Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov holds a press conference after the 28th OSCE Ministerial Council in Stockholm on Thursday, December 2. The annual OSCE Ministerial Council, chaired by Sweden, takes place on December 2-3. The ministers are expected to discuss security issues in the OSCE area and review the organisation’s activities.
Please forward the video.
November 29, 2021
The charade has come to a point that – diplomatically – is quite unprecedented: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov lost his Taoist patience.
By Pepe Escobar,
American hysteria over the “imminent” Russian invasion of Ukraine has exploded every geopolitical Stupid-o-Meter in sight – and that’s quite an accomplishment.
What a mess. Sections of the U.S. Deep State are in open revolt against the combo that remote controls Crash Test Dummy, who impersonates POTUS. The neocon-neoliberal axis is itching for a war – but has no idea how to sell it to an immensely fractured public opinion.
UKUS, which de facto controls the Five Eyes spy scam, excels only in propaganda. So in the end it’s up to the CIA/MI6 intel axis and their vast network of media chihuahuas to accelerate Fear and Loathing ad infinitum.
Russophobic U.S. Think Tankland would very much cherish a Russian “invasion”, out of the blue, and could not give a damn about the inevitable trouncing of Ukraine. The problem is the White House – and the Pentagon – must “intervene”, forcefully; otherwise that will represent a catastrophic loss of “credibility” for the Empire.
So what do these people want? They want to provoke Moscow by all means available to exercise “Russian aggression”, resulting in a lightning fast war that will be a highway to hell for Ukraine, but with zero casualties for NATO and the Pentagon.
Then the Empire of Chaos will blame Russia; unleash a tsunami of fresh sanctions, especially financial; and try to shut off all economic links between Russia and NATOstan.
Reality dictates that none of the above is going to happen.
All exponents of Russian leadership, starting with President Putin, have already made it clear, over and over again, what happens if the Ukro-dementials start a blitzkrieg over Donbass: Ukraine will be mercilessly smashed – and that applies not only to the ethno-fascist gang in Kiev. Ukraine will cease to exist as a state.
Defense Minister Shoigu, for his part, has staged all manner of not exactly soft persuasion, featuring Tu-22M3 bombers or Tu-160 White Swan bombers.
The inestimable Andrei Martyanov has conclusively explained, over and over again, that “NATO doesn’t have forces not only to ‘counter-act’ anything Russia does but even if it wanted to it still has no means to fight a war with Russia.”
Martyanov notes, “there is nothing in the U.S. arsenal now and in the foreseeable future which can intercept Mach=9-10+, let alone M=20-27, targets. That’s the issue. Same analytical method applies to a situation in 404. The only thing U.S. (NATO) can hope for is to somehow provoke Russia into the invasion of this shithole of a country and then get all SIGINT it can once Russia’s C4ISR gets into full combat mode.”
Translation: anything the Empire of Chaos and its NATO subsidiary try in Donbass, directly or indirectly, the humiliation will make the Afghanistan “withdrawal” look like a House of Gucci dinner party.
No one should expect clueless NATO puppets – starting with secretary-general Stoltenberg – to understand the military stakes. After all, these are the same puppets who have been building up a situation which might ultimately leave Moscow with a single, stark choice: be ready to fight a full scale hot war in Europe – which could become nuclear in a flash. And ready they are.
It’s all about Minsk
In a parallel reality, “meddling in 404” – a delightful Martyanov reference to a hellhole that is little more than a computer error – is a totally different story. That perfectly fits American juvenilia ethos.
At least some of the adults in selected rooms are talking. The CIA’s Burns went to Moscow to try to extract some assurance that in the event NATO Special Forces were caught in the cauldrons – Debaltsevo 2015-style – that the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk, with Russian help, will concoct, they would be allowed to escape.
His interlocutor, Patrushev, told Burns – diplomatically – to get lost.
Chief of the General Staff, Gen Valery Gerasimov, had a phone call with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen Mark Milley, ostensibly to ensure, in Pentagonese, “risk-reduction and operational de-confliction”. No substantial details were leaked.
It remains to be seen how this “de-confliction” will happen in practice when Defense Minister Shoigu revealed U.S. nuclear-capable bombers have been practicing, in their sorties across Eastern Europe, “their ability to use nuclear weapons against Russia”. Shoigu discussed that in detail with Chinese Defense Minister Wei Fenghe: after all the Americans will certainly pull the same stunt against China.
The root cause of all this drama is stark: Kiev simply refuses to respect the February 2015 Minsk Agreement.
In a nutshell, the deal stipulated that Kiev should grant autonomy to Donbass via a constitutional amendment, referred to as “special status”; issue a general amnesty; and start a dialogue with the people’s republics of Donetsk and Lugansk.
Over the years, Kiev fulfilled exactly zero commitments – while the proverbial NATOstan media machine incessantly pounded global opinion with fake news, spinning that Russia was violating Minsk. Russia is not even mentioned in the agreement.
Moscow in fact always respected the Minsk Agreement – which translates as regarding Donbass as an integral, autonomous part of Ukraine. Moscow has zero interest in promoting regime change in Kiev.
This charade has come to a point that – diplomatically – is quite unprecedented: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov lost his Taoist patience.
Lavrov was forced, under the circumstances, to publish 28 pages of correspondence between Moscow on one hand, and Berlin and Paris on the other, evolving around the preparation of a high-level meeting on Ukraine.
Moscow was in fact calling for one of the central points of the agreement to be implemented: a direct dialogue between Kiev and Donbass. Berlin and Paris said this was unacceptable. So yes: both, for all practical purposes, destroyed the Minsk Agreement. Public opinion across NATOstan has no idea whatsoever this actually happened.
Lavrov did not mince his words: “I am sure that you understand the necessity of this unconventional step, because it is a matter of conveying to the world community the truth about who is fulfilling, and how, the obligations under international law that have been agreed at the highest level.”
So it’s no wonder that the leadership in Moscow concluded it’s an absolute waste of time to talk to Berlin and Paris about Ukraine: they lied, cheated – and then blamed Russia. This “decision” at the EU level faithfully mirrors NATO’s campaign of stoking the flames of imminent “Russian aggression” against Ukraine.
Armchair warriors, unite!
Across NATOstan, the trademark stupidity of U.S. Think Tankland rules unabated, congregating countless acolytes spewing out the talking points of choice: “relentless Russian subversion”, “thug” Putin “intimidation” of Ukraine, Russians as “predators”, and everything now coupled with “power-hungry China’s war on Western values.”
Some Brit hack, in a twisted way, actually managed to sum up the overall impotence – and insignificance – by painting Europe as a victim, “a beleaguered democratic island in an anarchic world, which a rising tide of authoritarianism, impunity and international rule-breaking threatens to inundate”.
The answer by NATOstan Defense Ministers is to come up with a Strategic Compass – essentially an anti-Russia-China scam – complete with “rapid deployment forces”. Led by who, General Macron?
As it stands, poor NATOstan is uncontrollably sobbing, accusing those Russian hooligans – scary monsters, to quote David Bowie – of staging an anti-satellite missile test and thus “scorning European safety concerns”.
Something must have got lost in translation. So here’s what happened: Russia conclusively demonstrated it’s capable of obliterating each and every one of NATO’s satellites and blind “all their missiles, planes and ships, not to mention ground forces” in case they decide to materialize their warmongering ideas.
Obviously those deaf, dumb and blind NATOstan armchair warrior clowns – fresh from their Afghan “performance” – won’t get the message. But NATOstan anyway was never accused of being partial to reality.
November 23, 2021
So those evil vodka-soaked Russians are deploying their forces right near the Ukrainian border and are about to attack. Right?
Well, today I want to begin by sharing a few very basic maps with you. First, here is a map of Russia with her military districts:
The most important thing to understand is that the city of Moscow is located in the middle of the Western Military District which, in other words, means that Moscow is located on in frontier/border/boundary (приграничный) MD.
During the Cold War, the Ukraine used to be considered a 2nd strategic echelon territory (see here for a detailed discussion of how the Soviet forces were structured) and Moscow was far away from any conceivable frontline.
Nowadays, the entire Ukraine is de facto NATO controlled territory. In other words, the capital of Russia is located less than 300 miles from the Russian border with the Ukraine (see map)
Here is another very revealing factoid: during the 90s, Russia did not have a single division-size fully manned unit deployed west of Moscow. Now Russia has fully reactivated her famous 1st Guards Tank Army as the strategic reserve for the Western Military District.
What do you think brought about this rather dramatic change?
Might that not have something to do with the fact that NATO forces are now within the driving distance (on a tank, nor car) to Moscow’s suburbs?
And I won’t even go into the distances between the NATO forces in the 3B and Saint Petersburg (less than 100 miles).
And, in the light of the maps above, what do you think the Russians, any Russian, would make of the NATO verbiage: “we will never move (politically) NATO to the east, but now we had to, we will never deploy NATO forces to the east, but now we had to, we will not deliver lethal weapons to the Ukraine, but now we had to, we will not accept (de jure and de facto) the Ukraine in NATO, but now had to, etc. etc. etc.“.
The truth is that the Empire has been preparing a war against Russia since at least the mid 90s and that these preparations dramatically accelerated in the past seven years.
Which makes me wonder, what did the leaders of the Empire expect the Russians to do? Move all their forces back into the Central Military District so as to not frighten the 3B+PU? Seriously?
The truth of the matter is much simpler: in case of war, the three western military districts (Northern, Western and Southern) would all three find themselves in the first strategic echelon.
BTW – the Northern Military District has now been augmented with the Northern Fleet Joint Strategic Command (Объединённое стратегическое командование Северный флот) with a status equal to a military district which could haev been called “Arctic Military District”). Its official designation now is “joint strategic territorial formation of the Russian Armed Forces performing the task of a military district“. Its forces would also play a key role in northern Europe and the northern Atlantic.
In case of war, Russian military districts become “fronts”, that is “unified commands of operational and strategic troops (forces) of the armed forces in the continental theater of operations” which is militaryspeak for an independent military force capable of waging a full-scale combined arms war. Please keep in mind that these fronts would also have, when needed, the support of rear military districts and units/forces of the strategic reserve.
So what does all this mean?
It means that while western politicians spent the past 30 years or so slowly encircling Russia, Russian force planners successfully reformed the Soviet/Russian armed forces (which were in a terrible shape in the 90s and in a very uneven shape during most of the 80s) into a military capable of taking on all of NATO at once and quickly and very painfully defeat it.
Remember all those super-dooper weapons Putin mentioned in 2018 which were initially dismissed as “bad cartoons” by western “specialists” and which are now mostly deployed? You cannot understand their real role and significance unless you also take into account the reform (I would even say redesign) of the Russian armed forces in the last decade or so. If you want a quick refresher on this topic, please see this analysis I wrote in 2016, that is two years BEFORE Putin unveiled the new Russian weapons systems!
Here is the key element to remember when considering what could happen next: should it come to a real, full-scale, shooting war between Russia and the West, ALL of these weapons systems and forces will be available to the Kremlin and most of them probably will be used in the very early phases of this war. And I am not only taking about Iskander missiles or Bastion/Bal coastal defenses, I am also talking about the First Guards Tank Army which is such a powerful formation that there is literally no western equivalent to it. Such heavy armored formation have such the forces and means of destruction which would make it possible to carry out an operational breakthrough of the enemy’s front and while the same time reliably overcoming of the entire operational depth of enemy defense. During WWII and the Cold War such formation were called “Shock Armies” (ударная армия). If you look at the entire order of battle of NATO forces they simply don’t have anything even comparable to such a force.
And so, yes, of course, NATO commanders are frightened by what they see, this is true, and quite understandable. What is not understandable is why these delusional idiots created the condition which left Russia no other choice than to be ready to fight a full scale war in Europe, including a nuclear one.
And what do they want the Kremlin to do now? To dismantle these forces or send them back behind the Urals maybe?
I will simply end here with a few questions which don’t seem to bother the western “specialists” (LOL!) very much:
Andrei
PS: Russian Defense Minister Shoigu just reported that in November the USAF used 10 strategic bombers coming in from both the east and the west to rehearse nuclear strikes on Russia and that they changed course only 20km from the Russian airspace.
PPS: also please make sure to check Andrei Martyanov’s analysis today (and check him on a daily basis!)
A lot of commentators have pointed out that the West really does not want a full scale war with Russia because this would, at best, be a suicidal proposition. True.
But there are some specific interests in the West which very much want to raise tensions as high as possible. Today I will list just a few: (partial list)
The US energy sector
The energy sector is deeply concerned about Biden’s “green” rhetoric, combined with the fact that OPEC+ countries are not obeying US demands about prices. Also, US shale gas is expensive. Should a war happen between Russia and the Ukraine, it would also certainly completely derail Russian energy exports to the EU which, in turn, would create a very high demand for US energy in Europe (and worldwide). This is an old US goal in Europe, to force the EU to purchase US energy even though Russian can provide it for a much better price
NATO
That one is simple: NATO has no raison d’être, but now NATO leaders can claim to be the only thing standing between the good, freedom loving EU countries and Putin’s hordes.
“Biden” option one
Biden’s ratings are almost as bad as Zelenskii’s. If an anti-Russian provocation is executed and Russia has to openly intervene in the Ukraine, Biden can become a “wartime President” and he can wave the flag which will hopefully distract from his immense internal problems and make him look more “presidential” (which in US parlance means “more willing to use force”).
“Biden” option two
Say no provocation takes place and with time, all this hysteria eventually fizzles out. Then Biden can claim that “he showed the Russkies who is boss” and “America’s” resolve “deterred and contained the Putin”, etc. That would be like a mouse claiming that it deterred a sleeping bear from attacking it. The proof? Well, the evil bear did not attack, did it? So what more proof do you need?
“Biden” option three
As I have mentioned in the past, there are signs that the US has farmed out the Ukraine to the Europeans, which in turn means that should a shooting war happen, and its outcome is not in doubt, “Biden” can say “we tried to help the Ukraine as much as we could, more than anybody else, but they cannot expect us to go to war with Russia to support them”. In other words, letting “Ze” lose a war against Russia is a very elegant way to get rid of “Ze” and to blame the current full-spectrum chaos in the Ukraine on him, while deflecting any criticisms of the USA.
UK+EU politicians
UK and EU politicians have been faithfully parroting all the anti-Russian propaganda and now they are stuck in their own ideological corner: they hate Russia, but they need Russian energy. This dilemma could be “solved” by a short but nasty war which would powerfully re-polarize the EU against Russia and, therefore, fully and totally place the EU in the iron grip of the USA.
US MIC
That one is obvious: the bigger and scarier the Russian boogeyman is, the more the peace-loving USA can be spend on “defense”. And remember that the goal of US “Congresspersons” (love that newspeak!) is not to contribute to a sane US foreign policy, but to get re-elected. That, in turns, means that keeping the US MIC up and running, a real financial bonanza for a country otherwise is terrible economic shape, is one of the best way to get reelected while projecting the image of a “patriotic” elected official. Ted Cruz anybody?
The US deep state
The US deep state has always hated Russia and has always fanned the flames of hysterical russophobia. The Neocons play a major role here, but they are far from being the only ones, it is quite clear that, besides the White House, the deep state also runs the Department of State, the CIA and the Pentagon.
The 3B+PU
It is now clear that the 3B+PU attempted to overthrow Lukashenko, and that they failed. How to better conceal the magnitude of this failure from the general public than to have a short and ugly war against Russia, especially since the 3B+PU fully understand that Russia will never attack them first. Here I have to make a special mention of Poland which currently feels like a giant, standing as they do, on the shoulders of the USA. For them, it is a win-win situation: if Russia is defeated, they get to proclaim themselves the best soldiers in the history of the universe, if Russia wins, then they can declare themselves the most victimized nation on earth. Either way, both option are a salvific manna from the heavens for Polish nationalists (who otherwise are in trouble with the EU).
‘Ze’
Zelenskii’s ratings are even worse than Biden’s. Most of his former allies have turned against him and unless something very dramatic happens, his political future is pretty much zero, he will be lucky if he manages to escape the Ukraine on time, that is before somebody decides to take direct action against him (lots of different interests in the Ukraine are now openly and deeply hostile to ‘Ze’).
The British military/security establishment
The Brits have imperial phantom pains and they feel relatively safe, being far away from the Russian-Ukrainian line of contact. They also feel that it is quite unthinkable to imagine that Russia would dare to actually strike at a British ship/aircraft or, even less so, at a location in the UK. That latter belief is quite mistaken, by the way, because the Russians also realize that should they, say, sink a UK ship, or even hit a military facility in the UK, the latter would have two basic options: 1) do nothing by themselves and ask Uncle Shmuel for protection 2) counter-strike against Russia themselves, which would only expose themselves to more Russian counter-strikes. If this sounds like a losing strategy to you, it is because it is. But for the country of Litvenenko, Skripal, Bellingcat, and “highly likely” reality is never an impediment to action. Besides, it really appears that the UK is run by a mentally deranged Prime Minister surrounded by petty bureaucrats and a senile Queen.
The folks nostalgic for the good old days of the white, western, empire
That’s folks like Josep Borrell and all those who wanted a unipolar world, run by the West, of course, where no country could dare defy the rule of the Single World Hegemon (don’t matter which country, as long as it is a western one). These folks are the ones who need to get whacked, hard, by the Russian military every century or so.
In truth, there are many more groups in the West who want some kind of war, some want it quick and small, others want it bigger, while others want to stop the escalation just short of actual war.
As always, what happens next will be the result of of the sums of the many vectors influencing that outcome: each party will pull towards its interests as much as possible, and the sum vector of all of these unofficial foreign policies will result in what many of us will call “US foreign policy”, in spite of the fact that as such, no such policy exists (other than a sum of these different vectors).
Lastly, is the Putin-Biden being canceled?
Yesterday Psaki said that she was not aware of any preparations made for a summit between Biden and Putin. Also, a quick look at the calendar makes me wonder: between the upcoming Summit for Democracy, Dec 9th-10th, and the period between the western holiday season (Dec 24th – 1 Jan) the time available to organize such a summit is shrinking quickly. Following the initial announcement, the rhetoric in both Russia and the USA about such a summit has become much more vague as if both sides now appear to have second thoughts about this.
And if that summit is planned for sometime in January, then this just leaves more time for the Ukronazis to come up with any provocation they like. If that happens, then any summit would the scrapped sine die anyway.
We can still hope that this summit will take place, and that would be an effective way for “Biden” to show to “himself” and his enemies (the other factions of the US power structure) that he, “Biden”, is still in control. A bad peace is always preferable to a good war. But with so many western interests vested into such a war, I am not very optimistic.
21 NOVEMBER 2021
OneWorld is publishing the full text of the interview that Andrew Korybko gave to Giorgio Cafiero on this topic, some excerpts of which the latter included in his recent article for Inside Arabia titled “Israel’s Working Relationship with Russia Inside Syria”.
1. What does Russia believe it can get for itself through cooperation with Israel in relation to Syria?
Russia and Israel agreed to a deconfliction mechanism in September 2015 shortly before the onset of the former’s intervention in Syria. The two sides hoped to mitigate the risk of midair incidents since Moscow bombs forces that it and Damascus regard as terrorists while Israel does the same, albeit the latter strikes Syria’s IRGC and Hezbollah allies that were invited into the country but which Tel Aviv regards as latent national security threats. Neither wants to clash with the other since that could dramatically escalate regional tensions. Moreover, Russia and Israel have excellent relations, particularly proven by the fact that Tel Aviv declined to sanction Moscow in solidarity with its Western allies all these years.
Russia officially condemns Israel’s strikes from time to time but hasn’t ever taken any action to stop them, whether directly or indirectly. The second-mentioned observation gained extra credence in recent years after Syria has thus far failed to use the S-300s that it belatedly received from Russia in late 2018 after the incident near Latakia that President Putin described as a tragic chain of circumstances. Even though Russia also officially acknowledges the legality and anti-terrorist purposes of the IRGC and Hezbollah’s presence in Syria, some argue that the Kremlin might discretely be hoping for Damascus to request their dignified but phased withdrawal (in this context, under the duress of Israeli airstrikes) as part of a compromise solution for ending the war.
2. To what extent is Russian-Israel cooperation vis-à-vis Syria problematic for Moscow’s relationship with Tehran?
Russia and Iran both fight against ISIS/ISIL/Daesh and other terrorist groups in Syria, but the first-mentioned mostly does so through the air and via the sharing of tactical intelligence to the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) while the second joins the SAA and their shared Hezbollah allies in on-the-ground battles. Moscow and Tehran therefore have the same interest in supporting Damascus, but they seemingly differ over their post-war vision for the country. The Kremlin believes that a series of mutual compromises is needed by all parties of the conflict while the Islamic Republic’s implied stance is that its Arab ally doesn’t necessarily have to concede anything to those whom it doesn’t regard as its political equals.
Even though Russia isn’t directly involved in Israel’s strikes, Iran and Hezbollah might not be happy that Moscow doesn’t ever tip them off when it’s informed of these attacks ahead of time per the reported protocol connected with their deconfliction mechanism. There might also be some questions about why Syria hasn’t yet used its Russian-supplied S-300s that were belatedly shipped to the country after the September 2018 incident for the reported purpose of deterring what was described at the time as further irresponsible Israeli behavior. Since then, Israel has continued to strike Syria, with Damascus only targeting its incoming missiles and not using the S-300s or other anti-air defense systems to strike the attacking jets themselves like many earlier expected.
3. Does Bashar al-Assad’s government believe that Russia can pressure Israel in ways which suit the interests of Damascus?
It’s unlikely that Syria seriously has those expectations, and in the off chance that it did, they’re unrealistic. The power dynamic actually seems to be the inverse: Israel believes that Russia can pressure Syria when it comes to requesting Iran and Hezbollah’s withdrawal. Moscow doesn’t want to take sides since it has great relations with both, albeit of a different nature and strategic impact with respect to advancing its interests, hence why it’s hitherto sat back and passively let everything unfold between them as it has.
Nevertheless, it’s precisely this passivity in spite of occasional condemnations of Israeli strikes that can be interpreted as tacitly advancing Tel Aviv’s interests since Moscow doesn’t do anything to stop its attacks against the IRGC and Hezbollah, not directly nor indirectly as was earlier explained. This leads some to wonder whether Russia discretely prefers for Israeli strikes to function as a form of pressure for getting Syria to request Iran and Hezbollah’s withdrawal as part of a larger regional compromise that the Kremlin might hope to broker.
4. What are Israel’s incentives to work with Russia? Is there any good reason for Israelis to believe that Russia will act against Iranian influence/power in Syria?
There’s a massive Russian diaspora living in Israel that has gradually come to command sizeable influence in society and some parts of the permanent bureaucracy, including the formulation of foreign policy. President Putin is also very well respected in Israel for his resolute opposition to anti-Semitism, fascism, and historical revisionism connected to World War II. Furthermore, as an influential Great Power that’s returned to West Asia with its Syrian intervention and is nowadays considered the kingmaker for resolving that country’s crisis, Israel has every reason to pragmatically expand its relations with Russia, especially since this could give it some leverage to better balance its historical relationship with the US.
Nevertheless, Israelis shouldn’t have any unrealistic expectations about Russia directly acting against Iranian influence in Syria. Doing so would risk undermining Moscow’s anti-terrorist campaign there as well as its bilateral relations with the Islamic Republic which are important for maintaining stability in the South Caucasus, Caspian Sea, and Afghanistan. The most that Russia is seemingly willing to do is “passively facilitate” regular Israeli strikes against the IRGC and Hezbollah by not interfering with them per the reported conditions of the September 2015 deconfliction agreement and speculatively not authorizing Syria to use the S-300s and other anti-air defense systems for targeting attacking Israeli jets (which could escalate tensions), which is still a lot.
The world is headed for war and has been headed that way for quite a while now. Several times, just at the brink, the West decided to pull back, but each time it did that its ruling elites felt two things: first, the felt even more hatred for Russia for forcing them to back down and, second, they interpreted the fact that no shooting war happened (yet) as the evidence, at least in their minds, that standing on the brink of war is a pretty safe exercise. And yet, a major shooting war is quite possible in any of the following locations, or even in several simultaneously: (in no specific order)
As we can see, all of these potential wars could potentially involve Russia, either directly (3,4,5) or indirectly (1,2,6).
Today, I want to look at Russian options in the direct involvement cluster of wars 3, 4 and 5.
The first thing which I think is important to note here is that while the Ukraine has no prospects of becoming a NATO member country, some NATO member states have already taken the following steps to turn the Ukraine into a de facto NATO protectorate:
I have already discussed the 5th point here, so I won’t repeat it all here. The important point in the list above in #4, the deployment of a small force of UK, Swedish, French, US and other NATO units into the Ukraine. Such small forward deployed forces are referred to “tripwire forces” whose mission is to heroically die thereby triggering an automatic (at least in theory) involvement of their country of origin into the war.
Before going any further, I think I want to share with you a list of axiomatic facts:
The first three are rather uncontroversial, so let’s look at the 4th point a little closer. Let’s begin by looking at Russian counter-attack options against the Ukraine. Roughly summarized, here are what I see as the main possible options for a Russian counter-attack against the Ukraine:
In purely military terms, these are all doable options. But looking at this issue from a purely military point of view is highly misleading. But first, about the NATO tripwire force.
US/NATO commanders are not too bright, but they are smart enough to understand that in case of a Russian counter attack these forces would be wiped out, thereby potentially involving all of NATO in what could potentially be a huge, continental war. That is not what they want.
So the real purpose of this tripwire forces would be to create a powerful enough anti-Russian hysteria to transform the (currently disorganized and deeply dysfunctional) West into a single, united, anti-Russian block. In other words, this tripwire force presents a political challenge to the Kremlin, not a military one. This being said, we need to look a a number of absolutely crucial non-military factors.
For these reasons I submit that it would be extremely dangerous for Russia to bite-off more than she can chew. As the best (by far) political analyst of the Ukraine, Rostislav Ishchenko, said in an interview last week: “Putin cannot save the Ukraine, but he sure can ruin Russia [if he tries]” – and I totally concur with him.
Whatever legal pretense can be wrapped around a Russian liberation of the Ukraine, the reality is that whatever land Russia does liberate, she will then own and have to administer.
Why would Russia want to reimpose law and order inside a black hole?
Then there is this: while historically Ukrainian are nothing but “Russians under Polish occupation”, the past 30 years have created a new, very different nation. In fact, I submit that we have witnessed a true ethnogenesis, the birth of a new nation whose very identity is russophobic at its core. Yes, they speak Russian better than Ukrainian, but speaking the language of your enemy did not prevent the IRA, ETA or the Ustashe from hating that enemy and fighting him for decades. In many ways, the modern Ukrainians are not only are non-Russians, they are anti-Russians par excellence: I think of them as Poles, with vyshivankas instead of feathers.
Crimea was solidly pro-Russian in all its history. The Donbass was initially rather happy to form part of the Ukraine, even in the early post-Maidan period when protests were organized under Ukrainian flags. Those flags were later traded for LDNR/Russian flags, but only after Kiev launched a military operation against the Donbass. And the further you go west, the clearer this distinction is. As one LDNR commander once put it, “the further west we go, the less we are seen as liberators and the more we are seeing as occupiers“.
The crucial point here is this: it does not matter what you, or I, or anybody else thinks about the constituent parts of the new Ukie national identity, we can laugh about it all we want, but as long as they take it seriously, and enough of them do, then this is a reality we cannot simply overlook or wish away.
The other point which is often overlooked is this: the Ukronazi Banderastan has already mostly collapsed. Yes, in central Kiev things look more or less normal, but all the reports from the rest of the country point to the same reality: the Ukraine is already a failed state, totally de-industrialized, where chaos, poverty, crime and corruption are total. The same is becoming true even for Kiev suburbs.
When I observe at how slow the Russian efforts to reorganize (really, fix) Crimea are, by no fault of the Russians, by the way, I recoil in horror at the thought of what it would take for Russia to re-civilize and re-develop ANY liberated part of the Ukraine.
Russia is typically compared to a bear, and that is a very good metaphor on many levels. But in the case of the Ukraine, I see Russia like a snake and the Ukraine like a hog: the snake can easily kill that hog (by venom or by constriction), but that snake cannot absorb that dead hog, it is just too big for it.
But here is the single most important fact about this entire situation: the Ukie Banderastan is dying, most of its body is already necrotic, so there is absolutely no need for the Russian snake to do anything about it at all (other than retreating into a corner ready to strike, in a coiled position, and loudly hiss: “attack me and you are dead!“. Putin already said that much.
Still, what if? What if the Nazis, egged on by their “democratic” patrons, do launch an attack? At that point Russia will have no other option but to strike, using her standoff weapons (missiles, artillery, long range cruise missiles, etc.). Since we can safely assume that the Russians have been rehearsing exactly such a counter-strike we can expect it to be swift and devastating. Targets list will include: advancing Ukie forces, airbases and any aircraft (manned or not) taking off, any Ukie boat approaching the area of operations, communication nodes, supply dumps, roads, bridges, fortified positions, etc. That is a lot of targets to be hit at once, but hitting them at once is also the safest and most effective method to quickly achieve the immediate goal of stopping any possible Ukie advance on the LDNR. This initial phase would last under 24 hours.
[Sidebar: modern warfare is not WWII, you won’t see thousands of tanks and a clear frontline but, rather, you will see strikes throughout the strategic depth of the enemy side, intense maneuver by fire and the use of battalion tactical groups]
Should that happen, it is likely that NATO forces would move into the western Ukraine, not to “protect” it from a Russian attack which will never come, but to break off as much of the Ukraine as possible and take it under control. The pretext for such a NATO move would be the destruction (partial or full) of the tripwire force. NATO might also declare its own no-fly zone over the western Ukraine, which the Russians will have no need to challenge. Finally, the West will happily unite against Russia, and sever all economic, diplomatic and other ties to “isolate and punish Russia”. Let’s not kid ourselves, this would hurt the Russian economy, but not in a manner sufficient to break the Russian will.
Then will come the big question: how far should Russia go?
I am confident that this has already been decided, and I am equally confident that Russia will not follow the options 4, 5 and 6 above. Option 1 is a given, we can take that to the bank (unless the LDNR forces alone are enough to stop a Ukie attack). Which leaves options 2 and 3 as “possibles”.
So here I want to suggest another option, what I would call the “southern route”: while the line of contact between the LDNR and Banderastan can be pushed somewhat further west, I do not think that Russian forces shuold liberate any of major cities in the central Ukraine (Kharkov, Poltava, Dneipropetrivsk, Zaporozhie, ). Instead, I think that they ought to envelop these forces by a move along the coast as far as all of Crimea (up to Perekop) and maybe even up to, but not into, the city of Kherson. Of course, in order to achieve this, it would be necessary to bring a large enough force into the Voronezh-Kursk-Belgorod triangle to force the Ukrainians to allocate forces to their northeast. The Russian Black Sea Fleet could also conduct operations all along the Ukrainian coast, including near Nikolaev-Odessa to force the Ukies to allocate forces to coastal defenses, thereby easing the load on the Russian forces moving towards Kherson.
[Sidebar: let’s be clear here, the LDNR forces along cannot conduct such a deep operation without risking envelopment and destruction. That operation can only be executed at a relatively low cost by the Russian armed forces, including the Black Sea Fleet]
In such a scenario, Belarus could turn into a “silent threat from the north” which would further forces the Ukies to allocate forces to their northern borders, making the latter feel like they are being enveloped in strategic pincers.
What about Odessa?
Odessa is a unique city in many ways, and is population is generally pro-Russian. It is also a city which would have a tremendous economic potential if managed by sane people. However, Odessa is also a symbolic city for the Nazis, and they have placed a great deal of effort into controlling it. Thus, Odessa is one of the few cities in the Nazi occupied Ukraine which could rise up against their occupier, especially while the Russian forces move along the coast towards it. Here is where Russia could, and should, get involved, but not by taking the city WWII style, but by backing and supporting pro-Russian organizations in Odessa (primarily by using her special forces and, when needed, the firepower of the Black Sea Fleet).
What would the outcome of such a war look like?
One the down side, the West would unite in its traditional hatred for Russia, and economically Russia would hurt. That is not irrelevant but, I submit, this scenario is already in the making and even if Russia does absolutely nothing. Hence, this inevitable reality ought to be accepted by Russia as a condition sine qua non for her survival as a sovereign nation.
In military terms, the Poles and their Anglo masters would probably “protectively liberate” the western Ukraine (Lvov, Ivano-Frankovsk). So what? Let them! There is no penalty for Russia from this. Besides, the hardcore Ukronazis will then have to deal with their former Polish masters now fully back in control – let them fully “enjoy” each other 
What about the rump Banderastan (we are talking about the central Ukraine here)?? It would end up being in even a worse shape than it is today, but Russia would not have to pay the bills for this mess. Sooner or later, an insurrection or civil war would take place, which would pit one brand of Ukies against another, and should either one of them turn towards Russia or the liberated parts of the Ukraine, Russia could simply use her standoff weapons to quickly discourage any such attempts.
So how close are we to war?
Short answer: very. Just listen to this recent press conference by Lavrov. And its not only Lavrov, a lot of savvy political commentators and analysts in Russia are basically saying that the issue is not “if” but “when” and, therefore, “how”. I think that the straw that broke the Russia’s patience’s camel back is the suicidal way in which the real (historical) Europeans have allowed the 3B+PU to set the agenda for the UE and NATO. Oh sure, if NS2 goes ahead, as it still probably will, the Russians will be happy to sell energy to Europe. But in terms of agency, the only power Russia is willing to talk to is the United States, as witnessed by the recent visits of Nuland and Burns to Moscow. Let’s make one thing very very clear here:
Russia does not want war. In fact, Russia will do everything in her power to avoid a war. If a war cannot be avoided, Russia will delay the onset of that war as far into the future as possible. And if that means talking to folks like Nuland or Burns, then that is something the Russians will gladly do. And they are absolutely right in that stance (not talking to the enemy is a western mental disorder, not a Russian one).
As I have been saying for almost 2 years now, the Empire is already dead. The USA as we knew them died on January 6th. But the post Jan 6th USA still exists and, unlike the Europeans, the US ruling classes still have agency. Just look at clowns like Stoltenberg, Borrell, Morawiecki or Maas: these are all petty bureaucrats, office plankton of you wish, which might have the skills to run a car rental agency, maybe a motel, but not real leaders that anybody in the Kremlin will take seriously. You can hate Nuland or Burns all you want, but these are serious, dangerous folks, and that is why Russia is willing talk to them, especially when the request for such negotiations have been made by the US side (the Russians can’t really talk to clowns like Biden or Austin, which are just PR figures).
One thing needs mentioning here: the people of the rump-Banderastan and what will happen to them.
Actually, I think that the Ukraine is totally and terminally unsalvageable and the only good plan for anybody still living there is to do what millions of Ukrainians have already done: pack and leave. Since most of the unskilled Ukrainian labor force lived in the western regions of the Ukraine, they will naturally prefer moving to the EU to work as cabbies, plumbers, maids and prostitutes. Likewise, since most of the skilled Ukrainian work force comes from the southern and the eastern Ukraine, they will either be content with being liberated by Russia or they will move to Russia to work as engineers, medical doctors, IT specialists or even construction workers. Russia has a need for such culturally close and qualified work force and getting jobs (and passports) for them will be a no brainer for the Kremlin. True, what will be left of this post-Banderastan Ukraine won’t be a pretty sight: a poor, corrupt, country whose people will struggle to survive with lots of silly political ideas floated around. But that won’t be Russia’s problem anyway while the main threat to Russia, a united Banderastan becoming a NATO training polygon right across the Russian border, will simply evaporate, dying on its own toxic emissions. And if more Ukrainians want to move to Russia (or the free Ukraine), then the LDNR and Russian authorities will be able to decide on a case by case “do we wants these folks here or not?“. Those Ukrainians who have remain real Ukrainians will be welcome in Russia while the Ukronazis will be denied entry and arrested if they still try.
Addendum: the two powers with imperial phantom pains and dreams of war
I am, of course, talking about the UK and Poland, two minor actors who compensate for their very limited actual abilities with a never-ending flow of vociferous declarations. Mostly, they are just “playing empire”. Both of these countries know exactly that they once were real empires and why they are pretty irrelevant today – they blame much of their own decay on Russia and hence their dream is to see Russia, if not defeated, then at least given a bloody nose. And, of course, standing on the shoulders of the USA, both of these countries think of themselves as giants: they sure act the part very great gravitas and pomp.
Finally, their leadership is degenerate enough (inferiority complex compensated by a narcissism run amok) to lack even the basic common sense of wondering whether poking the Russia bear is a good idea or not. More than any other NATO members, these yapping countries need a good smackdown to bring them back to reality. Whether this smackdown will come in the form of some incident in the Ukraine or whether that will happen elsewhere is impossible to predict, but one thing is sure: the UK and Poland are (yet again!) the two countries which want, I would even say, need, a war with Russia more than anybody else (example one, example two). I find it therefore rather likely that, sooner or later, Russia will have to either sink a UK/Polish ship or shoot down a/several UK/Polish aircraft which will show to the world, including the Brits and the Poles, that neither the US, nor NATO nor anybody else is seriously going to go to war with Russia over the Empire’s underlings. Yes, there will be tensions, possibly even local clashes, and tons and tons of threatening verbiage, but nobody wants to die for these two hyenas of Europe (Churchill forgot to mention one), and nobody ever will.
Conclusion: war on the horizon
Right now, we are already deep inside a pre-war period and, like a person skating on thin ice, we wonder if the ice will break and, if it does, where that will happen. Simply put, the Russians have two options:
They have been trying the former as best they can to do the first for at least 7 years if not more. Putin did trade space for time, and that was the correct decision considering the state of the Russian armed forces before, roughly, 2018. Trump’s election was also God-sent for Russia because while Orange Man did threaten the planet left and right, he did not start a full-scale war against Russia (or, for that matter, Iran, China, Cuba, Iran and the DPRK). By late 2021, however, Russia has retreated as far as she could. The good news now is that Russia has the most modern and capable military on the planet, while the West is very busy committing political, cultural and economic suicide.
According to US analysts, by 2025 the USA won’t be able to win a war against China. Frankly, I think that this ship has already sailed a long time ago, but that semi-admission is a desperate attempt to create the political climate to circle the wagons before China officially becomes the second nation the USA cannot defeat, the first one being, obviously, Russia (I would even include Iran and the DPRK is that list). Hence all the current Anglo posturing in the Black Sea (which is even far more dangerous for US/NATO ships than the China Seas) is just that: posturing. The main risk here is that I am not at all convinced by the notion that “Biden” can rein in the Brits or the Poles, especially since the latter are both NATO members who would sincerely expect NATO to protect them (they should ask Erdogan about that). But, of course, there really is no such thing as “NATO”: all there is the US and its vassal states in Europe. Should the two wannabe empires trigger a real, shooting war, all it would take is a single Russian conventional missile strike somewhere deep inside the continental USA (even in a desert location) to convince the White House, the Pentagon or the CIA “get with the program” and seek a negotiated solution, leaving the Brits and the Poles utterly disgusted and looking foolish. I don’t think anything else can bring those two countries back to a sense of reality.
So yes, the war is coming, and the only thing which can prevent it would be some kind of deal between Russia and the USA. Will that happen? Alas, I don’t see any US President making such a deal, since however is in power is accused by the other party of “weakness”, “being a Russian asset” and all the rest of the flagwaving claptrap coming out of all the US politicians, especially in Congress. One possibly mitigating factor is that the US politicians are also dead set on confrontation with China, including during the upcoming Olympic games, and if these tensions continue to escalate, then the US will want Russia to at least not represent a direct threat to US interests in Europe and the Pacific. So maybe Putin and Xi can play this one together, making sure that with each passing day Uncle Shmuel gets even weaker while Russia and China get even stronger. Maybe that strategy could avoid a war, at least a big one. But when listen to the verbiage coming out of the UK+3B+PU, I have very little hope that the nutcases in Europe can be talked down from the edge of the precipice.
A Must see: What if Hezbollah Was Defeated?
Sayyed Nasrallah: All Options Open in Case of Israeli Attack
Sayyed Nasrallah: “March 14” Bets Are Falling, Syria to Pass Conspiracy
The enemy is this American Administration and its “tool” not “ally”in the region, Israel, Sayyed
‘Resistance Stronger than Ever… Lebanon Will Protect Oil Wealth’
Resistance Might Have to Occupy Galilee- Netanyaho; You can't !"Opposition Will Not Name Hariri; New Stage Has Begun
Day When you Could Threaten Us Are Over
‘Any Hand Seeking to Detain Any of Our Mujahideen Will Be Cut’
Iran's Project is the Palestinian's, Lebanon's and Arab's Project
Mideast Peace Talks Are "Born-Dead"
Our Freedom, Sovereignty Depend On Our Elements of Power
Videos: Hariri Assasination Evidence Expose
Israel behind Hariri's Assassination
Israeli Hand That Attacks Army Will Be Cut Off
Lebanon Pushed into Sensitive Stage from STL Gate - video
Nasrallah on The Resistances Wounded Day -Video Unite, Back Turkey, Take Part in Freedom Flotilla 2 -Video
Nasralla: In Next War, Only Fleeing Israelis Will Be Safe.
We’ll hit back and we are capable of it,
And More
