Assuming the Russia speculation is correct, what is their motivation? General chaos in Europe? It seems pretty reckless knowing this would be ascribed to them, and I don't see how they benefit here.

▲

torben-friis 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Part of the goal is to be a nuisance so Europeans pay a price for supporting Ukraine, in the hopes that we decide it's not worth the heat. Russia is banking on the west's refusal to face a conflict and the sacrifices it causes, kinda like a game of chicken.

We're about to hit a series of important elections as well (Spain, France, I think Germany soon as well?), hybrid warfare is supposed to influence in favor of extreme parties.

It's a major issue. On paper NATO can mop the floor with Russia even without the US backing, but nobody in a first world country wants to die in a ditch, and the endgame there is also unclear because Russia can play the nuke card if they're too threatened.

	▲	ben_w 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> On paper NATO can mop the floor with Russia even without the US backing, I think that was true a two years ago, but Russia has been forced to adapt to the drone warfare of Ukraine as much as Ukraine has been forced to adapt to the drone warfare of Russia. I suspect that right now, both Ukraine and Russia have independently got armed forces which could wipe the floor with the rest of non-naval NATO forces. And I'm only giving a "possibly" for the naval exception because of their limited production rate of long-rage drones so saturation attacks may be harder, not that it's impossible: we can already see the US navy being forced into a much longer distance stand-off range vs. Iran. That said, I'm getting this position mainly from watching Anders Puck Nielsen videos, so take with the usual scepticism/pinch of salt for "internet commenter/armchair general".

▲

twalla 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Retaliation for Ukrainian attacks on Yandex datacenters most likely - it communicates to EU states that Russia has capabilities to physically impact their infrastructure via cyberattack, which should act as a deterrent for sending aid or admitting Ukraine into the EU.

▲

awakeasleep 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't have any insight into this situation, but I feel like the incentives to blame Russia for any problem must be tremendous.

It's a perfect 'get out of jail free' card for any sufficiently complicated screw up.

	▲	jcomp 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This is where my mind goes too. They're not even outright blaming Russia here either, just planting the seed by referring to intelligence assessments that are for some reason made public. I hesitate to use the term because of the connotations, but considering the ever-increasing ease by which such cyberattacks can be conducted and the actors' identity obscured, this and similar incidents seem ripe for some kind of a false flag type deal. Some non-zero number of these incidents have to be exactly that. This isn't to excuse Russia's abhorrent conduct elsewhere either, I'm just not entirely convinced by the boogeyman lazy journalists seem perfectly content to keep trotting out.

▲

Jtsummers 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

As long as they can avoid loss of life (or significant loss of life) and direct attribution, but the rumors are still that it's Russia, this is a way to reduce popular support for Ukraine. The attacks aren't severe enough to make people want to support Ukraine to spite Russia, and it makes it apparent that there is a cost for the current support.

▲

cenamus 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

How does firebombing the British PMs home benefit Russia? How does flying explosive laden drones into European airports benefit them? How does bombing Kiev benefit them? Russia still does it