This is the single most excellent analysis of the NATO/Ukraine/Russia war I have read to-date. And believe me, I've read many.
Although it encapsulates everything I have ever written on the topic, it does so better and more comprehensively than I ever have. I would go so far as to say it does so better than anyone of whom I am aware ever has.
- The draft on the drawing board, or is that the chopping block?
- Delayed as several forecasts have been made, particularly the last essay. All appear correct so far and more of a matter of seeing how they play out.
- The tea leaves point to a wider war into Europe. No frozen conflict here.
No, it isn't a well thought out article, For example, "...the Russians have no interest in physically occupying [western Ukraine], and the Poles might actually help to bring security to it." This is delusional.
There is no possibility of a negotiated settlement to Biden's Ukraine War. The Russian Foreign Ministry has recently raised the strong possibility of severing all contact with Little Britain and Canada. Russia and China won't even pickup the phone when Washington calls because Washington's promises, statements, and treaties are asswipe. Sabotaging the Minsk agreements by refusing to apply any of its terms while treacherously using these treaties as means of rebuilding AFU weapons and units while continuing to murder 14,000 ethnic Russians. This murderous artillery shelling continues to this day.
Sen Graham recently called slaughtering Russians the best money the US has ever spent. Every other brain-dead US-NAYOYO politician has made similar statements as Washington's plan since 1993 has been to use Ukraine as a means of destroying Russia. It took the illegal 2014 CIA coup to produce Bandera Nazi monsters to implement this plan's "inherent irrationality".
An extremely accurate plan for Russian submission using former Warsaw Pact countries as NATO forward bases. This plan describes using Partners for Peace, and, NATO admissions as creeping threats to Russian security.
Ukrainian destruction was contemplated months into Clinton’s first year. It’s an absolutely chilling strategy displaying callused indifference to Ukraine’s fate. This proposal is currently implemented in Ukraine now, and in eastern Europe since 1993. The author, Posen, describes the whole concept as “inherent irrationality”. No wonder Clinton and the Demo subhumans pushed this project hard. I can only assume the Republicans held out for China as their slice of the geopolitical genocide pie.
Alexis de Tocqueville : “I know of no country in which there is so little independence of mind and real freedom of discussion as in America.”
Noam Chomsky: ”Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. Media.”
So there won't be any part of Ukraine left for the White West and their chosen Nazi monsters to occupy. The facts are Ukrainians despise their leaders and so would rather become hopeful refugees than fight for corrupt oligarchs and their Nazi death squads.The world will be a better and safer place when Russia wins this war. Putin has heard all the promises, watched the treaties signed, and treacherously ignored. He knows of racist genocides committed and planned. It won't be the vacuous excuses of White Western media cloaca and academics that define this war’s end. It will be blunt demands and brutal facts on the ground that outline Ukraine's public defeat. This war will end with NATO's humiliation, and the Global South ecstatically dancing in the streets. This war will end with Russian tanks shaking the ground at western borders.
Voltaire: “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”
Vladimir Zelenskiy, “I hope that the Congress will approve this financial assistance for our crimes… country”.
This is, again, very good stuff. Thanks a lot for your effort Aurelien. After reading this it becomes clear my feeling while watching the latest performance of A. Blinken, when he was trying to explain the objectives of the counteroffensive in some interview. He looked very much like the proverbial classroom pupil that, having paid no attention during the class, tries to provide an answer that looks reasonable or logic but anyone that had paid attention could see it was based on utter ignorance on the subject. He said something like "to provide Ukraine a strong position in the negotiation table" and "force Putin to negotiate". Shameless for a person in his position.
Here is one thing that I never did quite understand: why has Finlandization become a bad word? For what it is worth, Finland did quite well (especially for a former ally of Nazi Germany during World War II) through its enforced neutrality. It did not become a Soviet satellite like Poland or Hungary. It was left pretty much alone as long as it didn't antagonize the Soviets. But Finns seem to think that experience as utterly humiliating....
In my opinion, the Finns will receive a huge slap in the face for their sneaky behavior from the Russians in the not too distant future ! I will not feel sorry for them ! They worked for it!
Your reply is nonsense - "woke communist retards"!
The government of Finland is as far from being 'communist' as presumably you are. This sort of idiotic comment is usually made by US citizens who have been brought up to believe that 'communism' is inspired by the devil and is 'evil'.
The ‘Threat of Communism” is a convenient trope to delude idiots. Lets look at this.
Karl Marx devoted most of his life to analysing the economic system known as ‘capitalism’. He realised that (to simplify much) one side held most of the power and gained most of the profit i.e. the owners of capital and finance. Using their control of money and production, they exploit the people who produce the goods – the workers, by paying them less than the value of the material goods they produce, and selling these goods for more than their value in labour costs.
‘Communism’ and ‘Socialism’ are merely names for two types of self-organisation of workers. By mutual support workers are enabled to exert their power, and to rectify the injustice inherent in system described in the previous paragraph.
The demonisation and denigration of ‘communism’ and ‘socialism’ is a propaganda campaign utilised by the capitalist system in the west, and especially in the USA, for the past 100 or so years to stop the workers from ousting them from control of profits, aided by spurious ideas such as ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’. If democracy actually worked they would try their best to stop it. Their ‘freedom’ is the freedom for the worker to starve under a bridge if it happens to suit their employers, and the freedom the capitalists have to keep large amounts of money and power to themselves.
The “Threat of Communism” is solely to the capitalist class - not to the working class. Anyone who doesn't own shares but believes in the 'threat ' is a poor, deluded dupe.
Since I was born in communism and lived most of my life there, and in addition, my father was an insurgent in the rebellion against communism in 1956, and I was the suffering party in the subsequent retaliation, I have some experience of how communism works ! But in the meantime, I gained 33 years of experience in the so-called "Free World" or rather the world of "Free Robbery" ! According to my experience, communism could be a beautiful ideology, almost like the Heaven of some religions, but since we are frail people, usually all beautiful ideologies are strangely misguided due to people's desire for power and greed ! Look at Stalin , Pol Pot , Kim Ir Szen ! I experienced this in our country, Hungary, too, when the most vocal communist functionaries strangely became landowners, factory owners and billionaires, the most blatant example of this is the fallen ex-prime minister Ferenc Gyurcsány, who suddenly turned from a communist leader into a billionaire factory owner overnight. Surely there is no connection with the fact that his mother-in-law's family dominated the secret services during communism ! :) By the way, I noticed that the former communists are the most loyal servants of the US State Department, while the US government supports the former communists the most, with millions of dollars against the reigning Hungarian government and Mr Orbán ! Furthermore, after spending the past 33 years in the so-called Free World, I have come to hate the lying, eye-rolling Western "democracies" because they want to impose on us ideas that are foreign to us, which they have already successfully done to naive, brainwashed people, such as "woke" and gender idiocy and if we avoid them, apparently they would even want to force us with a gun ! Then they are surprised that the majority of Eastern and Central European citizens sympathize with conservative Russia !
You could also just as easily add "Look at General Suharto, Pinochet, George Bush, Tony Blair, etc. - all of whom caused the death of millions in total, and all of whom were good Capitalists".
People have weaknesses, as you have pointed out, but people also have both intelligence and empathy, and so we must try to create a system which will be fair for all and as proof against corruption as possible. Capitalism inherently has no possibility of doing this, but some form of socialism or communism does.
Everyone can have their own opinion. When you say that communism and socialism are two different names for self-organization of workers, it surprised me that anyone would regurgitate such nonsense. China is clearly communist and the workers (the people) have ZERO control of the country, their ability to self-organize or to affect any meaningful change. That ability is solely the power of another dynasty, in power until they are not. The Western world made a concerted decision (Kissinger, as an example and the WTO) to make China develop and become wealthy. That has nothing to do with the CCP! After WWII the USA developed Japan to keep it out of the Soviet sphere of influence. It was set up as a global manufacturing hub, spewing out what used to be called JapCrap. Over time the factories became more sophisticated and better products were created. Once Japan became too expensive in the late ‘80s and ‘90s, business left for S. Korea, then Taiwan, then HK and then to China. Now that China has become too expensive, business is moving on to other jurisdictions and it very well may be Vietnam, Bangladesh, India, Mexico that all share what China is currently doing. (Africa will
Be the final destination in our lifetime), but to place the Investment model of production and development at the feet of the CCP is simply not factual, no matter how many statistics one can dredge up stating how the CCP has reduced poverty in China to under 1%. Lots of statistics can be found making all sorts of statements, however the truth lies in the fact that Western leaders decided to develop China at their own societies expense to try and dissuade the Chinese people from being Communist. Let’s all not extrapolate that self-organized workers created a communist utopia on their own.
China claims merely to be 'on the road to socialism'. As can be seen from the experience of the USSR, it's not that easy to establish socialism from scratch, especially from such a poorly industrialised base as Russia was, and Marx was well aware of this.
China is completely different from 'western' countries in that capital and finance are closely controlled by the government. We shall see what happens in the future, but China is much more active in carbon reducing policies than the west, and China has also recently eliminated poverty - which is more than the US ever has.
love it ! A terrific summing up. What with you, the Duran, Mercouris, Yves Smith, and Redacted all on the same page, the possibility of an irreversible change in the the world order in a progressive direction, and the humbling of the US into just another world power looks like a serious but still distant possibility. I view the humiliating and permanent destruction of hubristic American and NATO predatory power as essential to any positive future whether socialist of capitalist. Western influence is even now in dramatic decline and the majority of the world's population and governments are backing away from engagement and support. It will take time, but it is happening, powered by the bovine stupidity and corruption of current US and EU politicians and military experts.
I know Aurelian discounts this but I share with Mercouris a growing fear that as the West's options shrink toward zero ( and as the next mega financial crash comes barrelling towards us ) the Nuclear tactical nuke looks more attractive, at first as a desperate battlefield warning to Russia but then in no time at all leading to strikes on active European military airfields across Europe.
Yes, on economic and social policy the US regime acts like our society has no future (pushing trans ideology in schools is extremely fatalistic). When they are faced finally with having to accept a position on the world stage incommensurate with their self-regard, I fear there won’t be enough to restrain them from going with the nuclear option.
“So basically, NATO officers from countries that no longer have a doctrine of heavy-metal warfare, whose strategic tradition is anyway defensive, and whose recent experience is of small-scale counter-insurgency wars, have been hurriedly training raw Ukrainian recruits to fight complex high-intensity offensive armoured battles with equipment designed for defensive or for counter-insurgency operations. Their opponents meanwhile continue to study and practice operational-level defensive doctrine as part of wider strategically offensive operations. Oh dear.”
That paragraph is the best summation I have seen of what has gone wrong with the “counter offensive”. As your article infers, the west is deeply hubristic and unable to self reflect on points like this.
You do not refer to the current shock and awe NATO air exercises but they seem redolent of our quite immature approach to what real warfare means.
I guess that the related question here is that the wider conflict with China is being brewed up, although the west seems as ill suited to wage war there as it is in Ukraine.
"Quite how an organisation with as much hubris as NATO (or for that matter the EU) is going to handle disappointment and defeat is an interesting question, but one that requires an essay of its own."
As long as they can be satisfied with words, the rest of the world can go about its business and mollify the US very cheaply until it collapses under its own delusions. I sense the makings of a great Russian comedy. “All that’s left to do is remove your troops from Europe and you will have achieved a glorious victory Mr. Biden!”
f-35, and related pentagon profit projects are unilateral disarmament. too heavy/short ranged to be carrier aviation if there were room for Lockheed techs and a large hill of spares on the ship.
usn aircraft carriers need land based cover from usaf f-22 and f-15, with marine f-18 assuring protection from aircraft, while aegis cannot deal with missiles…
for f-35a the computer cannot handle new radar which is catch up to the battle space and a tech refresh is needed to build block 4, not the refresh nor block 4 are technically competent. and block 4 is behind the challenges it would face today. while early blocks do not enter tests on outdated threat scenarios.
we see an order of us battle aimed at shareholder value…. while operations and logistics defer.
I think Russia has the defensive doctrine, not the west. It's Russia that has suffered major invasions throughout its history. The west is who goes around attacking every place on the planet. 🤷
Russia expects, as in prior invasions, that it will have to project into enemy occupied (no logistics) territory. that is not a defensive move. Defensive is to slow the enemy down in areas where you have logistics. the role of logistics in actual war cannot be understated, as noted by aurelien.
Correct - presently, and when/if Russia moves to western Ukraine and/or beyond they will then have a disadvantage in logistics, as ISL explained (his use of future tense was the clue).
Plastic guitars are actually very good. I prefer a wooden one but I can see the advantages of plastic. Emerald is a well-known quality builder in Ireland. Not inexpensive either. And a good player can do wonders with only three strings. Reinhardt, in particular, I expect would have confidently made it through the rest of the set if three strings exploded at once.
I get what you're saying, of course. I just wanted a distraction from all this horrible stuff and to think about music, instruments, musicians for a moment.
Excellent summing up of the situation. The only problem I see is this:
Russia defeats and then arranges circumstances in Ukraine to suit it's interests as it sees them.
Then what? How does Russia then put pressure on NATO and the EU to 'neutralise' themselves? Sure, militarily, Russia could probably defeat them too, if it wanted, but It probably doesn't want to give them the moral high ground, and sustain further casualties, by attacking. OK, the loss of cheap Russian energy and US economic policies are decimating EU economies, but are they willing to turn on the US and lean towards China (and Russia) - yet, anyway? NATO will be exposed as a busted flush, but so what? The narcissists in charge in Brussels will find it almost impossible to admit defeat, even if everyone else recognises it.
How can pressure be applied on them by Russia?
I am sure that others here can supply valid answers to this question, as sometimes I can hardly see beyond my own nose. I look forward to replies.
I think this is the strategic dilemma that Russia faces. Ironically, the longer Ukraine "survives," the easier the problem becomes for the Russians, since it forces the NATO to either continue wasting a lot of resources to prop up the corpse or stop and negotiate with the Russians. If Ukraine is completely defeated, on the other hand, NATO can just quit Ukraine and, well, not suffer as costly a drain as continuing to prop up Ukraine might. If Russia actually defeats Ukraine for good, Russia may be forced to find other means to put pressure on NATO and that may be harder. Or, the state of very costly new Cold War will continue more or less indefinitely.
Exactly - Russia is best served by spinning out the war for as long as possible- and the West is willing to play the game - as long as the west is allowed to think it's winning they will keep on throwing away resources and manpower
As for any 'final' solution, this can only emerge after it has become quite clear even to the US that the new strategic alliances being built by Russia and China start to bite alloverthe world, and the EU realise that China is the only power able to' reconstruct' or stabilise the country formerly known as Ukraine, as well as those war happy neighbours
I'll repeat a metaphor I've used elsewhere before, which sums up the essence of this conflict for me. It is like a football match between NATO and Russia, with the Ukraine cast in the role of the ball that's being kicked all over the pitch, by both sides.
Russia uses the Ukraine almost as much as the west does. They are leveraging the country to defeat NATO decisively without actually having to fight it directly. While the west may be in denial, Russia is under no such illusion, they know they already are in an undeclared war with NATO, and so does much of the rest of the world. And they intend to win it with the lowest possible cost to themselves. The longer the war in Ukraine lasts, the more problematic the larger conflict becomes for NATO, as they have been forced into a losing strategy.
Their own propaganda has made them hostages to the expectations of (the bulk of) their own populations, and forces them to keep pouring vast amounts of treasure into a black hole from which it will never return any dividends. Treasure which they incidently desperately need for their own ailing economies.
Or to use a more blunt metaphor, Russia has the west by the balls, and is slowly but surely ripping them right off.
attack a member nation and dare the rest to respond. if they don't, nato is de facto ended. if they do, nato is also de facto ended. and 'attack' doesn't (necessarily) mean 'invade'.
"Quite how an organisation with as much hubris as NATO (or for that matter the EU) is going to handle disappointment and defeat is an interesting question, but one that requires an essay of its own."
This is excellent. Spells out what many of us felt intuitively but unsystematically. Thank you Aurelian. I am guessing you might be retired US or UK military.
Off point a bit but I have always found everything by Vassily Grossman hugely educational on 1941-45 war in the East and especially around Ukraine / Stalingrad front. I try to ignore the Western antiStalin contextualising and framing and get back to his words . Tony Kevin
This is the single most excellent analysis of the NATO/Ukraine/Russia war I have read to-date. And believe me, I've read many.
Although it encapsulates everything I have ever written on the topic, it does so better and more comprehensively than I ever have. I would go so far as to say it does so better than anyone of whom I am aware ever has.
I cannot recommend it highly enough.
My this interest you - strategic pitch . . . https://les7eb.substack.com/
Les,
Your work is outstanding. I haven't seen anything is April. Or have I missed something?
Thanks,
A fan of yours
- Usually every two months.
- The draft on the drawing board, or is that the chopping block?
- Delayed as several forecasts have been made, particularly the last essay. All appear correct so far and more of a matter of seeing how they play out.
- The tea leaves point to a wider war into Europe. No frozen conflict here.
I will be looking forward to it. Thank you!
April . . . https://les7eb.substack.com/p/washingtons-war-ix-one-great-game
First time reader. That is a fantastic, well thought-out, well laid-out article.
Bravo
My interest you . . . strategic pitch - https://les7eb.substack.com/
No, it isn't a well thought out article, For example, "...the Russians have no interest in physically occupying [western Ukraine], and the Poles might actually help to bring security to it." This is delusional.
There is no possibility of a negotiated settlement to Biden's Ukraine War. The Russian Foreign Ministry has recently raised the strong possibility of severing all contact with Little Britain and Canada. Russia and China won't even pickup the phone when Washington calls because Washington's promises, statements, and treaties are asswipe. Sabotaging the Minsk agreements by refusing to apply any of its terms while treacherously using these treaties as means of rebuilding AFU weapons and units while continuing to murder 14,000 ethnic Russians. This murderous artillery shelling continues to this day.
Sen Graham recently called slaughtering Russians the best money the US has ever spent. Every other brain-dead US-NAYOYO politician has made similar statements as Washington's plan since 1993 has been to use Ukraine as a means of destroying Russia. It took the illegal 2014 CIA coup to produce Bandera Nazi monsters to implement this plan's "inherent irrationality".
1993: The Barry R. Posen Plan for War on Russia via Zombie State Ukraine — Mendelssohn Moses — The Postil Magazine -- https://www.thepostil.com/1993-the-barry-r-posen-plan-for-war-on-russia-via-zombie-state-ukraine/
An extremely accurate plan for Russian submission using former Warsaw Pact countries as NATO forward bases. This plan describes using Partners for Peace, and, NATO admissions as creeping threats to Russian security.
Ukrainian destruction was contemplated months into Clinton’s first year. It’s an absolutely chilling strategy displaying callused indifference to Ukraine’s fate. This proposal is currently implemented in Ukraine now, and in eastern Europe since 1993. The author, Posen, describes the whole concept as “inherent irrationality”. No wonder Clinton and the Demo subhumans pushed this project hard. I can only assume the Republicans held out for China as their slice of the geopolitical genocide pie.
Alexis de Tocqueville : “I know of no country in which there is so little independence of mind and real freedom of discussion as in America.”
Noam Chomsky: ”Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. Media.”
So there won't be any part of Ukraine left for the White West and their chosen Nazi monsters to occupy. The facts are Ukrainians despise their leaders and so would rather become hopeful refugees than fight for corrupt oligarchs and their Nazi death squads.The world will be a better and safer place when Russia wins this war. Putin has heard all the promises, watched the treaties signed, and treacherously ignored. He knows of racist genocides committed and planned. It won't be the vacuous excuses of White Western media cloaca and academics that define this war’s end. It will be blunt demands and brutal facts on the ground that outline Ukraine's public defeat. This war will end with NATO's humiliation, and the Global South ecstatically dancing in the streets. This war will end with Russian tanks shaking the ground at western borders.
Voltaire: “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”
Vladimir Zelenskiy, “I hope that the Congress will approve this financial assistance for our crimes… country”.
Вы не правы относительно западных границ. По простой причине, недостаток ресурса. Но ВВП умеет ждать. А ЕС и США поджимает электорат.
Also first time reader. Very good, thank you.
I agree. Indeed, I was sorry it ended so soon.
This is, again, very good stuff. Thanks a lot for your effort Aurelien. After reading this it becomes clear my feeling while watching the latest performance of A. Blinken, when he was trying to explain the objectives of the counteroffensive in some interview. He looked very much like the proverbial classroom pupil that, having paid no attention during the class, tries to provide an answer that looks reasonable or logic but anyone that had paid attention could see it was based on utter ignorance on the subject. He said something like "to provide Ukraine a strong position in the negotiation table" and "force Putin to negotiate". Shameless for a person in his position.
Here is one thing that I never did quite understand: why has Finlandization become a bad word? For what it is worth, Finland did quite well (especially for a former ally of Nazi Germany during World War II) through its enforced neutrality. It did not become a Soviet satellite like Poland or Hungary. It was left pretty much alone as long as it didn't antagonize the Soviets. But Finns seem to think that experience as utterly humiliating....
In my opinion, the Finns will receive a huge slap in the face for their sneaky behavior from the Russians in the not too distant future ! I will not feel sorry for them ! They worked for it!
a slap in the face, and a kick in the ass. just to make sure they learn their lesson.
They did it because they have woke communist retards running their government now, the old Finn politicians from previous are dead or retired.
Your reply is nonsense - "woke communist retards"!
The government of Finland is as far from being 'communist' as presumably you are. This sort of idiotic comment is usually made by US citizens who have been brought up to believe that 'communism' is inspired by the devil and is 'evil'.
The ‘Threat of Communism” is a convenient trope to delude idiots. Lets look at this.
Karl Marx devoted most of his life to analysing the economic system known as ‘capitalism’. He realised that (to simplify much) one side held most of the power and gained most of the profit i.e. the owners of capital and finance. Using their control of money and production, they exploit the people who produce the goods – the workers, by paying them less than the value of the material goods they produce, and selling these goods for more than their value in labour costs.
‘Communism’ and ‘Socialism’ are merely names for two types of self-organisation of workers. By mutual support workers are enabled to exert their power, and to rectify the injustice inherent in system described in the previous paragraph.
The demonisation and denigration of ‘communism’ and ‘socialism’ is a propaganda campaign utilised by the capitalist system in the west, and especially in the USA, for the past 100 or so years to stop the workers from ousting them from control of profits, aided by spurious ideas such as ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’. If democracy actually worked they would try their best to stop it. Their ‘freedom’ is the freedom for the worker to starve under a bridge if it happens to suit their employers, and the freedom the capitalists have to keep large amounts of money and power to themselves.
The “Threat of Communism” is solely to the capitalist class - not to the working class. Anyone who doesn't own shares but believes in the 'threat ' is a poor, deluded dupe.
Since I was born in communism and lived most of my life there, and in addition, my father was an insurgent in the rebellion against communism in 1956, and I was the suffering party in the subsequent retaliation, I have some experience of how communism works ! But in the meantime, I gained 33 years of experience in the so-called "Free World" or rather the world of "Free Robbery" ! According to my experience, communism could be a beautiful ideology, almost like the Heaven of some religions, but since we are frail people, usually all beautiful ideologies are strangely misguided due to people's desire for power and greed ! Look at Stalin , Pol Pot , Kim Ir Szen ! I experienced this in our country, Hungary, too, when the most vocal communist functionaries strangely became landowners, factory owners and billionaires, the most blatant example of this is the fallen ex-prime minister Ferenc Gyurcsány, who suddenly turned from a communist leader into a billionaire factory owner overnight. Surely there is no connection with the fact that his mother-in-law's family dominated the secret services during communism ! :) By the way, I noticed that the former communists are the most loyal servants of the US State Department, while the US government supports the former communists the most, with millions of dollars against the reigning Hungarian government and Mr Orbán ! Furthermore, after spending the past 33 years in the so-called Free World, I have come to hate the lying, eye-rolling Western "democracies" because they want to impose on us ideas that are foreign to us, which they have already successfully done to naive, brainwashed people, such as "woke" and gender idiocy and if we avoid them, apparently they would even want to force us with a gun ! Then they are surprised that the majority of Eastern and Central European citizens sympathize with conservative Russia !
You could also just as easily add "Look at General Suharto, Pinochet, George Bush, Tony Blair, etc. - all of whom caused the death of millions in total, and all of whom were good Capitalists".
People have weaknesses, as you have pointed out, but people also have both intelligence and empathy, and so we must try to create a system which will be fair for all and as proof against corruption as possible. Capitalism inherently has no possibility of doing this, but some form of socialism or communism does.
Everyone can have their own opinion. When you say that communism and socialism are two different names for self-organization of workers, it surprised me that anyone would regurgitate such nonsense. China is clearly communist and the workers (the people) have ZERO control of the country, their ability to self-organize or to affect any meaningful change. That ability is solely the power of another dynasty, in power until they are not. The Western world made a concerted decision (Kissinger, as an example and the WTO) to make China develop and become wealthy. That has nothing to do with the CCP! After WWII the USA developed Japan to keep it out of the Soviet sphere of influence. It was set up as a global manufacturing hub, spewing out what used to be called JapCrap. Over time the factories became more sophisticated and better products were created. Once Japan became too expensive in the late ‘80s and ‘90s, business left for S. Korea, then Taiwan, then HK and then to China. Now that China has become too expensive, business is moving on to other jurisdictions and it very well may be Vietnam, Bangladesh, India, Mexico that all share what China is currently doing. (Africa will
Be the final destination in our lifetime), but to place the Investment model of production and development at the feet of the CCP is simply not factual, no matter how many statistics one can dredge up stating how the CCP has reduced poverty in China to under 1%. Lots of statistics can be found making all sorts of statements, however the truth lies in the fact that Western leaders decided to develop China at their own societies expense to try and dissuade the Chinese people from being Communist. Let’s all not extrapolate that self-organized workers created a communist utopia on their own.
China claims merely to be 'on the road to socialism'. As can be seen from the experience of the USSR, it's not that easy to establish socialism from scratch, especially from such a poorly industrialised base as Russia was, and Marx was well aware of this.
China is completely different from 'western' countries in that capital and finance are closely controlled by the government. We shall see what happens in the future, but China is much more active in carbon reducing policies than the west, and China has also recently eliminated poverty - which is more than the US ever has.
love it ! A terrific summing up. What with you, the Duran, Mercouris, Yves Smith, and Redacted all on the same page, the possibility of an irreversible change in the the world order in a progressive direction, and the humbling of the US into just another world power looks like a serious but still distant possibility. I view the humiliating and permanent destruction of hubristic American and NATO predatory power as essential to any positive future whether socialist of capitalist. Western influence is even now in dramatic decline and the majority of the world's population and governments are backing away from engagement and support. It will take time, but it is happening, powered by the bovine stupidity and corruption of current US and EU politicians and military experts.
I know Aurelian discounts this but I share with Mercouris a growing fear that as the West's options shrink toward zero ( and as the next mega financial crash comes barrelling towards us ) the Nuclear tactical nuke looks more attractive, at first as a desperate battlefield warning to Russia but then in no time at all leading to strikes on active European military airfields across Europe.
And then ....
The Duran is one of the best discussion platforms I have seen. The quality of the dialogue is superb.....and extremely worrying.
Yes, on economic and social policy the US regime acts like our society has no future (pushing trans ideology in schools is extremely fatalistic). When they are faced finally with having to accept a position on the world stage incommensurate with their self-regard, I fear there won’t be enough to restrain them from going with the nuclear option.
Impressive logic. Why are there not more like you ?
Wow. This is a great analysis.
“So basically, NATO officers from countries that no longer have a doctrine of heavy-metal warfare, whose strategic tradition is anyway defensive, and whose recent experience is of small-scale counter-insurgency wars, have been hurriedly training raw Ukrainian recruits to fight complex high-intensity offensive armoured battles with equipment designed for defensive or for counter-insurgency operations. Their opponents meanwhile continue to study and practice operational-level defensive doctrine as part of wider strategically offensive operations. Oh dear.”
That paragraph is the best summation I have seen of what has gone wrong with the “counter offensive”. As your article infers, the west is deeply hubristic and unable to self reflect on points like this.
You do not refer to the current shock and awe NATO air exercises but they seem redolent of our quite immature approach to what real warfare means.
I guess that the related question here is that the wider conflict with China is being brewed up, although the west seems as ill suited to wage war there as it is in Ukraine.
"Quite how an organisation with as much hubris as NATO (or for that matter the EU) is going to handle disappointment and defeat is an interesting question, but one that requires an essay of its own."
Indeed. Please write that essay.
They will claim “victory” regardless of the outcome on the ground. They are shameless.
As long as they can be satisfied with words, the rest of the world can go about its business and mollify the US very cheaply until it collapses under its own delusions. I sense the makings of a great Russian comedy. “All that’s left to do is remove your troops from Europe and you will have achieved a glorious victory Mr. Biden!”
f-35, and related pentagon profit projects are unilateral disarmament. too heavy/short ranged to be carrier aviation if there were room for Lockheed techs and a large hill of spares on the ship.
usn aircraft carriers need land based cover from usaf f-22 and f-15, with marine f-18 assuring protection from aircraft, while aegis cannot deal with missiles…
for f-35a the computer cannot handle new radar which is catch up to the battle space and a tech refresh is needed to build block 4, not the refresh nor block 4 are technically competent. and block 4 is behind the challenges it would face today. while early blocks do not enter tests on outdated threat scenarios.
we see an order of us battle aimed at shareholder value…. while operations and logistics defer.
Brit citizen here...
the more I read about Ukraine the more ashamed I am of my Government and the USA.
This war was entirely avoidable and should never have happened.
I like Americans (worked with many) but I hope Russia wins .
I am sick of these pointless endless wars started by America and its arrogant , corruptruling class.
I am an ex Brit American. I could have written this word for word. I can assure you there are a huge number of Americans who believe as you do.
I think Russia has the defensive doctrine, not the west. It's Russia that has suffered major invasions throughout its history. The west is who goes around attacking every place on the planet. 🤷
Russia expects, as in prior invasions, that it will have to project into enemy occupied (no logistics) territory. that is not a defensive move. Defensive is to slow the enemy down in areas where you have logistics. the role of logistics in actual war cannot be understated, as noted by aurelien.
From everything I've read, it's Ukraine, not Russia, at a logistic's disadvantage.
Correct - presently, and when/if Russia moves to western Ukraine and/or beyond they will then have a disadvantage in logistics, as ISL explained (his use of future tense was the clue).
Plastic guitars are actually very good. I prefer a wooden one but I can see the advantages of plastic. Emerald is a well-known quality builder in Ireland. Not inexpensive either. And a good player can do wonders with only three strings. Reinhardt, in particular, I expect would have confidently made it through the rest of the set if three strings exploded at once.
I get what you're saying, of course. I just wanted a distraction from all this horrible stuff and to think about music, instruments, musicians for a moment.
Great analysis and very enjoyable to read!
Excellent summing up of the situation. The only problem I see is this:
Russia defeats and then arranges circumstances in Ukraine to suit it's interests as it sees them.
Then what? How does Russia then put pressure on NATO and the EU to 'neutralise' themselves? Sure, militarily, Russia could probably defeat them too, if it wanted, but It probably doesn't want to give them the moral high ground, and sustain further casualties, by attacking. OK, the loss of cheap Russian energy and US economic policies are decimating EU economies, but are they willing to turn on the US and lean towards China (and Russia) - yet, anyway? NATO will be exposed as a busted flush, but so what? The narcissists in charge in Brussels will find it almost impossible to admit defeat, even if everyone else recognises it.
How can pressure be applied on them by Russia?
I am sure that others here can supply valid answers to this question, as sometimes I can hardly see beyond my own nose. I look forward to replies.
I think this is the strategic dilemma that Russia faces. Ironically, the longer Ukraine "survives," the easier the problem becomes for the Russians, since it forces the NATO to either continue wasting a lot of resources to prop up the corpse or stop and negotiate with the Russians. If Ukraine is completely defeated, on the other hand, NATO can just quit Ukraine and, well, not suffer as costly a drain as continuing to prop up Ukraine might. If Russia actually defeats Ukraine for good, Russia may be forced to find other means to put pressure on NATO and that may be harder. Or, the state of very costly new Cold War will continue more or less indefinitely.
Exactly - Russia is best served by spinning out the war for as long as possible- and the West is willing to play the game - as long as the west is allowed to think it's winning they will keep on throwing away resources and manpower
As for any 'final' solution, this can only emerge after it has become quite clear even to the US that the new strategic alliances being built by Russia and China start to bite alloverthe world, and the EU realise that China is the only power able to' reconstruct' or stabilise the country formerly known as Ukraine, as well as those war happy neighbours
I'll repeat a metaphor I've used elsewhere before, which sums up the essence of this conflict for me. It is like a football match between NATO and Russia, with the Ukraine cast in the role of the ball that's being kicked all over the pitch, by both sides.
Russia uses the Ukraine almost as much as the west does. They are leveraging the country to defeat NATO decisively without actually having to fight it directly. While the west may be in denial, Russia is under no such illusion, they know they already are in an undeclared war with NATO, and so does much of the rest of the world. And they intend to win it with the lowest possible cost to themselves. The longer the war in Ukraine lasts, the more problematic the larger conflict becomes for NATO, as they have been forced into a losing strategy.
Their own propaganda has made them hostages to the expectations of (the bulk of) their own populations, and forces them to keep pouring vast amounts of treasure into a black hole from which it will never return any dividends. Treasure which they incidently desperately need for their own ailing economies.
Or to use a more blunt metaphor, Russia has the west by the balls, and is slowly but surely ripping them right off.
attack a member nation and dare the rest to respond. if they don't, nato is de facto ended. if they do, nato is also de facto ended. and 'attack' doesn't (necessarily) mean 'invade'.
As I understand it, there's a lot of wriggle room in Article 5.
"Quite how an organisation with as much hubris as NATO (or for that matter the EU) is going to handle disappointment and defeat is an interesting question, but one that requires an essay of its own."
I look forward to reading it.
This is excellent. Spells out what many of us felt intuitively but unsystematically. Thank you Aurelian. I am guessing you might be retired US or UK military.
Off point a bit but I have always found everything by Vassily Grossman hugely educational on 1941-45 war in the East and especially around Ukraine / Stalingrad front. I try to ignore the Western antiStalin contextualising and framing and get back to his words . Tony Kevin