Society's Child
Russia now has available in and around Ukraine 5-600,000 regular troops, almost none of which have been used so far, with Moscow having been relying on the DPR and LNR forces, the Wagner troops, Chechens, and massive attacks from the air by artillery, rockets, drones and such in previous phases of the war.
The false myth that Russia is losing the war is being exposed for the propaganda lie it has always been, risking the loss of public support in the West. That exposure is leaving the 'king even more naked' as the Russian offensive gradually gains steam over the next two months. Russia was not militarily defeated in Kharkiv and Kherson when it retreated from those places. In the latter case, there seems to have been a tacit agreement between Moscow and Kiev that Russian troops would withdraw behind the Dnepr, and Kiev's forces would not harass them much at all and the agreement appears to have held. In both cases, Moscow decided to withdraw forces because it was badly outnumbered and sought to avoid a fight and high casualties. Russian forces have been making steady progress over the last few weeks, recently taking Soledar. They are in the process of establishing operational encirclement around Bakhmut as well as Avdiivka and have moved deeply into Mariinka and Vugledar (Ugledar); all of which could trap 10,000s of Ukrainian troops. More importantly, the offensive that is slowly ramping up will consist of larger combined force operations that is most likely to more resemble actual all-out total war than the hitherto 'special military operation,' though I expect some considerable continuing restraint to preserve civilian and Russian military lives as much as is possible. Whether the offensive will include a ground and/or air assault on Kiev and an attempt to encircle and/or in intensive bombing campaign targeting Zelenskiy and the government infrastructure - thus far left to be - is impossible to know for sure, but is likely.
NATO is now openly at war with Russia and intensively escalating that war. This is not Russian propaganda; it has been a poorly held secret for months. NATO and the US provide: all of the kinds of lethal weapons; strategic, operational, and tactical intelligence; means of communications; and strategic and operational planning as well as tactical and weapons training. Polish and perhaps Rumanian and other state's soldiers have been fighting out of uniform in Ukraine against Russia. NATO has also organized Belarusian and Russian opposition units that are fighting Russia and allied forces in Ukraine.
The 'NATOization' of the Ukraine war and the effort to organize opposition military forces against Moscow and Minsk is making it more likely that Russia will pressure Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenka to bring Belarusian forces into the war along with Russia's own units deployed there, if only as part of the Russian-Belarusian 'joint Union force'. Lukashenka could put up little resistance, especially if it appears that Russia's efforts are failing or, more obviously, if Ukrainian or Polish elements were to undertake some sort of operation on Belarus's territory. Clearly, Lukashenka's prospects for retaining his hold on power decline sharply should Russia lose this war, given the likely repercussions for Putin's rule in the event.
Moscow may soon decide that since NATO countries are legally definable as combatants it has the right to respond in some way. Responses could include: financing terrorist attacks, sabotage, destroying non-Russian oil and gas pipelines, rejecting all international copyright law, targeting staging sites in Poland or Rumania from which supplies and newly Western-trained troops are transported to Ukraine — who knows, maybe all of the above. That could provoke open NATO-Russian warfare on European and Russian territory, which is already being hit by the Ukrainians using US missiles.
If the escalation stops with the new wave perhaps there will not be any such Russian responses, but Western 'appeasement' is unlikely. War is in the air from Washington to Warsaw to Moscow.
The always insightful Colonel Douglas McGregor is wrong when he says that in Washington they do not understand that Russia is a country that can and if need be will mobilize its entire population if its leadership perceives a threat sufficient to warrant it.
They understand this full well in DC and hope to force Putin to engage such a mobilization and trap Putin in a quagmire - regardless of the costs to Ukraine — with everything else that will entail for Russia's economic efficiency, residual freedoms, and political stability in the long-term. In other words, they hope to saddle Putin with a war that will ultimately destabilize the political system and lead to his downfall. The time frame in such thinking is probably connected with the next Russian presidential election scheduled for 2024. Elections are focal points that often spark 'color revolutions' such as Ukraine in 2004, Georgia in 2005, and the failed 2012 white ribbon protests in Russia. This is the idea driving the West's foolhardy strategic escalation of the war and complete lack of interest in cultivating peace talks. The foundational drive is that any talks will fail if Washington and Brussels do not agree to end NATO expansion at least in the case of Ukraine; something the West is unwilling to do. This is why I have been calling the 'special military operation' or 'Russia's war in Ukraine' the NATO-Russian Ukraine war.
The West now also is risking the great danger that what remains of the Ukrainian state will be destroyed for the goal of removing Putin from power. But any fall of Putin from power will change neither Russian resistance to NATO expansion and Western color revolutionism (regime change policies or 'democracy promotion') nor the strategies and tactics Moscow uses to carry out that resistance. Washington has a dearth of knowledge about or willingness to acknowledge and incorporate into policy Russia's long history of being targeted by Western powers for political interference and manipulation and military intervention and invasion and the resulting centrality of security vigilance in relation to the West in Russia's political and security culture. And destruction of the Ukrainian state will eliminate the prospect of stabilization through the transformation of Ukraine into a neutral buffer zone between NATO and Russia, a prospect that should be acceptable to all sides, including Kiev, after this terrible war.
The absence of American statesmanship - really, the presence of American anti-leadership, even international subversion - is bringing catastrophe. Washington should be pressing both sides to negotiate not just be sending more, more and still more lethal weapons to Kiev. This is a criminal abandonment of leadership that risks us all with World War III and nuclear conflagration. It is perhaps more and surely deeply disturbing - and certainly must be raising red flags in Moscow - that there is a senile, arrogant, corrupt American president threatened by congressional investigations and perhaps impeachment for crimes he and his son committed, who is deciding how far the West's involvement in the NATO-Russian war in Ukraine should go. The possibility that Joe Biden is not in charge or is being profoundly manipulated by a coalition of Washington Democrat Party-state and globalist radicals is no more comforting.
Overall, the script is one that seems to have been written in Hollywood if not in Hell itself. Can Humankind or Heaven amend a happy ending? I am having my doubts.
How will 2023 play out? Aside from all that has been said above for the moment, 2023 is unlikely to see an end to the war. Russia's offensive will be methodical and likely slowly grind down the Ukrainian army. The influx of large quantities of Western weapons — tanks, armored fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, and much more, including it seems also jet fighters — could stall that offensive but is not likely to prevent a Russian military victory on the ground. However, the costs to Russia (not to mention Ukraine!) in blood and treasure will be far greater than previously. This combination of Russia's attainment of a position of strength on the battlefield and rising human, financial, and political costs could create a willingness in Moscow to more earnestly pursue ceasefire or a more general peace settlement at the year's end.
2024 might see a settlement might involving Moscow's core demands: no NATO expansion to Ukraine, recognition of Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, and at least part of Zaporizhe and Kherson Oblasts as Russian territories, and de-nazification of Ukraine. But Ukraine and the West would need a face-saving compensation. If Moscow's forces drive to the Dnepr, then confining Russia's territorial gains to the already annexed territories would constitute one Russian compromise. Kiev could receive Western security guarantees (imbedded in a new overall European security architecture) and war reparations in some form. But all this seems unlikely at the moment, and one senses it is more likely there will be escalation up to and including NATO's direct involvement. After all, it is already a NATO-Russian war.
Comment: See also:
- Viktor Orban: West is 'in a War With Russia'
- The Nightmare of NATO Equipment Being Sent to Ukraine
- Russo-Ukrainian War: The World Blood Pump
- NewsReal: Germany Sending Tanks to 'Save Ukraine' - WEF Meets to 'Save The Planet'
- A Russian victory in Ukraine won't end the war
- As the Pentagon's favorite think tank calls for a swift end to the Ukraine conflict, is the mood shifting in Washington?
Reader Comments
Indeed!!
At 11,000 Ukrainian solders killed a month to 1100 Russian, x 1 year is 130,000 dead UKe soldiers, plus the wounded, and Uke is outta soldiers...Russia has 5-600k, plus Belarus....game over !!
And I agree who would ever trust the west in any truce/agreement as we all know that the Minsk agreements were a complete sham as elucidated by Merkel/Hollande.
They can withdraw without too much damage, and focussing on China. And blame the crazy the neocon chickenhawks in the Biden admin for that "crazy adventure overseas".
Not saying they do, but they have this option. And some people there talk that way.
And as I see it, the Pentagon (i.e. the actual military) is increasingly weighting in, and telling them to cool down. They know they don't really have the power to decisively take on Russia in Europe, and confronting both China and Russia would be disastrous.
That would pass the buck to the EU countries ...
I hope you are right and that the Pentagon will save the day.Not for reasons of "democracy", "justice" or whatnot, but just self-preservation.
While the armchair chickenhawks in the political administration push for war, the professionals in the Pentagon know what this amounts to, and they are the one's that can assess the strength of their own troups. And they are the one's that think the US would never survive a nuclear exchange.
The current softening of the tune makes me believe they got enough supporters to dissuade the White House from such a suicidal action. Still, there are plenty of crazy psychos around ...
So they just give up the Ukraine war ? 30 billion deep ? A lot of corruption in that. Still think they'll want their fight. Maybe their next enemy is their citizens.
What's chance they say, "we made a mistake".
Pentagon has had many chances to do the right thing in the past 40 years.Times have changed.
Just fighting scattered and disorganized insurgence groups or ragtag armies made the military fat, lazy and complacent, metaphorically speaking. And the US lost the edge, both in weapons design and production capabilities.
A conventional war against Russia would end in a disastrous embarrassment within a week. Not my opinion, but those of some high-ranking US military brass who know that matter.
To entice young people to fight ? Have they used this tactic before?
Am I making any sense ?
Even MSM sources have been openly admitting, Russia is winning, and will continue to mop the floor with Mr. Z's soldiers. So unless you're conscripted, my take is no one with a drop of brains would fight for Ukraine.
Of course there are the blissfully ignorant, right ?
Russia has said that, if that appears likely, it will use nuclear weapons.
NATO leaders, being habitual liars themselves, do not believe Russia.
Good night, all. It has been nice knowing you.
The time table depends on the Russian strategy. Who cares.
When that time has come, the West will be in no position to demand anything at the table. They constantly proved themselves agreement-incapable, scheming, arrogant and dastard lyers.