without making any demands other than your usual demands. – Italian Philosophers 4 Monica Feb 05 '22 at 23:05
  • Ted Wrigley, while it is clearly a good thing to question possible motives for a military build-up, it may be a lot more important to draw conclusions from Putin’s behavior over time. Putin deciding to launch a massive attack on a neighbor, knowing the consequences in terms of dead bodies piling up, expenses, and hit to popularity would be very unlike him. Remember, Putin would love to unite the two countries as brothers. You don’t achieve this with a bloody invasion. –  Feb 07 '22 at 16:46

1 Answers1

6

No, it is not a rare occurrence, not according to President Volodymyr Zelenskiy of Ukraine. ‘We don’t have a Titanic here’: President Volodymyr Zelenskiy complains war talk causing panic:

Zelenskiy said the recent buildup of Kremlin forces was “no more intense” than in spring 2021. “If you look at the satellite you will see the increase of troops. You can’t assess if it’s a threat, an attack or simple rotation,” he said, adding that some of the tents for Russian soldiers appeared to be empty.

Moscow moved in additional troops before major diplomatic negotiations, he said. “...They are trying to build up psychological pressure.”

In the past, Zelenskiy has pointed out that Ukraine has been at war for eight years, since Vladimir Putin annexed Crimea in 2014 and started a separatist conflict in Donbas.

These sentiments were further reinforced by Ukraine's defense minister (despite his estimates of Russian troop count being significantly greater in number than stated by OP), as of 28 January 2022, ibid 1:

Ukraine’s defence minister, Oleksiy Reznikov, said 112,000 Russian servicemen were on the border, with the number increasing to about 130,000, including navy and aviation personnel.

Reznikov said the deployment was no bigger than last April, when Russia dispatched 126,000 troops. The reaction from the international community was “disproportionate”, he told the Rada.

Rada refers to Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine’s house of parliament.

Ellie Kesselman
  • 746
  • 5
  • 17
  • 1
    I'll mention I did not claim any specific number as the truth and put 100,000 in quotation marks... anyway, +1. But - did Ukraine believe, last year, the Russia was about to invade them? – einpoklum Feb 05 '22 at 17:14
  • @einpoklum continued: "Zelenskiy... after a phone call on 27 Jan 2022 with Joe Biden, said “We don’t have any misunderstandings with President Biden. I just deeply understand what’s happening in my country, just as he does with the US,” he said... Zelenskiy shrugged off claims his government was in denial." Emphasis mine. It is quite presumptuous of Biden and various American pundit class (not so much military, at least, not so publicly) to suggest that Biden knows better what is going on in Ukraine than Zelenskiy does! – Ellie Kesselman Feb 05 '22 at 18:18
  • 1
    The greater presumption is to police, if not rule, the world, and decide that world states must be punished since the US has decided they've done something inappropriate. The US government seems to have made these statements to foment the confrontation, and probably not because they "really" believe it to be the case. Like the "Saddam has WMDs" claim. – einpoklum Feb 05 '22 at 18:25
  • 3
    According to Russian news, Ukraine was first to amass army on their side of the border. Which is now 125,000 if I'm not mistaking. So, the good question is, why Ukraine is moving forces to one place, very close to Russian border? Either way, forces are within own country's borders, at least atm. – zmechanic Feb 05 '22 at 19:03
  • 4
    Do you feel that Russia and their state-run news have a history of portraying events in a truthful manner? – PureW Feb 05 '22 at 20:10
  • 4
    @EllieKesselman - I don't think most people believe that Biden specifically knows more about what is going to happen than Zelenskiy. I imagine that those who take Zelenskiy's declarations at face value and still believe a Russian invasion of Ukraine is likely think that the massive apparatus of US spies that informs Biden knows more about Russia's goals than Ukrainian spies do. Although I would note that there have been recent cases of world leaders (in the United States, say) who knew less about their own country than anyone would have thought possible, to say nothing of their neighbors. – Obie 2.0 Feb 05 '22 at 20:39
  • 1
    @PureW - Both statements in the answer are from Ukrainian government officials and quoted from an independent UK news outlet. Where does Russian state news enter in the picture? – Obie 2.0 Feb 05 '22 at 20:42
  • 4
    @EllieKesselman - But even if Zelenskiy is better-informed, another question is whether he has incentives to be less than completely honest, right? After all, he himself says that the talk of war is causing economic chaos in Ukraine. If he downplays the threat and Putin invades, he will probably have to flee, but he probably would have had to anyway (and he can still reinforce the military while publicly denying any threat). If he downplays the theat and Putin does not invade, he looks better to the electorate and the economy may suffer less damage. He has little incentive not to downplay it. – Obie 2.0 Feb 05 '22 at 20:49
  • Of course, some have argued that Biden has his own incentives to be less than completely honest, as well. Still, the general point of what I am saying is that Biden would not have to be personally better-informed than Zelenskiy about Russian politics for Zelenskiy to be making incorrect statements. – Obie 2.0 Feb 05 '22 at 20:51
  • @zmechanic: Did Ukraine amass 125,000 troops in the Lugansk/Donetsk region? Because, if not, then maybe it's not really that close to the Russian border. – einpoklum Feb 05 '22 at 21:12
  • 3
    @PureW: I don't think it's a binary. That is, each state has its own idealized, or ideology-transformed, narratives. e.g. Russia will up-play the role of the Neo-Nazis in the Ukranian ruling coalition (Svoboda, the Azov Battalion); and the "The Russians are coming" spiel has the smell of something the US government decided to push rather than organic news. – einpoklum Feb 05 '22 at 21:15
  • 6
    @zmechanic because of course Ukraine invading Russia is an extremely believable threat. – Italian Philosophers 4 Monica Feb 05 '22 at 23:05
  • 1
    @PureW the job of state run or deep state run media is to promote agenda, no matter in which country they are. – zmechanic Feb 05 '22 at 23:51
  • 2
    @einpoklum Google Maps and Wikipedia tells me that Lugansk is only 10km away from border between the 2 countries. Modern warfare can cross this distance within seconds. This is very close by my standards. – zmechanic Feb 06 '22 at 00:00