Today, as soon as I published the appeal by Strelkov I got comments apparently telling me (“sorry Saker”) that Strelkov was not very credible. Now that I have also posted a report about Iazov’s views, I suppose that others will accuse me of “waiting too long” or for, as always, “worshiping Putin”. So, again – I have done so many times already – I will try to explain my personal position on these issues.
First, the fact that I post something here does not, repeat, not mean that I endorse it or agree with it. All you can conclude from me posting here is that I find what I post of interest, either factual, or as a possible contribution to an intelligent discussion.
Second, my position on Strelkov and other Novorussian sources. I will be honest with you, I rate the public information record of Strelkov, ANNA news, Golos Sevastopolia and others as completely inadequate, primitive and unreliable. I am, in fact, immensely frustrated by this. But I am also aware that not only are these guys not PR pros, they are not even amateurs. They are trying their very best and their very best is the best I can get for this blog. Who am I to decide not to post something here only because it is poorly presented or because the source has already made widely exaggerated claims?! We are not talking about a poorly made report about the latest results from the World Cup in Brazil or tennis from Wimbledon. We are talking about reports made by people who undeniably put their lives at risk (very much including the folks at ANNA-news and all other real journalists) and who are working in horrendous circumstances. Furthermore, in a war zone the people on the ground often know less than the folks safely hidden in underground bunkers or outside the conflict area altogether. Also, and this is always overlooked, folks in a warzone are often very severely sleep deprived. So many Strelkov really thinks that by his statements he can save the lives of some of his men? He might even sincerely believe that a Russian intervention is necessary. The bottom line is this: Stelkov, ANNA-news and the others are giving us what they can, it is their very best effort, and that is all that I have to oppose to the phenomenally sophisticated, multi-billion dollar worldwide propaganda network of the AngloZionist Empire.
Have you seen the footage of the Novorussian soliders taking old WWII tanks (a T-34 and a IS-1) off their plinths, cleaning them and, amazingly, re-starting their engines (which says a lot about the quality of Soviet weapons!)? One of the NDF soliders said to the camera “sure its old, but it can still shoot straight through a APC“. Well, the same goes for the information war, which I have to fight it with what I have, not with what I wish I had. This is why I will continue to post views in favor and against a direct Russian intervention, and why I will continue to post ANNA-news or Strelkov reports as long as they are available. I will not post facts which I know are false, nor will I deliberately lie, of course. But censoring Strelkov on the grounds that his credibility is shaky at best? Nope, that would be morally wrong.
As for my personal position it is this:
In my heart I felt that a Russian intervention was justifiable and needed as soon as I heard Poroshenko’s inauguration speech. I fact, I had predicted that it would happen within days. It did not. Well, even though it did not, my heart still believes that it should have happened right then, and that it for sure should happen right now, that waiting any further is both morally and pragmatically wrong.
In my mind, I am much more cautious. As soon as I heard Poroshenko’s inauguration speech I did conclude that Russia had no other choice but to intervene. To my surprise, that intervention never materialized, at least overtly. As a ex-professional military analyst I know that there are some explanations for this which make sense, other which don’t. Explanations such as “Putin is a coward” or “Putin was bought off” are, what I call “Gunfight at the OK Corral” kind of explanations: simple, clear and ideally adapted to a primitive Hollywood western movie type of plot. In real life, things are much more complex and the reality is that Putin, along with his Security Council, has made a judgment call with which one can agree or not, but which does not have to be simplified and reduced to “Gunfight at the OK corral” type of level.
For example, we know that the Russian intelligence services conducted covert polls in Crimea which assured them that the support for a Russian intervention was even higher than what they had predicted. Putin himself revealed that. We can be absolutely sure that such covert polls were also conducted – and still are – in the Donbass. What we do not know is what these polls show. So let’s make a simple thought experiment, in particular with those of you who are categorically in favor of a Russian intervention. Would you still support a Russian intervention if you found out that only 60% of the people in Novorussia wanted it? What about 50%? Or 45%? What if it was only 30% or even less? Keep in mind that, at least so far, the worst hit by the Ukie invasion are small towns while the majority of the population lives in the bigger cities. Also keep in mind that a good chunk of the locals work in companies belonging to the oligarch Renat Akhmetov who is categorically opposed to an intervention and who declared that he would not pay salaries to those who go on strike or do not work. Are you still convinced that a majority of Novorussians want an intervention? And assuming that yes, did you ever ask yourself what else they might want? What if they also want Russia to pay for their social services (Kiev sure ain’t!), what if they want Russia to pay for the complete reconstruction of the region? Do you believe that Russia ought to pay for what was destroyed by Nazis under US control?
I was recently listening to a very interesting panel of experts discussing Crimea and it is pretty clear that while Russia has the means and the will to make Crimea prosperous again, it is also rather obvious that this will take time and that in the initial stage Crimea is a mess and a heavy burden for the Russian economy (it’s mid to long term prospects are fantastic – no worries here).
There is another factor to consider: what will happen to the rump-Ukraine (aka “Banderastan”) and even the rest of the EU if Russia intervenes directly. Let’s make one more thought experiment, ok?
Say the Russian intervene – they basically destroy all of the Ukrainian armed forces and national guard within, say 48 hours. I don’t mean just the forces in the Donbass, I mean all of it. Just like they did in Georgia. In Georgia the Russians did not have to enter Tbilissi or or Batumi to basically completely disarm Saakashvili. They could do that in the Ukraine too: encircle and destroy all the forces in the East and use air and missile strikes to destroy whatever is left in the rest of the country from the western border of Novorussia to the Polish border. Then what?
Well, the Novorussians would be safe, and I would be drinking Champagne with my wife. But what would happen to the rest of the Ukraine? It would be disarmed and totally cut-off from the Donbass and Crimea. It’s economy would have collapsed (it will anyways, no matter what the Russians do) and nobody out there will have the money to pay for a reconstruction. Heck, nobody out there would even have a plan on how to resurrect a dead economy. Who do you think would fare best and be in power then? That’s right – the extremists. So just imagine a President Iarosh backed by Prime Minister Kolomoiski ruling their Nazi Banderastan with the help of their death squads. Can you imagine what the pressure would be on Russia to take further action? And, in the meantime, you can bet that NATO would go into full-paranoia mode, with possibly US and Polish forces sent to “protect” and “defend” the “Ukrainian people” from the “Russian imperialist bear and Czar Putin”. In the meantime, Russia would have to shoulder the full price-tag for such an immensely expensive operation while also paying for the resurrection of the Donbass economy. As for the Russian military, not only would it have to deal with the inevitable anti-Russian partisan movement in the part of the Ukraine it would control, it would also have to worry about deterring an always theoretically possible US aggression while at the same time avoiding making things worse and preventing a WWV (if WWIII was Cold War, and WWIV is the current one, then the next one would be WWV, right?).
And what do you think would be happening in the EU if the scenario above plays itself out? Not only would the EU economy collapse (it might do so even without a war in the Ukraine or sanctions against Russia), but NATO would further squeeze its iron claws so deep into the Body of Europe that it would be secure for decades. The EU would turn into a US protectorate for the duration for yet another Cold/Warm War which, again, could last for decades and waste a truly phenomenal about of human and financial resources.
Do you really want that?
Oh I can already hear the armchair strategists pounding their fists in indignation at, well, their armchairs, and saying:” but that is not at all what we are saying, we only support a limited intervention“. Oh yeah? Let’s look at these a little more closely.
Usually, the defenders of the limited intervention scenario offer three options, or a combination thereof:
a) a no-fly zone.
b) a rapid in-and-out operation.
c) an intervention limited “only” to the Donbas and not a step further.
All three of these options suffer form the same fatal flaw. They assume that the other side will play ball and accept the limited nature of that intervention. Take the no-fly zone. It is an act of war and the Ukies would be fully justified in retaliating against it, no only in the Donbass, but elsewhere. So what would you do if you were the Russian President, you declared a no-fly zone over the Donbass, your forces easily shoot out a number of Ukie airplanes out of the sky and if the Ukie President decided to begin lobbing missiles at Sebastopol or Rostov-on-the-Don? Would you expand the no-fly zone to the Zaparozhskaia Oblast? What about the ground to ground missiles, would you allow airstrikes to hunt them down like the US tried to do with Saddam’s Scuds?
The fact is that these so-called “limited” options have a huge tendency to grow in most unpredictable and, usually, painful manner.
No offense to anybody, but I have to be blunt here: the so-called “limited operations with no boots on the ground” are a myth created by the US propaganda machine to justify US interventions worldwide. And, to the extend that they truly can contribute to make a bad situation infinitely worse, they do kinda “work” for the US, but since Russia’s goal is not just to make things worse in the Ukraine, but to make them better, these limited operations are most certainly not some kind of obvious panacea or even a good choice.
As for the US, which has been using such “limited” interventions from Vietnam to Libya, when was the last time when such a limited intervention stayed limited or made things better for the country “hosting” it?
Does that mean that I am opposed to a Russian intervention?
No, not at all. What the above means is that unlike some commentators and bloggers I am aware of the infinitely complex and numerous factors which must be considered before the decision to send in Russian forces is made. What the above means is that I am aware of at least some, but not all, of the implications of such a situation. This means that while Russia might have to intervene, the fact that the Kremlin tries has hard as possible to avoid such a move is a sign of wisdom, not of cowardice, stupidity or betrayal.
My gut tells me that the US is so hell-bent on confrontation that Russia will have no other choice than to intervene, possibly by imposing a no-fly zone first. The sad reality is that while peace takes two, war takes only one, and when I listen to the psychopathic freaks in Kiev I have no hope at all for peace. There cannot be peace with Nazis any more than with Wahabis: the only way to deal with these freaks its to offer them a simple choice: desist or die. That is a terrible thing to say, and it goes deeply against my personal inclinations, but that is the terrible personal conclusion to which I have come.
By the way, Russia tried to ignore the Wahabi crazies in Chechnia and they proved Russia wrong. Russia also tried to ignore Saakashvili and his crazies, and they proved Russia wrong. Now Russia is trying hard to ignore the Nazis in Banderastan, and I don’t see any reason believe that this time around this will work. But also please notice this, Russia did not really intervene in Chechnia until the Russian public opinion was fully and totally supportive for such an intervention. Russia did not intervene in South Ossetia until the Russian public opinion was fully in favor of that operation too (although that is harder to prove, considering that Russia did only wait 24 hours before deciding to really go after Saakashvili rather than just protect or evacuate the Russian peacekeepers). It might well be that Putin and his advisers have already come to the conclusion that an overt intervention is inevitable, but that they are waiting for the public opinion in Russia and even in Novorussia to really back that option.
Again, me? I am all for it. Now. But I am nobody and my opinion is irrelevant. This is a judgment call to make for those who truly have all the fact and who will shoulder the responsibility for making (or not making) that call. Not me, not you, not even Mr Strelkov or Mr Glazev: that is a decision which can only be made by the Russian Security Council and, in the end, by Putin.
I really don’t envy him.
The Saker
PS: I suppose that some frankly stupid or simply dishonest and hostile commentators or bloggers still will manage to take a sentence out of context and make me say something I never did. Or they will personally attack me again as if I had a say in what the Kremlin decides. Frankly, I am tired of dealing with all sorts of strawman arguments and of trying to set the record straight. Folks, contrary to what you seem to think, I am not a Kremlin spokesman (that would be Mr. Peskov) nor does being aware of the complexities of the real world out there automatically make me a Putin apologist. For those of you who have simple and obvious solutions I have just this to say: “good for you, now please go to your room and let the adults continue their conversation”.
Saker Message:
Espina says
The Saker
04 July, 2014 23:34
I think it’s called spite…….
So keep up the good work you’re obviously getting right under their skin or should that be scales.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7B-4Lsrx8IA
Peace
@ 04 July, 2014 22:15
Part of your anger and upset, may be that your heart agrees with the critics more than you would like to admit.
know-it-all
SAKER another link for you, the Svobodba party has a ‘fist’ as a logo the very same as all the other Trade Marks of the American CIA NED.
A real eye opener exposing the USAID actions in every COUP and regime change, this is what they have been funding in Ukraine for years, direct intervention by the US Empire. OPOR just forward to @05:09 mins sec to see the ‘branding’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpXbA6yZY-8
http://niqnaq.wordpress.com/2014/07/05/further-example-of-the-unreality-of-usaias-current-propaganda-distinctions-between-moderate-and-extremist-jihadis/#comments
If Obama can justify giving 500million $ to these ‘moderate’ terrorists, just think what they have planed for poor Ukraine.
V.G.E. writes:
Thank you, Saker, for that analysis.
Let me add two observations:
1) Remember how at the beginning of this putsch and the uprising in the east blogs and comments were full of ‘Putin is a chess player’ and how he’d get the better of Kiev/EU/USA?
In chess, a good player will sacrifice a pawn or two or three in order to beat the opponent by check-mate.
Now that Slavyansk has ‘fallen’, perhaps this is a pawn sacrificed, a necessary sacrifice.
Don’t forget the NAO exercises taking place in the Black Sea and later in the Ukraine! is that a good time for Russia to intervene? I doubt it.
2) Since the end of WWII and the advent of TV, which now means that anybody can post videos on youtube, of shelling, dead people, the lot, we’ve seen more and more death and destruction which people in the times up to and including WWII just didn’t see on such regular basis. While we’ve become accustomed to seeing death, this has made us more and more sensitive to it. Thus we find it unbearable to see that lady Inna dying in front of our eyes – and we want the culprits punished. Death and war have more and more become up close and very personal, and we want it stopped. This is why so many are angry and want the powerful to intervene and stop it, regardless.
I am reminded of the Hungarian uprising in 1956, where I sat at the radio, tears streaming down my face, crying and asking why Eisenhower didn’t go in and help them. What does a ten-year old know about nuclear weapons and another world war!
I suggest that many here are feeling as helpless as I did then, and that this is why they find it difficult to accept your reasonings and analyses, Saker.
Thank you from me for writing them, they are hugely important!
Actually, this is a pretty good analysis.
–VN.
Very well said Saker
I agree with you that for Russia it is now about damage limitation and being seen as the one that actually went the extra mile for peace before bowing to the inevitable.
Maybe now that Slavyansk is no longer under siege and the world will be able to go in and see the death and destruction wrought, that the wind of public opinion will start to fill Putins sail more strongly.
We know for a Fact that the People of Ukraine were Denied their Constitutional Democracy, and as such some regions of the Ukraine have Declared their Independence from Illegitimate Imposed Dictatorship.
We know that the United Nations Charter guarantees the Civil and Political Rights of All the People in Member Countries of the United Nations, and there Must be mechanisms to try to gain Justice for these Legitimate Grievances.
Ukrainian forces launched a new offensive against pro-Russian rebels in the east of the country on Tuesday after President Petro Poroshenko ended a ceasefire and promised to purge the region of “dirt and parasites”.
The Illegitimate Terrorist President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko said he had given orders to attack and liberate our land from terrorists, but this is Malicious Slander of a Dictator following orders from Nazi Mafia America.
The Facts are that Petro Poroshenko and the other Nazis were under orders from Nazi Mafia America to attack Ukraine Constitutional Democracy, with the use of Terrorism, and this State Sponsored Terrorism is continuing in Ukraine to this day.
Writing on what would be for Honest People a Facebook page, but for Nazis it is an Anusbook page, Dictator Petro Poroshenko said he fighting to free Ukraine from dirt and parasites, but as a Billionaire Oligarch, there could be some People who would Justifiably consider him to be a True Parasite, and as a Nazi Dictator, there are Many People who consider him to be Dirt, and Nazi Dirt Filth
A leaked memorandum from the RAND corporation think tank suggests the Ukrainian Government should engage in an all-out war in eastern regions, including shutting down all communications, putting citizens in internment camps and kill all who resist such actions at http://whatreallyhappened.com/fr/content/leaked-us-think-tank-plan-e-ukraine-suggests-internment-camps-executions .
While we that the Nazi Mafia American Government are that type, it looks like the British would benefit from Nazism.
There are People who could be wondering how Britain would gain from Nazism, while it is known how America would benefit from Nazism in Europe.
America would benefit by Controlling Europe, but Britain wants to change its Relationship with the European Union, and wants to Blackmail the European Union Elites to give Britain what it wants, or they go to the Nuremberg Trials, with Baroness Aston along with Journalists and others having Recorded All of the Nazism for a Conviction at a Nuremberg Trial for Ukraine if Britain does not get what it wants with regards to its Exemptions and a Much More Devolved Relationship with the European Union, and this can be seen from the News Article Titled: Van Rompuy sets out minimalist EU vision, at http://euobserver.com/political/124830 .
Britain and America want to achieve their goals with Europe, but Britain wants to look Totally Innocent after it encouraged some other European Union Countries to be Nazis.
Britain and America are making Impossible Demands on Russia, even as Hitler made Impossible Demands on Occupied Countries for their Governments to order that there be No Resistance to Hitler, and the Resistance Fighters and the Partisans did not listen to their Governments, even after the Nazis killed 10 Innocent Civilians for each German Soldier killed by the Resistance Fighters or Partisans.
Those Occupied European Governments in WW 2 Europe did their best to have no Resistance, but People have a Will of their Own, and America has a Huge Prison Population, and when it can tell Every America to Obey the Law, then Russia as a Different Country to Ukraine will be able to tell its own Citizens and the Citizens of a Neighbouring Country what to do, and while Russia is not Indifferent to Nazism, it is a Fact, that Russia has nothing to do with the conflict in Ukraine.
We All Know that there is no Country that can control All of its Citizens, because Every Country has told All of their Citizens not to be Criminals, then we Know that Britain and America Know that People behave the same under the same conditions, and I do not want to list them as these are known to Historians.
The same is true of wartime, where some People will be Resistance Fighters, regardless of what their Government or even another Government does, and Iraq is one such example.
This are worse these days, because Britain and America have Secret Agents and Puppets, and these can create the Problems for which they will blame others in order to advance their own Interests at the expense of others.
There are a few Phases that America wants to use against Russia, and that is that the Ukrainians are suffering under the Rule of the President of Russia, and that they look to NATO for protection.
This is because Britain and America want WW 3 in order to Exploit Continental Europe, and this is why they Deliberately Engineered all of this Instability in Ukraine.
I would Never call America a friend or a partner, because America is the Most Dangerous Evil Enemy of the Human Race and of Europe.
The People of Ukraine and of Europe could know these Things if its Honest Citizens make these known to Ukrainians and other Europeans.
@larchmonter and co
I get your point. But you know… believe it or not, the sentiment here is against an armed invasion. Do Russians want to punish Poroshenko and co? Sure. Do they want to invade Ukraine and take on further responsibility and debt?
I’ll answer your question this way: there was a demonstration here a couple of days ago. 500 people showed up. This was in support of Novorossiya.
I am afraid these numbers are dismal.
Russians are sympathetic, but THEY DO NOT WANT A WAR.
I believe Putin knows this, so his inaction is also a reflection of the general masses and their sentiment.
C Stegiel:
Will populations tolerate extermination camps in Eastern Europe in the 21st century? If yes, would they draw a line at chemical warfare?
What populations? Its not hard to find average Americans who advocate nuking other people as a solution to world problems. Go down to the bar and start talking, you’ll probably find one.
Such people would undoubtedly tolerate extermination camps and chemical weapons so long as they are told they are being used against “the enemy” via the daily 2-minutes of hate.
Using them against Russians would be elementary – Boobus Americanus still thinks Russia is the enemy thanks to American corporate media. As far as most American’s are concerned, Russians are still communists out to conquer the world.
Please don’t forget America’s military has a training facility, the School of the America’s, dedicated to the training of death squad operatives in Latin America. The type of behavior you meantion isn’t much of a reach for such people.
As to Europeans, what did they do about the destruction of the Croatian, Bosnian, and Kosovar Serbs using these methods? Not only did they do less than nothing, they actively encouraged them by funding the Croatian and Muslim military groups, while simultaneously demonizing Serbs as the epitomy of evil. Again, what did Europeans do? They took the side of murderous Croatian Nazis, Bosnian Wahabbis, and Albanian Mafiosi and held them up as the epitomy of European values, while Serbs attempting to hold the multi-ethnic South Slav state together were demonized as bigots and killers.
There is no question that the re-run of the Yugoslavian Scenario in Ukraine with Galician Nazis, Crimean Tatars, Jewish mobster oligarchs, and focused on killing Russians will follow the same script with the same end with full support of the west unless Russia finds a way to oppose it this time, something they were unable to do for their Serb allies.
I meant to write: There is a Phrase that America wants to use against Russia, and that is that the Ukrainians or even the Russians Citizens in Russia because of sanctions are suffering under the Rule of the President of Russia, and that they look to NATO for protection.
At the same time, the provocation for Russia to intervene would be like America has used in Many other places, and that is that your loyal subjects or supporters are suffering under the Evil Undemocratic Decrees of Petro Poroshenko, and that look to Russia for protection.
America rarely Slanders an entire Country, but Only its President or Parliament, because it wants to portray the Citizens as Innocent, and the Government, usually a President or another type of Ruler as Evil and Guilty, because they do not want the Citizens to support the Ruler of their Country, but America did Maliciously Slander All Serbs along with President Slobodan Milosevic.
It should come as no surprise that America would a Colour Revolution in Russia, and that this is one of the things they hope and scheme for.
It is not the Person, because America would like someone like Boris Yeltsin as President of Russia, because they are not looking for friends and partners, but exactly like in Ukraine, America is Only wants Puppets who will Exploit their own People to serve the Interests of America.
NAZI Guard crimes please SHARE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WN_Mbe9u-vE
VIDEO like this needs to get out to the masses as the MSM is refusing to show this in Europe!
Ukraine: Atrocities committed by the US-Supported Ukrainian National Guard Atrocities by the UK NAZI Guard https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WN_Mbe9u-vE
Another very good video documentary exposing the Kiev NAZI crimes!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whqQCx6RXkY
Your scenario is a bit short sighted…
You are predicting economical collapse of the EU (on what grounds/basis?) at the same time as Russia shoulders all the burden you have laid out. This appears hardly possible at the same time – with the EU economy in shambles, a world-wide economic disaster is unavoidable, with the usual consequences on all countries providing fundamental resources such as oil, gas, etc…
Also, there’s not just Europe.. there is also Asia, most of all China.
And when two are fighting, the third one usually gains quite some power.
Already Russia turned to China to sell energy, and the outcome does not appear to be very favourable for Russia. Continue this scenario and combine it with reconstruction of Donbas and partisan war plus terrorist attacks – good luck!
What’s really annoying is the blunt and stupid assumption that there is such a thing as an omnipotent US and only Nazis in Ukraine. There is Nazis fighting on the Russian side as well – this is exactly the kind of conflict that attracts such people. however, in the recent presidential election in Ukraine, right sector and the other one got no more than 2% of the votes when *combined*! There’s millions of Ukrainians who are not nazis, and who are still completely opposed to Russia taking any influence on their country. People like you are about to turn these people into truly hating enemies!
And there is never aver an omnipotent power directing it all *anywhere*. In reality, all organizations, powers, and bodies make an incredibly huge amount of mistakes! Things almost never work out as planned, on neither side!