Posts
Ukrainian ceasefire Q&A/FAQ and RFC
6
September, 2014
There
are so many rumors and opinions about the latest ceasefire for
Novorussia agreed between the Novorussian leaders and the Junta reps
that I have decided to make a small survey of the issues in the
format of a Q&A/FAQ. I will write up a real analysis next
week. I also will use this opportunity to explain a few thing
about what my own personal position is. So here goes:
Q:
Do you support or oppose the latest peaceplan?
A: Neither.
First, I still have not seen the 14 points actually agreed upon and,
most importantly, I don't believe that this plan will hold.
Q:
Why not?
A: Because it is opposed by all the following
groups: the USA, NATO, the Ukie Nazis, most of the Novorussian field
commanders and a large segment of the Russian nationalist ideologues
in Russia. Furthermore, Poroshenko is so weak that he probably
cannot impose his will on others. Finally, the Ukies and their
western supporters have so reneged on every agreement they
signed/
Q: So you think that this agreement is
irrelevent?
A: No, not at all. For one thing, it's
perfect timing took a lot of wind out of the sails of the
anti-Russian crowd at the NATO summit which, after all, did not
result in anything more than hot air and empty threats.
Q:
Are you saying that this is a victory for Russia?
A:
Hardly, but it has been an effective way to temporarily defuse a
potentially dangerous situation. Also, the very fact that
neither the EU or NATO or the US were even present in Minsk is a
very powerful symbol of the fact that the "indispensable
nation" and it instruments of colonial domination are not
indispensable after all.
Q: But will this ceasefire not allow
the Junta Repression Force (JRF) to regroup?
Ukrainian
solider - Russian solider
A:
Yes, but that is not that relevant because of the size of its
strategic depth the Junta can to reorganize and regroup anyway.
Most the JRF units close to the front are so beat up that
"regrouping" will not help very much. At best
("best" for the JRF of course), this ceasefire will turn a
hasty retreat into a more or less organized withdrawal followed by a
much needed break. But the key thing to always remember is
this: wars are won by willpower, by moral strength, by a fighting
spirit. Unlike the Russians, the Ukies have had their fighting
spirit completely broken by the NAF. Check out the picture
circulating on the RuNet which I have posted above. It shows a
wounded Russian solider (from the 08.08.08 iirc) war against Georgia
and a Ukrainian solider captured in Novorussia (who had been made
famous by his militaristic and neo-Nazis videos posted on the Ukie
social media). This montage shows something crucial: just
compare the determined and undefeated expression of the severely
wounded Russia private with the totally broken and terrified
expression of the Ukrainian "paratrooper". The
difference here is not "Russian" vs "Ukrainian"
in an ethnic sense (there is no such thing as an "ethnic
Russian" or an "ethnic Ukrainian" - they are all
ethnically mixed), but the difference in the fighting
spirit of
the Russian solider and the Ukrainian one. And no amount of
US/NATO aid can change this: unlike the Ukie, the Russian knows what
he is fighting for and he is determined.
Q: What about
Mariupol?
A: What about it? The city is still
surrounded and the Novorussian Armed Forces (NAF) will not retreat.
All this ceasefire does is "freeze" the situation around
this city. If anything, the Ukies will use it to cut and
run.
Q: Will the NAF benefit ceasefire?
A: Yes.
There are several "cauldrons" in the NAF rear which are a
pain, well, in the rear, which will hopefully be flushed out by a
mutual agreement to have the JRF units to move out and leave their
weapons behind. If not, then please remember that the NAF
control all of
the Novorussian/Russian border and that the "voentorg"
(cover delivery of weapons and specialists) will continue
unabated.
Q: Are you saying that all is good and we should
rejoice?
A: Not at all. First, there are clear signs of
infighting in Novorussia. Not only was Strelkov apparently
blackmailed out of control, but there have been rumors of an
attempted coup by Antiufeev yesterday. The Novorussians denied
this info, others say that the coup failed, but there is no doubt
that there are real tensions inside Novorussia now and that while
some support the current strategy of negotiations (we can refer to
them as the "Zakharchenko clan") others clearly oppose it
(we can refer to them as the "Mozgovoi clan"). Likewise,
in Russia there are those who favor this strategy (most of the
"near-Kremlin" circles "околокремлевские
круги" - I explain this term here)
and those who oppose it (Dugin, Colonel Cassad, el-Miurid, and many
other generally para-Marxist bloggers and activists).
Q: So
you agree that this is bad for Novorussia?
A: No, I did not
say that either. I think that this is probably an inevitable
and possibly indispensable temporary phase in this conflict with is
neither a triumph nor a disaster, but something which is a natural
consequence of the situation on the ground.
Q: What do you
mean?
A: Contrary to most commentators here, I do not believe
that the NAF have been "treacherously stopped in what could
have been their triumphant march on Kiev". The amazing
successes in the south have totally obscured in the minds of many
the undeniable fact that the JRF forces north of Luganks are still
big, powerful and holding their ground, that the Ukies even managed
a (small and useless) counter-offensive in the region of Dukuchaevsk
and that, contrary to initial reports, the Donetsk airport is
still not under
full NAF control. Those who had imagined that the NAF would
soon move on and take Odessa, Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk or even Kiev
just don't understand the military situation. Right now, the
NAF can't even take back Slaviansk, nevermind reconquer all of
Novorussia.
Q: What about the notion that Russian and Ukie
oligarchs are the real force behind this deal?
A: What
oligarchs? Akhmetov has not only lost Donetsk forever, even
the material infrastructure of this assets is now in ruins.
Kolomoiski has had this assets in Crimea nationalized and he is now
locked in a struggle with both Akhmetov and Poroshenko. As for
the Russian oligarchs - they have exactly zero needs
for anything in the Donbass and they are way too smart to invest
anything in such a dangerous, unstable and ruined region. At
least in the short term, only the Russian state will provide help
for political reasons, but the Russian oligarchs have much safer and
lucrative options than the ruined Donbass.
Q: Okay, then what
about the accusation that rather then allowing the creation of a
viable and independent Novorussia, Putin has created yet another
Transnistria?
A: What is this thesis based on? On
a 14 point plan which nobody has seen and which will be soon broken
anyway?
Q: No, on the fact that instead of fighting
Poroshenko and the Nazis, the Novorussians have been forced to
negotiate with them.
A: Oh come on! How many times will
I have to explain that, unlike westerners, Russians have no problems
at all talking to their enemies? Study the history of the
Tatar-Mongol invasions of Russia when the Russian Princes were
always talking "negotiating" with the Khans of the Golden
Horde, and yet that never prevented them from rising up and fighting
them regularly. Russians are much more Asians than Europeans
and in Asia talking to your enemy is normal, it
is an integral part of warfare.
If in the West talking or negotiating with your enemy is a sign of
weakness, in
Asia it is not talking
or negotiating with your enemy which is a sign of weakness.
Q:
So what do you think Putin want in this war?
A: What he
always said he wanted: a united, independent, neutral, prosperous
and friendly Ukraine, in other words - "regime change" in
Kiev.
Q: So will he "sell out" Novorussia to
achieve this goal?
A: I don't know. Unlike
so many armchair generals who apparently also moonlight as telepaths
and prophets, I cannot read Putin's mind or predict the future.
What I can say is that so
far I
see no signs of Putin betraying or "selling out" anybody.
In fact, it takes an amazing degree of blindness or intellectual
dishonesty not to notice that the first and immediate consequence of
what many assume was a Kremlin-ordered change in the
Novorussian leadership has been a huge and successful offensive
which crushed the JRF. If Putin wanted to "sell out"
Novorussia to the Nazis, he could have easily done so just before
that counter-offensive was launched.
Q: So you really love
and trust Putin, don't you?
A: No, but I will admit that what
I have seen this man do for Russia and the world fills me with
sincere admiration, often bordering an awe, and that I see
absolutely no signs of him changing course. What I see is a
leader whose methods and strategies are simply too subtle and
complex for most "armchair heads of states" to
understand. The very same Putin-bashing crowd which now is
hysterically yelling about betrayal was saying exactly the same
things about Syria when Putin single handedly stopped the US attack
on it. And when the Russians told the Syrian to get rid of
their (dangerous and useless) chemical weapons the same
Putin-bashers were yelling from the top of their lungs that this was
the ultimate proof of Russian back-stabbing. Now Assad has, if
not won the civil war, but conducted a successful reelection and the
West is now eating humble-pie and pondering how to best get Assad's
help in Iraq. So while I don't "love" Putin, I sure
despise the Putin-bashers not only for their short-sightedness and
lack of expertise, but for their mind-blowing intellectual
dishonesty. They are like a broken record constantly repeating
"Putin betrayed, Putin betrayed, Putin betrayed". In
Russia this kind of rabid nationalists are called "горе
патриоты" or "sorrow-patriots". They
are the kind that never actually do anything
useful, but are the most vociferous about what should be done.
I want to make it clear that I am not referring to Strelkov,
Mozgovoi or any other real patriot who happens to disagree with
Putin. I am referring to those for whom Putin-bashing is an
end in itself and who basically don't give a damn as long as they
get to bash the man.
Q: Still, Novorussia wants independence
while Putin wants a united Ukraine. Don't you see the
contradiction here?
A: Of course I do. So? That
does not mean that one side is "bad" and the other one
"good", it just shows the truth of the US saying that
"where I sit is where I stand". The real question is
how this contradiction will be resolved. So far I don't know
and I reserve judgment precisely because, unlike the "professional
and full-time Putin bashers" I like to base my opinions on
fact, not telepathy or prophetic visions.
Q: You constantly
speak of "Putin bashers" - that is offensive to many!
A:
Guess what? I am not a nice guy. I am an direct guy who
calls it as he sees it and if that offends anybody, they are welcome
to hug a teddy-bear and go sob on their bed. My message to
them is - grow-up and remember that I owe you nothing. This is
my blog and I write it for adults who value truthfulness and honesty
over sugar-coated affirmations.
Q: What about Poroshenko -
has he not won a huge break if not victory?
A: Yesterday I
was watching the
latest edition of the priceless Ukie propaganda show "Shuster
Live" and
it felt like I was watching a funeral. The host and all the
guest were in a somber, sorrowful and quasi-depressed mode.
Though they did not want to admit the magnitude of the beating which
their "invincible Ukrainian army" just had taken, it was
pretty darn clear that flag-waving was no more the order of the
day. One Ukie official even said "when we are talking
about 30 to 40 thousand armed men then we *have to* talk to tehse
"terrorists"" - it was hilarious, really. So
no. Poroshenko, far from having "won" anything, is in real
deep trouble. For starters, his own Prime Minister - Iatseniuk
- is absolutely outraged about the deal and makes no bones about
it. Ditto for Timoshenko. I won't even go into the Nazi
freaks. The fact is that the protecting Poroshenko will now
become a major headache for the local CIA station in Kiev: the guy
is in HUGEtrouble
and his only hope is that during the next elections he will look
less bad and less crazy then the rest of them. That is
assuming these elections are held and that Iarosh or Tiagnibok do
not simply seize power and execute Poroshenko for "high crimes,
treason or being an FSB agent" (he is not, but how cares?!).
The regime is so much on the defense that even though everybody
knows that this plan is really Putin's plan, the Junta is engaged in
a massive PR effort to convince the public that this is really
Poroshenko's plan. The Russians, typically, just smile and are
happy to give him the credit (remember, this is Asia - different
rules apply).
Q: So what will happen next?
A: As I
said, I am not a prophet. But what I know is this: Putin
clearly has full control of Russia and Novorussia - what he says
happens, he can deliver. Poroshenko has no control over
anything, not even "his" own" ruling coalition.
There is no real power in Banderastan right not, not even the local
CIA station. For this simple reason I do not see how the
ceasefire could hold. Then I don't see much change in the
military balance either. The NAF is far more capable than the
JRF whose only advantage lies in the huge strategic depth of this
territory. The JRF used
to (past
tense!) have a huge advantage in hardware and manpower, but even
this is changing now. In terms of hardware, most of the best
hardware they had is now either lost or in NAF hands. Yes,
they still have huge reserves, but of old and terribly maintained
equipment. As for manpower, the Junta clearly has more and
more difficulties finding enough men to compensate for its huge
losses. Just ask yourself a basic question: if you were
Ukie, even a nationalist, would you want to join to JRF and go fight
the NAF? Exactly. Yes, NATO has promised 15 million
dollars. That would buy the Ukies, what, maybe 10 old and used
T-72 or 3 T-80? This is a joke, really. But even if the
US provides 150 millions in covert aid - this will not affect the
balance, nevermind tipping it. As for the NAF, it is doing
well and will probably get even more men and modern gear through the
"voentorg", but it cannot push too far. As one NAF
commander said, "so
far we have been liberators, but we don't want to become
occupiers".
The rule of thumb is simple: the further west the NAF goes, the less
support it will get and the more it will expose itself to guerrilla
warfare lead by a local insurgency. A
far smarter strategy is to sit tight and watch the Ukies go after
each other.
Q:
Why do you think that will happen?
A: Because no matter what
all this still holds true: the Ukraine was always an artificial
country, Banderastan is even worse. There is no real power in
control, even the Junta is "kinda" in power only.
The country is economically dead dead dead. The economic
crisis is only at it's very early stages, and from now on it's only
going to get worse. Socially, the people are increasingly mad,
disillusioned and feel lied to and, at the same time, less and less
afraid to speak up. The Nazis are by far the most united and
best armed group in the country, except for a theoretical "Ukrainian
military" which, at least so far, has no leader and is
therefore is not united (might this change in the future? Maybe).
Basically, any person who took Social Sciences 101 in college will
tell you that the Ukies will now turn on each other, God willing
just with words and ideas, but violence is most likely. For
the NAF it is far better to wait until Zaporozhie, Dnepropetrovsk,
Kharkov or even Odessa turn into lawless cities which nobody
really controls then to try to take them by force now. There
is even a real possibility that the NAF might be seen as a liberator
in these cities if chaos there reaches a "Mad Max"
level.
Q: What if NATO sends in forces to prop-up the
Junta?
A: LOL! First, I would strongly advise our
AngloZionist "partners" (as they say in Russia) to first
consult with their German, French and Polish colleagues to see if
the latter have pleasant memories of being in charge of the
Ukraine. Second, I would remind our AngloZionist partners that
their move into Iraq and Afghanistan was supposed to be a love fest
which would pay for itself. Third, I would also suggest to
them that if they did not like Maliki, they might not like Iarosh
either. Of course, sending a symbolic force to some maneuvers
with whatever is left of the Ukie military is a good idea - it's
called "showing the flag" - but to try to do something
meaningful by trying to use NATO military forces inside the Ukraine
would be very, very,
dangerous even if Russia does nothing at all to make things
worse.
Q: What about the EU?
A: I think that it
lost it's willpower (not that it ever had much!). That
ridiculous performance by Hollande has already come crushing down:
turns out that his loud statement was an "individual
opinion" with no legal meaning.
Now, of course, the EU Kindergartgen (Poland, Lithuania, etc.) will
keep on being what it is, a Kindergarten, but the adults (Germany,
France, etc.) are showing signs of getting fed up. I don't
expect them to make a 180 overnight, no, but I just expect them to
stop pro-actively making things worse. One of the possible
signs of that might be a decrease in the role of the EU and an
increase in the role of the OSCE.
Q: And what about Uncle
Sam?
A: He is totally stuck in his only mode: demands,
threats, condemnation, demands, threats, condemnation, etc. etc.
etc. Normally "aggression" is part of that mantra, except
that neither the US nor NATO have what it takes to militarily attack
Russia. As for the AngloZionist 'deep state' it will continue
to try subvert and economically cripple Russia, but as long as Putin
is on the Kremlin I don't see that strategy succeeding either.
Q:
Sounds like you are optimistic.
A: If so, then only
very very cautiously
so. I don't see a big drama, much less so a disaster, in what
just happened, I think that Russia holds all the good cards in this
game, and I see no danger for the people of Novorussia. To
those who wanted to ride on a tank straight to the Maidan I can only
say that even though I very much share their hopes and dreams,
politics is the art of the possible and that smart politics are
often slow and time-consuming politics. Maximalism is good for
teenagers, not heads of state whose decision affect the lives of
millions of people. Thus my temporary and provisional
conclusion is this: so far, so good, things are better than they
seemed to be only 2 months ago and I see no reason to expect a major
reversal in the foreseeable future.
Q: What do you consider
the biggest danger for Novorussia right now?
A: Political
infighting. I don't know if this is possible right now, but I
would like to see the emergence of an undisputed Novorussian leader
who would have the official and full support of Strelkov,
Zakharchenko, Borodai, Mozgovoi, Kononov, Khodakovski, Tsarev,
Bolotov, Gubarev and all the other political and military leaders.
This has to be a truly Novorussian leader, not just a "Putin
proconsul", a person capable of negotiating with Putin for the
interests of the people of Novorussia. I don't mean to suggest
that these negotiations cannot be friendly, if only because there
can be no Novorussia against Russia, but this leader needs to
represent the interests of the Novorussian
people,
and not the Russian people whose interests are (very well)
represented by Putin himself. Right now, the main reason why
Putin has so much power in Novorussia is primarily because there is
still no real Novorussian political leadership. There is a
Novorussian military leadership, and even they probably have to more
or less do what the Russian military tells them to do. Far
from being weakened by the emergence of such a truly independent and
truly Novorussian leader, I think that the Russian-Novorussian
alliance would be greatly strengthened by it. Novorussia
should not, and cannot, be micro-managed from the Kremlin. In
other words, what I hope is for a "Novorussian Nasrallah"
who would be a loyal and faithful but sovereign and independent ally
of Putin (like Nasrallah is for Ayatollah Ali Khamenei), but not a
poodle like Blair or Hollande. Novorussia needs a spokesman
and negotiator who could really have a mandate to speak for the
people of Novorussia. Until that happens, I will always be
worried for the future of the people of Novorussia.
*******
That's
it for now. I hope that with this self-made Q&A/FAQ I have
replied to many, if not most, of the questions, comments and emails
I simply had no time to respond to in the past. I also hope to
have set the record straight about my own views which have been
constantly and systematically mis-represented by either dishonest or
plain stupid individuals. If I am succeeded in terminally
offending and discouraging the Putin-haters - good. I am tired
of dealing with their illiterate rants. Ditto for Saker-haters
(- : told you: I am not a nice guy :-), to whom I will add this
personal message: stop telling me what I am supposed to do, say,
think or write. This blog is like an AA meeting: "take
what you like and leave the rest". But don't expect
me to change and don't expect me to change my views unless you can
show me by facts and logic that I
am wrong (in which case I will gratefully welcome the opportunity
correct my mistake). Rants just annoy me, especially racist
ones, but they won't make me turn into a clone of you.
Sorry
if I forgot many good questions or points and please feel free to
post more comments or questions, and I will try to answer those
which a) do not misrepresent my views (no more strawman) or b) which
I have not already answered ad nauseam elsewhere.
To those of you who have - correctly - detected my irritation and/or
frustration with certain comments I will simply say "guilty as
charged" (- : told you: I am definitely not a nice guy :-).
I won't even bother justifying myself, either you can or you cannot
imagine how frustrating it is for me to deal with, shall we say,
some "personality types". But either way there is
nothing I could add to affect that. To the many kind,
supportive, respectful, generous, educated, wise, interesting,
funny, sophisticated, compassionate, intelligent, principled,
honest, honorable and otherwise wonderful members of our community I
want to express my most heartfelt and sincere gratitude: I simple
don't know how I could have made it through these terrible and
tragic months without your help, support and kindness.
RFC:
Now let's get a good brainstorming session going about any and all
the topics above.
Cheers
and kind regards,
The
Saker
6
September, 2014
There
are so many rumors and opinions about the latest ceasefire for
Novorussia agreed between the Novorussian leaders and the Junta reps
that I have decided to make a small survey of the issues in the
format of a Q&A/FAQ. I will write up a real analysis next
week. I also will use this opportunity to explain a few thing
about what my own personal position is. So here goes:
Q: Do you support or oppose the latest peaceplan?
A: Neither. First, I still have not seen the 14 points actually agreed upon and, most importantly, I don't believe that this plan will hold.
Q: Why not?
A: Because it is opposed by all the following groups: the USA, NATO, the Ukie Nazis, most of the Novorussian field commanders and a large segment of the Russian nationalist ideologues in Russia. Furthermore, Poroshenko is so weak that he probably cannot impose his will on others. Finally, the Ukies and their western supporters have so reneged on every agreement they signed/
Q: So you think that this agreement is irrelevent?
A: No, not at all. For one thing, it's perfect timing took a lot of wind out of the sails of the anti-Russian crowd at the NATO summit which, after all, did not result in anything more than hot air and empty threats.
Q: Are you saying that this is a victory for Russia?
A: Hardly, but it has been an effective way to temporarily defuse a potentially dangerous situation. Also, the very fact that neither the EU or NATO or the US were even present in Minsk is a very powerful symbol of the fact that the "indispensable nation" and it instruments of colonial domination are not indispensable after all.
Q: But will this ceasefire not allow the Junta Repression Force (JRF) to regroup?
Q: Do you support or oppose the latest peaceplan?
A: Neither. First, I still have not seen the 14 points actually agreed upon and, most importantly, I don't believe that this plan will hold.
Q: Why not?
A: Because it is opposed by all the following groups: the USA, NATO, the Ukie Nazis, most of the Novorussian field commanders and a large segment of the Russian nationalist ideologues in Russia. Furthermore, Poroshenko is so weak that he probably cannot impose his will on others. Finally, the Ukies and their western supporters have so reneged on every agreement they signed/
Q: So you think that this agreement is irrelevent?
A: No, not at all. For one thing, it's perfect timing took a lot of wind out of the sails of the anti-Russian crowd at the NATO summit which, after all, did not result in anything more than hot air and empty threats.
Q: Are you saying that this is a victory for Russia?
A: Hardly, but it has been an effective way to temporarily defuse a potentially dangerous situation. Also, the very fact that neither the EU or NATO or the US were even present in Minsk is a very powerful symbol of the fact that the "indispensable nation" and it instruments of colonial domination are not indispensable after all.
Q: But will this ceasefire not allow the Junta Repression Force (JRF) to regroup?
 |
|
Ukrainian
solider - Russian solider
|
A:
Yes, but that is not that relevant because of the size of its
strategic depth the Junta can to reorganize and regroup anyway.
Most the JRF units close to the front are so beat up that
"regrouping" will not help very much. At best
("best" for the JRF of course), this ceasefire will turn a
hasty retreat into a more or less organized withdrawal followed by a
much needed break. But the key thing to always remember is
this: wars are won by willpower, by moral strength, by a fighting
spirit. Unlike the Russians, the Ukies have had their fighting
spirit completely broken by the NAF. Check out the picture
circulating on the RuNet which I have posted above. It shows a
wounded Russian solider (from the 08.08.08 iirc) war against Georgia
and a Ukrainian solider captured in Novorussia (who had been made
famous by his militaristic and neo-Nazis videos posted on the Ukie
social media). This montage shows something crucial: just
compare the determined and undefeated expression of the severely
wounded Russia private with the totally broken and terrified
expression of the Ukrainian "paratrooper". The
difference here is not "Russian" vs "Ukrainian"
in an ethnic sense (there is no such thing as an "ethnic
Russian" or an "ethnic Ukrainian" - they are all
ethnically mixed), but the difference in the fighting
spirit of
the Russian solider and the Ukrainian one. And no amount of
US/NATO aid can change this: unlike the Ukie, the Russian knows what
he is fighting for and he is determined.
Q: What about Mariupol?
A: What about it? The city is still surrounded and the Novorussian Armed Forces (NAF) will not retreat. All this ceasefire does is "freeze" the situation around this city. If anything, the Ukies will use it to cut and run.
Q: Will the NAF benefit ceasefire?
A: Yes. There are several "cauldrons" in the NAF rear which are a pain, well, in the rear, which will hopefully be flushed out by a mutual agreement to have the JRF units to move out and leave their weapons behind. If not, then please remember that the NAF control all of the Novorussian/Russian border and that the "voentorg" (cover delivery of weapons and specialists) will continue unabated.
Q: Are you saying that all is good and we should rejoice?
A: Not at all. First, there are clear signs of infighting in Novorussia. Not only was Strelkov apparently blackmailed out of control, but there have been rumors of an attempted coup by Antiufeev yesterday. The Novorussians denied this info, others say that the coup failed, but there is no doubt that there are real tensions inside Novorussia now and that while some support the current strategy of negotiations (we can refer to them as the "Zakharchenko clan") others clearly oppose it (we can refer to them as the "Mozgovoi clan"). Likewise, in Russia there are those who favor this strategy (most of the "near-Kremlin" circles "околокремлевские круги" - I explain this term here) and those who oppose it (Dugin, Colonel Cassad, el-Miurid, and many other generally para-Marxist bloggers and activists).
Q: So you agree that this is bad for Novorussia?
A: No, I did not say that either. I think that this is probably an inevitable and possibly indispensable temporary phase in this conflict with is neither a triumph nor a disaster, but something which is a natural consequence of the situation on the ground.
Q: What do you mean?
A: Contrary to most commentators here, I do not believe that the NAF have been "treacherously stopped in what could have been their triumphant march on Kiev". The amazing successes in the south have totally obscured in the minds of many the undeniable fact that the JRF forces north of Luganks are still big, powerful and holding their ground, that the Ukies even managed a (small and useless) counter-offensive in the region of Dukuchaevsk and that, contrary to initial reports, the Donetsk airport is still not under full NAF control. Those who had imagined that the NAF would soon move on and take Odessa, Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk or even Kiev just don't understand the military situation. Right now, the NAF can't even take back Slaviansk, nevermind reconquer all of Novorussia.
Q: What about the notion that Russian and Ukie oligarchs are the real force behind this deal?
A: What oligarchs? Akhmetov has not only lost Donetsk forever, even the material infrastructure of this assets is now in ruins. Kolomoiski has had this assets in Crimea nationalized and he is now locked in a struggle with both Akhmetov and Poroshenko. As for the Russian oligarchs - they have exactly zero needs for anything in the Donbass and they are way too smart to invest anything in such a dangerous, unstable and ruined region. At least in the short term, only the Russian state will provide help for political reasons, but the Russian oligarchs have much safer and lucrative options than the ruined Donbass.
Q: Okay, then what about the accusation that rather then allowing the creation of a viable and independent Novorussia, Putin has created yet another Transnistria?
A: What is this thesis based on? On a 14 point plan which nobody has seen and which will be soon broken anyway?
Q: No, on the fact that instead of fighting Poroshenko and the Nazis, the Novorussians have been forced to negotiate with them.
A: Oh come on! How many times will I have to explain that, unlike westerners, Russians have no problems at all talking to their enemies? Study the history of the Tatar-Mongol invasions of Russia when the Russian Princes were always talking "negotiating" with the Khans of the Golden Horde, and yet that never prevented them from rising up and fighting them regularly. Russians are much more Asians than Europeans and in Asia talking to your enemy is normal, it is an integral part of warfare. If in the West talking or negotiating with your enemy is a sign of weakness, in Asia it is not talking or negotiating with your enemy which is a sign of weakness.
Q: So what do you think Putin want in this war?
A: What he always said he wanted: a united, independent, neutral, prosperous and friendly Ukraine, in other words - "regime change" in Kiev.
Q: So will he "sell out" Novorussia to achieve this goal?
A: I don't know. Unlike so many armchair generals who apparently also moonlight as telepaths and prophets, I cannot read Putin's mind or predict the future. What I can say is that so far I see no signs of Putin betraying or "selling out" anybody. In fact, it takes an amazing degree of blindness or intellectual dishonesty not to notice that the first and immediate consequence of what many assume was a Kremlin-ordered change in the Novorussian leadership has been a huge and successful offensive which crushed the JRF. If Putin wanted to "sell out" Novorussia to the Nazis, he could have easily done so just before that counter-offensive was launched.
Q: So you really love and trust Putin, don't you?
A: No, but I will admit that what I have seen this man do for Russia and the world fills me with sincere admiration, often bordering an awe, and that I see absolutely no signs of him changing course. What I see is a leader whose methods and strategies are simply too subtle and complex for most "armchair heads of states" to understand. The very same Putin-bashing crowd which now is hysterically yelling about betrayal was saying exactly the same things about Syria when Putin single handedly stopped the US attack on it. And when the Russians told the Syrian to get rid of their (dangerous and useless) chemical weapons the same Putin-bashers were yelling from the top of their lungs that this was the ultimate proof of Russian back-stabbing. Now Assad has, if not won the civil war, but conducted a successful reelection and the West is now eating humble-pie and pondering how to best get Assad's help in Iraq. So while I don't "love" Putin, I sure despise the Putin-bashers not only for their short-sightedness and lack of expertise, but for their mind-blowing intellectual dishonesty. They are like a broken record constantly repeating "Putin betrayed, Putin betrayed, Putin betrayed". In Russia this kind of rabid nationalists are called "горе патриоты" or "sorrow-patriots". They are the kind that never actually do anything useful, but are the most vociferous about what should be done. I want to make it clear that I am not referring to Strelkov, Mozgovoi or any other real patriot who happens to disagree with Putin. I am referring to those for whom Putin-bashing is an end in itself and who basically don't give a damn as long as they get to bash the man.
Q: Still, Novorussia wants independence while Putin wants a united Ukraine. Don't you see the contradiction here?
A: Of course I do. So? That does not mean that one side is "bad" and the other one "good", it just shows the truth of the US saying that "where I sit is where I stand". The real question is how this contradiction will be resolved. So far I don't know and I reserve judgment precisely because, unlike the "professional and full-time Putin bashers" I like to base my opinions on fact, not telepathy or prophetic visions.
Q: You constantly speak of "Putin bashers" - that is offensive to many!
A: Guess what? I am not a nice guy. I am an direct guy who calls it as he sees it and if that offends anybody, they are welcome to hug a teddy-bear and go sob on their bed. My message to them is - grow-up and remember that I owe you nothing. This is my blog and I write it for adults who value truthfulness and honesty over sugar-coated affirmations.
Q: What about Poroshenko - has he not won a huge break if not victory?
A: Yesterday I was watching the latest edition of the priceless Ukie propaganda show "Shuster Live" and it felt like I was watching a funeral. The host and all the guest were in a somber, sorrowful and quasi-depressed mode. Though they did not want to admit the magnitude of the beating which their "invincible Ukrainian army" just had taken, it was pretty darn clear that flag-waving was no more the order of the day. One Ukie official even said "when we are talking about 30 to 40 thousand armed men then we *have to* talk to tehse "terrorists"" - it was hilarious, really. So no. Poroshenko, far from having "won" anything, is in real deep trouble. For starters, his own Prime Minister - Iatseniuk - is absolutely outraged about the deal and makes no bones about it. Ditto for Timoshenko. I won't even go into the Nazi freaks. The fact is that the protecting Poroshenko will now become a major headache for the local CIA station in Kiev: the guy is in HUGEtrouble and his only hope is that during the next elections he will look less bad and less crazy then the rest of them. That is assuming these elections are held and that Iarosh or Tiagnibok do not simply seize power and execute Poroshenko for "high crimes, treason or being an FSB agent" (he is not, but how cares?!). The regime is so much on the defense that even though everybody knows that this plan is really Putin's plan, the Junta is engaged in a massive PR effort to convince the public that this is really Poroshenko's plan. The Russians, typically, just smile and are happy to give him the credit (remember, this is Asia - different rules apply).
Q: So what will happen next?
A: As I said, I am not a prophet. But what I know is this: Putin clearly has full control of Russia and Novorussia - what he says happens, he can deliver. Poroshenko has no control over anything, not even "his" own" ruling coalition. There is no real power in Banderastan right not, not even the local CIA station. For this simple reason I do not see how the ceasefire could hold. Then I don't see much change in the military balance either. The NAF is far more capable than the JRF whose only advantage lies in the huge strategic depth of this territory. The JRF used to (past tense!) have a huge advantage in hardware and manpower, but even this is changing now. In terms of hardware, most of the best hardware they had is now either lost or in NAF hands. Yes, they still have huge reserves, but of old and terribly maintained equipment. As for manpower, the Junta clearly has more and more difficulties finding enough men to compensate for its huge losses. Just ask yourself a basic question: if you were Ukie, even a nationalist, would you want to join to JRF and go fight the NAF? Exactly. Yes, NATO has promised 15 million dollars. That would buy the Ukies, what, maybe 10 old and used T-72 or 3 T-80? This is a joke, really. But even if the US provides 150 millions in covert aid - this will not affect the balance, nevermind tipping it. As for the NAF, it is doing well and will probably get even more men and modern gear through the "voentorg", but it cannot push too far. As one NAF commander said, "so far we have been liberators, but we don't want to become occupiers". The rule of thumb is simple: the further west the NAF goes, the less support it will get and the more it will expose itself to guerrilla warfare lead by a local insurgency. A far smarter strategy is to sit tight and watch the Ukies go after each other.
Q: Why do you think that will happen?
A: Because no matter what all this still holds true: the Ukraine was always an artificial country, Banderastan is even worse. There is no real power in control, even the Junta is "kinda" in power only. The country is economically dead dead dead. The economic crisis is only at it's very early stages, and from now on it's only going to get worse. Socially, the people are increasingly mad, disillusioned and feel lied to and, at the same time, less and less afraid to speak up. The Nazis are by far the most united and best armed group in the country, except for a theoretical "Ukrainian military" which, at least so far, has no leader and is therefore is not united (might this change in the future? Maybe). Basically, any person who took Social Sciences 101 in college will tell you that the Ukies will now turn on each other, God willing just with words and ideas, but violence is most likely. For the NAF it is far better to wait until Zaporozhie, Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkov or even Odessa turn into lawless cities which nobody really controls then to try to take them by force now. There is even a real possibility that the NAF might be seen as a liberator in these cities if chaos there reaches a "Mad Max" level.
Q: What if NATO sends in forces to prop-up the Junta?
A: LOL! First, I would strongly advise our AngloZionist "partners" (as they say in Russia) to first consult with their German, French and Polish colleagues to see if the latter have pleasant memories of being in charge of the Ukraine. Second, I would remind our AngloZionist partners that their move into Iraq and Afghanistan was supposed to be a love fest which would pay for itself. Third, I would also suggest to them that if they did not like Maliki, they might not like Iarosh either. Of course, sending a symbolic force to some maneuvers with whatever is left of the Ukie military is a good idea - it's called "showing the flag" - but to try to do something meaningful by trying to use NATO military forces inside the Ukraine would be very, very, dangerous even if Russia does nothing at all to make things worse.
Q: What about the EU?
A: I think that it lost it's willpower (not that it ever had much!). That ridiculous performance by Hollande has already come crushing down: turns out that his loud statement was an "individual opinion" with no legal meaning. Now, of course, the EU Kindergartgen (Poland, Lithuania, etc.) will keep on being what it is, a Kindergarten, but the adults (Germany, France, etc.) are showing signs of getting fed up. I don't expect them to make a 180 overnight, no, but I just expect them to stop pro-actively making things worse. One of the possible signs of that might be a decrease in the role of the EU and an increase in the role of the OSCE.
Q: And what about Uncle Sam?
A: He is totally stuck in his only mode: demands, threats, condemnation, demands, threats, condemnation, etc. etc. etc. Normally "aggression" is part of that mantra, except that neither the US nor NATO have what it takes to militarily attack Russia. As for the AngloZionist 'deep state' it will continue to try subvert and economically cripple Russia, but as long as Putin is on the Kremlin I don't see that strategy succeeding either.
Q: Sounds like you are optimistic.
A: If so, then only very very cautiously so. I don't see a big drama, much less so a disaster, in what just happened, I think that Russia holds all the good cards in this game, and I see no danger for the people of Novorussia. To those who wanted to ride on a tank straight to the Maidan I can only say that even though I very much share their hopes and dreams, politics is the art of the possible and that smart politics are often slow and time-consuming politics. Maximalism is good for teenagers, not heads of state whose decision affect the lives of millions of people. Thus my temporary and provisional conclusion is this: so far, so good, things are better than they seemed to be only 2 months ago and I see no reason to expect a major reversal in the foreseeable future.
Q: What do you consider the biggest danger for Novorussia right now?
A: Political infighting. I don't know if this is possible right now, but I would like to see the emergence of an undisputed Novorussian leader who would have the official and full support of Strelkov, Zakharchenko, Borodai, Mozgovoi, Kononov, Khodakovski, Tsarev, Bolotov, Gubarev and all the other political and military leaders. This has to be a truly Novorussian leader, not just a "Putin proconsul", a person capable of negotiating with Putin for the interests of the people of Novorussia. I don't mean to suggest that these negotiations cannot be friendly, if only because there can be no Novorussia against Russia, but this leader needs to represent the interests of the Novorussian people, and not the Russian people whose interests are (very well) represented by Putin himself. Right now, the main reason why Putin has so much power in Novorussia is primarily because there is still no real Novorussian political leadership. There is a Novorussian military leadership, and even they probably have to more or less do what the Russian military tells them to do. Far from being weakened by the emergence of such a truly independent and truly Novorussian leader, I think that the Russian-Novorussian alliance would be greatly strengthened by it. Novorussia should not, and cannot, be micro-managed from the Kremlin. In other words, what I hope is for a "Novorussian Nasrallah" who would be a loyal and faithful but sovereign and independent ally of Putin (like Nasrallah is for Ayatollah Ali Khamenei), but not a poodle like Blair or Hollande. Novorussia needs a spokesman and negotiator who could really have a mandate to speak for the people of Novorussia. Until that happens, I will always be worried for the future of the people of Novorussia.
Q: What about Mariupol?
A: What about it? The city is still surrounded and the Novorussian Armed Forces (NAF) will not retreat. All this ceasefire does is "freeze" the situation around this city. If anything, the Ukies will use it to cut and run.
Q: Will the NAF benefit ceasefire?
A: Yes. There are several "cauldrons" in the NAF rear which are a pain, well, in the rear, which will hopefully be flushed out by a mutual agreement to have the JRF units to move out and leave their weapons behind. If not, then please remember that the NAF control all of the Novorussian/Russian border and that the "voentorg" (cover delivery of weapons and specialists) will continue unabated.
Q: Are you saying that all is good and we should rejoice?
A: Not at all. First, there are clear signs of infighting in Novorussia. Not only was Strelkov apparently blackmailed out of control, but there have been rumors of an attempted coup by Antiufeev yesterday. The Novorussians denied this info, others say that the coup failed, but there is no doubt that there are real tensions inside Novorussia now and that while some support the current strategy of negotiations (we can refer to them as the "Zakharchenko clan") others clearly oppose it (we can refer to them as the "Mozgovoi clan"). Likewise, in Russia there are those who favor this strategy (most of the "near-Kremlin" circles "околокремлевские круги" - I explain this term here) and those who oppose it (Dugin, Colonel Cassad, el-Miurid, and many other generally para-Marxist bloggers and activists).
Q: So you agree that this is bad for Novorussia?
A: No, I did not say that either. I think that this is probably an inevitable and possibly indispensable temporary phase in this conflict with is neither a triumph nor a disaster, but something which is a natural consequence of the situation on the ground.
Q: What do you mean?
A: Contrary to most commentators here, I do not believe that the NAF have been "treacherously stopped in what could have been their triumphant march on Kiev". The amazing successes in the south have totally obscured in the minds of many the undeniable fact that the JRF forces north of Luganks are still big, powerful and holding their ground, that the Ukies even managed a (small and useless) counter-offensive in the region of Dukuchaevsk and that, contrary to initial reports, the Donetsk airport is still not under full NAF control. Those who had imagined that the NAF would soon move on and take Odessa, Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk or even Kiev just don't understand the military situation. Right now, the NAF can't even take back Slaviansk, nevermind reconquer all of Novorussia.
Q: What about the notion that Russian and Ukie oligarchs are the real force behind this deal?
A: What oligarchs? Akhmetov has not only lost Donetsk forever, even the material infrastructure of this assets is now in ruins. Kolomoiski has had this assets in Crimea nationalized and he is now locked in a struggle with both Akhmetov and Poroshenko. As for the Russian oligarchs - they have exactly zero needs for anything in the Donbass and they are way too smart to invest anything in such a dangerous, unstable and ruined region. At least in the short term, only the Russian state will provide help for political reasons, but the Russian oligarchs have much safer and lucrative options than the ruined Donbass.
Q: Okay, then what about the accusation that rather then allowing the creation of a viable and independent Novorussia, Putin has created yet another Transnistria?
A: What is this thesis based on? On a 14 point plan which nobody has seen and which will be soon broken anyway?
Q: No, on the fact that instead of fighting Poroshenko and the Nazis, the Novorussians have been forced to negotiate with them.
A: Oh come on! How many times will I have to explain that, unlike westerners, Russians have no problems at all talking to their enemies? Study the history of the Tatar-Mongol invasions of Russia when the Russian Princes were always talking "negotiating" with the Khans of the Golden Horde, and yet that never prevented them from rising up and fighting them regularly. Russians are much more Asians than Europeans and in Asia talking to your enemy is normal, it is an integral part of warfare. If in the West talking or negotiating with your enemy is a sign of weakness, in Asia it is not talking or negotiating with your enemy which is a sign of weakness.
Q: So what do you think Putin want in this war?
A: What he always said he wanted: a united, independent, neutral, prosperous and friendly Ukraine, in other words - "regime change" in Kiev.
Q: So will he "sell out" Novorussia to achieve this goal?
A: I don't know. Unlike so many armchair generals who apparently also moonlight as telepaths and prophets, I cannot read Putin's mind or predict the future. What I can say is that so far I see no signs of Putin betraying or "selling out" anybody. In fact, it takes an amazing degree of blindness or intellectual dishonesty not to notice that the first and immediate consequence of what many assume was a Kremlin-ordered change in the Novorussian leadership has been a huge and successful offensive which crushed the JRF. If Putin wanted to "sell out" Novorussia to the Nazis, he could have easily done so just before that counter-offensive was launched.
Q: So you really love and trust Putin, don't you?
A: No, but I will admit that what I have seen this man do for Russia and the world fills me with sincere admiration, often bordering an awe, and that I see absolutely no signs of him changing course. What I see is a leader whose methods and strategies are simply too subtle and complex for most "armchair heads of states" to understand. The very same Putin-bashing crowd which now is hysterically yelling about betrayal was saying exactly the same things about Syria when Putin single handedly stopped the US attack on it. And when the Russians told the Syrian to get rid of their (dangerous and useless) chemical weapons the same Putin-bashers were yelling from the top of their lungs that this was the ultimate proof of Russian back-stabbing. Now Assad has, if not won the civil war, but conducted a successful reelection and the West is now eating humble-pie and pondering how to best get Assad's help in Iraq. So while I don't "love" Putin, I sure despise the Putin-bashers not only for their short-sightedness and lack of expertise, but for their mind-blowing intellectual dishonesty. They are like a broken record constantly repeating "Putin betrayed, Putin betrayed, Putin betrayed". In Russia this kind of rabid nationalists are called "горе патриоты" or "sorrow-patriots". They are the kind that never actually do anything useful, but are the most vociferous about what should be done. I want to make it clear that I am not referring to Strelkov, Mozgovoi or any other real patriot who happens to disagree with Putin. I am referring to those for whom Putin-bashing is an end in itself and who basically don't give a damn as long as they get to bash the man.
Q: Still, Novorussia wants independence while Putin wants a united Ukraine. Don't you see the contradiction here?
A: Of course I do. So? That does not mean that one side is "bad" and the other one "good", it just shows the truth of the US saying that "where I sit is where I stand". The real question is how this contradiction will be resolved. So far I don't know and I reserve judgment precisely because, unlike the "professional and full-time Putin bashers" I like to base my opinions on fact, not telepathy or prophetic visions.
Q: You constantly speak of "Putin bashers" - that is offensive to many!
A: Guess what? I am not a nice guy. I am an direct guy who calls it as he sees it and if that offends anybody, they are welcome to hug a teddy-bear and go sob on their bed. My message to them is - grow-up and remember that I owe you nothing. This is my blog and I write it for adults who value truthfulness and honesty over sugar-coated affirmations.
Q: What about Poroshenko - has he not won a huge break if not victory?
A: Yesterday I was watching the latest edition of the priceless Ukie propaganda show "Shuster Live" and it felt like I was watching a funeral. The host and all the guest were in a somber, sorrowful and quasi-depressed mode. Though they did not want to admit the magnitude of the beating which their "invincible Ukrainian army" just had taken, it was pretty darn clear that flag-waving was no more the order of the day. One Ukie official even said "when we are talking about 30 to 40 thousand armed men then we *have to* talk to tehse "terrorists"" - it was hilarious, really. So no. Poroshenko, far from having "won" anything, is in real deep trouble. For starters, his own Prime Minister - Iatseniuk - is absolutely outraged about the deal and makes no bones about it. Ditto for Timoshenko. I won't even go into the Nazi freaks. The fact is that the protecting Poroshenko will now become a major headache for the local CIA station in Kiev: the guy is in HUGEtrouble and his only hope is that during the next elections he will look less bad and less crazy then the rest of them. That is assuming these elections are held and that Iarosh or Tiagnibok do not simply seize power and execute Poroshenko for "high crimes, treason or being an FSB agent" (he is not, but how cares?!). The regime is so much on the defense that even though everybody knows that this plan is really Putin's plan, the Junta is engaged in a massive PR effort to convince the public that this is really Poroshenko's plan. The Russians, typically, just smile and are happy to give him the credit (remember, this is Asia - different rules apply).
Q: So what will happen next?
A: As I said, I am not a prophet. But what I know is this: Putin clearly has full control of Russia and Novorussia - what he says happens, he can deliver. Poroshenko has no control over anything, not even "his" own" ruling coalition. There is no real power in Banderastan right not, not even the local CIA station. For this simple reason I do not see how the ceasefire could hold. Then I don't see much change in the military balance either. The NAF is far more capable than the JRF whose only advantage lies in the huge strategic depth of this territory. The JRF used to (past tense!) have a huge advantage in hardware and manpower, but even this is changing now. In terms of hardware, most of the best hardware they had is now either lost or in NAF hands. Yes, they still have huge reserves, but of old and terribly maintained equipment. As for manpower, the Junta clearly has more and more difficulties finding enough men to compensate for its huge losses. Just ask yourself a basic question: if you were Ukie, even a nationalist, would you want to join to JRF and go fight the NAF? Exactly. Yes, NATO has promised 15 million dollars. That would buy the Ukies, what, maybe 10 old and used T-72 or 3 T-80? This is a joke, really. But even if the US provides 150 millions in covert aid - this will not affect the balance, nevermind tipping it. As for the NAF, it is doing well and will probably get even more men and modern gear through the "voentorg", but it cannot push too far. As one NAF commander said, "so far we have been liberators, but we don't want to become occupiers". The rule of thumb is simple: the further west the NAF goes, the less support it will get and the more it will expose itself to guerrilla warfare lead by a local insurgency. A far smarter strategy is to sit tight and watch the Ukies go after each other.
Q: Why do you think that will happen?
A: Because no matter what all this still holds true: the Ukraine was always an artificial country, Banderastan is even worse. There is no real power in control, even the Junta is "kinda" in power only. The country is economically dead dead dead. The economic crisis is only at it's very early stages, and from now on it's only going to get worse. Socially, the people are increasingly mad, disillusioned and feel lied to and, at the same time, less and less afraid to speak up. The Nazis are by far the most united and best armed group in the country, except for a theoretical "Ukrainian military" which, at least so far, has no leader and is therefore is not united (might this change in the future? Maybe). Basically, any person who took Social Sciences 101 in college will tell you that the Ukies will now turn on each other, God willing just with words and ideas, but violence is most likely. For the NAF it is far better to wait until Zaporozhie, Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkov or even Odessa turn into lawless cities which nobody really controls then to try to take them by force now. There is even a real possibility that the NAF might be seen as a liberator in these cities if chaos there reaches a "Mad Max" level.
Q: What if NATO sends in forces to prop-up the Junta?
A: LOL! First, I would strongly advise our AngloZionist "partners" (as they say in Russia) to first consult with their German, French and Polish colleagues to see if the latter have pleasant memories of being in charge of the Ukraine. Second, I would remind our AngloZionist partners that their move into Iraq and Afghanistan was supposed to be a love fest which would pay for itself. Third, I would also suggest to them that if they did not like Maliki, they might not like Iarosh either. Of course, sending a symbolic force to some maneuvers with whatever is left of the Ukie military is a good idea - it's called "showing the flag" - but to try to do something meaningful by trying to use NATO military forces inside the Ukraine would be very, very, dangerous even if Russia does nothing at all to make things worse.
Q: What about the EU?
A: I think that it lost it's willpower (not that it ever had much!). That ridiculous performance by Hollande has already come crushing down: turns out that his loud statement was an "individual opinion" with no legal meaning. Now, of course, the EU Kindergartgen (Poland, Lithuania, etc.) will keep on being what it is, a Kindergarten, but the adults (Germany, France, etc.) are showing signs of getting fed up. I don't expect them to make a 180 overnight, no, but I just expect them to stop pro-actively making things worse. One of the possible signs of that might be a decrease in the role of the EU and an increase in the role of the OSCE.
Q: And what about Uncle Sam?
A: He is totally stuck in his only mode: demands, threats, condemnation, demands, threats, condemnation, etc. etc. etc. Normally "aggression" is part of that mantra, except that neither the US nor NATO have what it takes to militarily attack Russia. As for the AngloZionist 'deep state' it will continue to try subvert and economically cripple Russia, but as long as Putin is on the Kremlin I don't see that strategy succeeding either.
Q: Sounds like you are optimistic.
A: If so, then only very very cautiously so. I don't see a big drama, much less so a disaster, in what just happened, I think that Russia holds all the good cards in this game, and I see no danger for the people of Novorussia. To those who wanted to ride on a tank straight to the Maidan I can only say that even though I very much share their hopes and dreams, politics is the art of the possible and that smart politics are often slow and time-consuming politics. Maximalism is good for teenagers, not heads of state whose decision affect the lives of millions of people. Thus my temporary and provisional conclusion is this: so far, so good, things are better than they seemed to be only 2 months ago and I see no reason to expect a major reversal in the foreseeable future.
Q: What do you consider the biggest danger for Novorussia right now?
A: Political infighting. I don't know if this is possible right now, but I would like to see the emergence of an undisputed Novorussian leader who would have the official and full support of Strelkov, Zakharchenko, Borodai, Mozgovoi, Kononov, Khodakovski, Tsarev, Bolotov, Gubarev and all the other political and military leaders. This has to be a truly Novorussian leader, not just a "Putin proconsul", a person capable of negotiating with Putin for the interests of the people of Novorussia. I don't mean to suggest that these negotiations cannot be friendly, if only because there can be no Novorussia against Russia, but this leader needs to represent the interests of the Novorussian people, and not the Russian people whose interests are (very well) represented by Putin himself. Right now, the main reason why Putin has so much power in Novorussia is primarily because there is still no real Novorussian political leadership. There is a Novorussian military leadership, and even they probably have to more or less do what the Russian military tells them to do. Far from being weakened by the emergence of such a truly independent and truly Novorussian leader, I think that the Russian-Novorussian alliance would be greatly strengthened by it. Novorussia should not, and cannot, be micro-managed from the Kremlin. In other words, what I hope is for a "Novorussian Nasrallah" who would be a loyal and faithful but sovereign and independent ally of Putin (like Nasrallah is for Ayatollah Ali Khamenei), but not a poodle like Blair or Hollande. Novorussia needs a spokesman and negotiator who could really have a mandate to speak for the people of Novorussia. Until that happens, I will always be worried for the future of the people of Novorussia.
*******
That's
it for now. I hope that with this self-made Q&A/FAQ I have
replied to many, if not most, of the questions, comments and emails
I simply had no time to respond to in the past. I also hope to
have set the record straight about my own views which have been
constantly and systematically mis-represented by either dishonest or
plain stupid individuals. If I am succeeded in terminally
offending and discouraging the Putin-haters - good. I am tired
of dealing with their illiterate rants. Ditto for Saker-haters
(- : told you: I am not a nice guy :-), to whom I will add this
personal message: stop telling me what I am supposed to do, say,
think or write. This blog is like an AA meeting: "take
what you like and leave the rest". But don't expect
me to change and don't expect me to change my views unless you can
show me by facts and logic that I
am wrong (in which case I will gratefully welcome the opportunity
correct my mistake). Rants just annoy me, especially racist
ones, but they won't make me turn into a clone of you.
Sorry if I forgot many good questions or points and please feel free to post more comments or questions, and I will try to answer those which a) do not misrepresent my views (no more strawman) or b) which I have not already answered ad nauseam elsewhere. To those of you who have - correctly - detected my irritation and/or frustration with certain comments I will simply say "guilty as charged" (- : told you: I am definitely not a nice guy :-). I won't even bother justifying myself, either you can or you cannot imagine how frustrating it is for me to deal with, shall we say, some "personality types". But either way there is nothing I could add to affect that. To the many kind, supportive, respectful, generous, educated, wise, interesting, funny, sophisticated, compassionate, intelligent, principled, honest, honorable and otherwise wonderful members of our community I want to express my most heartfelt and sincere gratitude: I simple don't know how I could have made it through these terrible and tragic months without your help, support and kindness.
RFC: Now let's get a good brainstorming session going about any and all the topics above.
Cheers and kind regards,
The Saker
Kiev – Going on the Defensive…
6 September, 2014
[Translator’s
note: The new mayor of Kiev, Vitaly Klichko, is a lot better boxer
than public speaker. His latest gaffe was saying, roughly, the
following: “The residents of Kiev should get ready for timber
(coffins)” instead of “get ready for winter”, when talking
about lack of gas for winter heating.]
Translator:
Daniil Mihailovich
Editor: S. Naylor
Original Source: Colonel Cassad LiveJournal
Editor: S. Naylor
Original Source: Colonel Cassad LiveJournal
The
events of recent days clearly indicate that the Kiev Junta is
switching to strategic defense tactic in the Donbass.
1.
The positions around Mariupol, Artemovsk, Constantinovka, and
Lisichansk are being fortified. This is no longer about using these
cities as bases for an offensive, we are talking about trying to hold
them in defensive battles. The Militia should accomplish putting an
end to the shelling of Donetsk in about a week. The Junta will try to
keep shelling for political reasons; as the cessation of terror
attacks on Donetsk would be a clear symptom of a complete disaster,
even for the most brainwashed “European Ukrainians”
2.
Leaving more than 20 settlements in Lugansk People’s
Republic(“LPR”) with open flanks shows that attempts encircle the
city are over. Junta forces that can be saved, will be pulled out of
the boiler to the south-west of Luhansk, then the front will slowly
move away to the north of Lugansk, because in its current
configuration, Junta is risking enveloping strikes by Novorossiya
Armed Forces (“NAF”) mechanized units. A huge column of armored
vehicles in Krasnodon demonstrates the potential power of such
attacks, against which the Junta simply has nothing.
3.
The Junta is moving troops from Perekop to Mariupol and Odessa. We
can now say goodbye to the plans of military provocations by Armyansk
and Chongar. The huge losses of the “Crimea” punitive battalion
by Ilovaysk have also seriously weakened the potential future
reconnaissance and sabotage capacities in Crimea proper. The Junta
initially made a fundamental error when it began massing a part
of its forces by Perekop. They were not sufficient to capture Crimea,
or to fend off a Russian invasion from the Crimea, and it is quite
possible that several battalions with reinforcements were exactly
what the Junta lacked in the decisive battles for Shahtersk and
Krasnyi Luch. In the end, they still had to be redeployed to the
Donbass, but only after they could no longer change anything,
strategically. The Crimea itself has now been completely taken out of
the equation; the Junta now has too much to deal with elsewhere, so
the ambitious plans of military and political pressure on the Crimea
are apparently dead for now.
4.
A similar pattern of events has occurred in the area near
Transnistria. The forces that the Junta had concentrated there have
now been redeployed to Donbass to close holes in the front lines. The
plan of combined pressure against Transnistria, together with the
United States and Moldova, turned out to be stillborn. Now there are
no chances for a successful offensive there, so nothing serious will
be deployed against Transnistria.
5.
The Junta’s fourth wave of mobilization is supposed to somehow make
up for their losses, but its “success” will be similar to the
third wave. The fact that the fresh cannon fodder are being equipped
with obsolete BTR-60/70 APCs (Armoured Personnel Carriers) and
machine guns from the 1930s clearly indicates that those unfit for
service will also be armed with obsolete weapons, so ground down
professional army brigades will be replaced with the new “Ukrainian
Volkssturm” – pointless and depressing, and even the punitive
battalions will appear capable in comparison to these new forces.
6.
The Junta persists in the separation of army units from punitive
forces. Punitive units are now even given tanks and IFVs, thus
repeating the failed experiment of the Nazis, separating individual
units of the SS from the rest of the armed forces, with their own
hierarchy, equipment and command. The main problem in these units is
lack of competent commanders, which systematically results in high
losses of personnel and vehicles.
7.
Thus, the autumn starts with the Junta in transition from offence to
defense, and there are clearly not enough resources to hold the
entire line; even after the front is straightened out. It should be
understood that even if the Junta could stretch a solid front line
from Donetsk to Berdyansk, there would be nothing available to close
a gap in the event of another breakthrough. In general, the size of
the theater of operations clearly exceeds the abilities of the
warring parties.
The Junta is facing the same problem faced by the
NAF in June, when it was trying to hold large areas without
sufficient forces to do so, which led to breaks in the front. Now the
Junta is in the same situation, thus emphasizing that operational
initiative is the key to victory, in the event one lacks sufficient
forces to control large swathes of territory. The side which has the
operational initiative can choose the direction of attack,
concentrate forces there, achieve local superiority, and convert
these efforts to captured towns and cities; and burning enemy
vehicles with charred corpses lying along the roads.
8.
As the Junta cannot seize the initiative back yet (the concentration
of 1-2 brigades by Zaporozhye, to be used for counter-attack,
requires a few more days), it began a retreat, during which it tried
to free up additional forces for the southern front and transition to
a stubborn defense of advantageous positions. It is now key for the
NAF to keep the operational initiative, as it more than offsets the
advantages of the enemy in manpower and vehicles. In this respect,
while carrying out offensives in several directions, it is important
not to overdo it and not to expose the flanks to cleaving strikes of
Junta’s mechanized forces (the NAF still had trouble parrying these
strikes as late as August).
Overall,
as of September 3rd, we can confidently say that the fascist Junta
has switched to strategic defense in the Donbass.
Alexey Mozgovoi: I Will Continue to the End!
Slavyangrad,
6
September, 2014
Alexey Mozgovoi, September 4, 2014: Against the Oligarchs and False Politicians. For the People.
Novorossiya
shall be! Oligarchs out! Power to the real, common people! This is
our [first] chance in many decades to build an equitable, human and
humane society.
WITH RESPECT TO
STRELKOV HAVING BEEN BETRAYED AND BETRAYAL IN GENERAL.
There
are so many who did not like what was begun and do not want to push
it to its logical conclusion!
They
only have money, offices and portfolios in their heads! But why did
the people of the South-East rise up??? Was it just so that they
could lose countless lives, lose their livelihoods, lose their
confidence in the future?
If
we are fighting for the interests of the people, is it not up to the
people themselves to decide the outcome of this struggle? See it
through completely…
Who
among these so-called members of the governments of the DPR and the
LPR bothered to ask the opinion of the Militiamen, who lose their
comrades in battles; the opinion of the relatives, who lost fathers,
sons and daughters in this struggle for the right to live free and to
choose their own path? I believe none of them did. All this seems to
be a farce; a spectacle, in which the role of the people of
Novorossiya is to be extras on the set.
There
have now been several stages of this betrayal of Novorossiya
(including the ‘resignation’ of Igor Ivanovich Strelkov). In my
opinion, right now, we are witnessing another attempt, by means of
negotiations, to stop the resistance and to prevent the destruction
of the oligarchic power in Ukraine. The fifth column in action… The
transfer of power from the oligarchy to the people—right now this
is the so-called international community’s nightmare. It became
clear to everyone long ago that the world is ruled by the likes of
Valtsman [Poroshenko], Chubais and the Rockefellers. For these,
removal from power is akin to death.
And
what do we see now? ARRANGEMENTS! And with whom? At the negotiating
table: the venerable Kuchma! During his reign, the fat cats only
gained momentum and swelled their appetites! Corruption soared to
inexplicable heights. He should be prosecuted, not negotiated with!
What will happen to the special status of Novorossiya, when all the
same contract killers will remain? What guarantees can be discussed
with people that have eliminated the word TRUTH from their
vocabulary?
Only
Kiev’s capitulation can resolve the current situation. Only
a separation of business interests from government can offer the
chance to build a state with a human face. And only the prosecution
of those who hold power, of the world “elite” can enable the
people to regain their dignity. Otherwise it was all for naught—all
the slogans and all the victims.
Do
we want to remain as marionettes in the hands of the armchair
intellectuals? I am not satisfied with such a prospect! We did not
take up arms just to stop halfway.
There
always was and always will be fear. Right now, many are afraid of the
coming winter. But this is animal fear. I am much more afraid of
staying as a serf—of remaining an animal in the hands of the glossy
feudal lords.
I
will continue to the end! Until we reach the intended target! Until
the full and unconditional victory of the free and proud Russian
Slavic World!!!
The Children Battalion of Precarphatia
The Slavjansk Diary – A Tragedy unfolding
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.