[This article was written for the Unz Review]
In a recent article, Paul Craig Roberts directly asked me a very important question. Here is the relevant part of this article (but please make sure to read the full article to understand where Paul Craig Roberts is coming from and why he is raising this absolutely crucial issue):
Andrei Martyanov, whose book I recently reviewed on my website, recently defended Putin, as The Saker and I have done in the past, from claims that Putin is too passive in the face of assaults. https://russia-insider.com/en/russia-playing-long-game-no-room-instant-gratification-strategies-super-patriots/ri24561 As I have made the same points, I can only applaud Martyanov and The Saker. Where we might differ is in recognizing that endlessly accepting insults and provocations encourages their increase until the only alternative is surrender or war.
So, the questions for Andrei Martyanov, The Saker, and for Putin and the Russian government is: How long does turning your other cheek work? Do you turn your other cheek so long as to allow your opponent to neutralize your advantage in a confrontation? Do you turn your other cheek so long that you lose the support of the patriotic population for your failure to defend the country’s honor? Do you turn your other cheek so long that you are eventually forced into war or submission? Do you turn your other cheek so long that the result is nuclear war?
I think that Martyanov and The Saker agree that my question is a valid one
First let me immediately state that I do find this question valid, crucial even, and that is a question which I have been struggling with for several years now and that still keeps me up at night. I think that this question ought to be raised more often, especially by those who care for peace and oppose imperialism in all its forms and I am grateful to Paul Craig Roberts for raising it.
Second, considering the overall nastiness of so much of the pro-Russian blogosphere and so-called “alternative media”, I want to go on record by saying that I have the utmost respect for Paul Craig Roberts, especially for his remarkable courage and intellectual honesty. At times I might not agree with everything Paul Craig Roberts writes, but I never forget that he is most definitely a real American patriot and a true friend of Russia. I consider him a precious ally in my own struggles.
Having clarified this, let me turn to Paul Craig Roberts’ question.
First, I will begin by questioning the very premise of this question and ask whether it is true that Russia has a policy of “turning the other cheek”?
In my opinion, that is a mistaken assumption. For one thing, Russia does not have “a” foreign policy, but several very different policies towards different countries and situations. I won’t list them all here, but I will mention two which are most often mentioned in this context: Syria and the Ukraine.
These are dramatically different conflicts with profoundly different characteristics:
| Syria | The Ukraine | |
| Risk of direct superpower confrontation between Russia and the USA | Yes | No (only indirect) |
| Risk of a local incident escalating into a full scale and nuclear war | High | Very low |
| Proximity to the Russian border | No | Yes |
| Overwhelming force advantage | US/CENTCOM/NATO | Russian military |
| Presence of a large Russian population | No | Yes |
| (Russian) Popular mandate for the use of force if needed | Supportive but cautious (not a blank check) | Strong (in case of Russian counter-attack to save Novorussia) |
| Risk of political blowback if Russia is forced to escalate or intervene | Limited (the EU has more or less accepted that Russia is in Syria, and even the US and Israel have) | Very high (in the EU) |
| Russian intervention justifiable under international law | Yes, self-evidently | Yes, but not self-evidently |
| Major economic and social consequences (for Russia) from the conflict’s outcome | No | Yes |
| Is Russia pressed for time to resolve this conflict? | No | No |
As you see, out of 10 characteristics the conflicts in the Ukraine and Syria have only one in common: that Russia is under no time pressure to resolve them. In fact, I would argue that time is very strongly playing to the advantage of Russia in both conflicts (note that I did not say that the local populations in the Ukraine and Syria are in the same position as Russia – for them every passing day is a nightmare).
The two most important comparative characteristics are the risk of the conflict escalating into a full scale and direct superpower confrontation which, by itself, could easily escalate into a nuclear war. This is most unlikely in the Ukraine and very possible in Syria.
Why?
Just look at the current stand-offs taking place in the two countries: in the Ukraine the Novorussians are warning of a concentration of Ukronazi armor near Mariupol; in Syria the Russian Navy and Aerospace Forces are poised to sink USN ships if given the order. See the difference in magnitude and quality?!
For these reasons I believe that we need to look at the Russian stance in these two conflicts separately.
Syria
I have written a lot about the Russian stance in Syria and I will therefore only provide a short bullet-point type summary
- The conflict in Syria places in very close proximity Russian and US forces. Furthermore, the Russian military task force in and near Syria is very small and cannot resist against a determined US/CENTCOM/NATO attack. If attacked, the Russians will rapidly have to use their long-range cruise missiles which are based (or in port) in Russia. What will the US do if that happens?
- There is no reason whatsoever to believe that the US side will react rationally (or even proportionally) if US bases or ships are destroyed in a Russian counter-attack: the political pressure to “teach the Russians a lesson”, to show that the US “has the greatest military in history” and all the rest of the typical US flag-waving nonsense will force Trump to show that he is the MAGA-President. The current US elites are not only “non-agreement capable”, but they are also ignorant, stupid, arrogant, and they also have an immense sense of self-righteousness, a messianic ideology and a religious belief in total impunity. To assume that the US is a “rational actor” would be highly illogical and, in the case of a possible nuclear war, completely irresponsible.
- Vladimir Putin was elected by the Russian people to protect and preserve their interests, not the interests of the people of the Ukraine or Syria. First and foremost, his main obligation is to protect the people of Russia and that, in turn, means that he must do everything possible to avoid a superpower confrontation from which the people of Russia would immensely suffer.
I personally fully support the Russian decision to intervene in Syria, but I have been very worried about the dangers inherent to such an operation from day 1. So far, I believe that the Russians have done a superb job: they have saved the Syrian people from the Takfiri nightmare, they have made it possible for the Syrian government to survive and liberate most of the Syrian people, and they have comprehensively defeated the plans A, B, C, D, etc. of already two (rather nasty, if incompetent) US Administrations. So far, the Russian intervention in Syria is a stunning success. This is also why the US Americans are so desperate for anything which would look like a “victory” for the “greatest nation on earth”, “land of the free, home of the brave” bla, bla, bla… And yet, for this Russian operation to become a real success Russia must do all she can to simultaneously increase the potential costs of intervention for the AngloZionists while denying them any political rewards of a US/Israeli attack. I would not call this “turning the other cheek” but rather I would refer to it as “absorbing blow after blow (especially when the “blows” are ineffective to the point of being almost totally symbolic ones!) until your opponents run out of steam while changing the reality on the ground“. Compare the situation in Syria 2 years ago and today, and tell me: who is winning this one?
The only possible conclusion is that, at least so far, the Russian policy towards Syria has been an immense success.
Now let’s look at the conflict in the Ukraine
The Ukraine
Here, I must confess, I am much more dubious. First, while I understand that this was a tough call, I have to admit that I still wonder whether it was the right thing to do to recognize the Ukronazi junta that came to power in Kiev. Why did the Kremlin agree to deal with them when they so clearly came to power as a result of a violent neo-Nazi coup, executed by a small number of hardcore extremists, and in direct violation of an international agreement signed just the day before? If in the EU it is legal to ban swastikas or even “revisionist books” (and jail people for writing them!), how is it that a bona fide Nazi regime which came to power by violence is instantly recognized? Well, we know that the AngloZionist Empire is the pinnacle of hypocrisy, but the recognition of this gang of corrupt and hate-filled thugs by Russia raises a lot of very disturbing questions. Finally, how hard was it for the Russians to see that the only possible outcome from a Nazi coup in Kiev was a civil war? After all, if I, using only open sources could predict the civil war in the Ukraine as early as on November 30th 2013, then surely the immense and highly competent Russian intelligence community had come to the same conclusions many months and even years before I did! So why did the Kremlin recognize a regime which would immediately start a bloody civil war? Again, disturbing questions.
Still, I won’t second-guess the Kremlin since the President and his aides had much more information upon which to take their decision than I do, even now in hindsight. I am much more bothered by the lack of Russian economic sanctions against the Ukraine, especially in the face of an almost never-ending stream of atrocities, provocations and hostile acts. It does appear that following the Ukronazi acts of piracy in the Sea of Azov, the Russians have finally decided that enough is enough and that the Ukros need to pay a high price (in economic terms) for their acts of piracy. But that is very little very late. What will it take to really get Russia serious? A bloody Ukronazi terrorist attack in Russia maybe?
Now, following the murder of Alexandr Zakharchenko, an increasing number of Russian politicians and public figures are calling for the recognition of the DNR and LNR by Russia. Frankly, I can only agree with this. Enough is enough, especially since there is nobody to negotiate with in Kiev, and there won’t be for the foreseeable future. Furthermore, the junta in power needs to pay for its constant provocations and I believe that Russia should slap some severe economic sanctions on the Ukronazi leaders and on the Ukraine itself. Just look at these two facts and tell me if you also see a problem here:
- The Russian FSB (whose investigators are in Donetsk) has declared that the Ukrainian SBU is behind the murder of Alexandr Zakharchenko
- Russia is the biggest economic investor in the Ukraine
Does that make sense to you?!
As for the Minsk Agreements, which were stillborn anyway, the Ukronazis have proven in words and in deeds that they have no intention whatsoever to implement them. I understand that the decision-makers in the Kremlin also realize that and that their goal is not to wait and hope for the Ukros to begin implementing these Agreements, but to use these Agreements as a “hook” to keep slowly weakening the regime in Kiev. Likewise, I do see the advantage of not recognizing the LNR/DNR: just like the USA created an anti-Russia in the Ukraine, so did the Russians create an anti-Ukraine in the Donbass. However, I think that this strategy has now outlived its usefulness and that the protection of the people of the Donbass should be considered more important than the weakening of the Nazi regime in Kiev. And yet, the spokesman for Vladimir Putin has just declared (yet again) that:
“After the perpetration of this terrorist attack it is very difficult to discuss anything with the Ukrainian side, but this does not mean that Russia is withdrawing from the Minsk process,”
Does that make sense to you?!
If/when the Russian military openly intervenes in the Donbass (like it did in Crimea) there is absolutely nothing the Ukros, NATO, the EU or the US will be able to do about it. This is not Syria and here the Russians have a huge, overwhelming, military advantage.
[Sidebar: this is why in military terms, all this “surrounding” of Russia by US/NATO military bases is nonsensical. As are the Baltic/Polish requests to host US/NATO bases on their territory. Modern superpower conflicts won’t really have frontlines and rears but are mostly fought throughout the depth of the theater of war. By placing US/NATO bases so close to Russia the Empire only makes the list of Russian weapons systems which can strike them longer and longer, resulting on more firepower and more redundancy for the Russian attack. This entire “encirclement” business is typical Neocon ideological nonsense. My favorite one? When the USN sails ships into the Black Sea where the survival time of any ship is measured in minutes once the Russians decide to sink it. Ditto for the Persian Gulf which is a terrible place to send USN ships, by the way. Should the Empire order a strike on Iran, it would probably begin by flushing all the USN ships out of the Persian Gulf (unless the Pentagon wants a tripwire force or a repeat of the “Liberty” false flag operation as pretext for attack)]
Not only will the Ukroarmy cease to function as a fighting force in 24-36 hours (most men will survive, by the way, but as combat subunits and units the Ukroarmy will cease to exist), but NATO will be in no position whatsoever to intervene. There is no risk of escalation in the Donbass, especially not a nuclear one. However, unlike Syria, any overt Russian intervention in the Donbass will have immense political consequences in Europe: all the tiny timid baby-steps that were taken by EU leaders to have some kind of independent foreign policy (I think of North Stream 2 for example) will be immediately crushed by a huge chorus of Russophobic hysteria coming out of AngloZionist puppet regimes in eastern Europe.
Truth be told, so far the Russian policy of sending equipment (the Voentorg) and specialists (the North Wind) has been very successful. The Russians managed to defeat the Ukronazis without direct intervention (with some minor exceptions like a few special ops, a few artillery strikes and some help to create a de facto air exclusion zone over the Donbass). The problem is that with Poroshenko being so unpopular and the Ukraine becoming a failed state (which it has been for a while already), the junta could well decide to attack again with (at least on paper) a re-organized, re-trained, re-equipped and much beefed up military force. And if they lose to the Novorussians – which they mostly likely will – then they can blame all their own self-inflicted disasters on Russian military intervention.
Finally, as I have written in the past, the big problem is that the AngloZionists risk very little in telling their Ukronazi proxies to attack Novorussia. Oh sure, a lot of Ukrainians will die, but the AngloZionists don’t care, and if the Ukroarmy is capable enough to force a Russian military intervention, then the Empire wins politically. The only bad scenario for the Empire would be for the LNR/DNR forces to be able to defeat the Urkos for a third time, again without any overt Russian intervention, which is a distinct possibility.
From a Russian point of view, I understand that an open intervention in the Donbass would be very costly in political and economic terms. However, I do believe that it is not an ‘all or nothing’ situation. Russia does not have to choose between doing nothing and sending her tanks into Kiev. Russia does have the option of tightening the screws on Kiev without going overboard. At the very least, Russia could implement painful economic sanctions. The Kremlin could also tell the regime in Kiev that there are red lines (including terrorist attacks in Novorussia, Crimea, or elsewhere in Russia), which should not be crossed and that Russia will not stand by for any Ukronazi provocation.
In conclusion of this section, I will say that the Russian policy towards the Ukraine has been a mixed bag with some real successes mixed in with some probably less than ideal responses. I believe that the Kremlin ought to consider political and economic means to retaliate against the Ukronazi policies while staying clear of any overt military operation for as long as possible (i.e., that is unless the Urkonazis threaten to over-run Novorussia).
Having compared and contrasted these two conflicts, let’s now look at the bigger picture. After all, Paul Craig Roberts is speaking about the future of our entire planet with his question: “Can War Be Avoided and the Planet Saved?”. And he is absolutely correct: what is at stake here is not just the outcome of a local or regional conflict, but the future of our entire planet.
The bigger picture: the existential war between Russia and the Empire
The USA and Russia have been at war for several years now. Yes, this war is roughly 80% informational, 15% economic and only 5% kinetic. But this can change very rapidly. The main reasons for this war are not just the usual mix of grand power rivalries, economic and financial struggles, the desire to control raw materials or strategic geographical locations. These are all present this time too, but the deeper reason for this war is that Russia and the USA represent two mutually exclusive civilizational models. Very succinctly, Russia wants a multi-polar world in which each country is free to develop as its people see fit and in which international law regulates relations between nations. The Empire stands, well, for itself, of course. Meaning that it wants a single world hegemony ruled by the AngloZionists. Furthermore, Russia stands for traditional moral and spiritual values whereas the Empire stands for greed, globalism and the destruction of all traditions and moral values. It is pretty self-evident that these two systems cannot coexist. They present existential threats to each other. Russia will either become sovereign or enslaved. The Empire will either control the planet or crumble. Tertium non datur.
The Russians fully understand that, as do the leaders of the transnational AngloZionist Empire. You think that I am exaggerating? Well, see for yourself what Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen had to say on this topic: (emphasis added)
We are witnessing historic changes across the entire threat landscape … The balance of power that has characterized the international system for decades has been corroding. America’s unipolar moment is at risk. Power vacuums are springing up across the globe and are quickly filled by hostile nation-states, terrorists and transnational criminals. They all share a common goal: They want to disrupt our way of life — and many are inciting chaos, instability and violence
Except for the totally hypocritical comment at the end about “chaos, instability and violence” (which are, by far, the biggest US exports), she is spot on. Hence the current tensions.
There is the very real possibility that this war will suddenly become 100% kinetic. The Russians also understand that, and this is why they have been preparing for WWIII for several years now. As I have already stated many times, the US armed forces are in no condition to fight a conventional war against Russia, and the recent Russian advances in military technology have pretty much rendered the US Navy and Air Force more or less useless. The US nuclear triad, however, is still fully functional and is more than sufficient to destroy Russia.
Russia has therefore also dramatically increased her strategic deterrence capabilities and in effect rendered all the US ABM efforts useless. Following the old motto si vis pacem, para bellum, Russia has now developed an entire family of new weapons systems designed to deter the US from any attack (see Andrei Martyanov’s analysis here and my own here). Putin’s plan is quite evident: he hopes that Russia will be able to convince the leaders of the United States that an attack on Russia would be suicidal. Now all Russia can do is try to do everything in her power to avoid such a conflict.
Paul Craig Roberts presents us with a very bleak picture when he says that:
The people in the West with whom he is dealing are idiots who do not appreciate his statesmanship. Consequently, each time Putin turns the other cheek, so to speak, the insults and the provocations ratchet upward (…) The reason I think Putin needs to do a better job of standing up to Washington is that I think, based on history, that appeasement encourages more provocations, and it comes to a point when you have to surrender or fight.
Sadly, I can only totally agree with Paul Craig Roberts, and I explained that in my article Each “Click” Brings Us Closer To The Bang!” which I concluded with the following words:
I can’t ignore the fact that each “click” brings us one step closer to the “bang.” And that suggests to me that the only real solution to this perilous situation is to find a way to remove the finger pressing on the trigger or, better, take away the gun from the nutcase threatening us all with it.
This is, I think, the core of the Russian policy towards the United States: trying to find a way to get the AngloZionst finger off the US nuclear trigger. This is a difficult and complicated task which can only be tackled very carefully, one step at a time. And yes, this strategy does imply that, at times, they seem to meekly “turn the other cheek” when in reality they are trying not to give the nutcase a reason to open up.
Think of it this way: what is the biggest mistake the USA is currently making? The US leaders do not realize (or, worse, do not care) that US actions are pushing Russia into a corner from which she cannot retreat. They are thus forcing Russia to stand her ground including, if needed, by military force. What would be the point of the Russians doing precisely the same thing, pushing the Neocons into a corner from which they would perceive that they cannot retreat? Please keep in mind that understanding what is unacceptable to your enemy (to reach the “breaking point” in negotiations theory) does not at all imply that you agree with your enemy’s values or point of view. We don’t have to find the AngloZionist messianic ideology and worldview as anything but repugnant and delusional to understand the fact that if openly and directly challenged the AngloZionists will strike out, most likely in a completely irresponsible and even suicidal manner. Thus the only possible strategy is to slowly weaken the Empire without ever giving its leaders the unambiguous signal that what Russia is really seeking is their complete demise. And, again, if that means giving them the illusion that Russia is “turning the other cheek”, then that is the price to pay to buy more time and further weaken the Empire.
That strategy, however, cannot be sustained forever, if only because appeasement does invite further abuse. Each time Russia successfully avoids WWIII the imbeciles in Washington DC interpret this as a further sign that “Russia is weak, and we are strong, we are the best, we are invincible!” and plan a further escalation of tensions and hostilities.
This is why I think that each conflict needs to be looked at on a case by case basis. In Syria, appearing to be “turning the other cheek” to avoid WWIII makes sense. In the Ukraine where such a risk does not exist, this strategy needs to be fundamentally reassessed. In Syria, Russian and US forces are in direct proximity, facing each other; in the Ukraine, however, the Ukronazi forces are a proxy for NATO, and thus they act like a buffer which reduces the risks of rapid uncontrolled escalation. Russia can use that to her advantage.
I also want to add this: should Russia decide to push-back in a more energetic manner, she will not do that across the board, but only in specific instances and specific conflicts. A stronger push-back in Syria will not automatically signal a stronger push-back in the Ukraine, and vice-versa. Russian military strategy places great importance on the concentration of forces on the main axis of attack, not across the entire battle area and so do Russian politicians. This entire notion of “being tough on” (crime, drugs, terror, etc.) is very US American. Russians don’t think this way at all. They will study the full disposition of the enemy and pick the one spot where a (counter-)attack makes most sense. So don’t expect Putin to suddenly stop “turning the other cheek” and “get tough with the Americans”. It simply won’t happen this way. In some spots the Russians will appear to give in, while in others they will increase the pressure. That is how all wars are won.
The internal factor: the 5th columnists
As I have mentioned many times in the past, Vladimir Putin also has to contend with a pro-Western and pro-Zionist 5th column inside the Kremlin and, more generally, inside the state apparatus. I call this 5th column the Atlantic Integrationists (as opposed to the Eurasian Sovereignists), but we could also call them the Washington Consensus/IMF/WTO/WB/etc/ or follow the example of Gary Littlejohn and call them “supporters of international financial institutions” (except that rather calling them “supporters” I would refer to them as “agents”). But whatever term we choose to use, it is crucial to always keep in mind that this 5th column remains the biggest threat Putin and Russia are facing and Putin has to keep that in mind in every decision that he makes. So far, these 5th columnists have focused mostly on what is dear to their hearts – money issues and internal politics – and left the military and security services to deal with what is dear to their hearts: the protection of Russian sovereignty and foreign policy. But you can be sure that if Putin ever makes a mistake (or even if he doesn’t, but only appears to make one) they will pounce on him and do everything they can to either outright oust him or, at least, force him and his supporters to agree to their treacherous agenda: to return to the nightmare of the 1990s: a total sellout of Russia to the AngloZionists.
Conclusion: simple perceptions vs a complex reality
So is Russia acting like a bully (like the US/EU say), or adequately responding when needed (as most Putin supporters believe) or does she meekly turn the other cheek (as Paul Craig Roberts concludes)? I would say that none of these characterizations are correct and that the reality is just far more complex.
For one thing, the examples of South Ossetia and Crimea show that Putin is willing, when needed, to take forceful military action. But in other cases, he prefers to delay any confrontation. In the case of Syria, this makes sense. In the case of the Ukraine, less so. Furthermore, Russia is still only a partially sovereign country and the power of the 5th columnists still strongly influences Russian decision making, especially in non-time-critical cases (South Ossetia and Crimea being perfect examples of a time-critical situation). This is why Russian actions often appear as contradictory zig-zags (even when they are not). Russians also still have a rather weak public relations capability (for examples, see here, here and here)
This perception problem is made worse by the regrettable fact that much of the English language Russia-focused blogosphere has been roughly split:
- On the one hand, mindless cheerleading combined with emphatic denials that there are any problems at all.
- On the other hand, defeatist “all is lost” or “Putin sold out” kind of commentary only serving to confuse the matter further.
They are all equally wrong. Worse, they both damage Russia in general and Putin in particular (sadly, most of them have sold out to their financial sponsors and are more interested in pleasing this or that oligarch than about being truthful).
Russian policies should be viewed dialectically: as evolving processes which often contain the seeds of their own contradiction, but which still end up being tremendously successful at the end, at least so far. Rather than hoping for perfection or infallibility from Putin, we should offer him our conditional and critical support. In fact, I would even say that Putin and the Eurasian Sovereignists can greatly benefit from critical support as this gives them a justification to take corrective action (for example, Putin has already amended, albeit minimally, the proposed pension reform project as a direct result of a massive public outcry). You could also put it this way: each time the Russian public opinion is outraged by Ukronazi actions or the perception that Russia is meekly turning the other cheek brings closer the day when Russia will finally recognize the two Novorussian republics. Right now what I hear a lot in the Russian media (including state media) are expressions of immense frustration, disgust and anger and calls for the Kremlin take a much harder line on the Ukros in Kiev. Popular anger is a powerful weapon which Putin can use against his enemies, both internal and external.
So let us follow Paul Craig Roberts’ example and continue to ask the hard questions and remain critical of Russian policies.
The Saker
Links to responding documents in this discussion thread:
Russia As a Cat – Andrei Martyanov replies to Dr Paul Craig Roberts
What Should Putin Do? – Dr Roberts replies to Andrei Martyanov
I Agree with The Saker as Far as he Goes – Dr Roberts replies to The Saker
I have read and thought about all this, and at a moment in time one can agree with the Saker. But we are not at a moment in time. The pendulum is swinging away from the US, the trend is very clear. We all know the reasons why, so I won’t repeat. There will come a point, and I think its very close now, when the US empire has to be firmly taught a lesson.
And I disagree with the Saker’s military assessment re Syria. First, Russia may have small, but not insignificant, forces in Syria. But Syria is within moments of the forces of Russia from its mainland, whereas the supply lines to the US are, well, very long. All of the US bases (in Syria, Qatar, or Turkey, or even Europe), or at sea, could be destroyed within minutes. And Israel is the US’s soft underbelly – as a commentator recently said. Second, if this blows up, the Hormuz is closed and the price of oil goes through the roof, even if its available. The US economy will crater overnight. Third, I wouldn’t count on and NATO support for the US, and in reality there is little they can offer other than the usual fig-leaf for American aggression. Fourth, when did America last win a war? In the last 100 years (and I discount WW2, since this was a Russian victory) I can only recall the invasion of Grenada, and even then Reagan had to apologise to the UK.
The US is at the end of the road, it just doesn’t know. Maybe even Putin underestimates his strong position, or as PCR writes maybe he doesn’t have the stomach.
I’m not advocating war that could get out of control, but at some point, enough is enough.
Supplies ? These are just the listed ones and not including those of their puppets.
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8631e9519ebf375684bb8ec90164d848
The weakness that I think exists on the side of the Empire is the foot soldiers. Are they motivated to dies at a moments notice for “Demo-crazy” ?
The United States runs a constant propaganda campaign aimed at its soldiers. This is in addition to the propaganda aimed at the general population which includes propaganda designed to get young people to enlist in the military.
An example of this was seen early in the Dubya’s Iraq War. Soldiers were constantly told they were there because of 9-11. I remember a journalists book about Inside the Green Zone describing a mess hall with pictures of the Twin Towers painted on the wall. This despite the fact that no Iraqis took part in 9-11, and that Saddam as a dictator viewed Islamist movements like Al-Qaeda as a large threat to his power and used his dictatorial powers to crush them and keep them out. There was no Al-Qaeda in Iraq until the Americans overthrew Saddam. But American propaganda aimed at the soldiers reinforced that the Iraq War was in response to 9-11 and the bizarre notion that Saddam supported Al-Qaeda thus he deserved a hundred thousand American troops in his country.
You can make all the jokes you want about demo-crazy, but if you fight the Americans you’ll be fighting a bunch of brain-washed, amphetamine addicted zombies.
I agree with you (I spent around 13 years living in LA, DC. Chicago and SF)
Another important thing to remember about them is that they are probably the biggest cowards anywhere – and a genuinely confident person is next to impossible to find – they all obsess about high-school style popularity games
cdvision,
Interestingly enough, I agree with Saker, on most points, but I also agree with you. Russia may have small contingent in Syria, but as you are saying Russia could move in many assets if needed practically overnight. Just like Mortianov said, nobody really knows how many subs Russia has cruising the Mediterranean Sea. In case of conflict, I expect all NATO air assets to be instantly grounded (blown to pieces on the ground), this is not Libya. Also, just like he said “good luck catching Mig31’s”, the US won’t know what hit them.
On the aspect of surrounding Russia, I think that the key is to have as many possible points hitting Russia, so it gets overwhelmed. But, as Saker says, and I am using my words here this is neocon wet dream.
As for the 5th column, those bastards exist in every country and are subservient to the Wall Street and City of London. This is why, some (two) years ago Putin ordered identification of dual citizens.
“We are not at a moment in time.”
An interesting statement, as a philosopher might argue that we are always at a moment in time. This moment keeps changing, that is true. But we are always at a moment in time, just not the same one as a moment ago and not the same one as a moment from now.
One item that The Saker does not mention, and of course one cannot mention everything in a single essay, is that Russia and China are both growing stronger as time passes. We’ve seen Russia creating options for itself beyond the one gas pipeline through Ukraine. We’ve seen Russia develop alternative routes of transport to Turkey and Germany. This has reached the point where now the Germans are begging for the Ukro-fascists wanting promises that Russia won’t just turn off the gas on that route when the Nord Stream 2 project comes on line.
We’ve also seen the development of economic ties with China, and the construction of large pipeline projects in that direction. Thus, should a break with Ukraine cause the Europeans to put on more sanctions on Russia, now trade with Europe is less important to Russia because they have over time been creating new trade links with a billion Chinese.
If you look a few decades into the future, it appears obvious that China will become the world’s most powerful economy. Russia has built strong diplomatic links with China, helped by idiots in the US that have launched the same sort of hybrid war on China as upon Russia thereby creating incentives for the diplomacy and growing trade links between Russia and China.
Overall, this makes Europe less and less important to Russia as a trading partner. This is a natural progression from the Europeans being willing to make themselves a less reliable trading partner by going along with US sanctioons. All of this adds up to Russia become more and more free of Europe and any European wishes or demands.
I know that for those who want to see tanks rolling across borders and missiles flying through the air as the only gangster methods for proving one’s manhood and showing how tough one is, but Russia in Putin’s martial arts fashion has slowly been manuevering to lessen European power and influence over Russia to the point where it is now becoming meaningless as Russia creates other options.
In such a situation where one is growing stronger while an enemy is growing weaker, it makes perfect sense to follow a strategy of delaying any conflict.
“Russia creates other options.”
This is key, for countries as well as for people.
Plan A isn’t enough.
Develop Plans B, C, and D. And then think of ways to combine them.
At every level.
Fractal planning.
Even a decent football coach tries to think ahead about what will happen in a coming game if Plan A doesn’t work and thus has drilled his/her team enough in Plans B and C just in case the coach needs to make such an adjustment during the upcoming match.
Of course, the bad football coaches who lose fail to think ahead and plan and prepare ahead in such a fasion.
This “America never wins wars” comment is straight out of leftist dreamland. America has won every war it’s been in for 100 years. Some by decisions rather than knock outs, but still, they always win. That’s why there’s an bizarre urgency to learn English in Kazakhstan – because America won. That’s why slum kids in Central Africa wear nike logo shirts – because America won. That’s why the Vietnamese eat at Mcdonalds – because the USA won. When the enemy brands you, it means you lost.
I also doubt “getting America back,” in some sort of hot war, is anywhere near a good idea. There are so many areas Russia could improve his game, especially in the informational war sphere, as Saker mentions.
There’s this worry amongst the information warriors and diplomats that they will appear cynical. Alright. Here’s a bigger problem: being gullible. Getting sucked in by tired old American con-men is really not acceptable at this point. They even got sucked in by this British poisoning charade. The completely exposed, pathetic has-been British sucked them in!
Certain technical things need to be done behind the scenes. But when it’s a public event, boy, Russia has to be ready to hypnotize the audience into a trance with a big, beautiful story. What happens backstage cannot be allowed to ruin what’s happening in front of the audience.
No more rambling. These points were pretty much made in the article. Read the article, and give particular attention the the points on Russia’s lackluster PR initiatives (note: I’d go much further on the RT critique; I’d say most of what it does is anti-Russia, presently). There is so much more that can be gained without ever developing a better fighter jet. Actually, with every new weapon Russia announces, I ask how it will embarrass Niki Haley out of existence. And it won’t. That’s the problem.
I agree with Russia needing to up it’s PR game. This is an area that it has always been weak in. This is primarily because it doesn’t have the assets that the west has to promote it’s side of the story but Russia’s efforts to improve on this has been mediocre at best.
Those of us in the west who are awakened to the lies our government tell us have done so mostly through our own reassoning and of course mostly fluking into finding blogs like this one that intelligently inform us. RT is a good example of this but is constantly under attack and drowned out by other news mediums. RT’s mild atacks on Russia itself as u point out are in the spirit of properly investigating both sides of the story in my view. When Russia tries to defend itself whether it’s Ukraine/Crimea or the Skripal case etc. It seems to be a fart in a hurricane and gets little traction in the west. I don’t know how it can overcome this but it defintely has to improve.
In terms of culture I don’t agree with you. The international culture influenced by the USA is no longer as vigorous in the USA as it is in the rest of the world. America sat astride the world after WWII and used its influence to create a world order based on diplomacy and rule of law certainly compared to what was there before. Pax American was real and worked fairly well. However, after the coup of 1963 things began to change politically so that by the late seventies the USA began its cultural and political decline now in full bloom for all the world to see. I say this as someone who has seen it unfold before me. To be blunt, the problem in the USA is corruption pure and simple and while it can limp along this way for awhile major changes will come within the decade or utter ruin and decentralization will result. This is why Washington is so desperate to create enemies–no enemies, no Washington gravy trains.
When we used to live in Virginia and South Carolina there were times I spent slowly walking through some of the national military cemeteries there. My Good Lord, so many died so young, and because every war has its losers– and those who loose everything, including life itself–I have seen firsthand how any “win” the US supposedly has gotten from any war is truly terrible. The psychic toll on our Earth has been terrible, also, like a disease that goes on for centuries without healing. When the bankers and corporations and trading with the enemy types “win”, believe me, the people loose. The phrase “leftist dreamland” can be replaced by all-spanning, all encompassing nightmare, right and left, not only for America, but for the entire planet.
Agree ‘cept for the WW2 was a Russian victory. Russia was key as was the U.S./UK. U.S. provided the Russians with those trucks (and planes) that proved the margin of victory. Logistics is everything.
Actually the Lend/Lease aircraft and trucks arrived in small numbers and only after the USSR had already defeated Germany at the battles of Moscow, Stalingrad, and Kursk and were pushing the Gerrmans out of Ukraine and Byelorussia. Only about 5 percent of the weapons used by the Red Army came from the West, and most of those were delivered in 1944 and 1945. Although the trucks were very useful, the aircraft and tanks were inferior to what the USSR was already producing in huge numbers by 1943. They were mostly used for secondary roles like moping up behind the front line, fighting pro-Nazi Ukrainian partisans, and guarding prisoners of war.
A brief comment on Ukraine as I don’t have more time:
In my opinion, Russia does not want to have to rebuild more parts of the former Ukraine (Crimea is expensive enough). Russia wants to use its economic surplus for education, science and the social welfare of its citizens. If Russia would take over the responsibility for Donbass or other parts of Ukraine, it would have to spend at least another decade for rebuilding a society that others destroyed.
Marcel Leutenegger
That is basically true. However, what is to become of Ukraine ? Can it in the future function at all, when even the Ukrainian Foreign Minister has admitted that almost one million Ukrainians are departing the country every year (the number is probably higher) ? I don’t see Ukraine surviving in it’s present form. At least 2/3 of it will in end be reunited with Russia.
One way to take on such projects is to do them one stage at a time. Thus, as time progresses, the amount that Russia is needing to spend on Crimea will decrease. As an example, a major expense would have been creating the transport and power links to the country across the Kerch Strait replacing the previous overland links via now-fascist-controlled Ukraine. But, these costs are a one-time costs and when the construction is completed they drop off and the Crimea economy does better with the new transport and power supplies and there is less overall need in those areas.
As such, Russia then has resources released for other projects.
Marcel, I totally agree with what you said, and I’ll add that why should Russia have to replenish what others are stealing from Ukraine daily. And, certainly Russia does not want to be held accountable to fulfilling all the contracts signed by the Kievan junta.
Yes, why should Russia have responsibiltiy for dysfunctional Ukraine?
The EU and the USA will have to take responsibilty. If they don’t . . . ?
Maybe, not Russia’s problem.
Maybe Russia can incorporate the Ukraine *after* the USA and the EU have “bought” the item they broke (You broke it; you buy it). That is, made necessary investments to provide the basis for a functioning state.
But if Ukrainians continue to emigrate to Russiak, there will be a continued self-sorting and Russia will likely get the best elements in Ukrainian society.
I assume that in this discussion, Ukraine or the Ukraine refers to the western part of the country.
Katherine
Kat, your point is precisely correct: we are talking about the Western Ukraine (Galicja), although we are not saying it. Poland can take it and deal with descendants of UPA.
You are dead right in this belief. In fact Putin has made no secret of the fact that he does not intend to involve himself in Ukrainian affairs. He has stated to do so, would require massive Russian economical costs detrimental to Russia it’self.
How come I’m aware of this and can recall reading his statements in this regard, but many comenters on here are unawares of those statements ???
Very good article by the two(?)remaining sane people in the US who understand the global situation(Maybe Prof Cohen as well?).
It is maybe time for Putin to fire the 5th column.The pension reform(forced on Putin by them)was totaly non necessary for a rich country like Russia with almost no debts(compared to the ponzi mountains of debts of the western countries).RF holds almost 24% of all energy ressources of the entire World.
The fith column came with this ‘reform’ only to kill Putin popularity and …it works(from 88% to 37% yesterday).
They will probably try some kind of Maidan again,it is now or never for them.
How is it possible that Putin takes such an idiot decision at the worse moment in terms of global stability.If he really wants this reform he could have waited a few years when things willl maybe stabilize or…there will be no need for pensions at all as after a nuclear war everybody will be dead(I hope not of course).
Very bad timing.
Putin is a globalist,if he could he would rejoin the EU next monday and he even tried to join NATO to some extent after 09/11.
Of course anybody else for the Russians would be even worse with maybe the exception of Shoigu?
I don’t understand the ‘our partners’ policy after 4 years of 24/7 attacks against Putin and all Russians.
Why Putin does not ask to treat russophobia as anti semitism?It is pure racism no?
About the return of the Skripal hoax,what is your opinion on that Saker(I guess it is linked to the coming false flag in Syria)?
Trump Does 180 Shift On Syria: Regime Change Back On The Table.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-06/syrian-regime-change-table-trump-does-180-shift-syria-wapo-sources
“We, the leaders of France, Germany, the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom, reiterate our outrage at the use of a chemical nerve agent, known as Novichok, in Salisbury on 4 March. … We have full confidence in the British assessment that the two suspects were officers from the Russian military intelligence service, also known as the GRU, and that this operation was almost certainly approved at a senior government level,” the statement read.
How is it possible that these western countries are reacting this way like if they were occupied and pushed to war by a small country of 8 millions people?
There must be some secret blackmail coming from Israel?
Those who are really in charge, do not need to ‘blackmail’ their minions and subordinates. They simply issue orders.
Putin may have offered to join EU and NATO back a decade ago. But that does not mean that this is his current position on the issue. Time and the world has moved on, and things change. I know its a common technique on the modern internet to search someone’s lifetime and then slam them over something found from decades ago. But wiser people realize that people and positions can indeed change.
Its one of the issues I have with Mr. Roberts in that he constantly mis-reads the term “partner” as used by the Russians. A decade ago, use of the term might have been offered as an olive branch towards peace. Note, not a white-flag of surrender, but as a signal that if sane people had wanted to sit down and discuss a sane relationship, then it was possible. Now I note that the term ‘partner’ is used by Mm. Lavrov and Putin with high decrees of sarcasm and derision since the olive branch has been obviously rejected. Mr. Roberts appears incapable of noting the difference.
“the 5th column.The pension reform(forced on Putin by them)”
Do you have some forensic, indisputable proof to this. The forcing by some unnamed, unidentified people I mean. Could you provide it please,
Otherwise I will have to include your post along with those of some of my ancient forbears, claiming that certain actions were forced on them by the alignment of the stars, also actions due to of because they didn’t leave out enough milk for them.
“Otherwise I will have to include your post along with those of some of my ancient forbears, claiming that certain actions were forced on them by the alignment of the stars”
Indeed.
It seems likely Putin is waging war against the Russian people all by himself (or along with his Oligarch friends).
Roberts, Martyanov and you Saker….I love to read you!
As non-Russians, particularly having not been subject to the 1990’s and then the last 18 years of comeback, most of us are truly “playing a video game” with the Russian military to assuage our own powerlessness in the face of the rampaging Hegemon.
We see Ukraine as an easy war to win. We see Syria as one more S-400 away from complete defeat and removal of the US from Syrian territory. (and, total frustration of any more Israeli attacks).
But that’s our mentality and emotions disconnected from the Russian reality.
It also is why we cannot ‘read’ Putin’s moves.
Saker makes wonderful sense. But, his analysis still does not change our “thinking”.
We don’t have the responsibilities of Putin; we risk nothing advocating changes in his policies, tactics and strategies, and we may have our hearts in the right place, but our bodies are thousands of miles out of harm’s way.
So, though I have recognized that my advocacy for more ‘action’ against the Hegemon is not going to happen in Syria, I persist. It truly is hard to give up the remote controls.
This essay is very helpful to better comprehend the patience of Putin. Patience truly has worked. Patience in Ukraine allowed the Military enough time to build up and take on Syria. Patience in Syria has gathered many allies and friends of Russia in the Middle East. The long patient game of weapons development now has given Putin a geopolitical tool with the S-400 as a wedge against NATO (Turkey), a wedge in the Gulf States (Qatar and Saudi Arabia want it), a chip with India (which allows Russia to get closer with Pakistan), and a deepening with China as it holds off the Hegemon in its sphere. All that from patient development, and then surprise, many of them, including Kalibr cruise missiles and the strategic hypersonic weapons.
Putin made those decisions years ago. Payoff came in 2015-2018.
Even patience with Erdogan has wedged Turkey from the West. And that decision to work with Erdogan came after the knife in the back shoot down of the Russian jet and murder of its pilot.
We have a lot to learn from this analysis and conversation between Saker and Roberts. And much to learn about patience and Putin’s strategic use of it.
The world clash of civilizations is not a video game.
Very well balanced comment.
Reminds of when Dr. Mahathir was Prime Minister of Malaysia the 1st time. He wanted to use gold as money and use barter trading with other countries. Too many opposed and no steps were taken to implement this.
On hindsight, he really was on the right track, except nobody thought so at that time.
Same with Putin and his supporters. The endgame is the end of the Empire without world war. Putin does things which do not fit our personal template what the right thing to do is. But the result is the Empire showing its true face, going mad while it crumbles. Those who can see, will see. Those who cannot see, will never see it now, but perhaps in some future.
Well said Larchmonter445 !!!
Key is vigilance and patients.
I don’t think anyone denies the successes of the Russian Federation in the last few years, but it is the people in Donbass that suffer due to Moscow’s patience.Generally speaking I don’t think it’s wise to let your allies suffer to get on the good side of those who are hostile towards you.Though not being in Donbass I don’t know what people there think about this.
You forgot russian ambasador in turkey, assasinated.
If one tries to point to a failure by Russia from being inactive, one cannot find a situation to point to. The west is losing its death grip on the whole world. The multi-polar world is ascending.
The Ukraine is well understood in Donetsk, and Zakharchenko himself has spoken about it. Novorossya understands that it must wait, and carry proudly the task of being the buffer between Russia and the US aggression. It does this best in its precise current situation, protected by Minsk 2.0 that has frozen the game so brilliantly. Russia, as mentioned in comments, simply will not spend the money she would become morally obligated to spend to support a corrupt Ukraine, when that money does more good in Russia.
On the other hand, if Russia had followed any of Paul Craig Roberts’s agonized pleas for actions over the last 2-3 years, there’s no telling how many failures she might have performed by now. Roberts, although he doesn’t understand it, would bring us to war. I respect him greatly on economics, but he’s totally dangerous handling the short fuse of geopolitics.
I do not understand how can anyone can insist on seeing the glass as half empty when it is so obviously more than half full, and even brimming over. If one counts the amazing successes of Russia in actually changing this world for the better, one should be chagrined to spend much time picking tiny holes in her policies. What armchair presumption!
Recall that a few years ago we were afraid the gray hegemony would smother the whole world, and now we see immense patches of sunshine throughout the global sky.
I praise Russia, which doesn’t even know that I exist, but which simply from doing the right thing – again and again – has changed the world I live in. I have learned from watching her actions to respect the care that goes into them.
“How long does turning your other cheek work? Do you turn your other cheek so long as to allow your opponent to neutralize your advantage in a confrontation? Do you turn your other cheek so long that you lose the support of the patriotic population for your failure to defend the country’s honor? Do you turn your other cheek so long that you are eventually forced into war or submission? Do you turn your other cheek so long that the result is nuclear war?”
This is framing the question in such a way that it allows one to control the dialogue. Russia is not engaging in turning the cheek nor being reactionary. They have their geostrategy, which they adjust as need arises. Therefore, the question is irrelevant. The day after Russia let’s the zpc/now determine her actions will be the beginning of the end of Russia as an independent nation.
The israeloamerican planners working day and night to bait Russia into moves zionazia has planning are probably not very happy people right now. :-D
Vot Tak, you keep turning the proverbial cheek, until there is no other choice. When you stop turning your cheek you will be facing at least some destruction and rebuilding which will require borrowing money, which is what the City of London wants you to do. Making money is the name of the game for City of London and paying them is what Russia is trying to avoid at all cost. The ultimate payback is hitting Wall Street and City of London in the places where they keep all their wealth, and I am not talking about the paper money but their real wealth.
Actually I am back with some quotes and links from Martianov:
“Any serious military analyst knew already in 2014 that neither US, nor NATO as a whole, could defeat Russia in conventional war near Russia’s borders.
On March 1 it became clear that Russia can strike any targets, including within the US, conventionally with US not being able to do anything about it.”
You can read this at:
http://www.unz.com/article/grand-strategy-revisited/
Let me add another one of his articles, where he uses a wonderful analogy to Russian story about the Cat who ate the chicken and the cook:
http://www.unz.com/article/russia-as-a-cat/
All I am saying trust Russia’s philosophy which governs its movements, which most likely will keep all of us alive.
Thanks for posting links to those great articles, Anonius.
Sorry, I meant the cook and the cat who ate the chicken. I did not mean the cat ate the chicken and the cook.
I also think that Russia is not obeying the US and their miserable threats – just a couple of days ago the US warned Syria not to go after Idlib – Russia basically spat in their face – Hurrah –
I wish I was on the Russian side in physical locality.
I’m with you Ann. If I was younger I’d be inclined to want to live there. I’m not under any illusions that it is a perfect country, but they are moving in the right direction after the Soviet nightmare and are setting the example for the world in morality and spirituality. I’m now just repulsed by just about all the leadership (if one can call it that) in most western countries, with the U.S. at the head of that list. I think now the U.S. will use humanitarian intervention as their excuse to attack Syria. Their hypocrisy is stunning. Now Trump, the great hero has decided they are not leaving until Assad is replaced! They have no intention of ever leaving there so where is this mess heading?
“…or does (Russia) meekly turn the other cheek (as Paul Craig Roberts concludes)?”
But does Dr. Roberts believe the other cheek is being turned due to “meekness”?
To this reader at least, Dr. Roberts does not suggest that any cheek-turning on Putin’s part has followed from sheer meekness. Rather, he seems to consistently speculate that Russia’s inaction (described as having the appearance of a turning of the cheek, as though to invite further insults) is founded not in reflexive pacifism, but rather upon a flawed premise – that Washington’s derangement is temporary and therefore transient, that the unanswered provocations will subside according to the extinction principle, and especially that given time, it is to be expected that Russia will prevail. The concern is that Russia’s reserve and diplomacy, repeatedly left unanswered by any moderation on Washington’s part, reveals that a foundational miscalculation has been made in intellectual terms, and not that Russia has behaved in an excessively meek or hopeful way.
Reading the first lengthy quotation from Dr. Roberts, it seems clear that his concerns arise from a fear of time being very much of the essence; that allowing it to pass in this conflict without incident or offset is profoundly unhelpful to Russian interests. And it does seem that most, if not all, successful tactical escalations on the part of the US force(s) to date have followed their strategic successes in buying more time from Russia. Some of these temporal breaks have surely enabled, for instance, important adjustments by the US side to the worldwide propaganda program, or in other cases, the resupplying, refreshing, rebranding, refinancing, and/or repackaging of the proxy subversives arrayed against the Syrian people. But, is it not fair to ask, under exactly what circumstances does giving the enemy a time out ever help one’s cause?
It is suggested that Russia is not “pressed for time to resolve this conflict”. Unfortunately, what Russia does with this seeming abundance of time may in the end be made insignificant by the question of what the US will do with the time it is being given (again and again). Ultimately, do we not have a case of divergent views on the value of time to each side? If the passage of time somehow assists the fulfillment of Russia’s interests (whatever we agree those to be), then she is indeed not “pressed for time.” But if we conclude that the effectiveness and lethality of the US effort in Syria only grows with time – where it is left unchallenged or unthwarted by dramatic means – then we too might begin to couch our concerns in the manner of Dr. Roberts: “Do you turn your other cheek so long that you lose…?”
Unfortunately, I tend to agree with your views so eloquently described in your comment. Playing with time works in both directions, for both players, postponing one danger creates another one, until you have to eliminate it, so the notion of winning time is very fluid, it’s a two-edged sword.
Yes an excellent analysis of the factor of time in struggles of empire. PCR is consistent in his belief that the endgame is the destruction or subjugation of anyone who defies the west and that without a “bloody nose” the pressure on Russia and China will only increase and stakes raised higher.
I think what he’s trying to say is that if Russia showed some serious pushback then the west might give up on it’s plan for hegemony and reconcile or those elements of deep state might become weakened and replaced. The longer Russia stalls the greater the eventual conflict will be and might become nuclear as the Russophobia increases. This may be correct but without a clear provacation of a Russian attack the west will use the act as a reason to strike back with much greater force. Thus the impasse and attack by proxy.
Well, I do not agree with any postulate, that: “Russia needs to be pushed, until she surenders herself to the hegemon”. My point is, Russia will not surrender, and will continue to avoid getting involved in any “punching game”. Time is on Russia’s side, and let me repeat Putin’s words: “If attacked, Russia will bring the destruction to America’s homeland so America can finally learn what it to sift through the rubble and bury millions of dead, which Russia had to endure for centuries”.
I was say, “Keep turning your cheek until you are ready not to do it any more.” That time is used to be better prepared oneself for when you stop turning your cheek. In that respect Putin is as wise as a fox. Better to run and fight later than go full guns blazing and be shooting with a BB-gun.
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/whites_of_their_eyes.png
Consider how the chemical weapons thing has been handled by Russia.
Round One- Syria’s chemical weapons stock was dismantled. A diplomatic achievement for Russia. There are reports that this process was started because Russia had intercepted missiles headed for Damascus after the chemical attack accusations.
Round two- Khan Shaykhun- Russia lets the US attack Syria with minimal loss of life and physical damage.
Round three- Douma- Russia gives a warning, Allows the US to throw bombs that damage some unimportant buildings.
Round four- Russia has positioned its hardware in a way which makes it very difficult for the US to get away with a repeat performance. Plus they have clearly said that they are not going to buy any false flag excuse.
I very much doubt there will be any US cruise missiles landing in Syria in Round Four.
If Syria/Russia can safely get back Idlib and negotiate the US evacuation from Syria it will be clear to everyone that the Empire has ended and all that remains is to negotiate how to dismantle the Empire with the least amount of pain for everyone.
Once Syria is solved Ukraine will be solved automatically, plus a whole host of Empire related imbroglios.
Your post is extreme optimism not rooted in the real world. The ziocons are fanatics, and will not limp away somehow reformed.
The fable of the frog and the scorpion sums up all that one needs to know about their nature.
With regard to Ukraine. The Ukronazi war against the Don Bass IS A DE FACTO WAR against Russia. No ifs and buts. Secondly the Minsk agreement was never negotiated in good faith by the Ukies and Poroshenko simply acts as a marionette pushed hither and yon by the US who effectively control the Ukraine. Thirdly the people of the Don Bass will NEVER accept or be forced into the rule of Kiev, even with guaranteed autonomy. Please bear witness to those massive crowds attending Z’s funeral; did they look like they wanted to become of the wretched Ukraine failed state?
Next item:
The alleged insanity of the neo-cons and their supporters. The Question arises are they really insane; are they really unaware the outcomes of a toe-to-toe conflict with Russia? Or is it all a bluff, a game of pretend. Are they really willing to sacrifice cities like New York, Chicago and Los Angeles for Riga, Sofia, Warsaw and Bucharest consistent with Article 5 of the NATO constitution?
The whole strategy is based upon the premise of a Russian surrender which they hope will be the winning strategy. Only the US is likely to start a war, Russia is not. So the decision to commit mutual suicide lies with the US. The will look into the abyss, and, in the words of F.Nietzsche will find that the abyss will look back into themselves.
1. “The Russian FSB (whose investigators are in Donetsk) has declared that the Ukrainian SBU is behind the murder of Alexandr Zakharchenko”
2. The British government’s claim to have identified two Russians who would have done so bad a job that a series of trails “would lead to “Moscow’s involvment””
a mere coincidence ? or an opportune counterfire ?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6141275/Russian-oligarchs-living-mansions-Britain-face-crackdown-dirty-money.html
Particularly targeting Russian oligarchs.
In the hope of what…….betchya will not hand over Bill Browder….posted on cafe yesterday re UN meeting….what can Russsia do…?
The inconsistencies continue “Silman Mir said police searched his hotel for four months without telling him why
Detectives from Scotland Yard first arrived at the City Stay Hotel in Bow, east London, on May 4
But Mr Mir, 54, said he had no idea where officers kept visiting the hotel until yesterday when TV crews appeared on his doorstep
Police found ‘tiny traces’ of novichok in the room where the men stayed that were of no danger to public health….. etc
Novichok ‘could have killed 4,000’: Russia is accused of ‘playing dice’ with lives of Britons as security officials say perfume bottle had enough nerve agent to cause ‘significant loss of life’……
And security sources have also claimed the police and secret service are probing whether the novichok hidden in a high-tech perfume bottle entered Britain in a diplomatic bag then smuggled into the Russian embassy in London”
RAmping it up…….
“GCHQ’s REVENGE on ‘brazen’ Kremlin: Boss of cyber intelligence agency warns it will deploy its entire arsenal against Russia”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6140773/Russia-poses-active-threat-warns-UK-spy-chief.html
‘Furthermore, the Russian military task force in and near Syria is very small and cannot resist against a determined US/CENTCOM/NATO attack.’
Russia won’t be fighting alone against USA/NATO in Syria though(if it comes to that), there’s also Syrian troops,Iran,Hezbollah and Iraq, even Turkey might side with Russia depending the circumstances.Here Russia’s disadvantage in numbers is negated by the presence of it’s allies(and strategic partners).
PCR falls into the classic right wing mindset of always needing to maintain a wannabe John Wayne tough guy image, lest you be seen as weak. His thinking is shortsighted and shallow on this. He says Putin needs to be more firm in his response, yet states a mere few paragraphs later that Washington is insane and would react irrationally… Is it just me or is this… let me put it very diplomatically, an ill-advised strategy? Washington, as he correctly points out, is stuck in their ideological, exceptionalism bubble, they would see the need to enact an even tougher response, as the Saker points out, to “teach the Russians a lesson.” No, what the Russians are doing is the best thing they can do, wait out the Western collapse, which is looming.
As for the Ukraine, Saker, Russia can not allow the Ukraine to implode, it will create an economic black hole right on their doorstep. If you think it already is, you have not seen anything yet. At this point, there are at least functional institutions left, even if barely any at all. They can also not allow the Ukraine as a whole to turn on them, which would happen if they take steps which negatively affect Ukrainian citizens. The further West you go, the more people you encounter who had a favourable image of Russia before the coup, but who were brainwashed into believing Russia is the aggressor. Friends of mine who live in Kiev and who are ethnic Russians, tell me Putin is the devil and Russia is responsible for their situation. As of right now, they are the minority, if Russia turns the screws on them, it will change and strengthen the pro-West fascists’ grip on power. The Russians have most likely punched in the numbers and calculated how much they need to spend on the Ukraine, in order for what remains of the state to survive the Nazi occupation and decided they can afford it. So they keep the state afloat for the time being, perhaps the elections next year will already bring much needed change. Not saying I believe there will be legitimate elections, but it’s hard to imagine Poroshenko remaining in power, nobody likes him, not even the Nazis any more. He has a single digit approval rating. Ukraine has had either 1 or 2, depends on how you look at it, actually elected presidents in it’s existence, the rest came to power either through colour revolutions, appointments, power grabs or coups. Poroshenkos time is running out, one way or another.
But time is on the side of Russia, the end of the US empire will mean the end of the Ukrainian Nazis, it will mean the end of Saudi Arabia, the end of the EU, the end of Israel.
India, which has behaved like a spoiled brat up until now, wanting to play both sides of the equation in it’s favour under that moron Modi, now joined Russia and China in buying gold in place of the US dollar, further weakening it as the worlds reserve currency. India is THE emerging economy to watch, even die hard western economists agree on that, and now it’s no longer cosying up to Washington. They also say they will buy the S400s regardless of sanction threat from the US.
The US is getting weaker every day, which is the reason for the sanction barrage, they are running out of time to destroy the China+Russia alliance, which is, according to their thinking, the only way for them to preserve their hegemony after the coming economic crisis. They are trying to damage the weaker link, at least economically, Russia. They do this in order to incentivise the Chinese to drop the dead weight and look for other, more economically stable and capable partners. Up until now, this strategy failed miserably, and it will fail in the end as well, because by now, the Russian economy is near bulletproof against Western sanctions. They can do their worst, it will barely make a difference. Even SWIFT exclusion will not do a damn thing.
The Skripal nonsense, which is designed to give more pretexts for the entire West to sanction Russia, is so pathetically and poorly thought through and executed, because they simply didn’t have the time to prepare a better story. It shows that they are in full desperation mode, which is another good reason to refrain from nonsensical, macho tough guy responses.
Dr Paul Craig Roberts is an excellent analyst when it comes to Washington’s and NATO’s policies, and I enjoy reading his analysis. However, when it comes to the internal situation in Russia, as well as to Russia’s foreign policy, Dr Roberts is prone to making exaggerated claims, as he does not live in the country, and does not have the full picture. For example, he has stated – correctly – that NGO’s in Russia could pull off a color revolution, and that Russia should expel them. Well, NGO’s did indeed try to pull off Kiev style color revolutions, with pathetic results. After Putin’s March victory, not even Soros bothered with any street “demonstrations” in Moscow. The point is that Russia is keeping an eye on NGO’s, and quite a number of them have been expelled, something Dr Roberts does not mention.
When it comes to Russia’s foreign policy, I have to disagree with Dr Robert’s assessment that Russia is turning the other cheek. In military terminology we have something which is known as the “defensive offensive”, namely a very subtle form of strategy. Russia is applying a “soft”, sophisticated approach, vastly superior to Americas imperial bully boy tactics, which only creates enemies. Examples:
In Syria the US, in conjunction with NATO and Saudi Arabia, created ISIS, for all to see. In the beginning Russia stood back, waiting for the right time. Russia intervened in Syria on the day Vladimir Putin made his speech in the UN, to the complete surprise of the West. NATO was shocked both by Russian efficiency, as well with the newly introduced Russian high tech. The actual operation in Syria was indeed sophisticated. Russia sent a small, but highly trained force to the country, which was advantageous from the political point of view, stipulating to the domestic population that it will not create a new Vietnam out of Syria. However, this small force was more powerful than it appeared, as it had the backing of the Russian Navy in the Mediterranean and in the Caspian, as well as from the Russian Air Force inside Russia. The result ? NATO is not so much worried by the Russian military presence inside Syria, as by the Russian military inside Russia, which acts as backup. When Trump recently attacked Syria with cruise missiles, Russian bombers were in the air, warning NATO that they will attack its naval ships in the Mediterranean if Russian forces in Syria were attacked. Washington got the message, with the result that the attack against Syria was feeble, achieving almost nothing.
When it comes to Ukraine and the Donbass, Putin again applied the soft, but sophisticated approach. He did not reunite the Donbass with Russia like he reunited Crimea. He left that for a later date, instead providing logistical support. He is playing the waiting game, waiting for Ukraine to implode financially, economically and ethnically. Why should he only settle for the Donbass when he can get the bulk of Ukraine, some 75 % of the country ?
The Western coup d’etat against Yanukovich in Kiev in 2014 was one of the most foolish things I have seen in my entire life. NATO grabbed Kiev while Putin reunited Crimea with Russia and moved on to the Donbass. I am still laughing, as the West started a chain reaction which cannot be stopped, and one that in the end will only benefit Russia.
When the West instigated that coup d’etat, it applied well tried methods used in Latin America, while at the same time forgetting Ukraine’s history. The original Russia was centered in Kiev, while the name of Ukraine is derived from the Slavic word “Krayina”, which means “frontier region”. From “Krayina” you get “Ukrayina”, and from “Ukrayina” you get Ukraine, which was Russia’s western frontier.
And what do we have now in Ukraine ? A feudal entity run and plundered by it’s oligarchs, who have the full support of Poroshenko, whose “popularity” has struck rock bottom. A former Ukrainian PM admitted that by December of 2017 some 4 million Ukrainians have emigrated to the West and 4.4 million to Russia. At the beginning of this week the current Ukrainian FM admitted that almost one million Ukrainians are leaving the country every year, although the number is probably more than that. In July the Russian Orthodox Church in Kiev organized the 1030 year celebration of the Baptism of Russ, which was attended by 200.000 Ukrainians.
The West is driving Ukraine towards break up. The country cannot sustain itself financially and economically. The West has no more money to give it. The only thing it can give it is sophisticated weapons, which in a military conflict will almost certainly fall into the hands of the Donbass Russians. You don’t use a conscript army for military aggression, especially since the bulk of the conscripts don’t wish to fight.
And Putin ? He is sitting in the Kremlin and watching the show. Analysts since last year have been stating that it’s only a matter of time before Ukraine breaks up into three parts. It’s slowly going that way, and I doubt if it can be stopped. Yes, the country can be federalized into three federal units, but this will only slow down the break up. The eastern and central parts will end up inside the Russian Federation, the bulk of Ukrainians in the end wanting this.
Finally, when it comes to Russian liberals, they do exist, but their power is limited. Nobody in Russia can forget the Yeltsin years and liberal capitalism, when the country was plundered of 100 billion dollars a year. Worse for the liberals, people in Russia are watching the impoverishment of Ukraine, a carbon copy of the situation which existed in Russia under Yeltsin. The liberals have no option but to follow Putins line, fearful of any repercussions from the general population if they tried reincarnating the social and economic situation which existed under Yeltsin. For example, that new bridge in Crimea was built by a Russian oligarch in record time. Putin gave the order and the oligarch complied.
Both PCR and The Saker have always tacitly and openly dismissed the indisputable probability that both Russia/Putin and the US/Trump are controlled by the SAME powerful people who do not have either country’s best interests in mind.
There is NO REASON for Putin’s Russia to not protect Russian personnel and Russian allies from Western and Israeli attacks and to prevent such further aggression by destroying American bases inside Syria or airbases in Israel or elsewhere.
Self-defense is not casus belli. And if the Americans are mad enough to start WWIII over it then they will do it regardless of what the Russians do.
By not responding to US and Israeli aggression, Putin has CAUSED the unnecessary prolongation of the Syrian war and THOUSANDS of additional Russian, Syrian and allied nation casualties.
There is no excuse for Russia to be the biggest foreign investor in Ukraine when Ukrainians pursue genocidal policies towards Russians and murder Russians by torturing, crucifying and burning Russians alive on the crosses that the Ukrainians nailed them to, all painstakingly filmed on videos that the Ukrainians uploaded to YouTube. I’ve seen them, you’ve seen them.
There is no reason for Russia to sell gas to Ukraine OR Europe when both are committing acts of war against Russia by passing sanctions against Russia. What does Russia need fraudulent and intrinsically worthless Euros or Dollars for? Russia grows its own food and makes its own cars and planes. Dealing in the international bankers’ fraudulent fiat currencies [fraudulent because money cannot be fiat, by definition] only empowers them to fund wars and mayhem at no cost to them.
The Saker and Paul Craig Roberts:
CONSIDER or at least do not continue covering up the indubitable reality of the collusion and conspiracy of the international psychopaths who rule this world.
Putin and Trump (or Merkel or Netanyahu or Prodi) are only the international bankers’ agents and errand boys. Their ONLY mission is to engender the maximum sustainable rate of the culling of the human race possible.
Murder, torture, rape, depravity at the highest rate that is possible for humans to endure without going extinct.
Imagine what life is like in Syria for one day. You think WWIII is worse than that? No sir, death is better than Hell any day.
Truth and justice are the only means to peace.
There is some truth in your post…sometime I’m asking myself:and if all this story telling since,let’s say 9/11 or since the fall of the USSR was a big ‘fake’?All MIC are making incredible profits(shareholders when private and a lot of jobs in Russia for exemple).The US neocons(and Israel)invented the war on terror.It worked quiet well for 17 years(and counting).With this new cold war 2.0 it is back to business as usual(of course not for the people dead or injured in wars or terror attacks).A lot of insiders/oligarchs are making a lotttttt of money.They can not even imagine a world without war anymore.What will save us from these devils?Let’s hope some ET’s intercepted our conversations and show up…but I would not bet too much money on this issue.
Thanks for the response. All it takes for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing. Provided there are any good men around.
USA=EU=Israel=Russia=KSA=ISIS
I have to disagree with what you have written. Read my comment above. Russia is indeed responding, but in a very subtle way, avoiding Western traps, ie. being accused of open aggression.
@B.F.
Putin could have stopped the Americans dead in their tracks without firing a single shot in anger simply by refusing to sell Russian oil and gas for dollars thence cutting off funding for the Anglo-zionist war machine.
That’s no casus belli. So why didn’t Putin do it when he had nothing to lose and the world to win by proceeding thusly?
While you make some interesting points(though I don’t believe the RF and the USA are run by the same people) a couple of your claims are incorrect.For one, Russia does protect their personnel, a while back they warned they would hit back at anything that attacks them and as far as I know USA/NATO/Israel has not attacked Russian personnel yet.But you are right about Russia’s allies and partners, though Russians do everything short of actually shooting back to deter attacks against their allies, even right now Russia is holding naval exercises in the Mediterranean Sea, no doubt to deter another FUKUS attack against Syria.And they also haven’t prolonged the war in Syria, if anything they have been making progress at a remarkable speed by normal military standards, just because the media doesn’t report every inch of land they take doesn’t mean they haven’t been fighting.
Also I think you should take into account the fact the government(or regime) in power and the people in the country aren’t the same thing.Sanctions/economic warfare hit the people more so than the government in power and may even end up strengthening the government(ie: instead of Ukrainian troops deserting, they might actually start joining the Ukrainian military, even if only to get a paycheck).
Let us agree to disagree then: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/13/world/europe/russia-syria-dead.html
Or this: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-conflict-turkish-ultra-nationalist-suspected-of-killing-russian-pilot-may-have-ties-to-the-a6987376.html
Or the Russian “advisors” killed along with the Syrian-regime-allied troops for which I have no links to offer…
BUT
You may find this one rather enlightening: http://geopolitics-behind-the-mask.36089.n8.nabble.com/Sacred-Cow-Slaughterhouse-of-the-totally-non-kosher-kind-Look-out-below-td169.html
This one even more: http://geopolitics-behind-the-mask.36089.n8.nabble.com/Everybodys-Hero-And-that-s-not-an-quot-optional-quot-suggestion-either-td149.html
Both PCR and The Saker have always tacitly and openly dismissed the indisputable probability that both Russia/Putin and the US/Trump are controlled by the SAME powerful people
Yes, indeed, that ‘indisputable’ notion is counter – factual and illogical. That is why not a single semi-informed Russia analyst believes in it.
The Saker
@The Saker,
Why is Putin selling Russian oil for American dollars still? (Or Euros or Yuans which are different names for the same thing.)
You may want to peruse the following for your personal edification: http://geopolitics-behind-the-mask.36089.n8.nabble.com/Everybodys-Hero-And-that-s-not-an-quot-optional-quot-suggestion-either-td149.html
You have already put this link under this post – any further will go in trash as promotion. Mod
And
http://geopolitics-behind-the-mask.36089.n8.nabble.com/The-Judeo-Russian-Mafia-td151.html
Putin never did this as promised: https://new.euro-med.dk/20141215-putins-confident-putin-to-nationalize-rothschilds-central-bank-and-purge-collaborators-with-west-war-till-one-side-collapses-inevitable.php
Some perspective for you.
Please don’t change your mind though.
Please don’t change your mind though.
Based on that nonsense, I won’t. And neither will anybody else who understand Russia or, for the matter, basic economics.
The Saker
Stonkislav:
“Using fake Russian passports, two senior GRU operatives will fly direct from Moscow to London by Aeroflot. On Saturday they will travel to Salisbury by public transport. They will make no attempt to conceal their features; on the contrary, they will parade around ostentatiously ensuring they are spotted by as many CCTV cameras as possible. In the evening they will return to their hotel and open the container holding the world’s deadliest nerve agent, conveniently ensuring the room is contaminated. On Sunday they will return to Salisbury, again by public transport. Again they will make no attempt to conceal their features; instead they will ensure they are spotted by as many CCTV cameras as possible. In broad daylight on a Sunday afternoon they will march up to Skripal’s front door, ignoring the risk that Skripal himself might open the door at any time, or that they might be spotted by neighbours. Wearing no protective clothing at all, they will then smear or spray – we’re not quite sure which yet – the world’s deadliest nerve agent on the handle. Afterwards they will return to the station. At some point they will casually throw the remains of the world’s deadliest nerve agent into some bushes. Having completed their mission, they will then fly direct back from London to Moscow…”
Vladimir:
“What an absolutely fantastic plan! I say… GO FOR IT!!!”
A very astute analysis. I agree fully on Ukraine (and feel even more informed). As for Syria there may not be major economic consequences, but this is a matter of degree. There are economic consequences. As for the 80/15/5 nature of the conflict, I feel it is more 45% informational, 50% economic and 5% kinetic. While Russia has distanced itself more effectively from the dollar, and wisely so (if only to set the very important example of successful dollar independence) much of the remaining world is far slower to follow this lead.
It is critical to understand that the dollar is the empire’s most powerful weapon. I say this under the presumption that under the MAD doctrine all bets are off. Nuclear winter is an endgame that renders all discussion moot, so I remove it from the discussion as a condition of continued existence of the species. Once removed, we understand and discuss the kinetic element more clearly.
In the end, it is the dollar that defeats the political will of countries obligated to hold it, such that it allows for said 5th columns and a US military presence in proximity to every anti-dollar target.
Putin understands this. His strategy and actions betray this understanding. But why confront a dangerous adversary that is bent on slowly destroying itself with no conflict required?
The critical miscalculation of the empire is its overconfidence in the dollar weapon, as demonstrated by its flagrant use of the dollar as a financial drug supplied to an addicted world.
Human nature, as proven by the resurgence of nationalism, populism and sovereign-ism is a powerful force. The dollar as a drug habit can be broken and replaced. And the will to do so is more powerful than the small plutocracy that traffics in the economic heroin that is the dollar system.
Gold will never replace fiat, but it will replace the dollar as the focal reference point from which all currencies are valued. Here, China, Russia and Iran, even India hold the “winning hand”.
”Gold will never replace fiat …”
Tell it to the marines!
Gold’s been around for 5000 years, the fiat system since 1971. During that period a whole series of financial and economic crises have taken Why has the US, reputedly in possession of at least 8000 tonnes of the stuff, the EU 10000 tonnes, and why are both Russia and China both stockpiling the precious metal. This simply demonstrates that we never really left the gold standard. Fiat currencies come and go, gold remains, however. Gold is money. Fiat is just a token of money or claim on money. Fiat currencies only survive as long as their is public confidence in their presumed value. And these types of crises with their destabalising effects are not going to go away, in fact they are going to get more severe.
Very true,
There are two comparisons to look at.
Historically we know that 1 troy oz of gold in Roman times bought a toga and shawl, a pair of sandals and a head covering. Now, with gold at an artificial manipulated low, of about US $ 1200, you can still buy a cheap suit and shirt [about 750] a pair of shoes, a lightweight mac, and a hat. After about 2000+ yrs
Now go look at what the fiat currency of US was worth in todays terms 100 yrs ago, [i.e. buying power] and now. I’s currently gone from being $1.0 to about 10 cents.
Gold is stored value, and always has been. Over thousands of years. Every fiat money ever invented died after just over about 100 year. s ‘Nough said.
Very shrewd and exhaustive analysis!
As always I am grateful to the Saker for a considered, detailed and intelligent analysis. I have particularly enjoyed the almost conversational engagement between the Saker, PCR and Martyanov over this highly critical issue which I think has benefitted all of us who have followed it.
There is, however an aspect which has not been commented upon by all three of you. That is the poor, and increasingly precarious financial position of the USA. The US is currently running a 25% budget deficit (about $1T shortfall on a $4T spend) at the peak of the economic cycle, with interest rates still near unprecedented lows. It also has a debt:GDP ratio of over 100%, which is growing by around 5% per annum. As interest rates rise, the cost to the US of rolling over all that debt will only grow. Russia, even with sanctions, is in a much stronger financial position than the US. Were there to be a global slowdown or economic crisis (which is only a matter of time) it is the US which would likely experience the most economic pain. In this respect time is very much more on the side of Russia than the US.
In the 1990s the USA was able to defeat the USSR largely by forcing it to spend well beyond its abilities in an arms race. Right now, with the USA spending around $1T a year on all “defence” related activities, it is the US which is looking like it is spending well beyond its means. My suspicion is that the US is rapidly approaching the point where its economic stability is so poor that it wouldn’t take much of a trigger to significantly damage confidence in the US$. Furthermore, the US population now seems so divided politically/racially that any collapse in living standards could easily trigger widespread unrest.
There may not be a formal military agreement between Russia and China, and the two countries may be unlikely to turn to each other for military support but there is a common interest here in taking the US down a notch or two economically and politically and forcing it to play fair in the multipolar world they seek. A full-blown confict between the East and West does not necessarily have to be kinetic. It is not even that Russia/China have to attack the US economically to see this outcome – all they have to do is abstain from helping it and set a precedent that many others might be happy to follow. The empire is supported by the US$’ role as reserve currency and the “charity of strangers” in buying US treasuries. A large part of that world is growing tired of giving the US a free ride.
The bottom line is that time seems to be very much on Russia’s side here and that “turning the other cheek” as PCR calls it is actually strengthening Russia’s position. All the rhetoric is currently about the apparently imminent assault on Idlib, but perhaps the most harmful thing that Putin might do to the US in Syria is simply containment – keep the crazies bundled up in Idlib? There is a lot the pro-Syrian coalition might do to chip away around the outskirts without taking the fight to the centre and thereby allowing the US to make the chemical weapons accusation. Time is running out for the empire faster than it is for Putin or Assad.
The dialectical process in action:
Atlanticist/neoliberal 5th column success: pension ‘reform’.
Eurasian sovereignty success: Caspian treaty.
A dialectical process is this Atlanticist/Eurasian sovereignty struggle. These are superficially contradictory, but Russia is developing through this on going process. Probably not return to 90’s style ever again.
Russia is successfully excluding external powers from central Asia, for example by Caspian treaty, while itself, Russia, is taking on western neoliberal characteristics, ‘free market ideology’.
I follow both PCR and Saker, and I have seen on Instagram that Putinofficial has already published in full the under answer article of PCR.
The Saker proves himself to be a balanced and informed analyst of the complex world that is now rapidly evolving. The desires of many to reduce these profound world problems to simple formulas, is exposed by the wisdom demonstrated here. Accepting and still working with the truly uncertain nature of even the short term futures unfolding every day now, requires a deep sense of openness and balance lacking in many commentators.
Unseen but profoundly important spiritual realities like truth and compassion give depth and stability to those of us who would find a way through the seeming chaos of the modern world. My thanks to the Saker for holding these realities central to our possible deliverance from this fearful passage we are engaged in navigating.
The list of crimes and outrages against Russia is long and vicious, and that’s just considering the ones that are openly known or strongly suspected. At the very least, the language of appeasement that we hear from Russia in reply (“our partners” etc) is difficult to stomach sometimes.
The thing is, we’ve been hearing about the “decline of the American empire,” and its ensuing more or less imminent fall, for a number of decades now. But collapses tend to be slow motion affairs to be muddled through, unless they be deliberately or accidentally engineered from within by its ruling elites, as was the case with the USSR.
(Hell, not even the Ukraine –a certified basket case of rampant incompetence, thievery and insanity—can manage to get its long promised implosion over with)
If the strategy in reply to the continuous outrages against Russia is simply to “wait out” the collapse of the offenders, on the grounds that, right now, their reaction might be too irrational (if one replies too impolitely or on the same vicious terms), well then I suppose the waiting may take a while, perhaps even centuries, it’s not excluded. And regarding the level of actual madness of someone who likes to *pose* as a madman, it can never be known without being willing to call his bluff.
With regard to posing as a madman, this is from “Essentials of Post-Cold War Deterrence”, a 1995 report by the United States Strategic Command.
http://nukestrat.com/us/stratcom/SAGessentials.PDF
“The emotional fears we are seeking to invoke in an adversary should be compelling, but should not be paralyzing. He must be free to make choices, specifically, the choice to abandon the behaviors or actions we are seeking to deter. A threat is most compelling when an enemy cannot rationalize away the destruction, pain, suffering, and chaos you are threatening to unleash if deterrence fails” (p. 6)
“Because of the value that comes from the ambiguity of what the U.S. may do to an adversary if the acts we seek to deter are carried out, it hurts to portray ourselves as too fully rational and cool-headed. The fact that some elements may appear to be potentially “out of control” can be beneficial to creating and reinforcing fears and doubts in the minds of an adversary’s decision makers. This essential sense of fear is the working force of deterrence. That the US may become irrational and vindictive if its vital interests are attacked should be part of the national persona we project to all adversaries.” (p.7)
In other words. Madness “should be part of the national persona we project…”
Well, it certainly is. The success on this objective has been absolute and undeniable.
May I add a suggestion? As someone who has spent a fair amount of time in Russia since the early ’90s, my impression has always been that most Russians always hoped for some sort of integration and friendship with the West.
President Putin has a firm belief in the virtue of political stability and tolerates a lot of small evils to ensure a stability in which Russia can grow and thrive, and the bigger steps he has taken – jailing Khordokovsky for example – have been forced on him.
It is my impression that as late as 2010 he still believed that it was possible to build a reasonable accord with Washington. It was only when Trump came to power and continued Obama’s anti-Russian policies that the kopek can real have said to have properly dropped.
most Russians always hoped for some sort of integration and friendship with the West.
That was very true in the 1990s.
Today the percentage of Russians who are still interested is in the 2-4% range max.
The Saker
Hello again. And even more worth-little opiniating, when the Gloves fall off what will happen? Considering all unknowns, can it be at all predicted outcome wise? surely every above-mentioned conflict can be considered in this light as hypothetical tests of hypothetical capabilities in and of a hypothetical. Legitimate fear of god sounds the most plausible to me, vis-à-vis Russia’s submission of sorts to the powers that be.
“The US empire has to be firmly taught a lesson.” A good point, as it bears on the one-sidedness of the idea that the Rus just sit there and take no actions in their own defense. But what kind of “lesson”? A “hamstring” operation would be good. I think of the USS Donald Cook incident, which seems a good example of a Rus non-kinetic attack on an enemy’s infrastructure that is also designed to send a larger, system-wide message: “You are very vulnerable.”
I would argue that what the Rus need right now is a non-kinetic, USS Donald Cook-style bit of message-sending to the US, which could be done covertly or, better yet, overtly and very much in public. Better, at this point, to humiliate via technology (as in the Cook case), than to turn kinetic.
And what of the UK, in it’s tail wagging the dog role, as it attempts to, I’m guessing, keep building a political cause, based on its false-flag operations, to take Rus off the UN Security Council, or set up some sort of Rus “government in exile”? The UK may deserve a hamstringing even more than the Zionists. Better yet, hamstring them both. I have no military training, but it seems like a series of bold, non-kinetic asymmetrical “responses” on both the military and political fields is badly overdue.
Like empty barrels the empire makes a lot of noise…. .
the problem for the empire is that Russia does not aggressively military respond to their threads. That makes them mad.Since they have gone so far, It may even become difficult for them not to act first. In doing so they will utterly perish. because their mind’s judgment is clouded by hatred.and all the dreadful negativity they indulge in. They are likely to make a capital mistake.
But ultimately the struggle is between the destructive diabolic forces, the forces of falsehood and darkness and the the Divine forces, the forces of truth.and light. Humans act as their instruments. I think by now everyone with a bit of sixth sense can see this. Those who stand at least for some truth and light will emerge as victors. Victory in the measure of their Sincerity. To me prayer for the victory of Truth and Light is a great strength
Dear Saker,
Thank you for this article! Early in this piece you talked about how these matters keep you up at night, I really identify with this, and I feel the body of the whole article points out the immense complexity of the situation Putin Faces, and the world in turn, faces at the hands of Atlantic Integrationst elite aggresive psychopathic arrogance. In light of this I question circles of influence, and by that I mean not just the Mafioso circles but the vast collection of citizens and influence makers alike in the US, Russia, and other countries. Given collective perceptions, is there a way we can disect the different positions and motives?
I have this impression that the US, in regard to this article and Russia-Gate as well as many related topics, like Bill Browder, etc., has a majority of citizens who don’t even care about any of this or don’t have time to look into it. But if there were a way to get an accurate assessment of the percentage of people like this how would it be assessed?
I find the idea that most people don’t care about the political world because it is so confusing and covered with incomplete stories designed to mislead using false narratives and outright lies, very disturbing. It is just as disturbing as what I thought before which was simply that the masses (or the vast majority of people) were duped, buying into false unfounded narratives like Russia-Gate. So either way, it does not bode well for world Sovereignists.
Going deeper however, has to do with those yelling and screaming the false narratives, the Rachel Maddows and all the other dominant voices in the US Corporate Media.
What percentage of the population do these individuals make up, and if we could divide them even further, what percentage of them really believe the narratives they are putting out there, and what percentage of them are simply lying?
A parallel yet unrelated situation I mention just to underscore indoctrination across the board that takes place in a variety of fields: American AMA/Rockefeller Molded Medical Schools indoctrinate their students toward drug use, leading them as MDs huge financial rewards when they employ drug treatments and understudied devices in their practices rather than directing their patients toward natural health practices. How many are driven by greed and how many simply believe in what they are taught? In regard to the Media, just as in regard to medicine, I would like to know.
What about government employees, intelligence agency people, Pentagon Employees , Executives, Legislative and Judicial branches of government, and multiple other agencies including the military themselves? How many believe their narratives, and how many are lying to cover their asses? I’d like to know the percentages. What percentage do not believe or recite the dominant narrative, if any? And what happens to them?
If there were a way to get a read on who in Media is simply buying the narrative they are given and who in Media is consciously continuing it because of what they are making, who in government is cloistered from the truth and who is touting the lie to keep their job or stay out of jail? Justice would have as you have said before in other articles thousands of people in jail for the atrocities from the Democrats up to the current state of Russia Gate.
Why do I even ask these questions? It’s just very difficult to identify all the different groups that make up our country or any other country, and it’s very hard even once you’ve identified such groups of regular people and influential celebreties, what is going on in their heads from a standpoint of rough percentages.
Somewhere along the line I heard that it takes only a small percentage of people with the same values to joint together and change the world. I think it was something like 10 percent. If this is true it is a powerful idea. For all the noise the mainstream media makes, I wonder just how few really stand on their Russia-Gate Narrative with the implicate dangers of it deception and with the Neocon assaults leading our country toward the kind confrontational issues you have so eloquently highlighted in this article.
It just could be that the percentage of actual Russia-Gaters is ridiculously small, and that the percentage of people who are feeling the implications of where this charade could lead us, is growing.
The bottom line is I want to somehow get more involved to deconstruct the myths that could lead the world to destruction and break through the lie some people have been convinced of regarding Putin and Russia as the dark evil ones.
I sadly have to admit or even reconsider my question because I forgot that my 19-year-old brilliant son who has already exceeded my very humble achievements, as with many other millennials, totally buys into the Russia-Gate Mueller investigations, etc. etc.. He is smart and we have a good relationship, and I debate this topic with him and others. Even with the history of the false WMDs intelligence justifying the second Iraq war and my pointing out the the Mueller allegations against the GRU agents are only allegations without evidence provided, he still trusts the Government.
I am starting to catalog more and more examples of decisions in Government and discourse based on a lack critical thinking and a lack of evidence such as justifying the US war in Afghanistan or turning the Magnitsky Act into law going merely off of Browder’s word without researching the facts…how many more examples can be found? Millions I am sure. I pray that as events unfold and we continue to watch what happens my son starts to understand the truth beyond the lies that run through the airwaves.
Justice at home could be a turning point if it is possible. If the Republicans dominate the positions won in the upcoming midterm election then with faith and miracles, the Democrats and Neocons who generated this hysteria, might be held accountable, the FBI and Justice Department, in turn, would begin to restore whatever trace of (rule of law) it had lost, and an widespread reassessment of the past few years would be looked at more closely by more people with more critical thinking being employed. The aggressive foreign policy of the US would face more scrutiny and opposition than it already is facing, and maybe we could turn in the direction of gracefully, giving up the empire and cleaning up our country as an alternative to, as you have stated, facing collapse or worse yet nuclear annihilation.
Thank you, thank you, thank you, Saker for giving us such valuable food for thought and for showing us that we are not alone.
I appreciate your emotional sincerity, but “he is smart”??
Maybe in a narrow field of study….but in the over-arching realm of all occurring on this planet…..he is deluded and incompetent, and dangerously so.
You need to increase your self confidence and take the brat to the woodshed and tell him the truth.
A few million people do that, and humanity is safe from itself.
The unwillingness to ruffle a few chicken-hawk feathers is not love and will not be respected.
Hi Mr Spencer,
U seem to be where I was at not too long ago on the path to “enlightenment”.
I first awoke at the Wikileaks/Manning revelations. Ever since I have slowly become “that guy”. At first desperately trying to open peoples eyes to the lies they believe without thought rarely finding meaningful dialogue or even heartfelt pushback. It was mostly “really? Oh! Excuse me………..
Many years later and my wife completely ignores me and rarely raises anything political in my presence and warns strangers and friends not to do so when we meet. It’s not that she has a better argument but some people are just sheep. To be fair I had a brilliant sister who constantly tried to pull everyone she knew from the matrix who I would constantly ignore because I just wasn’t interested.
My advice: think like a priest. Never preach but push people to think and eventually you’ll reach one and they’ll reach one etc. Never be discouraged and despite the seeming always coming apocalypse try to be happy. Ces’t la vie!
As for your son lead by example as every 19 yo just wants to drink and f***.
There is a very good Russian article on the asymmetry of Russian actions.
It just published, you’ll need Yandex translation (use their browser for automatic translations).
I’ll post just the last three paragraphs:
“Russia in Idlib is now a difficult task. It is not to repel the American attack, and to not discourage her TOO MUCH. Trump goes on the attack, not because he wants to defeat the Russians in Syria, but because he wants to defeat the globalists in America. And do it before the elections to the Congress. That is, the causes of the American attack on Syria is a purely internal. If Russia is too much give in Syria Trump on the nozzle, it risks to drown him, instead of something to support his terrible image and help to win.Just because trump is beneficial for Russia too great it breaks all the things, based on what American power in the last decades. To turn a guy into an idiot and help his impeachment is beyond national interests of Russia. We can not now go too far in Syria. Trump needs to get out of the fire good and not stupid and defeatist.
That is the fate of the US is now in the hands of Russia. And Russia is America under his plan, lowering it slow and controlled – although the United States remains the global hegemon and very strong when it hit Russia with sanctions. But Russia does not dissolve teeth on the throat of the States. At the same time supported by cheap gas Moscow Berlin London finishes in Europe.
To understand that the British and Americans very painful. So painful that no collapse of the ruble and jokes in Salisbury with the useless scrap of paper there the clerks from the OPCW, which intimidated the British security services, unable to quench the pain. Russia responds asymmetrically – that continues to do something that was the cause of such insane and ineffective actions of London and Washington. After the US has finished firing on Damascus, Russia and Syria will continue boosting Idlib and depress it.And then build the “great wall of China” around Deir-ez-Zor and none of the mouse will not slip out, especially with the oil. We have the example of Erdogan showed how easy the bomb the convoys of oil export from Syria, Russia does not want to allow. And the States will have to go from there. And the subject of negotiations with Russia saving face US in this story another of their destruction. And while Russia needs to try very hard not to give the Trump to get the missiles where not necessary, and it does not make him a weakling and a symbol of American shame.Russia should give Trump the opportunity to finish his important business. The second President of the United States will not, as Russia will not be a second Gorbachev.”
https://cont.ws/@alex-haldey/1054552
Read it all. You’ll much better understand this topic.
Putin has had to “rescue” Erdogan, Merkel, Trump, while protecting Assad, Rouhani, and most bitterly, Bibi.
This is the nature of the asymmetry of Russian geopolitical moves.
As Idlib unfolds, keep in mind all the ingredients in the recipe for success.
Especially with today’s news that Turkey wants to allow the terrorists to leave Idlib and exit into Turkey.
Compared to killing them, of course, I would reject this. But Putin and Rouhani (and probably, Assad) will go along with some kind of “escape” for thousands of these scum.
The reason Putin is now the most respected and wise global leader by far is he is capable of wisdom and imbued with knowledge of history, psychology and military achievements that result in ultimate success. For instance, who would have thought that such a small aerospace force could win the war in Syria? With less than 25 planes, and a tiny group of helicopter gunships, Russia has dominated the war at every battle.
We have a lot to learn about Putin, the Russian military, the Russian will to win, and the Russian diplomatic skills.
It could just as easily be the case this ‘internal power struggle’ of the USA is scripted stage play intended to deceive foreign observers and achieve Washington’s various goals.In which case anyone who believes Trump is genuine is being played for a fool.
As for allowing terrorists to leave, that actually makes sense, for one thing it’d make things easier for Syrians and their allies and spare them some unnecessary battles, also considering they aren’t professional soldiers it’s likely they’d go back to doing whatever non-terrorist activities they were doing before.
That article you linked is superb: many thanks
“Russia’s asymmetric response is very painful.”
https://cont.ws/@alex-haldey/1054552
Why is Putin still selling Russian oil and gas for Euros and dollars?
These intrinsically worthless and illegal (according to Article 1, Section 10 of the US Constitution) currencies are issued by countries which have committed acts of war against Russia by imposing sanctions against Russia’s national interests.
Selling Russian oil and gas for dollars amounts to aiding and abetting the enemy by financing his war machine that’s pointed at you.
If the Russians demanded Rubles for their oil, it would effectively increase the Russian currency’s purchasing value by generating an additional international demand for it as it became necessary to pay for Russian energy and natural resources purchases, thereby boosting Russian prosperity at the expense of American power.
Conversely, asking for at least partial payment in gold, or using gold as a means to settle trade imbalances, also defangs the US dollar by prying its hungry jaws off international trade and thence preventing Anglo-Zionists from getting a piece of the action every time business is conducted anywhere in the world.
Hero? Traitor? Or simply incompetent?
Ineffective at least IME.
PCR and Saker provide us with very valuable insights into the current geo-political situation. Thank you very much to both of you! I love reading your lines.
Saker, your summary table is great. I would add the following line to it: ” Is the conflict close to being successfully resolved? YES for Syria, NO for ukraine. (Once Idlib is cleared, the Syrian conflict is over. )
This may explain why Russia acts so decisively in Syria, and so hesitantly vis-a-vis the Kiev regime.
In Syria, the Russian military has the support of the central government, its leader, political & military apparatus, and Syria’s citizens. In Kiev, on the other hand, the “government” is the enemy, along with the neo-nazi militias, the army and the citizens of western Ukraine (who support the regime).
Also, what does a state need to do to “de-recognise” another state? Russia has already pulled it’s ambassador, cancelled the free trade zone, and have stopped exports to Kiev. What other measures need to be put in place?
An interesting analysis. Unfortunately however, the established narrative, that Putin has a secret strategy in which he is strategically attempting to weaken US hegemony simply does not seem to me to be well supported by the facts. The facts being the actual actions and statements of the RF government and spokesmen. They rather seem to indicate that the RF government does not view the relationship with the US as essentially adversarial. It would seem to me a more rational thought process to assume the statements and actions of the RF government and Putin are what they appear to be and not discount them if they don’t fit the narrative. For example, when an RF spokesman states that the RF government will continue to support the Minsk II process it would seem logical to assume the truth of that statement. The statement doesn’t “make sense” because it does not fit the narrative that Russian support of Minsk II is actually a strategy to secretly weaken the Kiev government. It may be, but there should be more evidence other than what we think is the Russian strategy.
A carefully nuanced and in my view very accurate analysis of the situation.
People who advocate that Russia sink US ships in the Med are just oblivious to the fact that the US would consider this the start of WWIII and immediately not only attempt to destroy Russian assets in Syria but also inside Russia itself. There is no way this would not escalate to nuclear attacks by both sides. It’s simply not feasible for Russia to do this even if Russian assets inside Syria are massively attacked by the US. The best Russia could do would be to massively attack US assets inside Syria – which it could do easily from the homeland with less chance the US would escalate to the homeland.
On the other hand, I’ve long thought that Putin should order Russia to simply destroy the Kiev regime as a functioning government. Invade Ukraine, destroy the Ukraine military, wipe out the Nazi battalions, execute the corrupt oligarchs, put a puppet regime in Kiev – then immediately go home (and possibly recognize the Donbass region as a “Russian protectorate” which is still part of Ukraine.) NATO and the US could do nothing. It would be over in a week. And it would mean Ukraine would stay quiet for several years and not be a threat to Russia for a decade. Yes, it would give the US and EU hysterics and a propaganda victory about “Russian aggression” – but as The Saker says, it would change things *on the ground.* Suppressing Ukraine definitely would eliminate one of Russia’s main problems.
As for Syria, as yet the US has no move to make. Allegedly the US has now decided to maintain its military presence inside Syria indefinitely (and Trump has apparently agreed to this) with the stated purpose of “forcing Iran to leave Syria.” There is no way the US can achieve that goal without militarily engaging Iranian forces inside Syria and I don’t see either Putin or Assad going along with that, as it threatens Syria directly. So it’s another aimless US move that can’t work.
The same applies to Israel. Israel can conduct pin-prick strikes against Iranian forces inside Syria, but they don’t materially change the situation on the ground and if Israel does anything more, it risks Russian response. Russia has no brief to protect Iran inside Syria, but if a conflict there escalates to the point of threatening Syrian sovereignty then Russia will respond.
So Syria really isn’t much of a threat because neither side will risk WWIII over it. If the neocons are as nuts and in control of Trump as people think, then of course a move might be badly miscalculated. We shall see if that is the case over the Idlib operation. If Trump escalates his response over another White Helmets false flag chemical attack from “firecracker display” to serious damage, then Russia may be forced to respond. But I don’t think Trump and Mattis has the nerve to do that, regardless of what the other US government mouthpieces say.
Because the fact remains that only a massive sustained US air campaign against Syria – not just a one-off air attack – can possibly change the facts on the ground. And Russia has explicitly ruled out allowing such a campaign, even if the US can overwhelm Russian assets in the region. Which means the US has to commit to risking WWIII to conduct such an operation. Any lesser operation will simply be ineffective, and Russia knows that, too. So I don’t see that happening.
If it does, then obviously all bets are off and all this speculation people are doing will have to be reconsidered.
A very good article.
To me, though, I don’t feel that we really know what the Kremlin’s policy is towards the Ukraine. Stalling for time, obviously, but, other than that, things seem contradictory. Is the goal to see an economic collapse or not? Is the goal to maintain the current state of the Donbass as a limbo territory or is there a desire to make it more structured for the future? Is a Novorossiya that grows over time acceptable, or would it be better to agree to taking just the Donbass if the West offers it? When all the choices are bad, which one do you choose?
Also, the US is very good at keeping rotten regimes going. The idea that Kiev would collapse without a huge push seems naive to me.
“So, the questions for Andrei Martyanov, The Saker, and for Putin and the Russian government is: How long does turning your other cheek work? ”
In this specific case, yes — because peace in on Russia and China’s side this time.
The USA is on the clock: its economy is barely floating because of QE and very low interest rates (bordering negative rates sometimes, if you factor inflation). Its private non-financial sector debt (corporate debt) is as high as always, so investment in infrastructure is out of question for the foreseeable future: the USA lost its carrot.
In an abstract world, the USA could continue like this forever, stagnated. But the USA doesn’t exist in a vacuum: by remaining stagnated economically, it is losing power vis-a-vis the rest of the world, specially China. Trump’s trade war has failed spectacularly: according to data released by the US Commerce Department on Wednesday, the US trade deficit increased 9.5 percent to $50.1 billion in July, widening for a second straight month and surging to a five-month high since the trade war started. US trade deficit with China swelled 10 percent to a record $36.8 billion, a head-on blow to the US policies in the trade war. (source: http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1118659.shtml)
So,
1) war has already begun and,
2) China and Russia are already winning — for now.
Seems to me Putin and his folks are fighting a two front war, against the Orcs outside the borders and against the “5th column” inside Russia. Putin is essentially handling the situation the same way on both fronts by giving his opponents enough rope to hang themselves.
Even if the pension reform is unpopular Putin will use it to keep those pushing for it in check and hold them responsible. Same thing with the compromises he has had to do along the way (plenty when it comes to Ukraine I suspect); if someone (a “5th columnist”) demands a certain action and the result is (predictably) detrimental to Russia’s interests Putin will have weakened the internal opposition while enforcing the position that Russia needs more and better solutions and so can push for more.
This may look like “turning the other cheek” but in fact it is not.
One other point of difference.
The survival of the terrorists, particularly from the ‘stans, is an existential security threat to Russia. The Ukraine military is not. If the former survive in appreciable numbers, they will be transferred to Russia’s southern border to wreak havoc there. The Ukraine military is no substative threat to the Russian military.
A Russian spokesman/diplomat (Lavrov ?) has said that Ukraine is approaching a Georgia moment, ie the time is approaching for Russia to go in, trash the Ukraine military and pull out.
The 5th columnists need to stop watching so many American TV shows (especially shows produced after 1970). None of that represents how most Americans live.
Are the Russians biding for time until they are able to stop using the US dollar in international trade?
If nothing changes, will the Ukrainian government turn into another Somalia? Without a strong central government, the oligarchs could then go to war with each other and fight until utter exhaustion. Wouldn’t it be to Russia’s benefit to see the Ukrainian government fall? Perhaps a more radical government could assume power and be goaded into attacking Russia?
Why doesn’t Russia sanction Ukraine in response to western sanctions?
The anglozionist empire is failing. It is in the throes of rapidly declining economic and military superiority, plus there are the internal struggles now going on as people within the empire become so polarized and saturated with the AZ hatred mantras that they start “eating each other”. On top of this, the US dollar hegemony has now gone off a cliff and is rapidly plummeting to its final destruction.
Because of the latter especially, the blank cheque (or open credit card) that the US has been able to use until now to do what it wills militarily and economically in order to control and threaten the globe to get its own way, is rapidly coming to an end. The western elites see this, like a timer counting down with only minutes or seconds left to act, and see the writing on the wall. I think that this gives them a “use it or lose it” mentality. They have to go full-in now with the hope of reversing this trend, or lose their dream of world conquest forever. This makes them extremely dangerous. They *are* backed into a corner, already. I think they are in panic mode.
– Excellent ´partial analysis´ of the motivations and considerations that President Putin might have had/taken, in order to win time/avoid full armed conflict with the US-GB-ZionTalmudicMafia… at the moment…
– President Putin have said that he will use lethal force, i.e. nuclear, if the Integrity of the Russian territory is under attack or if the existence of the Russian State-Federation is at risk.
– The Syrian theatre of operation has given the RU military forces an excellent opportunity to test in real combat conditions new weapons and warfare techniques/strategy/coordination, including honing the pilots skills and assessing/measuring the effectiveness of new electronic/cyber devices to jam/disable the opponents. So Putin-Russia have gained invaluable data and field experience from the Syrian operation.
– A master stroke as deterrent: The development by RU of new unstoppable weapons that makes it possible to bring war directly on the US soil. Once those weapons are in service, the triumvirate (US-GB-ZionTalmudicMafia) will think twice before engaging into provocations.
– I am sure that President Putin have read and re-read Sun Tzu´s “The Art of War” and that he is bidding his time.
– Most of all, his concern nr. 1 is: avoiding the suffering that a war, conventional or with tactical nukes, may bring to the Russian people. That goes without saying that President Putin is doing all what he can to avoid a full scale nuclear war that will be the end of life as we know it on earth and witch consequences nobody can predict.
I understand what VVP is doing on many fronts, and I understand what he can not do but does anyway, via proxy. Take the pension reforms. Raising the pension age for women a few more years over time raised hell, but lo and behold, our local government announced yesterday that they, Sevastopol, will start the pensions at age 55 as before as long as the lady has propeeska for Sevastopol as of yesterday. Pups wouldn’t have done that without specific orders from above.
I also see that VVP and Xi are not interested in a catastrophic collapse of Uncle Sugar or UK, instead they are carefully calculating how to gentle ease them down from the throne to the outhouse without a whole lot of chaos as was done to Russia.
Both those gentlemen fully understand that neither Foggy Bottom nor uk have a patriotic and dedicated military unit overseeing all the nuke and chem/bio weapons, to protect them and guard them for the State, no matter what happens, like Russia did and does. Hell, I can guaranty you no one man or organization in either country knows the location of all the nuke and chem/bio weapons floating around in said countries. That in and of itself should scare the mortal crap out of The World, but no one thinks of those facts and no one thinks we will live to see uk a sad little third world shithole, which it is now, and US spiraling down to second world status with one foot squarely in third world. But we will.
If this downward plunge can be calculatedly done in stages, as is happening now, methinks we will live to see a better and perhaps more peaceful world. It won’t take the removal of President Trump to accomplish this plan, in fact President Trump, in his own way, is assisting in pulling Uncle Sugar back from the precipice he was handed and doing his level best to alter the established methods used by Foggy Bottom for the last several decades. We all know President Trump is a prisoner in a gilded cage, this being the last thing he thought would happen the day after his election, but look at him now, taking the actions he can take. Think about the trade deals and the trade sanctions he’s put in place with supposed allies of US, and before you start screaming, look at the tariffs and taxes Japan, Korea and EU put on US made goods coming to their shores, plus their economic support subsidies of their own manufacturing, business and agriculture and products thereof. Then there is the proposed wall along the Mexican border, which said border leaks illegals entering US like a colander in a hurricane. And for all these actions, the neocons and libs are screaming bloody murder. When they scream as they are today, President Trump is doing something right. And so is President V. V. Putin of Russia.
Auslander
Author
Never The Last One https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00ZGCY8KK A deep look in to Russia, her culture and her Armed Forces, in essence a look at the emergence of Russian Federation.
Sevastopol, The Third Defense. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B079KRPLS4 Book 1, A Premonition, The Move South. Set against a backdrop of real events and real places, the reader is left to filter fact from fiction.
Agree with you that Xi and Putin want to minimize global chaos of all types. Trump is an enigma, which has its plusses and minuses, but I can’t discern any plan on his part other than the further enrichment of himself and his class. The unleashed political chaos within the Outlaw US Empire has provided a boost to candidates from what would be termed the Left-side of the political spectrum, but we are far from seeing a Populist Movement of the sort occurring in the late 1800s or mid 1920s-WW2, although the seeds are sown. It’s entirely possible the people of the UK will regain control of their government well before us, if indeed we can ever achieve the requisite solidarity. If you haven’t, I suggest you read this statement by A. Wess Mitchell, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on 21 August 2018 entitled U.S. Strategy Towards the Russian Federation, where you’ll find this within the 1st paragraph:
“The foundation for this strategy is provided by three documents, as directed and approved by the President: the National Security Strategy, the National Defense Strategy and the Russia Integrated Strategy.” [My Emphasis]
Yes, and I think what PCR does not seem to get (although I do respect his positions otherwise (except approval of Reagan)) is that both China and Russia are playing for time. That is the most important element – and anyone who knows a bit about those two countries should be able to discern this strategy. No one would benefit from a precipitous fall of the pretend-hegemon. The only way is to let it happen slowly, while the two countries create a parallel system. (Of course, US is committing so many blunders as if hell-bent to effect its own demise. It would be ironic if the two countries ended up having to rescue US from its own stupidity.)
While PCR’s question seems rational, it actually betrays a certain degree of misunderstanding the large picture. What from a hyper-aggressive Anglo-Saxon perspective looks like offering the other cheek is likely just a long-term strategy with – nevertheless – a very specific goal (i.e., to de-fang the pretend-hegemon) that takes all realities (e.g., limitations and advantages) into consideration. What would PCR suggest instead?
Regarding Russia, the word of the moment in time in Looney-landia is “quagmire” and like a pack of dogs setting on a bear they intend to make this the keynote of their “diplomacy”. Spoilers they are. The neocons deeply fear how powerful a developed Russia will be with up-to-date infrastructure, functioning systems of education and a very, very wealthy, largely self sufficient economic base supported by a socially cohesive society.
As for a war in Ukraine, there is the possibility of sanity on the side of NATO in the form of a German veto of rashness and stupidity but in the mid East things can get exaggerated and out of hand very easily. Germans are a practical people and do not cotton to being lead over the cliff by idiots. Plus they have already have the recent historical memory of being trashed by ideologues.
One can hope.
Good article as usual; what quibbles I have are very minor. But Saker, a change has occurred: Terrorist forces at al-Tanf will be targeted, so withdraw before your people get hurt. I tried to find an official Russian site link for this info but all I could find were Twitter entries: https://twitter.com/MintPressNews/status/1038112158301802498 Instead of listing all the individual links, I’ll just provide the link to my search results, https://twitter.com/search?q=Al-Tanf&src=tyah
Whitney Webb’s Mint Press News besides CNN is the main source for this information, but it lacks a link to any official Russian source to corroborate. So, although it may appear a change has occurred, it may very well be just another provocation.
what a wonderfull exchange between PCR & Saker & Martyanov, must be archived for the future generations.
on short note:
– Russian international policy remind me of masochism and not “turning the other cheek”
– Russian internal situation mostly economic, would argue on high and mid level management there are unfortunately plenty of “дураки” or stupid persons.
It is true, to really understand Russia and Putin’s actions you really have to be Orthodox or at least come from Eurasia. Now some people accusing Russia of weakness in the face of anglo agression, need to apologise to Putin. Today he reject Turks peace deal for Idlib, which would have meant Jihadists being given freedom by Erdgan. Russia and Assad will return ALL of Syria to the syrian People, as is morally right. This is the geopolitical things which count, not parading about with south china sea stunts and mindless provocations, like the Anglo do,
Mr Craig Roberts may be pro Russian, but he cannot stop his inner Hooligan tendency to wish for massive wars and movie explosions. Anglo are supremacists who only understand blunt force. Quite similar to the Nazi mentality- if Hitler controlled himself, didnt invade USSR and stuck to central Europe, there would never have been world war. But the protestant supremacist mind, now allied in epic irony with the Zionists, who are much the same, demands total control and childish divsion of the world into Ally and Enemy . Each of the Russian people living today lost big parts of their family in that war, there is no desire in Russia for a second patriotic war, although they would be prepared for it if it happened, they dont seek it.
Putin thinks something like this -Anglo are our enemy, but remember it is not better to beat them quickly and violently with the deaths of millions Russian military and civilian deaths, and much of Earth made into Chernobyl, than to beat them more slowly, and along with allies like China, ecnomically and geoplitically overwhelm the collapsed debt/ military industrial Altlantic Empire. Consider who is an ally really of USA, UK, Israel and thier foriegn policy right now, who would fight to defend them- Only Nazi Galicia (former know as Ukraina), maybe the always weak minded Canada, crazy liberal pedofile Denmark, Holland, but apart from that- no one. The lack of allies shows their weakness and moral sickness. The Islamic world is not Russians enemy and that is why even Saudi do not dare help terrorist in Kavkaz any more. Real Muslims know russia and eurasian alliance is the only way to stop Anglo Israeli imperialism. The Putin rejection of Erdogans plan means that Russia is in a position of strength and can control the terms of Geopolitics.
re.: ‘maybe the always weak minded Canada, crazy liberal pedofile Denmark, Holland, but apart from that- no one.’ You forget Norway which is already de facto occupied by the US in: (Tromsdalen, Frigard, Bjugn (APS prepositioned stocks) – in Vaernes and Tromso (marines), in Bodo and Oerland (F -35), in Andoy and Lakselv (Poseidon), in Evenes (NASAMS II missiles), in Vardo (missile shield radar).
You may also be interested to follow the forthcoming NATO Trident Juncture – 18 C2 war game in Central Norway with deployment of 40 000 troops, 120 fighter planes, 70 vessels (in October)
https://navaltoday.com/2018/05/28/norway-to-host-70-vessels-40000-personnel-for-trident-juncture-2018/
Have a look at the map here:
https://www.aldrimer.no/trident-juncture-koster-forsvaret-750-mill/
You may also note that in May 2018 the US, Finland and Sweden signed a trilateral defence pact.
https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/security/2018/05/finland-sweden-and-us-building-three-way-defence-ties
American impunity will sink to the bottom of the Mediterranean along with its ships when the Russians introduce the American Navy to it’s 5th generation hyper-sonic missiles which the American Navy won’t have an actual defense against.
Andrei Martyanov has another response:
https://russia-insider.com/en/us-mental-patient-russian-straitjacket/ri24672
This is the same article that had been published originally on Sept 4 in the Unz Review with the title “Russia As a Cat”
http://www.unz.com/article/russia-as-a-cat/
”The people in the West with whom he / Putin / is dealing are idiots who do not appreciate his statesmanship. Consequently, each time Putin turns the other cheek, so to speak, the insults and the provocations ratchet upward (…) The reason I think Putin needs to do a better job of standing up to Washington is that I think, based on history, that appeasement encourages more provocations, and it comes to a point when you have to surrender or fight.”
What Roberts misses is that, while keeping his calm, Putin and Russia do stand up to the US. Granted, Putin could let Zhirinovsky insult and infuriate the Pindos with his big mouth (very often on point too!), but that’s not really needed. Putin isn’t appeasing the Exceptional and Indispensable garbage; he is outsmarting them over and over again. To Putin and Russia, the brain matters more than the mouth whereas in the West — especially so the US — it’s the exact opposite priority. This illustrates at a much lower level the incompatibility of Russia and the West.
At least you have stopped rabbiting on about Putin’s popularity in the polls.
‘lack of Russian economic sanctions against the Ukraine’ – Saker, Putin has stated that he considers ukrainians (not all) as Slavs, and therefore doesn’t want to contribute towards their suffering, and is even keeping ukrainian heads above water, so to speak; how much more impoverished – even dead – do you think ukrainians would be now otherwise?
As for the strike force being assembled in Mariupol direction, in today’s daily report, the DPR stated that within 1 week, even without their intervention, it decreased by almost 1,500 people. On the other hand, there have been reports of foreign fighters (ISIS types), including (Western) mercenaries, and NATO personnel, which would more than likely include SF. On the third hand, kiev has been calling up 18-22 years who have low morale, so their fighting effectiveness would be negative.
Also, it is being spoken about by Donbass Defenders that because Zahk was murdered, any attack would be massively counter-attacked, not just to avenge him, but also because of pent up anger and to avenge all the others including Givi & Motorola.
Many Russian ex forces are packed and ready to go too, and Putin has given – more than once – his personal guarantee that the Donbass would not be overrun anyway.
Politically, the temporary stand in for Zahk – Timofeev – along with the entire Cabinet, was dismissed today, and he has left, reportedly to Russia, while Pushilin has been made interim Head of the DPR.
Correction: ‘Politically, the temporary stand in for Zahk – Timofeev – along with the entire Cabinet, was dismissed today, and he has left, reportedly to Russia, while Pushilin has been made interim Head of the DPR.’ –
Politically, the temporary stand in for Zakh, Trapeznikov – & Timofeev – along with the entire Cabinet, was dismissed today, and Timofeev has left, reportedly to Russia, while Pushilin has been made interim Head of the DPR.
Brinkmanship is what you do when history runs against you, when its winds are 100% in your favour, sail cautiously.
The battle is not between Russia and the USA, that is the US position of lots of separate enemies ranked from strongest to weakest. Thee battle is of the world against the the empire, my country Australia a number 1 collaborator, but nothing lasts forever.
Yesterday I switched from an American web host to a Chinese one (Alibabacloud), I could not afford the excessive fee for commands that had been taken out of the package last year. $8 instead of close to $50 per month. I had been with the US host for nearly a decade, it was once the cheapest substantive host I could find.
Alibabacloud has servers around the world, not just in the US, including one in Sydney. I now have a small solid state computer running my favoured OS in the cloud and my small as I write the software for my new small business (the fees would had wiped out my small capital fund within 3 months). I now have enough funds to stay with Alibabacloud for years.
Soon Toaboa will be available, that is bigger than Amazon, in terms of electronics, delivery times and much else Amazon will soon become an expensive ebookshop.
Next year we will be seeing a large range of electric cars from China (from cheap to luxury) with better batteries. The top range more than half the price of Tesla. Low running costs and low maintenance, the internal combustion engine, the status symbol of the US empire, just got thrown into the dustbin.
Australia stuck with internal combustion engines and we now make zero cars! Much of Adeliad’s economy whet with the closed factories — we use to be a leader in electric cars, but we were given orders and followed them as we do with everything else.
The largest new battery factory in the world has been built in China electric car giant Byd. It made zero news here, but by the end of next year most batteries will come from there, be cheaper, last longer and recharge faster.
The US forced Australia to provide a very poor fiber-optics system, for me having fiber-optics at the end of the street meant zero gain from copper (which had four years ago been ‘upgraded’ to a much worse carrying capacity), though I am just 1.2 kilometers from the exchange itself I now have my old copper speed back!
Huwai and Zte offered us a new 5g nation wide telecommunications system, but our American partners/masters would not have one of the five eyes compromised so we do without it.
The war against empire is being won on every front, the points of military confrontations are not the front-line in this war. America offers nothing and takes all, China does not interfere and offers much, Russia is the Eurasian link that beings Europe, Africa and Asia together. That is what will defeat the US.
quote:
“On the aspect of surrounding Russia, I think that the key is to have as many possible points hitting Russia, so it gets overwhelmed. But, as Saker says, and I am using my words here this is neocon wet dream.”
I have “wrassled” with the question as to whether the neo con “plan,” if one may call it that, has any prospect of rational success and is it sane; given that Russia could consider itself surrounded but surrounded by what? I would not want to bet the ranch on any of the Baltics making any serious impact in a conflict-same for Bulgaria, Rumania, Greece. And Turkey? No there there as far as fighting Russia. Germany and France have a fairly long road ahead with marginal combat effectiveness in many units and air wings. (IMHO) Poland, just not sure.
So then, all of this happy talk about NATO solidarity comes down to merely offering basing rights (and arms agreements) to the US. This cannot be a happy thought for the Empire unless they plan to launch a first take out strike with very very uncertain expectations for success.
Given the marginal, if that, prospect for success against Russia (whatever definition of success one could attribute to the zios’ plan, are they really that crazy and really that oblivious to the risks of the total destruction of the planet. Viewing the thuggery coming out of Pompeo, bolton, and deputies mitchell, hook, et al, the answer very sadly seems to me to be yes.
A problem also arises because the US dollar is the reserve dollar/petro dollar. Thus putting the US in a very powerful position. One where it is able to print money endlessly and ends up controlling/trying to control the world. Much has been made of China and the part she plays in the development of a multi-polar world. Putin can’t act decisively until China undermines the power of the US currency. Who knows how long this will take. But it will happen. Commentators have been predicting the end of US economic hegemony for a while now. But because the US can print worthless dollars the end has longer to reach. But it will be reached. I also notice that in New Zealand, China gets particularly bad press. But I think when the $US goes down this is the way Putin and Xi will take the neo-con finger off the button. China fights the economic war.
I perfectly understand Putin’s position and his apparent inaction. I think that I would do (or not do) exactly the same thing. But let’s see what happens with Idlib, eh? One way or another, this will add to the picture.
Something we so often forget in our attempts to understand the people of the world, especially those with whom we disagree, or have outright antipathy for, is that there are usually a dozen and one perfectly viable interpretations of what anyone does; that all of our interpretations are based on our own perceptions, which are very much rooted in our emotions, and that the perpetrator of an act sees it very differently from their place in the Universe, to that of the watcher.
Take kindness. A rich man sees a poor struggling young girl in the village below his mansion. Feeling kind, he takes her away to his mansion, and loaded food table, glowing in his riotousness. But she has lost her friends, her warm family interactions and laughter and dancing used to distract from being hungry. She becomes lonely and miserable. So — was he kind?? His intention was, but was his action?
The same rich man sees another poor lady he and she share much with, including love. But he decides it would be kinder to spare her some of the tensions and risks of his life, and leave her where she is. She dies of loneliness and lost love. Again – was he kind.?? Only the receiver of act can determine whether or not it was kind.
PCR sees the restraint and disciplined control of V.V. as “turning the other cheek”
I am sure V.V. sees it as part of an overall plan to ensure one thing above all else – the safety and well being of Russia and her people.
I used to look at the horrific mess Russia was, in 1999. After Putin grasped the reins, it still seemed too much to be turned around in time. I’m sure many would have said, – “it’s going to take over 50 yrs for Russia to get back on her feet – and by that time American Empire will have invaded and taken her over. America could, even now, nuke Russia to non-existence”.
What Russia needed was time – I remember now seeing Putin conducting one his Q & A’s — no way of remembering which, of so many, it was. I do remember the question to him “what do you value the most, as President, what do you want the most”. And his answer? “Time”. Ahhh. I thought. Yes.
There was an old joke used on a TV show about Henry VIII. His wife Jane tells him: “there was a horseman in France, whom the King had condemned to death for some misdemeanour. And the man said “Sire, spare me for one year, and I will teach your favourite horse to speak. The King agrees. But says his friend in the stable as he recounts his situation, what are you going to do in a year?
In a year, says the horse man, the horse may die. In a year, the King may die. Or, the horse may talk”
In a few years, the American Deep State may die. Or the Empire may collapse. Or, the crazies may wake up to common sense.
In the meantime, Russia is growing stronger, inventing more, growing richer – and nobody is dying by the thousands.
Seems like a sensible option, to me.
I think, putting sanctions against
Ukraine’s nazi government could be a PR disaster. Even the frase: sanctions are against the government, not people, could be interpreted as traitorous to the -Russian- people living in Ukraine.
I think that is the driving force behind the sanctions avoidance. But I agree that recognition of the regime may (or even has to) be seen as a mistake. But again, this can be used as time-delaying strategy.
Thanks Mr. Saker and PCR for this exchange and to the excellent comments here. I agree these times are really about how each of us is going to conduct ourselves and which civilizational model we choose as the Saker says, and I would suggest adding to your ratio of activity in this fight: 80% informational, 15% economic, 5% kinetic and 100% spiritual.
I think the spiritual is the blind spot of in many critical analysis, this is becoming more and more obvious to me personally the more I see the world in it’s current form. I still remember when the western “mean girl” cabal was accusing Putin of every crime in the book (they love bearing false-witness), and where was he? In an Orthodox church somewhere in Russia. That man is on solid ground.
There was an interesting moment at last years Valdai meeting when even the head of the Nobel admitted that the “one-eyed liberalism” was being rejected, and that the rejection of this Luciferian component is what the people globally are slowly waking up to. This is a highly noble form of populism in my opinion.
Do the Russians enjoy “protection” from the Americans’ side for selling Russian oil for worthless and illegal (according to Article 1, Section 10 of the US Constitution) petrodollars the same way that the Muslim Saudi terrorists are generously provided the aforementioned “protection” by their American handlers?
Uh, I looked up Article 1, Section 10, and I fail to see what how it relates even to any of the popular mis-definitions of the term “petrodollar”.
Article 1, Section 10 says that no state, in other words, New York or California for example, can take acts reserved for the new federal government. They can’t issue coins, they can’t make foreign treaties, etc.
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript
Admittedly, 99% of the people on the internet have no clue as to what a “petrodollar” actually is. The term originated after the OPEC oil crisis in the early 70’s when for the first time America’s balance of trade in oil tilted towards America importing (and paying for) oil from OPEC. The people in Washington realized that it was a bad thing to be sending dollar overseas constantly to buy what they needed, but only if those dollars never came back to the US. Thus, the Washington crowd started a policy aimed at getting those dollars spend on oil to come back to America. They sold weapons to the Saudis for those dollars. They encouraged the Saudis to invest those dollars in America in items like real estate. etc.
The term petrodollar referred to those dollars coming back home. Ie, the dollars that were shipped abroad to pay for petrol, and which were then encouraged to come back to the US in exchange for weapons or other items. That’s what a Petrodollar is defined as.
A petrodollar is not something printed by the state of New York which would be illegal under article 1, section 10. I know everyone on the internet makes up their own definition of the term petrodollar to suit their own needs, which has made the term completely useless in modern discourse. But I’ve yet to see any of these made-up or inferred definitions be something that violates Art 1, Sec 10 as being created by one of the states within the United States.
@anonymous
Petrodollars have nothing to do with Article 1, Section 10 of the US Constitution. Said legislation prohibits usage of debt notes as money. What you know as US dollars or more accurately as Federal Reserve Notes (sic) today are created out of thin air or brought into existence by issuance of debt. Hence, modern US dollars are illegal because they are just another name for debt and consist of nothing but debt. Therefore, current dollars or FRNs are *illegal* and *unlawful* because they are debt, and nothing but debt. No US State, California or NY or Seattle, can conduct any business or make or receive any payment in current (illegal and unlawful) US dollars.
Petrodollars are a colloquialism which has no official basis or recognition. It refers to the supposed understanding between the American Deep State and the Muslim Saudi terrorists whereby the Saudis invest the proceeds of their oil sales into US Bonds and US Treasuries in return for “protection” generously provided by the US military. Which basically means most of the proceeds of the Saudi oil sales are returned back to the Anglo-Zionist psychopaths as ‘protection money’ and never actually leaves American shores.
Hope this helps you to understand.
Time after time I am impressed with the Saker’s powerful analytics. Excellent article once more.
I follow the Paul Craig Roberts articles as well, and respect him very much, too. I think the US is going down ever faster, and that is what causes their panic moves and volatility. Russia needs simply to wait, they cannot, the power is seeping through their fingers.Their delusional behaviour which could lead to an all out confrontation is obvious, as well, that is why the Craig’s questions are so difficult to answer.
I have read many times the phrase ‘Russians understand only force”. Actually, it is the westerners projection of their own mindset. Craig is a westerner too, and he understands the western mind quite well, but I feel the Russian mentality is less easy for him to understand. There are real and great differences between the two mentalities, though, and the big problem is the western leadership misunderstanding the Russian attitudes as a sign of weakness. The present western leaders do not seem to understand much, anyway.
The basic fears of the west are xenophobia and the loss of material subsistence. The basic fear of the east is a loss of the respect from their surrounding, the people they are close with. The annihilation and extermination of the external enemies is a natural thought to the west, and the east was always more worried abut the internal ones. That gave Russia some tough times in the past, but my man’s intuition is telling me these times are finally over.
Nevertheless, the picture of the west right now bodes no well, that much is clear.
Hi Slobodan,
nice post, and in in prompt to your comment, ‘The annihilation and extermination of the external enemies is a natural thought to the west, and the east was always more worried abut the internal ones.’ I would concur, but I moot it goes a bit beyond that.
Who is West’s external enemy? Why of course, anybody that is not controlled by them. That is a horrible definition, but I believe, apt. And herein the cycle of confrontation; those outside the empire arm up so as to be able to defend themselves, and not be invaded or destabilised at the West’s whim. This is unacceptable to the narcissistic control freakery of the west, and indeed, to their business model, which is not based on trade, but also on control.
Control Freakery is a nasty thing. The control freak finds possession of 90% control to be wholly inadequate, even dangerous. What might the vassal do with that 10% control? The control freak is kept awake by the thought, and by the horrendous implication that 10% may in time become 11%. This is the nature of control freakery; a total lack of empathy or morality, simply an obsession with self, inflamed by endless paranoia, and greed.
So the scorpion cannot change its own psychosis, so we hope instead for it’s capabilities to collapse. And I am well represented on this site in my views that the west was hijacked centuries ago by the internationalist bankers, but nonetheless, I think that the western citizenry has been programmed well to fear anything east, or ‘other’, in Pavlov’s dog fashion. I recall in 2003 trying to convince a colleague that the Iraqi WMD theme was a grand lie, before realising that he frankly didn’t care; I sensed that he just wanted West to reassert dominance over any upstart that failed to comply, to soothe his own insecure need for ‘global order.’
I think that Russia’s avoidance of national debt is a stunning achievement, and a total affront and existential threat to the central banking model. My chief concern, is with regards to an adversary who is a brilliant poker player, has survived and thrived for centuries if not millennia, and who is extremely cunning and deceptive. Arguably, though they suffer setbacks, they have never been defeated, This is biblical in scope.
Just a remark. Any military attack of US on the Russian in Syria would be inviting of an nuclear war. That is what Saker himself implies as well, and that makes it out of question, unless the west got completely out of their minds. The politicians may be, but their generals are a bit more level-headed. Strange how that well known Clemanceau’s saying about war being too serious a business to be left over to generals got inverted in the west as well. Generals guarding the peace remind of a goat guarding the cabbage, though..
This makes the conventional CENTCOM advantage a bit of a theoretical matter, as long as no one gets really crazy. If the US generals had some traits of their predecessors from the fifties and sixties, well, the thought must make one shudder.
@Slobodan Cekic
No need to go nuclear. Putin and the Russians could bring the Americans to their knees instantly if only they stopped selling Russian oil for American dollars, thence cutting off funding for the American war machine and the Anglo-Zionist guns-and-butter scheme.
But
Just like the Soviets who aided and abetted the Anglo-Zionist NATO enemy by selling USSR’s oil for dollars, Putin and co. continue feeding the supposed enemy.
Yet
It all makes sense when you consider that both the American and the Russian governments are infested by politicians beholden to the same Tribe, the same international bankers, the same Anglo-Zionist psychopaths who gave us the (Jewish) Bolsheviks who murdered 20+ million Christian Russians.
Your blood is on their hands yet you give them your honor, your wealth and your life.
I’m proud to be dismissed as an ignorant fool by self-professed “experts” for there I find myself in the company of righteous men like Solzhenitsyn who also told the truth about what the Russian people suffered at the Jews’ hands.
mod-to note: Absolutely no use of capital letters except for abbreviations (and proper grammar).
‘S up Dude?
I’ve observed a consistent pattern of the wrong assessments, loony strategies and deliberate misrepresentations (lies?) of facts in all your comments.
Are you a member of the US establishment?
In response to USA=EU=Israel=Russia=KSA=ISIS,
I’m sympathetic to your views, but your conclusions are maybe off.
The dollar game is the basis of West’s power, yes. To use those same dollars, abets the system, yes. To reject it, and make alternative arrangements, is effectively a declaration of war against the hegemon, so before rejecting it, you better be ready for that war.
Russia and China have not moved away from the dollar, but are increasingly making moves to construct alternatives to the dollar, or to limit the dollar’s dominance. This is what has stung the west into action, with sanctions, defamation, the war of words, and even military threats and colour revolutions (even assassinations).
So just sayin,’ the fact that Russia under Putin continues to play according to the dollar rules, his increasing coolness to that same dollar is an unacceptable challenge to the hegemon. One does not simply ‘drop’ the dollar; it would be defacto war, whether kinetic or not. On a mundane level, all European trade and ties could be lost to Russia. That’s the situation we have bubbling away. Until ready and prepared for such consequences, it is a delicate situation.
1,500 years ago, the Anglos used to pay the Vikings in gold and goods, to stop attacking them; it was a protection racket and the payments were called ‘Danegeld.’ A short term measure for sure, but it bought time. Was it the right thing to do? It depends how one uses that time.
I disagree with your opinion that not using somebody else’s currency — especially for the purposes of relinquishing one’s goods and services for free, as it is in the case of fiat dollars — is an act of war. There is no attack involved in such an act. Anyone who would attempt to start a war with such an excuse deserves to be wiped off the face of the earth.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
The economic war being waged against Russia and Iran is relentless and effective. Eventually, it will force the destruction of both nations’s social/political orders, as well as their respective economies. Neither country has an effective way to counterattack the United States on economic terms; and neither has the means to neutralize the destructive effects of this economic warfare being waged against them. Waiting for the Zionist “ubermenschen” to have a change of heart on their own is not a strategy; it is wishful thinking.
American Zionist victory over Russia and Iran is inevitable unless the Americans suffer military defeats in Syria and Afghanistan, or in Ukraine. Russia does not have to draw the “red line” now in Syria (even though I think that it should); but it must prepare to take swift military action at some point in time.
Secretary Mattis, General Dunford, and White House Chief of Staff Kelly very well understand the consequences and costs of war. They should be able to persuade President Trump to respect -and perhaps even acknowledge- the red lines, provided that Putin, Shoigu, and Gerasimov make it clear what those red lines are and that they actually do exist.
“These are all present this time too, but the deeper reason for this war is that Russia and the USA represent two mutually exclusive civilizational models. Very succinctly, Russia wants a multi-polar world in which each country is free to develop as its people see fit and in which international law regulates relations between nations. The Empire stands, well, for itself, of course. Meaning that it wants a single world hegemony ruled by the AngloZionists. Furthermore, Russia stands for traditional moral and spiritual values whereas the Empire stands for greed, globalism and the destruction of all traditions and moral values. It is pretty self-evident that these two systems cannot coexist. They present existential threats to each other. Russia will either become sovereign or enslaved. The Empire will either control the planet or crumble. Tertium non datur.”
My how times change?
There must be many angry, furious actually, people in the halls of power throughout the world who believed they had the answer to the solution of man’s ways? A One World Government? Particularly disturbing for me was hearing some fools in the EU wanting some alien to arise who could solve everyone’s problem’s {See quote by H. G. Wells below} and to actually believe this is bizarre when we were given a Messiah but alas no He was to be rejected. Therefore is Russia playing a dangerous game by not following what the powers that be want? Given the quotes below it is something to reflect upon:
The only escape from total destruction of civilization will be a world government, or we will perish in a war of the atom.
—Harold Urey
In the field of atomic energy, there must be set up a world power.
—Robert J. Oppenheimer
World government has become inevitable.
—Arthur Compton
One world Government is in the making. Whether we like it or not, we are moving toward a one-world government.
—Dr. Ralph Barton Perry of Harvard
Either we will find a way to establish world government, or we will perish in a war of the atom.
—Raymond Swing to Albert Einstein
The secret of the bomb should be committed to a world government, and the USA should immediately announce its readiness to give it to a world government.
—Albert Einstein
Sovereignty must go, that means also the interests which sovereignty protects must be recognized as outmoded in character and dangerous in operation.
—Professor Laski of Oxford
We shall have a world government whether or not we like it. The only question is, whether world government will be achieved by conquest or consent.
—James Warburg, February 17, 1950 before the U.S. Senate
It is necessary to discover a head capable of directing it, endowed with an intelligence surpassing the most elevated human level.
—H.G. Wells
Let that man be a military man or a layman, it matters not.
—Paul Henry Spaak, first president of the Council of Europe, planner of the European Common Market, president of the United Nations General Assembly, and one-time Secretary-General of NATO
Strong, one-man civilian control of America’s giant military establishment is vital to the nation’s wellbeing. The concentration of authority is inevitable.
—Roswell Gilpatrick, Deputy Secretary of Defence
“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years……It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government which will never again know war, but only peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity. The supernational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries. It is also our duty to inform the press of our convictions as to the historic future of the country.” David Rockefeller
Dostoevsky was the ultimate visionary of what is currently happening correct?
“Why hast though come to hinder us?…We are working not with Thee but with him {Satan}…We took from him what Thou didst reject with scorn, the last gift he offered Thee, showing you all the kingdoms of the earth. We took from him Rome and the sword of Caesar, and proclaimed ourselves sole rulers of the earth…We shall triumph and shall be Caesar’s, and then we shall plan the universal happiness of man… Hadst though accepted the last counsel of the mighty spirit {Satan}, Thou wouldst have accomplished all that man seeks on earth -that is, someone to worship…Who can rule men if not he who holds their conscience and their bread in their hands?”
Jesus is
“‘the stone you builders rejected,
which has become the cornerstone.’
Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.”
Some EU politician wants is an alien? Junker and his aliens? https://youtu.be/ytNYpGakV8w
The inevitability of one world government, is just a supposition. It is debateable. I bet most if not all of those you quoted, are on a particular team.
The benefits of a one world government is highly debatable, and is arguably the stuff of nightmares. War between states could morph instead into war on all individual liberty, as the system focuses instead on the enemy within.
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Wherever power resides, it attracts swarms of flies and vermin who want it for selfish and even evil reasons. If they work together, it is to everybody else’s detriment. If thieves fall out, the possibility of insurrection, revolution, even war, surfaces again. The Bolshevik revolution cost Russia more lives than any war ever did, and it was an internal affair.
Saker, it seems that while the Russians understand the Americans and know what they plan to do in Syria, the Americans only shout, they do not listen.
Hence, the latest news is “US Military Preparing For “Options” In Syria and Dunford’s statements.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-08/us-military-preparing-options-syria
Do you remember your phrase about the Americans saying “Whatca gonna do about it?”
“Team America” will bomb and kill and perhaps this time is making clear Russians are in the kill zone.
After all, the Fake News said America already killed hundreds of Russians in Syria and nothing happened other than they died.
So the Americans will all this hate and invective very soon attack Russia.
The question is whether Russia will make a stand. In April, they made clear the consequences of attacks on Russian assets: destruction of the launch platforms.
But Washington is arrogant and driven by hate. Soon, there will be a hot war that it starts. I have no doubts. The venom from London and Washington have for Russia is as great as Hitler’s hate for Jews, perhaps greater.
You misunderstand turning the other cheek. It doesn’t mean passive acceptance of being beaten.
https://www.cpt.org/files/BN%20-%20Jesus%27%20Third%20Way.pdf
Excerpt below, from theologian Walter Wink:
***
The backhand was not a blow to injure, but to insult, humiliate, degrade. It was not administered to an
equal, but to an inferior. Masters backhanded slaves; husbands, wives; parents, children; Romans, Jews. The
whole point of the blow was to force someone who was out of line back into place.
Notice Jesus’ audience: “If anyone strikes you.” These are people used to being thus degraded. He is saying
to them, “Re-fuse to accept this kind of treatment anymore. If they backhand you, turn the other cheek.” (Now
you really need to physically enact this to see the problem.) By turning the cheek, the servant makes it
impossible for the master to use the backhand again: his nose is in the way. And anyway, it’s like telling a joke
twice; if it didn’t work the first time, it simply won’t work. The left cheek now offers a perfect target for a blow
with the right fist; but only equals fought with fists, as we know from Jewish sources, and the last thing the
master wishes to do is to establish this underling’s equality. This act of defiance renders the master incapable
of asserting his dominance in this relationship. He can have the slave beaten, but he can no longer cow him.
By turning the cheek, then, the “inferior” is saying: “I’m a human being, just like you. I refuse to be humiliated
any longer. I am your equal. I am a child of God. I won’t take it anymore.”
Such defiance is no way to avoid trouble. Meek acquiescence is what the master wants. Such “cheeky”
behavior may call down a flogging, or worse. But the point has been made. The Powers That Be have lost
their power to make people submit. And when large numbers begin behaving thus (and Jesus was addressing
a crowd), you have a social revolution on your hands.
In that world of honor and shaming, the “superior” has been rendered impotent to instill shame in a
subordinate. He has been stripped of his power to dehumanize the other. As Gandhi taught, “The first principle
of nonviolent action is that of non-cooperation with everything humiliating.”
How different this is from the usual view that this passage teaches us to turn the other cheek so our
batterer can simply clobber us again! How often that interpretation has been fed to battered wives and
children. And it was never what Jesus intended in the least. To such victims he advises, “Stand up for
yourselves, defy your masters, assert your humanity; but don’t answer the oppressor in kind. Find a new, third
way that is neither cowardly submission nor violent reprisal.”
***
I suspect guided by the Holy Spirit Russia understands this. They may not answer in kind.
Military question: why is NATO Centcom US Power overwhelming? Where are the missiles coming from? How do they get to Syria? Do you target the bullets coming from the gun or the shooter? I think this goes back to the 800 pound gorilla of Martyanov.
American Patriot
“Paul looked straight at the Sanhedrin and said, “My brothers, I have fulfilled my duty to God in all good conscience to this day.” At this the high priest Ananias ordered those standing near Paul to strike him on the mouth.”
“Then Paul said to him, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! You sit there to judge me according to the law, yet you yourself violate the law by commanding that I be struck!”
Those who were standing near Paul said, “How dare you insult God’s high priest!”
Paul replied, “Brothers, I did not realize that he was the high priest; for it is written: ‘Do not speak evil about the ruler of your people.’
Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and the others Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, “My brothers, I am a Pharisee, descended from Pharisees. I stand on trial because of the hope of the resurrection of the dead.”
I thought it might be useful to post a link to Mr. Roberts latest reply in this discussion.
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/09/07/i-agree-with-the-saker-as-far-as-he-goes/
I do not agree with the premise of the article. I can instantly think of four incidents where Russia made clear that there are red lines that will be enforces by military means:
1. The war in Georgia in 2008
2. Securing Crimea in 2014
3. Showing the USS Donald Cook its way in the Black Sea in 2014
4. Intervention in Syria 2015
I do not see a nation showing the other cheek but a very determined nation that will use an appropriate amount of military as ultima ratio to enforce its red lines.
The future of Ukraine is connected to future of current EU policy. Ukraine is no way independent player, just pawn of bigger players (US/NATO/EU and Russia).
Russia has its biggest problems with demographics and economy. For instance: when will it have money enough to invest post Soviet environment reform and clean infrastructure? Garbage Russia doesn’t sound fascinating at all.
Love the analysis. Cultural and language differences are rarely accounted for by the “Western Press”. By design? These differences are extremely important in understanding anything or anyone with a different cultural perspective.
In any case you seem to describe the Russian strategy in Syria, in American parlance, as the Rope-A-Dope. A defensive strategy of absorbing blows from a physically superior opponent until the opportune time to counter-attack with crushing effectiveness. It worked in Kinshasa, Zaire (now Congo) for Muhammad Ali against George Foreman that many years ago. We will see how the Russians fare. For the sake of humanity I wish them Godspeed.
First I want to say that I’m very pleased to have discovered this website. I compliment you on your great insights on the realpolitik and economic colonialism that you expose.
As far as your answer to PCR, I have to take exception to your conclusion. PCR is right. The American psyche is one of Exceptionalism and conquest since the birth of the nation. With the dodma of Manifest Destiny, the US excused it’s bloody conquest of the West and the so-called Mexican war that extended its territory from “sea to shining sea”. To the point where Ulysses S Grant thoughtthe civil war was divine punishment for the crimes committed during that expansion. Then came the fabricated Spanish/American war to grab the Cuba and the Philippines with ferocious ruthlessness under the same pretext of a Manifest Destiny for this country. To the point where Mark Twain called American soldiers “assassins in uniform”.
Now fast forward to the 1990s after the fall of the Soviet Union, a new political doctrine was enunciated. The Project for a New American Century which is nothing more than the Manifest Destiny of the nineteenth century on steroid, on a global scale. With it the military doctrine of Full Spectrum Dominance was also adopted. Russia was weak and on the path of dismemberment under Yeltsin. It was a question of time, or so they thought. But then came Putin and the miraculous reemergence of a powerful Russia.
You say tha the reaction of the US would be too unpredictable for Russia to challenge its military directly. Well history teaches us differently. When confronted with a commensurate power that can inflict heavy losses while in conflicts where its vital interest, the American leadership will show sudden reasonableness. Whereas when facing a weak adversary, it will move full speed ahead.
The ultimate obstacle to Western designs in the Middle East and elsewhere is not Iran as it is convenient to pretend but Russia. And Russia, like it or not, is the ultimate target. And Paul Craig Roberts is right. Slowly through attrition they will be at the gate where Russia will have no choice but to capitulate or nuclear war. Whereas now Russia has sufficient parity to stop this inexorable advance. And only a show of force will do that.
In a nutshell, PCR is correctly identifying the concern that ‘Weakness provokes aggression,’ or specifically, that ‘perceived’ weakness is provoking aggression.
I am myself fully sympathetic to that concern. But I am also aware that Sun Tzu is far smarter than I will ever be, and it is too early to call, whether Russian behaviour is due to lack of options, or actually following a cunning plan. Remember too that Putin is a judo expert, where self discipline is key, and the art of using your opponents own strength against him.
It is also worthy of note, that if the US and Russia clash directly, and US assets or servicemen are attacked (even in retaliation), then the political fallout could create a new Iron curtain where Europe will freeze for lack of Russian gas, and Russia will lose its biggest customer. Europe and Russia both lose, and the US smirks from the sidelines; who then the winner from an ostensibly minor skirmish, in which Russia will be forever after portrayed as an out of control bully?
It’s all connected, the battle for Idlib is going to be fought on many fronts, some beyond our sights.
“that appeasement encourages more provocations, and it comes to a point when you have to surrender or fight”
It is not only the lack of military response to the (“anglozionists”) resource war corporate fascists-who are the rulers of the “empire”-, it is the lack of a clear, factual, historical perspective that should be stated without diluting it with mealy-mouthed platitudes. The US is not a partner, nor is it a responsible state party. It does not negotiate honestly and its leaders lie. Russia loses when its UN ambassador tries to sugar coat US atrocities and lies. It loses when it helps hide US actions aiding terrorists in Syria and elsewhere,,,just one example.
“Russia is still only a partially sovereign country and the power of the 5th columnists still strongly influences Russian decision making,,,,,”
This should not be a problem that still exists for Russia and Putin after so many years. He’s had plenty of time to put the traitors in prison. It is a big question as to why he hasn’t.
“for example, Putin has already amended, albeit minimally, the proposed pension reform project as a direct result of a massive public outcry,,”
The further implementation of austerity is a sign that Putin is losing control, or is stupid. Austerity is used by the empire corporate fascists to destabilize governments, particular ones targeted for regime change, as is Russia. A perfect recent example is Brazil. Rousseff got elected after Lula, who had set the country on a popular, social and economic track. What did she do? Somehow she was convinced to implement austerity measures, which decimates the economy and her supporters, who turn on her. She is impeached, Lula is imprisoned and Temer, a CIA asset is now president busy raping and pillaging for his corporate fascist masters.
“that appeasement encourages more provocations, and it comes to a point when you have to surrender or fight”
It is not only the lack of military response to the (“anglozionists”) resource war corporate fascists-who are the rulers of the “empire”-, it is the lack of a clear, factual, historical perspective that should be stated without diluting it with mealy-mouthed platitudes. The US is not a partner, nor is it a responsible state party. It does not negotiate honestly and its leaders lie. Russia loses when its UN ambassador tries to sugar coat US atrocities and lies. It loses when it helps hide US actions aiding terrorists in Syria and elsewhere,,,just one example.
“Russia is still only a partially sovereign country and the power of the 5th columnists still strongly influences Russian decision making,,,,,”
This should not be a problem that still exists for Russia and Putin after so many years. He’s had plenty of time to put the traitors in prison. It is a big question as to why he hasn’t.
“for example, Putin has already amended, albeit minimally, the proposed pension reform project as a direct result of a massive public outcry,,”
The further implementation of austerity is a sign that Putin is losing control, or is stupid. Austerity is used by the corporate fascists to destabilize governments, particular ones targeted for regime change, as is Russia. A perfect recent example is Brazil. Rousseff got elected after Lula, who had set the country on a popular, social and economic track. What did she do? Somehow she was convinced to implement austerity measures, which decimates the economy and her supporters, who turn on her. She is impeached, Lula is imprisoned and Temer, a CIA asset is now president busy raping and pillaging for his corporate fascist masters.
@carlusjr
At last a voice of reason in the wilderness where even supposed alternative news luminaries fan the flames of the false dichotomy of West versus East, Russia against the US, Turkey versus Israel.
We’re all ruled by spineless puppets who are nothing more than errand boys and girls working for the Jewish and Anglo-Zionist bankers and assorted NWO psychopaths.
Trump=Netanyahu=Putin
Thanks for sharing!
And you may well be right, but what happened to JFK when he threatened those same powers?
Witness also Olaf Palme, a presidential assassination where unsurprisingly, no killer or motive was found, or even Ronald Reagan, who survived an assassination attempt very soon after his inaugration; no motive found, even though the shooter was caught. Just a random, crazy guy. Sure.
In the UK, Corbyn is under attack yet again on trumped up charges of anti-semitism. He is threatening our true masters simply by not swearing fervent allegiance to the zionist cause. Unacceptable!!! Note the deafening lack of any claims to anti-semitism directed to the ruling Tory party, so draw your own conclusions there. And where is the uproar? Will it be just you and I storming the barricades? If the people don’t care, or are too dumb to see what is happening, then Corbyn is largely defenceless.
What needs to be done is one thing; but achieving it is another. Where does power sit? Trump is the US president, and his position has largely been rendered a ceremonial one. And he is just a man, whose family and interests can be threatened. How is power distributed in Russia today? We cannot criticise Putin for failing to apply power that he might not actually have on the ground.
On that note; in societies where the ostensible ruler did have such powers that we now wish Putin to have so that he can clean house, then what if his successor is a bad ‘un? Thoughts of Nero come to mind, and we might regret a President having too many powers.
My impression is that Putin waits for his opponents to slip up before acting. There is no timeline on that; it is event driven.
@Occasional Poster
JFK was one of them, and I don’t recall him doing anything great or even good. I never said wolves do not attack their own. I expect we will be treated to this spectacle again soon.
No need to be fatalistic. Always remember: neither us nor the cabbalistic/sadistic/NWO psychopaths created this world, nor determine a single thing in it purely based on volition. When was the last time you decided to decide anything? The answer is the same both for you and I as it is for the Anglo-Zionist filth: *never* We all have the potential to make a change that counts. It all adds up. Share your knowledge. Empathize.
We may all have our music to play in this realm but the chef of the orchestra is not one from amongst us. And that equalizes things to a considerable extent, to the supreme chagrin and distaste of the self-appointed masters of the universe.
That British politician you mentioned, he’s not a great man anyway. He’s going to flip flop like the others if/when elected. The solution will not be offered by the men behind the curtain. There’s not a single major political party anywhere that’s not beholden to the Anglo-Zionist bankers and the Talmudic Jewish psychopaths.
Persevere. And thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Back in the day, no one ever said ” maintaining a military presence in xxx country” no they said occupy it or conquer it …. It is Newspeak, like “a final solution”.
What the US is doing yet again is using its might and military power to subject another nation to its whims and wishes, at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives. “Bringing democracy” to the destitute. And if they were not destitute, they sure will be now.
I think we are many that eagerly awaits the collapse of the hegemon, the final solution to the US. And it will come, sooner than later, their society is so divided and unequal that civil unrest is certain. I hope to live long enough to watch on telly, I will even buy a telly just to watch.
Meanwhile it is election day in Sweden. The fascists are marching. SD id forecast to take home more than 20 % of the vote. Per Albin would be ashamed. I am ashamed.
@Den Lille Abe
There are Swedish *cities* in Sweden where Swedes are afraid to go because Swedes that venture there are systematically attacked, raped and murdered by Muslim and African so-called immigrants which have replaced the indigenous Swedish population.
Google the city called Rinkeby. RT.com made an excellent documentary about what the Muslims have done to this Swedish city. You are conflating self-defense and self-preservation with fascism which is dead wrong on the face of it.
https://www.rt.com/news/399365-europe-no-go-zones-real/
https://www.rt.com/news/379093-journalist-sweden-rinkeby-police/
https://www.rt.com/news/378142-sweden-riot-rinkeby-fire/
…You turn the other cheek for as long as the Enemy wants you to reciprocate.
To not play in to the the hands of the enemy is a pillar in warfare (and were lucky that Tehran, Pyongyang, Damascus, Moscow, Beijing and Hezbollah have been so cool headed).