Tag Archives: Ukraine-Russia War

Glenn Diesen: One Year On… Why the Ukraine War Spells Doom For U.S. Hegemony and the NATO Alliance, by Finian Cunningham

The war hasn’t met the military or economic expectations of the U.S. and its proxy Ukraine. From Finian Cunningham at strategic-culture.org:

Russia is not backing down, but it can’t be said for the U.S. and its allies who are increasingly looking at a weakened geopolitical position.

After one year of war in Ukraine, Russia has not collapsed in the dramatic way that the United States and its European NATO allies were confidently predicting.

U.S. President Joe Biden in visits to Ukraine and Poland this week hailed the “unity” of NATO and the transatlantic alliance.

The reality is the Western transatlantic alliance is showing signs of fragmenting because of the immense strain on Europe’s economy due to European governments following Washington’s hostile policy towards Russia.

Street protests across Europe are growing against NATO and governing elites seen to be servile to American policy. This is not just about the war in Ukraine. The whole Western capitalist order is shaking at its foundation, largely because of American hegemonic ambitions. The Ukraine war is merely a manifestation of underlying geopolitics.

Contrary to Western great expectations, the Russian economy is holding up strongly and its military operations in Ukraine seem to be gaining the upper hand. This is in spite of the U.S.-led NATO bloc “throwing everything they can” at Russia to defeat it, from endless supplies of weaponry to support the Kiev regime, to endless rounds of economic sanctions in an attempt to collapse the Russian economy.

Glenn Diesen is a Professor at the University of South-Eastern Norway. He is an expert in international politics and Russian foreign relations.

Diesen explains that Russia has long been preparing for confrontation with the United States and its European allies. Ever since the U.S.-backed coup in Kiev in 2014 and the Western betrayal of the 2014 and 2015 Minsk peace agreements, Moscow quietly realized that it would have to reinforce its economy to withstand the anticipated Western showdown.

Continue reading

Russia Has No Strategy for Winning This War, by Rolo Slavskiy

It may be a very long war. From Rolo Slavskiy at unz.com:

If you look at and analyze the Not-War on the strategic level, well, you can’t help but come to the conclusions and talking points presented by the pessimists. If you’re honest, that is.

But the narrative has now shifted and the discussion is being framed on the tactical level. That is, the events around Bakhmut are what the Russian news and the commentators are talking about now. But the action around Bakhmut is a tactical one. There are three levels to military operations, at least in the Russian school.

Tactical

Operational

Strategic

And if you were hoping for a quick conclusion to the Bakhmut offensive, well. I’ve got more bad, but totally predictable, news for you.

URA:

The founder of Wagner PMC Yevgeny Prigozhin denied the information about the encirclement of 1.5 thousand Ukrainian soldiers near Bakhmut (Artemovsk). His comment is published by Prigozhin’s press service in the official telegram channel. He noted that the Ukrainians are putting up strong resistance and Bakhmut (Artemovsk) will not be taken in the near future.

“In all directions, the enemy is becoming more active, pulling up more and more new reserves. Every day, from 300 to 500 new fighters approach Bakhmut in all directions. Artillery fire intensifies every day,” said Yevgeny Prigozhin. He drew attention to the inappropriateness of positive promises that will not come true in the near future.

At the moment, fierce battles are being fought near Bakhmut (Artemovsk). Serious losses of the Armed Forces of Ukraine near Bakhmut were reported by the American media, 360 TV channel reports . Yevgeny Prigozhin said that the capture of Bakhmut would be the key to Russia’s victory in the Ukrainian conflict, the National News Service reports . Acting head of the DPR Denis Pushilin said that the Russian military surrounded 1.5 thousand Ukrainian soldiers near Bakhmut .

Continue reading

NATO Members Float Plan For Negotiations Amid “Growing Doubts” Ukraine Can Retake Territory, by Tyler Durden

The U.S. and NATO are looking for a face saving way out. Good luck with that. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

Update(1525ET): NATO has “answered” China’s Ukraine peace proposal unveiled earlier in the day by previewing a peace plan that three major Western allies reportedly have in the works. The plan hinges on Ukraine forging a defense pact with NATO (though stopping short of formal membership), and in return Kyiv would enter talks with Moscow, likely with territorial concessions on the table.

It’s said to be motivated in part by Western leaders having “growing doubts” over Ukraine’s ability to reconquer territory – thus a more ‘realist’ and pragmatic perspective might be taking hold one year into the stalemated conflict. The Wall Street Journal broadly outlines the German, France, UK plan as follows

Germany, France and Britain see stronger ties between NATO and Ukraine as a way to encourage Kyiv to start peace talks with Russia later this year, officials from the three governments said, as some of Kyiv’s Western partners have growing doubts over its ability to reconquer all its territory.

U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak last week laid out a blueprint for an agreement to give Ukraine much broader access to advanced military equipment, weapons and ammunition to defend itself once the war ends. He said the plan should be on the agenda for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s annual meeting in July.

But if the plan hinges on creating a ‘fortress Ukraine’ through ramped up arms deliveries, including tanks and possibly jets, then it’s unlikely to sit well with Moscow – especially if the plan falls short of making territorial concessions. WSJ continues: 

The officials were careful to say that any decision on when and under what conditions any peace talks start is entirely up to Ukraine. Sunak on Friday said the West should give Ukraine arms that would give it a “decisive advantage” on the battlefield, including warplanes.

Continue reading

Patrick Lawrence: Russia’s New Reset with the West

The new reset is Russia’s recognition that the West has been double-dealing and cannot be trusted. From Patrick Lawrence at consortiumnews.com:

Putin’s announcement of a suspension of the last extant U.S.-Russia arms-control pact this week was a carefully attenuated move. It was also a big deal, but not in the way Western officials encourage us to think it is.

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Feb. 23 in Moscow during Defender of the Fatherland Day, which marks the founding of the Red Army. (President of Russia)

News that Russia will suspend its participation in the New START nuclear arms pact, which arrived Tuesday via Vladimir Putin’s annual address to the Federal Assembly, had to land hard.

This suspension is not a withdrawal, as various Western media reports initially described it, and it is temporary, as the Russian president described it. It is a carefully attenuated move, then.

But it is a big deal nonetheless, although it is not a big deal in the way Western officials encourage us to think it is. It is a big deal in ways that Western officials do not want us to think about. 

“With today’s decision on New START,” NATO Secretary–General Jens Stoltenberg said at a joint press conference in Kiev with Dmitry Kuleba, the Ukrainian regime’s foreign minister, “the whole arms control architecture has been dismantled.”

This is the baldest, farthest-out-there take on Moscow’s step back I have been able to find. The New York Times initially ran this quotation but dropped it from its news report within a few hours, wisely. Now you have to find it in The Kyiv Independent, the not-independent propaganda daily backed by various Western governments.

What Stoltenberg was doing in Kiev, given NATO claims it is not prosecuting a war against Russia, is a good question. Then again, lots of people of Stoltenberg’s stature travel to Kiev these days.

President Joe Biden just took a train from Poland to Kiev to have a look at the progress or otherwise of the war the U.S. is not waging against Russia. Let us not miss: This kind of thing has much to do with Putin’s New START decision, as he made clear in his remarks Tuesday. 

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, passing through Athens, termed Moscow’s decision “unfortunate and irresponsible”— an improvement on Stoltenberg’s deranged assessment.

Continue reading

The World Has Enough Trouble, by James Howard Kunstler

The trouble is created by our rulers and borne by us. From James Howard Kunstler at kunstler.com:

“[This] is what happens when you invent your own reality. You end up bamboozling yourself. — The Sirius Report on Twitter

    If you think about it at all, can you come up with any good reasons why our country has involved itself in the Ukraine war? To defend democracy, many say? An emptier platitude does not exist in the vast slippery lexicon of spin. To thwart Russia’s imperial overreach? You apparently have no clue about Ukraine’s history, ancient or modern. To incite an overthrow of the wicked Putin by his own people? The Russian president is more popular there now than even John F. Kennedy was here in 1962.

     There actually are no good reasons for what we are doing in Ukraine, only bad reasons. Mainly, stoking the war there diverts Americans’ attention from our own problems, which is to say the titanic failures of America’s political establishment. The USA is falling apart from a combination of mismanagement, malice, and negligence. Our economy is a tottering scaffold of Ponzi schemes. Our institutions are wrecked. The government lies about everything it does. The news industry ratifies all the lying. Our schoolchildren can’t read or add up a column of numbers. Our food is slow-acting poison. Our medical-pharma matrix has just completed the systematic murder and maiming of millions. Our culture has been reduced to a drag queen twerk-fest. Our once-beautiful New World landscape is a demolition derby. Name something that hasn’t been debauched, perverted, degenerated, or flat-out destroyed.

Continue reading

Marketing Ukraine’s Reconstruction to Fuel the War, by Laura Ruggeri

You can’t have reconstruction without ruination. From Laura Ruggeri at strategic-culture.org:

The fantastical narratives of recovery and reconstruction were concocted years earlier as part of several ‘reform plans’ for Ukraine.

Immediately after the start of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine, key players in the coalition supporting Ukraine, as well as transatlantic financial institutions and think tanks, were already discussing the governance and financing of Ukraine’s reconstruction. They invariably framed it as a historic opportunity for the country: like a phoenix rising from the ashes, Ukraine would become a beacon of freedom, democracy and rule-of-law, a testimonial for Build Back Better, a “green and digital economy” success story; the country would leapfrog several stages of economic and governmental development and its economic growth would replicate Germany’s post-war boom. Unsurprisingly, the more recent and far less inspiring examples of Western-led ‘reconstruction’ in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan didn’t earn mention.

The speed with which fantastical narratives of recovery and reconstruction were churned out shouldn’t surprise anyone because they had been concocted years earlier as part of several ‘reform plans’ for Ukraine. One could say they are hardwired into the overall strategy of this proxy war against Russia as they are aimed at securing political, military and financial support for Ukraine to prolong the war rather than an incentive to negotiate peace. All those who produce these narratives are directly or indirectly linked to governments that are involved both in the destruction of Ukraine and the Ukrainization of Europe, a process designed to fully control, militarize and loot the Old World.

Continue reading

The Dire Significance of Putin’s Feb 21 Speech, by David Sant

David Sant makes a strong argument for some extremely unsettling conclusions. From Sant at thesaker.is:

On Tuesday, February 21st President Putin gave a speech that was expected to be very significant. After it was delivered, however, most pundits said he didn’t say anything we didn’t already know. Most of them focused on his announcement of the withdrawal from the START II treaty. However, he said something far more significant.

An Existential Threat

What Mr. Putin said, when read through the lens of international law, should be chilling to the West.

We would do well to remember that Mr. Putin majored in international law. His speech made a legal case against NATO.

First he listed, by my count, 30 different ways in which the Western nations have attacked Russia. These included the expansion of NATO to Russia’s borders, support of terrorists in Russia, economic war, terrorist sabotage of the Nordstream Pipeline, financing of the coup and war in Ukraine, directly assisting Ukraine to attack targets in Russia including Russia’s nuclear bombers, and plotting to destroy and partition Russia into pieces.

Nestled in the middle of these was an important statement.

“This means they plan to finish us once and for all. In other words, they plan to grow a local conflict into a global confrontation. This is how we understand it and we will respond accordingly, because this represents an existential threat to our country.”

Continue reading

Biden Goes All in on Proxy War Against Russia, by David Stockman

It’s an irrelevant consideration in Washington, but Ukraine’s war with Russia has absolutely nothing to do with the defense and security of the United States. From David Stockman at antiwar.com:

No, Joe, that’s not Hunter you’re sniffing. But Zelensky is a pretty good substitute – every bit as corrupt, drugged-up and delusional as the First Son.

So hug away. You have already proven (repeatedly) that there is no betrayal of America’s true homeland security you will not eagerly embrace.

And, yes, unlike the manifold images on Hunter’s laptop, this picture of the purported hero of the free world snorting cocaine was probably photo-shopped. But so what?

How would our addle-brained President tell the difference!

After all, he apparently can’t even tell the difference between friend and foe. That’s surely the implication of the great Seymour Hersh’s latest bombshell about the pipeline bombings.

According to Hersh’s Deep State sources, the guy shuffling around the Oval Office is so befuddled that he actually ordered the bombing of the $25 billion and strategically crucial Nord Stream pipelines. The latter, of course, are half-owned by Germany, which is by far Washington’s most important and powerful European ally, and have been the economic conduit for cheap Russian gas that has fueled the German industrial economy.

To be sure, Biden apologists keep blathering about his intrepid stand for the postwar”liberal international order”. But given that Washington has been a serial invader, occupier and destroyer of dozens of countries since WWII, that’s a risible joke. Still, who in their right mind would incinerate the economic lifeline of an ally, hoping that the damage just might possibly ricochet and hit an enemy, too?

Indeed, Joe Biden said in no uncertain terms before the event that he would do it, even if he hasn’t yet explicitly confessed. But he doesn’t need to because there are exactly zero alternative suspects.

Continue reading

SCOTT RITTER: Arms Control or Ukraine?

The Ukraine-Russia War has scuppered all hopes of arms control agreements between the U.S. and Russia. From Scott Ritter at consortiumnews.com:

As Russia suspends New START, the sooner the Ukraine war ends, the sooner the U.S. and Russia can work to preserve arms control to avert the ultimate disaster.

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s Feb. 21 address to Federal Assembly. (Kremlin)

Russia experts and national security specialists will be poring over the text of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s address on Tuesday for some time to come, trying to divine hidden meaning.

The fact is, however, Putin’s speech was something rarely heard in Western political circles —unvarnished statements of fact, set forth in a straightforward, surprisingly easy-to-understand manner.

In a world where Western politicians regularly dissemble to shape perception, even if the underlying “facts” are not true (one need only refer to President Joe Biden’s infamous phone call with former Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, in July 2021, for an example), Putin’s speech was a breath of fresh air — no hidden agendas, no false pretense — no lies.

And on the issue of arms control, the truth hurts.

“I have to say today,” Putin announced near the end of his address, “that Russia is suspending its participation in New START. I repeat, not withdrawing from the treaty, no, but merely suspending its participation.”

The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), signed in 2010 as the outcome of negotiations between U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, ostensibly caps the number of strategic nuclear warheads that each country can deploy at 1,550; limits the number of deployed land-and submarine-based missiles and bombers used to deliver these warheads to 700; and caps at 800 the deployed and non-deployed ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers and heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments.

Continue reading

Putin’s speech and what it means. By Guiseppe Filotto

Remarkably for a politician, Vladimir Putin is pretty much a straight shooter. From Guiseppe Filotto at gfilotto.com:

Read the whole thing here, direct from the Kremlin, because I would not trust a single Western Media source with telling me the sky is blue at this point.

In essence, however, Putin is doing simply what I stated Russia was and would continue to do, back in October 2022 (well, long before that, but I spelt it out on this blog for the masses then).

And that is: Using verifiable facts (aka known as truth) as their propaganda. Is EVERYTHING Russia says on the level? Maybe not. I am sure some tiny elements here and there might be actual propaganda, but by and large, what Putin says is pretty closely related to the reality of facts, events and objective observations of reality.

In the long term, especially when you are dealing with actual missiles and guns and flying bullets, that kind of “propaganda” is invincible.

Because even the retarded norms start to see it after a while.

Here is a small excerpt of his speech.

The recent Munich Conference turned into an endless stream of accusations against Russia. One gets the impression that this was done so that everyone would forget what the so-called West has been doing over the past decades. They were the ones who let the genie out of the bottle, plunging entire regions into chaos.

Continue reading