The context: a double declaration of war
Listening to Poroshenko a few days ago and then to Obama at the UNGA can leave no doubt whatsoever about the fact that the AngloZionist Empire is at war with Russia. Yet many believe that the Russian response to this reality is inadequate. Likewise, there is a steady stream of accusations made against Putin about Russia’s policy towards the crisis in the Ukraine. What I propose to do here is to offer a few basic reminders about Putin, his obligations and his options.
First and foremost, Putin was never elected to be the world’s policeman or savior, he was only elected to be president of Russia. Seems obvious, but yet many seem to assume that somehow Putin is morally obliged to do something to protect Syria, Novorussia or any other part of our harassed world. This is not so. Yes, Russia is the de facto leader of the BRICS and SCO countries, and Russia accepts that fact, but Putin has the moral and legal obligation to care for his own people first.
Second, Russia is now officially in the crosshairs of the AngloZionist Empire which includes not only 3 nuclear countries (US, UK, FR) but also the most powerful military force (US+NATO) and the world’s biggest economies (US+EU). I think that we can all agree that the threat posed by such an Empire is not trivial and that Russia is right in dealing with it very carefully.
Sniping at Putin and missing the point
Now, amazingly, many of those who accuse Putin of being a wimp, a sellout or a naive Pollyanna also claim that the West is preparing nuclear war on Russia. If that is really the case, this begs the question: if that is really the case, if there is a real risk of war, nuclear or not, is Putin not doing the right thing by not acting tough or threatening? Some would say that the West is bent on a war no matter what Putin does. Okay, fair enough, but in that case is his buying as much time as possible before the inevitable not the right thing to do?!
Third, on the issue of the USA vs ISIL, several comment here accused Putin of back-stabbing Assad because Russia supported the US Resolution at the UNSC.
And what was Putin supposed to do?! Fly the Russian Air Force to Syria to protect the Syrian border? What about Assad? Did he scramble his own air force to try to stop the US or has he quietly made a deal: bomb “them” not us, and I shall protest and do nothing about it? Most obviously the latter.
In fact, Putin and Assad have exactly the same position: protest the unilateral nature of the strikes, demand a UN Resolution while quietly watching how Uncle Sam turned on his own progeny and now tries to destroy them.
I would add that Lavrov quite logically stated that there are no “good terrorists”. He knows that ISIL is nothing but a continuation of the US-created Syrian insurgency, itself a continuation of the US-created al-Qaeda. From a Russian point of view, the choice is simple: what is better, for the US to use its forces and men to kill crazed Wahabis or have Assad do it? And if ISIL is successful in Iraq, how long before they come back to Chechnia? Or Crimea? Or Tatarstan? Why should any Russian or Syria soldier risk death when the USAF is willing to do that for them?
While there is a sweet irony in the fact that the US now has to bomb it’s own creation, let them do that. Even Assad was clearly forewarned and he obviously is quite happy about that.
Finally, UN or no UN, the US had already taken the decision to bomb ISIL. So what is the point of blocking a perfectly good UN Resolution? That would be self-defeating. In fact, this Resolution can even be used by Russia to prevent the US and UK from serving as a rear base for Wahabi extremists (this resolution bans that, and we are talking about a mandatory, Chapter VII, UNSC Resolution).
And yet, some still say that Putin threw Assad under the bus. How crazy and stupid can one get to have that kind of notion about warfare or politics? And if Putin wanted to toss Assad under the bus, why did he not do that last year?
Sincere frustration or intellectual dishonesty?
But that kind of nonsense about the Syria is absolutely dwarfed by the kind of truly crazy stuff some people post about Novorussia. Here are my favorite ones. The author begins by quoting me:
“This war has never been about Novorussia or about the Ukraine.”
and then continues:
That statement is too vacuous and convenient as a copout. Do you really mean to say that the thousands of people murdered by shelling, the thousands of young Ukrainian conscripts put through the meat grinder, the thousands of homes destroyed, the more than 1 million people who have turned into refugees… NONE of that has anything to do with Novorussia and Ukraine? That this is only about Russia? Really, one would wish you’d refrain from making silly statements like that.
The only problem being, of course, that I never made it in the first place :-)
Of course, it is rather obvious that I meant that FOR THE ANGLOZIONIST EMPIRE the goal has never been the Ukraine or Novorussia, but a war on Russia. All Russia did was to recognize this reality. Again, the words “do you really mean to say that” clearly show that the author is going to twist what I said, make yet another strawman, and then indignantly denounce me for being a monster who does not care about the Ukraine or Novorussia (the rest of the comment was in the same vein: indignant denunciations of statements I never made and conclusions I never reached).
I have already grown used to the truly remarkable level of dishonesty of the Putin-bashing crowd and by now I consider it par for the course. But I wanted to illustrate that one more time just to show that at least in certain cases an honest discussion is not the purpose at all. But I don’t want to bring it all down to just a few dishonest and vociferous individuals. There are also many who are sincerely baffled, frustrated and even disappointed with Russia’s apparent passivity. Here is an excerpt of an email I got this morning:
I guess I was really hoping that perhaps Russia, China The BRICS would be a counter force. What I fail to understand is why after all the demonisation by the U.S and Europe doesn’t Russia retaliate. The sanctions imposed by the West is hurting Russia and yet they still trade oil in euros/dollars and are bending over backwards to accommodate Europe. I do not understand why they do not say lift all sanctions or no gas. China also says very little against the U.S , even though they fully understand that if Russian is weakened they are next on the list. As for all the talk of lifting the sanctions on Iran that is farcical as we all know Israel will never allow them to be lifted. So why do China and Russia go along with the whole charade. Sometimes I wonder if we are all being played, and this is all one big game , which no chance of anything changing.
In this case the author correctly sees that Russia and China follow a very similar policy which sure looks like an attempt to appease the US. In contrast to the previous comment, here the author is both sincere and truly distressed.
In fact, I believe that what I am observing are three very different phenomena all manifesting themselves at the same time:
1) An organized Putin-bashing campaign initiated by US/UK government branches tasked with manipulating the social media.
2) A spontaneous Putin-bashing campaign lead by certain Russian National-Bolshevik circles (Limonov, Dugin & Co.).
3) The expression of a sincere bafflement, distress and frustration by honest and well-intentioned people to whom the current Russian stance really makes no sense at all.
The rest of this post will be entirely dedicated to try to explain the Russian stance to those in this third group (any dialog with the 2 first ones just makes no sense).
Trying to make sense of an apparently illogical policy
In my introduction above I stated that what is taking place is a war on Russia, not hot war (yet?) and not quite an old-style Cold War. In essence, what the AngloZionists are doing is pretty clear and a lot of Russian commentators have already reached that conclusion: the US are engaged into a war against Russia for which the US will fight to the last Ukrainian. Thus, for the Empire, “success” can never be defined as an outcome in the Ukraine because, as I said previously, this war is not about the Ukraine. For the Empire “success” is a specific outcome in Russia: regime change. Let’s us look at how the Empire plans to achieve this result.
The original plan was simplistic in a typically US Neocon way: overthrow Yanukovich, get the Ukraine into the EU and NATO, politically move NATO to the Russian border and militarily move it into Crimea. That plan failed. Russia accepted Crimea and the Ukraine collapsed into a vicious civil war combined with a terminal economic crisis. Then the US Neocons fell-back to plan B.
Plan B was also simple: get Russia to intervene militarily in the Donbass and use that as a pretext for a full-scale Cold War v2 which would create 1950’s style tensions between East and West, justify fear-induced policies in the West, and completely sever the growing economic ties between Russia and the EU. Except that plan also failed – Russia did not take the bait and instead of intervening directly in the Donbass, she began a massive covert operation to support the anti-Nazi forces in Novorussia. The Russian plan worked, and the Junta Repression Forces (JRF) were soundly defeated by the Novorussian Armed Forces (NAF) even though the latter was suffering a huge deficit in firepower, armor, specialists and men (gradually, Russian covert aid turned all these around).
At this point in time the AngloZionist plutocracy truly freaked out under the combined realization that their plan was falling apart and that there was nothing they could really do to rescue it (a military option was totally impossible as I explained it in the past). They did try economic sanctions, but that only helped Putin to engage in long overdue reforms. But the worst part of it all was that each time the West expected Putin to do something, he did the exact opposite:
- Nobody expected that Putin would use military force in Crimea in a lightening-fast take-over operation which will go down in history as at least as amazing as Storm-333.
- Everybody (including myself) expected Putin to send forces into Novorussia. He did not.
- Nobody expected Russian counter-sanctions to hit the EU agricultural sector.
- Everybody expected that Putin would retaliate after the latest round of sanctions. He did not.
There is a pattern here and it is one basic to all martial arts: first, never signal your intentions, second use feints and third, hit when and where your opponent doesn’t expect it.
Conversely, there are two things which are deeply ingrained in the western political mindset which Putin never does: he never threatens and he never postures. For example, while the US is basically at war with Russia, Russia will gladly support a US resolution on ISIL if it is to Russia’s advantage. And Russian diplomats will speak of “our American partners” or “our American friends” while, at the same time, doing more than the rest of the planet combined to bring down the AngloZionist Empire.
A quick look at Putin’s record
As I have written in the past, unlike some other bloggers and commentators, I am neither a psychic not a prophet and I cannot tell you what Putin thinks or what he will do tomorrow. But what I can tell you is that which Putin has already done in the past: (in no particular order)
- broken the back of the AngloZionist-backed oligarchy in Russia.
- achieved a truly miraculous success in Chechnia (one which nobody, prophets included, had foreseen).
- literally resurrected the Russian economy.
- rebuilt the Russian military, security and intelligences forces.
- severely disrupted the ability of foreign NGOs to subvert Russia.
- done more for the de-dollarization of the planet than anybody before.
- made Russia the clear leader of both BRICS and SCO.
- openly challenged the informational monopoly of the western propaganda machine (with projects like RussiaToday).
- stopped an imminent US/NATO strike on Syria by sending in a Russian Navy Expeditionary Force (which gave Syria a full radar coverage of the entire region).
- made it possible for Assad to prevail in the Syrian civil war.
- openly rejected the Western “universal civilizational model” and declared his support for another, a religion and tradition based one.
- openly rejected a unipolar “New World Order” lead by the AngloZionists and declared his support for a multi-polar world order.
- supported Assange (through RussiaToday) and protected Snowden
- created and promoted a new alliance model between Christianity and Islam thus undermining the “clash of civilization” paradigm.
- booted the AngloZionists out of key locations in the Caucasus (Chechnia, Ossetia).
- booted the AngloZionists out of key locations in Central Asia (Manas base in Kyrgyzstan)
- gave Russia the means to defend her interest in the Arctic region, including military means.
- established a full-spectrum strategic alliance with China which is at the core of both SCO and BRICS.
- is currently passing laws barring foreign interests from controlling the Russian media.
- gave Iran the means to develop a much needed civilian nuclear program.
- is working with China to create a financial system fully separated form the current AngloZionist controlled one (including trade in Rubles or Renminbi).
- re-establised Russian political and economic support for Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Brazil, Nicaragua and Argentina.
- very effectively deflated the pro-US color-coded revolution in Russia.
- organized the “Voentorg” which armed the NAF.
- gave refuge to hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian refugees.
- sent in vitally needed humanitarian aid to Novorussia.
- provided direct Russian fire support and possibly even air cover to NAF in key locations (the “southern cauldron” for example).
- last but not least, he openly spoke of the need for Russia to “sovereignize” herself and to prevail over the pro-US 5th column.
and that list goes on and on. All I am trying to illustrate is that there is a very good reason for the AngloZionist’s hatred for Putin: his long record of very effectively fighting them. So unless we assume that Putin had a sudden change of heart or that he simply ran out of energy or courage, I submit that the notion that he suddenly made a 180 makes no sense. His current policies, however, do make sense, as I will try to explain now.
If you are a “Putin betrayed Novorussia” person, please set that hypothesis aside for a moment, just for argument’s sake and assume that Putin is both principled and logical. What could he be doing in the Ukraine? Can we make sense of what we observe?
Imperatives Russia cannot ignore
First, I consider the following sequence indisputable:
First, Russia must prevail over the current AngloZionist war against her. What the Empire wants in Russia is regime change followed by complete absorption into the Western sphere of influence including a likely break-up of Russia. What is threatened is the very existence of the Russian civilization.
Second, Russia will never be safe with a neo-Nazi russophobic regime in power in Kiev. The Ukie nationalist freaks have proven that it is impossible to negotiate with them (they have broken literally every single agreement signed so far), their hatred for Russia is total (as shown with their constant references to the use of – hypothetical – nuclear weapons against Russia). Therefore,
Third, regime change in Kiev followed by a full de-Nazification is the only possible way for Russia to achieve her vital objectives.
Again, and at the risk of having my words twisted and misrepresented, I have to repeat here that Novorussia is not what is at stake here. It’s not even the future of the Ukraine. What is at stake here is a planetary confrontation (this is the one thesis of Dugin which I fully agree with). The future of the planet depends on the capability of the BRICS/SCO countries to replace the AngloZionist Empire with a very different, multi-polar, international order. Russia is crucial and indispensable in this effort (any such effort without Russia is doomed to fail), and the future of Russia is now decided by what Russia will do in the Ukraine. As for the future of the Ukraine, it largely depends on what will happen to Novorussia, but not exclusively. In a paradoxical way, Novorussia is more important to Russia than to the Ukraine. Here is why:
For the rest of the Ukraine, Novorussia is lost. Forever. Not even a joint Putin-Obama effort could prevent that. In fact, the Ukies know that and this is why they make no effort to win the hearts and minds of the local population. If fact, I am convinced that the so-called “random” or “wanton” destruction of the Novorussian industrial, economic, scientific and cultural infrastructure has been intentional act of hateful vengeance similar to the way the AngloZionists always turn to killing civilians when they fail to overcome military forces (the examples of Yugoslavia and Lebanon come to mind). Of course, Moscow can probably force the local Novorussian political leaders to sign some kind of document accepting Kiev’s sovereignty, but that will be a fiction, it is way too late for that. If not de jure, then de facto, Novorussia is never going to accept Kiev’s rule again and everybody knows that, in Kiev, in Novorussia and in Russia.
What could a de facto but not de jure independence look like?
No Ukrainian military, national guard, oligarch battalion or SBU, full economic, cultural, religious, linguistic and educational independence, locally elected officials and local media, but all that with Ukie flags, no official independence status, no Novorussian Armed Forces (they will be called something like “regional security force” or even “police force”) and no Novorussian currency (though the Ruble – along with the Dollar and Euro – will be used on a daily basis). The top officials will have to be officially approved by Kiev (which Kiev will, of course, lest its impotence becomes visible). This will be a temporary, transitional and unstable arrangement, but it will be good enough to provide a face-saving way out to Kiev.
This said, I would argue that both Kiev and Moscow have an interest in maintaining the fiction of a unitary Ukraine. For Kiev this is a way to not appear completely defeated by the accursed Moskals. But what about Russia?
What if you were in Putin’s place?
Ask yourself the following question: if you were Putin and your goal was regime change in Kiev, would you prefer Novorussia to be part of the Ukraine or not? I would submit that having Novorussia inside is much better for the following reasons:
- it makes it part, even on a macro-level, of the Ukrainian processes, like national elections or national media.
- it begs the comparison with the conditions in the rest of the Ukraine.
- it makes it far easier to influence commerce, business, transportation, etc.
- it creates an alternative (Nazi-free) political center to Kiev.
- it makes it easier for Russian interests (of all kind) to penetrate into the Ukraine.
- it removes the possibility to put up a Cold War like “wall” or barrier on some geographical marker.
- it removes the accusation that Russian wants to partition the Ukraine.
In other words, to keep Novorussia de jure, nominally, part of the Ukraine is the best way to appear to be complying with AngloZionist demands while subverting the Nazi junta in power. In a recent article I outlined what Russia could do without incurring any major consequences:
- Politically oppose the regime everywhere: UN, media, public opinion, etc.
- Express political support for Novorussia and any Ukrainian oppositionContinue the informational war (Russian media does a great job)
- Prevent Novorussia from falling (covert military aid)
- Mercilessly keep up the economic pressure on the Ukraine
- Disrupt as much as possible the US-EU “axis of kindness”
- Help Crimea and Novorussia prosper economically and financially
In other words – give the appearance of staying out while very much staying in.
What is the alternative anyway?
I already hear the chorus of indignant “hurray-patriots” (that is what these folks are called in Russia) accusing me of only seeing Novorussia as a tool for Russian political goals and of ignoring the death and suffering endured by the people of Novorussia. To this I will simply reply the following:
Does anybody seriously believe that an independent Novorussia can live in even minimal peace and security without a regime change in Kiev? If Russia cannot afford a Nazi junta in power in Kiev, can Novorussia?!
In general, the hurray-patriots are long on what should be done now and very short any kind of mid or long term vision. Just like those who believe that Syria can be saved by sending in the Russian Air Force, the hurray-patriots believe that the crisis in the Ukraine can be solved by sending in tanks. They are a perfect example of the mindset H. L. Mencken was referring to when he wrote “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong”.
The sad reality is that the mindset behind such “simple” solutions is always the same one: never negotiate, never compromise, never look long term but only to the immediate future and use force in all cases.
But the facts are here: the US/NATO block is powerful, militarily, economically and politically and it can hurt Russia, especially over time. Furthermore, while Russia can easily defeat the Ukrainian military, this hardly would be a very meaningful “victory”. Externally it would trigger a massive deterioration of the international political climate, while internally the Russians would have to suppress the Ukrainian nationalists (not all of them Nazi) by force. Could Russia do that? Again, the answer is that yes – but at what cost?
I good friend of mine was a Colonel in the KGB Special Forces unit called “Kaskad” (which later was renamed “Vympel”). One day he told me how his father, himself a special operator for the GRU, fought against Ukrainian insurgents from the end of WWII in 1945 up to 1958: that is thirteen years! It took Stalin and Krushchev 13 years to finally crush the Ukrainian nationalist insurgents. Does anybody in his/her right mind sincerely believe that modern Russia should repeat that policies and spend years hunting down Ukrainian insurgents again?
By the way, if the Ukrainian nationalists could fight the Soviet rule under Stalin and Krushchev for a full 13 years after the end of the war – how is it that there is no visible anti-Nazi resistance in Zaporozhie, Dnepropetrivsk or Kharkov? Yes, Luganks and Donetsk did rise up and take arms, very successfully – but the rest of the Ukraine? If you were Putin, would you be confident that Russian forces liberating these cities would receive the same welcome that they did in Crimea?
And yet, the hurray-patriots keep pushing for more Russian intervention and further Novorussian military operations against Ukie forces. Is it not about time we begin asking who would benefit from such policies?
It has been an old trick of the US CIA to use the social media and the blogosphere to push for nationalist extremism in Russia. A well know and respected Russian patriot and journalist – Maksim Shevchenko – had a group of people organized to track down the IP numbers of some of the most influential radical nationalist organizations, website, blogs and individual posters on the Russian Internet. Turns out that most were based in the USA, Canada and Israel. Surprise, surprise. Or, maybe, no surprise at all?
For the AngloZionists, supporting extremists and rabid nationalists in Russia makes perfectly good sense. Either they get to influence the public opinion or they at the very least can be used to bash the regime in power. I personally see no difference between an Udaltsov or a Navalnii on one hand and a Limonov or a Dugin on the other. Their sole effect is to get people mad at the Kremlin. What the pretext for the anger is does not matter – for Navalnyi its “stolen elections” for Dugin it’s “back-stabbed Novorussia”. And it does not matter which of them are actually paid agents or just “useful idiots” – God be their judge – but what does matter is that the solutions they advocate are no solutions at all, just pious pretexts to bash the regime in power.
In the meantime, not only had Putin not sold-out, back-stabbed, traded away or otherwise abandoned Novorussia, it’s Poroshenko who is barely holding on to power and Banderastan which is going down the tubes. There are also plenty of people who see through this doom and gloom nonsense, both in Russia (Yuri Baranchik) and abroad (M. K. Bhadrakumar).
But what about the oligarchs?
I already addressed this issue in a recent post, but I think that it is important to return to this topic here and the first thing which is crucial to understand in the Russian or Ukrainian context is that oligarchs are a fact of life. This is not to say that their presence is a good thing, only that Putin and Poroshenko and, for that matter, anybody trying to get anything done over there needs to take them into account. The big difference is that while in Kiev a regime controlled by the oligarchs has been replaced by a regime of oligarchs, in Russia the oligarchy can only influence, but not control, the Kremlin. The examples, of Khodorkovsky or Evtushenkov show that the Kremlin still can, and does, smack down an oligarch when needed.
Still, it is one thing to pick on one or two oligarchs and quite another to remove them from the Ukrainian equation: the latter is just not going to happen. So for Putin any Ukrainian strategy has to take into account the presence and, frankly, power of the Ukrainian oligarchs and their Russian counterparts.
Putin knows that oligarchs have their true loyalty only to themselves and that their only “country” is wherever their assets happen to be. As a former KGB foreign intelligence officer for Putin this is an obvious plus, because that mindset potentially allows him to manipulate them. Any intelligence officer knows that people can be manipulated by a finite list of approaches: ideology, ego, resentment, sex, a skeleton in the closet and, of course, money. From Putin’s point of view, Rinat Akhmetov, for example, is a guy who used to employ something like 200’000 people in the Donbass, who clearly can get things done, and whose official loyalty Kiev and the Ukraine is just a camouflage for his real loyalty: his money. Now, Putin does not have to like or respect Akhmetov, most intelligence officers will quietly despise that kind of person, but that also means that for Putin Akhmetov is an absolutely crucial person to talk to, explore options with and, possibly, use to achieve a Russian national strategic objective in the Donbass.
I have already written this many times here: Russians do talk to their enemies. With a friendly smile. This is even more true for a former intelligence officer who is trained to always communicate, smile, appear to be engaging and understanding. For Putin Akhmetov is not a friend or an ally, but he is a powerful figure which can be manipulated in Russia’s advantage. What I am trying to explain here is the following:
There are numerous rumors of secret negotiations between Rinat Akhmetov and various Russian officials. Some say that Khodakovski is involved. Others mention Surkov. There is no doubt in my mind that such secret negotiations are taking place. In fact, I am sure that all the parties involved talk to all other other parties involved. Even with a disgusting, evil and vile creature like Kolomoiski. In fact, the sure signal that somebody has finally decided to take him out would be that nobody would be speaking with him any more. That will probably happen, with time, but most definitely not until his power base is sufficiently eroded.
One Russian blogger believes that Akhmetov has already been “persuaded” (read: bought off) by Putin and that he is willing to play by the new rules which now say “Putin is boss”. Maybe. Maybe not yet, but soon. Maybe never. All I am suggesting is that negotiations between the Kremlin and local Ukie oligarchs are as logical and inevitable as the US contacts with the Italian Mafia before the US armed forces entered Italy.
But is there a 5th column in Russia?
Yes, absolutely. First and foremost, it is found inside the Medvedev government itself and even inside the Presidential administration. Always remember that Putin was put into power by two competing forces: the secret services and big money. And yes, while it is true that Putin has tremendously weakened the “big money” component (what I call the “Atlantic Integrationists”) they are still very much there, though they are more subdued, more careful and less arrogant than during the time when Medvedev was formally in charge. The big change in the recent years is that the struggle between patriots (the “Eurasian Sovereignists”) and the 5th column now is in the open, but it if far from over. And we should never underestimate these people: they have a lot of power, a lot of money and a fantastic capability to corrupt, threaten, discredit, sabotage, cover-up, smear, etc. They are also very smart, they can hire the best professionals in the field, and they are very, very good at ugly political campaigns. For example, the 5th columnists try hard to give a voice to the National-Bolshevik opposition (both Limonov and Dugin regularly get airtime on Russian TV) and rumor has it that they finance a lot of the National-Bolshevik media (just like the Koch brothers paid for the Tea Party in the USA).
Another problem is that while these guys are objectively doing the US CIA’s bidding, there is no proof of it. As I was told many times by a wise friend: most conspiracies are really collusions and the latter are very hard to prove. But the community of interests between the US CIA and the Russian and Ukrainian oligarchy is so obvious as to be undeniable.
The real danger for Russia
So now we have the full picture. Again, Putin has to simultaneously contend with
1) a strategic psyop campaign run by the US/UK & Co. which combines the corporate media’s demonization of Putin and a campaign in the social media to discredit him for his passivity and lack of appropriate response to the West.
2) a small but very vociferous group of (mostly) National-Bolsheviks (Limonov, Dugin & Co.) who have found in the Novorussian cause a perfect opportunity to bash Putin for not sharing their ideology and their “clear, simple, and wrong” “solutions”.
3) a network of powerful oligarchs who want to use the opportunity presented by the actions of first two groups to promote their own interests.
4) a 5th column for whom all of the above is a fantastic opportunity to weaken the Eurasian Sovereignists
5) a sense of disappointment by many sincere people who feel that Russia is acting like a passive punching-ball.
6) an overwhelming majority of people in Novorussia who want complete (de facto and de jure) independence from Kiev and who are sincerely convinced that any negotiations with Kiev are a prelude to a betrayal by Russia of Novorussian interest.
7) the objective reality that Russian and Novorussian interests are not the same.
8) the objective reality that the AngloZionist Empire is still very powerful and even potentially dangerous.
It is very, very, hard for Putin to try to balance these forces in such a way that the resulting vector is one which is in the strategic interest of Russia. I would argue that there is simply no other solution to this conundrum other than to completely separate Russia’s official (declaratory) police and Russia’s real actions. The covert help to Novorussia – the Voentorg – is an example of that, but only a limited one because what Russia must do now goes beyond covert actions: Russia must appear to be doing one thing while doing exactly the opposite. It is in Russia’s strategic interest at this point in time to appear to:
1) Support a negotiated solution along the lines of: a unitary non-aligned Ukraine, with large regional right for all regions while, at the same time, politically opposing the regime everywhere: UN, media, public opinion, etc. and supporting both Novorussia and any Ukrainian opposition.
2) Give Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs a reason to if not support, then at least not oppose such a solution (for ex: by not nationalizing Akhmetov’s assets in the Donbass), while at the same time making sure that there is literally enough “firepower” to keep the oligarch under control.
3) Negotiate with the EU on the actual implementation of Ukraine’s Agreement with the EU while at the same time helping the Ukraine commit economic suicide by making sure that there is just the right amount of economic strangulation applied to prevent the regime from bouncing back.
4) Negotiate with the EU and the Junta in Kiev over the delivery of gas while at the same time making sure that the regime pays enough for it to be broke.
5) Appear generally non-confrontational towards the USA while at the same time trying as hard as possible to create tensions between the US and the EU.
6) Appear to be generally available and willing to do business with the AngoZionist Empire while at the same time building an alternative international systems not centered on the USA or the Dollar.
As you see, this goes far beyond a regular covert action program. What we are dealing with is a very complex, multi-layered, program to achieve the Russian most important goal in the Ukraine (regime change and de-Nazification) while inhibiting as much as possible the AngloZionists attempts to re-created a severe and long lasting East-West crisis in which the EU would basically fuse with the USA.
Conclusion: a key to Russian policies?
Most of us are used to think in terms of super-power categories. After all, US President from Reagan on to Obama have all served us a diet of grand statements, almost constant military operations followed by Pentagon briefings, threats, sanctions, boycotts, etc. I would argue that this has always been the hallmark of western “diplomacy” from the Crusades to the latest bombing campaign against ISIL. Russia and China have a diametrically opposed tradition. For example, in terms of methodology Lavrov always repeats the same principle: “we want to turn our enemies into neutrals, we want to turn neutrals into partner and we want to turn partners into friends“. The role of Russian diplomats is not to prepare for war, but to avoid it. Yes, Russia will fight, but only when diplomacy has failed. If for the US diplomacy is solely a means to deliver threats, for Russia it is a the primary tool to defuse them. It is therefore no wonder at all the the US diplomacy is primitive to the point of bordering on the comical. After all, how much sophistication is needed to say “comply or else”. Any petty street thug know how to do that. Russian diplomats are much more akin to explosives disposal specialist or a mine clearance officer: they have to be extremely patient, very careful and fully focused. But most importantly, they cannot allow anybody to rush them lest the entire thing blows up.
Russia is fully aware that the AngloZionist Empire is at war with her and that surrender is simply not an option any more (assuming it ever was). Russia also understands that she is not a real super-power or, even less so, an empire. Russia is only a very powerful country which is trying to de-fang the Empire without triggering a frontal confrontation with it. In the Ukraine, Russia sees no other solution than regime change in Kiev. To achieve this goal Russia will always prefer a negotiated solution to one obtained by force, even though if not other choice is left to her, she will use force. In other words:
art: Josetxo Ezcurra |
Russia’s long term end goal is to bring down the AngloZionist Empire. Russia’s mid term goal is to create the conditions for regime change in Kiev. Russia’s short term goal is to prevent the junta from over-running Novorussia. Russia’s preferred method to achieve these goals is negotiation with all parties involved. A prerequisite to achieve these goals by negotiations is to prevent the Empire from succeeding in creating an acute continental crisis (conversely, the imperial “deep state” fully understands all this, hence the double declaration of war by Obama and Poroshenko.)
As long as you keep these basic principles in mind, the apparent zig-zags, contradictions and passivity of Russian policies will begin to make sense.
It is an open question whether Russia will succeed in her goals. In theory, a successful Junta attack on Novorussia could force Russia to intervene. Likewise, there is always the possibility of yet another “false flag”, possibly a nuclear one. I think that the Russian policy is sound and the best realistically achievable under the current set of circumstances, but only time will tell.
I am sorry that it took me over 6400 words to explain all that, but in a society were most “thoughts” are expressed as “tweets” and analyses as Facebook posts, it was a daunting task to try to shed some light to what is turning to be a deluge of misunderstandings and misconceptions, all made worse by the manipulation of the social media. I feel that 60’000 words would be more adequate to this task as it is far easier to just throw out a short and simple slogan than to refute its assumptions and implications.
My hope that at least those of you who sincerely were confused by Russia’s apparently illogical stance can now connect the dots and make better sense of it all.
Kind regards to all,
The Saker
I would only add that somewhere along the line good people everywhere need to figure out how to defeat the CIA’s Mighty Wurlitzer. All of these coups and wars do not benefit the 99% of Americans who don’t get rich from oil and armaments. Yes, that’s certainly not Putin’s, or Russia’s, job, and there are a few good Americans who try. If Americans can recognize what is behind the US’s foreign policy that would oppose it. Unfortunately, the US is getting less and less democratic as money and the power of the elite control both the media and the election process of both major political parties.
Anonymous said…
Russia should have a Foreign Minister who can speak English well
Russia already has a Foreign Minister who can speak English well. See
Sergey Lavrov gives interview in English to “Russia Today”
But it might be better if he spoke in English more to the people of the West. But the MSM would be unlikely to show it. ‘Censorship by omission’, it’s called.
I don’t see Paul Craig Roberts being far off the mark on what he has been saying.
We all know, we all have been saying and repeating that the US/NATO is at war with Russia.
And yet many people consider it unthinkable that Russia should say: Okay, enough. We are not selling any more gas to countries that belong to a military alliance intent on destroying us.
What is so outlandish about the notion of stopping support to your declared enemies?
And note that Russia can very well absorb the economic impact of stopping gas sales to Europe. The impact would be only temporary as it could increase sales eastward. But to Europe, it would be pretty catastrophic.
PC Roberts is right to point out that such a move, or the hint of it, cold be wise.
M K Bhadrakumar has been predicting the imminent demise of Assad since almost the first week of the conflict in Syria. He has zero credibility with me on anything related to this country.
On the subject of the Libyan betrayal, Putin recognized he was powerless to stop the Sarkozy initiated regime change and gang rape operation. Still, Gaddafi was no hero. He has been playing footsie with the worst elements of AZ Deep State for decades, nothwithstanding his public statements and mercurial behaviour.
Putin is responsible for Russia. The decision to protect another corrupt and relatively pliant Arab leader, Assad, reflected Russian interests and a change of attitude following Gaddafi’s video taped rape by agents of the French government. There is no excuse for Russia’s betrayal on moral grounds but it would have been truly unacceptable if Russia had let it happened two times. Ignoring it on political grounds would have been almost impossible.
If Syria is betrayed it will be because of Iran and Rouhani. The setup is there and Nasrallah is aware of the problem.
Very good work.
My discrepancies are with the possible meaning of your “oligarchs are a fact of life”.
There are facts and facts. Akhmetov is not a natural fact, but the unnatural accumulation of wealth and power which the AZS procured and organized before destroying the USSR. That “he knows how to get things done”, surely the engineers, workers, scientists abd managers of Donbass know better. And they do not need to associate with criminals such as kolo, poro etc to get things done.
That Putin is clearly perceiving that a purge is necessary if not a complete overhaul of Russia, is all to clear with the latest oligarch owner of Bashneft standing trial. Putin may choose to downplay that there is no politics behind it, but the politics is exposed: the firm is to be returned to the republic where it has its oil fields. And rightly so.
It will be most difficult for Russia to survive unless this non-political policy becomes more extended, slowly, step by step.
Who needs parasytes? Russia? I doubt it.
Better put the eggs on creativity and enhancing the people’ participation, than having them merely the events which will actually determine theur fates!!!
I do not know Dugin well enough for calling him a “useful idiot”, but it might be the case that he perceives the same shortcomings on Putin’s internal policybof not committing the Russian people to participate more actively. That this discourse might be used by the msm as to expose Putin as a weakling, it may well be the case. But this would not invalidate the discourse, but only makes more urgent to heed it and do something practical about it.
Kind regards.
Thank you,
Very good work.
My discrepancies are with the possible meaning of your “oligarchs are a fact of life”.
There are facts and facts. Akhmetov is not a natural fact, but the unnatural accumulation of wealth and power which the AZS procured and organized before destroying the USSR. That “he knows how to get things done”, surely the engineers, workers, scientists abd managers of Donbass know better. And they do not need to associate with criminals such as kolo, poro etc to get things done.
That Putin is clearly perceiving that a purge is necessary if not a complete overhaul of Russia, is all to clear with the latest oligarch owner of Bashneft standing trial. Putin may choose to downplay that there is no politics behind it, but the politics is exposed: the firm is to be returned to the republic where it has its oil fields. And rightly so.
It will be most difficult for Russia to survive unless this non-political policy becomes more extended, slowly, step by step.
Who needs parasytes? Russia? I doubt it.
Better put the eggs on creativity and enhancing the people’ participation, than having them merely the events which will actually determine theur fates!!!
I do not know Dugin well enough for calling him a “useful idiot”, but it might be the case that he perceives the same shortcomings on Putin’s internal policybof not committing the Russian people to participate more actively. That this discourse might be used by the msm as to expose Putin as a weakling, it may well be the case. But this would not invalidate the discourse, but only makes more urgent to heed it and do something practical about it.
Kind regards.
Thank you,
Sorry Saker but how to change resime in Kiev if you give gas with credi?,if Russia give Gas to #Ukraine [Nazi Junta] Kiev’s ethnic cleansing in #NovoRossiya highly profitable.I think you must to write one explanation for this.
On the subject of Prophesy…
It is not so much an act of prediction as it is an attempt to conjure a future reality.
A well timed ‘prophesy’ can harm your opponents more than all the facts in the world put together.
Past, present and future are all within your grasp. A change of perspective on some past event will not only change your current reality, it will also change your future.
The whole of
Sergey Lavrov gives interview in English to “Russia Today”
is rather interesting, especially toward the end where Lavrov describes the dishonesty of the Americans (the congenital liar Kerry foremost among them) with whom he has the thankless task of attempting to negotiate. He says (giving examples) that whenever an agreement is (apparently) reached they immediately (a) put the whole burden of implementation on the Russians, (b) immediately complain unreasonably about delays in implementation and (c) bring in new conditions which were never part of the agreement, conditions likely to derail the whole process. These are tactics that the Israelis have used for many years in their sham ‘negotiations’ with the Palestinians, and probably the Israelis taught them to the Americans.
Missing in your analysis is the legion of potential (but so far ignored) partners of Russia who are the “Truthers”. We have been fighting a lonely battle against the AngloZionists who attacked US on 9/11. We would welcome some assistance from Russia in the form of evidence…and a way of finding justice through the International courts. Am I mistaken? or have I been reading too much into the several recent declarations by Lavrov and Putin that “Nobody has a monopoly on the Truth”…said again just today by Lavrov in his speech at the UNGA? Also, RT had a report on 3 first responders dying of cancer yesterday and today there is a report that Russia has done a 9/11 “data dump” of information about the atrocity.
Is it just wishful thinking that Russia has finally realized that one of the most loyal and powerful potential allies it could have are the 37% of North Americans who call themselves 9/11 truthers.
@Serendipity
Ok so he should use his command of English more. In the West it’s not what you say that matters, it’s HOW you say it.
Interesting read.
I wonder how Russia is going to archive the stated goals if they keep throwing their allies under the bus one by one?
Instead of helping Syria to defend their airspace and arranging mercenaries for them they had to give up their chemical weapons and now the US and the “Friends of Syria” are bombing their own smokescreen ISIS inside Syria.
It will not take long and they will take on the SAA after an “incident” (maybe someone in Damascus will fart and a F22 will go down ;) and videos will show the farting person and Assad will be acused of using chemical weapons).
Once Syria is finished the same gang of “moderate” organ eaters and beheaders will move to Lebanon and the other “chess player” Iran.
After “checkmate” in Teheran with the old tricks “nuclear weapons”, “non lethal lethal” aid to the “opposition”, oh god suddenly Al-Quaeda, ISIS, IS, Khorasan Group and the Easter Bunny are using Iran as a save haven you can insert “no fly zone”, “chapter 7”, “UN Resolution”, “danger to world pease”, “bring freedom and democracy” and so on.
Its like a snowball, small at start and growing. Kosovo, Libya, Syria, Lebanon and Iran. There will be 100.000s of idiots with black flags and brown underwear and guess where they are going next? I bet they will move north but not to Alaska. The US and other will watch once their idot army of remote controlled terrorists will attack Russia. They might not even attack themselfes they might just watch and sit back.
Here’s my take on M K Bhadrakumar’s Iran offers to be West’s natural ally
The Anglo-Zionists and Rouhani are attempting to engineer the overthrow of Assad and pin blame for it on a Putin betrayal.
There’s nothing more to it.
Ali Khamenei is weak. Young Iranians are sick to death of the clerical establishment. Iran and the US/Israel are already working closely together on operation ISIS none of which would have been possible without full Iranian support.
If Assad falls it will take a serious toll on Russian credibility. Failure to protect Syria will confirm that a promise of full Russian support against the Empire is worthless. No Russian leader, least of all Putin, could tolerate such an outcome under any circumstances.
Once again, Rouhani-Rafsanjani represent the war profiteer double dealers in Iran who traded oil for weapons going back to the time of the Hostage Crisis and Iran Contra. Don’t be fooled by these cynical gangsters in religious garb. They are well and truly demonic.
Russia has a serious problem in Syria and so does Hezbollah. The Israelis are quiet and therefore ecstatic.
Simply a brilliant summation, deserves wide circulation.
Putin is hopefully a student of Sun Tzu’s Art of War, but what is happening in Syria is worrisome, and what happened in Libya (under Menendev’s watch … looks like his Atlanticist sympathies were exploited to fool him into supporting a fraudulent UN resolution) is not reassuring.
@ The Saker,
Absolutely excellent!
This morning, I had an organic pancake with honey, strawberries and a freshly squeezed juice… The weather was fantastic, so me and my girlfriend went for a bike ride… In the afternoon we did everything imaginable two loving people can do to each other…Then, as I thought it couldn’t get any better, I opened your site and read this fabulous analysis. Now, my day is complete! Thank you!
P.S. To people, who is offering to edit this article – Just do it. Send it to him. Leave it up to his discretion of what to do with it.
As one Russian blogger sometimes says: you have done a stellar job here, Saker! Thank you for a very informative article combined with a powerful analysis!
I don’t agree with your eavluation of Dugin. There’s a interview with him in portuguese http://legio-victrix.blogspot.com.br/2014/09/entrevista-com-aleksandr-dugin-no.html?spref=fb and he says the absolute opposite, for exemple, he does not support a nationalist maidan, on the contrary, he clearly sees this as the 6th column’s plan to overthrow Putin. He got fired from his position at the State University so I don’t think he has so many friends.
thats it… all signs shows how hard and complex are Putin’s tasks… but some people insists on playing checkers instead of chess…
I don’t think is possible to explain more clearly than you did…
greetings from Brazil!
Dear Saker,
I am in full agreement with you. However I just want to clarify one point. There is no Security Council Resolution in existence that authorises the US to bomb the Islamic State in Syria. The Security Council did pass a Resolution under Chapter VII on 24th September 2014 but it is about combating terrorism generally and it certainly does not authorise a bombing campaign against the Islamic State in Syria. Here is the text of the Resolution and a summary of the Security Council debate from the UN’s website.
THERE IS NO UN SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION AUTHORISING THE BOMBING OF THE ISLAMIC STATE IN SYRIA
I just want to make this point because the Saker appears to think otherwise. See this comment.
http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/the-russian-response-to-double.html
The Security Council did pass a Resolution under Chapter VII on 24th September 2014 but it was in general terms and concerned combating terrorism in general. It did not authorise any bombing of the Islamic State in Syria. Here is the text of the Resolution and a summary of the debate from the UN’s website.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2014/sc11580.doc.htm
As I have explained in my piece for RIA Novosti, in the absence of a Resolution from the Security Council or Syria’s agreement bombing the Islamic State in Syria is illegal.
http://en.ria.ru/authors/20140926/193309718/International-Law-Suffers-Most-From-US-War-in-Syria.html
Lavrov’s criticism of the US’s unilateral resort to force made at the UN General Assembly shows he thinks so too even if out of a desire to avoid appearing to side with the Islamic State (and by extension with Islamic terrorism) he didn’t spell the fact out.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2014/sc11580.doc.htm
As I explained in a piece I have written for RIA Novosti, bombing the Islamic State in Syria without a Security Council Resolution or the express agreement of the Syrian government is illegal.
http://en.ria.ru/authors/20140926/193309718/International-Law-Suffers-Most-From-US-War-in-Syria.html
Judging from reports of his comments at the General Assembly Lavrov thinks so too even though he is careful not to say it so as not to appear to be siding with the Islamic State against its enemies.
http://en.ria.ru/world/20140927/193366428/Lavrov-US-Openly-Declares-Right-for-Unilateral-Use-of-Military.html
again a very good article. Long but worth to read. Step by step analysis and finally the conclusion under the light of those points. As an engineer I really appreciate the methodical approach you take. I wonder if you took any engineering or software education to approach things so methodically? Best Regards
I do not believe that Putin’s position is simply strategic in terms of Anglo alliance.
what I mean by this is that Putin’s nationalism (nation liberation), with relative self-sufficiency and above board trade between nations, is all about delivering a new multi-polar war.
This is not an invention, it is not Puytin’s idea it is a result of history the Hyper-power is dying, history cannot repeat itself and provide a new hyperpower, we are moving to a new system as the old system clings onto life.
Putin is strong, intelligent and principled these are were not in the past recommendation for leadership; but times are changing and it now becomes a wonderful fit.
Obama is a weak puppet in a regime of lies and blood, the opposition is nkot personal but historical.
Having just listened to Lavrov I am more certain of this than ever. we are on the cusp of a mighty historical change.
Saker;
Thank you so much for your blog and your insight into these matters involving president Putin’s difficult task of steering Russia through the political minefield that the Anglo/Zionist forces have set in place. I stumbled upon your blog by accident and am delighted to find someone with your degree of knowledge of the events transpiring in that part of the world and who is reporting honestly about these events. Prior to this I had to satisfy myself with Dr. Paul Craig Roberts’ reportage on these matters, and though he does a fine job, still he does not have the insight and connections that you appear to possess.
Until the arrival of the internet, people like myself here in the US had no means of getting the “other side” of the story concerning any political event. It is laughable that the schools here speak disparagingly of the “censorship” in other lands even though true unbiased reporting of foreign (and many domestic events) is rarer than a promise made and kept by Obama.
This segment covering “The Russian response to a double declaration of war” has given me new perspective into the complexity of the problem that Putin must deal with in maintaining the sovereignty of Russia in the face of the US/Zionist quest for world domination. Prior to reading this article I too, like many others wondered why Putin simply did not answer sanctions with the threat of withholding gas from Europe or provide the NovoRussians with direct military aid. Your article helped to provide a much broader understanding of the negative consequences of such moves and the advantages of the restraint that Putin exhibits. Thank you for your insight and perspective, it is much appreciated.
The allusion to “the path of peace”—this is a hint: not for Putin, with whom all bridges have been burned and who will not be forgiven for anything. It is a more than clear call to the sleeper agents in Russia—it is time to wake up and go to work. The cause of peace cannot wait.
From slavyangrad.org. El Murid What is Good What is bad. Obama’s outrageous speech at UN
Russia’s long term end goal is to bring down the AngloZionis Empire. Russia’s mid term goal is to create the conditions for regime change in Kiev. Russia’s short term goal is to prevent the junta from over-running Novorussia. Russia’s preferred method to achieve these goals is negotiation with all parties involved. A prerequisite to achieve these goals by negotiations is to prevent the Empire from succeeding in creating an acute continental crisis (conversely, the imperial “deep state” fully understands all this, hence the double declaration of war by Obama and Poroshenko.)
—
This is superb distillation of your 6000+word essay
If I were the lead Anglo negotiator playing for Team AZ, here’s what I would offer to Putin and Lavrov:
1 – Continued possession of Tartus and guaranteed pipline access including development rights for Russian oil companies throughout the ME.
2 – A bi-national ‘Finlandized’ Ukraine including full status for Novorussia. I don’t believe Putin is in a position to accept any less. Full rights for Russian speakers will not be enough after tens of thousands of dead. Accepting less then what apppears to be total victory in Ukraine will diminish Putin completely and allow his critics to portray his actions as unquestionably cynical.
If the narrative of Putin the politician has any meaning, he can’t be seen to abandon Novorussia. Future Russian soft power, necessary for the long game, depends on the appearance of a Russian victory in Ukraine.
3 – Seriously enhanced special drawing rights for the Russian currency based on the value of energy and other resources. Russia will be filthy stinking rich in less than ten years; a giant deposit-only ATM for Europe and China. Any offer to Russia has to take account of her vast natural wealth.
In effect Russia would be a powerful anchor for the new unitary global currency system. Considerations would have to be made for appearances and reasons of ‘competition’ but otherwise the new system would be centralized. This is what globalists, bankers and oligarchs the world over are after and it is up to Putin to say ‘da’ or ‘nyet.’ This is my speculative belief and I fully understand I have excluded many other possible offers that could be directed at Russia.
There have been many recent public statements by political officials the world over that could be construed to be associated with negotiations. Did Glazev’s message from yesterday sound like that of a man who was determined to torpedo negotiations? There are many disturbing or not so disturbing signs all around, depending on your perspective.
The important question, that none of us can answer: can you see Putin accepting such an offer even if the Anglos could come up with it, never mind follow through? In effect they would be offering to make Putin the hero of the new one world order. China is presumably strongly in favour of absolute stability and is almost certainly pushing Putin to make a deal and protect the trillions of USD assets they already own. Meanwhile Iran is flailing around like a knife wielding gypsy sorrounded by waffen ss.
Or will it be someone other than Putin if Putin won’t go along. I often think we overestimate his power to say no to the oligarchs. Are his friends in intelligence and 87% of the Russian public enough to sustain him? What if were 40% after a real or preceived betrayal of Novorussia? There are so many questions which are impossible to answer.
I also wonder if the recent insertion of Gaddafi meme into public consciousness is meant as a threat and to pressure the Russian leader into making the ‘responsible’ decision.
I can’t see Putin going through with it. The story about a massive find of Russian oil as big as that of the Gulf of Mexico seems to bloster his hand by encouraging a belief that Russia can go it alone. Like I said before, Russia will be filthy stinking rich no matter what. Putin knows this and so does everyone else.
If Putin does say ‘da’ then I have completely misunderstood him from the begining. If so I am with Dugin and the rest of the fire starters. Maybe Paul Craig Roberts is raging like a madman for a very good reason. The globalist machine we have built will destroy us unless we develop the wisdom to use our power in a reasonable way. In the absence of even the possility of this development, the only alternative is for a powerful state to claim the mantle of moral leadership in the world. Russia is the only nation in a position to do so.
The only way to oppose psychopathic power is to confront it with a credible threat. I believe Putin understands this principle but I have no way of knowing.
Well, we sure got a lot of those “concern trolls” to visit. Mostly anonymous, of course.
Libya sucked up to the West and tried to play too many games, all the while letting the insanely corrupt Misrata tribe (of Turkish Jews) choose between jail and war. Not defending Russia, but there was no way Russia could prevent the West from grinding it down into dust.
As for Syria, who knows what is going on? The US PTB now lie about everything, and broadcast fake events of all sorts, from fake beheadings to staged shootings to dubious terror with crisis actors. The Syrian Army has been making more and more progress, but may not be able to take the areas in the East. But this doesn’t mean Russia has sold them out.
The complaint about Russia or Putin or Lavrov not speaking forcefully in English about how evil the West is is strange. These speeches would be twisted to show how mentally unstable they are, and wouldn’t necessarily do much positive. The Russian approach of taking certain actions seems a lot better. Banning agricultural products from the EU was worth a lot more than a speech. The Western media are owned and controlled by Russia’s opponents to a large degree. A random look at the news shows “Putin Advisor says Putin planning WWIII for the Last Decade”.
A better approach would likely be to put a lot of money into media and NGOs and cultural stuff. The Russian elite ignored the Ukraine and ex-Soviet states to a large degree, and concentrated on Germany and Europe. So now the younger generation in places like Armenia have a distorted view of Russia and the West – plus, the best job in town is to work for Soros.
By the way, I think you are missing part of the infowar strategy. People like Dugin are needed to make Putin seem like a moderate. One has to create a range of debate, and prepare the country for future decisions. If Russia does decide to intervene at some point, it will be useful to have Dugin or Zhirinovsky arguing to go all the way to Lvov so that Putin can seem like a moderate in stopping at Kiev and Odessa – if that is the strategy.
” But as I made my way from Kharkov in north-eastern Ukraine down to the Donetsk region not far from the fighting, I got a close look at the tense relationship between volunteer battalions and regular army forces, and the extremely fragile and fractured state of the Ukraine’s fighting force.
What I saw there did not speak well for Ukraine’s future military operations…”
http://pando.com/2014/09/25/refugees-neo-nazis-and-super-patriots-heading-into-the-ukrainian-war-zone/
Dear Saker,
You are forgetting the question of building the South Stream. That is why the fate of Syria for Russia is important: if the USA accomplishes the overthrown of al-Assad, then you can count the project for dead, because then apipeline from Qatar will run into Europe instead of the South Stream. Russia’s economy is poorly diversified, and this will sensibly diminish Russia’s revenues in the near future.
Saker,
Larchmonter445 said, “Brilliant, warts and all. I’d be happy to edit for you.”
He shares your breadth of perception; you might ask him to try.
In fairness to those who feel that the Kremlin’s policy shafts the residents of Novorossiya, here is a translation of an El-Murid piece on the current situation:
http://slavyangrad.org/2014/09/28/profits-before-glory/
Everyone has reason to be happy, except the residents of Novorossiya, who perhaps made a big mistake by voting their displeasure with Kiev.
Not saying it is the case, just that this is a common feeling. The counter-argument that the Kremlin had to sacrifice them for the bigger war is quite valid.
Thanks for a needed and lucid overview Saker.
However, is “regime change” in Kiev an adequately stated goal? A new regime may also be dysfunctional, dangerous, hostile, CIA/MI6/MOSSAD infested. What is needed is a regime change that is dedicated to normalization of relations with Russia, and this would seem difficult without underlying cultural change that sees a growing and significant number of Ukrainians seeing Russia in a positive light.
The notion that this can be accomplished in short order may seem preposterous if one summons up worst case scenarios, and cite historical examples of long term animosity. But there are also many examples of rapid transitions from all out war and hatred towards equanimity and cooperation.
The recent actions by Russia in asking that surrounded Ukrainian troops not be exterminated, and offering safe passage, is an example of a compassionate policy in the face of extreme provocation that can hardly fail to have some degree of positive ripple effect in Ukrainians feelings towards Russia.
This is not to argue that a tidal wave of pro-Russian Ukrainians will suddenly swamp the hostile Ukrainians, or that there will come a time when no Ukrainian hates Russia. But behaviours and tactics that encourage a trend away from hatred and towards equanimity and then reconciliation can be undertaken, and this approach will have an influence on the course of events; and the degree of influence will be related to the quality of the effort. It is not helpful to dismiss out of hand as impossible or implausible a rapid process towards mature relations. ‘ Daring is half way there’.
Regime change may happen over the next few years in various NATO countries which may also influence events towards sanity.
Re: Anonymous 27 September, 2014 21:38 and Libya, and Anonymous who provided
“Last Speech of Mu’ummar Qaddafi … before he was betrayed and killed with Russia’s public consent given to his killers”
As I understand it, Russia under Medvedev foolishly signed onto a UNSC no fly zone, not onto the horrific war of aggression that was actually implemented.
This analysis is a masterpiece! Thank you!
http://pando.com/2014/09/25/refugees-neo-nazis-and-super-patriots-heading-into-the-ukrainian-war-zone/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/02/22/what-really-happened-in-the-yom-kippur-war/
^^^Everybody needs to read this
Syria was betrayed by Egypt in the Yom Kippur war?
The war also ejected USSR out of the middle east affairs and solidified the petrodollar the de-facto world currency, thereby sealing USSR’s doom
USA’s clearly seeking a repeat scenario.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/02/22/what-really-happened-in-the-yom-kippur-war/
some good reading:
http://pando.com/2014/09/25/refugees-neo-nazis-and-super-patriots-heading-into-the-ukrainian-war-zone/
Masterfull!
The best part of Saker’s analysis is the “carefully defusing a bomb” analogy to describe how Russia is managing the West’s aggressive warlike posturing.
Sanctions are an act of war, but Russia will not shut off the gas to her Nato adversaries in response because that would be highly provocative and could very well lead to war–which Russia is trying very hard to prevent.
It was very smart to respond instead by counter-sanctioning the EU agriculture sector. As Saker always says, when Russia is faced with an existential threat, she concentrates.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Thanks Saker. That was a great analysis. It is really hard to find information on the internet that isn’t total horseshit, really, really hard. I appreciate the effort you put in.
All the best
Dear Saker,
what a superb analysis! This is what Germans call a “Punktlandung” … :-)
As regard to the Oligarchs, curiously enough, I just red two days ago in the commentary section of a German journal that Akmetov is in fact financing the reconstruction of the Donbass. The commentator said that he had this information from a building contractor personally known to him. I am sure, businessmen always know what is going on.
The treatment of the Oligarchs obviously follows a known Chinese proverb that says that “you must kill a chicken to scare the monkeys”. “The old saying holds that it’s smarter to punish or do away with a lesser animal (a chicken) as a lesson to a higher or more important one (a monkey) that you can’t afford to get rid of. Hopefully, the monkey will take the hint and fall into line.”
Meanwhile, as you will know, “Crimean parliament nationalizes Ukrainian tycoon Kolomoisky’s assets in Crimea”. http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/747817.
I think that some oligarchs fondly remember the time when they could make money by playing off both sides …
And in Germany:
“ZDF-chief Peter Frey rejects the criticism of the Ukraine-reporting of the ZDF. It had always reported “as objectively as possible”. In the ZDF Television Council, the member of parliament Gesine Lötzsch from “Die Linke” had complained that the report about the nationalist Ukrainian Azov Battalion with swastikas and SS rune on the steel helmet had been broadcasted without any comment” (remember, this news feed was shown in “Neues aus der Anstalt”). http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/zdf-chefredakteur-weist-kritik-zurueck-13177405.html.
There are no open Putin bashing articles in the German MSM since at last one week (I don’t know about the “Süeddeutsche” because I don’t read it anymore). Scared?
Best wishes
Angelika
Thank you for those 6500+ words! That is an article I can refer others to. It also gives me more hope than I’ve felt over the past week.
Dmitry Orlov noted that America is apt to be very dangerous over the next couple of years. A false flag would not be a surprise. It looks like Putin would be the best hope for dealing with that if it happens.
Paul II, when I saw that it was Illarionov, a truly deranged anthropogenic climate denialist in the only incarnation in which I have met him before, who revealed Putin’s dastardly machinations, I laughed so hard that…well, I’ll leave that to your imagination. The nut-case is probably wrangling for a job in Murdoch’s sewer or at some stink-tank like the Heritage of Cato nut-houses.
Paul II, when I saw that it was Illarionov, a truly deranged anthropogenic climate denialist in the only incarnation in which I have met him before, who revealed Putin’s dastardly machinations, I laughed so hard that…well, I’ll leave that to your imagination. The nut-case is probably wrangling for a job in Murdoch’s sewer or at some stink-tank like the Heritage of Cato nut-houses.
Another master piece from Saker, no pink coloured sunglasses, just a simple reality of the world delivered by the Saker who stands most of his time very firmly on the ground and not dreaming about the non existing clouds, maybe as the result of his previous experience working for the Empire.
As we read the pro and against comments is just absolutely beautiful sign of the coming change even the birth of this new Golden Age looks like a Cesarian section including the loss of lots of blood.
We can see daily more and more lies are revealed and even the Uncle Sam is still hanging on the MSM media are loosing their power dramatically even people who were never before interested in politics are starting to question the ethics of the politicians and what they are trying to present for us.
It will take time to understand the Slavic culture and it is OK too, world is beautiful because every single nation can bring something different at the same time very precious.
Definitely this master piece should be circulated as far and wide as possible.
Anonymous 22.39, there is an excellent article on human organ trafficking by Nancy Scheper-Hughes, an acknowledged expert on human organ trafficking in which, while observing that organ traffickers come from a wide range of groups and countries, she states that ‘Israel is at the top. It has tentacles reaching out world-wide’. Israeli organ traffickers’…have a pyramid system at work that is awesome….they have brokers everywhere, bank accounts everywhere; they’ve got recruiters, they’ve got translators, they’ve got travel agents who set up the visas’. The trade, which preys on the poor in poor countries, she says is ‘…paying the poor and hungry to slowly dismantle their bodies’. In a 2008 lecture Scheper-Hughes noted that when she interviewed Israeli organ traffickers their expressed motivations included greed, but also, ‘..revenge, restitution, reparation for the Holocaust. Some doctors and brokers had said to her that, ‘It’s kind of an ‘eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’. We’re going to get every single kidney and liver and heart that we can. The world owes it to us’. How in the name of mercy peasants and the destitute in India, China or Moldova become responsible for ‘The Holocaust’ is a question for experts in Talmudic logic. I urge you to read the whole article.
Anonymous 22.39, there is an excellent article on human organ trafficking by Nancy Scheper-Hughes, an acknowledged expert on human organ trafficking in which, while observing that organ traffickers come from a wide range of groups and countries, she states that ‘Israel is at the top. It has tentacles reaching out world-wide’. Israeli organ traffickers’…have a pyramid system at work that is awesome….they have brokers everywhere, bank accounts everywhere; they’ve got recruiters, they’ve got translators, they’ve got travel agents who set up the visas’. The trade, which preys on the poor in poor countries, she says is ‘…paying the poor and hungry to slowly dismantle their bodies’. In a 2008 lecture Scheper-Hughes noted that when she interviewed Israeli organ traffickers their expressed motivations included greed, but also, ‘..revenge, restitution, reparation for the Holocaust. Some doctors and brokers had said to her that, ‘It’s kind of an ‘eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’. We’re going to get every single kidney and liver and heart that we can. The world owes it to us’. How in the name of mercy peasants and the destitute in India, China or Moldova become responsible for ‘The Holocaust’ is a question for experts in Talmudic logic. I urge you to read the whole article.
Would “full de-Nazification” include having Tymoshenko as president? Of the current figures in the Ukraine (outside Novorossiya), how many are not Nazis?
The reason for asking is that Poroshenko is not really a Nazi, so the issue seems to be that Kiev needs to go back to how it was 20 years ago or something. The problem is not one individual, it is the whole scene in Kiev.
In other words, we need suggestions as to how to get the 20-100,000 Nazis in Kiev to leave. Pay them to move to Alberta?
@Oil in the Arctic
These are a few excerpts from an article of 2007:
Confessions of an “ex” Peak Oil Believer/By F William Engdahl, September 14, 2007
“An entirely alternative theory of oil formation has existed since the early 1950’s in Russia, almost unknown to the West. It claims conventional American biological origins theory is an unscientific absurdity that is un-provable. They point to the fact that western geologists have repeatedly predicted finite oil over the past century, only to then find more, lots more…
Not only has this alternative explanation of the origins of oil and gas existed in theory. The emergence of Russia and prior of the USSR as the world’s largest oil producer and natural gas producer has been based on the application of the theory in practice. This has geopolitical consequences of staggering magnitude…
In 1956, Prof. Vladimir Porfir’yev announced their conclusions: ‘Crude oil and natural petroleum gas have no intrinsic connection with biological matter originating near the surface of the earth. They are primordial materials which have been erupted from great depths.’ The Soviet geologists had turned Western orthodox geology on its head. They called their theory of oil origin the ‘a-biotic’ theory—non-biological—to distinguish from the Western biological theory of origins….
That radically different Russian and Ukrainian scientific approach to the discovery of oil allowed the USSR to develop huge gas and oil discoveries in regions previously judged unsuitable, according to Western geological exploration theories, for presence of oil. The new petroleum theory was used in the early 1990’s, well after the dissolution of the USSR, to drill for oil and gas in a region believed for more than forty-five years, to be geologically barren—the Dnieper-Donets Basin in the region between Russia and Ukraine….
While the American oil multinationals were busy controlling the easily accessible large fields of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran and other areas of cheap, abundant oil during the 1960’s, the Russians were busy testing their alternative theory. They began drilling in a supposedly barren region of Siberia. There they developed eleven major oil fields and one Giant field based on their deep ‘a-biotic’ geological estimates. They drilled into crystalline basement rock and hit black gold of a scale comparable to the Alaska North Slope…
Russian geophysicists used the theories of the brilliant German scientist Alfred Wegener fully 30 years before the Western geologists “discovered” Wegener in the 1960’s. In 1915 Wegener published the seminal text, The Origin of Continents and Oceans, which suggested an original unified landmass or “pangaea” more than 200 million years ago which separated into present Continents by what he called Continental Drift…
Up to the 1960’s supposed US scientists such as Dr Frank Press, White House science advisor referred to Wegener as “lunatic.” Geologists at the end of the 1960’s were forced to eat their words as Wegener offered the only interpretation that allowed them to discover the vast oil resources of the North Sea. Perhaps in some decades Western geologists will rethink their mythology of fossil origins and realize what the Russians have known since the 1950’s. In the meantime Moscow holds a massive energy trump card”.
This is strategic thinking and planning for the long term. Did you know that “On 27 June 1997, at the Saint Petersburg Mining Institute, guided by rector Vladimir Litvinenko, Putin defended his Candidate of Science dissertation in economics, titled ‘The Strategic Planning of Regional Resources Under the Formation of Market Relation'”?
The following part does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that stalling with a big Transdenistria is the right strategy:
“By the way, if the Ukrainian nationalists could fight the Soviet rule under Stalin and Krushchev for a full 13 years after the end of the war – how is it that there is no visible anti-Nazi resistance in Zaporozhie, Dnepropetrivsk or Kharkov? Yes, Luganks and Donetsk did rise up and take arms, very successfully – but the rest of the Ukraine? If you were Putin, would you be confident that Russian forces liberating these cities would receive the same welcome that they did in Crimea?”
-The USSR, perhaps foolishly, took in Galicia, a very pro-Nazi area. Russia may be fighting them a hundred years from now. It looks like Galicia has conquered Kiev, which is the heart of the current mess. But Galicians and those in Kharkov are not in the same situation. There was, and is, a huge infrastructure behind the Nazis. There isn’t much behind the Russians. In fact, the Kremlin says they aren’t Russians. Yes, Novorossiya is getting enough help to survive, but how much help are those in Kharkov getting?
The next thing is that Russian forces or the NAF will not receive the same kind of treatment that occurred in the Crimea. So what? The world is a messy place. As a wild guess, the numbers for a pro-Russian position might be: Crimea 95%; Novorossiya 90%; Kharkov 75%; Odessa 70%; Kiev 35%; and Moscow 75%. But it is a bit of a strawman to argue against a perfect world. Russia’s choices are almost all bad, and that may be why things got to such a disastrous state.
Thank you for this deep analysis. It is both refreshing and reassuring to know that there are at least a few voices of sanity still operating. Following this situation from the US has been frustrating, as it isn’t just the “usual suspects” who muddy the waters, but a number of otherwise intelligent people on the left who seem to lose it whenever Putin’s name comes up. You’d think he was Stalin reincarnated!
Many thanks for this article which is answering most of the questions I had concerning Putin.
It is a brillant analysis. I was getting really concerned by Putin’s behaviour related to Ukraine and Syria. Yours explanation is restoring my confidence in Puttin. Many thanks!
For serendipity
About Lavrov speaking english.
A couple of years ago, speaking about Syria on RT I heard him saying “for our partners situation in Syria is getting catastrophic”.
Then on french MSM it became “Lavrov said : situation in Syria is getting catastrophic”.
That’s how it works, unfortunately.
And, anyway, it is logical for an official to speak his country langage, words have official meaning this way.
Saker,
The (big) trouble with Putin is that he seems alone, I mean that if, one way or another, his opponents gets him out of the way there will be nobody else to continue what he has done. And life has always been very fragile, I’m sure somewhere somebody is trying to get rid of him.
The history of Finnish-Russo (Soviet U) relationship, so called real politics based of hard facts of geopolitics is one example explained in this essay. Just like there isn’t future for Ukraine backed by western power, there wasn’t, there isn’t and won’t never be secured future for western backed future for Finns.
Now for the first time since 1944 there are really dangerous western backed offensive to manipulate Finnish class of young policians ann folks to jump that dangerous train to make Finland a new western frontline basement though all majority of population are against this scaremongering mainstream propaganda.
“Russia’s long term end goal is to bring down the AngloZionis Empire. Russia’s mid term goal is to create the conditions for regime change in Kiev. Russia’s short term goal is to prevent the junta from over-running Novorussia.”
That long term goal is rather ambitious. Why want to bring down the West, if the West is busy bringing down itself, with its impossible dream (nightmare really) of keeping the old communist dream alive of wanting to create a world state?
The current Russian policy of restraint and not provoking the US too much and keeping lines to Europe (Germany) open is perfect. Meanwhile let China continue its rise towards becoming the worlds largest economy and let the US buffoon concentrate on them instead. Oh, and then there is the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, keeping the US busy on another huge front:
http://deepresource.wordpress.com/2014/09/28/why-is-the-us-still-in-afghanistan/
Like Dmitri Orlov has been predicting for over a decade or so: the US is going to bite the dust, just like the USSR did. Time is working in favor of Russia. Eventually, the rise of China and the downfall of the US will drive Russia and Europe into each others arms, after the European nationalists (beginning in France) have removed the US-oriented globalist/Davos crowds from power and the ‘Atlanticist Faith’ has been evaporated:
http://deepresource.wordpress.com/2014/08/15/karel-van-wolferen-on-the-atlanticist-faith/
Furthermore, I think that using Chechia as a template for future Christian-Islamic relations could be too optimistic. Chechia was crushed first into submission by Russia, before ‘friendly relations’ developed. I think that a sort of ‘clash of civilizations’ between the Christian and Islamic world is inevitable. Not necessarily resulting in a war, but in a sharp divide, yes.
http://deepresource.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/flames-of-war-isis-the-movie/
Kind regards,
Dutch
Dear Saker.
There is something I do not understand about your reasoning:
You say Russia does not want to go to war but there is a point at which Russia WILL got to war.
You say that the west, i.e. Usa are crazy enough to push to that point. OK.
Then you say that Nato is strong, superior in numbers but that Russia is superior in quality, capability and motivation in a war in Ukraine. So even if it is possible with a Nato victory, it is more probable with Russian victory. And even if the possible should occur instead of the probable, then Russia would use tactical nuclear weapons and win.
(Russia has bigger and more modern nuclear arsenal than all of Nato put together).
This is kind of the same but opposite to the relation between Nato and the Warsaw pact in the seventies and eighties.
IF you are right, and both Russia and Usa knows the above, why would it be wrong for Russia to intervene right now and liberate all of Novorossia from Odessa to Charkow? It would save a lot of people from dying in a protracted war, and the end-result will be the same!
Thank you for the analysis and keep up the great work.
Sincerely,
‘Afghan’
When will Germany libarate itself from the american occupation forces??
Mu’ummar Qaddafi was a putz but he did a lot for his country and Africa in general. The amount of money he threw at the continent is amazing. He made Libya into an Oasis in the desert. I learnt never to rely on all those 40 things you did not know because they are accurate only to an extent and only in situations. They are not absolute truths.
But I do know Saddam did a lot of good for Iraq and turned it into a modern society where the infant death rate used to be lower than the US with gas at 1/20th what the rest of us paid. We do know that neither Qaddifi or Saddam had billions squirreled away in the US and UK like other countries. What many dont know is that Libya has one of the largest reserves of white gold on the planet, unpolluted and that too in a desert. Its value is more than black gold and was one of the main reasons he was taken out. Controlling unpolluted water on that scale is like having your own oil well. You would think all of Africa would have benefited from this. But things like that are not for third world people. They are for corporations to sell. France is a big exporter of bottled water.. Makes you wonder why France was on the front lines in Libya. Qatar wanted the weapons to arm the terrorists sent to Syria and were the main backers. I might not have liked Qaddifi or Saddam but they did more for their people than anyone else. Real shame to see how the countries were 10 or 20 years ago compared to now. Europeans seems like they will never allow others to advance and live prosperous lives if they are not part of their alliance like S.Korea or Japan. Lavrov has good intentions in stating the equality of states. Now if only the so called free world would respect this so called equality.
1. There is no electricity bill in Libya; electricity is free for all its citizens.
2. There is no interest on loans, banks in Libya are state-owned and loans given to all its citizens at 0% interest by law.
3. Home considered a human right in Libya Gaddafi vowed that his parents would not get a house until everyone in Libya had a home. Gaddafi’s father has died while him, his wife and his mother are still living in a tent.
4. All newlyweds in Libya receive $60,000 Dinar (US$50,000) by the government to buy their first apartment so to help start up the family.
5. Education and medical treatments are free in Libya. Before Gaddafi only 25% of Libyans are literate. Today the figure is 83%.
6. Should Libyans want to take up farming career, they would receive farming land, a farming house, equipments, seeds and livestock to kick-start their farms all for free.
7. If Libyans cannot find the education or medical facilities they need in Libya, the government funds them to go abroad for it not only free but they get US$2,300/mth accommodation and car allowance.
8. In Libyan, if a Libyan buys a car, the government subsidized 50% of the price.
9. The price of petrol in Libya is $0.14 per liter.
10. Libya has no external debt and its reserves amount to $150 billion now frozen globally.
Great Man-Made River project in Libya $27 billion.
11. If a Libyan is unable to get employment after graduation the state would pay the average salary of the profession as if he or she is employed until employment is found.
12. A portion of Libyan oil sale is, credited directly to the bank accounts of all Libyan citizens.
13. A mother who gave birth to a child receive US$5,000
14. 40 loaves of bread in Libya costs $ 0.15
15. 25% of Libyans have a university degree
16. Gaddafi carried out the world’s largest irrigation project, known as the Great Man-Made River project, to make water readily available throughout the desert country.
Wow. I for one am thoroughly glad you wrote long and carefully enough for us to see beyond the visible. It’s a top notch analysis. Thank you so much for clarifying this multitude of issues.
Rasmus
Hey Saker,
May I ask you a simple question: what makes your thesis that Russia’s key interest in the Ukraine is “regime change” doable in the future when it wasn’t able to
secure at least a neutral regime in Kiev for the last decade?
What kind of logic is that? “Go two steps backward in order to go one step forward.”
Confused indeed!
Преведено на српски / Translated into Serbian:
The Saker: Одговор Русије на двоструку објаву рата | Ћирилизовано
Thanks
Thank you for another thoughtful, well written article. Your analysis has been helpful for me time and again. Please keep up the good work!
“why would it be wrong for Russia to intervene right now and liberate all of Novorossia from Odessa to Charkow?”
Because then you could not separate central Europe from NATO with God’s own crowbar. Because the Czechs, Slovaks, and Magyars would become little Polands. Because it would validate in the eyes of Europeans that the USA was right about Russian aggression.
I am continually amazed how various “anonymousians” here, think the right policy for Russia is to behave just like Kiev and blitzkrieg their opponents.
Why would you want Russia to waltz into the US built ‘cauldron’?
@Saker: wow, stunning analysis. Thank you!
Living in the USA, one goes almost literally insane, because almost nobody is able to filter out the lies and deceptions of the MSM.
Thus, once one has awakened to a model of reality that corresponds better to the information one now ingests, one has nobody to talk to. A sense of isolation sets in, and one feels quite anxious and depressed at times.
I can’t stress enough how brainwashed people here are.
Here’s one example:
Which man is truly human, and which is a fake, a puppet, an inhuman robot, Obama or Putin (clickable links there).
You can clearly see that Putin actually cries and expressed emotion, while Obama is a dead-inside robopath, if he even ever had anything in there.
My son understands this, because he is only 8. But adults are mostly far too brainwashed. Fake versus reality no longer has meaning for them.
Thanks for inspiring us with the idea that someone and some nation has a strategy to defeat the Empire of Lies.
I am still hoping to emigrate within 1 or 2 years, as the USA is now a nation of 90% robopaths and sociopaths. I hope we can get out before it starts consuming itself.
Good luck to you, Putin, and humans everywhere.
Amazing text!
Regards from Serbia,
where we are all expecting visit by president Putin in two weeks. I believe hundreds of thousands if not millions will be in the streets to greet him.
The Wend.
Dear Saker,
You are forgetting the question of building the South Stream. That is why the fate of Syria for Russia is important: if the USA accomplishes the overthrown of al-Assad, then you can count the project for dead, because then apipeline from Qatar will run into Europe instead of the South Stream.
—-
I have seen Iraqi Kurdish potential pipeline routes with its terminus in Haifa
Could you imagine the ultimate Anglo Zionist wet dreams.
The Yahuds would have the choke point on Arab oil
http://www.bushstole04.com/Iraqwar/haifa.htm
@WizOz
An absolutely outstanding book on the topic of the abiotic origins of oil is The Deep Hot Biosphere by Thomas Gold.
Gold is a sharp multidisciplinary scientist and makes his case very well. The book requires some basic understanding of chemistry, but nothing very technical. It’s a great read to anyone scientifically curious about this topic.
Just wanted to add my appreciation, Saker, for the important work you are doing.
Many blessings,
Andrew
Saker,
Great analysis, I’m with you 100%. It’s time for a false flag by the Anglo-Zionists. It could be nuking a city, a dirty bomb or it could be assassination of Obama, which would make a good pretext to bring in hard-core fascist dictatorship. There have been two intrusions to the White house in the last week or two. This may be seen as a threat against Obama from the Deep State: “You have let the war in Ukraine cool down. Ramp it up, and also start bombing Assad’s forces in Syria – or else.”
@MK Ngoyo “China is not expansionary it will not try and take Siberia.”
Take a look at the first map at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_minorities_in_China which clearly shows the original Chinese territories and the conquered lands added in the last 2000 years. Then add to that the current claims of China to Taiwan, to the whole of the South China Sea (and to some other smaller territories). This looks to me like an ever expanding culture. And add to that the Chinese hypercompetitive mindset and their feeling of racial superiority: this looks to me like a hegemon in the making. Meeting this culture will be a strong challenge – and Putin is correct to be /very/ cautious in his approach.
Plan A of the AZ Empire failed. Plan B of the AZ Empire failed. And the Imperial attempts at diplomacy are correctly labelled ‘comical’ in the Saker’s analysis.
Do you really believe they have a plan? I can find consistent patterns of behavior in the actions of the AZ Empire but that is not the same as a plan. And if you are looking for a clear, well thought through plan, one that’s been vetted at all levels, one with details and contingencies, I don’t think you can find one.
The American policy-making process is fragmented and feeble. Cliques and cabals can collude to set events in motion. So long as their ‘collusions’ have no particular cost and generally agree with American goals a small organized clique can get away with a lot.
The events discussed at this blog are life and death for Russia. For American policy makers the cost thus far has been zero. Nothing. The ‘loss’ of Crimea is an annoyance, nothing more. The outlook of America is utterly simplistic. We are the good guys. We wear the white hats. We are also the 800 pound gorilla in the room. We always win in the end. Doesn’t matter how badly we lost in Vietnam, how we were beaten and humiliated serially in Iraq, how badly we screw up every country we mess with. We are still the good guys and we always win.
Nothing that happens in Ukraine is going to change the American mindset. If we exclude Ukrainian Americans, Russian Americans and Jews not one American in a thousand can find Ukraine on a map. Or tell you what country Odessa is in. Or think of Kiev as anything but a style of preparing a chicken. Rooskies we know we hate. Anything that punishes Rooskies we like.
At university I knew two ROTC instructors who had served in the US Army inside Ukraine 1952-1954.Those two were always surrounded by a coterie of young Ukrainian American students who were OUN. Later when the wars in Yugoslavia began half the Croatian Americans I knew turned out to be Ustashe. Ustashe organized very openly around Chicago. Many Roman Catholic parishes posted Ustashe signs and symbols in the front yard. I once had a neighbor, a German from Konigsberg, who had many late-night yard parties that always concluded with a group sing of the Horst Wessel song. Loud and long they sang. This is all in Chicago, the place the American president and all his close advisors are from. If a Daley or an Axelrod or a Pritzker thinks about Eastern Europe at all, their prime impressions all come from the same sort of neighbors I’m thinking of. OUN and Ukraine are basically synonyms from this parochial perspective. Who makes policy? Zbigniev Brzinski is a Pole from Galicia. Nuland/Nudelman has a father from Odessa.
The real danger I see comes when America loses. As nothing at all has been invested walking away would not have to be hard. But pride may not allow that. Being humiliated by Rooskies may be even harder to stomach than defeat by cave-dwelling 7th century ragheads. And the expats are going to scream. For most purposes American democracy has stopped responding to anything but cash. When the millions of East European expats scream they may be heard. I will not expect a response smarter than Plan A or Plan B.
@Notsofast
China is neither expansionary nor imperialist. You are looking at a 2000 year history. Compare that to England, Russia, USA, Portugal, Spain, Italy all over the last 600 years only. Not even talking 2000 yrs!
The Chinese claim on Taiwan is entirely warranted. Taiwan was(is) an part of of China when Chiang Kai-Chek and his defeated nationalists fled there in 1949. In fact the only reason Taiwan was able to break away from China was US support for the Nationalists.
If you go back 2000+ years, compare the behavior of China and Rome when both were threatened by marauding attackers at their borders. Rome struck out and tried to conquer the world from Africa to Britain to India. They built garrisons everywhere suppressing the local population. Thats expansionary and imperialistic. China built the great wall.
Furthermore if China had been expansionary it, not Russia, would have Siberia.
Considering the present I see nothing in the behavior of China that suggests an imperial or expansionary ambition. The US is trying to create a storm in a tea cup re the South China sea. If you look at China’s behavior in Africa, Latin America and even Asia. They are striking commercial and resource deals without any attempt to acquire political control over those countries. This is in stark contrast to the west which always seeks political and military control over weaker countries with which it does business.
A customs Union with China is the way to go for Russia. Not immediately but within 10 or so years. . Immediately Russia should piggy back on China’s deals in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Do joint ventures etc.