By Pepe Escobar, posted with permission and first posted at Asia Times
Ukraine and Russia may be on the brink of war – with dire consequences for the whole of Eurasia. Let’s cut to the chase, and plunge head-on into the fog of war.
On March 24, Ukrainian President Zelensky, for all practical purposes, signed a declaration of war against Russia, via decree No. 117/2021.
The decree establishes that retaking Crimea from Russia is now Kiev’s official policy. That’s exactly what prompted an array of Ukrainian battle tanks to be shipped east on flatbed rail cars, following the saturation of the Ukrainian army by the US with military equipment including unmanned aerial vehicles, electronic warfare systems, anti-tank systems and man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS).
More crucially, the Zelensky decree is the proof any subsequent war will have been prompted by Kiev, debunking the proverbial claims of “Russian aggression.” Crimea, since the referendum of March 2014, is part of the Russian Federation.
It was this (italics mine) de facto declaration of war, which Moscow took very seriously, that prompted the deployment of extra Russian forces to Crimea and closer to the Russian border with Donbass. Significantly, these include the crack 76th Guards Air Assault Brigade, known as the Pskov paratroopers and, according to an intel report quoted to me, capable of taking Ukraine in only six hours.
It certainly does not help that in early April US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, fresh from his former position as a board member of missile manufacturer Raytheon, called Zelensky to promise “unwavering US support for Ukraine’s sovereignty.” That ties in with Moscow’s interpretation that Zelensky would never have signed his decree without a green light from Washington.
Controlling the narrative
Sevastopol, already when I visited in December 2018, is one of the most heavily defended places on the planet, impervious even to a NATO attack. In his decree, Zelensky specifically identifies Sevastopol as a prime target.
Once again, we’re back to 2014 post-Maidan unfinished business.
To contain Russia, the US deep state/NATO combo needs to control the Black Sea – which, for all practical purposes, is now a Russian lake. And to control the Black Sea, they need to “neutralize” Crimea.
If any extra proof was necessary, it was provided by Zelensky himself on Tuesday this week in a phone call with NATO secretary-general and docile puppet Jens Stoltenberg.
Zelensky uttered the key phrase: “NATO is the only way to end the war in Donbass” – which means, in practice, NATO expanding its “presence” in the Black Sea. “Such a permanent presence should be a powerful deterrent to Russia, which continues the large-scale militarization of the region and hinders merchant shipping.”
All of these crucial developments are and will continue to be invisible to global public opinion when it comes to the predominant, hegemon-controlled narrative.
The deep state/NATO combo is imprinting 24/7 that whatever happens next is due to “Russian aggression.” Even if the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) launch a blitzkrieg against the Lugansk and Donetsk People’s Republics. (To do so against Sevastopol in Crimea would be certified mass suicide).
In the United States, Ron Paul has been one of the very few voices to state the obvious: “According to the media branch of the US military-industrial-congressional-media complex, Russian troop movements are not a response to clear threats from a neighbor, but instead are just more ‘Russian aggression.’”
What’s implied is that Washington/Brussels don’t have a clear tactical, much less strategic game plan: only total narrative control.
And that is fueled by rabid Russophobia – masterfully deconstructed by the indispensable Andrei Martyanov, one of the world’s top military analysts.
A possibly hopeful sign is that on March 31, the chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, General Valery Gerasimov, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, talked on the phone about the proverbial “issues of mutual interest.”
Days later, a Franco-German statement came out, calling on “all parties” to de-escalate. Merkel and Macron seem to have gotten the message in their videoconference with Putin – who must have subtly alluded to the effect generated by Kalibrs, Kinzhals and assorted hypersonic weapons if the going gets tough and the Europeans sanction a Kiev blitzkrieg.
The problem is Merkel and Macron don’t control NATO. Yet Merkel and Macron at least are fully aware that if the US/NATO combo attacks Russian forces or Russian passport holders who live in Donbass, the devastating response will target the command centers that coordinated the attacks.
What does the hegemon want?
As part of his current Energizer bunny act, Zelensky made an extra eyebrow-raising move. This past Monday, he visited Qatar with a lofty delegation and clinched a raft of deals, not circumscribed to LNG but also including direct Kiev-Doha flights; Doha leasing or buying a Black Sea port; and strong “defense/military ties” – which could be a lovely euphemism for a possible transfer of jihadis from Libya and Syria to fight Russian infidels in Donbass.
Right on cue, Zelensly meets Turkey’s Erdogan next Monday. Erdogan’s intel services run the jihadi proxies in Idlib, and dodgy Qatari funds are still part of the picture. Arguably, the Turks are already transferring those “moderate rebels” to Ukraine. Russian intel is meticulously monitoring all this activity.
A series of informed discussions – see, for instance, here and here – is converging on what may be the top three targets for the hegemon amid all this mess, short of war: to provoke an irreparable fissure between Russia and the EU, under NATO auspices; to crash the Nord Steam 2 pipeline; and to boost profits in the weapons business for the military-industrial complex.
So the key question then is whether Moscow would be able to apply a Sun Tzu move short of being lured into a hot war in the Donbass.
On the ground, the outlook is grim. Denis Pushilin, one of the top leaders of the Lugansk and Donetsk people’s republics, has stated that the chances of avoiding war are “extremely small.” Serbian sniper Dejan Beric – whom I met in Donetsk in 2015 and who is a certified expert on the ground – expects a Kiev attack in early May.
The extremely controversial Igor Strelkov, who may be termed an exponent of “orthodox socialism,” a sharp critic of the Kremlin’s policies who is one of the very few warlords who survived after 2014, has unequivocally stated that the only chance for peace is for the Russian army to control Ukrainian territory at least up to the Dnieper river. He stresses that a war in April is “very likely”; for Russia war “now” is better than war later; and there’s a 99% possibility that Washington will not fight for Ukraine.
On this last item at least Strelkov has a point; Washington and NATO want a war fought to the last Ukrainian.
Rostislav Ischenko, the top Russian analyst of Ukraine whom I had the pleasure of meeting in Moscow in late 2018, persuasively argues that, “the overall diplomatic, military, political, financial and economic situation powerfully requires the Kiev authorities to intensify combat operations in Donbass.
“By the way,” Ischenko added, “the Americans do not give a damn whether Ukraine will hold out for any time or whether it will be blown to pieces in an instant. They believe they stand to gain from either outcome.”
Gotta defend Europe
Let’s assume the worst in Donbass. Kiev launches its blitzkrieg. Russian intel documents everything. Moscow instantly announces it is using the full authority conferred by the UNSC to enforce the Minsk 2 ceasefire.
In what would be a matter of 8 hours or a maximum 48 hours, Russian forces smash the whole blitzkrieg apparatus to smithereens and send the Ukrainians back to their sandbox, which is approximately 75km north of the established contact zone.
In the Black Sea, incidentally, there’s no contact zone. This means Russia may send out all its advanced subs plus the surface fleet anywhere around the “Russian lake”: They are already deployed anyway.
Once again Martyanov lays down the law when he predicts, referring to a group of Russian missiles developed by the Novator Design Bureau: “Crushing Ukies’ command and control system is a matter of few hours, be that near border or in the operational and strategic Uki depth. Basically speaking, the whole of the Ukrainian ‘navy’ is worth less than the salvo of 3M54 or 3M14 which will be required to sink it. I think couple of Tarantuls will be enough to finish it off in or near Odessa and then give Kiev, especially its government district, a taste of modern stand-off weapons.”
The absolutely key issue, which cannot be emphasized enough, is that Russia will not (italics mine) “invade” Ukraine. It doesn’t need to, and it doesn’t want to. What Moscow will do for sure is to support the Novorossiya people’s republics with equipment, intel, electronic warfare, control of airspace and special forces. Even a no-fly zone will not be necessary; the “message” will be clear that were a NATO fighter jet to show up near the frontline, it would be summarily shot down.
And that brings us to the open “secret” whispered only in informal dinners in Brussels, and chancelleries across Eurasia: NATO puppets do not have the balls to get into an open conflict with Russia.
One thing is to have yapping dogs like Poland, Romania, the Baltic gang and Ukraine amplified by corporate media on their “Russian aggression” script. Factually, NATO had its collective behind unceremoniously kicked in Afghanistan. It shivered when it had to fight the Serbs in the late 1990s. And in the 2010s, it did not dare fight the Damascus and Axis of Resistance forces.
When all fails, myth prevails. Enter the US Army occupying parts of Europe to “defend” it against – who else? – those pesky Russians.
That’s the rationale behind the annual US Army DEFENDER-Europe 21, now on till the end of June, mobilizing 28,000 soldiers from the US and 25 NATO allies and “partners.”
This month, men and heavy equipment pre-positioned in three US Army depots in Italy, Germany and the Netherlands will be transferred to multiple “training areas” in 12 countries. Oh, the joys of travel, no lockdown in an open air exercise since everyone has been fully vaccinated against Covid-19.
Pipelineistan uber alles
Nord Stream 2 is not a big deal for Moscow; it’s a Pipelineistan inconvenience at best. After all the Russian economy did not make a single ruble out of the not yet existent pipeline during the 2010s – and still it did fine. If NS2 is canceled, there are plans on the table to redirect the bulk of Russian gas shipments towards Eurasia, especially China.
In parallel, Berlin knows very well that canceling NS2 will be an extremely serious breach of contract – involving hundreds of billions of euros; it was Germany that requested the pipeline to be built in the first place.
Germany’s energiewende (“energy transition” policy) has been a disaster. German industrialists know very well that natural gas is the only alternative to nuclear energy. They are not exactly fond of Berlin becoming a mere hostage, condemned to buy ridiculously expensive shale gas from the hegemon – even assuming the hegemon will be able to deliver, as its fracking industry is in shambles. Merkel explaining to German public opinion why they must revert to using coal or buy shale from the US will be a sight to see.
As it stands, NATO provocations against NS2 proceed unabated – via warships and helicopters. NS2 needed a permit to work in Danish waters, and it was granted only a month ago. Even as Russian ships are not as fast in laying pipes as the previous ships from Swiss-based Allseas, which backed down, intimidated by US sanctions, the Russian Fortuna is making steady progress, as noted by analyst Petri Krohn: one kilometer a day on its best days, at least 800 meters a day. With 35 km left, that should not take more than 50 days.
Conversations with German analysts reveal a fascinating shadowplay on the energy front between Berlin and Moscow – not to mention Beijing. Compare it with Washington: EU diplomats complain there’s absolutely no one to negotiate with regarding NS2. And even assuming there would be some sort of deal, Berlin is inclined to admit Putin’s judgment is correct: the Americans are “not agreement-capable.” One just needs to look at the record.
Behind the fog of war, though, a clear scenario emerges: the deep state/NATO combo using Kiev to start a war as a Hail Mary pass to ultimately bury NS2, and thus German-Russian relations.
At the same time, the situation is evolving towards a possible new alignment in the heart of the “West”: US/UK pitted against Germany/France. Some Anglosphere exceptionals are certainly more Russophobic than others.
The toxic encounter between Russophobia and Pipelineistan will not be over even if NS2 is completed. There will be more sanctions. There will be an attempt to exclude Russia from SWIFT. The proxy war in Syria will intensify. The hegemon will go no holds barred to keep creating all sorts of geopolitical harassment against Russia.
What a nice wag-the-dog op to distract domestic public opinion from massive money printing masking a looming economic collapse. As the empire crumbles, the narrative is set in stone: it’s all the fault of “Russian aggression.”
“To contain Russia, the US deep state/NATO combo needs to control the Black Sea – which, for all practical purposes, is now a Russian lake. And to control the Black Sea, they need to “neutralize” Crimea.”
Reading this, I get the impression that the author is perpetuating the myth that Sevastopol is Russia’s only access to the Black Sea and the only port for its Navy…
The Russian Navy does not “need” Sebastopol but on the other hand it is imperative that Russia protects the population of Crimea, this is what has been done since 2014.
Not to mention all the investments made in infrastructure, investments that are never ‘listed’ and ‘catalogued’ by the Western media, who prefer the simplistic image: Russia=occupiers…
Tell us, Kristof, how not controlling the port and base at Sevastopol the Russian Fleet would have the same strength in the Black Sea and into the East Med.
By the way, are you an Admiral or naval expert.
Because what you present in your comment defies 400 years of naval history.
So, we await your answer.
And if the RF didn’t have Sevastopol, we can assume they wouldn’t have Crimea either. You do understand that, don’t you?
Another thought: you are way out on a flimsy limb and sawing like a lumberjack on steroids.
One option is to just state you don’t know what the hell you proposed. Hint.
@Larchmonter, thanks for proving my point.The idea that without Sevastopol the Russian Navy loses its only base in the Black Sea is a myth.
I repeat the Russian Navy does not need Sebastopol, since the beginning of the 2000s the decision was taken to build another base, ironically this base was 90% ready in 2014…
ps: From 2013 https://jamestown.org/program/the-future-of-the-russian-black-sea-fleets-bases-novorossiysk-versus-sevastopol/
same source, this time in 2007 from another article :
“Admiral Vladimir Masorin, commander-in-chief of Russia’s naval forces, announced ambitious plans to expand the Russian Black Sea Fleet’s forces and missions during his just-completed visit to the fleet’s main base at Sevastopol in Ukraine. The plans focus on developing Novorossiysk as a major naval base on Russian territory, retaining Sevastopol (past 2017 if it possible), and restoring the Fleet’s capability to reestablish a presence at least to some degree in the Mediterranean.
The 1997 basing agreements (valid until 2017) do not allow Russia to add ships to its Fleet on Ukraine’s territory. Meanwhile, Russia is building up the Novorossiysk base on the Russian coast, in immediate proximity to the Crimea. It is constricting new piers and other port installations there, as well as barracks for marine infantry (ship-borne landing troops) and installations for land-based aviation.”…
crimea to the russia people is vastly more than a seaport. its symbolic importance goes back centuries and this alone demonstrates obtuse thinking suggesting its relevance is essentially naval related.
by quoting the jamestown org your “tell” is showing!
@tedrichard, You may not “appreciate” the source I quoted and I understand you, but the facts are there.
I am not the one reducing Crimea to a port but that is the narrative that the media served us in 2014 and they continue to do so.
As these media “forget” to do a factual state of affairs on the infrastructure in Crimea before 2014 vs after.
Access to Crimea is “free” for all foreign journalists with visas for Russia, but they refuse to come and see the reality of the situation in Crimea preferring to write their articles from Moscow…
ps: On a personal note, during my visits to Crimea after 2014, I could never be 100% “happy”, the cause? I was always thinking about those who were trying “to live” in the Donbass… only a few hundred kilometres away from the joy of life on the beach and the basements to protect themselves from the bombs …
You are too ignorant or a troll to further this thread.
A pathetic attempt. Transparent trolling.
Ignorant? my observations are not based on reading articles but on regular visits to Crimea since 2007…
Before 2014 Crimea was abandoned by Kiev and was in a state of decay, the simple crossing between Port Kavkaz and Kerch took you back in time, since 2014 efforts have been made to rehabilitate the infrastructure and develop the region. (I am not talking about the bridge, but about everything that has been done inside).
If you don’t want to read the two articles mentioned above, you can do your own research on Google or even better on Yandex and you will find more information about the port of Novorossiysk and the fact that the decision was taken in the early 2000s.
You can also do your research regarding the evolution of the infrastructure in Crimea since 2014, there are different sources but the “easiest” is to browse the dedicated pages on the Skyscrapercity forum.
The Future of the Russian Black Sea Fleet’s Bases: Novorossiysk Versus Sevastopol
Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 10 Issue: 157
Maksym Bugriy September 6, 2013
Kristol
Ok, I’ll take the bait (pun intended)
What exactly is your point?
You reference an article from 2013?
A lot have water has passed under the bridge in that time.
(What bridge? Possibly the Kerch – you know, the one that did not exist in 2013).
What I take from your (ancient history) article is that years prior to the Euromaiden, years prior to the incineration of Ukrainian nationals at the Odessa trades hall, there existed tensions and disputes between Ukraine and Russia regarding Russia’s lease and occupation of its historic Sevastopol base.
Like all tenants being harassed by their landlord, the Russians were making plans – as it says in your article- in the eventuality that the Ukrainians kicked them out. (Renege on the contract).
So?
Whatever the state of play in 2013, it’s long since been overtaken, and in 2021 Russia now owns Sevastopol, Simferopol, and the entire Crimea.
Just how much blood Ze and his masters intend to shed to change this, is the discussion here.
ELi5 why an article from 2013 is relevant?
@White Whale, In addition to the 2013 article there is the one from 2007, I remind you that the decision to develop a base for the Navy on Novorossiysk was taken in the early 2000s.
To “understand” my point of view, just read this part of Escobar article “To contain Russia, the US deep state/NATO combo needs to control the Black Sea – which, for all practical purposes, is now a Russian lake. And to control the Black Sea, they need to “neutralize” Crimea” and all the MSM who in 2014 and after associated Crimea with Russia’s only gateway to the Black Sea… thus completely ignoring the reality on the ground…
The advantage, if I may say so, of such a narrative was to make Russia’s protection of the local population completely disappear, substituting only a material interest: access to the sea…
But Russia does not “need” this access in Crimea, it has enough ports on the Black Sea, not to mention the two on the Sea of Azov (Rostov and see more recently the development of Taman: https://www.portseurope.com/port-of-taman-russias-bulk-cargo-champion-in-the-black-sea/ )
@White Whale, in order to “illustrate” my previous comment, just a quick search on Google with “crimea only access to black sea” and you can find those article posted 2 days ago and in February ( I will not post the links, no need), In both articles, the narrative ignores the ports of Novorrossiysk, Tuapsé, Sochi,…
“What Putin didn’t mention in his speech that in Crimea’s history, the arrival of Russians meant war, deportations and militarization of the strategic peninsula that wedges into the Black Sea providing easy naval access to the Bosporus and northern Turkey, Russia’s old adversary.”
Here it’s from an other source, February 2021: “The annexation of Crimea means Russia now shares direct maritime borders not only with NATO member Turkey but also with Bulgaria and Romania, two other alliance members.”
To receive some insights from this discussion, it seems that by having both an expancing Novorossiysk port while holding on to Sevastopol port RF is confident they can assure theirs and everyone’s security and reasonable peaceful interests in the Black Sea region.
To understand that especially since 2013-2014 they don’t consider a good partner-like approach like declaring “we make Novorossiysk” the greatest and only port we’ll use and graciously leave Sevastopol to become a USA/NATO war games base.
RF “needs” this scenario to not happen.
@Larchmonter, by the way can you tell me where the “Tartus or Syrian Express” is loaded?
Новороссийская военно-морская база
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sx0b9cZtZw
Thank you for the update and key info! I would like to suggest that the view of US and UK allied together may be off. I think plenty of recent events suggest a widening rift (if not all out warfare of some description) between the US and UK, involving vaccines, carbon pricing, infrastructure (billionaire v. billionaire, perhaps?) to military (Poland?)
NATO = UK + USA pushing an agenda with Poland and Baltic states as HiWis.
Germany, France, Turkey, Greece, Romania, Bulgaria do not want to be involved.
Chances are NATO will fracture. China has a Silk Road which is pure antithesis of Mackinder and only by blowing up Ukraine can US-UK hinder the diminution of their maritime power and isolation
Ever Given proved the point recently – I still cannot shake the thought it was intentional and the 25 crew were engaged in strange antics pre-blockage
Greece is probably the most pro-Russian (and pro-Serbian) country in the “collective West” (read: NATO/EU) given their obvious religious ties. The Greeks were the most vocal against the bombing of Belgrade in 1999. If even they were heard…
It’s strange but that sounds to me like the little boy who sing in the dark to reassure himself.
M. Escobar is a great specialist of China. Nowhere we can read or ear the China position on that.
M. Escobar, what about China in this affair please ?
What gives you the idea that Pepe Escobar is a great specialist on China?, (Removed. No attacking the author. Mod.) though in a general sense he is pro-China. That opinion is one I developed since reading his column on Asia Times Online back in the early 2,000’s.
However, I for one do like Pepe as a geo-political columnist. Only wish he would spend some time developing depths on topics that he takes interest in.
Please make comments based on the post not the author. Mod.
Wow, Mr. Escobar. Amazing work. The link to the Ischenko article is much appreciated. People said the Al Assad missile attack was the US’s Suez Moment but this Ukronazi-neocon provocation will go so badly for them, it will be impossible to ignore as the decline will accelerate. The US’s Hail Mary Pass is really, really not going to go well for them. I pray that civilians are spared.
Good to see a writer who pinpoints the real objective of the empire in these goings on. To keep USA in, Russia out and the Germans down.
Many people are perplexed seing USA pushing Russia into the arms of China. Seing as China is the main geopolitical competitor of USA. However, US no1 priority is and has always been to keep Europe subjugated. A closing between Germany and Russia would be a mortal threat to the main USA powerbase, the continued subjugation of Europe.
And a major goal of the Americans (which they got following the English) is to make sure that Germany and Russia are also on opposite teams.
Just to add to the Dejan Beric (Serbian sniper) video, for the non- Serb speakers:
While he says they are expecting an attack in early May, he also says several times “if there is one” I.e. an attack. Then he says “if they [the Ukrainians] are smart, there won’t be one”.
He says, quite matter-of-factly, that if they do attack, it will be “catastrophic” for them.
He says Russia moved all their military equipment, troops in broad daylight so that the Ukrainians can see for themselves the firepower they are up against.
Btw, does anyone have the second part of his video?
So it seems the gambit by the US (in their minds) is clear:
1) Provoke the RF into attacking Ukraine, and hopefully bleeding it a bit.
( Ideally get it to take all of Ukraine and the burden that represents, but I don’t think anyone believes Putin will fall for that.)
2) Gain the propaganda victory that ensues from being able to claim “aggression” on its part, hopefully damaging Russia’s reputation in the eyes of the world.
3) Split Germany from Russia and get NS2 canceled.
4) Take over whatever’s left of Ukraine entirely by Nato bases right up to the border with the RF.
What choices does Russia have, but to take a least some of Ukraine back to establish defensible borders and stop the slaughter of its people?
However, I think in the long run this will backfire on the US/West, as most of their hairbrained plans usually do.
What will happen eventually is that Germany will have to make peace with Russia for its energy, the world will wake up to the games the US plays, and the Ukraine will turn into a economic nightmare that the West cannot fix.
@US guy, at present the Ukraine already is an economic black hole…………..something the west will never be able to fix, they break good, but they never fix, they don’t know how. Ukraine’s only hope is to return as a chastened prodigal child to the Motherland.
Cheers, M
@Sean: “Ukraine’s only hope is to return as a chastened prodigal child to the Motherland.”
That same Motherland brought up her Western Ukraina to be Mother’s little industrial and agricultural helper; in the good old days before Khruschev’s hare brained bid for independence, and Gorbachev’s naive trust in Uncle $cam as agreement-capable.
Germany is not as important as 20 years ago. Currently Rural wants to buy an insolvent specialist aluminium fabricator in Germany which unions accept, liquidator accepts, but German Economics Ministry delays and imputes “defence” issues. Yet KUKA robotics firm was sold to China and that was core to vehicle manufacture and clearly has military application. No objection from Berlin.
Anyway how can Germany afford aluminium production with the highest electricity prices in EU ?
Germany no longer has such a key role industrially as its investments are abroad – Turkey, Asia, and its technology is no longer so advanced.
Just as in early 1950s when Stalin offered Adenauer a United Neutral Germany akin to Austria it is USA that cannot let Germany go. It needs the footprint and bases for its global projection.
Much of this is US-UK policy of keeping satellites in place.
Anyway how can Germany afford aluminium production with the highest electricity prices in EU ?….
they cant! you mentioned it your self Rheinfelden is insolvent and others will follow, Aluminium produced in GerMoney will be ending very soon
Especially when NS2 will be stopped, lets hope for GerMoney they will wake up in time….
Excellent fresh perspective.
Thank you.
Now to wait for the Greens to get into power and complete Germany’s destruction.
“However, I think in the long run this will backfire on the US/West, as most of their hairbrained plans usually do. “
“What’s implied is that Washington/Brussels don’t have a clear tactical, much less strategic game plan: only total narrative control.”
Leaving aside that in any interaction total control is never an option, the dispositions you describe afford significant opportunities for others whilst the opponents perceive that the dispositions afford flexible opportunities to them.
Wonderful Pepe, as always.
So to wrap it up:
All of the North, Arctic – check
BAltic states, ignored to death – check
Belarus, in fold – check
NAvalny shitting his pants – check
Ukraine, not a chance in hell – check
F#ck the EU? OK – check – feel free to stop NS2, hell, we stop ALL oil, gas flows. How about that? Go suck on it!
Any thoughts re Russia is finally getting fed up with Turkish lack of action in Syria and seems more determined to show it by intensifying action e g in Idlib….trying to show Turkey no messing with us and what the heck you doing with Ukraine????? Can the Qatar Turkey connection be broken?
Can the head of the snake Nato be dealt with?
The White House is not asking the U.S. public what it thinks about participating in a war in Ukraine. Which is about normal for Biden & Co. The U.S. has many problems, and the establishment has a legitimacy crisis, but even now, instead of tackling these problems, or trying to shore up their legitimacy, they are still messing around in other countries. There may be quite a bit of public discontent if the U.S. gets involved in a new war in Ukraine.
Washington is also deluded if it thinks it can trash Ukraine without consequences. If Ukraine disintegrates, it will reflect on the United States, offering more evidence that the U.S. is toxic, and no longer creates things but just destroys.
The narrative of ‘Russian aggression’ was drawn by the notorious forgery known as the ‘Testament of Peter the Great’. It remained ‘set in stone’ like in the Tables of Moses as the law to be followed by ‘Europe’s’ foreign policies ever since. Even as justification for the defense of ‘European’ values’ of ‘democracy, free speech, ‘rule of law’, etc’ against ‘Asian’ despotism and arbitrary.
Everyone looks at what Russia could lose if war breaks out.
Knowing Putin and the Russian Generals as we do from their actions since 2008, I think the US will lose NATO if the Ukies go into action.
Putin wants to destroy NATO or see it broken up from internal contradictions.
Destroying Ukraine thus is the poison that will cripple NATO.
For 30 years NATO has dreamed of getting Ukraine as a platform to alter Russia’s defenses and drastically impact the nuclear weapons Russia has.
The US/NATO have lost Donbass and they have lost Crimea. Next they will lose most of Ukraine and likely any hope of holding Odessa, much less getting into the Azov Sea.
NATO is the target Putin is sighting.
By indirect action, destroying the Ukraine military and taking Novorossiya and leaving the mess of Ukraine to the EU, Russia hands NATO a major defeat that will shatter its members.
Everything changes when the Ukies get destroyed. Most of all, NATO is fractured.
And with that, the US is massively weakened.
Putin and his Generals want the Ukies to launch. It’s their game plan. The Time is right.
Larchmonter445
Well spoken. The following sentence in the article is open for debate:
“By the way,” Ischenko added, “the Americans do not give a damn whether Ukraine will hold out for any time or whether it will be blown to pieces in an instant. They believe they stand to gain from either outcome.”
A defeated Ukraine will see a chain reaction inside the country. Analysts have sine 2017 been stating that it will implode into three parts. I just don’t see how the US will gain by a Ukrainian defeat. Does it intend to rally Western Europe to it’s side ? No way. Germany can hardly wait to leave NATO, and if it does, this will lead to a chain reaction inside the Alliance.
Will Ukraine attack ? It will depend what Washington decides. If Washington has grasped what the consequences of a Ukrainian attack will be, then there is a chance that war might be avoided, although the chance is pretty slim. As things stand now, Ukraine will probably attack, the actual attack depending on geographic conditions, ie. on the ground being dry enough to accept tanks and self propelled artillery.
Hi Larchmoneter445. Long time reader of the site. Question: what firepower would the Russians employ against a large Ukraine tank attack? Also, if the gloves come off, is it likely thermobaric Tor-1/2 systems are employed?
Thanks.
Some echoes of ‘Ukrainian’ history resound in my mind:
July 8, 1708, the eradication of the Bulavin Rebellion
July 8, 1709, the Battle of Poltava.
Excellent as usual.
I think the key statement (out of many) is this: “It certainly does not help that in early April US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, fresh from his former position as a board member of missile manufacturer Raytheon, called Zelensky to promise “unwavering US support for Ukraine’s sovereignty.””
It makes all the difference when the revolving-door regulator-capture reframing is not “USA/nato vs Russia” — but rather the more accurate “Raytheon (et al) vs Russia.”
The modern truth is: Russia and China have governments in control of policy and industry. The USA (and therefore also its yapping poodle collection) have Industry setting policy and running government for their shareholder benefits — aka ‘we the people’ with shares to hold.
I’m sorry to say Rus this is what you get if you don’t nip s*it in the bud. Ukraine showed enough symptoms of craziness ever since the yellow revolution and all Rus could do was try poison Yuschekno. That was the canary or trial baloon or whatever. Right then, right there tons of things could have been done to figure out what was necessary. Rus has one dimensional thinking and its own echo chamber and philosophy that has been proven not worth the time ever since SSR collapsed. But, what it did was do more of same.
Rus is no more a socialist county than Sweden is. Why can’t the smartest people there, like VVP explain it to it’s people and it’s near abroad? That’s all it takes and they can secure their near abroad better and for ever!
I think it is possible that the military ignoramuses’ in NATO / US are using the Ukrainian military build up to see if they can track where the serious hidden western Russian military assets really are — from arms and troop movements. I think that the Western US / NATO militaries are panicked that the West doesn’t have the economic juice to prolong the conflict much longer and they may be mapping for a “first strike” using the Ukrainian forces as bait into showing where the Russians are bunkered down. This year the moves with the NATO forces are sweeping — B1′ bombers into Norway. B2 bomber’s. into Portugal — today the fifth fleet went into the Red sea. It (and I hope that it is) could be a bluff, but it might really be gameboard positioning. With the new missile launchers being set up near the western Russian border –you just never know. I enjoy living so I hope I am wrong. At the very least it is serious. and it might be a much larger picture than just the eastern Ukraine.
Great to see Pepe is on my wavelength 🤣🤣👍
In open thread #4 I posted about Ze and a large Ukrainian delegation visiting Qatar.
I made exactly the points Pepe makes about the “interesting” bilaterals that were signed.
Serbian Girl, another long time contributor here, was also alert to implications.
Qatar, as paymasters of ISIS, has never received the spotlight it deserved.
Ze and the Ukrainian visit, at this pivot point in the “game” is significant.
Jihadis, takfiris, mudjadeen, “moderate rebels”, whatever branding you want to give them, have been useful (bloodthirsty) idiots in the Great Game for at least a century.
So it was kinda synchronistic that today the CIA decided to tweet and boast of its sponsorship of the Afghan Mudjadeen …… having “hand on the bible, Boy Scout honour” denied exactly that since the last 1970s.
A century prior, the British had already proven how expedient it could be to use radical Islamics as a proxy across the Middle East and into Central Asia.
Why and how does Saudi Arabia even exist? (Rhetorical)
I am not a subscriber to eschatological theories, but golly.
With all the diverse “players” lining up to take the (battle) field, it does indeed seem we live in “exiting” times, even if not exactly “end” times.
https://www.rt.com/usa/520281-cia-tweet-arming-taliban/
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-polytics/3221499-ukraine-qatar-sign-15-joint-documents.html
Mujihadeen and Taliban not same.
That called Mujihadeen fought Soviet were much Arab radicals
supported from outside.
Mujihadeen is the plural form of Mujihad,the ARABIC term for one engaged in Jihad
Taliban formed 1994 against Mujihadeen excesses, overthrew leadership.
Taliban are predominate Pashtun and related Tribes which make 80% of Afghan population.
Ok, yes, Mudjaden and Taliban are different. But they are feathers from the same bird.
Both are progeny of the CIA.
The final scene of Rocky 3, has “This movie is dedicated to the Mudjadeen, the proud freedom fighters of Afghanistan”. They were US pets, up until when they weren’t.
And Taliban means “student”.
The CIA went in and set up the madrassas – religious schools- where the strand of Islam was taught.
The textbooks were written and printed in the US. This was policy under Zbigneiw Brezinzski – who vehemently denied doing exactly what the Soviets accused him of, until a decade later, he wrote “The Grand Chess” and boasted he’d funded some “Afghan Arabs” to “give the Soviets their Vietnam”
My point is Perfidious Albanon and later the US, have created, then used extreme Islamics as blunt bloody tools of Empire.
The branding of the pet extremists morphs and changes depending on which theatres of war they are used. But *used* they are.
Mujihadeen and Taliban not same.
That called Mujihadeen fought Soviet were much Arab radicals
supported from outside.
Mujihadeen is the plural form of Mujihad,the ARABIC term for one engaged in Jihad
Taliban formed 1994 against Mujihadeen excesses, overthrew Mujihadeen leadership.
Taliban are predominate PASHTUN and related Tribes which make 80% of Afghan population.
“Merkel explaining to German public opinion why they must revert to using coal or buy shale from the US will be a sight to see.”
I seem to remember a reader (Serbian Girl?) reminded us some time ago that Germany has a lot of under-used coal, and many under-employed German miners would be glad to see a halt to imported gas. Germany was also foremost in chemical conversion of coal to gas (Fischer Tropsch process). Merkel might have an easier time converting German public opinion (as to why they must revert to using coal) than Pepe thinks.
Very good analysis from Pepe Escobar.
It not so often that the geopilitical analysts fully understand the energy aspects of the problem:
As Pepe says the “energiewende” is a total failure. and Germany desperatly needs cheap natural gaz. The internal opposition against the use of very bad coal is very strong.
On the other hand Pepe has also understood that Germany needs to make commercial deals with China.
A savage concurrency has already destroyed its windmill industry.
NS2 is not so important for Russia.
I just love watching the way intelligent people dance around the biggest elephants in the room. The more intelligent the person, the more complex the Dance of Avoidance (DOA).
“On March 24, Ukrainian President Zelensky, for all practical purposes, signed a declaration of war against Russia, via decree No. 117/2021.
The decree establishes that retaking Crimea from Russia is now Kiev’s official policy. That’s exactly what prompted an array of Ukrainian battle tanks to be shipped east on flatbed rail cars, following the saturation of the Ukrainian army by the US with military equipment including unmanned aerial vehicles, electronic warfare systems, anti-tank systems and man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS).”
“Ukrainian president Zelensky” did not sign anything. There’s a trans-Atlantic control-cable that runs from the US State Department (Joe Biden & Co.) right into the back of Zelensky & Co.’s brain. In reality, it was the US State Department (USSD) that signed that decree. It is the USSD that intends to take Crimea back from Russia and establish US sovereignty over the entire area of the USSD’s drone-nation “Ukraine”.
So that decree is “official”, and the USSD’s other drone-nations all say that they, too, essentially support drone-nation-automaton “Zelensky’s” decree. (Once again, the “International Community” all sing the same song. Other Big News: the earth is still rotating on its axis and, therefore, the sun will continue rise and set today in earth’s mid-latitudes.)
This situation leads to an obvious question. Beyond the US (“Ukraine”) first demanding that Russia leave Crimea and piling on more and more sanctions, if Russia does not agree to voluntarily hand over Crimea’s keys to the US (“Ukraine”), including Sevastopol, what is the first military step the US (“Ukraine’) might take to kick Russia out of Crimea?
If I were employed at a high level in the USSD, here’s an option that I’d very seriously be considering right now as a perfectly logical follow-up to my department’s (“Zelensky’s”) decree — for quite obvious reasons, and assuming for the moment that it actually can be done, destroy or render unusable a mile or two of “Putin’s” new Kerch Strait vehicle and RR bridge closest to Crimea, at a time when there is the least possible amount of traffic, and observe Russia’s response. (Of course this destruction will be preceded by some serious, evidence-free, CIA/NYT/BBC/OPCW/WADA/etc.-verified “Russian aggression” that necessitates a forceful, but intelligently restrained, response from “the International Community”.) How will the gentle men Mr. Putin and Mr. Lavrov respond to the International Community’s relatively-restrained, “retaliatory response” of destroying or rendering unusable a couple of miles of bridge that, according to the International Community, should never have been built in the first place?
А если на все посмотреть с высоты повыше.
Китай сверяет часы с Лавровым, с южной Кореей. Лавров в Индии. Все ждут действий у границ с Украиной, для санкций и отмены NS2. Россия накаляет риторику.
Китай паралельно проводит операцию на Тайване и в Мьянме.
Мир возбуждается, но на два фронта действовать не может.
Китай ожидает санкции и блокада в мировой экономике. Все ожидают экономического коллапса в Китае. Китай проецирует экономику во внутрь страны и страны его поддерживающие.
Нефть поступает из Ирана и России.
Мир понимает, что без товаров из Китая очень плохо. От России на время отстают. Северный поток с повестки перемещается вниз. Все озадачены Китаем.
yandex translation … mod
And if you look at everything from a higher height.
China checks the clock with Lavrov, with South Korea. Lavrov in India. Everyone is waiting for action at the borders with Ukraine, for sanctions and the cancellation of NS2. Russia is heating up the rhetoric.
China is conducting a parallel operation in Taiwan and Myanmar.
The world is excited, but it cannot act on two fronts.
China expects sanctions and a blockade in the global economy. Everyone expects an economic collapse in China. China projects the economy into the interior of the country and the countries that support it.
The oil comes from Iran and Russia.
The world understands that without goods from China it is very bad. They are lagging behind Russia for a while. The Nord Stream is moving downwards from the south. Everyone is puzzled by China.
Everyone expects in vain an economic collapse in China.
Возможно перевод с русского на английский некорректен.
Китай не ожидает коллапс. Опыт России с Крымом доказывает, что можно выдержать натиск мирового алигорхата. У Китая больше инструментов и свободы действий.
Google translation,MOD:
Perhaps the translation from Russian into English is incorrect.
China does not expect a collapse. Russia’s experience with Crimea proves that it is possible to withstand the onslaught of the world aligorkhat. China has more tools and more leeway.
Great pièce by Pépé.
Today i red a post by a good source which made some sense. Bearing in mind Minsk II in 2015 and (a) Obama reminding that RF has the escalatory dominance in Ukraine and (b) Medvedev who said a Swift ban would be the nuclear option, the post argued that the US/NATO are expectating a partition novorossiya (incl. Odessa, Nikolaev, even Dnipropetrovsk) vs What’s left of Ukraine.
Geographical détails do not matter, even with the most optimistic scénario, what hé was saying is that once settled, they would go for full sanctions/embargo and Iron curtain 2.0.
Back to Swift, i Hope Russia developed it’s own network since 2015, or at the very least they have a contingency plan via other payement networks like SIA Colt. Same with CLS and most clearing Platforms or gateways like LCH, CME, Markit, etc…
I really Hope Donbass people will prevail and that Merkel really owns Macron so they Can take their distances from NATO and preserve their national interests… The timing provided by Pépé for the completion of the pipeline will be Key to determine when the ukrops will launch their attack(s).
I have to say that no NATO country can now say they believe in Free Trade, since NS2 is a clear example of that and the product supplies is far, far cheaper than any US LNG.
So the US believes in forcing highly expensive products on satrapies in Europe and orders them to turn on a supplier who offers reliable product on much more favourable terms.
Do remind who it is who believes in a ‘rules-based international order’?
The rules right now are: ‘expensive trumps cheap, thuggery trumps negotiations, Russophobic racism trumps humanity’.
Go and ask those self-righteous twerps on the Hill and in BLM how US behaviour toward Russia would play if it were the KKK against black people???