by Vladislav Shurigin
Note: this is a machine translation of an article I came across on the Runet. The Saker
Today, commenting on the response received from Washington, Lavrov quite unexpectedly plunged into lengthy explanations on the topic that the American response, being in essence and in meaning a frank counter-ultimatum of Russia (in which we were quite unequivocally sent on an erotic journey on foot on all key topics for Russia – the non-admission of Ukraine to NATO, the non-proliferation of NATO further East and a return to the geopolitical situation of 1999), is quite productive and meaningful, in which there are rational grains. “We received only the day before yesterday answers that in such a Western style cast a shadow on the fence in many ways, but there are rational grains, as I have already said, on secondary issues,” the minister said in an interview with Sputnik, Echo of Moscow, Moscow Speaks and Komsomolskaya Pravda radio stations.
What kind of “grains” did Mr. Lavrov find, rubbing between his fingers the American substance that they piled on our demands? According to him, among such topics that would be important for Russia is a return to negotiations on medium- and shorter-range missiles, a moratorium on the deployment of which in Europe was previously proposed by the President of the Russian Federation. In addition, Russia offered to coordinate verification measures for such a withdrawal.
“Then it was ignored, and now it is included in their proposals. Just as our initiatives introduced by the General Staff were ignored, on the withdrawal of exercises away from the border on both sides, on the coordination of the maximum distance for the rapprochement of combat aircraft and ships, a number of other de-escalation and deconfliction measures, confidence-building measures,” the minister said and almost happily added: “All this has been rejected over the past two or three years, now it is proposed to discuss all this.”
And now I want to remind you of my own text “The Calm before the Storm”, written exactly a month ago, immediately after the publication of our demands to the United States and NATO: “… Washington faces the task of winning time from Moscow, during which the AFU will be strengthened to the level, as already mentioned above, at which they will be able to wage war with Russia for quite a long time with the massive military-technical assistance of Western allies and their limited participation (Air Force, air defense, intelligence, special forces).
Having reached this level, the Armed Forces of Ukraine will certainly begin hostilities against the republics at any convenient occasion or provocation, and Russia will face the prospect of getting involved in an exhausting war and finding itself in complete economic isolation after the introduction of new “total” sanctions – or resign itself and cede Donbass to Ukraine with all the reputational consequences for itself.
According to experts, it takes another 18-24 months to “pump up” Ukraine, provided maximum military supplies of equipment and weapons to Ukraine, as well as the deployment of NATO military contingents and its logistics infrastructure along the Ukrainian borders. Actually, this task – the gain of time – is now determined by the US policy towards Russia. Maximum pressure in all directions, accusations that Russia is going to attack Ukraine in the near future, demands for the withdrawal of troops – on the one hand. And on the other – the constant generation of illusions of negotiations, meetings of diplomats and even direct contacts of presidents. All this has one goal in mind – to draw Russia into an endless process that has no implementation.”
Then, two weeks later, commenting on the first reviews of Americans on our demands on the radio station “Moscow Speaks”, I literally said the following: “It’s good when you know the player opposite for many years and how he bluffs. Of our three main positions, they chose one, but the one that is really important to them is to agree on missiles. Because we are seriously outperforming them here, we are leading in the latest weapons in a number of areas. They need a time reserve. Therefore, they say that they are ready to discuss the topic of disarmament with us – here they are the darlings themselves. And they are not ready to discuss everything else.”
I am not an employee of the Russian Foreign Ministry and certainly do not have my sources in the US State Department, but even my modest experience of third-party observation of how Americans have been behaving with Russia for the last thirty years was enough to predict how they will behave today. This is nothing new!
The key question is another – how will we continue to behave? To answer it, we will try to understand at what point of the Ukrainian crisis we are at today.
We completely missed the chance to “reset” Ukraine in 2014, when after the February coup in Kiev, we could completely change the political landscape of the “nezalezhnaya”. Pro-Russian forces (at that time the most powerful among the political movements of Ukraine), relying on our power, political and economic support, could politically “wall up” the pro-Western, pro-American Maidan in Kiev together with the Bandera Nazis who fully supported it, create a parallel power center headed by legitimate President Yanukovych in Kharkiv and unite the regions of the east and south-east of Ukraine around it, depriving Kiev not only of two-thirds of the economic potential and access to sea trade routes, but also most of the army and even legitimacy, after all, the coup took place the day after the agreements signed between the leaders of the Maidan and Yanukovych on resolving the political crisis. It was the perfect opportunity, but we missed it. Who in the Kremlin insisted on recognizing the legitimacy of the coup in Kiev, we will find out after the publication of the materials of the meetings of the Security Council, but today, according to the reshuffle in the leadership of the presidential administration soon after these events, we can understand who it was.
In 2014-2015, we did not use the chance to change the “configuration” of Novorossiya – Donbass, which spontaneously appeared on the political map of Ukraine, when, after the start of Kiev’s punitive operation against the rebellious self-proclaimed republics, Kiev suffered a crushing military defeat – first in the summer of 2014, and then in January-February 2015, which would allow pushing the borders of Novorossiya beyond Mariupol and northwest to the political border of the Luhansk region. Instead, the Kremlin again went to the preservation of the Kiev regime and agreed to negotiations in Minsk, hoping thereby to somehow cajole the collective West, maintain partnership relations with it, and at the same time “send a signal” to Kiev about the senselessness of further war.
Once again, the Kremlin made a strategic miscalculation. It was not possible to “appease” the West – a “crusade” was launched against Russia, led by the leader of the Western world, the United States. All kinds of sanctions were imposed, unprecedented pressure on Moscow began, and the largest operation since the Soviet era was launched to destabilize the internal situation in Russia, form a pro-Western irreconcilable opposition in it and prepare for the “orange revolution”. At the same time, Ukraine received a full military-political protectorate of the United States and NATO, then modern equipment and weapons went to Ukraine, military reform was initiated and carried out under American and NATO control. In parallel with this, in 2015-2017, a large-scale cleansing of the political and information space was carried out from any, even minimally suspected of “pro-Russian” leaders, movements and the media. An unprecedented information and propaganda campaign has been launched to mobilize the population of Ukraine against the main historical enemy – Russia.
The Kremlin has not responded to this threat in any way.
Over the next four years, not even a minimally effective information pool was created, broadcasting to Ukraine and working with the Ukrainian population. Apart from a few websites and a couple of informational programs on Russian TV, there is absolutely nothing in this space of war! And this allows the Kiev leadership to be absolutely confident in the reliable control of the anti-Russian sentiments of the majority of the population of Ukraine. We have completely lost the information campaign for the minds of Ukrainians.
Apparently, the Kremlin began to realize the drama of the situation only at the end of 2020, when it became finally clear that Ukraine, under the new President Zelensky, was not only not going to somehow restore relations with Russia, but, on the contrary, was increasingly openly opposing Russia and preparing for war with it, rapidly developing and increasing its Armed Forces. It became clear that there would be no peaceful resolution of the crisis in Donbas. That Ukraine’s “curators” no longer consider it as a potential defenseless victim of Russian aggression, but are increasingly openly preparing it as a trap into which Russia will have to fall when Ukraine’s military power is brought to a level that allows it to effectively fight against Moscow for sufficient time, during which large-scale military-technical assistance will be launched and the price of victory for Moscow will become unacceptable. This means that Russia will either have to get involved in this military conflict with unclear military and domestic political consequences, or accept and cede Donbass to Ukraine, as Milosevic had to give in to Western pressure and “surrender” Serbian Bosnia and Serbian Krajina, which will also lead to disastrous domestic political consequences for the Kremlin’s rating.
Both are equally satisfied with Washington and London, who are building this trap for Moscow today.
The testing of this plan, or rather, its first stage could be a sharp aggravation of the situation in the Donbas in February – March last year. Even a local offensive by the Ukrainian army would require Russian military intervention. And this would be immediately used to break Russia’s economic ties with the EEC, completely stop the Nord Stream-2 and “marginalize” Russia as an “aggressor”.
Thanks for posting this article.
If I may be so bold as to suggest additional measures to break the trap:
*Refuse to accept US dollars and euros for payment of Russian exports.
*Announce a temporary deployment (6-8 months) of Russian air defence troops to Cuba and Venezuela, during which time Russian troops can train local personnel to operate & maintain the full suite of S-400, BukM2, and Pantsir air defence systems.
*Complete ban on NATO civilian airliners from using Russian airspace
Yesterday’s soup.
Sounds like Strelkov and his sidekick, the Armenian philosopher of war writings.
The military calculus is in the hands of Shoigu and Gerasimov, not the Kremlin.
Reading this analysis is like looking at a mirror image or an image through a photographic lens, everything is upside down and left to right. However, the reality hasn’t changed just because you look through a lens. Up is up and down is down and left is left and right is right.
Ukraine is a treasure not sought by Russia. It is a dungheap of millions of Russophobes and nazis.
Donbass barely measures up as a 50-50 proposition. Even many pro-Russians in Donbass liked being part of Ukraine. It was their history. It only turned deadly after the Maidan.
The two oblasts, now shrunken to the two republics in waiting, have never been on the same page. Lugansk was run by criminal war lords repurposed as heroic battalion leaders. The two governments since the separatist uprising have never become one. The Army Russia fashioned after the fighting was over is unified. And controlled by Russian military. There is nothing organic about Donbass except problems, egos and corruption. The watermarks of the problems are all Ukrainian not Russian.
This article’s author thinks there is a pot of gold easily taken with no costs thereafter.
We know Ukraine is a fetid cesspool. What we must have our eyes open to is the pail of crap that comes with Donbass.
This is what the Kremlin has always accounted for. The smaller the pail, the better.
Fools rush in. Wise men wait.
The best solution is if Minsk 2 is formally dead and useless, recognize the two republics as independent states, arm them legally, openly, like the US/UK/NATO arm Ukraine. The shock to Ukraine’s political life and economic reality will help end the current trajectory. Other regions of Ukraine may break away.
No need for Russia to fight a war over a pail of crap or a cesspool.
Some analysts think they know the facts better than the Kremlin.
The author is listed as a military expert.
Does he think Russia mishandled the Donbass War by not entering it in 2014-2015?
They won it. They stuck Ukraine, France and Germany with the Minsk 2 Agreement.
They bought time to go to Syria and win there.
Or should the Russian Federation just be Empire of Donbass and stay regional, not be the global Super Power they now are?
What was the bigger problem for the Kremlin, the coup against Yanukovic or the separatist revolt by Stelkov?
The coup in Kiev might have been counter-couped by the Kremlin.
Instead, they had to save Strelkov’s ass, arm the militias, recruit a North Wind, supply a Voentorg and win the war so a ceasefire could be established.
Stelkov defied the Kremlin, trying to force a Russian military invasion into Ukraine.
Apparently, this article wishes that had been the case.
I read it and I’m searching for how the Ukrainian trap is to be broken.
I see the trap is a Russian creation for NATO to fall into. That’s what I’m seeing is occurring.
I posted this two days ago:
Minsk 2 will be the bone upon which the Ukraine chokes to death.
Ukraine will be the bone upon which NATO chokes to death.
NATO will be the bone upon which the US hegemon chokes to death.
Russia will be the bone upon which the EU chokes to death.
“Ukraine is a treasure not sought by Russia. It is a dungheap of millions of Russophobes and nazis.”
We both agree it will be the military, and not the politics, that will call the shots.
otoh they may achieve symbiosis of efforts and results.
my perspective is that it makes sense both politically and tactically, to have a pro russian aligned rukraine up to transnitria. taking odessa diagonally up to the oblasts, and taking defensive geografic positions as generous as need be.
if russia can handle a belorus side kick, it could handle rukraine.
As for the nazis, push them to the east and let them be an ulcer in europe until it removes its parasites and comes to its senses. let them decide the name of that entity. Accept prorussian back to rukraine and help them be an independent pro russian/cso country.
how it can be acomplished, i dunno, but some kind of solution along this lines seems to make sense to me.
@anodinous,
I am certain it was a typo. You must have intended to push the nazis to the west, not the east. For that, we concur. Gift them to Poland. They deserve one another.
yup, west it was…
@Larchmonter445
Thanks for the thoughtful comments. I’m not familiar with the politics or the details of this Ukraine ordeal, but I also got the feeling the article’s author is using this to press on something else. I read expecting he would lay out what he thought the trap was, and how to escape it. Neither the former was well defined, nor he even attempted to answer the latter, except in very general terms.
From what I’ve been able to see from both the Russian side, as well as the US side, my feeling is Russia does have some trump cards in her sleeves, and they have been playing them rather well. I don’t know if it could have been better played, but that doesn’t matter as long as Russia gets what she wants.
Let us pray for the Ukraine, NATO, US and EU to choke to death.
Cheers from France.
Larchmonter445, – I agree with you that, for Russia, and occupied Ukraine would be “a dungheap of millions of Russophobes and nazis” – or something like that. What Russia might do is to invade in February or early March 2022, occupy it temporarily while demiltarizing it and getting rid of the nazi sympathisers and other extremists. Then give NATO choice: (1) accept permanent Russian occupation of and control over Ukraine for the indefinite future; or (2) accept that Ukraine firmly belongs within Russia’s sphere of interest, and accept that if Russia agrees to withdraw its army from Ukraine, it will be on the condition that Ukraine become “Finlandicized” – that is, become a non-aligned buffer state between Russia and NATO, with a foreign policy firmly in the hands of Moscow but with a domestic political system that is democratic and as economically free as the Ukrainian people want it to be. Thus, Russia would declare that Ukraine may join the EU if it wants to, but NOT NATO – not ever.
Faced with a Russian-occupied Ukraine, it seems possible that NATO will accept the second solution of this Russian ultimatum. The Donbass region would remain Ukrainian territory but Russia would guarantee its future security against any attempt by Kiev to occupy or dominate the Russian-speaking population there.
I wonder whether this might be a feasable solution?
I fully agree with this analysis but I have not read what solution is proposed to the dilemma, so: how NOW can Russia escape the “Ukrainian trap”? My personal idea is that Russia should destroy both the Ukrainian military and the NATO forces already present close to its borders before it is too late to pay an acceptable price. Time is not working for russia.
As machine translations go, this one is excellent. We translators may be becoming technologically obsolete and on our way to extinction!
I have been saying this exact thing for 8 years now.It’s good to see there are some patriots in Russia that understand the situation. But now what are they going to do about it. If they fail this time too they might as well give it all up,they may not have another chance. I remember 8 years ago being shocked that Russia, who held all the cards in Ukraine at that time just folded their hand and let it collapse. I continued to be shocked in the years after,and here we are today. The missed opportunities Vladislav Shurigin outlined here were exactly what I was thinking during these years.
I must disagree with one of the major themes here that Russia lost or is losing any kind of information war. I’ve always noted that Russia doesn’t answer verbal assaults in the same terms as they are made. Instead, she works to change entire paradigms.
And now, with her demands of the US, Russia is not only changing paradigms by the ton, but changing the correlation of forces, the balance of power.
Russia, superbly skilled in asymmetrical warfare, is forcing the US to walk backwards in retreat, while leaving the words alone for the US to use as a face-saving measure with its domestic population. The US knows extremely well – and has shown us in many instances – how to perform this trick of retreating.
Russia will let the US juggle its own words to cover this – why should Russia bother? She will have the lawful documents, the binding agreements, the emplacements and deployments, the facts on the ground, the only things that matter.
Power: the one aspect of the human condition that you can’t fake.
Russia, the master of Systema, has thrown the US to the ground without the US’s even understanding how it happened. The US never saw the move, but suddenly it is disarmed and on the ground.
And behind its bluster of words, that are only believed by its propagandized dupes (who, by definition, are powerless and unimportant), the US is effectually now actually suing for the terms of its capitulation.
Russia failed in nothing. The world is being changed by Russia. The US is being shown its place in that world.
@Grieved
Concur completely. Very well stated in bold exactly what is going on. The US is chasing the best plea bargain it can get.
It is talking ankle bracelet while the world is thinking noose.
@Larchmonter 445 wrote: It (The US) is talking ankle bracelet while the world is thinking noose.
I recommend both putting a bracelet on the US military and a noose around the neck of those responsible for instigating 30 years of terror against humanity.
Justice must be served or we will never have peace.
I can see some validity in the arguments the author makes about Russia not doing certain things. OTOH, I tend to agree with Larchmonter445 that it really wasn’t Russia’s place to involve itself in Ukraine any more than it had to.
I’ve been on record as saying for years that Russia should invade Ukraine, destroy and disarm the entire Ukrainian military, wipe out the neo-Nazi battalions, depose the Kiev regime, install a puppet regime, then go home without doing any “nation building.” The idea was simply to “pacify” Ukraine long enough to deal with other issues. But that’s just me.
I can understand how Russia didn’t want to involve itself with all that, given how much could go wrong. Perhaps Russia will consider doing those things now that NATO is encroaching even more thoroughly into Ukraine. Perhaps it won’t. Apparently it will depend on whether Russia continues to think it’s better to keep Ukraine at arms’ length or whether it decides to eliminate the problem as far as possible.
I vote for the latter, but again, that’s just me. Since I don’t get a vote in the Duma or the security council, my vote doesn’t count. And neither does anyone else’s outside those bodies. We’ll just have to wait and see what happens.
After what was done to not only Russia, China, Venezuela, Malaysia, etc., it is time for Malaysia and some other countries, say, Indonesia and India, to have operatives or witnesses to film the filming or the handling and use of the films (or something else, say get the phone calls or emails, for example).
It would be nice for a/some third part(y/ies) to bear witness to Ziocon/Banderite bearing false witness(es). This time what is needed is evidence of foul play that is not so easy to dismiss and rush to a judgment simply because it comes from the manufactured enem(y/ies), as if that is a valid reason to begin with.
what are you using for machine translation? as a russian to english translation editor for a couple companies in Moscow, i recommend DeepL
russian site: https://vnnews.ru/kak-slomat-kapkan-vladislav-shurygin/ appeaars that he used translate.yandex.com … mod
I concur with DeepL, especially if you also edit with the inbuilt dictionary.
By waiting for a favourable diplomatic response from the U.S. and NATO, unfortunately it seems that Putin is making a similar mistake to that of Hitler: delaying the launch of the attack. Hitler fatally delayed Operation Typhoon and the Battle of Kursk, giving the Soviets time to reorganise and defend. If Putin is really waiting for a genuine U.S. negotiation position, he is deluded; it won’t happen. He he wants to control Ukraine’s future status, he will need to act militarily, and soon – inside February 2022.