NYT headline
Up until this point, it was smeared as so-called "Russian propaganda" to claim that the Ukrainian Conflict has culled Kiev's best fighters but now it's officially confirmed by the NYT.
The New York Times (NYT) meant to trumpet the coalition of 20 countries whose "stealthy network of commandos and spies [is] rushing to provide weapons, intelligence and training" to Kiev in their latest piece about this but inadvertently also ended up revealing the qualitative scale of that US proxy's losses. It's already been disclosed that Kiev's experiencing up to 1,000 casualties a day, has already lost between 30-50% of its total military equipment according to its own officials, is out massively outgunned per the Associated Press' latest admission, but only now has it been confirmed that it's "losing a lot of experienced people" in the words of an unnamed former Trump Administration official.

Up until this point, it was smeared as so-called "Russian propaganda" to claim that the Ukrainian Conflict has culled Kiev's best fighters but now it's officially confirmed by the NYT. Furthermore, that same source compared the scale of Kiev's losses to "the height of the Vietnam War for us", bluntly concluding that "it is terrible." Shortly thereafter, an unclear number of "former American officials" are alleged to have informed the NYT that "The Ukrainian military's most acute training problem right now is that it is losing its most battle-hardened and well-trained forces". This revelation follows the news just last week that one of Russia's surgical strikes killed over 50 Ukrainian generals and officers.

As Kiev's "most battle-hardened and well-trained forces" continue dwindling down, it's becoming much more dependent on its Western overlords to provide training in order to soften the qualitative blow that these losses have inflicted upon it. The trend is that its military forces are increasingly being trained either abroad or by foreigners inside the country, not by its own veterans, and that the rank-and-file are quickly turning into little more than conscripted cannon fodder for the US-led NATO proxy war on Russia. The latest information warfare narrative against Russia is that it's a modern-day "colonial power', but this observation actually proves that it's the US that fits this description instead.

To explain, the declining unipolar hegemon provoked Russia's ongoing special military operation by refusing to respect the integrity of its national security red lines that were explained in Moscow's security guarantee requests from last December. This was done knowing fully well that it would be their Ukrainian proxies that would be on the receiving end of this conflict, not their own. In the span of just one-third of a year, the NYT then confirmed that not only has Russia successfully culled the quality of Kiev's fighters, but that those who remain are completely dependent on the US as explained in that outlet's latest article.

Not only that, but the impossibility of naturally replacing these "most battle-hardened and well-trained forces" anytime soon means that Kiev will become more dependent on foreign trainers, which adds a visible dimension to its colonial relationship with the US wherein Americans and others openly prepare their Ukrainian proxies for battle with Russia. Kiev's military forces have no semblance of sovereignty after its best fighters were already taken out by Russia and they were thus compelled to come under foreign control as a result. This outcome that even the NYT just acknowledged discredits the latest information warfare narrative against Russia by exposing the US as the real colonizer in this conflict.

Ukraine isn't "fighting for its independence" since its leadership already voluntarily ceded control of its armed forces to the US and the other 19 countries participating in the "stealthy network of commandos and spies" that the NYT revealed in its latest piece. This bait-and-switch means that while the US-led Western Mainstream Media (MSM) was gaslighting about the supposed "threat" that Russia poses to Ukraine's sovereignty, this same sovereignty was given to the US behind the scenes after Kiev made the decision to openly become that declining unipolar hegemon's vassal state in exchange for continuing the conflict that it's destined to lose.

Put another way, one of the reasons why the US provoked the Ukrainian Conflict was to create the pretext for openly taking control of its proxy's military after Russia culled them of their "most battle-hardened and well-trained forces". Furthermore, the existing damage that's been inflicted by Russia throughout the course of its special operation made Zelensky so desperate for reconstruction aid that he literally offered his overlords "to take patronage over a particular region of Ukraine, city, community or industry" while speaking at this year's Davos Summit. In other words, this US-provoked conflict directly led to the loss of both Ukraine's military and economic independence.

Not only that, but it's extremely likely that the US will continue provoking more such proxy wars across the world in the coming future in an attempt to replicate the neo-imperial success of its Ukrainian operation whereby it'll exploit the same conflicts that it sparks in order to obtain control of its vassal's military and economy under the false pretext of "supporting" it. After all, there's no reason for it not and there are plenty of fault lines across the world for it to take advantage of for these ends. This is especially the case across the Global South that's emerging as the primary zone of competition in the New Cold War, which means that some of the world's poorest countries might also suffer Ukraine's fate.