Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Thu Apr 10, 2025 11:49 am

Military and political positioning
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 10/04/2025

Image

“ The Guardian used to recognize Azov as a far-right, neo-Nazi group. In 2022, they adopted the narrative that Azov has ‘evolved,’ but apparently it’s no longer worth mentioning, even as a notorious Azovite demands the resignation of Ukraine’s top general,” Moss Robeson, whose consistent monitoring of the Ukrainian far right has made him an indispensable commentator, wrote on social media on Wednesday. Robeson was referring to the interview published by one of the UK’s leading newspapers, which no longer bothers to provide any context when describing the Azov movement, born in 2014 from the men in black organized by Andriy Biletsky to collaborate with local and regional authorities in the repression and intimidation of the pro-Russian side , that is, those opposed to the government born out of the coup that culminated in Maidan.

Eleven years later, a movement that is the fruit of the most extreme right-wing nationalist organizations and whose leader was nicknamed the White Leader , not only because of the pun on his surname, has become completely normalized. Azov's racist tendencies have not disappeared, and just yesterday, Ukrainian historian Marta Havrysko published that “anti-Roma racism is openly promoted by one of Azov's ideologues, Oleksiy " Konsul " Reins, a fighter in the Third Assault Brigade. He calls International Roma Day "bullshit" and mocks the term "Roma," alluding to the more "accurate" term: Gypsy. Konsul tries to convince his thousands of followers that Ukraine has never been and never will be a multicultural country. He refers to tolerance as poison.”

During this time, Biletsky's small group of men in black and his initial core, the Borodach Battalion, from which both Denis Prokopenko of the Azov Brigade and Maksym Zhoryn of the Third Assault Brigade originate, have evolved into two brigades with a significant presence in the Armed Forces of Ukraine that are on the verge of expanding again to become corps, small armies whose origins have become an anecdote that resurfaces periodically and is quickly buried on the grounds that they are no longer ideological units but mere military structures. The growth of these years has also left a paradox. The one that has retained the original name, Azov, is the brigade that was defeated at Mariupol and captured at Azovstal, whose connection to Andriy Biletsky, leader of the movement of which the brigade was the military arm, is no longer direct. Now a colonel, Biletsky is now the leader of a brigade, the Third Assault Brigade, which does not bear the Azov name, although it has retained a modernized version of the wolfsangel that has always been the group's symbol. Because of their ties to far-right paramilitary movements, both brigades were included last year under the U.S. Defense Appropriations Act, which prohibits arming, training, or funding Biletsky's Third Assault Brigade or Prokopenko's Azov Brigade.

This last brigade includes Bohdan Krotevych, who, as The Guardian writes , “resigned as chief of staff of the Azov Brigade in February in part to be able to talk.” Captured, like his commander Prokopenko and the backbone of the powerful brigade after the surrender of Azovstal, Krotevych was handed over to Turkey as part of a prisoner exchange. In the summer of 2023, Erdoğan handed the POWs over to Zelenskyy, who, according to the agreement, were to remain in the country until the end of the war. As the British outlet notes, “as a former POW, he is one of the relatively few serving soldiers who has the right to leave.” The lack of recruits to replace the exhausted troops, the general mobilization, and the absence of demobilization plans for men who have been fighting for years, means that in Ukraine they have to remain in their posts and cannot leave the country.

Krotevych's relevance is not limited to Ukraine's idealization of Azovstal's defense since the spring of 2022, but to the fact that he has become one of the most influential figures in the Ukrainian Armed Forces due to or despite that defeat. Azov and the rest of the Ukrainian units found themselves besieged in Mariupol in the face of the Russian advance and entrenched themselves in the industrial complex owned by Rinat Akhmetov, a Soviet factory equipped to withstand the type of war being waged in the city. Azovstal protected the Ukrainian soldiers until they surrendered. Krotevych's relevance was first clearly perceived in his role in the dismissal of General Yury Sodol as commander of the Joint Forces Operation last summer. At the time, Krotevych accused Sodol of having caused the defeat at Mariupol, a claim that had both a short-term effect—the general was removed from a senior post—and a medium-term effect, when Sodol was dismissed from the Armed Forces of Ukraine citing a medical report. Krotevych's complaint, which prompted a wave of opportunistic messages supporting the accusations, proved decisive.

Even as Azov's former chief of staff, Krotevych remains influential and has acquired a high status within the Ukrainian military establishment , which is increasingly dominated by highly ideological individuals with far-right tendencies. This makes the interview published yesterday by The Guardian particularly relevant , in which Krotevych directly targets Oleksandr Syrsky. The interview coincides with Ukrainian reactions to a lengthy article published by The New York Times , which acknowledges the proxy nature of the war against Russia, highlights the role of the United States in the planning and execution of various Ukrainian defensive and offensive operations, and gives American generals credit for the successes while blaming the Ukrainians for the failures. The section of the article dealing with the failed 2023 counteroffensive is notable, placing much of the blame for the failure to achieve its objectives on the insistence of Oleksandr Syrsky, then commander of the ground forces, in fighting for the recapture of Artyomovsk, lost by Ukraine just days before the start of the Ukrainian offensive operation in Zaporozhye. In his reaction to the publication, Valery Zaluzhny, now Ukraine's ambassador to the United Kingdom but at the time Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, also tries to exonerate himself by pointing the finger at his subordinate.

“The General Staff ordered that when a soldier finishes his shift [on the front], he cannot rest in the rear, he must rest 50 meters from the front,” Krotevych complains, emphasizing the impact of the FVP drones, which can pose extreme danger to troops positioned so close to the battle. “They still have the mentality of fighting in the Second World War,” he said. “They still refuse to recognize new means of attacking targets.” He said the army commander was relying on regulations issued in 2016 to justify forcing soldiers so far forward, a time when “war was completely different,” The Guardian writes, before focusing on the direct accusation against the current commander.

“Krotevych said: ‘Syrskyi has to go,’ arguing that the military commander-in-chief, appointed in February 2024, had failed to break through the Russian lines except at Kursk in August, where he had found ‘the weakest point’ and executed a simple ‘linear attack,’” The Guardian continues . Krotevych, who according to the article understood the point of the attack on Kursk – after all, its objective remains ‘to destabilize Russia so that it cannot wage war again’ – claims that Syrsky focused excessively on the Kursk adventure, to the detriment of Donbass, where ‘there were huge problems’ and that the choice was made to ‘stay there too long,’ giving Russia the opportunity to inflict ‘significant casualties’ on Ukraine. The Kursk operation, successful only in its initial stages, was somewhat suicidal from the moment Ukraine had to dig in without any possibility of making progress and achieving a strategic result to exploit in a negotiation.

The result, for Krotevych, is that Ukraine has failed to go beyond the initial maneuver, while "the enemy somehow manages to break through our lines every month." "Syrsky isn't trying to apply the science and art of war," the Azov member charges, adding that the general has "only two functions: if the enemy attacks, you simply put more people there. And if the enemy is outflanking you, you withdraw your people and say you care about people's lives." The accusation against Syrsky is direct, although misleading, since this has been Ukraine's modus operandi not only in Artyomovsk or Avdeevka, but throughout the entire war, from Debaltsevo in 2014 to Severodonetsk and Lisichansk, under Zaluzhny's command, in 2022. And even Artyomovsk, where all the blame is placed on Oleksandr Syrsky, occurred when Zaluzhny was commander-in-chief, so he must also bear his share of the responsibility, as does his subordinate, who proposed the plan, and President Zelensky, who not only approved it, but also rewarded the general's performance by promoting him to top commander.

At a time when all actors are seeking to position themselves politically in anticipation of possible elections, it is significant that people like Krotevych are publicly aligning themselves with the positions of Zaluzhny, considered Zelensky's main political rival, while directly blaming all the military misfortunes on Oleksandr Syrsky, selected to lead the Ukrainian army largely for his closeness to the president and his willingness to accept offensive plans with clearly political intentions at the risk of incurring heavy losses.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/04/10/posic ... -politico/

Google Translator

******

From Cassads's telegram account:

Army without paper.pdf
15.2 MB
Digital Front: SAP Will Write Off Everything

Instead of bulletproof vests — a SAP license. Instead of mobilized people — ERP implementation. While the soldiers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are senselessly dying at the front, the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine proudly reports: we have become a paperless army.

Yes, perhaps soon all logistics and supplies in the army will be through SAP. And if earlier you could just write a report, now you have to submit an application, wait for approval, receive an e-order, go through the approval of the OCZ and CRZ, wait for confirmation and get... well, at best, a refusal. But in digital format.

Key "successes": — Refusal of paper registers: now even the loss of property is in electronic form
— Control of deliveries in "real time" (only without deliveries)
— The needs of the military are now formed in one click (and disappear in two)
— Everything that could previously be resolved in a day can now be automated for months

SAP works. The main thing is that it will generate a beautiful report. Even if nothing was delivered, and the warehouses are empty.

In the photo, 60 developers in a warm room in Kiev. None of them are on the front lines, but all of them are heroes of PowerPoint and KPI. Each has their own function: someone in logistics, someone in digital management of the grenade life cycle. And all in SAP.

And at the front? At the front, there is dirt, blood and "Cossacks" falling apart after 400 km.
But we are a digital army! NATO applauds. And the soldiers die or survive. As best they can.

We are Bereginya . We monitor every megabyte that the Armed Forces of Ukraine digitalizes.

***

Colonelcassad
🎖🎖 The Kiev regime, in violation of the Russian-American agreements to cease strikes on energy facilities for 30 days from March 18 of this year, continued unilateral attacks on Russian energy infrastructure.

Over the past 24 hours, the Ukrainian Armed Forces attacked Russian energy facilities four times.

- In the Kursk region:
on April 8 at 08:18, as a result of deliberate shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the high-voltage line of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre - Kurskenergo was disconnected due to broken wires in the spans of the supports. Household consumers in the village of Bolshoe Soldatskoye in the Bolshesoldatsky district were left without electricity.

On April 8 at 13:20, as a result of deliberate shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the high-voltage line of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre - Kurskenergo was disconnected due to broken wires in the spans of the supports. Household consumers in the villages of Kamyshnoye and Krupets in the Belovsky district were left without electricity.

- In the Zaporizhia region:
on April 8 at 22:39, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian attack UAV on the Botievskaya wind power plant, the wind power plant was damaged. The plant reduced its operating capacity by 3.25 MW.

- In the Rostov region:
on April 9 at 03:50, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV, the high-voltage line of the Rosseti Yug PJSC - Rostovenergo branch was disconnected due to damage to the wire. About 400 household consumers in the Kamensky district were left without power supply.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Russian military intelligence bot
April 9, 15:00

Image

Information for residents of Nazi-occupied Ukraine.

Russian military intelligence bot

Russian military intelligence appeals to the people of Ukraine, whose hearts and minds have not yet been infected by the vile propaganda of Western executioners who have turned Ukraine into a death camp.

Our army is liberating the cities of Ukraine. In Donetsk, Lugansk, Mariupol and other liberated cities, people live in peace and safety, they are not forced to hide from the TCC hunting squads that take men to certain death, in the cities we have liberated, people are building lives for themselves and their families, building a future free from death, poverty and lies. If you want your city to soon be under the rule of which you are citizens and people, and not cheap meat used to realize the commercial interests of Western concentration camp masters, then write to our bot.

We are interested in any information concerning the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the Main Intelligence Directorate, the National Guard, units of foreign fighters and other departments and structures serving the occupation government of Zelensky. We understand the state that the people of Ukraine are in now, so for effective help to us, we offer a generous financial reward, which will be enough to leave the territory of the concentration camp.

This bot is the only official bot of the Russian military intelligence, keeping in touch with us through it, you will receive the maximum level of security for your good deeds.

Also, we appeal to the administrators of the communities waging an information war against the Western occupation forces: Help us in distributing the bot, thus you will make a significant contribution to bringing the end of the war closer and the liberation of the enslaved peoples.

Write to us:

@oko_saurona2_robot

Sincerely, Russian military intelligence.

P.S. Distribution is welcome, especially for residents of Ukraine.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9772555.html

General Popov will be returned to the front
April 9, 13:23

Image

Former commander of the 58th Army, General Popov, will be returned to the front after all. Apparently, the open letter to Putin reached its addressee.
The general will be released from the pretrial detention center and sent to the front as a commander of an assault detachment. He will not be reinstated in his general's position (according to his lawyer). Last year, he was officially dismissed from the armed forces. Case

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9772325.html

Extension is not possible
April 10, 10:57

Image

Extension is not possible

The European Commission will not extend trade benefits for products from Ukraine, which expire on June 5, 2025. This was stated by EU Commissioner for Agriculture Christoph Hansen, quoted by Politico.

Europe will cancel the benefits that allowed Kiev to supply agricultural products on favorable terms. Emergency access to the European market will last for another two months.

"The current measures will be canceled in any case. The Council has made it clear that an extension is not possible," Hansen emphasized.

In 2022, the EU suspended tariffs on all goods coming from Ukraine for a year to help Kiev increase export volumes. However, this step hit local farmers - especially producers from Poland, France, Hungary and Slovakia. They claimed that cheaper Ukrainian products flooded local markets. Despite their protests, the zero tariff regime was extended first until June 2024, and then until 2025.

https://lenta.ru/news/2025/04/09/v-evro ... produktov/ - zinc

The Trump factor and the question of the future restoration of what will remain of Ukraine.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9774070.html

Google Translator

*****

Petka the wiretapper

Assessing Azovites. Zaluzhny the peacebringer, Arestovych the clown, and Poroshenko the blackmailer. Black suitcases of cash from Moscow. 'Russian spy' wins again in Kiev courts
Events in Ukraine
Apr 09, 2025

Yesterday’s article had a look at recent polls on trust towards various political figures in Ukraine. Ex chief of the army Zaluzhny came first, followed by Zelensky, head spook Budanov, and leader of the Azov movement Biletsky.

Today, some more relevant news emerged - Bohdan Krotevych, another top Azov figure, was interviewed by the Guardian.

Image

The article was a big takedown of current head of the army, Oleksandr Syrsky. Syrsky was placed in charge of the army to replace Zaluzhny back in early 2024. The idea was that Syrsky, a charisma vacuum yes-man, would not present the same problems that the excessively popular and independent Zaluzhny did. But Syrsky, nicknamed ‘the butcher’ for his love of sending troops on suicide missions, got into plenty of his own scandals. I wrote about Krotevych’s big 2024 showdown against Sodol, a top Syrsky general for his butchering ways (not against the Russians), back here.

Image
Syrsky

This was manipulated by Zelensky PR-woman Bezuhla as a valiant struggle against the corrupt army bureaucracy, and Zelensky soon fired Sodol. But now Krotevych is going after Syrsky - Zelensky doesn’t have many options. I’ve written before about rumours he wants to get rid of Syrsky too, but it hardly seems wise to keep recycling army leaders like this. At some point, he’d have to make do on the constantly repeated Azovite slogan on the need for ‘motivated young nationalists in charge’ - ie, the Azovites. At that point, if Zelensky found Zaluzhny unbearably politically attractive, wait until a young nationalist with a sexy beard is in charge of the army…

Image
Another Krotevych photo

Here’s what Krotevych had to say about Syrsky in today’s Guardian article:

“I started receiving from the high army command, from the commander-in-chief HQ, orders that became more and more borderline criminal, which I, in my good conscience, was unable to fulfil and follow,” Krotevych said.

the veteran told the Guardian that he had “70% decided to quit” the Ukrainian military because commanders were still “asking of soldiers things which they wouldn’t ask of themselves”.


He also criticizes Syrsky for placing soldiers in danger of Russian missile and drone strikes. This has been a constant problem in Ukraine, constantly resulting in massacres of both recruits at training centres and other units. For instance, on March 3 Ukraine’s army command admitted that a Russian missile attack had killed 19 soldiers at a rear unit. Following public uproar, a criminal investigation was opened. No doubt it will be just as successful in catching the culprits as usual. Anyway, here’s what Krotevych had to say about the problem:

“The general staff ordered that when a soldier’s shift [on he frontline] is over, they can’t rest in the rear, they have to rest 50 metres from the front,” Krotevych said, which he added was typically at a platoon forward observation base.

Forcing soldiers to recover so close to the front put “all these people in grave danger”, he argued. He accused the army command of being “criminally guilty of not understanding the principles of war right now” and in particular “how FPV drones work, how glide bombs work”.

He said similar thinking affected the positioning of larger headquarters. At one point, Krotevych said, Azov’s brigade headquarters was itself struck, after the unit had been “asking, insisting” that it be moved back because Russian forces were advancing. “They specifically told us no, and we got a direct hit.”


Finally, Krotevych had no praise for the Kursk operation, which he blames on Syrsky:

Krotevych said: “Syrskyi must go,” arguing that the military commander-in-chief, appointed in February 2024, had failed to break the Russian lines except into Kursk in August, where he had found “the weakest spot” and executed a simple “linear strike”.

Though Krotevych said the attack into Russia had made sense at the time, he accused Syrskyi of being overly focused on the attack “when we had huge issues” defending Pokrovsk in southern Donbas and “remaining there too long” as Moscow has gradually rolled up the salient, with Ukrainian forces incurring significant losses.


It’s hard not to see this as an attack on Zelensky as well. As I said, Syrsky is seen as Zelensky’s yes-man. While Zelensky’s media mouthpiece, the MP Mariana Bezuhla has been increasingly criticizing Syrsky, this is just her usual strategy - Zelensky is doing his best, but it’s these awful corrupt Soviet generals that are to blame. Likewise, it is absurd to pretend that the Kursk operation was simply Syrsky’s invention. Kursk all stinks of Zelensky - and London’s, as Kit Klarenberg points out - beloved strategy of PR warfare.

So now we get to the end of article - politics. Krotevych swears off political ambitions - Freud’s teachings on denial are relevant here. Instead, he apparently plans to get into the international man of mystery game:

Krotevych said he had no intention of entering politics himself. “I just want to destabilise Russia so it could not make war again,” he said.

The former soldier now intends to set up a private company, Strategic Operational and Intelligence Agency (Soia), obtaining intelligence on Russia, Belarus, North Korea and other countries unfriendly to Ukraine and acting as an expert liaison with the west.


And guess where he’ll be staying:

As part of that work, Krotevych said he hoped to spend time in London, though he stressed he was not aligned with Ukraine’s ambassador to the UK, Valerii Zaluzhnyi, a predecessor to Syrskyi, who is considered a potential future candidate for Ukraine’s presidency.

I found this particularly funny to read. Krotevych here rejects any talk of linking up with Zaluzhny - but in an interview from only a few months ago to a top USAID-funded publication in Ukraine, Krotevych boasted that he’d been hanging out with Zaluzhny in London, and that he even gifted an antique British army knife to the general. Meanwhile, their wives had their own date together. Seems quite the alignment to me. In the same July 2024 interview, Krotevych promised that the public would be ‘hearing more of Zaluzhny soon’.

So I’ve taken Mr Krotevych’s advice - let’s have a look at Zaluzhny’s political prospects: why he has better chances than Zelensky to end the war, and a titillating new story about how Zelensky apparently tried to arrest him in 2023. This will also allow me to let loose against the insufferable Aleksei Arestovych.

But we won’t stop there - next, ex-president Poroshenko’s alliance with Zaluzhny, and Poroshenko’s own political hopes and threats. Zelensky has crafted up a new and impressively ridiculous scandal about Poroshenko’s black suitcases of cash flown in from Moscow - for their part, the president’s office is apparently confident in their gambit.

This will lead us onto an analysis of Poroshenko’s links with Trump, and the reasons why Trump is probably not too keen on the so-called ‘Petka the wiretapper’. As usual, it will bring us to a discussion of the deep politics of Russiagate.

Finally, some even deeper politics - how some of Ukraine’s most experienced ‘pro-Russian’ political operators continue surviving in the capital, with one of the toughest representatives having just defeated several more pro-western, Poroshenko-affiliated politicians and media publications in court. They have been forced to pay him tens of thousands of hryvnia to atone for spreading calumny about his being a Russian agent.

This will lead onto my conclusion on Zelensky’s future - perhaps not as bleak as some may hope, at least for Zelensky (for the country, another matter). Become a paid subscriber to find out more.

(Paywall with free option.)

https://eventsinukraine.substack.com/p/ ... wiretapper

*****

Brief report from the front, April 9, 2025

Report by Marat Khairullin with illustrations by Mikhail Popov.
Zinderneuf
Apr 09, 2025

Image

In the Kursk region, Ukrainian Armed Forces continue attempts to hold positions on Russian territory near the settlements of Oleshnya and Gornal (Hornal on the map), where intense fighting persists. The enemy is reinforcing the area around the Oleshnya farmstead while attempting to establish a layered defensive line along Guevo-Gornal, exploiting the terrain—hills, woodlands, and the Psel River—and using the Gornal Monastery and Mount Fagor as strongholds. The mountain’s elevation provides the enemy with observation over Russian troop movements.

Mount Fagor is a unique landmark, ranked among Russia’s top ten most scenic locations. Following the monastery’s restoration in the early 2000s, a memorial cross was erected atop the mountain.

Image
Mount Fagor

Image
View from the mountain to the Psel River.

Image
A cross on Mount Fagor and 13 pine trees growing in a group of twelve trees and one separately, symbolizing Christ and his 12 apostles.

Image
St. Nicholas Belogorsky Monastery in the village of Gornal near Mount Fagor.

Military reports indicate that Russian forces near Gornal are not only engaging Ukrainian militants but have also clashed with Colombian mercenaries. Intercepted radio communications include English and Polish voices.

The Russian advance in border areas is hindered by dense minefields, with engineering units working continuously to clear them.

In Sumy region, where Russian troops are pushing back the enemy and securing sections of the border, assault operations have begun near Loknya, northeast of Yunakovka. Fighting is currently concentrated in the settlement’s center.

Near Veselovka, the AFU launched a counterattack but were repelled, suffering heavy casualties from combined artillery and drone strikes.

Image
ЛБС 01.11.2024=Line of Combat Contact November 1st, 2024. ЛБС 01.01.2025=Line of Combat Contact January 1st, 2025. Зона Активности=Zone of Activity.

In the Liman direction, Russian forces are strengthening positions west of Makeevka and advancing across a broad front near Katerinovka and Novolyubovka. The AFU are attempting to stall the offensive by deploying poorly trained conscripts born in 2006-2007.

Combat has begun for control of Novoe, a settlement large enough that it will serve as a staging ground for further Russian advances.

Simultaneously, Russian units are advancing toward Zelenaya Dolina, securing several strongpoints on its outskirts. In the coming days, efforts will likely focus on consolidating the frontline from Zelenaya Dolina to Grekovka (Hrekovka).

Image

On the Ocheretine axis, Russian troops have pushed north of Arkhangelskoe (Arhanhelskoe on the map) and launched an assault on Kalinovo. Meanwhile, clearing operations have intensified in the Tarasovka-Novgorodskoe (New York) pocket, aiming to eliminate remaining Ukrainian resistance.

https://maratkhairullin.substack.com/p/ ... ront-april

******

No solution but the dissolution of the terrorist Kiev regime

Lucas Leiroz

April 10, 2025

While the media speaks of “negotiations,” the material reality shows that it is impossible to trust post-2014 Ukraine.

Since the 2014 coup and under the command of the illegitimate Maidan junta regime, Ukraine has increasingly exhibited signs of a terrorist state. Under the guise of defending “European values,” the Kiev regime has consistently violated international law, adopted prohibited methods of warfare, and openly supported neo-Nazi formations.

As well known, in recent years, Ukraine has committed war crimes and terrorism against civilians, especially in Donbass and the Belgorod and Kursk regions, where the Ukrainian army and nationalist groups carry out barbaric attacks against cities, destroying vital infrastructure such as homes, schools, and hospitals. Thousands of civilians, including children, have lost their lives in artillery bombardments, justified by the Kiev regime as part of a “fight against separatists/invaders.” However, the evidence reveals that this has always been a deliberate terrorist campaign against the civilian population, not a legitimate military confrontation.

Furthermore, the Ukrainian regime resorts to the use of prohibited weapons such as cluster munitions and landmines, particularly in residential areas, which is strictly prohibited by international conventions. These attacks aim to intimidate the civilian population and suppress their resistance.

Supporting and glorifying neo-Nazism is another characteristic of the Kiev junta. Groups such as the Azov Regiment, the Right Sector, the National Corps, and Kraken, all openly neo-Nazi, are integrated into Ukraine’s security forces. These groups are responsible for numerous war crimes, including torture, executions, and the murder of civilians and prisoners of war, and instead of being punished, they are celebrated by the Kiev regime.

Faced with a growing lack of soldiers willing to fight against their Russian brothers, Ukraine has recruited international mercenaries, including extremists from the Middle East and European far-right groups. These mercenaries, including militants from the “Chechen” separatist battalion Sheikh Mansur, are involved in terrorist activities such as sabotage, kidnappings, and extrajudicial executions.

In addition to crimes within its own territory, Ukraine also carries out terrorist attacks outside its borders. Examples include attacks on Russian soil, such as the explosion on the Crimean Bridge and the murders of Russian civilians like Daria Dugina and Vladlen Tatarsky. Similarly, sabotage against energy infrastructure continues to occur even after ceasefire agreements mediated by Trump. These actions reflect Kiev’s terrorist war strategy, with its intelligence services and affiliated groups acting as classic terrorists, putting innocent civilians at risk.

The physical elimination of opponents is also encouraged by the regime, with the murder of pro-Kremlin activists, journalists, and even former political allies. The Ukrainian GUR (Main Intelligence Directorate), in a shocking move, has openly begun recruiting terrorists to carry out attacks on Russian territory. This recruitment is a clear demonstration of the intensification of the regime’s terrorist practices.

Despite the evident war crimes and terrorism committed by Kiev, Western countries continue to arm and finance it, turning a blind eye to the atrocities being committed. This double standard in Western politics is evident: while similar actions by Russia are immediately labeled as “aggressions,” attacks on civilians perpetrated by Ukraine are described as a “fight for democracy.”

Given these facts, the international community (mainly the European Union, following the US recent example) must question the true meaning of “Western democracy” and reconsider its unrestricted support for a terrorist regime like Kiev’s. The world must recognize the Ukrainian regime as criminal and cease its support for its terrorist actions. However, as Western goodwill cannot be relied upon, Russia must continue to act decisively to neutralize the enemy.

The historical experience of post-2014 Ukraine shows that Kiev is a terrorist state, with which it is simply impossible to negotiate. The neo-Nazi regime understands only the language of force – and it is through force that the Ukrainian problem will be solved.

The only viable solution to the conflict is the dissolution of the existing Ukrainian state through a combination of regime replacement and territorial reconfiguration.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... ev-regime/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Fri Apr 11, 2025 1:45 pm

The importance of American weapons
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 11/04/2025

Image

As previously announced, the United States and the Russian Federation met yesterday in Istanbul to continue the dialogue process aimed at restoring diplomatic relations between Washington and Moscow, reducing tensions between the two major nuclear powers, and moving toward a resolution to the war in Ukraine. The meeting followed the confirmation of the exchange of a Russian-American citizen imprisoned in Russia and a Russian-German citizen imprisoned in the United States. Gestures of goodwill and signs that the dialogue is yielding some results appear periodically, although they contrast with the lack of tangible progress toward a comprehensive ceasefire or even strict compliance with the mutual agreement not to attack energy infrastructure in Russia and Ukraine. The blockage in finding a political and diplomatic path to peace is frustrating Donald Trump, who has publicly expressed his anger with Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky, but it inspires a certain amount of confidence in the Ukrainian press, which favors continuing the fight until Ukraine is in a position of strength to negotiate.

From this perspective, Ukraine's needs are not to adopt a demanding but reasonable stance and remain within diplomacy, but rather to strengthen its position to prolong the military path. In this sense, doubts about the US stance are one of the main concerns of the army leadership and the government. "The support of partners, of course, plays a crucial role. Especially when we received aid from the United States. Now, US aid has decreased. And the main help comes from our partners in Europe," Oleksandr Syrsky said in an interview with LB.UA on Wednesday , before emphasizing the need to increase domestic production. "We must also rely on our own forces. And we have achieved successes in artillery production. Quite significant successes in electronic warfare. We are making progress; our partners are already studying our experience," he boasted.

Despite the growing emphasis on Ukraine's industrial successes, the external supply of arms, ammunition, financing, and intelligence remains Kyiv's top priority. And while increased European assistance offsets some of the US contribution, it is a recognized fact that once the material committed during the Biden era is exhausted, Ukraine will struggle to obtain some of its most important weapons, which are not produced in Europe. In other words, Kyiv would need the United States to continue supplying them, or to agree to sell them to European countries, which would then donate them to Ukraine, or for the Ukrainian government itself to acquire the material.

The importance of the United States in providing the necessary material to continue fighting this high-intensity war was once again highlighted by Volodymyr Zelensky's statements last Wednesday, in which he opened the door to the acquisition of US weapons against payment. For about a year, Ukraine has been aware that US assistance would not always be free. Even before Donald Trump's victory seemed an option, it was Joe Biden who, with the invaluable assistance of Senator Lindsey Graham, forced the reluctant Ukrainian president to accept the possibility that in the future some of Washington's military assistance could be provided in the form of credit. Zelensky tried to reject this possibility, although the reality of the US-Ukraine relationship, in which Washington holds all the cards, left kyiv no choice but to accept. At the time, the White House was trying to overcome the obstacle of the blocking Republican minority, which delayed the approval of a new military aid package for Ukraine for weeks. Presenting the aid as a loan that could be recovered later was a way to facilitate Congressional approval of the measure. Ukraine's acceptance was based, in part, on the conditions set for repayment of the loans, which in reality remained non-repayable aid.

The situation changed the moment it became clear that there would be no second Biden administration and that the risk of a Trump return was a reality. From this fear arose the Victory Plan , which put Ukraine's natural resources on the table for exploitation by privileged allies, a point that Donald Trump has taken literally and has used to demand that Ukraine return all US military assistance (much overstated). In his confusion about the causes of the war and its true status, Donald Trump has been clear in his desire to ensure that supplies to Ukraine no longer represent a burden on the US budget—if indeed they are, given the magnitude of its military spending (916 billion in 2024 compared to the approximately 65 billion that Washington has provided in three years in military assistance). "There's no appetite to pass a new military assistance package for Ukraine," said Mike Johnson, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, in February, echoing Donald Trump's stance.

Even for Zelensky, always optimistic about his ability to negotiate a more favorable deal, it has become clear that the only option for continuing to obtain US weapons is to purchase equipment. “We handed the American side a large package that we want to buy. Buy in one form or another,” Zelensky stated, adding that there are “many different formats and tools that we are ready for. We were willing to find both $30 billion and $50 billion for a suitable package.” “For us, it’s a kind of security guarantee. How do we connect our agreement with a security guarantee? Very simple. Give us the package and we will pay for it. We view this package, which includes air defense and other critical tools that we urgently need, as a security guarantee. That’s how it all fits together,” the Ukrainian president added. kyiv sees extreme militarization, not negotiation, as the way to guarantee its future security and is not afraid to incur further debt or demand more assistance from its other allies, primarily the European Union, to acquire the military equipment with which to continue fighting now and act as a deterrent in the future.

“There is an agreement, we will provide money. Accordingly, (if) you want (we can pay) this (Reconstruction Investment Fund) or you (the United States) directly. It makes no difference to us,” Zelensky added. With these words, the Ukrainian president once again put the minerals agreement, of which this fund is a part, back on the table. Even though it has not been signed, Ukraine still seeks to renegotiate the treaty presented by the United States, which includes a US veto power, priority in obtaining benefits, and does not include security guarantees or clarify how much of the funds received there will return to Ukraine for reconstruction. To this end, Ukraine has assembled a legal team of experts in which, according to the president of the Kyiv School of Economics, it will invest $2.7 million, which shows the difficulty Kyiv finds itself in when it comes to legally protecting itself from its main ally. Even so, Zelensky is willing to contribute not only a significant portion of the revenue from mineral extraction to this fund, but also payments for arms purchases. It seems no coincidence that Ukraine has shown its willingness to contribute even more than the United States has demanded to this common fund when it seeks to renegotiate the terms. “If this is a true partnership, then we have to talk about parity. It has to be 50-50,” Zelensky stated. Ukraine is seeking to contribute another 30 or 50 billion to this fund in the hope that some of the money used to purchase weapons will be recovered in the form of reconstruction funding, something that will hardly convince Donald Trump.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/04/11/la-im ... unidenses/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Summary of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation as of 10 April 2025

- Units of the North force group in the Belgorod direction inflicted defeat on formations of a mechanized, airborne assault brigade, a coastal defence brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and two territorial defence brigades in the areas of the settlements of Prokhody, Turya, Krasnopolye, Ugroedy and Miropolskoye in the Sumy region. The enemy's losses amounted to 105 servicemen, an armoured combat vehicle, two vehicles and two field artillery guns.

- Units of the West force group improved the situation along the forward edge. They inflicted defeat on the manpower and equipment of two mechanized brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and two territorial defence brigades in the areas of the settlements of Makeyevka in the Luhansk People's Republic, Dvurechanskoye in the Kharkiv region, Yampol and Kirovsk in the Donetsk People's Republic. The Armed Forces of Ukraine lost more than 250 servicemen, three vehicles and an artillery gun. An ammunition depot has been destroyed.

– Units of the Southern group of forces have improved their tactical position. They have defeated formations of two mechanized brigades, an airmobile brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and a territorial defense brigade in the areas of the settlements of Zarya, Kleban-Byk, Grigorovka and Tarasovka of the Donetsk People's Republic. The enemy has lost up to 330 servicemen, three armored combat vehicles, 23 cars, three field artillery guns and an electronic warfare station. A field ammunition depot has been destroyed.

– Units of the Center group of forces have taken up more advantageous lines and positions, have defeated the manpower and equipment of three mechanized brigades, an assault brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, a marine brigade and a territorial defense brigade in the areas of the settlements of Kotlino, Udachnoye, Elizavetovka, Petrovskogo, Kotlyarovka, Novosergeevka and Bogdanovka of the Donetsk People's Republic. The losses of the Ukrainian armed formations amounted to 430 servicemen, five combat armored vehicles, six cars and two artillery pieces.

– Units of the "East" group of forces continued to advance deep into the enemy's defense, inflicted losses on the manpower and equipment of two mechanized, airborne assault brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the territorial defense brigade in the areas of the settlements of Poddubnoye, Bogatyr, Shevchenko and Otradnoye of the Donetsk People's Republic. The enemy's losses amounted to 170 servicemen, a combat armored vehicle, eight cars and two field artillery pieces, including a 155 mm self-propelled artillery unit "Caesar" made in France.

– Units of the Dnepr group of forces took up more advantageous lines and positions, defeated the formations of two coastal defense brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and a territorial defense brigade in the areas of the settlements of Novopavlovka, Blagoveshchenskoye and Kamenskoye in the Zaporizhia region. Up to 90 servicemen, three combat armored vehicles, seven cars, an artillery piece, two electronic warfare stations and an ammunition depot were destroyed.

– Operational-tactical aviation, strike unmanned aerial vehicles, missile troops and artillery of the groups of troops of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation defeated military airfield infrastructure facilities, missile and artillery weapons depots, ammunition and military equipment, as well as concentrations of manpower, equipment of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and foreign mercenaries in 144 districts.

– Air defense systems shot down nine JDAM guided aerial bombs and a US-made HIMARS multiple launch rocket system, as well as 200 aircraft-type unmanned aerial vehicles.

***

Colonelcassad
Russian Defense Ministry: In violation of the Russian-American agreement to cease strikes on energy facilities for 30 days from March 18, the Kiev regime continued unilateral attacks on Russian energy infrastructure.

Over the past 24 hours, the Ukrainian Armed Forces carried out five attacks on Russian energy facilities.

— In the Bryansk Region:
on April 11 at 05:09, as a result of the deliberate shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces of the Khvoshchevskaya energy facility of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Center - Bryanskenergo, a high-voltage line was disconnected due to a broken wire in the span of the supports. Some household consumers in the Sevsky District were left without power.

— In the Kursk Region:
on April 10 at 09:00, as a result of the deliberate shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces of the Mokrushino energy facility of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Center - Kurskenergo, a 10 kV high-voltage line was disconnected due to the destruction of a complete transformer substation. Household consumers in the Belovsky district were left without electricity.

- In the Luhansk People's Republic:
on April 10 at 11:43, as a result of deliberate shelling by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the building of the Troitsky section of the Svatovsky RES was damaged and the warehouse building of the LPR State Unitary Enterprise "Republican Grid Company" in the urban-type settlement of Troitskoye was destroyed. The leading engineer of the enterprise received shrapnel wounds.

On April 10 at 15:02, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian attack UAV on the 110 kV "Rubizhna" electrical substation of the LPR State Unitary Enterprise "RSK", a transformer was disabled.

- In the Zaporizhia region:
on April 10 at 23:55, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian attack UAV on the 35 kV Polohy electrical substation of the Tavria-Energo State Unitary Enterprise, a transformer was disabled. About 7,250 people in six settlements were left without electricity.

***

Archangel Spetsnaz : Kursk Region, situation as of the morning of April 11

In Kursk Region, our units have begun an assault on the positions of Ukrainian formations in the area of ​​the village of Gornal — the settlement is located at a tactical height, which complicates the offensive.

However, units of the Russian Armed Forces have cleared the forest areas to the east of the Gornalsky Monastery and have come very close to the settlement itself.

Now the Ukrainian Armed Forces cannot contain our offensive on the battlefield, but they are trying to slow it down by striking the assault units with both artillery and drones.

In addition, the enemy's work on the rear areas and supply routes does not cease. The Ukrainian Armed Forces do not intend to simply surrender the rest of the Kursk Region, so the work continues. And there is no need to rush here.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Some "Math" ...

... from official sources.

КУРСК, 10 апреля. /ТАСС/. Российские военнослужащие занимаются в том числе эвакуацией тел солдат Вооруженных сил Украины из приграничных районов Курской области, счет идет на десятки тысяч. Об этом ТАСС рассказали в российских силовых структурах. "Киевский режим даже не пытался эвакуировать тела уничтоженных вэсэушников. Более того, многие украинские военнослужащие скончались от полученных ранений, брошенные "побратимами". В настоящее время российские военнослужащие занимаются в том числе эвакуацией тел украинских солдат. Счет идет на десятки тысяч", - сказал собеседник агентства. Он добавил, что российским бойцам после освобождения Гуева осталось выбить ВСУ из населенных пунктов Олешня и Горналь Курской области.

Translation: KURSK, April 10. /TASS/. Russian servicemen are also evacuating the bodies of Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers from the border areas of Kursk Oblast; the number is in the tens of thousands. This was reported to TASS by Russian security agencies. "The Kiev regime did not even try to evacuate the bodies of the killed Ukrainian servicemen. Moreover, many Ukrainian servicemen died from their wounds, abandoned by their "brothers." At present, Russian servicemen are also evacuating the bodies of Ukrainian soldiers. The number is in the tens of thousands," the agency's source said. He added that after the liberation of Guyev, Russian fighters still have to drive the Ukrainian Armed Forces out of the settlements of Oleshnya and Gornal in Kursk Oblast.

This is to merely remind everyone the statistics on Kursk "operation" by NATO, which today is counted in 72 990 of personnel (most are KIAs, not just "casualties"), 405 tanks, 331 BMPs, 300 APCs, 2260 armored vehicles, 597 artillery pieces et al. That makes this image, if anyone wonders, a rather timid affair, especially when it MUST be considered it was done to surrendering and defenseless Iraqi troops.

Image

Here, in Kursk and now Sumy oblasts, the affair is entirely different, and it does not fit General Cavoli's numbers. Just doesn't. And we all should keep in mind that Russian MoD's modus operandi in terms of reporting 404 losses is extremely conservative, bordering on understatements. As I already stated--sometimes Russians simply do not (and often cannot) count those killed in all kinds of tanks, APCs and armored cars and they just leave it be, leaving to already tactical rear medics and funeral teams deal with sorting out mangled bones, burned flesh and whatever is left after the visit by artillery, Kornets or loitering munitions.


E.g. After this thing hits your position (RSZO Tornado) with thermobaric warheads (constantly used in SMO) --there is very little left of human (euphemism for VSU personnel) to even count or consider a "unit" of 200 (very few live as 300s after Tornado and it is not a good life). That is why not only Russians have to evacuate tens of thousands of VSU corpses and remains, but the uncovering of VSU's shallow mass graves will also only drive these statistics higher, much higher. And then--this is just ONE of many operational axes in SMO. That also partially explains the animal cruelty of VSU and NATO personnel (Poles and French are especially noted) towards POWs but especially towards Russian civilians--mass executions, especially of children, rapes, robberies et all--those are all hallmarks of European "civilization". Everything, every single instance is documented and attached, and (war) criminal cases are opened by Investigative Committee, among others.
This guy--he is safe now and should count his blessings being Russia's POW--talks about what kind of "training" British military provided him.

(Videos at link.)

Even he admits--it was shit. Twice taken to range to shoot, the rest--theory. Yes, this is what British military is--all theory and no skills and understanding of modern war, The guy also complains how he was treated in British hospital after he fell sick. Of course, for British he is a Ukrainian subhuman, a cannon fodder to be used against hated Russians. Western "elites" lost all remnants of their humanity, and Russians MUST count their blessings when seeing what Europe is and why the way it exists the only thought in Russian mind today is: Europa delenda est. The US is a different game.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/04/some-math.html

******

Ukraine Further Discredited Itself After Budanov Doubled Down On Defending Wartime Censorship
Andrew Korybko
Apr 11, 2025

Image

He inadvertently legitimized Western observers critically re-evaluating certain official narratives.

GUR chief Kirill Budanov doubled down earlier this month on defending Ukraine’s wartime censorship policy. According to him, “During wartime, knowing the whole truth is not necessary. Otherwise, people may develop opinions. Some minds are not prepared to grasp the harsh reality. Let’s not put them to the test. Everything should be dosed.” He’s basically saying that Ukrainians might react so negatively to the truth that they could end up harming perceived national security interests.

Although Budanov didn’t elaborate, he was probably implying that drastic shifts in public opinion brought about by widespread knowledge of the truth could prompt some of his compatriots to destabilize the situation behind the front lines through large-scale protests, strikes, and even sabotage. Moreover, his candidness also harms Ukraine’s perceived national interests, albeit in a different way than the aforesaid by legitimizing Western observers’ critical re-evaluations of certain official narratives.

For instance, it might now no longer be as taboo for them to question Ukraine’s claim that Russia inexplicably butchered the residents of Bucha during its withdrawal from Kiev in spring 2022, which Zelensky exploited as one of the pretexts for pulling out of their peace talks. Moscow insisted that it wasn’t responsible for that war crime, but its position was ignored by the West, though some brave journalists might now revisit what happened and lend more credence to its false flag arguments.

Ukraine’s accusations that Russia bombed civilian targets might also be critically re-evaluated. Instead of continuing to take these claims for granted, they might now be seen as examples of wartime censorship for covering up the misfiring of Ukrainian air defense missiles or their accidental landing in population centers, exactly as Russia has always alleged was what happened. Proof of Ukraine deploying military assets there, which would be legitimate targets under international law, might also be uncovered.

Another possibility is that JD Vance is vindicated for telling Zelensky to his face in late February during their infamous fight in the White House that Ukraine takes Western journalists on propaganda tours and is forcibly conscripting civilians off the street. Ukraine has perceived national security interests in misleading Western media about the conflict’s military-strategic dynamics and censoring video evidence of its manpower problems, but the Western public might finally soon become aware of these truths.

No less significant is the possibility that some of the Western media, even if only beginning with those in the MAGA camp, start talking more about Ukraine’s war crimes in Russia’s Kursk Region. This universally recognized part of Russia was invaded by Ukraine last August with the West’s military, logistical, and intelligence support, ultimately costing their taxpayers around $3 billion according to Sputnik’s calculations. A segment of the public might recoil in horror after finding out what they were funding.

And finally, the truth about Ukraine’s enduringly doomed prospects against Russia might become more widely known at home and abroad, which could speed up progress on a peace deal upon more people learning that there was never any credible chance of the West’s proxy winning. The five preceding official Ukrainian narratives and more are now fair game for Western observers to critically re-evaluate in light of Budanov counterproductively doubling down on his country’s wartime censorship policy.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/ukraine- ... ted-itself

*******

That's all, folks!
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Sat Apr 12, 2025 12:01 pm

Realities of Proxy Warfare
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 12/04/2025

Image

“The conflict in Ukraine is not a ‘proxy war against Russia,’ but the result of Russia’s unprovoked aggression, culminating in its invasion of the country in February 2022, for which Ukraine received international support for self-defense in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter. Ukraine is not fighting on behalf of any foreign government or organization. It is a sovereign and independent state with a democratically elected president and parliament,” wrote EU vs. Disinfo , a European Union agency for countering counternarratives —a euphemism for the fight against Russian disinformation —on July 30, 2024. Despite the fact that much of the already minimal Russian media was censored in the European Union in 2022, the one-sided battle against the Russian version of events continues fully engaged, sometimes colliding with reality.

Just a few months later, Boris Johnson, one of the most belligerent figures in the war against Russia and who has pushed for Ukraine to have everything necessary to fight safely, stated in an interview: "Man, we're not going to fool ourselves. We're fighting a proxy war against Russia." Last March, in an interview with Fox News in which he insisted on the stalemate and defended Donald Trump's position of seeking an end to the conflict, the current US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, insisted that "frankly, it's a proxy war between nuclear powers, the United States, which is helping Ukraine, and Russia." With the exception of the European Union authorities, whose intransigent stance is reflected in the fact that it has taken even longer than Ukraine to shift its rhetoric toward a false pacifism of highlighting the importance of peace but insisting that it must be carried out unconditionally and without allowing Russia a voice in the negotiations, the proxy nature of the current war is increasingly less questioned.

In The New York Times ’ recent article , “Society: The Secret History of the War in Ukraine,” the New Yorker details “the untold story of America’s hidden role in Ukraine’s military operations against Russia’s invading armies.” As has happened in other cases in the past—such as the Ukrainian attempt to capture the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant in an amphibious landing off Budanov’s GUR, which was considered Russian disinformation until The Times confirmed a version that repeated what Moscow had denounced months earlier—it took a Western media outlet to write about what was already obvious, that since 2022 Ukraine has fought hand in hand with the United States, for it to stop being considered Russian propaganda .

“In a way, Ukraine has been, on a broader scale, a rematch in a long history of proxy wars between the United States and Russia: Vietnam in the 1960s, Afghanistan in the 1980s, Syria three decades later,” writes The New York Times , which presents four wars thousands of miles from US borders. Although three years late, even the mainstream Western media are now accepting the proxy nature of this war, which was always a common battle between the West and Russia.

Despite the evidence, The New York Times insists that its investigation “reveals that the United States was woven into the war far more intimately and broadly than previously believed. At critical moments, the partnership was the backbone of Ukrainian military operations that, by American counts, have killed or wounded more than 700,000 Russian troops (Ukraine has put its own casualties at 435,000). Side by side in the Wiesbaden mission command center, American and Ukrainian officers planned Kyiv’s counteroffensives. A vast American intelligence-gathering effort guided the large-scale battle strategy and funneled precise targeting information to Ukrainian soldiers on the ground.” “A European intelligence chief recalled his shock at learning how deeply involved his NATO counterparts were in the Ukrainian operations. ‘Now they're part of the assassination chain,’” the outlet added, aiming to highlight the importance of US involvement in the war, in which it attributes a key role to virtually all of Ukraine's successes.

“The guiding idea of ​​the alliance was that this close cooperation would allow the Ukrainians to accomplish the most unlikely of feats: to deliver a crushing blow to the Russian invaders. And in the early chapters of the war, blow after blow, thanks to Ukrainian courage and skill, but also Russian incompetence, that ambition seemed increasingly within reach,” the article states in its opening section, which recounts Ukrainian successes, always emphasizing the importance of American weapons, intelligence, and planning.

“One of the first tests of the concept was a campaign against one of Russia's most feared battle groups, the 58th Combined Arms Corps. In mid-2022, the Ukrainians, using American intelligence and targeting information, unleashed a barrage of shells against the 58th's headquarters in the Kherson region, killing generals and staff officers stationed there. Time and again, the group relocated to another location; each time, the Americans found it and the Ukrainians destroyed it,” the article boasts, for example.

However, three years after the start of the German-directed partnership , commanded by General Donahue, best known for his image as the last American soldier to leave Afghanistan after Kabul had already fallen to the Taliban, it is clear that the proxy war was not as successful as Ukraine, the United States, or the Western press had hoped. “As the Ukrainians gained greater autonomy within the alliance, they became increasingly secretive about their intentions. They were constantly angered that the Americans could not, or would not, give them all the weapons and equipment they wanted. The Americans, in turn, were angered by what they considered the Ukrainians' unreasonable demands and their reluctance to take politically risky steps to bolster their vastly outnumbered forces,” the article writes. When things go wrong, a dispute over who is to blame inevitably arises.

“Tactically, the alliance reaped victory after victory. However, at arguably the most crucial moment of the war—in mid-2023, when the Ukrainians mounted a counteroffensive to gain momentum after the successes of the first year—the strategy devised in Wiesbaden fell victim to Ukraine's fractious internal politics: President Volodymyr Zelensky against his military commander (and potential electoral rival), and the military commander against his stubborn subordinate commander. When Zelensky sided with the subordinate, the Ukrainians poured vast amounts of men and resources into an ultimately futile campaign to recapture the devastated city of Bakhmut. Within months, the entire counteroffensive ended in a stillborn failure,” The New York Times writes , referring to the counteroffensive with which Emmanuel Macron, Rishi Sunak, and Antony Blinken claimed they would put the Kremlin between a rock and a hard place.

By then, Russia had recovered from its initial mistakes, had been able to mobilize its military industry, recruit enough soldiers to compensate for the initial imbalance in troops, and the situation had become noticeably complicated for Ukraine. As activist Almut Rochowanski wrote on social media, "Victory has a thousand fathers, but defeat must have grown up in one of those grim Soviet orphanages." Up to that point in the article, The New York Times had attributed the successes to the collaboration between the United States and Ukraine, although always giving the leading role to Washington. From the start of the counteroffensive, the report turned negative, focusing on internal divisions and especially on the insistence of a section of the Ukrainian command on continuing with a plan with which the United States disagreed. The centerpiece of this phase of the war is, without a doubt, the battle for the city of Artyomovsk, Bakhmut, lost by Ukraine a few days before the start of the counteroffensive. This offensive always bore the name of Oleksandr Syrsky, a man always questioned by his troops for his willingness to send large numbers of soldiers to fight even when the battle was already lost.

“The counteroffensive was to begin on May 1. The intervening months would be spent training for it. General Syrsky would contribute four seasoned brigades—between 3,000 and 5,000 troops each—for training in Europe; they would be joined by four brigades of new recruits. The general had other plans. At Bakhmut, the Russians were deploying, and losing, large numbers of troops. General Syrsky saw an opportunity to swallow them up and ignite discord in their ranks. “Take all the new ones” to Melitopol, he told General Aguto, according to American officials. And when Zelensky sided, over the objections of his own supreme commander and the Americans, a key pillar of the counteroffensive was scuppered,” writes The New York Times, placing the blame for the failure of the 2023 counteroffensive, the turning point of the war, on Zelensky and, above all, everything, to General Syrsky.

Image

“There was a lot of talk about Wiesbaden last week, and rightly so. This headquarters has truly become our secret weapon when it comes to coordinating operational planning with partners and determining the resources needed for its execution,” the now former commander of the Ukrainian army and current Ukrainian ambassador to the United Kingdom wrote days after the report was published. In his post , Valeri Zaluzhny does not attempt to defend himself, as the accusations are not directed at him—even though the counteroffensive or the actions of his subordinates, including Syrsky, were his responsibility—but he does offer a subtle comment. He does so through an image, in which he can be seen alongside General Cavoli, the highest authority of the US military in Europe, taken in August 2023, when it was already obvious that the entire counteroffensive had failed.

In a more compromised position due to direct accusations, Oleksandr Syrsky did choose to defend himself. In an interview with LB.UA , the current Supreme Command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine insisted on the correctness of the disastrous battle for Bakhmut, in which his troops decimated Wagner, but not the Russian army, and did so at the cost of high casualties, the use of excessive numbers of troops and at the expense of operations that could have been more viable. “Anyone who participated in the offensive knows this isn't true,” Syrsky said, referring to the blame The New York Times places on the fight for Artyomovsk for the failure of the flagship operation that Ukraine and its American allies had planned for 2023. “Yes, we carried out an offensive south of Bakhmut. But we carried out offensive operations with two brigades from the group. If we had had five brigades, I think both Bakhmut and Soledar would have been liberated,” Syrsky insisted, trying to blame a lack of resources for the failure of his operation.

To this end, Syrsky prefers not to take into account that Russia had already seized the initiative and that by May 2023, when the city fell into the hands of Moscow's troops, its brigades were already severely depleted. Ukraine simply did not have enough troops to carry out a two-pronged attack, as the general continues to insist should have been done. Had this been the case, Syrsky asserts, Russia would have simply abandoned the cities it had fought so hard to secure, "because the idea of ​​this operation was to cut off the three main roads that provided logistical support to this group," he adds, suggesting an unrealistic plan to cut off communications between Artyomovsk and two key areas, Gorlovka and Debaltsevo, something that was never feasible.

“When we planned these actions, we understood that our forces were insufficient. We had two brigades without additional ammunition. That is, within the limits of what was supplied to us to carry out ordinary actions in the usual way. But we counted on surprise, on the fact that we would break through the enemy defense with actions that were not only adventurous but courageous, considering the fact that it was unprepared, not like, for example, in Zaporozhye. There, all the fortifications were in an ordinary field,” Syrsky insisted, reaffirming his idea of ​​attacking Artyomovsk despite being aware that he lacked the necessary resources and was simply clinging to a surprise effect that didn't exist, since Russia always expected an attack in that direction.

Syrsky's words are relevant, as they reflect the overall approach taken by both Ukraine and the United States. Underestimating the opponent and overestimating its own forces was the initial mistake of the Russian Federation, which Washington subsequently repeated with expectations that did not correspond to reality. When that reality translates into a lack of success on the battlefield, it is easier to blame the proxy army than to take the blame.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/04/12/reali ... rra-proxy/

Google Translator

*****

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
🎖🎖 The Kiev regime, in violation of the Russian-American agreement to cease strikes on energy facilities for 30 days from March 18, continues unilateral attacks on Russian energy infrastructure.

Over the past 24 hours, the Ukrainian Armed Forces recorded five attacks on Russian energy facilities.

- In the Zaporizhia region:
on April 11 at 02:00, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV on the 35 kV Chubarevka substation of the Tavria-Energo State Unitary Enterprise, a transformer was damaged. Household consumers in five settlements (about 1,650 people) were left without electricity.

- In the Krasnodar region:
on April 12 at 02:40, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV in the area of ​​the Vasyurinskaya railway station of the North Caucasus Railway, the contact network was damaged, causing the stop of two passenger trains.

- In the Kursk region:
on April 11 at 08:31, as a result of the deliberate shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces of the Kondratovka power facility of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre - Kurskenergo, a 10 kV high-voltage line was disconnected due to a broken wire. The industrial load in the Belovsky district was left without power supply.

On April 12 at 04:29, as a result of the deliberate shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the 110 kV Belaya - Rybinskie Budy high-voltage line of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre - Kurskenergo was disconnected due to a broken wire in the span of the supports. About 19,400 household consumers in the Oboyansky and Belovsky districts were left without power supply.

In addition, on April 10 at 18.43, due to a wire break, the 110 kV Yuzhnaya-Lgov high-voltage line of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Center - Kurskenergo was disconnected. On April 11, during an inspection in this place, debris from a Ukrainian attack UAV was discovered under the high-voltage line.

***

Colonelcassad
The SBU and GUR counterintelligence saw a threat in the "Widows' Maidan"

Initially, the protests of relatives of the Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers were initiated by the office of the Ukrainian president, who tried to create the illusion of "unfortunate Azov soldiers" in the international media, whom the Russian authorities continue to "keep in Russian prisons."

However, the international media are tired of writing that "the bad Russian authorities should make a goodwill gesture and release the good neo-Nazis," and the movement of relatives of prisoners of war and missing Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers began to grow.

After the "Kursk adventure" and the invasion of the Belgorod region, this movement turned into a force completely uncontrolled by the Ukrainian special services, which can seriously harm Bankova.

Moreover, activists no longer just go out with single pickets in support of the "captured," but directly accuse the Ukrainian Armed Forces command of "meat assaults" and the lack of evacuation of the wounded and the bodies of destroyed soldiers.

A separate line is informing relatives and friends of the Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers. Thus, per day we alone receive hundreds of messages from the wives and mothers of enemy soldiers, to whom we answer honestly about the status of their relatives. You can contact us via the feedback bot.

At the same time, the GUR and SBU began working with the commanders of Ukrainian units, demanding that they minimize the protest activity of relatives.

The first to "salute" this order were the 95th separate airborne assault brigade and the notorious 225th death regiment ( 225 OSHR ).

- Regiment commander Oleg Shiryaev, as we see from the messages of the widows of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, approached it straightforwardly: former prisoners serving in the rear units of the regiment simply use physical force against women, and if this does not help, they call the police, demanding that the activists be arrested, one of whom has already disappeared somewhere in the dungeons of the Ukrainian repressive machine.

- The 95th separate airborne assault brigade approached it creatively. Brigade Commander Maryshev appointed his assistant R.V. Sirko (Ruzhana) responsible for communicating with relatives of the Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers, to whom she simply lies about the status of their son or husband.

Women are interested in this Ruzhana, her role and place in the Ukrainian Armed Forces. We will answer: a graduate of the Odessa Academy, born on March 30, 1998, originally from Lviv. Never distinguished by her humanity, but always knew how to please senior officers. All data will be provided upon separate request.

Ruzhana also organized a real bot farm on Facebook, where fakes under the guise of Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers reassure relatives with disinformation: everyone is alive and well... they just haven't been in touch for several months.

Well, today the Kiev regime already sees a threat in grief-stricken women. Next in line are young children,against whom the repressive machine will also start working.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

*******

New Syrsky Interview Sheds Light on Upcoming Russian Operations + Recruitment Figures
Simplicius
Apr 10, 2025

As rasputitsa winds down, rumors of Russian offensives are gaining strength. In a new interview with LB.UA, Ukrainian C-in-C Syrsky has made a number of interesting statements. The first being that the Russian offensive on the Sumy and Kharkov regions has “already begun”:

"Russia's new spring offensive against northeastern Ukraine 'has actually already begun,' Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi said in an interview with the LB.UA outlet published on April 9. Syrskyi's comments come after President Volodymyr Zelensky warned that Moscow is amassing forces for a fresh offensive against the Kharkiv and Sumy oblasts this spring.

'I can say that the president is absolutely right, and this offensive has effectively already begun,' Syrskyi said. For nearly a week, Russian offensive operations have almost doubled in all main sectors, the commander-in-chief noted."


This is borne out by frontline evidence, as Russian forces have continued to make pushes in these regions. Particularly in Sumy, Russia has advanced the past few days, capturing Veselovka and as of today entering Loknya, as seen below:

Image

Image

Zhurava nearby was also taken:

Image

Russia is reportedly massively using the ‘drone ambush’ tactic in this region, where the drone sits in wait by the roadside until an AFU vehicle emerges. The below video was reportedly taken precisely near Loknya, where such Russian drones are wreaking havoc on Ukrainian logistics routes:
(Video at link.)

This is said to be the Ukrainian road-o’-death leading to Loknya, video captured from the AFU side: (Video at link.)

In Kharkov, the front suddenly stirred awake as Russian forces made new advancements in Vovchansk for the first time in weeks if not months.

Likewise southeast of there Russian forces have been making major headway on the Lyman front. Many Ukrainian military channels have been squawking about Russian successes there in the past few days:

Image

Another Ukrainian analyst about the above direction:

In the estuary direction, the occupiers again managed to advance deep into our positions.

This applies to the Katerynivka-Nove line, where the enemy slipped between the villages, cut both castellans connecting them, and gained a foothold.

In such conditions, the defense of Katerynivka was practically impossible, so the village is not controlled by the Defense Forces.

Then the rolls go to Novomykhaylivka and, actually, Novye. And there Lypove also goes together.

From the Makiivka district, the scum are trying to reach Hrekivka.

The occupier's intermediate goal is to capture the Andriyivka-Izyumske-Stepove line in order to paralyze logistics in both the Borivka and northern estuary directions.


The places referred to are here:

Image
.
Image

In a new Reuters piece, a ‘senior Ukrainian official’ named Pavlo Palisa said that the real push is expected to begin later this month and in May:

Image
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/uk ... 025-04-10/
One of the ways that we know Russia has begun stepping up offensives is the larger use of armored vehicle formations. During the winter months we saw much more small-scale action, with the now-standard ‘drip-feed’ tactic of inserting small clusters of troops into hedgerow and forest landing positions by way of light and mobile ATVs, bikes, etc.

Now we’ve again begun to see heavily armored columns of modified tanks with anti-mine rollers and the classic ‘shed’ designs. In the last Sitrep I covered the Russian 4th Motorized Rifle Brigade’s assault in the area south of Chasov Yar. Now a new look at that assault has been released, showing us an interesting aspect we rarely get to see: (Video at link.)

In the video, we can see not only a large amount of Ukrainian FPV drones failing against the ‘fortified’ Russian tanks, but most importantly, how those tanks which are eventually disabled are brought back to life by Russian engineering forces. This casts doubt over Ukrainian daily losses claims against Russian vehicles, wherein rapidly-spliced footage shows hits on Russian tanks invariably counted as ‘kills’ when in actuality a large portion of the vehicles are towed back to repair base and diligently restored.

Also, since Russian troops are actively advancing, it makes more sense they’d have more opportunity to collect disabled but salvageable vehicles from both sides, later restoring a good percentage of them. The retreating side—that is, the AFU—gets the short end here. After all, isn’t that the excuse used by the pro-UA crowd for why Russia always collects more bodies for ‘cargo 200’ exchanges? That’s not to mention the restored vehicles are later hit again and again, vastly inflating the ‘destroyed vehicles’ category.

By the way, on that note, a member of Oryx’s team has given an update to the tally of vehicles lost in the Kursk offensive:

Image

Full spreadsheet.https://t.co/R0MIzniAIT

Note that even Oryx’s team now admit Ukraine lost more vehicles than Russia, officially painting the operation as a major failure. Now that Russia has effectively retaken virtually everything there, who do you think will be the recipient of all those destroyed vehicles, restoring a good percentage of them?

Corollary to the above—Russian forces finally fully captured the last real settlement of the Kursk region yesterday in Guevo:

Image

Getting back to Syrsky’s interview one more time; it’s a long interview with a lot of nuggets.

Firstly, he again stokes fears of a big Russian offensive on Kiev later this year, citing the renewed large-scale ‘Zapad’ exercises in Belarus set to be held in September.

Syrsky opines:

All exercises have a purpose. In other words, the appearance of exercises is the most acceptable way to relocate, transfer troops, concentrate on a certain direction and create a group of troops.

Actually, this is how it started in 2022. You will remember that the group was initially created, it conducted exercises, and we all hoped that they would end, the Russian troops would return to their territory.

But when it was decided that these exercises were continuing, it became obvious to me that everything was going to change.


The next interesting tidbit: He claims that the Russian artillery advantage is now only 2:1, rather than 10:1 like last year. He claims Ukraine’s destruction of the Russian Toropets arsenal in September 2024 caused Russia to halve its shell usage. Russia has gone from firing 40,000+ rounds per day, to 23,000 now—according to him, although it has recently “crept up a little” to 27-28k.

Interestingly enough, Le Monde just reported yesterday that Ukraine’s “largest ammunition production facility” was destroyed by Russian strikes:

‼️🇺🇦💥 Ukraine's main ammunition production facility destroyed in Shostka, Sumy region, — Le Monde

▪️The commander of the UAV company of the 104th brigade of the Ukrainian territorial defense Anton Serbin told the newspaper about this.

➖"In 2024, the Zvezda (gunpowder) and Impuls (detonators) plants were shelled several times, including on December 31, 2024, when 13 ballistic missiles were fired at them," the publication writes.

➖"Our main national ammunition production facility was destroyed," Serbin said.


The most significant portion of the interview discusses mobilization numbers of both sides:

But I want to say that the front is constantly increasing, the Kursk operation and the enemy's actions in the Kharkiv region, in Volchansk, gave us an increase in the front by 200 km.

And the enemy has increased its grouping fivefold since the beginning of the aggression. Every month they increase by eight to nine thousand, for a year it turns out 120-130 thousand. On January 1, 2025, in Russia, the group of troops participating in the fighting in Ukraine numbered 603 thousand military personnel, today it is already 623 thousand.


Above he states that Russia has increased the size of its entire military grouping in the SMO by fivefold since the beginning. Given that he says the Russian contingent is now at 623,000, we can assume his position as being that Russia started the conflict with a mere 125k men, not the 250k+ most often claimed.

Interestingly, Syrsky later hints another confirmation of this when he states that Russia’s assault on Kiev consisted of a mere 9 battalions—this is hardly two brigades. If the main direction was so low in manpower, how did people ever come up with the infamous “250 BTGs” hoax?

But getting back, read what he says again:

Every month they increase by eight to nine thousand, for a year it turns out 120-130 thousand. On January 1, 2025, in Russia, the group of troops participating in the fighting in Ukraine numbered 603 thousand military personnel, today it is already 623 thousand.

This is critical: he’s stating that every month, Russia gains a net positive of 8-9k men, and the total grouping grows by 120-130k per year. Just from January 1, 2025, the Russian grouping has increased by 20,000. Where are Western propagandists now, who loudly proclaimed Russia is losing so much men as to be bleeding out a net monthly negative?

Hypothetically assuming the claims of both sides are true: Russia claims to recruit 30,000 men per month; Syrsky claims ~8,000-9,000 is the net gain. This implies 21-22k monthly losses, which is 700+ per day, or perhaps 300 KIA and 300 irrecoverably wounded. However, unlike Ukraine, Russia allows demobilization via contract expiry, and so a large part of those monthly losses are accounted for by soldiers leaving the SMO due to non-renewal of contract. It’s difficult to estimate the exact percentage this takes up, but let’s say it is hypothetically 50%, then it would reduce Russian KIA to 150 daily average, which is likely not far from reality. It should also be mentioned, Ukrainian officials had previously claimed Russia is lying and is only mobilizing a total of ~20k per month, which would make net losses even smaller.

Syrsky also glumly admits that Russia’s total mobilization resource is depressingly vast:

If we take the prepared mobilization resource of the enemy — those who have served in the military, military training-it is about 5 million people. And the mobilization resource as a whole is 20 million. Imagine their potential. And what can we do under these conditions? Of course, mobilization and transfer.

As a last note, Syrsky interestingly admits that the entire Kursk operation was meant to slow down a planned Russian offensive across the entire front:

After that, the enemy regrouped, completed the training of the 44 corps, and in fact, from mid-June, began a strategic operation on the entire front. He began to attack vremenniy Yar, Toretsk, New York, Pokrovsk, Zaporozhye, in the Kupyansky direction, in Limansky, that is, practically everywhere.

The situation was critical, and in these conditions it was necessary to do something to weaken the enemy's onslaught as much as possible. And then, in fact, the idea was born to conduct its counteroffensive where the enemy does not expect it and where it is the weakest.


So, now that Kursk is over, it seems Russia is resuming this offensive across every front, except this time Ukraine has no tricks left.

That being said, there are rumors Ukraine has been building some reserves for a new offensive attempt for the same purpose, but there’s a kind of diminishing returns effect each time for what they can muster, amidst shrinking resources.



To finish off the frontline updates, the other major area of offensive success has again been on the Zaporozhye line, where Russian forces completed captures along the flanks near Stepove, flattening out the front:

Image

There are numerous other advances to be covered next time, including in Toretsk and in the south Konstantinovka direction.

In the Kupyansk direction, Ukrainian channels are even claiming Russia is using “mini submarines” to transfer troops to the growing Oskil river lodgement:

Kupyansk direction, information from "Adequate Kharkiv resident". A story is spreading in Ukrainian channels that the Russian army is using micro-submarines to transfer infantry and ammunition to the bridgehead on the western bank of Oskol. The enemy's Magyar birds are hovering over the river day and night every day, but they don't see any signs of moving forces across the river - not a single watercraft, and yet our infantry appears from somewhere on the west bank. An underground tunnel? No response yet.



We’ve shown the photo last time, but now comes the full video from frontline reporter Kulko about the 1,600+ Ukrainian drones downed by Russian EW warfare on the Kursk front: (Video at link.)

Likewise a frontline Zvezda report on Russian assault tactics, utilizing large smoke canisters for concealment: (Video at link.)

Some photos of new serially produced BMP-3s and T-72B3Ms, equipped with new anti-drone rubber pads as well as factory standard EW modules:

Image

Image

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/new ... heds-light

******

New Buffer Zone? The Situation in the Kursk Direction
April 10, 2025
Rybar

Image

In the Kursk direction, a successful offensive continues in several areas, where Russian troops are gradually advancing deep into the Sumy region.

More about the situation in the Kursk direction
The Russian Defense Ministry confirmed recent reports of the liberation of the village of Zhuravka . According to sources on the ground, several adjacent forest belts have also come under the control of Russian troops.

There are also battles taking place on the Vladimirovka-Veselovka line , during which Russian troops are systematically advancing south.

Heavy fighting is taking place on the Basovka-Loknya-Oleshnya line . Ukrainian formations have launched several counterattacks in the direction of the first two settlements, but have not achieved success. The situation in the Oleshnya area remains difficult.

In the vicinity of Guevo, the situation is still hidden by the "fog of war". For the third day now, information about the Russian Armed Forces' advance in the direction of the settlement of Gornal has been discussed on the Internet , but it has not been confirmed by either sources on the ground or objective control footage.

It is too early to talk about building a “buffer zone” on the border with the Sudzhansky district : only a couple of villages in the Sumy region have been occupied, and the Kursk region itself has not been completely liberated.

However, the enemy is slowly retreating. And if the trend continues, then at some point Sumy may already be within the range of Russian barrel artillery.

https://rybar.ru/novaya-bufernaya-zona- ... pravlenii/

In theory, everything was fine. But then reality came
April 11, 2025
Rybar

AFP reports that following yesterday's summit of the so-called "coalition of the willing," only six countries expressed their willingness to send troops to Ukraine. Among them are Great Britain , France , and the Baltic states . The sixth state is not named.

The results of the summit are not surprising. Over the past few months, since talks began about the possible deployment of peacekeepers to Ukraine, the initial “fighting ardor” of Western countries has given way to harsh reality.

The British, who were in the vanguard, counted on broad support for the initiative and hoped to get away with only command functions of the mission, and they saw the backbone of the peacekeeping group in other members of the “coalition.”

However, the Poles have the largest armed forces in Europe, not counting the US . But the latter are not eager to involve themselves in this adventure. The other countries yesterday directly stated that they are waiting for some specifics from the US.

The French were also initially in the camp of the "war hawks" . And the Baltic countries are acting in their own repertoire, supporting any anti-Russian initiative, although they themselves can offer one and a half cripples from their troops .

For this reason, the media has already started saying that the British intend to deploy troops within five years if the war ends. There is no unity in Europe, and Great Britain itself has huge problems with its army, so they cannot handle such missions alone.

https://rybar.ru/v-teorii-vse-bylo-horo ... -realnost/

Americans change ambassador to Ukraine
April 11, 2025
Rybar

The US Ambassador to the so-called Ukraine, Bridget Brink, has left her post. The State Department has confirmed the information. According to the Financial Times , this happened "due to growing political differences with the Trump administration . "

Brink came under increasing pressure from senior figures in the new American leadership who questioned her willingness to support their Ukraine strategy.

This political decision, to be completely honest, was expected from the very beginning, from the moment Donald Trump came to power. After all, Bridget Brink is a protégé of Joe Biden , who has worked in Kiev since May 2022.

As soon as Trump officially became president, the first thing he did was begin political purges in government structures, removing officials loyal to the Democrats and putting his trusted people in their places.

In the context of the change in the US approach to resolving the Ukrainian issue, resistance from the ambassador to the so-called Ukraine was possible in some moments, and in order to exclude something like this in the future, the Americans simply removed Brink.

https://rybar.ru/amerikanczy-menyayut-posla-na-ukraine/

*******

"Kellogg Plan"
April 12, 12:53

Image

The "Kellogg plan" for the division of Ukraine published by globalist media.
Kellogg himself claims that it was distorted and that everything is not quite so.

In the presented video, it is simply a freeze without Kherson and Zaporozhye and with the presence of NATO troops in Ukraine, which contradicts the goals of the SVO. So this configuration of the division of Ukraine is unlikely regardless of whether Kellogg was distorted or not.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9777631.html

Google Translator

******

Maidan and Odessa – The West’s Ukrainian Massacres

Sonja van den Ende

April 12, 2025

The scars endure in Odessa, Kharkov, Mariupol, and Volnovakha, where war has claimed countless loved ones.

In 2016 and 2017, I was invited by the families of the victims of the 2014 Odessa Trade Union House massacre to document this atrocity. The slaughter on May 2, 2014, received little – if any – attention in Western media. Over 40 people were burned alive after a mob of neo-Nazi hooligans, backed by the West, attacked peaceful protesters demonstrating against the fascist regime installed in Kiev. This regime was the product of a 2013 coup d’état orchestrated by the U.S. and its EU accomplices, branded as the “Maidan Revolution.” By 2014, its violence had spread to Odessa.

The Mothers of Odessa – echoing Argentina’s Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo – sought justice for the massacre. Like the Argentine mothers who protested the disappearances under military dictatorship, they demanded accountability for May 2, a day the West has long buried in silence – because it was complicit in Kiev’s coup and, indirectly, Odessa’s tragedy.

That day, a football match between Kharkov’s Metalist and Odessa’s Chornomorets had drawn hooligans, including followers of Andriy Parubiy – a self-proclaimed admirer of Hitler’s national socialism. Many of these neo-Nazis later joined the Azov Regiment, entrenching themselves in Mariupol’s Azovstal plant. But on May 2, 2014, they descended on the Trade Union House, slaughtering 42 protesters.

Parubiy, a fascist and neo-Nazi, would later ascend to Ukraine’s political elite, serving as Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council and Speaker of Parliament. He was warmly received by EU officials, including Victoria Nuland, even as he pushed laws banning Russian, Crimean Tatar, Romanian, and Hungarian in official spheres.

In March 2025, the European Court of Human Rights finally ruled on the case – eleven years late. It found Ukraine guilty of failing to investigate and awarded each victim’s family a meagre €14,000 in damages. The court also condemned Kiev for delaying the return of one victim’s body to his family. A token verdict for state-sanctioned murder.

The police and judiciary’s refusal to act in Odessa mirrored the Maidan massacre in February 2014, where fascist gunmen – backed by the U.S. and EU – fired on protesters from the Hotel Ukraina, sparking chaos to enable the coup. Among the orchestrators were EU figures like the late Dutch politician Hans van Baalen (VVD) and Belgium’s Guy Verhofstadt, who incited the mob with inflammatory speeches.

Recent revelations expose the role of Georgian mercenary Mamuka Mamulashvili and U.S. sniper Brian Christopher Boyenger, a former US Army soldier. Both apparently helped lead the group of snipers who fired on the protesters from the Ukraina hotel in Kiev during the Maidan coup.

It’s worth noting that these efforts were likely supported – and possibly encouraged – by former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili. Mamuka Mamulashvili, who served as a senior military advisor to Saakashvili, played a key role in what was termed the “revolution” in Ukraine. Saakashvili’s involvement bore fruit: on May 30, 2015, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko appointed him governor of Odessa. To assume the role, Saakashvili took Ukrainian citizenship, renouncing his Georgian ties. However, in 2017, his Ukrainian citizenship was revoked, leaving him stateless and residing in the Netherlands. Later, President Volodymyr Zelensky reinstated Saakashvili’s citizenship and, in May 2020, appointed him head of Ukraine’s National Reform Council. In 2021, Saakashvili returned to Georgia, where he was arrested on corruption charges and remains imprisoned.

Mamuka Mamulashvili has led the Georgian Legion, a military unit fighting against Russia in Ukraine, and is wanted by Russian authorities. Likely recruited between 2013 and 2014, Mamulashvili allegedly served American interests, including acting as a sniper in Kiev during that period. His involvement spans decades of conflicts in the Caucasus, including wars in Abkhazia, Chechnya, South Ossetia, and now Ukraine, where he commands the Georgian Legion.

A recent report highlighted American fighters returning from Ukraine, bringing violence home. One such figure, Brian Christopher Boyenger, served with the Right Sector in Ukraine during the summer of 2016. Boyenger appeared in a Ukrainian documentary aired in April 2016, alongside another American, showcasing their combat roles. A former sniper with the U.S. 101st Airborne Division in Iraq, Boyenger later joined the 2014 Maidan events in Kiev as a sniper.

The conflict in Ukraine didn’t begin with Russia’s Special Military Operation in 2022 but traces back to the 2013 coup, often labelled a “revolution.” This event, one of many U.S.-backed regime changes – frequently in collaboration with the EU – spiralled out of control. The West believed it had Russia cornered, expecting NATO’s expansion to Ukraine would weaken Moscow. The U.S. and Europe anticipated an easy victory in this proxy war, pushing toward Odessa to spark another uprising. They overlooked Odessa’s predominantly Russian-speaking population, miscalculating the city’s loyalties. The ultimate aim was regime change in Russia, a goal partially achieved in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Yet Ukraine exposed the limits of Western hubris, costing countless lives since 1945. Europe now faces decline, no longer aligned with the “MAGA” vision of America.

The “Make America Great Again” movement prioritizes self-interest but hasn’t abandoned imperialism. It backs Zionism – a colonial project since 1948 – in Israel and seeks global dominance through commerce, though it shuns investment in Gaza, as Trump recently stated. America now operates like a ruthless corporation, trading overt wars for business deals while still fuelling conflicts in Palestine, Syria, and Yemen. Europe, meanwhile, reels from its defeat in Ukraine, fearing an eventual war with Russia – perhaps by 2030, some speculate.

The scars endure in Odessa, Kharkov, Mariupol, and Volnovakha, where war has claimed countless loved ones. Calls for peace echo loudly, yet for the residents of Russia’s four new regions, peace remains elusive. They know who fired the shots: Western proxies, including Americans and Europeans, with the latter still clinging to the path of conflict.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... massacres/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Sun Apr 13, 2025 12:37 pm

The United States and the Starmer-Macron plan
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 04/13/2025

Image

“I have appealed to the participants in today's meeting in the Rammstein Contact Group format to focus, first and foremost, on Ukraine's air defense,” Zelensky stated in his remote address from his hometown of Krivoy Rog to his NATO allies in Germany. “We really need it,” he continued, “ten Patriot systems, the free world has them. What we need now are more political decisions to make them work for peace. We need that result.” Working for peace involves more weapons and less negotiations, as European countries and Ukraine have opted for the tactic of demanding unconditional compliance. “A month ago, Ukraine agreed to a 30-day ceasefire, and Russia still hasn't accepted it,” Kaja Kallas insisted again this week, referring to a truce that neither Brussels nor Kyiv wanted, and whose demand they have joined solely as a way to pressure Moscow.

“Our job as defense ministers is to get urgent military aid into the hands of the Ukrainian fighters,” stated John Healey before the meeting, who, in the absence of Pete Hegseth, wanted to become the summit leader. Calling 2025 a critical year for Ukraine, the British minister insisted that “today we are committing billions more” in military aid. The outcome of the meeting was a promise to provide Ukraine with $23.8 billion in military assistance. Despite the fact that talks seeking a resolution to the war are being held for the first time since 2022, several countries, including the United Kingdom, have announced their largest annual contributions since the start of the conflict. In line with his British counterpart, Boris Pistorius also expressed his commitment to military pressure. “Russia must understand that Ukraine can continue to fight, and we will support it,” he stated. The German version is that “given Russia’s continued aggression against Ukraine, we must admit that peace in Ukraine appears to be beyond our reach in the foreseeable future.” The European response to the situation is to increase the flow of aid to Ukraine, incentivize European military production, and proceed with the rearmament policy without opening any avenue for negotiation to avoid escalation and reduce tensions.

From across the beautiful ocean , much further from the battle and with no particular interest in Ukraine's future beyond its use as an extractive colony, Donald Trump hasn't changed his tune either, demanding a swift resolution to a war whose political causes he doesn't understand and which he has yet to find a way to solve. "Russia needs to get moving," he wrote on his personal social media platform, "too many people there are DYING, thousands a week in a terrible and senseless war. A war that never should have happened and wouldn't have happened if I had been president!" Donald Trump has forgotten that the Ukrainian policy of his first term was exactly the same as that followed by Obama and Biden and that he, too, was unable to resolve the Donbass conflict, a resolution of which would have made the Russian invasion in 2022 less likely.

However, despite his ignorance of the reality of the war and the constant errors and manipulations of the figures left by the conflict, Donald Trump's initiative remains the only one involving both countries that seeks to move from the heated phase of the war to diplomacy. On Friday night, for approximately four hours, Steve Witkoff, the United States envoy to the Middle East and a key interlocutor in the negotiations with the Russian Federation, met with Vladimir Putin in a meeting attended by senior Russian advisors Kiril Dmitriev and Yuri Ushakov. This is the third time Witkoff has met with Vladimir Putin since Donald Trump came to power. Before the meeting, details of which have not yet been revealed, Dmitry Peskov insisted that no major breakthroughs should be expected.

Russian skepticism and, above all, the experience of the seven-year Minsk process are an obstacle for Russia, aware of the risk of a false closure similar to the broken ceasefire of 2015, to act quickly. Even at the risk of offending Donald Trump and achieving Ukraine's goal of portraying Moscow as the main obstacle to peace, Russian tactics have not changed, and the Kremlin insists that the underlying causes of the conflict must be resolved rather than rushing into a truce that would likely follow the same path as those that followed one after another during the years of the Donbass war.

This reality implies the continuation of the war, mutual accusations of noncompliance with the commitment not to attack certain targets, and constant rumors of offensive movements. "The new spring offensive against northwestern Ukraine has already begun," Oleksandr Syrsky stated in his recent interview with LB.UA , referring to the Russian attacks in Sumi and Kharkiv, local and limited to pushing back Ukrainian troops to prevent a new scenario like Kursk, and the resumption of the most intense battle around Pokrovsk-Artyomovsk, where the war of attrition that has dragged on in Donbass continues. Syrsky's words come as the general tries to defend himself against accusations of mismanagement in scenarios like Kursk, a fight that has come at the cost of sacrificing resources that were needed on the southern and eastern fronts. Denouncing an enemy offensive acts as a way to divert attention and also as a way to appeal to its allies, who can be forced to increase their arms supplies by claiming greater danger. To do so, it is only necessary to exaggerate the magnitude of offensive actions whose capabilities are limited. This is demonstrated by the slowness with which the front has moved in all theaters except Kursk.

The relative paralysis of the front lines in the war of attrition, the continuation of mutual attacks in the rearguard, and the inability of diplomacy to take decisive steps toward any kind of resolution leave the door open for European countries to continue insisting on their plan, a coalition of the willing, to send a deterrence mission to Ukraine once a ceasefire is signed. According to several media outlets, six countries have expressed interest in sending troops—including France and the United Kingdom, which are sponsoring the initiative—while the United States reiterates its non-participation, although it appreciates, as Hegseth stated in his speech at the Rammstein group, the European efforts. Starmer and Macron's plan is specifically designed to attract Donald Trump, who is being asked for external participation in the form of a security mechanism in exchange for the promise that the cost and risk will be borne by the countries of the European Union and the United Kingdom, as he has been demanding for months.

Image

“Although Kellogg indicated that US participation in the coalition would be limited, he encouraged Starmer and other European leaders to ‘pick up the phone’ and make their case,” The Times reports in a report based on an interview with Trump’s envoy for Ukraine, the creator of the plan of incentives and threats that the White House is implementing to force Kyiv and Moscow to negotiate and possibly the most sympathetic to the Ukrainian government in the entire US administration. This is a clear signal that at least part of the Trump administration is willing to offer European countries the security mechanism they seek to make their desired military mission viable, which depends militarily and politically on the will of the White House. Only Washington can impose on Moscow the military presence of NATO countries, which the Kremlin has always considered a red line.

“Kellogg, 80, said the Anglo-French-led force west of the Dnipro River, which bisects Ukraine from north to south and runs through Kiev, ‘would not be provocative at all’ to Moscow. He said Ukraine was a country large enough to accommodate several armies trying to enforce a ceasefire,” The Times added , adding that the report also included a seemingly new idea from the general, which has caused a stir both for the measure itself and for the interpretation that has been made of the comparison it implies. “It could almost be like what happened to Berlin after the Second World War, when there was a Russian zone, a French zone, a British zone and an American zone,” Kellogg said, in a statement that he sought to clarify yesterday, believing that it had been misinterpreted. The Times , which presents the idea by providing a map of the different zones of influence and adds an infographic of Germany's occupation zones after World War II, does not hide the fact that it interprets Kellogg's words as a proposal for the partition of Ukraine, with which the general says he does not identify. "The Times article misrepresents what I said. I was referring to a post-ceasefire resilience force in support of Ukraine's sovereignty. By partition, I was referring to areas or zones of responsibility for an allied force (without US troops). I was NOT referring to a partition of Ukraine," Kellogg wrote yesterday. This is not a partition of Ukraine, but rather the explicit support of Donald Trump's envoy for Ukraine—whose views do not necessarily represent those of the rest of the administration, as has been made clear in the past—for Starmer and McCrone's plan to send a European military mission to Ukraine as part of a peace agreement.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/04/13/estad ... er-macron/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Bezuglaya reported that there was a missile attack in Sumy during a ceremonial formation for awarding Ukrainian military personnel. As usual, she blamed Syrsky for this. According to Bezuglaya, the information about the formation leaked from the SBU.

Residents of Ukraine can only be advised to stay as far away from Ukrainian military personnel and Ukrainian military facilities as possible. Being near them, you risk your life.

Image

***

Forwarded from
War on fakes
Fake: The Russian Armed Forces deliberately hit the civilian population of the city of Sumy with Iskander missiles. This was stated by Volodymyr Zelensky.

Truth: The strike by two high-precision Iskander-M OTRKs was carried out on the congress center of Sumy University, where the award ceremony of the militants of the Armed Forces of Ukraine was taking place. The electronic warfare systems installed there were able to deflect one of the missiles. The second missile hit the target right on target. Thus, the Ukrainian army once again exposed its own civilian population to attack. The human shield tactic has been used by the Armed Forces of Ukraine since the very beginning of the conflict.

The presence of military personnel on the territory of the congress center is also proven by the vehicles captured on camera by the Ukrainian media. For example, several army pickups are visible, including one with a tactical sign (triangle). Units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine with exactly these tactical signs invaded the Kursk region in August 2024. The concentration of vehicles of this type is not typical for urban conditions. Also, Ukrainian military personnel were captured on video in the first minutes after the explosion. What they were doing on Sunday at the supposedly "non-working" congress center is a rhetorical question.

The fact that the military award ceremony was held was confirmed by Verkhovna Rada deputy Maryana Bezugla:

"Appeal to Syrsky and separately to the commander of the TRO: do not gather the military for the award ceremony, and especially in civilian cities - again the Russians had information about the gathering. And there is still a formation at the training grounds..."

Ukrainian propaganda led by Zelensky is trying to use what happened to demonize Russia and try to disrupt the negotiations between Moscow and Washington.

***

Colonelcassad
1:18
The mayor of Konotop demanded that the Gauleiter of Sumy Oblast resign by 6 p.m., otherwise he threatens to tell "the whole truth about the attack on Sumy", transparently hinting that the attack was not just like that and that the injured civilians were simply set up, including the Gauleiter and the head of the SBU of Sumy Oblast.

In fact, all the hysterics of Shariy and other bastards are aimed at concealing the real culprits of the civilians who were injured, whom the Zelensky regime and its local representatives traditionally use as human shields.

The mayor of Konotop also reported that SBU Lieutenant General Artyukh was the first to flee Sumy after the attack, running over children with his car along the way.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Kit Klarenberg: Stepan Bandera’s Sinister MI6 Alliance Exposed
April 11, 2025
By Kit Klarenberg, Substack, 3/23/25

March 17th marked the 80th anniversary of the creation of the Ukrainian National Committee. With the Red Army rapidly advancing on Berlin, Nazi officials released Ukrainian ultranationalist military units from their command, and recognised the Committee – and a newly-formed National Army under its control – as the legitimate government of Ukraine. It was hoped the UNC would continue Hitler’s crusade against the Soviet Union following Berlin’s rapidly impending defeat in World War II, which occurred two months later.

The UNC’s establishment was eagerly supported by notorious Ukrainian ultranationalist Stepan Bandera, founder of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN-B) and Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), two ultranationalist factions heavily complicit in the Holocaust. As the mainstream media has acknowledged, his legacy endures in modern Ukraine, in the form of Neo-Nazi military units such as Azov Regiment, and he remains a much-celebrated figure in certain quarters of the country – much to the chagrin of Kiev’s Eastern European neighbours.

Bandera believed Nazi Germany’s UNC recognition would encourage American and British backing for OUN-B’s anti-Communist crusade, and Ukrainian independence. The Ukrainian Supreme Liberation Council (UHVR), which the OUN-B was instrumental in founding in 1944, was already in covert contact with London and Washington. As it was, no such formal support ever came to pass. Yet, little-known declassified CIA records expose the malign contours of a long-running conspiracy between Bandera and MI6 to destabilize the Soviet Union during the Cold War’s initial years.

This dark handshake only expired because MI6’s fascist asset was resistant to joining forces with other Ukrainian anti-Communist forces, therefore jeopardising plans by Washington and London for all-out war with Moscow in Donbass. That plot, intended to ultimately collapse the entire USSR, has eerie, direct echoes of the current Ukraine proxy war. So too Britain’s willingness, then and now, to go far further than the US in building alliances with the most reactionary, dangerous Ukrainian ultranationalist elements, in service of balkanising Russia.

‘Bandit Type’

MI6’s post-war relationship with Bandera began while he was exiled in post-war Munich, West Germany in 1948, via Gerhard von Mende. An ethnic German hailing from Riga, Latvia, von Mende has been described as an “enthusiastic Nazi” who headed Berlin’s Reich Ministry for the Occupied Eastern Territory, or Ostministerium. Among other connivances, von Mende was charged with recruiting fifth columnists from the USSR’s Central Asian republics, to undermine and attack Communist authorities. He has been credited with influencing subsequent British and American support for Islamic extremism.

Per a declassified CIA biography, after Nazi Germany’s defeat, von Mende was “interned as a ‘guest’” at the Agency’s Camp King, where Nazi officials and soldiers were interrogated and tortured. In some cases, inmates were unwittingly dosed with LSD under PROJECT BLUEBIRD, a forerunner of the CIA’s notorious MKULTRA mind control program. Subsequently, von Mende became an asset for West Germany’s Nazi-riddled BND, the CIA, and MI6, continuing to recruit anti-Communist assets in the USSR via a front company.

Image
A modern celebration of Stepan Bandera, Ukraine

Through this position, von Mende was kept abreast of UPA activities and capabilities, and maintained an intimate personal relationship with Bandera. The Ukrainian fascist ideologue’s thuggish West German network was by then hard at work killing hundreds of local citizens suspected by the CIA and MI6 of harboring Communist sympathies. While the OUN-B chief’s “ask” of British intelligence was initially judged too high, that perspective rapidly changed. By 1949, MI6 was helping Bandera airdrop his chaos agents into Ukraine.

A year later, Britain’s foreign spy agency began formally training these operatives to gather intelligence and carry out sabotage and assassinations on Soviet soil. This sinister compact was established despite stern CIA and State Department opposition. The Agency considered UHVR, which by this point had cut ties with Bandera’s murderous ultranationalist mob, a far more palatable alternative. The group was now led by Ukrainian-Greek Catholic priest Ivan Hrinioch, a “longtime CIA asset”, and former high ranking OUN-B operative Mykola Lebed.

During World War II, Lebed oversaw the UPA’s massacre of tens of thousands of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia. However, he subsequently disavowed this genocidal carnage, and led UHVR’s push to unite Ukrainian emigres, who had fractured due to bloody, internecine squabbles towards the conflict’s end. Under the auspices of Operation AERODYNAMIC, for decades the CIA exploited UHVR to foment “nationalist flare-ups” throughout the Soviet Union, “particularly” in Ukraine, and “encourage divisive manifestations among” the population, to “exert pressure on the Soviet regime.”

Image
Internal CIA description of Operation AERODYNAMIC

By this time, Bandera had fallen out of favour with many Ukrainian nationalists more generally, even renounced by what remained of OUN-B’s Kiev-based leadership. This, his genocidal past, and overt anti-US actions and statements due to Washington’s refusal to publicly advocate for Ukrainian independence, all deterred the CIA from employing him. MI6 was unperturbed however, and pushed ahead with its Bandera operations. This created a ludicrous situation, with London and Washington supporting bitterly antagonistic Ukrainian nationalist factions, which frequently undermined and attacked each other.

As a British intelligence memo on “the crisis over Bandera” noted, by 1950 Ukrainian nationalist leaders had “become aware of the fact that the British and Americans were backing rival groups,” putting the agencies’ joint anti-Soviet projects at risk. It was decided to dispatch a cosigned message to UPA headquarters via Ukrainian CIA and MI6 agents parachuted into Lviv, calling for an end to “present disagreements” between opposing nationalist factions, which London and Washington professed to “deplore” and hoped “may be resolved.”

Image

It signed off with the now-infamous, Bandera-coined nationalist slogan, “Glory to the Ukraine” (“Slava Ukraini”). The memo’s MI6 author moreover recalled an in-person meeting he had with Bandera in London. The spy described him thus:

“Convincing and sincere…a professional underground worker with a terrorist background and ruthless notions about the rules of the game, acquired by hard experience, along with a thorough knowledge of the Ukrainian people…a bandit type if you like, with a burning patriotism which provides an ethical background and a justification for his banditry.”

The MI6 operative cheerfully added that genocidal mass murderer Bandera was “no better and no worse than others of his kind I have had dealings with in the past,” and “genuinely grateful for the help given to him” by British intelligence, “but at the same time is certainly trying to get all he can out of it.” The CIA begged to differ however, commissioning a study of London and Washington’s conflicting positions on the “Ukrainian underground” and Bandera, and how to resolve this divergence.

‘Political Overtones’

An ensuing appraisal repeatedly declared Bandera and OUN-B to be “completely unacceptable” to the CIA, “both from the political and the operational standpoints.” It proposed the Agency and MI6 take joint ownership of the UHVR and its anti-Soviet wrecking project in Ukraine, and “exchange political, operational and intelligence data resulting from these operations.” Meanwhile, the CIA would “take independent action to neutralize” OUN-B’s “present leadership”, including Bandera himself. It’s unknown if this was pitched to MI6, although London’s steadfast opposition was inevitable.

Image

The “British position”, as described in the study, was Bandera’s “importance” had been serially “underestimated by the Americans, as a rallying symbol in the Ukraine, as leader of a large emigre group [and] as a leader favored by the homeland headquarters.” This didn’t tally with the reality on-the-ground as detected by the CIA, but MI6 had a vested interest in maintaining the fascist demagogue as an agent. An April 1951 Agency memo summarizing recent “talks” with British intelligence “on operations against the USSR” noted:

“[MI6 is] seeking progressively to assume control of Bandera’s lines…[MI6 argues] Bandera’s name still carried considerable weight in the Ukraine…[and OUN-B is] the strongest Ukrainian organization abroad, is deemed competent to train party cadres, [and] build a morally and politically healthy organization.”

By contrast, the CIA observed Soviet authorities “had been successful to a remarkable degree in transforming the mentality of the younger generation” of Ukrainians, resulting in them vehemently rejecting Bandera and his brand of rabid nationalism. While the Agency therefore favoured “political neutralization of Bandera as an individual”, MI6 balked, as this “would lead to a drying up of recruits” and “disrupt British operations.” However, the declassified papertrail shows London eventually tired of their fascist asset.

In February 1954, a senior MI6 official who led liaison with OUN-B for two decades made a “final attempt to bring Bandera to reason” in London, due to the genocidaire’s refusal to reconcile and unite with opposing Ukrainian nationalist elements. The high-ranking British spook offered him “one last chance” to make amends with émigré leaders. Bandera “refused this suggestion with arrogant finality,” thus making “the break” between Bandera and MI6 “complete.”

All British intelligence-run Ukrainian agents who remained loyal to Bandera were duly jettisoned. MI6 informed other nationalist leaders the agency “would not resume” its relationship with him “under any circumstances.” Bandera remained exiled in Munich, and continued to run belligerent cloak-and-dagger operations against the Soviet Union, while ratcheting up his anti-Western rhetoric. The CIA and MI6 viewed these activities as a significant problem, with no obvious solution.

As CIA records of a January 1955 “joint US-UK conference” put it, despite the “unanimous desire” of British and American intelligence to “‘quiet’ Bandera,” it was equally vital the KGB was “not allowed to kidnap or kill him.” This could make Bandera “a martyr” among Ukrainian ultranationalists, a prospect to be avoided if at all possible. Hence, London and Washington kept him alive and well, while permitting West Germany’s BND to run him as an agent. Their old friend Gerhard von Mende was his handler.

West German authorities wished to punish Bandera and his in-country network for crimes including kidnapping, but von Mende consistently intervened to insulate his compatriot from prosecution. A July 1959 CIA report noted the BND’s use of Bandera was such a “closely held” secret within the agency, it wasn’t even formally cleared with the West German government, “due to political overtones.” Despite this omertà, the BND moved to secure Bandera a US visa.

Image
Excerpt from CIA document
It was hoped he would connect with Ukrainian emigres Stateside, while ingratiating himself with the CIA and State Department. Per an October 5th 1959 Agency memo, the BND believed “it should be a simple matter” for the CIA “to influence the issuing of a visa” for Bandera, as “many less desirable and less ‘exploitable’ individuals” had already visited the country via Agency assistance. A formal request was resultantly submitted to Washington. Just 10 days later though, the KGB assassinated Bandera in Munich.

Despite their mutual wish Bandera not be “martyred” by Soviet intelligence, it is likely the CIA and MI6 breathed a collective sigh of relief upon news of his death. The OUN-B and UPA founder’s destabilising, disruptive influence within the Ukrainian anti-Communist underground was a significant impediment to Anglo-American spying agencies implementing a far grander plan than any they had hitherto tried. Namely, fomenting all-out war against the Soviet Union, using Ukrainians as footsoldiers.

This is the first instalment of a two-part investigation. Stay tuned.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/04/kit ... e-exposed/

Russia Matters: Putin Hosts Wiktoff to Discuss Ukraine, While US, RF Make Progress on Diplomatic Missions
April 12, 2025
Russia Matters, 4/11/25

Vladimir Putin hosted Steve Witkoff to discuss Ukraine and, possibly, Iran, but so far details of the meeting, which was not announced in advance and which was not followed by any media opportunities, have been scarce in the public domain. Putin hosted Wiktoff in St. Petersburg on April 11 in what became their third meeting to explore ways Russia and the U.S. could move toward putting an end to the Russian-Ukrainian war as well as, possibly, the Iran issue, but as of 4:00 p.m. (UTC−05:00), no details were reported on either what exactly the two discussed or whether and what the outcomes of the four-hour meeting may have produced. Prior to the meeting, Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov cautioned reporters that it was unlikely to produce “decisive results.”1 At the beginning of the meeting, Peskov said “the negotiation process itself is a closed process,” making clear that the sides were not going to reveal details to the public. Indeed, after the meeting was over, neither Putin nor Wiktoff made any public comments, with Trump’s envoy leaving the venue. Commenting on the contents of the talks after the meeting was over, Peskov only said that the talks focused on “aspects of a peaceful settlement in Ukraine.” According to pro-Kremlin Russian political expert Sergei Markov, however, Putin and Wiktoff also discussed Iran’s nuclear program, which is something that Witkoff is to discuss during the next leg of his trip on April 12 in Oman. Unlike Putin’s previous two meetings with Witkoff in Moscow,2 Russian TV showed the beginning of the meeting, which took place in the Boris Yeltsin presidential library. The footage featured Putin and Wiktoff approaching each other in one of the library’s halls, smiling and shaking hands, with Wiktoff also placing his right hands on his heart. Prior to the meeting with Putin, in which Putin’s foreign policy aide Yuri Ushakov and his foreign investment envoy Kiril Dmitriev also participated,3 Witkoff held a separate meeting on April 11 with Dmitriev. The two have earlier met for talks in Saudi Arabia and then in the U.S.4 After the April 4 talks in Washington, Dmitriev was asked to take a message back to Putin that the U.S. “needs to know whether you’re serious about peace,” according to Marco Rubio as Trump grew impatient with Putin over the lack of momentum on negotiations toward a ceasefire.5 In his latest comments on the need to end the war, Trump wrote on TruthSocial on April 11: “Russia has to get moving.”
U.S. and Russian delegations led by Russia’s new ambassador to the United States, Alexander Darchiyev and U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Russia and Central Europe Sonata Coulter, respectively, claimed progress after meeting in Istanbul on April 10 for a second round of talks aimed at normalizing the operations of their diplomatic missions. At the meeting the U.S. delegation reiterated concerns about the current Russian policy prohibiting the U.S. Embassy in Moscow from employing local staff. In his turn, Darchiyev stated that the United States and Russia discussed and agreed to measures to facilitate the movement of diplomats and accelerate the granting of diplomatic visas, according to ISW. He also stated that the Russian delegation prioritized discussions about the return of confiscated Russian diplomatic property. While the talks were supposed to be focused on diplomatic missions only, the Russian delegation was also to ask the U.S. to lift sanctions against its flagship airline Aeroflot to resume direct flights with America, according to Reuters.
Russia gained 113 square miles of Ukraine’s territory (about 1 Nantucket island) in the past month, though its overall pace of advance declined this week, according to the April 9, 2025, issue of the Russia-Ukraine War Report Card. Last week’s gain of 47 square miles (March 25–April 1) was followed April 2–8 by a gain of only 29 square miles, according to the card. This week, Ukraine again continued its fighting withdrawal from Kursk, giving up control of only a single square mile of territory there. At the same time, both Ukrainian and Russian sources confirmed that Ukrainian forces were operating in the neighboring Belgorod region of Russia this week, according to the card. The deceleration of the Russian army’s pace of weekly gains in Ukraine contrasts with Putin’s recent claim that the Russian armed forces are “set to finish them [Ukrainian forces] off.” Putin made this claim even though, as RM staff estimated in a recent news digest, it would take the Russian forces 15 years or more at their recent rate just to capture the entire regions of Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, if the Russian forces were to focus only on these four regions. The gap between Putin’s claim and actual progress on the battlefield may have several causes. One may be that Russia was consolidating its forces in preparation for a major renewed offensive. Another, which may have been overlooked, is Putin’s desire to repeat his success in misleading Trump6 on the situation on key parts of the Russian-Ukrainian frontline. If key members of the Trump team take Putin’s most recent claims of imminent victory as fact, that would logically change the administration’s bargaining position in ceasefire or peace negotiations, and it would represent a smart, cheap, low-risk strategy to gain more from a favorable shift in the U.S. position through disinformation than through military achievements on the battlefield.*
Bridget Brink, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, is stepping down following increasing policy disagreements with Donald Trump’s administration, people familiar with her decision told FT. Her departure also comes amid a deterioration in her working relationship with Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the people said. Ukrainian officials said they saw Brink as being too critical of them, particularly of the country’s efforts to root out entrenched corruption, according to FT.
The price for Brent fell to a four-year low of below $60 a barrel this week after China and the U.S. escalated their tariff war7 and the OPEC+ group pledged to boost output next month, according to Bloomberg. However, the plunge won’t be a game changer for Russia’s ability to finance its war machine as rising revenue from non-energy sectors and rainy-day reserves help offset losses, this news agency estimated. While Russia’s National Wealth Fund has slimmed down since the start of the invasion, it’s still sufficient to make up any shortfall in oil revenue for the next 18–24 months should Russia’s crude cost around $50 a barrel, according to estimates by Bloomberg Economics.
The share price of JPMorgan’s EMEA Securities Trust, formerly JPMorgan Russian Securities, trades at five times its net asset value (NAV), having nearly tripled in the last six months, according to investment writer Max King’s estimate published by British weekly investment magazine MoneyWeek.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/04/rus ... -missions/

'Russia matters' is not a friendly publication.

******

The US empire's many bad options

The jungle is winning. From Brzezinski to Kagan. The economic history of western consumer imperialism. Tariffs and reverse Kissinger. Counter-productive proxies.

Events in Ukraine
Apr 11, 2025

In what is hard to describe otherwise than the disintegration of the US-managed liberal internationalist order, I wanted to take a look at its history and future. From the 1990s vision of the USA gradually delegating economic power to loyal allies, to the current fixation on military force to prevent the irresistible tide of ‘the jungle’. I’ll even divulge my view on the political economy of western consumer imperialism.

First, history. The 1990s, the peak of American unipolar power and arrogance. The end of history, the absence of alternatives. And if Fukuyama provided the ideology, Zbigniew Brzezinski provided the geo-strategy.

Image

After serving as national security advisor to Jimmy Carter and counsellor to Lyndon Johnson, he could now distil the formula for continued US victory. Brzezinski’s hawkishness is perhaps most well known in terms of his management of the proxy war against the USSR in Afghanistan. It was with reference to this ‘successful’ Afghanistan policy that Democrat strategists like Brzezinski advocated arming Ukraine against modern Russia:

Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?

B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?


Surely Brzezinski, the consummate cold warrior, believed in the eternal power of the west? In fact, his stance in his classic 1997 book was more nuanced.

Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives

Of course, on the one hand, Brzezinski was optimistic:

for some time to come—for more than a generation—America's status as the world's premier power is unlikely to be contested by any single challenger. No nation-state is likely to match America in the four key dimensions of power (military, economic, technological, and cultural) that cumulatively produce decisive global political clout. Short of a deliberate or unintentional American abdication, the only real alternative to American global leadership in the foreseeable future is international anarchy. In that respect, it is correct to assert that America has become, as President Clinton put it, the world's "indispensable nation."

But he still accepted the US would inevitably be contested. However, he believed that a multipolar world could emerge peacefully:

since America's unprecedented power is bound to diminish over time, the priority must be to manage the rise of other regional powers in ways that do not threaten America's global primacy. As in chess, American global planners must think several moves ahead, anticipating possible countermoves.

But Brzezinski didn’t think that new centers of power should be allowed to emerge on their own conditions. Instead, the US had to craft the global chessboard to its benefit.

Image

It was in this context that he considered eastward NATO expansion indispensable – it would unify the Europeans under the aegis of US leadership, and prevent the emergence of intra-european conflicts:

The enlargement of NATO and the EU would serve to reinvigorate Europe's own waning sense of a larger vocation, while consolidating, to the benefit of both America and Europe, the democratic gains won through the successful termination of the Cold War. At stake in this effort is nothing less than America's long-range relationship with Europe itself. A new Europe is still taking shape, and if that new Europe is to remain geopolitically a part of the "EuroAtlantic" space, the expansion of NATO is essential. By the same token, a failure to widen NATO, now that the commitment has been made, would shatter the concept of an expanding Europe and demoralize the Central Europeans. It could even reignite currently dormant or dying Russian geopolitical aspirations in Central Europe. Indeed, the failure of the American-led effort to expand NATO could reawaken even more ambitious Russian desires. It is not yet evident—and the historical record is strongly to the contrary— that the Russian political elite shares Europe's desire for a strong and enduring American political and military presence. ....

There must be few Americans cited more often in Russia than Brzezinski. Brzezinski articulated what looks like the fundamental US interest in Ukraine. The following paragraph became particularly infamous:

Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire. Russia without Ukraine can still strive for imperial status, but it would then become a predominantly Asian imperial state, more likely to be drawn into debilitating conflicts with aroused Central Asians, who would then be resentful of the loss of their recent independence and would be supported by their fellow Islamic states to the south.

Clearly, the die was set long ago when it came to Ukraine. American geo-strategists saw NATO expansion to be of existential importance. Without it, Europe would cease to be a reliable US ally, and without Europe, US control over Eurasia – ‘the global heartland, or the pivot for world power’, as Brzezinski put it. Even in the late 90s, they were thinking about an upcoming confrontation with Russia:

If a choice has to be made between a larger Euro-Atlantic system and a better relationship with Russia, the former has to rank incomparably higher to America. For that reason, any accommodation with Russia on the issue of NATO enlargement should not entail an outcome that has the effect of making Russia a de facto decision-making member of the alliance, thereby diluting NATO's special Euro-Atlantic character while simultaneously relegating its newly admitted members to second-class status. That would create opportunities for Russia to resume not only the effort to regain a sphere of influence in Central Europe but to use its presence within NATO to play on any American-European disagreements in order to reduce the American role in European affairs

Regardless, Brzezinski seemed to think that such a confrontation was not entirely necessary. He was fundamentally optimistic about his country’s imperial capacity:

The most immediate task is to make certain that no state or combination of states gains the capacity to expel the United States from Eurasia or even to diminish significantly its decisive arbitrating role.

….

The first phase must, therefore, logically and deliberately lead into the second, one in which a benign American hegemony still discourages others from posing a challenge not only by making the costs of the challenge too high but also by not threatening the vital interests of Eurasia's potential regional aspirants. What that requires specifically, as the middle-term goal, is the fostering of genuine partnerships, predominant among them those with a more united and politically defined Europe and with a regionally preeminent China, as well as with (one hopes) a postimperial and Europe-oriented Russia and, on the southern fringe of Eurasia, with a regionally stabilizing and democratic India. But it will be the success or failure of the effort to forge broader strategic relationships with Europe and China, respectively, that will shape the denning context for Russia's role, either positive or negative

At the height of unipolarity, US imperial planners were already thinking about a multipolar world. But they thought they could manage its emergence. They hoped to install pro-American, pro-western governments in these new emerging centres – ‘a postimperial and Europe-oriented Russia’, for instance.

The carrot, rather than the stick, was seen as the main weapon of US influence. Brezinski urged a free trade agreement with Japan in order to keep it on Washington’s side:

It also follows that Japan—if it is to turn its face to the world and away from Asia—must be given a meaningful incentive and a special status, so that its own national interest is thereby well served. Unlike China, which can seek global power by first becoming a regional power, Japan can gain global influence by eschewing the quest for regional power. But that makes it all the more important for Japan to feel that it is America's special partner in a global vocation that is as politically satisfying as it is economically beneficial. To that end, the United States would do well to consider the adoption of an American-Japanese free trade agreement, thereby creating a common American-Japanese economic space.

For America, Japan should be its vital and foremost partner in the construction of an increasingly cooperative and pervasive system of global cooperation but not primarily its military ally in any regional arrangement designed to contest China's regional preeminence.


Imperial dominance could be sustained by free trade and beneficial economic cooperation, rather than military contestation.

Brzezinski published his plan for continued US pre-eminence in 1997. Now fast forward to 2018.

Image

Robert Kagan, one of the most influential neoconservative intellectuals, advisor to numerous Republican and Democrat administrations, co-founder of the ultra-hawkish Project for a New American Century, editor at the Washington Post, publishes his latest manifesto in favour of liberal internationalism.

Just like Brzezinski, Kagan is also deeply involved with Ukraine. Kagan is husband of Victoria Nuland, who occupied top positions in the State Department from 2013-2017 and 2023-2024, was one of the most powerful figures in the Democrat power elite pushing for greater involvement in Ukraine. Whenever I write about ‘Sorosites’ here, one might as well call them ‘Nulandites’, or ‘Kaganites’. Nuland, among other positions, is member of the board for the National Endowment for Democracy.

Image
Nuland famously handed out cookies at the euromaidan events of 2013-14 in Ukraine. Whether because of her cookies or not, the ‘revolution’ in favor of joining the EU and NATO came to a violent victory.

Kagan shares the same liberal imperialist ideology as Brzezinski, but the tone is vastly more pessimistic. Here is the main argument of the Jungle Grows Back:

The liberal world order is fragile and impermanent. Like a garden, it is ever under siege from the natural forces of history, the jungle whose vines and weeds constantly threaten to overwhelm it.

Kagan constantly criticizes any idea of historical progress:

Today there are signs all around us that the jungle is growing back. Where once many hoped that all the nations and peoples of the world would converge on a common path of liberal democratic capitalist development, we now see authoritarianism surviving if not thriving. Today a Russian dictator and European would-be dictators boast of their illiberalism, and a Chinese leader, wielding the absolute power of a Mao, portrays his nation as a model for the world.

Kagan’s view is clearly dominant among the western elite. Recall Josep Borell, EU foreign policy chief in 2022:

"Europe is a garden. We have built a garden. Everything works. It is the best combination of political freedom, economic prosperity and social cohesion that the humankind has been able to build – the three things together… The rest of the world…. is not exactly a garden. Most of the rest of the world is a jungle, and the jungle could invade the garden

Image

Borell called EU diplomats ‘gardeners’, and urged them to go back into the wilds of the global ‘jungle’:

A nice small garden surrounded by high walls in order to prevent the jungle from coming in is not going to be a solution. Because the jungle has a strong growth capacity, and the wall will never be high enough in order to protect the garden…

Europeans have to be much more engaged with the rest of the world. Otherwise, the rest of the world will invade us, by different ways and means.


I read Brzezinski and Kagan in March 2022. I’d just left Ukraine, and it felt like a good time to understand the forces animating the world. Three years later, Ukraine remains central to this shift from a ‘benign’ free trade empire to an ever more erratic, protectionist, militarized one. Brzezinski had much hope that America’s allies would soften the inevitable fall of US supremacy. How effective has America’s Ukrainian ally been in that role? And what does all this have to do with Trump’s tariffs and the idea of pulling a ‘reverse Kissinger’, allying Russia with the US against China? What are the limits of US power?

Economic long durée
To begin with, the historical conditions of possibility of western dominance, however short or long-lived, should be kept in mind.

(Paywall with free option.)

https://eventsinukraine.substack.com/p/ ... ad-options

******

On April 12, an F-16 fighter jet was shot down in the Sumy region
April 13, 13:00

Image

The Russian Defense Ministry officially confirmed the information about the downing of an American F-16 fighter with a Ukrainian pilot in Sumy Oblast yesterday. The aircraft was hit by a S-400 air defense missile system, from whose missiles the Ukrainian Air Force pilot was unable to evade.
The aircraft fell in Sumy Oblast, the pilot (Mankurt Pavel Ivanov) was killed. This is the first 100% confirmed downing of an F-16 by our air defense systems in Ukraine.
Before this, 1 aircraft was damaged/destroyed on the ground and another was shot down by "air defense titans" from the Patriot air defense system.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9779577.html

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Mon Apr 14, 2025 12:12 pm

The United Kingdom in the proxy war against Russia
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 04/14/2025

Image

“On a spring morning, two months after Vladimir Putin’s invading armies entered Ukraine, a convoy of unmarked cars slithered up to a Kiev street corner and picked up two middle-aged men in civilian clothes,” The New York Times writes , opening its report on the United States’ role in leading the proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. “The passengers were senior Ukrainian generals. Their destination was Clay Kaserne, the U.S. Army Europe and Africa headquarters in Wiesbaden, Germany. Their mission was to help forge what would become one of the most closely guarded secrets of the war in Ukraine,” the report continues, revealing that “the convoy, crewed by plainclothes but heavily armed British commandos, traveled 400 miles west to the Polish border. The crossing proceeded smoothly, armed with diplomatic passports. They later arrived at Rzeszów-Jasionka Airport, where an idle C-130 cargo plane was waiting for them.” This is the first of many mentions of the United Kingdom's role in the joint effort against Russia that began in February 2022 and continues today, now with a much more prominent role for British political and military authorities given the US government's stepping aside since Donald Trump came to power.

From Weisbaden, in western Germany, and with the collaboration of other countries, the United States has led the Ukrainian military effort, boasting of successes and blaming Ukraine for mistakes. In that effort, “a Polish general became General Donahue’s deputy. A British general would manage the logistical hub in a former basketball court. A Canadian would oversee training,” The New York Times states in describing the joint effort. However, the thrust of the US article focuses on the role of generals like Donahue and the importance of US weapons, organization, intelligence, and planning, while the role of the other Western allies is overlooked. Even so, the report acknowledges the British role at key moments, especially once the management of preparations for the 2023 counteroffensive began to cause serious problems between the US and Ukrainian military representations due to Kyiv’s objectives and demands.

In this context, The New York Times acknowledges the value of the British contribution, both for its good relationship with Ukraine and for its presence on the ground. “‘I’ll take care of it,’ Wallace said. The British military had considerable influence in Kyiv; unlike the Americans, they had sent small teams of officers into the country after the invasion. Now the defense minister was wielding that influence and demanding that the Ukrainians dismiss the commander,” the newspaper writes, referring to the initiative of Ben Wallace, then British defense minister, to mediate between the disputing parties.

An article published by The Times , focusing on the political and military role of the United Kingdom, seeks to complement The New York Times ' account and highlight the importance of the British role in managing the difficult times and overcoming the friction that had arisen between Ukraine and the United States due to differences of opinion on the directions of the offensive, the necessary material and the moment in which it should begin. “While Britain’s unwavering support for its eastern European ally has been no secret, the extent of its involvement and influence—last-minute trips to Kiev, helping to forge battle plans and gathering vital intelligence on the Russians—has remained largely hidden. Until now,” The Times says , adding that “behind closed doors, Ukrainians refer to British military chiefs as the ‘brains’ of the ‘anti-Putin’ coalition of the US, Britain and dozens of other like-minded nations. Known for having the temerity to deploy troops inside the country when no one else would, Britain’s role in the war has been deeper than many observers might think.”

In 2023, the report states, “everything threatened to spiral out of control.” “Ukraine had launched its long-awaited offensive, a key moment in the war in which, having shocked the world by expelling Russia from the gates of Kiev in its opening days, Ukraine saw an opportunity to regain ground in the Donbass region and change the dynamics of a grueling battlefield. But things were not going well,” writes The Times , embracing the more optimistic view of an offensive that “was supposed to be the turning point of the war. There was a sense of optimism within the coalition that the battle would be Ukraine’s last and that President Putin would be forced to accept peace.” With the arrogance of someone who perceives himself superior and is unable to understand that the other side had been preparing for months to defend itself against a predictable offensive that could only take place exactly where it did, the United Kingdom and Ukraine - and to a lesser extent the United States, the only party that, according to The New York Times, questioned the feasibility of capturing Melitopol - firmly believed that this battle would put Russia between a rock and a hard place and force the Kremlin to accept the only peace they were willing to accept: the victory of Ukraine and the unconditional defeat of the Russian Federation.

“It was then that Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, a privately educated boy from Oldham, and his two ‘top lieutenants’, Lieutenant-General Sir Roly Walker and Lieutenant-General Sir Charlie Stickland, earned the respect of Ukrainians and Americans alike,” boasts The Times , explaining that “in the weeks before it began, General Sir Jim Hockenhull, the head of the strategic command and a former head of defence intelligence, met with Kirilo Budanov, the head of Ukrainian military intelligence. They discussed how they could work together to achieve the objectives of the counterattack: Hockenhull had highly sensitive military assets.” By this time, Budanov was conducting extensive drone operations in the Black Sea and had promised that his troops would reach Crimea before the summer, an optimism he apparently shared with his British partners.

In a subtle reference to Britain's importance in terms of intelligence, a well-known fact about the relationship with the GUR, The Times explains that "while Walker and Stickland collaborated on the planning, Hockenhull, operating in the shadows, provided information on the Russians. 'They needed enough information to be effective in what they were doing. They needed an advantage against a numerically superior adversary.'" It was May 2023, and, according to the British outlet, "the Ukrainians had a problem. The plan was for all the materiel from the United States, the United Kingdom, and other countries to arrive by the end of March. But the end of March turned into the end of April, and then the end of May." The British outlet claims, quoting a British military source, that "Ukraine kept waiting to have all the materiel, and we kept saying you have to go, that Russia isn't strong. You have to challenge them; you have enough equipment." In other words, the United Kingdom was pressuring Ukraine to launch a counteroffensive when the military authorities in Kiev were still claiming they didn't have all the necessary equipment. Despite Ukrainian criticism, The Times insists that "at the time, the weapons they had been given for the counteroffensive were equal to those available to the entire British army."

That mobilization of resources didn't yield the expected results, and by June, when it was already clear that Ukraine was not going to break through the Zaporozhye front and had abandoned the tactic of large convoys—which were quickly destroyed by Russian mines, artillery, and drones—in favor of smaller infantry groups, American impatience began to set in. "They reached a point where they had run their own war games and said it was time," says a defense source. "The Ukrainians said that everyone, including the Americans and the British, had underestimated the Russian obstacles they would face and also the characteristics of the modern battlefield." "The road was littered with Russian landmines, and those trying to clear them faced the threat of drones exploding overhead," reports The Times . As before, Western sources seem surprised by the fact that Russia had prepared its defense, mined fields to impede the advance of tanks, and managed to catch up with the technology that has changed this war and in which it had lagged behind: drones. Perhaps the US and British intelligence work so lauded by the media was not as comprehensive as they would have us believe, although, in reality, information about Russia's performance in terms of preparation for the offensive did not require extensive resources and was described by Russian journalists who visited the Zaporozhye front throughout the winter and spring of 2023.

Under pressure from the United States, which, according to British sources, demanded results, Zaluzhny set about explaining to the British military commanders, his preferred interlocutors, that the recruits, “in their thirties and forties, not twenty,” “spent only three days at the front. The first was a day to settle in. The second was a day to push forward 200 or 300 meters, and the third day was for consolidating and making way for fresh troops,” a process that Ukraine's allies viewed as “slow and tedious.” According to the British newspaper, the United States was wondering “what the hell was going on” and demanding “a much faster pace.”

Image

It was at this tense moment that The Times understands the main British intervention took place. “Radakin cut short a long-planned holiday and told Wallace, with whom he worked closely, that he needed to go to Ukraine to bring the two sides together. Radakin reportedly told him the situation was ‘too contentious.’ The plan was for Radakin to sit down with Zaluzhny, listen to the Ukrainians, and try to explain his point of view to the Americans via video call from Kyiv. Radakin boarded the Soviet-era overnight train from Poland to Kyiv to discuss it in person with Zaluzhny, who would later become Ukraine’s top diplomat in Britain and a favorite to succeed Zelensky,” the outlet states, suggesting a close relationship between London and Valery Zaluzhny, who has been leading in polls for months ahead of a possible presidential election. The United Kingdom also had the advantage of having personnel on the ground, as "the Americans only went to Ukraine rarely due to concerns about appearing too involved in the war, unlike British military commanders, who were free to go whenever they deemed necessary. Sometimes their visits were so sensitive that they went in civilian clothes."

The Times 's great success is that "British diplomacy brought the two sides back together, and in mid-August, Radakin, Zaluzhny, and Cavoli met in person on the Polish-Ukrainian border. During a five-hour discussion, they drew up plans for a counteroffensive and outlined plans for the winter, as well as for the following year. It was a signal that the Americans weren't going anywhere." The image of that meeting was published in The New York Times report and also used by Valery Zaluzhny in his post responding to the report.

Despite the epic nature of the counteroffensive that The Times wishes to attribute to British participation in the Western effort, the 2023 operation ultimately became the turning point that Kiev's allies had hoped for, although not in the way they had hoped. Ukraine was unable to break through the front and did not even approach Melitopol, considered the gateway to Crimea , thus never managing to put Russia between a rock and a hard place . Ukraine not only failed to achieve its offensive objectives, but also compromised its defense by ceding the initiative. Those brigades trained by the Western allies to advance on the southern territories, for example the 47th Brigade, were converted into defensive teams in lost battles such as Avdeevka, a clear sign of the change that had occurred on the front and from which Ukraine sought to escape with the Kursk operation, which ultimately also failed to achieve what it sought.

In this situation, and with no possibility of militarily defeating Russia at the front, the United Kingdom is leading the European effort to introduce a Western armed mission into Ukrainian territory as a means of deterrence and Western control of the country after a proxy war in which, according to British military sources cited by The Times , “Ukraine has paid a terrible price for defending itself, but it has also given us a window into modern warfare.” In this proxy war, Ukraine—which Western countries, including the United Kingdom, encouraged to continue fighting in 2022 when diplomacy was expected to yield a better deal than it will achieve militarily—provides the dead, and its allies reap the benefits of using the theater of operations as a testing ground they do not wish to lose.

“As Britain’s commitment to Ukraine’s defense deepens, some are wary of where the road ends. John Foreman, a former defense attaché in Moscow and Kiev, is nervous about the looming prospect of an open-ended military commitment in Ukraine with an “uncertain mission” that could last more than a decade, as well as the impact this could have on NATO,” The Times concludes . As Foreman admits, “It’s easy to get involved in a war, harder to get out.”

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/04/14/el-re ... tra-rusia/

Google Translator

*******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
The background to today's shelling in Sumy, where, according to updated data, 34 people, two children, and 117 wounded were killed.

I worked in Sumy in the fall of 2022-fall of 23 in the Sumy Regional Council at the invitation of the head of the OVA.

It was a difficult period, shelling, provocations, and I had to constantly move to different meeting places.

Similar things happened in the OVA or the regional council.

The congress center, where I arrived today, was just one of the camouflaged meeting centers of the OVA, where awards were held, among other things (on the first floor).

What Maryana Bezugla is talking about (that there were awards there this morning) is quite possible, since this happened there all the time.

Sumy is literally teeming with Russian agents, they don't really tell us about this, the security agencies and deputies are full of Derkach's people and someone simply leaked information about the event.

Judging by the fact that the head of the OVA Artyukh filmed a video literally after the hit, he obviously either just left the Congress Center or was there for the presentation.


(c) Oleg Popenko

***

Colonelcassad
Gauleiter of Konotop confirmed once again that the attack on Sumy was carried out on the gathering of the 117th Volkssturm Brigade. And Gauleiter of Sumy Oblast Artyukh and the head of the SBU for Sumy Oblast are to blame for this.
He also reported that Gauleiter Artyukh is to blame for the flight to Sumy on March 24, when more than 100 civilians were injured after the detonation of a damaged ammunition depot in Sumy. He promises to continue to expose those involved in the deaths of civilians in Sumy.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

*******

Bombshell Reports: "German Weapons Not Made for War"
Simplicius
Apr 12, 2025

Spiegel published a quite eye-opening piece yesterday, which reveals the long-kept truth about the performance of German weapons systems in real wartime conditions:

Image
https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschl ... b1c9193b67
Before we delve into it, here is a summary of what the article found:

Image

A German military assessment exposes major issues with NATO weapons in Ukraine.

The PzH 2000 howitzer, while advanced, is so technically fragile that its combat usefulness is in doubt. The Leopard 1A5 tank is used mostly as makeshift artillery due to weak armor. The Leopard 2A6 is too expensive and complex to maintain at the front.

Air defense systems also face problems. The IRIS-T works well, but ammo is too costly and scarce. The Patriot system is called “unsuitable for combat” because its MAN carrier vehicles are outdated and lack spare parts.

This information was revealed in a transcript of a lecture given by the deputy military attaché of the German embassy in Kiev. The summary of the paper is very clear: “Hardly any large German piece of equipment is fully suitable for war.”


The report cites “an internal paper of the Bundeswehr” about the real practicality of Germany’s top weapons. We can assume that the very same results extend to the entire constellation of NATO weaponry in general, since they are virtually all constructed with the same design philosophies, often even with interoperable systems—like the 120mm Rheinmetall tank barrels shared between the Abrams and Leopard series.

Also, for the sake of thoroughness and to establish context, Spiegel explains that the ‘report’ was taken from a lecture given to junior officers of the Bundeswehr by a ‘deputy military attaché of the German embassy in Kiev’:

The paper, which is available to SPIEGEL, is a transcript of a lecture given to around 200 junior officers of the German Armed Forces in Delitzsch, Saxony. The speaker was the deputy military attaché of the German embassy in Kyiv, who spoke at the end of January about the experiences of the Ukrainian armed forces in the fight against the Russian war of aggression. He spoke in clear terms about the problems the Ukrainians had with German weapons in combat. An army officer eagerly took notes in order to use the findings for training in the Bundeswehr.

Spiegel minces no words when they declare that the attaché’s report is in large part “devastating”.

The clearest example is Germany’s very advanced—but over-designed—PhZ 2000 self-propelled artillery gun.

For example, although the Panzerhaubitze 2000 is an “outstanding weapon system”, it is “so technically vulnerable that its suitability for war is highly questionable”. Although the Leopard 1A5 main battle tank has proven to be “reliable” at the front, the Ukrainians “often only use it as makeshift artillery due to its weak armor”. And with the newer Leopard 2A6, the cost of maintenance is so high that repairs at the front are often not possible.

To witness it in action is to behold a marvel of engineering: (Video at link.)

Well, here’s a Ukrainian one jamming in action: (Video at link.)

But just as many in the Russian sphere had long suspected, such ‘dazzling’ workmanship and technology usually leads to high maintenance and reliability costs, as anyone who’s owned a BMW can probably attest.

There have even been claims that one of the PhZ 2000’s most vaunted capabilities, that of the Multiple Rounds Simultaneous Impact (MRSI), remains unused in the war because firing so many rounds in such quick succession quickly wears out the ‘delicate’ barrel.

Recall that last year, I fielded a similar report about the French Caesar which stated that due to the massive unit cost of the system, it was relegated to being used only sparingly in a ‘sniper’ style scoot-and-shoot role, lowering its effectiveness. There’s even been a growing sentiment around the fact that towed artillery guns have made a comeback, and are now ‘preferable’ to self-propelled guns in the modern style of warfare, given their ability to remain concealed, lower heat signature—owing to having no engine—smaller profile, etc. Some have even gone on to proclaim that ‘scoot-and-shoot’ tactics are dead given that the preponderance of drones now makes it safer to stay concealed in one place rather than attempt moving, which only immediately exposes you to drone ISR.

One Russian analyst’s take:

Thus, the technologically advanced Panzerhaubitze-2000 self-propelled gun and the Leopard-2A6 tank are extremely capricious, and any technical malfunction often cannot be corrected in the field. As a result, for the AFU is more popular on the battlefield simple early "Leopard-1A5" and the same old American self-propelled gun M-109A3, which was tested in battles.

Due to the weaker dynamics at the front, towed artillery has a number of advantages over self-propelled guns, including camouflage and survivability. We have a similar picture. The high-tech Msta-S self-propelled gun appears less and less frequently in reports and on the front line. The towed "Hyacinth-B" becomes the main howitzer at the front. For the same reason, we will never see "Armata" on the battlefield. Well, except only for PR.


The Spiegel report goes on to touch on other systems, including IRIS-T and Patriot air defense, which it calls “unfit for war” due to the carrier vehicles being “too old” and lacking spare parts. There’s a reason many Russian systems have interoperable vehicles; for instance, seen here is an MZKT-7930 which can hoist everything from Bal coastal defense missiles, 96L6E radar for the S-400, Uragan MLRS, and even Iskander missile launcher—as well as many other things:

Image

With this type of modular design concept, there are plenty of spare parts to go around.

The most damning concluding statement from the article:

In summary, the paper is very clear: "Hardly any large German device is fully suitable for war".

Ouch.

And this, by the way, comes only days after Bloomberg published its own devastating report about a German drone project for Ukraine.

Image
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... tions-from

The essential rundown is that a “high tech” kamikaze drone that was meant to be the German ‘Lancet’ turned out to be a total fraud, as Ukrainian commanders found it to have subpar electronics, warheads, etc., after taking it apart.

The following summary is a must-read:

Bloomberg has published a critical article about the German startup Helsing, which produces kamikaze drones HX-2 and HF-1 for Ukraine.

The company started with a plan to create AI-powered software that could process and integrate data from military sensors into a single network. The company grew quickly and raised much of its initial funding from Spotify’s Daniel Ek, who invested €100 million. In its first year, the company opened offices in France and the UK.

Helsing soon began to strike deals with defense contractors and bid for military contracts, mostly in Germany. That’s where it had its strongest connections: co-founder and co-CEO Gunnbert Scherf had spent two years working for the defense ministry under Ursula von der Leyen.

In 2022, when the German government created a special €100 billion defense fund and significant funds began to flow into the sector, Helsing merged with Rheinmetall. However, at the end of 2024, the agreement was terminated because “the partnership did not progress to the stage of technical cooperation.”

Investors, military experts and former employees are concerned about whether the startup can justify its €5 billion valuation. The company has been described as overly secretive about its product development and overly confident in public statements about its technology.

Last November, Helsing struck a deal with Ukrainian startup Terminal Autonomy to outfit 4,000 low-cost drones with Helsing's new Altra software. The drone was named the AQ 100 Bayonet (HF-1).

Ukrainian military personnel who received the HF-1 complain about a weak warhead, unreliable and complex software, and inflated cost.

"We are talking about a product that is made of cheap components and sold as cutting-edge technology," said a serviceman with the Ukrainian Unmanned Systems Forces, whose unit received 120 HF-1s in February. "I can assure you because I took them apart." He said "a product like that costs no more than 100,000 hryvnia (€2,200). And it costs €16,700, which is prohibitively expensive."

On March 21, a post was published on the Facebook page of Ukrainian military man Oleksandr Karpyuk, in which the HF-1 drone was described as having a “shitty” warhead and a “very primitive guidance system.”

The company charges an unusually high premium for its software, adding thousands of euros to each device. Officials at one of Ukraine’s anti-corruption agencies have also raised concerns about the price, but the company is not under investigation. Helsing’s Simon Bruynjes declined to provide details on the HF-1’s pricing, but rejected Karpyuk’s claims that each drone costs 18,000 euros as inaccurate and exaggerated.

In February, the company announced that it could produce 1,000 HX-2 drones per month and planned to send 6,000 of them to Ukraine as part of an order from the German government. However, the German Defense Ministry said it had not yet made any financial commitment to the order.

Military Informant


Image

Well, what else is new when it comes to NATO toys?

That being said, like some of my more extreme colleagues, I don’t take the view that all NATO equipment is a priori junk. For instance, earlier in the week the Russian 38th Research Institute published their frank results for tests of the captured M2 Bradley. The Ministry of Defense institute found the Bradley to be superior to the BMP-3 in a number of areas, in their opinion. Namely they found its accuracy and armor to be better—things long known to most, particularly given the Bradley’s much heavier weight, in regard to the armor.

However most pro-UA rejoicers glossed over the report’s statement that the BMP-3’s overall firepower was greater than the Bradley’s, given its additional 100mm cannon and ability to fire ATGM missiles on the move, which the Bradley cannot do.

Image
“Results of research tests of the Bradley M2A2 ODS SA IFV (USA)”. Authors: Mushin A.V., Konyuchenko V.V., 38th Research Institute.

Furthermore, the BMP-3’s maneuverability is much greater. Coincidentally a new video appeared of a Ukrainian Bradley being badly beaten by the Swedish CV90 in a drag race, demonstrating the Bradley’s sluggish performance: (Video at link.)

And of course, few bothered to post the much more damning second part of the report from the same institute, comparing the Russian flagship T-90M to the captured Leopard 2A5—which some said was actually the 2A6:

Image

The report found the T-90M superior in virtually every category, including—most shockingly—the T-90M’s fire-control and detection capabilities, i.e. the quality of its optics.

Full translated report. https://btvt.info/7english/Studies_of_L ... Russia.htm

Comparative analysis showed that the T-90M tank outperforms the Leopard 2A5 in key TTCs, primarily due to the following technical solutions:

In Terms of Firepower:

Increased detection and identification range of targets by the tank commander and gunner-operator in night and challenging conditions up to 3,300 meters due to the T-90M’s modern fire control system, surpassing the Leopard 2A5’s effective night firing range;

The T-90M is equipped with a guided weapon system, enabling engagement of targets at ranges up to 5,000 meters;

Enhanced area of effect and personnel damage capability due to the T-90M’s remote detonation system for high-explosive fragmentation shells, absent on the Leopard 2A5;

The T-90M ensures shorter preparation and firing time for the first shot and a higher rate of fire due to the use of an automatic loader and target tracking system.

In Terms of Protection:

Protection of the frontal projection against tandem-warhead ATGMs due to the T-90M’s “Relikt” dynamic protection system;

The T-90M offers the option to install an active protection system for all-around defense against anti-tank threats.


Read the full tank report to see other comparisons the institute did, such as T-72B3M vs. Ukrainian T-72AG and T-64BV. Also, here is the full original Russian report. https://uploadnow.io/f/RMnlN44

The author of the above translation of the report is a known pro-Ukrainian Russophobe who condemned the Russian institute for glossing over many nuances. To an extent I would agree; for instance, in the T-90M vs. Leopard comparison, there are many more interesting and critical systems that could have been compared, such as the tanks’ communications and integrated battle management systems, which give the tanks networked battlefield ‘awareness’ of blue and red forces. Also, other passive defensive systems like the T-90M’s Shtora-1 laser detector (yes, the T-90M still has the Shtora, they took out the dazzlers from the T-90A but retained the laser detectors), which autonomously detects illuminators like those used in ATGMs and then fires off countermeasures like smoke grenades in automatic mode, as well as rotating the turret in the direction of the threat, etc.—none of which the Leopard has.

Ultimately, today’s findings merely reinforce what I’ve been writing about since the beginning. Not that Russian weapons are magically “better” than those of the West—in fact, in many, if not most, circumstances they are slightly subpar on a purely one-to-one basis. But they are generally made with a design philosophy which reflects actual total war, rather than some combination of MIC corporate profit maximizing with the shift toward ‘counter insurgency’, which mostly privileges high-cost, high-precision weaponry.

But as I explained in the below article, this does not mean Russia merely makes “cheaper” weapons, but rather the entire design philosophy revolves around weaponry which can be picked up and used effectively by ‘relatively untrained’ conscripts, given that a total or ‘people’s war’ scenario presupposes that high casualties will attrit much of the initial highly trained ‘professional’ corps, leaving farmers and miners to handle weaponry meant for taking out tanks and planes. The same goes for the ability to repair these weapons on the fly, in DIY fashion, once your logistics rear has been badly ravaged by war. NATO weaponry, for the most part, would be incapable of being serviced once the logistics rear is even slightly degraded.

In The Spirit Of Russian 'Total War'
Simplicius
Image
February 22, 2023
In The Spirit Of Russian 'Total War'
An important distinction has been long overdue in the making, as pertains to a topic of much confusion and misinterpretation to a great many people.

Read full story https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/in- ... -total-war


As a last timely last corollary to all the above, we have today’s news that an F-16 “game changer” was shot down by Russian missiles:

Image
https://www.bbc.com/ukrainian/articles/cly189xz210o
It was confirmed by both the BBC above, and Ukraine’s own official Air Force command account:

Image

BBC claims the following:

According to Air Force sources, Ivanov's plane was allegedly shot down by a Russian missile.

"In total, the Russians fired three missiles at the plane. It was either a guided anti-aircraft missile from the S-400 ground-based system, or an R-37 air-to-air missile,"the source said.


The R-37 is typically carried by the Su-35s.



A new report from Uralvagonzavod: (video at link.)



Lastly, speaking of expensive NATO weaponry, it was just announced that another of the much-vaunted American hypersonic missile projects has now been cancelled:

Image

Just a week ago Popular Mechanics declared Russia as ahead in the hypersonic race:

Image
https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... c-missile/

The subheading correctly notes:


I recall a time when the Western press world was a jamboree of jeering about Russian hypersonics not “actually” being hypersonic, for a laundry list of arbitrary reasons.

Don’t worry, Trump’s tariffs will surely fix that. Oh wait—Newsweek reports:

The fate of the project to produce the latest American F-47 fighter jets depends on supplies of rare earth metals from China, which Beijing has already imposed restrictions on, writes Newsweek.

"Beijing is in a position of strength, controlling materials critical to the U.S. defense industry. China... has imposed export restrictions on rare earth metals that are key to the fighter jet that will be the backbone of the U.S. Air Force's next-generation fleet. Trump has touted the F-47 as a successor to the F-22 Raptor. But the viability of the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program to build the fighter jets depends heavily on materials that China produces," the publication writes.

As the newspaper notes, we are talking about such light and heavy rare earth metals as samarium, gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, lutetium, scandium and yttrium.


Well, there’s always Greenland.

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/bom ... an-weapons

*******

Attack on Sumy: How the formation of the 117th brigade of the Troops of the Armed Forces of Ukraine ended
April 13, 2025
Rybar

Image

In the morning, the Russian Armed Forces launched a strike on the center of Sumy — it landed in the area of ​​the congress center of Sumy State University. The event was widely reported by local media due to civilian casualties on the street.

High resolution infographics

Perhaps the propaganda of the Kiev regime would have presented everything in an ideal light for itself, if nuances had not emerged: Ukrainian public figures themselves openly confirmed that the target of the attack was the concentration of Ukrainian Armed Forces personnel.

What did the enemy himself tell us?
MP Maryana Bezugla, who has repeatedly highlighted the inconvenient facts of the real state of affairs at the front, publicly stated that an award ceremony for members of Ukrainian formations was taking place in the region.

Bezuglaya noted (not without reason, let's say) that there was a high probability of an information leak, due to which the assembly location became known to the Russian Armed Forces. She also criticized the Ukrainian Armed Forces command for the fact that no conclusions were made on the formations after the previous arrivals.

Then the mayor of Konotop, Artem Semenikhin, spoke about the situation , also accusing the head of the Sumy region, Vladimir Artyukh , of organizing the awarding of the Ukrainian Armed Forces personnel in the city center and, in addition, reported that after the first flight he “was the first to run, knocking down children on his way.”

Finally, another odious MP, Igor Moseychuk, also confirmed that in one of the damaged buildings, there really was a plan to award members of the 117th TRO brigade in honor of the unit’s seventh anniversary, where civilians were also herded.

Unfortunately, there were casualties among civilians. However, it was a strike on a specific military target, information about which was confirmed. In this case, apparently, one of the missiles lacked precision.

At the same time, it is curious how, without any outside help, the Ukrainian media shifted the focus from the victims to internal political squabbles, single-handedly smashing to smithereens the version of a “targeted attack on civilians.”

In general, formation-based attacks are capable of inflicting colossal damage on the enemy in manpower - one can recall at least the effective strike on the 179th center in Poltava in September 2024. There is no need to be surprised by the choice of such targets.

https://rybar.ru/udar-po-sumam-chem-zak ... y-tro-vsu/

Kyiv has not drawn any conclusions. The US and so-called Ukraine's resource negotiations are at a dead end
April 13, 2025
Rybar

As reported by Reuters , there was no breakthrough in the recent talks on mineral resources between the US and the so-called Ukraine, and the discussions took place in an “antagonistic atmosphere.”

The authors of the article note that the draft agreement is “maximalist” and much tougher for the Kiev regime than the one that Zelensky rejected during the February “benefit performance of Ukrainianism” in the White House.

In particular, the Americans demand access to the fields and propose to direct absolutely all income from their production to a joint fund. They also want control over the GTS, through which Russian gas goes to Europe.

The Kiev regime's calculation is to refuse and wait for Washington to soften its demands. For political reasons, Trump needs to get a deal as quickly as possible without lengthy bargaining, and the US itself contributed to this behavior by being soft on the so-called Ukraine.

But in an effort to present itself as a defender of the “Ukrainian bowels” (which, by the way, Zelensky himself offered to the US), the Kiev regime may wrest some things for itself, but the agreement will still be worse than the original version.

In fact, the leadership of the so-called Ukraine acts according to its favorite principle of “neither for itself, nor for the people,” which each time leads to its position in the long term becoming weaker than it was before.

https://rybar.ru/v-kieve-vyvodov-ne-sde ... -v-tupike/

Google Translator

******

Results of the attack on Sumy. 04/13/2025
April 14, 13:07

Image

Results of the attack on Sumy. 04/13/2025

Let's sum up the missile strike on Sumy:

Yesterday, April 13, in Sumy, on the territory of the congress center of Sumy State University, a ceremonial meeting was held dedicated to the next anniversary of the beginning of the "anti-terrorist operation" of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, as well as the awarding of the most distinguished servicemen of military units and subdivisions from the OTG "Seversk".

According to information from the source, the command of the OTG "Seversk" was present at the event: 95 separate airborne assault brigade, 80 separate airborne assault brigade, 21 separate mechanized brigade and 117 separate territorial defense brigade, a total of up to 200 people.

As a result of the missile strike, the enemy's losses amounted to 140 people, including up to 60 people killed and up to 80 people wounded. About 30 vehicles were destroyed and damaged. In addition, there is information about one SBU representative who was present at the event who was killed.

At the same time, the first obituaries have started to arrive: as reported by the Berdichev District Military Administration of the Zhitomir Region, as a result of yesterday's strike, the brigade commander of the 27th Rocket Artillery Brigade, Colonel Yula Yuri Andreevich, was killed.


https://t.me/The_Wrong_Side/23070 - zinc

Image

The latter is especially noteworthy. The 27th Rocket Artillery Brigade participated in terrorist strikes against populated areas of the Russian Federation in the Kursk and Belgorod Regions.

Image

And here is another one of the visitors to the "children's concert".

Overall, a good strike, a good catch.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9781484.html

Google Translator

*****

Spoils of war: Time for Trump to send off the clowns in Ukraine

Martin Jay

April 14, 2025

Talking directly to Putin across the big table might be the only way forward as the two clowns he has given the task to seem to be only prolonging the agony

Is the honeymoon period between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin over, following now what appears to be two months of talks of how to get a peace deal in Ukraine still dragging on without any light at the end of the tunnel?

While it is true that a peace deal in Ukraine is hampered by a lack of sincerity by the Ukrainian caretaker President Zelensky and even more smoke and mirrors by the Europeans who are now basically adversaries of the Trump-Putin initiative [READ They prefer war], it is in fact the Trump camp itself which is the heart of the problem.

Speed is one issue. Trump wants to flip a switch to lighten up the Christmas tree. He thinks a peace deal should be absurdly simple and is now vexed by some corners of U.S. media which remind the American people how preposterous the “24 hour” peace deal pledge was, leading up to taking office in January of this year. He’s also driven to getting a fast deal signed off by the deadline of nominations for the Nobel Peace prize approaching this year – a prize which he obsesses over given that Obama won one for practically doing nothing.

A speedy deal could have been a possibility if his chief negotiators were chosen more wisely.

Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff who recently met with Putin for four hours, believes he knows what the key is to getting a fast deal. He told Donald Trump that Ukraine should give Russia what it demands — total control of four eastern Ukrainian regions it annexed in 2022, some of which are still under Ukrainian control, according to Reuters reports. His comments have shocked many Republicans who have been complaining to Marco Rubio about his pro-Russia “stance” while General Keith Kellogg, who met with Zelensky recently caused a media storm by doing a ‘foot in mouth’. Kellogg, not a man overburdened with the stress of being highly intelligent, said that Ukraine could be divided up rather like Berlin was after the end of WWII – a comment he had to swiftly retract on social media later on. It is hardly a secret that Russia’s position on western troops in Ukraine is clear and such an idea is folly at best.

But idiotic ideas which everyone knows won’t work seems to be the game that Europeans are playing in Ukraine. The idea of British and French soldiers on the ground has now been made clearer and now we know this is only a scenario after a peace deal has been secured. And so, contrary to what we are reading in the high-brow press about Europe breaking away from the teat of the U.S. and doing its own thing on the security stage, in fact, the EU, along with the UK, need Trump more than ever as their so-called plan is to secure Zelensky’s future and their investments with all the cash and military hardware they can muster, only on the condition of a U.S.-Russia brokered ceasefire.

The problem with this is that it makes so much of the negotiations even more tricky for Trump who would like to use the possibility of removing Zelensky as leverage. For Zelensky to be part of the longer plan, which would secure peace, this puts even more emphasis on a deal with him, which benefits the U.S. and Trump. And yet, in recent days we are reading that the mineral deal is likely to go ahead as, quite apart from Trump changing its terms to be much more favourable to him, Zelensky has hinted that he can’t sign anything which would bar Ukraine from becoming an EU member state – which gives us a clue as to what the deal really is, which is more about geopolitics that real minerals, clearing the air over the mystery of how Trump and Zelensky can really be negotiating over minerals when the UK’s Keir Starmer already got in first and nailed it. There are no real minerals to be had. The mineral deal is a Trojanesque affair which actually is the platform for other, bigger issues. Trump is reported to be eyeing a gas deal in Ukraine which is probably where the real payback is for him.

But all players – Trump, Zelensky, the EU – want to have their Shylock moment in Ukraine. Peace is not something on its own merit which can be negotiated. Each one wants his pound of flesh first, before peace is agreed. Years ago, this would have been called ‘the spoils of war’. These days it’s just called ‘The Ukraine Deal’. For Russia it’s much more simpler. Moscow simply needs guarantees that NATO can’t sign up Ukraine and that the ‘winner takes it all’ rule of modern warfare is respected at the very least. For Russia to be given extra parts of the east which are currently in Ukrainian hands would be smart as it would accelerate everything but it’s unlikely that Zelensky could ever agree as his EU Godfathers would never agree to it. Putin probably knows this which is why he also wants, commercially, some fruits from the spoils of war himself, which is why one of his top investment tzars was present at the mammoth talks between him and Witkoff.

If Trump really wants his Nobel Prize this year, he had better get his skates on and do the only practical thing: get rid of Witkoff and Kellogg – which really does sound like a U.S. foodstuffs conglomerate – and come to Moscow himself. Talking directly to Putin across the big table might be the only way forward as the two clowns he has given the task to seem to be only prolonging the agony. But the conclusion that Trump must be coming close to ‘Zelensky is really the problem’ is fast approaching. Amazing that Zelensky is able to play Trump, even to this day. Perhaps this is the best performance yet of an actor who became president through being an actor in a TV show where he played a populist president in Ukraine. When Trump finally gives up on any deal with Zelensky, expect swift changes to happen in Ukraine’s political arena, reminding us all that the threats that EU countries have made about the tanks on the lawn in Kiev are nothing more than a handful of dust in the grand scheme of things. Trump is about to panic. There will be blood.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... n-ukraine/

I disagree with the assumption here that these morons that Trump sent are the problem. They are nothing but messenger boys delivering a message very much from Trump, because you know Trump will allow no deviation from his dictat. Talking to Putin directly probably won't help, might make matters worse, as having Russian minimal demands which undoubtedly signal defeat for the US put directly in his face will not go well.

No Peace Prize for you, Orange Man.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Tue Apr 15, 2025 11:52 am

Attack in Sumi
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 04/15/2025

Image

“I think everything could be fine between Ukraine and Russia, and you'll know that very soon. There comes a point where you have to put up with it or shut up. We'll see what happens, but I think everything's going well,” US President Donald Trump said Sunday aboard Air Force One, just hours after a Russian bombing left around 30 dead and dozens injured in the center of the Ukrainian city of Sumi. “Currently, 38 people are being treated in medical facilities in Sumi following yesterday's Russian missile attack, including 9 children. Eleven people, including 3 children, are in critical condition,” added Volodymyr Zelenskyy yesterday, whose communications team spent the entire day expressing their gratitude for the messages of support received from their foreign allies. Earlier, the Ukrainian president had demanded a firm response to a bombing that he claimed was a deliberate attack on the civilian population. His message was directed both at his European partners, from whom he demanded an increase in the flow of arms, financing, and ammunition, and at the United States, from whom he demanded a tougher political stance.

“I think, unfortunately, that Russian narratives prevail in the United States,” Zelensky had declared in an interview recorded days earlier but broadcast that Sunday on CBS in the United States . “How is it possible to witness our losses and our suffering, understand what the Russians are doing, and still believe that they are not the aggressors, that they did not start this war? It seems to me that the vice president, in some way, justifies Putin’s actions,” he added, referring to the position of JD Vance, with whom he had the Oval Office confrontation in which Donald Trump clearly sided with his vice president, allowing him to humiliate the Ukrainian guest. Zelensky’s words not only refer to the government’s position, but throughout the war, the Ukrainian complaint about any information that contradicted the official Ukrainian account has been a constant. This was the case, for example, when The Wall Street Journal published a lengthy report that, while exonerating the Ukrainian president, implicated Ukraine and several people in the military chain of command in the attack on the Nord Stream pipeline, or when The New York Times denied the Ukrainian version following the bombing of a market in Konstantinovka, where it was a Ukrainian anti-aircraft missile and not a Russian projectile deliberately fired at the civilian population that caused numerous civilian deaths.

Nothing similar was repeated after the Sumi bombing, in which the press opted for explicit condemnation and the publication of the Ukrainian version without even mentioning the Russian denial, adhering unequivocally to the version given by the political authorities. “Putin and peace apparently don't fit in the same sentence. Russia's barbaric Palm Sunday attack against Christian worshippers in Ukraine appears to be Putin's response to efforts to achieve a ceasefire and peace,” said Lindsey Graham, the senator who in the past has advocated continuing to fight “until the last Ukrainian.” The use of Palm Sunday as an aggravating factor has been unanimous in the Western reaction, generally from those who have not pointed it out as such, for example, in the case of Israel's breach of the truce in Gaza during Ramadan, which has resulted in hundreds of deaths, including a large number of children. This double standard makes the religious holidays of white and Christian populations more important. On Sunday, pro-Palestinian groups also highlighted that the harsh condemnations of the Russian bombing of civilian infrastructure contrasted with the timid mentions of yet another Israeli bombing of Gaza's hospital infrastructure. On Palm Sunday, Israel gave staff twenty minutes to evacuate patients and personnel before bombing Al Ahli Baptist Hospital once again.

While Ukraine and its European allies insist that the attacked building was a civilian facility located in the center of a city filled with civilians in broad daylight, Russia claims its military use and insists that a meeting of military commanders was being held there. This version has been validated by three Ukrainian sources who can hardly be described as pro-Russian: the mayor of a nearby town, Mariana Bezuhla, a deputy elected by Zelensky's party, and the nationalist Ihor Moisichuk. All of them have denounced the regional governor's recklessness in celebrating the seventh anniversary of the 117th Airborne Brigade in the city center, a fact apparently captured by Russian intelligence, which, according to Moscow's version, prompted the bombing. The fact that the death of Colonel Yuri Yula, commander of the 27th Brigade, was announced yesterday, for example, also reinforces the Russian argument that a military target located in a civilian area was attacked, something that Western powers criticize as the use of human shields only when it occurs as a result of bombing by their allies.

“The Sumi missile attack took place on the anniversary of the 117th brigade defending the city. Three Ukrainian sources—the mayor of Konotop, an outspoken Rada deputy, and a prominent far-right figure—claim that the Russians targeted an awards ceremony held to mark the occasion. But the Russian command knew perfectly well that a daytime attack on the city center would cause multiple civilian casualties. The second attack, targeting the street in front of the building and destroying a trolleybus carrying passengers, is particularly horrifying,” wrote Russian opposition journalist Leonid Ragozin, horrified by the images of the attack. The overlooked detail is that the escalation in the northwest of the country and the clear worsening of the situation in Sumi is a direct consequence of Zelensky's Russian adventure, who claimed in August of last year that the Ukrainian offensive in Kursk was intended to prevent a Russian offensive in the region. At the time, the Russian presence in Kursk was so limited that the troops chose to retreat rather than defend themselves. The Ukrainian president never explained how a group with no defensive capability was prepared for offensive actions.

The Ukrainian attack on Russia not only prevented the progress of planned negotiations for a partial ceasefire that would preserve the integrity of both countries' energy infrastructure, but also re-exposed Sumi to Russian missiles at a time when it was already clear that Ukraine would not be receiving additional anti-aircraft equipment from the United States. It's obvious that the bombing will be used by Kiev to demand more air defense systems from its allies, something Zelensky had already mentioned in his interview on 60 Minutes . "When children and adults are killed by missiles," the Ukrainian president stated, "I can't understand why we can't agree on new Patriot systems," he asserted, failing to mention that Ukraine has more anti-aircraft systems than many of its allies.

In the same interview, Volodymyr Zelensky urged Donald Trump to visit Ukraine, something he has repeatedly refused, to understand the real situation. The Ukrainian president blindly believes that seeing the reality on the ground can change the position of his most important ally, despite the fact that experience shows that observing the destruction wrought by war up close often reinforces previous positions. This was the case, for example, with the delegation of several African countries led by South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, who, after visiting Maidan, Bucha, and Irpin, instead of condemning Russia, left Ukraine insisting on the need to reach an agreement to avoid further deaths.

“World leaders have unanimously condemned the barbarity of Russian missiles. We are very grateful for this support. The problem is that words alone will never be enough to stop Putin. For those raised in the Western democratic tradition, it is difficult to imagine a situation where negotiations are meaningless. A medieval story with a bloodthirsty maniac on the throne doesn't fit into 21st-century reality. But this anachronism is killing Ukrainians today, and it has no plans to stop,” Mikhail Podolyak wrote on social media, apparently forgetting that the US government has clearly distanced itself from the statements of its European partners.

Despite the tepid condemnations or the description of the bombing as a mistake, representatives of the Trump administration have reacted by reaffirming their commitment to ending the conflict. “The attack by Russian forces against civilian targets in Sumi, carried out today on Palm Sunday, surpasses all bounds of decency. Dozens of civilians have been killed and wounded. As a former military leader, I understand the attacks and this is wrong. That is why President Trump is working to end this war,” wrote Keith Kellogg on social media, taking a position similar to that held by Steve Witkoff and Donald Trump, who once again defended himself by attacking and targeting his predecessor and Volodymyr Zelensky, whom he accuses of having been unable to prevent the war. Yesterday, the US president launched another poisoned barb at Volodymyr Zelensky following his demand for more military equipment. Trump was reacting to the news that Ukraine is willing to invest $15 billion donated by its European allies to acquire Patriot missile systems and anti-aircraft munitions. Zelensky “is always looking to acquire missiles,” he said, before adding that “when you start a war, you have to know you can win the war, right? You don’t start a war against someone 20 times bigger than you and expect people to give you missiles.”

The European reaction has also been reaffirming its positions. “This weekend, the horror reached its climax with the Palm Sunday massacre,” said French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot, adding that “it is proof, if proof were needed, of Vladimir Putin’s contempt for the civilian population and the rules of war. And while Ukraine accepted a ceasefire a month ago, Vladimir Putin clearly has no intention of moving in that direction. He must be forced to do so.” This is also the main message from Emmanuel Macron, who in his response to the Sumi bombing stated that “strong measures are needed to impose a ceasefire on Russia.” European countries, which reacted to the US announcement opening the diplomatic route with belligerent language and increased military supplies to Ukraine, have insisted on that path following last weekend’s attack. The most significant statement was undoubtedly that of Chancellor-in-waiting Merz, who expressed his support for sending German Taurus missiles—a red line drawn by Olaf Scholz, who not only revealed that the missiles could reach Moscow but that their delivery would require the presence of German soldiers directly involved in their use—to Ukraine, as kyiv has been demanding for several years. In an interview with a German media outlet, the CDU leader even outlined the targets: Crimea or the Kerch Bridge, an attack that would currently be more symbolic than effective, since Russia has the land corridor for its military communications with the peninsula.

The latest statements by Merz, who has not yet been sworn in as chancellor but has already reached a grand coalition agreement with the SPD, Macron's words, and Starmer's belligerence, which add to the usual commitment to war among the Baltic republics, reinforce the impression that European countries have completely discarded diplomacy as a solution to the conflict. The same countries that refused to press for compliance with the points set out in the diplomatic process in which they participated are now trying to prevent any progress in the US-led process, to which they have not even been invited. Their hope, like Zelensky's, is that Donald Trump will give up his insistence on calling the conflict a bad war and move closer to the European position, currently hawkish, seeking to protect Ukraine not from death and destruction, but from the possibility of diplomacy.

The problem for Brussels and London is their limited capacity to act, currently limited to increasing arms supplies—for which they continue to depend on the United States—and the possibility of a veto over the lifting of sanctions, such as the exclusion of Russian banks from the international SWIFT payment system. In these three years of proxy war, Russia has proven capable of handling both aspects. Despite an arms supply that has given Ukraine a quantity of weapons similar to the materiel available to the British army, kyiv's troops have been unable to recover their lost territories. And although the Russian economy has suffered in many ways, economic sanctions have not prevented the implementation of military Keynesianism, which has made it possible for the Russian Federation to continue supplying its army.

In the absence of more decisive action, the European Union is relying on the symbolic. Yesterday, Ukraine announced that it has invited member states to meet in Kyiv on May 9 to counter the Victory Day celebrations in Moscow. Brussels, for its part, has recommended that countries aspiring to join the EU, especially those in the Balkans—only Serbia had announced that its president would be present—not attend the annual parade, which has become the largest popular event held in the Russian Federation. In her purest diplomatic style, Kaja Kallas warned of "consequences" for those who dare to disobey the order.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/04/15/ataque-en-sumi/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
In violation of the Russian-American agreement to cease strikes on energy facilities for 30 days from March 18, the Kiev regime continued unilateral attacks on Russian energy infrastructure. Six attacks by the Ukrainian Armed Forces on Russian energy facilities have been recorded.

In the Bryansk region:
- On April 14 at 17:20, as a result of deliberate shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the Solovyovka complete transformer substation of the Bryanskenergo branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre was disconnected due to damage.

- On April 14 at 20:36, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV on the Khvoshchevskaya complete transformer substation of the Bryanskenergo branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre, a 10 kV high-voltage line was disconnected due to damage. Household consumers in the Sevsky district were left without power supply.

In the Kherson region:
- On April 14 at 21:12, an attack by a Ukrainian attack UAV was recorded on the 150 kV Vinogradovo substation of the Tavricheskoye PMES branch of PJSC Rosseti.

- At 23:42, as a result of a repeated attack by a Ukrainian attack UAV on the 150 kV Vinogradovo substation, a transformer was disconnected and caught fire as a result of the damage received. About 56,250 people in 108 settlements of the region were left without electricity.

In the Kursk region :
- On April 15 at 01:30, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV in the city of Kursk on L. Tolstoy Street, an above-ground steel low-pressure gas pipeline was damaged. Gas supply to 165 subscribers was cut off.

— On April 15 at 02:40, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV in the city of Kursk on Pervomaysky Prospekt, an overhead steel low-pressure gas pipeline was damaged. Gas supply to 21 subscribers was cut off.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Palm Sunday Attacks On Sumy And Al-Ahli

In yesterday's week-in-review I had linked to a missile attack on the Ukrainian city of Sumy:

Russia launched a missile attack on the center of Sumy. More than 30 people were killed - Strana

Machine translation:

This morning, the Russians fired two ballistic missiles at the center of Sumy. 31 people were killed, including 2 children.
84 people were injured, including 10 children.

The Prosecutor General's Office reported that at about 10:15, the Russian military launched two missile strikes on the center of the city of Sumy. Rescue operations are continuing, the number of victims is being specified.


One of the pictures Strana provided showed the destroyed congress center of the Sumy State University .

Image

Shortly after the incident the Member of the Rada Mariana Bezuglaya accused the military command of staging a ceremony in the city despite it being less than 20 kilometer from the active fighting front (machine translation):

Mariana Bezuhla (Mariana Bezuhla) @marybezuhla - 9:32 UTC · Apr 13, 2025
Russia shelled the center of Sumy on Palm Sunday. Appeal to Syrsky and separately to the TrO commander: do not gather the military for awards, and even more so in civilian cities-again, the Russians had information about the cluster. And the polygons are still being plotted...

Don't build, don't do "reward and build" so that your scoop and you with it will be cursed!

SBU: another information leak.

No one has been punished for previous cases. For example, after the tragedy with the award ceremony in the 128th brigade, no one has yet been handed suspicion. Therefore, Brigade Commander Lysyuk is the godfather of General Zubanich...
...
Mr. President, is this OK for you? Keep silent and keep scoops??? They don't draw conclusions! They don't draw conclusions, Mr. President!


Mariana Bezuhla has some notoriety for having insider information from the Ukrainian military. She has for some time argued for the removal of the Ukrainian Commander in Chief General Syrsky.

She later added:

Vinnytsia, Chernihiv, Poltava, Dnipro, Sumy. All cases are similar. In between, there are hundreds of other Russian cynical attacks directly on civilians, but there are cases where the enemy received information about the military in major cities. It is impossible not to draw conclusions! The enemy is trying to take every chance!
...
We cannot put up with the indifferent heads of some administrations who send out information about meetings in an open way, and then remain in their positions — as has happened several times before.


Her tweet included a propaganda picture of the 117th Territorial Brigade.

Bezuhla was not the only politician to speak out:

MP Mariana Bezuglaya, former MP Ihor Mosiychuk and Mayor of Konotop Artem Semenikhin said that the missiles arrived at the award ceremony for the military of the 117th territorial Defense Brigade, which is fighting in Sumy region and just today marks the anniversary of its creation. Bezuglaya and Mosiychuk say that there may have been a leak of information when sending out invitations to the event.
Moreover, Mosiychuk said that civilians were also invited to the event. Including children.

"I hope that in Sumy they are already detaining the head of the Internal Affairs Service Artyukh and MP Ananchenko (MP from Sumy from the ruling Servant of the People party- Ed. ), who so wanted to make a splash at the festive awarding of soldiers of the 117th TrO brigade on the occasion of the seventh anniversary. Artyukh, Ananchenko promoted the award ceremony in Sumy and gathered there, in addition to the military, also civilians, in particular children! Scum and scum! " - wrote Mosiychuk.


At the same time, Konotop Mayor Artem Semenikhin called Governor Artyukh "scum and scarecrow" and called on him to "get down on his knees and apologize to people" before 18:00. He also said that he was on the spot at the time of the impact and "draped" from there, "knocking down children." He called on the governor and the head of the regional SBU to resign.

Today news appeared of several high ranking military casualties:

Colonel Yurii Yula, commander of the 27th Rocket Artillery Brigade named after Ataman Petro Kalnyshevskyi, was killed in a Russian missile attack on the city of Sumy on 13 April.
Source: Berdychiv City Council; Suspilne, a Ukrainian public broadcaster, with reference to Berdychiv District Military Administration; Ukrainska Pravda sources in the defence forces.


The 27th Rocket Artillery Brigade is the only Ukrainian unit that is officially equipped with HIMARS, the U.S. missile system which is used to fire long range missiles into Russia. It is headquartered in Sumy. The U.S. military would regard its commander a 'high value target'.

Today the Russian Ministry of Defense announced:

Yesterday, the Russian Armed Forces launched two Iskander-M operational-tactical missiles in conditions of heavy electronic warfare countermeasures and foreign-made air defence systems in action to hit the site in Sumy where commanding officers of the Seversk task force had a meeting. More than 60 servicemen of the Armed Forces of Ukraine have been eliminated.
The Kiev regime continues to use the Ukrainian population as a human shield by deploying military facilities and carrying out activities involving servicemen in the centre of the densely populated city.


The facts thus seem to be clear. There was a ceremony planned for the seventh anniversary of the founding of the 117th Territorial Brigade. This was to take place in the congress center of the Sumy State University. Medals were to be presented for the recent participation of the brigade in the attack on the Russian oblast of Kursk. Invitations to the commanders of neighboring units were sent out.

Russia's Foreign Minister Lavrov hinted that 'western' military official were also there:

We have facts about who was at the facility that was hit in Sumy - Lavrov
"There was another "meeting" of Ukrainian military leaders with their Western colleagues, who were either under the guise of mercenaries, or I don't know under the guise of who," the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry emphasized."


The Russian military got wind of the event and destroyed the congress center (pics) with two Iskander missiles. There were military and civilian casualties. But under the rules of war the strike was on a legitimate target.

European politicians widely condemned the attack as having been on civilians. President Trump called the attack a "mistake".

Neither the New York Times nor the Washington Post report of the military target of the Russian attack. Both emphasize that the attack took place on Palm Sunday.

NYT (archived):

Two missiles hit the city center about 10:15 a.m., according to the regional prosecutor’s office. Ukraine’s interior minister, Ihor Klymenko, said the ballistic missiles struck when the streets were crowded with civilians out enjoying Palm Sunday, a Christian celebration popular in Ukraine. At least 83 people were injured, Mr. Klymenko added.

The Post (archived):

The attack on the city’s downtown area occurred on Palm Sunday, as families flocked to church to mark the beginning of Holy Week ahead of Easter. Volodymyr Artyukh, head of the Sumy regional military administration, said Russia launched two ballistic missiles at the city.
One hit “an ordinary city street” in Sumy, which sits just 18 miles from the Russian border, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky wrote on Telegram.

In another attack yesterday Israel destroyed one of the last hospitals in Gaza.


The New York Times has only a short video of the attack:

Israeli Strike Heavily Damages One of Gaza’s Last Major Hospitals
No one was killed in the attack on the Ahli Arab Hospital, but a child being treated for a head injury died from the rushed evacuation, according to the Anglican Church in Jerusalem, which oversees the medical center.


The Washington Post report is better (archived):

The Israeli military bombed the last fully functional hospital in Gaza City early Sunday, medics there said, giving patients, doctors and displaced Palestinians sheltering on the grounds only 20 minutes to evacuate before it struck and destroyed key parts of the facility.
More than 200 people — 88 patients and 120 staff members — were at al-Ahli Hospital when its reception received a call from the Israeli military telling them to leave the building shortly before 2 a.m. local time, according to the facility’s medical director and an American orthopedic surgeon volunteering at the hospital.


The al-Ahli hospital is provided for and administered by Christian institutions. But neither paper thought it necessary to emphasize that the illegal attack on the obviously civilian target took place on Palm Sunday.

Only deep down its piece does the Post insert a quote which mentions it:

“The Diocese of Jerusalem is appalled at the bombing of the hospital now for the fifth time since the beginning of the war in 2023 — and this time on the morning of Palm Sunday and the beginning of Holy Week,” the Baptist Church in Jerusalem said.

The Russian attack on a legitimate military target is depicted as a war crime. That it took place on Palm Sunday is emphasized.

The illegitimate Israeli attack on a civilian health care institution is treated as somewhat normal. Despite its direct relation to Christian heritage and care there is no explicit mention that it took place on Palm Sunday.

This is an example of how propaganda inserts religion when it helps to condemn an "enemy" but leaves it out when it reports of the outrage committed by a "friendly" force.

Posted by b on April 14, 2025 at 15:27 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/04/p ... .html#more

******

Uriel Araujo: Ukraine’s military crisis: far-right whistleblower exposes leadership failures
April 14, 2025 natyliesb
By Uriel Araujo, InfoBrics, 4/11/25

Uriel Araujo, PhD, anthropology researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts

Bohdan Krotevych, a notorious former Ukrainian commander and ex-chief of staff of the far-right Azov Brigade, has publicly called for the removal of General Oleksandr Syrskyi, Ukraine’s armed forces commander, accusing him of endangering soldiers’ lives with “borderline criminal” orders and outdated tactics, the Guardian reports.

Krotevych, who resigned in February (allegedly to speak freely), criticized Syrskyi for micromanaging the military and issuing directives that force troops to rest dangerously close to the front lines, such as 50 meters away, rather than in safer rear areas. He argues that Syrskyi’s lack of strategic innovation—relying on throwing more troops into battles or withdrawing them only when overwhelmed—has contributed to Ukraine’s losses in 2024 and 2025, including advances by Russian forces in Donbas and Kursk.

Although Krotevych is known to have in the past also reported General Yuri Sodol to the State Bureau of Investigation for “incompetent command”, the Guardian article highlights in fact a quite rare public and rather scandalous dissent from within Ukraine’s military ranks, shifting some blame for recent battlefield setbacks from external factors—like Russia’s numerical superiority—to internal leadership failures. Krotevych’s outspokenness underscores broader frustrations with Syrskyi, who has been criticized for his tactics since taking command in February 2024, despite earlier successes like the Kharkiv counteroffensive.

General Syrskyi is a four-star general and the Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces since February 8, 2024. He has played key roles in the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian conflict, commanding the Kharkiv counteroffensive in 2022 as well as the Bakhmut one in 2023. Known for his strategic acumen, he has been both praised in Ukraine for battlefield successes and criticized for high-casualty tactics, earning nicknames like “General 200.”

Bohdan Krotevych, the whistleblower, in turn is a infamous figure in Ukraine’s military landscape, recognized for his role as a former commander and chief of staff of the Azov Brigade, a unit within the National Guard of Ukraine. Krotevych joined Azov in 2014 following Crimea’s status referendum and annexation to Russia.

The Azov Brigade itself, originally formed as a volunteer battalion in 2014, has been widely controversial due to its ties to far-right and neo-Nazi elements. Founded by neo-Nazi Andriy Biletsky, a figure with a documented history in ultra-nationalist and white supremacist circles, the unit has attracted individuals with extremist views from the very start.

Western media and analysts, including pre-2022 reports from CNN, Time etc, have noted and reported Azov’s neo-Nazi affiliations, though its integration into Ukraine’s National Guard and its role in fighting Russia have apparently shifted its public image (in the West at least) toward that of just a disciplined military force. Although the frequent appearance of Nazi swastikas and other such symbols on the uniforms of Azov’s soldiers (sometimes caught on live TV) remains an embarrassment.

Krotevych’s own far-right connections have been scrutinized. Critics point to his recommendation of a memoir by Albert Kesselring, a Nazi war criminal, to Azov recruits. He also took part in the 2014 Maidan coup as a member of the Right Sector—a radical nationalist group with far-right ultra-nationalist roots.

When accused of having political ambitions, Krotevych has been explicitly distancing himself from any alignment with Ukraine’s ambassador to the UK, Valerii Zaluzhnyi. Four-star General Zaluzhnyi, by the way, is General Oleksandr Syrskyi’s predecessor, viewed as a possible future contender for the presidency of Ukraine.

Zaluzhnyi, too, has been under scrutiny for far-right connections. He was photographed in front of a portrait of Stepan Bandera, the controversial Ukrainian nationalist figure, in a post shared by Ukraine’s parliament on X in January 2023 to mark Bandera’s birthday. The image sparked significant controversy, particularly in Poland, due to Bandera’s historical ties to ultra-nationalist groups and Nazi collaboration during World War II, involving the ethnic cleansing of Poles and Jews, as documented by historians such as Timothy Snyder. This remains a major issue with Polish-Ukrainian relations, as I’ve written. All of that is business as usual in post-2014 Ukraine.

It is true Krotevych’s resignation and outspokenness could suggest personal bias or a settling of scores (or political goals). His claims however do make sense. They resonate with some soldiers and analysts who have long criticized General Syrskyi’s “Soviet-style” approach, earning him monikers like “the Butcher” among detractors for high casualty rates, notably during the battle of Bakhmut in 2023.

As a former Azov Brigade commander with frontline experience, Krotevych has firsthand knowledge of combat operations and leadership dynamics, which should lend some weight to his operational critiques. Moreover, his specific examples, like the proximity of rest zones to combat lines, are plausible given documented reports of Ukraine’s strained resources and Syrskyi’s emphasis on holding ground at all costs. It was seen in Bakhmut, where Ukraine suffered heavy losses before withdrawing.

Independent analyses, such as those from military observers in Western media, have similarly noted Syrskyi’s preference for grinding, manpower-intensive tactics over maneuver warfare, which aligns with Krotevych’s charge of strategic stagnation.

Far-right extremism and corruption aside, the fact is that, despite billions in aid, Ukraine’s armed forces grapple with deep-rooted issues, from resource strains to criticized leadership tactics. And Washington has, as I wrote, even in September 2024, largely shifted this burden to Europe, and European leaders barely seem willing to shoulder it.

At this rate, the West’s proxy war in Ukraine against Moscow risks becoming Europe’s “Vietnam”—a prolonged, costly quagmire.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/04/uri ... -failures/

******

Three Arguments For & Against Russia Extending Its “Energy Ceasefire” With Ukraine
Andrew Korybko
Apr 14, 2025

Image

Both scenarios entail considerable risks.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Putin will have the final say on whether Russia extends its 30-day moratorium on strikes against Ukraine’s energy infrastructure that’ll expire on Friday. He also noted that “the moratorium has essentially not been observed by the Ukrainian side”, which is true, but the US hasn’t pressured Ukraine to comply with its part of the agreement. Here are three respective arguments for and against Russia extending its “energy ceasefire” with Ukraine:

----------

1. Maintain Positive Diplomatic Dynamics With The US

Talks with the US are generally going well so Russia might want to maintain these positive diplomatic dynamics with a view towards making tangible progress on normalizing ties and ending their proxy war. To that end, Putin could once again opt for patience and restraint since the threats posed by Ukraine’s continued violation of their “energy ceasefire” remain manageable, thus enabling Russia to possibly obtain more of its goals through diplomacy than if it reverted to relying solely on military means.

2. Dispel The Neocons’ Claims About Russia’s Intentions

Warmongering forces within the American Establishment and among their media allies have claimed that Russia is untrustworthy, and this perception could be lent false credence if Putin declines to extend the “energy ceasefire”, thus potentially adding unbearable pressure upon Trump to end their talks. The neocon faction might then command more influence over the administration with all that entails for a dangerous escalation with Russia if they then convince Trump to double down on support for Ukraine.

3. Incentivize The US To Finally Apply Pressure On Ukraine

Part of the Russian-US talks concern strategic resource cooperation, which understandably takes a long time to negotiate due to the nitty-gritty details, so maintaining positive diplomatic dynamics in spite of Ukraine’s continued violation of the “energy ceasefire” could raise the odds of a major deal. Should one be clinched, then the US might then be much more incentivized to finally apply pressure on Ukraine, both with regard to respecting this moratorium and conceding to more of Russia’s demands for peace.

-----

1. Show That Putin Won’t Be “Led By The Nose” Again

On the other hand, deciding against extending the “energy ceasefire” that Ukraine never abided by would show Trump that Putin won’t be “led by the nose” again, which refers to how the Russian leader characterized former German Chancellor Merkel’s manipulation of him through the Minsk Accords. Putin could calculate that this would uphold his personal reputation, make Trump respect him more as a leader, and therefore raise the odds of the US pressuring Ukraine to comply with any future deals.

2. “Escalate To De-Escalate” On Better Terms For Russia

By resuming attacks against Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, perhaps dramatically so through the use of more hypersonic medium-range Oreshniks, Russia could “escalate to de-escalate” with the intent of achieving better terms for itself through whatever subsequent deals the US might broker with Ukraine. This strategy would amount to giving the US a dose of its own medicine that Biden applied to Russia, but there’s no guarantee that it’ll have the intended effect with the much more differently wired Trump.

3. Decisively Exploit Perceived American Weaknesses

Be that as it may, Putin’s calculation could be that the US has become so weak over the past few months due to Trump’s eagerness to “Pivot (back) to Asia”, the resultant rift that this created with Europe, and his global trade war that Russia would be foolish not to exploit this by pulling out all the stops in Ukraine. This thinking takes for granted that the US couldn’t or wouldn’t rally the West to “escalate to de-escalate” in kind but would meekly withdraw from the conflict instead, which can’t be known for sure.

----------

Both scenarios entail considerable risks, with another extension possibly leading to Trump manipulating Putin just like Merkel did while rejecting an extension could result in a serious Russian-US escalation, though their respective benefits could potentially be the diplomatic or military resolution of this conflict. Putin is very cautious and averse to escalations, however, so he might be inclined to extend Russia’s de facto unilateral compliance with this lopsided “energy ceasefire” unless “hardliners” dissuade him.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/three-ar ... nst-russia

******

This is Biden's war, not mine.
April 14, 22:59

Image

Trump accused Biden and Zelensky of starting the war in Ukraine because of them.

"The war between Russia and Ukraine is Biden's war, not mine. I had nothing to do with this war, but I am now making efforts to stop the death and destruction. If the 2020 presidential election had not been rigged, this terrible war would never have happened. President Zelensky and Lying Joe Biden did a terrible job allowing this tragedy to begin. There were many ways to prevent it. But that is in the past. Now we need to stop it - and fast" (c) Trump

On the one hand, yes, Biden and Zelensky deliberately unleashed a war in 2022, but Trump is disingenuous when he says that he had nothing to do with it.
Under Trump in 2017-2020, the arming of Ukraine continued, the Volker-Surkov negotiations were effectively profaned, and Trump turned a blind eye to the development of Nazism in Ukraine, although it was obvious under Poroshenko. Trump also effectively turned a blind eye to the sabotage and disruption of the Minsk agreements by Germany and France, which used them to prepare Ukraine for war against Russia.

So Trump's stories that he has nothing to do with this war are a pathetic lie. His responsibility is simply somewhat less than that of Biden and Zelensky.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9782553.html

Gauleiter Sumy dismissed for attack on 117th Brigade meeting
April 15, 12:59

Image

As a result of the secondary information detonation after the missile strike of the Russian Armed Forces on the gathering of the Armed Forces in Sumy on 13.04.2025, the Gauleiter of Sumy Oblast Artyukh was removed from his post.

He once again confirmed that the strike was carried out on a gathering of military personnel, but at the same time denies that he was its organizer. This hints that there is someone else in this story who actually organized this gathering, putting the Gauleiter of Sumy Oblast before the fact. And this someone is clearly higher in rank than the former Sumy Gauleiter, so he does not give his name.

In general, the enemy's attempt to create another "Bucha" failed. And the Sumy Gauleiter also had to be removed.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9783450.html

Strike from Moscow-City
April 15, 11:04
Screenshot 2025-04-15 093500.

Image

Moscow-controlled FPV attack drone hits Ukrainian Armed Forces facility in Chasovy Yar for the first time at an ultra-long distance

(Video at link.)

Details of the strike on the Ukrainian Armed Forces facility in Chasovy Yar by a drone controlled from Moscow:

The strike was carried out by the Ovod FPV drone using the new Orbita control system.
The UAV crew from the Espanyola brigade, located near Chasovy Yar, prepared the drone for takeoff.
Then the drone was controlled by a UAV operator located in Moscow City.
The drone flew more than 11 km from the takeoff point to the target and successfully hit it.
The Orbita developers told RIA Novosti that the new system will allow drone strikes to be carried out by giving commands from anywhere in the world.
https://t.me/rian_ru/289542 - zinc

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9783266.html

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Wed Apr 16, 2025 11:44 am

"On the threshold of something significant"
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 04/16/2025

Image

Last weekend, just hours before the Russian attack on Sumi—which yesterday claimed its first political victim, the head of the Regional Military Administration, who is accused by various quarters of holding a military ceremony in the city center, exposing the civilian population to Russian missiles—a smiling Steve Witkoff met with Vladimir Putin for the third time since January. Until yesterday, the only thing that had emerged was Donald Trump's optimism, which did not disappear with the heavy bombing on Sunday, nor was it affected by the criticism of some of his advisors. According to The Wall Street Journal , Keith Kellogg, the United States envoy for Ukraine, and neocon Secretary of State Marco Rubio, are reportedly pressuring Donald Trump to treat the Russian Federation's desire for peace with greater skepticism, a way of bringing the White House closer to the position of Ukraine and its European allies. The rift within the US administration is evident despite attempts by individuals like Rubio to adhere strictly to Donald Trump's rhetoric and message. Sanctioned by Russia and a hawkish advocate for China containment, the top diplomat is the leading exponent of that segment of Trumpism, which he has opportunistically joined in the pursuit of power despite political differences, determined to be tougher on the Kremlin in the current negotiation process.

It's no surprise, then, that Moscow feels more comfortable with Steve Witkoff, who on his previous visit to Russia showed himself willing to believe and publicly disseminate the story Vladimir Putin had told him about the attempted assassination of Donald Trump—the Russian president claimed to have prayed for his life—and who has described the Russo-Ukrainian war in terms very similar to those of the Russian government, something that is being repeated today. "This is my third meeting with him," said Trump's Middle East envoy and unofficial main interlocutor with the Russian Federation, referring to his meeting with the Russian president. "The last meeting lasted about five hours. At the time, two of his top advisors, Ushakov and Kiril Dmitriev, were in the room," he added, before describing the meeting as "convincing" and specifying that he finally received an answer to the question of "what Putin's request is for permanent peace here."

The two names mentioned by Witkoff, common in high-level meetings, are an indication of the meeting's theme. Considered one of Vladimir Putin's main advisors on international affairs, the mention of Ushakov is a sign of normalcy in a negotiation that is, above all, political. The presence of Kiril Dmitriev, president of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, is a clear sign of Russian interest in negotiating with the United States the economic aspects of a possible agreement between the two countries, something that excites Witkoff, who in an interview with right-wing Trumpian publicist Tucker Carlson wondered, "Who wouldn't want a world in which Russia and the United States collaborate to do good things together?" The opportunity to re-enter the Russian oil extraction business was the first economic aspect discussed after the Riyadh meeting, to which must also be added the United States' interest in gas transit. According to several media reports, in the last meeting with Ukraine, Washington reportedly sought to gain control of the gas pipeline that runs from Suya, a town in Kursk recently lost by Ukraine, to the western border in Uzhgorod. Although Ukraine's intention is to prevent the transit of Russian gas and focus on transporting ideologically correct gas like that from Azerbaijan, it is clear that anyone who aspires to this will have to reach an agreement with the Russian Federation, without whose approval it is impossible to travel from Baku to Suya.

In the face of this enthusiasm, Sergey Lavrov has always maintained his coldness and mild skepticism, insisting that the two countries will never have a similar point of view, even if they could cooperate. The slowness with which the process is advancing, which the European and North American press and political establishment understand as a ploy by Russia to delay negotiations and prolong the war, in which it currently knows it is superior, is actually a response to the distrust that has grown in recent decades in the relationship between Moscow and Western capitals, including Washington. Hence, Russia insists on a comprehensive agreement, not a truce without guarantees that it will lead to a negotiation of the final issues, or that poses the risk of important aspects being left out of a document that goes no further than the vague promises that previous Russian political leaders received from their Western counterparts. The experiences of the negotiations for the withdrawal from Afghanistan in the 1980s, in which, according to the UN negotiator himself, "the United States moved the goalposts" at the last minute, weigh heavily in this regard; the verbal promises that Mikhail Gorbachev was unable to obtain on a piece of paper; and the recent seven-year Minsk process, in which Ukraine tried to rewrite the agreements practically from the moment they were signed. "We know very well what a mutually beneficial agreement looks like, one we have never rejected, and what an agreement looks like that could lead us into another trap," Sergey Lavrov said on Monday, acknowledging the difficulty of reaching an understanding with Ukraine and mentioning the two relevant aspects in the negotiation of a treaty between Moscow and Kyiv: "NATO and the territories." Added to this are the economic issues of Russia's reintegration into the Western market and the lifting of sanctions, something Russia must negotiate with the United States and, above all, the European Union and the United Kingdom—a task possibly more arduous than resolving the war. Russia's red line clashes head-on with Ukraine's. On the same day, Minister Sibiha stated that "Ukraine now has 110 seasoned combat brigades. NATO membership must remain on the table."

The difficulty in imposing an agreement has not yet dissuaded Witkoff, who is confident that he is on the verge of something very significant for the entire world. Furthermore, I believe there is an opportunity to reform relations between the United States and Russia through attractive commercial ventures that, in my opinion, could provide real stability in the region. Partnership creates stability. With his limited knowledge of the conflict, Donald Trump's envoy believes he is in the final phase of a negotiation in which he only now seems to have understood the parameters within which the decision will be made.

“We've reached a point where Putin has expressed his desire to achieve a lasting peace, not just a ceasefire, but something more. And we have an answer to that as well,” he stated in an interview with Fox News , expressing what the Russian Federation has been making perfectly clear for months. “This peace agreement is about the so-called five territories,” he stated, without attempting to name the five Ukrainian regions—Crimea, Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson—whose territories are fully or partially under Russian control, and which he was unable to list in his previous interview with Tucker Carlson. “But in reality,” he added, “it's much more. It's about security, protocols, NATO, Article V.” Despite the naive optimism of Witkoff and the US administration in general, which has already shown it has the power only to coerce Ukraine and not Russia, the resolution of the war depends on an agreement between Kiev and Moscow on two aspects—NATO and the territorial issue—on which their positions remain incompatible.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/04/16/a-las ... ificativo/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
The Kremlin said that they will not yet announce when exactly the "energy truce" expires.
Formally, it was declared on March 18 and expires on April 18, that is, in two days.
Since the enemy has not observed it for a single day, Russia may resume strikes on energy facilities on April 19 for purely formal reasons, adding these facilities to the pool of targets for daily massive Geranium raids.

It may be extended only as part of some behind-the-scenes negotiations with the Trump administration for non-military reasons.

But in general, the "energy truce" clearly demonstrated both the obvious inability of the Nazi regime in Kiev to negotiate, and the real desire of the United States to force the Nazi regime in Kiev to a truce. So even in this form, it was not useless. And then Washington wonders where that "mistrust" comes from in Moscow.

***

Colonelcassad
🎖🎖The Kiev regime, in violation of the Russian-American agreement to cease strikes on energy facilities for 30 days from March 18, continued unilateral attacks on Russian energy infrastructure. Six attacks by the Ukrainian Armed Forces on Russian energy facilities

have been recorded . - In the Belgorod Region: on April 15 at 08:05, as a result of deliberate shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the 35 kV Krasnaya Yaruga - Terebreno high-voltage line of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre - Belgorodenergo was disconnected. About 17,400 consumers in the Grayvoronsky District were left without electricity. On April 16 at 04:02, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV that dropped a munition on a transformer of the 110 kV Krasnaya Yaruga electrical substation of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre - Belgorodenergo, more than 4.6 thousand supply points in seven settlements of the Krasnoyarsk District were left without electricity. - In the Bryansk region: on April 15 at 16:02, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV, multiple damages were recorded to the 35 kV Andreykovichi substation of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre - Bryanskenergo. On April 15 at 19:36, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV, a high-voltage line of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre - Bryanskenergo was disconnected due to a break in the wires in the span of the supports. Household consumers in the settlement of Podyvotye, Sevsky district were left without power. - In the Kursk region: on April 15 at 05:35, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV, a break in the wire caused a disconnection of the 35 kV Kamyshi - Murynovka - Kirovskaya high-voltage line of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre - Kurskenergo. - In the Kherson region: on April 16 at 00.49, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV on the Sivash wind power plant, a transformer caught fire. The plant reduced its operating capacity by 30 MW.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

*******

Zelensky Charms CBS, as Trump Throws Impatient Tantrum
Simplicius
Apr 14, 2025

Today brings us a new 60 Minutes interview with Zelensky, which was rife with ‘interesting’ moments, the first being Zelensky’s proclamation of his undying hatred for Putin: (Video at link.)

More than just eyebrows, this clearly raises questions as to how it could be possible to negotiate with a character of this unstable bent, who exemplifies such unadulterated and unprofessional bias.

The now duly-unelected Narcocrat went on to admit Ukraine is incapable of retaking lost territories by force: (Video at link.)

The most interesting statement was made by CBS itself, attributed to Zelensky on social media—that Ukraine has up to “100,000 soldiers dead”:


Zelensky’s press office immediately sprang into damage control: (Video at link.)

Zelensky did not mention the alleged 100,000 killed soldiers in the interview with CBS - Zelensky's press secretary.

According to Serhii Nykyforov, CBS News attributed their own figures to president Zelensky. Ukraine's losses stand at 45,100 KIA soldiers as of February.

So, Ukraine is still officially toting the 45k dead line. Funny how back in May 2022, Zelensky essentially admitted 100 KIA per day in the much lower intensity fighting:

Image

I say ‘low intensity’ because this was long before the Russian mobilization—at this point maybe 150-200k total Russian troops had been involved in the war, compared to the 600k+ seen today. The war is now on day 1145, if you multiply that by 100 KIA per day, you get a minimum of ~115,000. But as I said, the frontline was much smaller back then, and we can expect for the casualties to have skyrocketed by now, which one can extrapolate to mean that the real figure is far higher than 115k.

For his part, Trump erupted over the interview, calling CBS a failed station, and other predictable insults. The problem is, Trump has been floundering on his Ukraine position, digging himself a deeper hole out of desperation to save face over the failed talks with Russia. In his efforts, he has made quite a few contradictions. Sensing people’s increasing view that he has now ‘owned’ the reputationally-toxic Ukrainian conflict, Trump went on the offensive to claim it is Biden’s conflict, after all. But at the same time, he goes on to brag that he was the president to give Ukraine its first big military boost with the Javelins, which won them their ‘first big battle’ and allegedly destroyed a lot of Russian tanks: (Video at link.)

So, whose war is it, really?

This reeks of infant desperation:

Image

In fact, Trump is getting really antsy about Russia’s steadfast adherence to its long-held principles. Lusting for the PR boost of ending a pesky war he knows nothing about, Trump is nearly begging for Russia to stop advancing and winning:

Image

Russia has got to stop the war because too many people are dying? From the lips of the man who just bombed Yemen, tearing apart dozens of children and civilians?

No, we aren’t fooled so easily. He cares nothing whatsoever about any imagined ‘deaths’ in Ukraine, otherwise he’d be blowing his shofar just as loudly about the ongoing genocide in Palestine, aided in full by his administration, not to mention the senseless slaughter in Yemen. In reality, Trump is likely getting anxious for two reasons: the first, as stated before, to score political points for his floundering administration; the second is likely because all the MIC deep state operatives around him are putting heavy internal pressure on him to reorient to China, and he knows the Ukraine conflict is a huge drag on the US’ resources.

There’s likely even more secretive reasons, like not wanting Russia to expand its control and influence too much in Europe, as think-tank influencers have likely apprised Trump of the consequences of that: Russia’s fast-tracked clinching of superpower status.

Circling back to the topic of casualties, there is another set of interesting figures that have trickled out the past few days. First, there was the ‘shocking’ report from Verstka Media that military recruitment has been soaring in Russia, even more than normal:

Image
https://verstka.media/v-moskve-rezko-vy ... minoborony

A German data analyst crunched the numbers and found that Russia may be recruiting as many as 1,400+ people a day:

Image

The analyst notes in the thread his belief that Russia suffers ~200 KIA per day in the war, which would mean by his own numbers Russia is vastly out-generating the losses.

Sibreal.org also published a study:

Military recruiting is soaring in Russian regions, per Sibreal.org, officials hiking signing bonuses and aggressively pushing contracts. In Irkutsk as of March 1, new recruits receive 1.4 million-ruble bonuses; more than an entire average annual salary.

The first Verstka piece is a major failure of propaganda; not only did they uncover that Moscow region experienced a record number of signups in April—which flies in the face of crude claims about Russia ‘exploiting’ poorer regions at the benefit of ‘rich Muscovites’—but also that Russians are signing up not for the money, but for revenge for Kursk, and most critically, boosted morale from the perceived growing successes of the Russian army:

Speaking about what motivates Moscow volunteers to join the army today, the source who selects them notes that this is, among other things, the success of the Russian army on the battlefield, propaganda and a desire for revenge. To the first point, the selector refers the liberation of the Kursk region, and to the second-reports of pro-government media about possible crimes on the part of the Ukrainian military.

The above is about as bad a development for Ukraine as can be imagined: it means Russians are growing confident, and their boosted patriotism is only expanding the army’s size and strength.

But it gets worse: Deputy Head of the Ukrainian Presidential Office Pavel Palisa released another devastating data point in an interview with BIHUS Info, as reported by Ukrainian Pravda:

Image
https://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2025/04/12/7507330/

Ukraine: despite being offered a one-time cash benefit of 1 million hryvna (US$24k) "only 500 people between 18 and 24 have signed up for the army" Deputy Head of the Presidential Office Pavel Palisa

So, while being offered virtually the same $24k+ signing bonus as Russian troops, Zelensky’s newly much-vaunted 18-24 recruitment drive bagged a grand total of…. 500 signups.

No, not just in April so far, but since the inception of the entire program in February. That means from this critical 18-24 cohort, despite record monetary incentives, they managed to recruit—from the entire country, no less—only 160 or so people per month. This is while Russia is recruiting over 1,000 per day total.

The point is that, this is a dire bellwether for the critical 18-24 cohort: it means virtually no one in that age range wants to willingly serve in the war. As a kind of trial run for a necessary future forced mobilization of this group, it shows that virtually no one from the group wants to voluntarily serve, and that forcing them to fight when the time comes will be a very messy affair.

That comes at a time when there are again increased reports of women being recruited into the ranks, even from prison:

A captured soldier of the Armed Forces of Ukraine from the 425th assault regiment "Skala" reported during interrogation about the conscription of women from prisons to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. They have been preparing them for a month and a half, and now there are 2-3 women in the assault unit of 8 people. The men in the Rock are about 45 years old, and the women are about 30.

Not to mention the first reported deaths from the new 18-24 cohort, including a 21-year old girl who was featured in a video proudly discussing her signup to the 1 million hryvnia bonus program: (Video at link.)

Not long after, she was reported deceased on the front, along with another 18-year old of her cohort:

Image

The first deaths have been reported among those who signed a contract under the “18-24 program” with the Ukrainian army. It’s an 18-year-old guy named Alexander and a 21-year-old girl named Veronika.

What’s really interesting here is that, judging by the obituary, Alexander died on April 5th. Even if he signed the contract on the day the program was announced, February 11th (which is unlikely), from the moment of signing to the moment of his death, just over 50 days passed instead of the promised 3 months of training (basically 45 days + 14 days + 14 days). It’s obvious that these promises are simply not being kept, and the young recruits are being sent to the front way earlier.



A few last items:

Reports that the “coalition of the willing” to galvanize boots on the ground for Ukraine has failed again:

Image

At the same time, Mad Macron’s feisty frogmen are apparently champing at the bit over in Romania:

🇫🇷⚔️🇷🇺 The French army is preparing to fight Russia on the border with Romania, - Le Figaro

▪️French military maps the territory on the border of Romania with Ukraine and Moldova in case of a possible clash between NATO and Russia.

▪️In 2024, soldiers from the 28th separate military unit of the French ground forces, the only military topographic unit in the republic, arrived in Romania to update the maps of the area. The military paid special attention to mapping the Focsani Gate, a corridor between the Carpathian foothills and the Danube, which, according to NATO, could be used by the Russian army for an offensive.

▪️In combat conditions, troops must be prepared to continue operations even if satellite signals are suppressed.

➖"The Allies needed updated information on the expected battlefield," explained the unit's commander, Colonel Guillaume Schmidt, the purpose of the mission.

▪️The result of the joint work of French military topographers and the National Cartographic Agency of Romania was a three-dimensional map of the area.

➖“It will allow us to accurately determine the location of bridges and possible crossings,” explained Sergeant Joannie.

▪️A battle between the French army and the Russian army on the eastern borders of Romania is only possible if the Russian Armed Forces capture the Odessa region and Moldova before that.

RVvoenkor


Image

Read the last part again:

A battle between the French army and the Russian army on the eastern borders of Romania is only possible if the Russian Armed Forces capture the Odessa region and Moldova before that.

The opposite is true: they’re clearly there to map out routes to seize Odessa swiftly in the case Ukrainian defenses collapse and Russian troops bear down on the key city.

This comes after The Times shared Trump envoy Keith Kellogg’s alleged vision for how Ukraine could be partitioned between zones of influence like Germany after WWII:

Image
https://www.thetimes.com/us/american-po ... -ldjprpzxt

Kellogg himself sputtered out a refutation:

The Times article misrepresents what I said. I was speaking of a post-cease fire resiliency force in support of Ukraine’s sovereignty. In discussions of partitioning, I was referencing areas or zones of responsibility for an allied force (without US troops). I was NOT referring to a partitioning of Ukraine.

The Trump admin has no real clue how to end the conflict, and Lavrov mentioned yesterday that the US still has not come close to acknowledging Russia’s core interests in the war. The two sides had again just met in Istanbul days ago, but it was said that Ukraine was hardly even discussed at all, rather other areas of preliminary rapprochement between the two countries took precedence.

Witkoff did follow up by meeting Putin, and released a promising summary of the “five hour long meeting”: that Putin effectively for the first time in person articulated the exact conditions it would take to achieve a ceasefire.

That means the Trump administration no longer has any real excuse in pretending to not understand Russia’s demands and security interests.

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/zel ... ump-throws

No doubt the Russians are shaking in their boots in fear of another French invasion...

******

Ukraine Confirms Sumy Strike Target - Russian Build Up For Summer Campaign

Yesterday I reported of Sunday's missile attack in Sumy, Ukraine:

There was a ceremony planned for the seventh anniversary of the founding of the 117th Territorial Brigade. This was to take place in the congress center of the Sumy State University. Medals were to be presented for the recent participation of the brigade in the attack on the Russian oblast of Kursk. Invitations to the commanders of neighboring units were sent out.
...
The Russian military got wind of the event and destroyed the congress center (pics) with two Iskander missiles. There were military and civilian casualties. But under the rules of war the strike was on a legitimate target.


Ukrainian politicians had alleged that the head of the Sumy Oblast State Administration Volodymyr Artiukh had send out the invitation for the event and had arranged for the military ceremony to take place in the middle of the city.

The government of Ukraine essentially confirmed that today by removing Artiukh from his position:

The Cabinet of Ministers has approved the dismissal of Volodymyr Artiukh from the post of head of Sumy Oblast State Administration and the appointment of Oleh Hryhorov to this position.
Konotop Mayor Artem Semenikhin accused Volodymyr Artiukh, Head of Sumy Oblast State Administration, of organising a gathering of soldiers from the 117th Brigade for an award ceremony in the centre of Sumy on 13 April.

Artiukh acknowledged that an award ceremony for servicemen took place in the city centre, but did not name the initiator.


Do not expect any western mainstream media to report these facts.

I have for quite some time not reported on the progress of the war in Ukraine. That is not because nothing is happening there. The Russian forces are pressing on all fronts while building up their reserves. Most of the many small pushes are successful but the current progress isn't measured in miles per day.

This is an attrition war. The capturing of land, which still happens, is not the measure of success. The destruction of the enemy's material and personnel resources is what matters. In this regard the Russian forces are making good progress. Over the last month the daily Ukrainian casualties as reported by the Russian Ministry of Defense have crept up from a low of about 1,200 per day to some 1,500 per day now. That is still far away from the 2,500 per day reported during the summer and fall of 2024 but still a noticeable increase.

There is also an intensification of air and drone strikes on military factories far behind the frontlines. Instead of once or twice per week these are now a daily occurrence. The results of these strikes are only rarely reported. They do not have an immediate effect on the fighting. But they will over time diminish Ukraine's resources and its supplies of weapons and munition.

The ground in Ukraine is still muddy. Only when it dries up will we see a general campaign by the Russian forces.

They will look for weak spots in Ukraine's defense lines and push on each of those until one or more breakthroughs occur. Fresh forces will then moved up to exploit the breaches.

Posted by b on April 15, 2025 at 15:07 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/04/u ... l#comments

******

Downplaying Ukraine Connection in Latest Trump Plot
April 14, 2025

The early evidence indicates that the latest plot to kill Donald Trump was directed by one or more persons in Ukraine. But you wouldn’t know that from the mainstream media, reports Joe Lauria.

Image
Nikita Casap. (Waukesha County Sheriff’s Department)

By Joe Lauria
Special to Consortium News

Included in the F.B.I.’s affidavit charging a 17-year old Wisconsin teenager for murdering his parents in February and plotting to assassinate President Donald Trump with explosives dropped from a drone are the transcripts of Telegram chats the suspect had with one or more people in Ukraine.

In all three communications cited by the F.B.I., the suspect, Nikita Casap, uses the handle @accelerationist. The first transcript reads:

“@accelerationist: ‘what country do you think will get the blame for this [Trump’s assassination]?’

Unknown: Russia will be blamed for it, this is the goal.”


Casap then asks Unknown how he should send his 3-page manifesto outlying his reasons to assassinate Trump and possibly Vice President J.D. Vance: to create the needed chaos to overthrow the U.S. government and “save the white race” from “Jewish controlled” politicians. Casap asks if his manifesto will be edited and Unknown simply tells him to send him photographs of the document.

The F.B.I. then described the second Telegram conversation:

Image

The phone number in the document is found on a Facebook page called “DIY soapmaking” with no further information other than an email address. Consortium News wrote to the address but received an “Address Not Found” response. A call placed to the number by CN indicates that the number, unsurprisingly, is no longer working.

In the third chat, Casap received instructions from someone writing in Cyrillic.

Image

This could be either the same person or someone else in Ukraine or conceivably in Russia writing in Cyrillic. The F.B.I. reports third-hand from a classmate of Casap that Casap told him he was in contact with someone in Russia.

The F.B.I. does not make clear whether “Unknown,” “POMaH BiKTOBNWY,” and “forest” are different people. But whether one or three, they are clearly directing Casap to change his license plates, to drive from Wyoming back east to Kansas, south to Oklahoma and then west to California.

He did not make it that far however. On Feb. 28, police in WaKeeney, Kansas arrested Casap just 85 minutes after his step father’s car was listed by police as stolen. In the car was a .357 magnum revolver, jewelry, $14,000 in cash and several electronic devices.

Earlier that day police in Waukesha, Wisconsin had discovered the dead bodies of his mother, Tatiana Casap, 35, and his stepfather, Donald Mayer, 51, in the family home.

Nikita Casap had killed them both about two hours apart on Feb. 11, police determined. A neighbor saw Casap leaving with the family dog in Mayer’s SUV on Feb. 23. He had lived with his parents’ decomposing bodies for 12 days.

The F.B.I. says Casap killed them to get the financing and “autonomy” needed to carry out the assassination.

The bureau says the Telegram “messages in Russian” took place between Feb. 14, three days after police say he killed his parents, and Feb. 24, four days before he was arrested. The conversation about making it look like Russia did it took place on Jan. 25, however, according to the affidavit.

In what appears to be a possibly fourth Russian language chat with someone the F.B.I. does not identify, Casap is instructed what to do with his parents’ bodies.

“a. ‘Reply to them all and say [you] got sick.

b. ‘Take [drag] them to the basement.'”


The F.B.I. contacted Mayer’s employer who told the bureau he had not showed up for work for two weeks but had sent several messages saying that he was sick. Casap did not drag the bodies to the basement but left them where he had killed them. He covered them with blankets and was charged with “hiding a corpse” as well as plotting to kill the president.

A Plot Directed From Ukraine

One can only conclude from this early evidence that Casap was directed from Ukraine in a plot to kill Trump. The F.B.I. says Casap had already bought drones and explosives. He received instructions on how to use the drones to extend their range and avoid detection but the F.B.I does not say where these directions came from. Casap had a Telegram chat with someone named Angel of Death about purchasing a “drone with a dropping mechanism” in bitcoin for about $1,200 to $1,500. The affidavit does not say where Angel of Death is located.

We know that one or more people in Ukraine instructed Casap every step of the way: to move his parents’ bodies, to text his father’s workplace, to change the license plates on his stepfather’s SUV, to follow a circuitous route to California, and to send his manifesto to Ukraine.

Casap also communicated to them about the plan for him to settle in Ukraine once the assassination was carried out. And perhaps most significantly someone in Ukraine told him that the goal of the operation was to make it look like Russia had assassinated Trump.

At this point there is no indication who this person or persons may be in Ukraine. The F.B.I. says Casap was involved in a Satanic group. (He also praised Hitler in his manifesto.) The bureau provides chat transcripts with like-minded Satanists but none of these are said to be in Ukraine.

Eureka, California appeared to be his final destination some time in March. There’s no indication yet that he would come into possession of the drone or drones there and the explosives. Trump did not visit Eureka, the scene of several recent anti-Trump protests, in the month of March or so far in April.

Earlier Ukraine Connections

This is the second time a connection to Ukraine has arisen in a plot to assassinate Trump. Ryan Routh was arrested for attempting to kill Trump on his golf course in West Palm Beach, Florida on Sept. 15, 2024.

Routh told The New York Times and Newsweek that he flew to Ukraine in 2022 to fight but was rejected because he had no military experience and was in his mid-50s. So he turned to recruiting foreign fighters for Ukraine, but apparently failed at that too.

There is no indication Routh maintained any connection to Ukrainian authorities.

A week ago on April 8, federal prosecutors said in a court filing that in August 2024 Routh tried to purchase an anti-aircraft weapon from a Ukrainian weapons dealer which prosecutors are tieing to Routh’s surveillance of Palm Beach International airport, where candidate Trump flew into and out of.

The court filing says: “Attempting to purchase a destructive device to blow up President Trump’s airplane lies squarely within the realm of an attempt on his life, and Routh’s statements about the purpose of the purchase drives home his intent.”

He allegedly wrote to the arms dealer: “Send me an rpg [rocket-propelled grenade] or stinger [anti-aircraft missile] and I will see what we can do … [Trump] is not good for Ukraine.”

Media Downplay

Given the extent of the evidence divulged in the F.B.I.’s affidavit about the involvement by one or more persons in Ukraine in a plot to assassinate a president of the United States it should cause great wonderment why the leading media in the U.S. and abroad either downplayed or completely ignored the Ukraine connection in this story.

In the fourth paragraph of The Washington Post ‘s account we read that the F.B.I. “found messages in Russian and communications on TikTok and Telegram,” without any mention of Ukraine. It leaves the impression that the messages originated from Russia.

The 11th paragraph reads: “A review of Casap’s communications also found that he planned on leaving the United States for Ukraine after carrying out his plot.” No mention of him discussing this with someone in Ukraine, however.

As an afterthought, CNN’s account leaves it to the penultimate paragraph to say, out of the blue, with no context or explanation:

“According to the Waukesha County complaint, detectives found messages indicating Casap planned to leave the US for Ukraine. In one Telegram message, he asked, “So while in Ukraine, I’ll be able to live a normal life? Even when it’s found out I did it?”

The BBC reported without proof that Casap was in touch with people in Russia about killing his parents, that he planned to go to Ukraine and was simply “in touch” with other parties about killing Trump. It reported:

“The court documents allege the suspect was speaking with people in Russia about plans to kill his parents.

Authorities said the teenager paid for a drone and explosives to use in an attack – and had plans to escape to Ukraine.

‘He was in touch with other parties about his plan to kill the president and overthrow the government of the United States,’ investigators wrote.”


The Australian Broadcasting Corporation just stuck in the middle of its report:

“In court, prosecutors alleged the teen was in touch with a person who spoke Russian and shared a plan to flee to Ukraine.

Federal prosecutors alleged Nikita’s manifesto outlined his reasons for wanting to kill Mr Trump and included ideas about how he would live in Ukraine.”


Perhaps worst, The New York Times does not mention Ukraine once.

Neither The Guardian nor The Wall Street appear to have covered the story at all.

https://consortiumnews.com/2025/04/14/d ... rump-plot/

*****

Ukraine Conveys to U.S. Proposals on Minerals Deal

Image
Ukrainian Economy Minister Yulia Svyrydenko. X/ @BloombergTV


April 15, 2025 Hour: 9:25 am

Meanwhile, Zelensky asked parliament to extend the current martial law for an additional 90 days.

On Tuesday, Ukrainian First Deputy Prime Minister and Economy Minister Yulia Svyrydenko presented her country’s proposals on the minerals agreement to the United States.

“The Ukrainian delegation had the opportunity to convey to the American side all the proposals that we prepared in Kiev,” Svyrydenko was quoted as saying.

She said that some agreements were reached during the consultations and expressed hope for continued dialogue with Washington on the matter. “This is not the final round,” she said.

A technical delegation from Ukraine arrived in the United States last week for the consultation, the Interfax-Ukraine news agency reported.

Image

On Tuesday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky asked parliament to extend the current martial law for an additional 90 days. The bill to prolong the martial law, which is due to expire on May 9, has been submitted for consideration.

Meanwhile, Zelensky also requested for approval of the extension of the general military mobilization for the duration of the martial law, if extended.

The Ukrainian parliament first imposed martial law and declared mobilization in February 2022 in the wake of the military conflict with Russia.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/ukraine- ... rals-deal/

******

"It was a mistake"
April 15, 17:19

Image

Continuation https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9783450.html

The US will not sign a statement condemning the Russian strike on the Ukrainian Armed Forces in Sumy
In addition, Washington informed its G7 partners that it is ready to negotiate with Moscow.
A little earlier, the Trump administration called the incident a "Mistake".

Washington knows very well who was hit, so it sees no reason to make a comedy about "a strike on civilians" now. Under Biden, Washington would certainly join this hysteria.

Of course, the failure of this attempt to create a new "Bucha" only means that the enemy, after the failure of this story, will begin preparing the next one. It will definitely have a large number of killed civilians and this time it will try to make it more plausible.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9784004.html

Losses of foreign mercenaries in Kursk region
April 15, 20:20

Image

Bodies of foreign mercenaries found in the Kursk region:

▪️Poland — 1963
▪️Georgia — 1230
▪️Columbia — 917
▪️France — 208
▪️Germany — 197
▪️Great Britain — 156
▪️USA — 89
▪️Australia — 17
▪️Japan — 4

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9784073.html

By the summer campaign of 2025
April 16, 11:54

Image

In Ukraine, martial law and forced mobilization have been extended until August. Accordingly, there will be no elections in Ukraine until autumn. Accordingly, despite the chatter about a ceasefire, the war will continue. A hot summer campaign is ahead.
Those who relaxed amid the chatter about peace - do not relax.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9784856.html

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Thu Apr 17, 2025 12:00 pm

The importance of Mikhail Zabrodsky
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 04/17/2025

Image

On March 29, The New York Times published one of the most important articles ever written about the war in Ukraine, " Partnership : The Secret History of the Ukrainian Conflict." Although the most relevant part of the story relates to the military model promoted by the Ukrainian allies, Britain and the United States, the article provides particularly interesting information about the key figures in this story, some of whom are little known to the public. Despite their undoubted historical significance, little is generally known in Europe about the American General Christopher Donahue or his main Ukrainian interlocutor, Lieutenant General Mikhail Zabrodsky.

This article focuses on this Ukrainian general, who was instrumental in shaping the political and military actions of the governments that emerged after the coup forces' victory at Maidan. This decisive role is particularly evident in the initial phases of the Ukrainian conflict, especially in everything related to the events following the approval of the anti-terrorist operation (ATO), which led to the war in Donbass in 2014. But it is even more evident when considering the processes associated with the formation of Ukraine's military strategy following the Russian invasion in 2022.

Given its length, the article is presented in two parts. The first examines the consolidation of Mikhail Zabrodsky's military and ideological influence in Ukraine, specifically analyzing his contribution to shaping the militarist theses of the Ukrainian state. The second shows how the Ukrainian general's ideas determine the configuration of Ukraine's post-2022 military strategy, particularly regarding the 2023 counteroffensive against the Russian Federation and its underlying military logic.

Zabrodsky and the war

On March 8, 2014, just weeks after the overthrow of President Yanukovych, the 95th Airborne Brigade, one of the main units of the Ukrainian state's special forces, was mobilized. Following the declaration of independence of Crimea and Sevastopol, the brigade was deployed to the peninsula's borders before later being assigned to the front lines in Donbass. Supported by the new nationalist state, far-right forces had by then been responsible for forcibly suppressing the Anti-Maidan opposition groups in major Ukrainian cities, especially in Kyiv and Kharkiv. In Odessa, such actions had led to the imprisonment of the main leaders of that opposition in the House of Trade Unions and the subsequent burning of those sheltered there, an event that occurred amid the total indifference of the Ukrainian state institutions in the city. Only one issue remained: controlling the rebellion, which had strong local support, in the eastern Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Lugansk.

A mixture of local rebel groups and some militants from third countries, as was the case with the nationalist Maidan rebellion itself, the fight for territorial control in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions could not be left to the local far-right, given its insignificant influence. The new ruling nationalism required a combined action of regular army forces and far-right volunteer groups transferred from other regions of Ukraine. This action marked a significant qualitative change: the shift from armed police and paramilitary repression to the use of military action against opponents of the new nationalist regime.

Slavyansk would constitute the starting point of the new phase of the conflict, now of a fully military dimension. And it was precisely in the Slavyansk area that the first significant intervention took place by a soldier who would come to play a decisive role in the war on the Eastern Front in Europe: Mikhail Zabrodsky, commander of the 95th Brigade at the time.

Zabrodsky is an essential figure in the political and military reconstruction of the Ukrainian State, with a decisive role in the recovery of important areas of Donbass for that state after the introduction of the so-called " anti-terrorist operation " ( ATO ), launched on May 12, 2014. His forces participated in the siege of Slavyansk during the period from May to July of that year, concentrating their action on the capture and control of strategic locations around the besieged city, in particular Mount Karachun, from which the Ukrainian army continuously bombards the positions of the besieged rebels.

Image

Having captured the area between Krasny Liman, Slavyansk, and Kramatorsk in early July, the assault unit of then-Colonel Zabrodsky participated in the Ukrainian plan to block the Russian-Ukrainian border in Donbass and to surround and besiege the cities of Donetsk and Luhansk. Although this plan failed, also in its objective of maintaining control over Donetsk airport, between mid-July and August 10, the so-called "95th Brigade raid" contributed to breaking the siege of several Ukrainian army units and to the recovery of part of the adjacent territory in the rebel-held areas of Donbass, particularly in the Lysychansk area.

The outcome of Ukraine's decision to use the army to confront a largely civilian and local rebellion within the framework of the ATO is a turning point in the post-2014 Ukrainian conflict, given the high number of people killed or injured. A September 2014 United Nations report , whose findings have not been substantially altered since, estimated the total number of deaths (including 28 minors) between mid-April and September 3, 2014 (close to the date of the first Minsk Agreement) at 2,905, and 7,640 injured (not including the 298 fatalities resulting from the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH-17).

Zabrodsky's actions in 2014 would help make him one of Ukraine's leading military figures and a Hero of Ukraine, but would also lead to his being regarded as a soldier with blood on his hands by his opponents in the east of the country. Promoted to Major General in August 2015, he held the command of the Airborne Assault Forces from late 2014 to 2019. Promoted to Lieutenant General, he took command of the ATO forces (later Joint Forces Operation ) in 2017.

2019-2022: Contributing to the formation of the militarist theses of the new Ukrainian state
In 2019, Mikhail Zabrodsky took the step of entering politics. He accompanied former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in his resounding defeat on a trip with the European Solidarity party, which also included Andriy Parubiy, the long-time leader of the Ukrainian far right. The current commander of the Ukrainian Airborne Forces, a fundamental part of the country's special forces, maintains his military status, although now as part of the military's legislative body.

As First Deputy Chairman of the National Security, Defense, and Intelligence Committee of the Ukrainian Rada from 2019 to 2022, Zabrodsky played a decisive role in consolidating a radical vision for resolving the Ukrainian crisis, centered on a series of key points that will determine the future outcome of the crisis: a firm commitment to NATO membership; the consideration of an armed solution to the conflict in eastern Ukraine, with theorization of a possible direct military intervention in Donbas (and de facto in Crimea); and, in some aspects of short-term action, a determined desire to put an end to the Russian-German Nord Stream gas pipeline system.

Security Guarantees through NATO
In a 2021 interview with 0bozretavel in April 2021, published in two parts ( 1 and 2 ), Zabrodsky linked Ukraine’s future security to NATO membership, noting that given “ Russia’s quantitative superiority, Ukraine can only guarantee its security after joining NATO .” In that regard, he welcomed President Zelensky’s parallel statements that NATO membership was the only way to end the war in Donbas. However, he qualified, “ it is important that his words do not deviate from his actions ” and that the path towards NATO, “ enshrined, among other things, in our Constitution , ” be maintained because there are still “ those who want to slow down these processes ” and believe that “ the desired outcome is our non-admission . ”

From a "Ukrainian" version of the Minsk agreements to the potential recapture of Donbass through direct military intervention
Zabrodsky's most defining political trait during this period is his oscillation between proposing a solution to the Donbass conflict through the imposition of a "Ukrainian" interpretation of the Minsk agreements and considering direct military intervention in that region.

Poroshenko's version of Minsk in the defensive phase
During his time in the Rada, Zabrodsky opposed Zelensky's initial positions on the pacification of Donbass, based in his own words on the idea that "we just need to stop shooting ." In June 2020 , during a televised debate on ICTV TV, he insisted that, a year after the new president's arrival, " the shooting has not stopped ." The shooting on the front has not stopped, the actions of withdrawing forces are " absolutely useless and, above all, diplomatically ineffective ," and there has been no progress " in the formation or strengthening of the international coalition that has supported us all these years and thanks to whose support you and I are now in this study ." These were the years when Ukraine accused Russia of every bombing, including the Ukrainian attacks on the DPR and LPR, which it presented as self-bombing.

According to Zabrodsky, the new leadership team lacked a clear vision of how to stop Russian aggression and simply criticized the Poroshenko administration's measures. Zabrodsky interpreted Zelensky's team's statements that the Minsk agreements had reached a dead end and constituted a dead end as a reluctance and inability to implement them in the manner defined by the previous president. " It may be a dead end for those who do not want to implement this process ," Zabrodsky noted, adding, however, that there was still no alternative to Minsk as a legal platform for negotiations.

Of course, Zabrodsky's vision was a sui generis interpretation , embodied in the so-called Road Map to the Minsk Agreements formulated by Poroshenko (and, of course, never accepted by the various parties). This Road Map sought to impose the presence of an international peacekeeping contingent whose main function would be to control the entire temporarily occupied territory , including the border between Ukraine and Russia, and to disarm illegal armed formations . In other words, he intended to rewrite the Minsk Agreements to his liking in order to achieve by diplomatic means what had not been achieved by military means. " Everything was written before the team working now arrived, so why not take advantage of it and use it? " the Lieutenant General stated.

In fact, faced with the possibility of applying the Steinmeier formula, aimed at consolidating the special status envisaged for certain areas of Donbass, Zabrodsky would soon begin to backtrack on his commitment to Minsk. Thus, in a Facebook post in August 2020 , he clearly expressed his opposition to " pacification agreements," which largely resemble the fulfillment of certain demands as ultimatums, and which, furthermore, introduced " artificial restrictions on the front, completely incomprehensible, unprecedented, and clearly not useful for our units in carrying out their tasks ." He saw this, through acceptance of provocations, as granting impunity to the enemy . “ Everything, from the ban on opening fire, which was communicated to the Joint Forces personnel… to the prohibition even on upgrading the engineering equipment of strong points and positions… impunity only fuels the enemy's desire to advance stealthily and conduct "disruptive" and "unsystematic" fire against our units. These two newly created and almost forgotten terms from the 2020 war in the East, according to their creators, should now obviously mean enemy fire without the risk of receiving a response. Strange associations, very similar to the artillery fire coming from the territory of the Russian Federation in the distant year of 2014… ” In those years, it was not the People's Republics that stealthily advanced into the supposedly neutral zone, but Ukrainian troops.

The real opposition to Minsk is already clearly evident in the positions expressed in the April 2021 interview with Obozretavel . Asking about the reasons for the Russian Federation's acceptance of an autonomous Donbass, with special status, within Ukraine, he stated that " the existence of the DPR/LPR is an instrument of pressure and an open wound in Ukraine, constantly affecting national and international political processes, so this conflict could last for decades. Unless Ukraine actually fulfills its conditions. These are elections, reintegration, federalization, special status, and the rest." And, if this model of autonomy were accepted, he concluded that " the entire economic and political burden of maintaining these territories will fall on Ukraine, and the mechanism of external influence will continue to operate ."

The “Krajina” model in the offensive phase

Image

As the aforementioned interview shows, in 2021, important sectors in Ukraine were once again considering the possibility of advancing toward Donbass in accordance with the Croatian scenario implemented in Krajina. When asked whether the Ukrainian army could retake Donbass, Zabrodsky stated: " The potential exists ," although he clarified that " the transition to active combat, and in particular to offensive actions " depends on the political will of the country's leaders because it implies " preparing for this, including information, shaping public opinion, and the support of Western partners ."

But if such political will exists, Zabrodsky's position on the army's readiness and capability to intervene and advance in Donbass was clear: “ If [such political will] exists , Ukraine is capable of implementing this particular option. I am sure of this . ” “ The Armed Forces of Ukraine are ready to actively advance in Donbass ” if they have “ the support and unity of the entire country ,” “ national public support, unity of efforts across the country, availability of reserves, and adequate provision of resources .”

In the July 2021 Kholodny Yar , he spelled out what was necessary to make a scenario possible that was still difficult to achieve: “ Let there be a vision, a plan… we need political will, strong leadership, a firm decision .” Pointing to the need to go beyond conventional politics, he went on to state: “ It is necessary to continue the determined effort to replace military equipment that has simply worn out, to supply goods, food, the joint training of various security forces, to work with volunteer units, including integration, to plan military operations, and to strengthen morale. According to the most modest estimates, this would take at least a year—if this decision were to be made now, [and here]. A year of concentrated work. No evasions left and right. No looking for excuses. Perhaps even longer .”

Zabrodsky, clearly assuming the option of intervention, nevertheless warned the Obozretavel interviewer that the cost of the war would be very high: “ If we say that this is a dead end and that there is no other way out [than direct military intervention for the return of Donbas] , we must also prepare public opinion for such a scenario… we must be prepared for this in advance, and not throw up our hands and say: “Well, we didn’t think it would be so serious.” Believe me, it will be so serious .”

The radical opposition to Nord Stream 2
Zabrodsky's hardline militaristic positions were also reflected in more specific aspects of relations with Russia during this period, with particular reference to the issue of Nord Stream 2.

Thus, in 2020, he emerged as one of the main signatories of a letter from a cross-party group of 29 Ukrainian parliamentarians warning of the international security implications of the completion of Russia's Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline. The letter, published on October 13, 2020, by the Atlantic Council, was titled " Putin's Pipeline Is a Strategic Weapon. It Must Be Stopped ." Its contents stated: " The United States must stop Russia's plans before it is too late. Nord Stream 2 is a Russian strategic weapon and has almost reached its objective. The pipeline has crossed the Baltic Sea, but due to US sanctions, construction has stopped one step away from reaching Germany. It is time for the democratic world to end this threat for good ." That wish was granted in September 2022, when explosive devices destroyed three of the four Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 pipelines. The clues point to Ukraine.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/04/17/la-im ... zabrodsky/

I doubt Ukraine had the ability to destroy the Nord Stream pipelines, that the US did it. Who profits?

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Russian Defense Ministry : The Kiev regime, in violation of the Russian-American agreement to cease strikes on energy facilities for 30 days from March 18, has continued unilateral attacks on Russian energy infrastructure. Ten attacks by the Ukrainian Armed Forces on Russian energy facilities
have been recorded . – In the Belgorod Region: on April 16 at 06:31, as a result of deliberate shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the 35 kV high-voltage line "Graivoron - Dorogoshch" of the branch of PJSC "Rosseti Center" - "Belgorodenergo" was disconnected due to a break in the wire in the span of the supports. On April 16 at 14:39, as a result of deliberate shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, a complete transformer substation of the branch of PJSC "Rosseti Center" - "Belgorodenergo" was disabled. On April 16 at 15:32, as a result of intentional shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, a 10 kV high-voltage line of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre - Belgorodenergo was disconnected due to a broken wire in the span of the supports. The settlement of Krasnaya Yaruga remained without power supply. On April 17 at 05:28, as a result of intentional shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, a high-voltage line of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre - Belgorodenergo was disconnected due to a broken wire in the span of the supports. The settlement of Krasnaya Yaruga (26 supply points) remained without power supply. - In the Bryansk region: on April 16 at 20:58, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV, a complete transformer substation of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre - Bryanskenergo was disconnected due to damage. Some household consumers in the settlement of Podyvotye in the Sevsky district were left without power supply. – In the Zaporizhia region: on April 17 at 01:30, as a result of artillery shelling by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the 150 kV electric substation "Kuibyshevo" of the branch of PJSC "Rosseti" - Tavricheskoe PMES was damaged. – In the Ryazan region: on April 17 at 01:57, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV, due to a break in the wires in the span of the supports, the 10 kV high-voltage line of the branch of PJSC "Rosseti Centre and Volga Region" - "Ryazanenergo" was disconnected. Household consumers in the village of Turlatovo, Ryazan district were left without power. – In the Tver region : on April 16 at 13:56, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV, due to a break in the wires, the high-voltage line of the branch of PJSC "Rosseti Centre and Volga Region" - "Tverenergo" was disconnected. Household consumers in the village of Yuryevo, Konakovsky district were left without power. – In Kursk Oblast : On April 16 at 18.50, as a result of a UAV attack on the 35 kV Zvannoye substation of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Centre – Kurskenergo, a transformer was disabled. Some household consumers in the Glushkovsky District (610 supply points) were left without power supply. – In Tula Oblast:
On April 17 at 02.31, as a result of an attack by a Ukrainian UAV, a high-voltage line of 10 kV of the branch of PJSC Rosseti Center and Volga Region - Tulaenergo was disconnected due to a break in the wires in the span of the supports. Some household consumers in the settlement of Pervomaysky, the village of Podkhozhie Vyselki, and the village of Shishlovo in the Novomoskovsk district were left without power supply.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Growth Of Ukraine's Azov Units Follow Path Of The Waffen-SS

The rise of Nazism in Germany was accompanied by the rise of its armed militants. These were used to fight opposing political parties and militia formations. They were ruthless.

The units were later known as the Waffen-SS:

After release from prison Hitler decided that he needed a paramilitary group to protect him personally. That group should be steadfastly faithful and loyal to him alone; not least to protect him from possible SA intrigues. Therefore Hitler established a personal bodyguard in his hometown München (Munich). Initially this group numbered only ten men with one officer. It was first called "Stoßtruppe Hitler" (Shock Troops Hitler). Again the title derived from divisional assaults groups from World War I. Later it was renamed "Schutz Staffel" (SS or Protection Squad).
...
By 1932 the SS had some 30,000 men, ...
...
In March 1935 Hitler renounced the Treaty of Versailles and announced the expansion of the German Army and the formation of the SS Verfügungstruppen (SS VT or SS special purpose troops) as the core of a full military division. This unit was financed by the police budget to counter any Army fears.


After the start of the war the 'armed evil' grew further:

By 1939, four regiments (Standarten) had been organized.
...
During the following winter and spring, regiments that had fought in Poland were expanded into brigades and later divisions. ... These three divisions were to be the nucleus of the Waffen-SS in its subsequent rapid expansion.
...
At the end of 1940, the Waffen-SS numbered slightly more than 150,000 men. By June 1944, it had grown to 594,000. Intended as an elite force, the Waffen-SS evolved due to the exigencies of war from the original SS concept of a military organization imbued with Nazi ideology and loyalty to Hitler into a polyglot force of decreasing combat effectiveness.


The Waffen-SS was not part of the regular army. It had its own financial resources. It recruited and trained its own officers through Nazi youth organizations. These were 'true believers' .

There are a lot of parallels between the rise of the Waffen SS and the Ukrainian Nazi formation known as Azov.

Azov started as a violent hooligan gang in Kharkov. It mixed nordic myth and Nazi ideology. It found rich oligarchs as sponsors and in exchange provided them with the necessary muscles to solve 'business conflicts'. It has its own youth organization and international network.

Already in 2014, after the U.S. instigated a coup against the elected government of Ukraine, the fascist background of the newly installed government was shining through. Prime Minister Yatsenyuk, selected by the State Department's Victoria Nuland, designated the Russian speaking people in east Ukraine who opposed him as "subhumans" i.e Untermenschen in Nazi speak.

In December 2014 the BBC(!) warned of the growing Nazi menace in Ukraine:

the ultra-nationalists have proven to be effective and dedicated fighters in the brutal war in the east against Russian-backed separatists and Russian forces, whose numbers also include a large contingent from Russia's far right.
As a result, they have achieved a level of acceptance, even though most Ukrainians are unfamiliar with their actual beliefs.

The volunteer Azov Battalion is a case in point.

Run by the extremist Patriot of Ukraine organisation, which considers Jews and other minorities "sub-human", external and calls for a white, Christian crusade against them, it sports three Nazi symbols, external on its insignia: a modified Wolf's Hook, a black sun (or "Hakensonne") and the title Black Corps, which was used by the Waffen SS.

Azov is just one of more than 50 volunteer groups fighting in the east, the vast majority of which are not extremist, yet it seems to enjoy special backing from some top officials:

Interior Minister Arsen Avakov and his deputy Anton Gerashchenko actively supported the parliament candidacy of Andriy Biletsky, the Azov and Patriot of Ukraine commander
Vadim Troyan, another top Azov official and Patriot of Ukraine member, was recently named police chief for the Kiev region
Mr Korotkykh is also an Azov member
Ukraine's media have been noticeably silent on this subject.
...
[A]lthough Ukraine is emphatically not run by fascists, far-right extremists seem to be making inroads by other means, as in the country's police department.

Ukraine's public is grossly under-informed about this. The question is, why doesn't anyone want to tell them?


A year after the 2014 coup the CIA secretly started to train Ukrainian paramilitary groups for an insurgency against an eventual Russian invasion:

The CIA is overseeing a secret intensive training program in the U.S. for elite Ukrainian special operations forces and other intelligence personnel, according to five former intelligence and national security officials familiar with the initiative. The program, which started in 2015, is based at an undisclosed facility in the Southern U.S., according to some of those officials.

The trainees included Azov units:

Despite sometimes open acknowledgement of its Nazism — its former commander once said the “historic mission” of Ukraine is to “lead the White Races of the world in a final crusade for their survival” in “a crusade against the Semite-led Untermenschen” — Azov was incorporated into the country’s National Guard in 2014, owing to its effectiveness in fighting Russian separatists. US arms have flowed to the militia, NATO and US military officials have been pictured meeting with them, and members of the militia have talked about their work with US trainers and the lack of background screening to weed out white supremacists.

Given all this, it would be more of a surprise that the neo-Nazis of Azov haven’t been trained in the CIA’s clandestine make-an-insurgency program. And we’re already seeing the early signs of blowback.


In 2022, three days after the launch of Russia's military operation in Ukraine, I warned that these units would come to haunt the west:

CIA support for Ukrainian Nazis has a long history.
Op-Ed: The CIA has backed Ukrainian insurgents before. Let’s learn from those mistakes - LA Times

A new Nazi insurgency in eastern Europe is an exceptionally bad idea. Fascist groups from everywhere would join in. A few years from now it may well lead to Nazi terror in many European countries. Have we learned really nothing from the war on Syria and the ISIS campaign?


Meanwhile 'western' media who had previously condemned Nazi units in Ukraine started to whitewash them:

Recently the New York Times, like many other 'western' outlets, has changed its language when reporting about the fascist Ukrainian Asov Battalion.
What was once "a Ukrainian neo-Nazi paramilitary organization" which even the FBI said is notorious for its “association with neo-Nazi ideology” was first relabeled as merely "far right" before it became a normal "unit in the Ukrainian military".


While propagandizing Nazi units the media have failed to point out the dangers of their growth:

During the war Azov has grown through active recruiting from "the Azov Battalion, a Ukrainian neo-Nazi paramilitary organization" into the Azov Regiment and, after losing in Mariupol, into a brigade size unit.

It has since, like the Waffen-SS previously, continued to grow and has now reached the size of a corps:

The very first corps formation within the National Guard is now a reality. On April 15, 2025, the Azov Brigade, along with several other National Guard units, officially announced the establishment of the new 1st “Azov” Corps of the Ukrainian National Guard, marking the creation of the Guard’s first operational corps.
The formation of a corps is based on the 12th Special Purpose Brigade “Azov” has been anticipated for many months.

The 12th Brigade, now the 1st Azov Corps, is the main fascist unit in the National Guard. It had the resources and time to celebrate its new status with 3:48 minute propaganda video.

Another Azov unit, the 3rd Brigade is part of the regular Ukrainian military. It is also designated to expand into a corps:

According to Yuriy Butusov, the 3rd Assault Brigade will be restructured into the 3rd Army Corps. The new formation will be led by none other than Andriy Biletsky, the founder of the brigade and the Azov movement.

In NATO formations a corps has between 20,000 and 45,000 soldiers. While the newly formed ones in Ukraine are currently still smaller their designation as corps points to further growth.

Already the two Azov corps are the world’s largest armed neo-Nazi formation. They are growing further through their own recruiting structures and youth organizations as well as by absorbing other 'nationalist' units.

These forces will become a serious danger for Europe:

Thomas Fazi @battleforeurope - 9:45 UTC · Apr 16, 2025
A heavily Nazified army right on the EU’s border that will turn against European countries for “stabbing them in the back” as soon as the war comes to an end. Ukraine is the real security threat to Europe, not Russia.


A first taste of the backlash from the western support for Nazis in Ukraine has created came with an assassination attempt against then presidential candidate Donald Trump:

Yesterday one avid U.S. supporter of the fascists in Ukraine tried to assassinate the Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump:

Jack Poso 🇺🇸 @JackPosobiec - 1:39 UTC · Sep 16, 2024
EXCLUSIVE: Attempted Trump assassin Ryan Routh appeared in a propaganda video for the AZOV BATTALLION in May 2022
Embedded video


Routh, himself being too old to fight, had tried to hire foreign mercenaries to fight on the fascist side in Ukraine. He obviously targeted Trump because he had promised to dictate an end to the war in Ukraine.

As I have warned since years back:

Many more such incidents, predominantly in Europe, are likely to follow.

Posted by b on April 16, 2025 at 11:26 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/04/g ... .html#more

******

Poroshenko accused of trading with Crimea
April 16, 21:27

Image

In Ukraine, Poroshenko was accused of participating in trade with Crimea and four new regions of Russia.

This is actually an open secret. Since 2014, there has been direct trade between Ukraine and the LPR and DPR. Primarily coal. It was supervised by the secret services on both sides. Those who interfered without permission ended badly (see the history of the Tornado battalion and the "coal wars" in the LPR 2014-2015 with the shooting of Cossacks).

During the Minsk agreements, cheap coal from Donbass was supplied to Ukraine, and money was supplied to the LPR and DPR, which was used (or should have been used) to finance the republics. However, in the same LPR, more than 90% of the proceeds in 2014-2015 were stolen (see the Lyamin case).

In 2017, a blow was struck according to Poroshenko's scheme, when a coal blockade of Donbass was organized (they used the well-known freak Semyon Semenchenko), after which coal stopped flowing directly across the front line. However, the scheme was simply rebuilt and coal from Donbass was already flowing to Ukraine through Russia and Belarus (and some of it was bought by the Turks, ignoring the official position on non-recognition of the LPR and DPR and Crimea). And this is only one of many schemes, not to mention the old story about the candy factory that belonged to Poroshenko and that we have been demanding to take away from Poroshenko for many years.

Naturally, all of this was done with the knowledge of Poroshenko and his entourage. The fact that they decided to remind the chocolate Fuhrer of this now is quite funny, because all of this was known in Ukraine 10 years ago. The cocaine Fuhrer simply wants to get rid of Poroshenko, who is offering himself to the Americans as a replacement puppet.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9786230.html

Former Kursk Region Governor Arrested in Case of Theft During Fortification Construction
April 16, 18:54

Image

Former Kursk Region Governor Arrested in Case of Theft During Fortification Construction

Former Kursk Region Governor Alexey Smirnov has been detained. Law enforcement officers came to his home this morning.

According to Mash, Vladimir Lukin, former CEO of the Kursk Region Development Corporation, testified against him. He was previously arrested ( https://t.me/mash/60244 ) in connection with the theft during the construction of fortifications in the Kursk region. Both Lukin and Smirnov were associated with the Ivanovo region. Preliminary, they could have participated in the theft of state funds from the housing and utilities fund there.
* * *

Of the 15 billion rubles allocated from the federal budget for the defense of the Kursk region, about 200 million rubles were stolen, writes 112.
According to a media source, the corruption scheme was as follows: money was transferred to shell companies that won fictitious tenders, after which artificial conditions were created for non-fulfillment of contracts, which were then terminated, and the companies disappeared with the prepayment.

As has been said before, the case of theft of money during the construction of fortifications in the Kursk region will be long-running and will not be limited to contractors alone.
In fact, the case is identical in content to similar cases in Ukraine, such as the theft of money during the construction of the "Yatsenyuk wall" and the theft of money during the construction of fortifications to the west of Avdiivka and in the Krasnoarmeysk area, where retreating Ukrainian troops were surprised to discover that some of the fortifications existed only on paper.

One people.

P.S. We are waiting with interest to see what other names will emerge in this case.
I am sure that if you start digging in neighboring Bryansk, you can also find a lot of interesting things there.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9785894.html

"Lancet" vs T-64
April 17, 13:00

Image

"Lancet" vs T-64

ZALA "Lancet" deprived the Ukrainian Armed Forces of more than 120 T-64 tanks

(Video at link.)

The T-64 has become the most common tank in the Ukrainian army. According to open sources ( https://lostarmour.info/tags/lancet ), since the beginning of the Second Military Operation, the ZALA Lancet reconnaissance and strike system has destroyed 121 T-64 tanks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The coordinates of enemy equipment are received by operators of the Lancet loitering munitions in real time from the ZALA Z-16 reconnaissance UAVs. Due to their high maneuverability, high-quality video signal, and the use of modern control and navigation algorithms, the Lancets are capable of attacking armored vehicles from an unexpected direction, striking at weakly protected areas, which often leads to the detonation of ammunition.

The T-64 tank, developed in the 1960s, has become one of the main fighting vehicles of the armored forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukraine inherited hundreds of such tanks, which were modernized to the T-64BV, T-64BM "Bulat" and other versions. These tanks are distinguished by combined armor, a 125-mm gun and relatively high mobility. During the modernization, the latest versions of combat vehicles also received modern thermal imagers, a satellite navigation system, a digital radio station and updated dynamic protection. According to Ukrainian media, at the beginning of the Second World War, the Ukrainian army had about 800 active T-64 tanks in service.

We present a selection of footage of objective control of the use of Lancets against T-64 tanks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

@ZalaAero - zinc

It's good that the "Lancets" were tested on militants in Syria. Without them, it would have been more difficult for us on the Ukrainian front.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9787298.html

What is this 'Second World War' business? A translation glitch like 'fighter bombers' or a political statement?

Google Translator

******

Vietnam's lessons for Ukraine

An essay on neutrality, sovereignty, and complicated relationships.
Events in Ukraine
Apr 16, 2025

There’s one matter that I don’t write about too often here, though I have plenty of thoughts about it. That topic is the discourse and practice of self-described ‘pro-Ukrainian leftists’. I don’t write about them for several reasons. For one, I knew several of them, and I never find it particularly enjoyable to write about people you know, even if you were never particularly close.

But more importantly, the whole posture comes off as quite ridiculous to me. I never really understood who it was meant to work on – if you’re a pro-American liberal, then sure, ‘support Ukraine’. But if you’re critical of the current world, which leftwing people generally claim to be, I don’t quite understand how one could support a project which calls itself the savior of the ‘rules based’ international order.

Anyway, my surprise is rather misplaced. Plenty of leftwing people are quite happy with the current international state of affairs and want to preserve it – albeit with some improvements for the living standards of citizens of the imperial core. In that case, certainly, it would make sense to support the fight for NATO hegemony.

But things get truly strange when the historical comparisons get let loose.

Image
For what it’s worth, I vehemently disagree with the idea of lumping the likes of Zelensky, Noriega and Bin Laden with the other two great Arabic Lions. But my thoughts on the true relevance of Iraq to Ukraine, something I thought and read a lot about in 2022, is a topic for another article.
I haven’t noticed too many comparisons with the invasion of Iraq, which probably makes sense – using such a parallel would imply that Zelensky is just as morally reprehensible as Saddam Hussein is supposed to have been. Instead, the left-liberals have a different beloved historical parallel: Vietnam.

Here is an example of this approach from an archetypal Ukrainian left-liberal writing for Jacobin:

To put it in historical terms, the war in Ukraine is no more a proxy war than the Vietnam War was a proxy war between the United States on one side and the Soviet Union and China on the other. And yet, at the same time, it was also a national liberation war of the Vietnamese people against the United States as well as a civil war between supporters of North and South Vietnam. Almost every war is multilayered; its nature can change during its course. But what does this give us in practical terms?

During the Cold War, internationalists did not need to laud the USSR to support the Vietnamese struggle against the United States. And it is unlikely that any socialists would have advised left-wing dissidents in the Soviet Union to oppose support for the Vietcong. Should Soviet military support for Vietnam have been resisted because the USSR criminally suppressed the Prague Spring of 1968? Why then, when it comes to Western support for Ukraine, are the murderous occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq considered serious counterarguments for aid?


As usual with sophistic arguments, there’s a grain of truth. Indeed, the simple fact of US support for a particular government isn’t enough to decide on the reactionary or progressive essence of that government. Instead, making such a judgment requires some understanding of the nature of that particular government, the domestic interests it represents.

Of course, in reality, the nature of the US government means that it invariably supports reactionary entities.

Regardless, back to the domestic level. There are clearly qualitative differences between how contemporary Ukrainian nationalists and Vietnamese communists – not the ‘Viet Cong’, the derogatory term used by the US invaders – saw their struggle.

While there are plenty of attempts in western historiography to underplay the role of communist ideology on the Vietnamese, that certainly isn’t how Ho Chi Minh saw it. If you read his works, you can find constant references to and analysis of the works of Marx, Lenin, and Stalin. Today’s Ho Chi Minh museum in Hanoi emphasizes the impact reading Lenin’s theses on the colonial question had on Ho’s political development.

Image
A Lenin statue in Hanoi

The Vietnamese communists also played a major role in the global third wordlist communist movement known as Tricontentalism, allied in particular with revolutionary Cuba and the DPRK. They had a compelling political line, opposed to both Soviet conservativism and China’s divisive factionalism. Though mainly focused on Cuba and the DPRK, Moe Taylor’s book also has interesting analysis of Vietnam’s role.

North Korea, Tricontinentalism, and the Latin American Revolution, 1959–1970 eBook by Moe Taylor - EPUB | Rakuten Kobo India
While they were certainly fighting for national independence, national liberation in the abstract is quite meaningless. Plenty of Ukrainian nationalists believe that ‘national liberation’ means joining NATO, privatizing the economy, talking only in Ukrainian, and wearing expensive replicas of peasant clothing from 200 years ago.

That is clearly a very different conception of national liberation from the Vietnamese, who focused on economically uplifting the peasantry, industrializing the country, and working alongside the progressive third world to combat western imperialism.

Works of All Nations Are Brothers” - Vietnamese poster promoting international proletarian solidarity, late 1970s : r/PropagandaPosters
It's also worth mentioning that whenever pro-Zelensky Ukrainian government officials or nationalist media speaks of the Vietnam war, they loudly sympathize with the American puppet regime in the south, as opposed to the ‘barbaric northern communists’. Naturally, the fall of Saigon is often brought up by such figures to urge against ‘betrayal by western allies’.

That’s why it’s rather amusing when Urkainian left-liberals waging English-language info-war patronizingly call on insolent ‘western leftists’ to listen to (their) ‘Ukrainian voice’. But what about the Ukrainian voices in government?

In short, while Vietnam was on the side of the global majority, Ukraine views itself as the vanguard of the ‘civilized west’, fighting a desperate battle against ‘Asiatic orcs’.

Image

But there’s also another contrast between the two – the meaning of sovereignty.

Is a country automatically worthy of ‘support’ if it is fighting a war against a larger neighbor? Few would agree with such a statement, since Nazi Germany, for instance, was much smaller than the USSR it invaded. But what if the larger country is the first to deploy large-scale force?

Beyond the fairly irrelevant, self-obsessed question of who outside observers should ‘support’, what about the country itself – at what point should the imperatives of geographic location take precedence over principled positions? Is it really wise to indefinitely fight a larger neighbor with the support of a distant ally?

The reason I ask these questions is because there is another, much more fruitful way to compare Ukraine to Vietnam, an avenue unexplored by the aforementioned Jacobin article. Both share a complicated, often shared history with a large neighbor. Where Ukraine has Russia, Vietnam has China. But Vietnam chose a far more productive approach towards coexistence.

(Paywall with free option)

https://eventsinukraine.substack.com/p/ ... or-ukraine

If I ever encountered a 'pro-Ukrainian leftists' I'd smack them from now to now. Good thing I ain't on Twitter.

******

A false flag is about to be unmasked

Stephen Karganovic

April 17, 2025

The SBU-organized Konstantinovka massacre is part of a pattern of crimes against humanity perpetrated by the Kiev regime.

Frontline news has it that very soon the city of Konstantinovka (or Konstantinyvka, as it was ridiculously renamed by the Banderites, like so many other geographical locales, including Kiev, in a puerile attempt to disguise their historically Russian identity) will soon be under the control of Russian forces. That is good news for the inhabitants of Konstantinovka, but it is unpleasant news for SBU, the Ukrainian state security service. Konstantinovka’s imminent liberation means that SBU’s September 6 2023 false flag operation, which cost the lives of at least seventeen civilians in an attempt to pin on Russians the blame for the massacre they had themselves staged, is about to be exposed.

The SBU-organized Konstantinovka massacre is part of a pattern of crimes against humanity perpetrated by the Kiev regime. Bucha (masterfully deconstructed by the Russian delegation at the UN Security Council) and Kramatorsk are other prime examples. None of these crimes had any military purpose or significance whatsoever but were conceived and committed by the Kiev regime exclusively in order to reap propaganda benefits. But whilst the poor victims are all dead or maimed, the intended propaganda benefits have largely eluded the sloppy organisers of these criminal acts.

Fortunately, SBU’s criminality is matched only by its ineptness. Many of its schemes have fallen apart due to the utter incompetence of their personnel. Consequently, most of their false flag operations were exposed with relative ease soon after they were carried out. In that regard, the Konstantinovka slaughter of innocent civilians that they enacted in 2023 was not an exception.

This is a good opportunity to briefly outline the nature of false flag operations. They are primarily undertaking of a political or propaganda nature. They consist of the execution of a criminal act by one actor in a manner that the blame can be plausibly shifted to another actor, whilst the real perpetrator remains undetected and shielded from responsibility.

The expression “false flag” originated in the 16th century and referred to the intentional misrepresentation of someone’s true allegiance, initially in naval confrontations. The object of the ruse was for a naval vessel to fly the flag of a neutral or enemy country in order to hide its true identity so that the hostile act and the resulting damage would be attributed to the power under whose falsely flown flag the damage was inflicted.

Since the 16th century, when this practice was initiated, successful concealment of the perpetrator’s true identity has become an immensely complicated enterprise due to the development of efficient technologies capable of uncovering most types of deception, especially when it is attempted by practitioners who are unskilled. That has proved to be a major handicap for the Kiev regime and its security services. As a result, most of their trickery tends to fall flat and is exposed with remarkable rapidity.

The Kramatorsk incident is a classic example. Ukrainian forces targeted the city’s railway station, killing several dozen civilians who happened to be there, in the expectation that with the assistance of the collective West media apparatus the blame for the massacre would easily be attributed to the Russian side. The sloppy Ukrainian perpetrators however failed to remove numerical markings from the “Tochka-U” projectile that they used, which clearly linked it to the weapons stock known to be in the possession of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Perhaps inadvertently, an Italian journalist who happened to be in Kramatorsk, took a snapshot of missile debris after the attack.

Once the missile markings that were visible in the photograph were magnified and forensically examined, the game was up. It was clearly established that the lethal instrument originated from Ukraine’s military arsenal. Without much further ado both Ukrainian and Western propaganda outlets dropped the matter, forgetting completely the victims that, until literally the day before, they had been mourning with touching devotion whilst condemning scathingly the attack that they had themselves perpetrated as proof of “Russian barbarism”.

In addition to false flag operations that are planned in advance, there is also an opportunistic, post factum, variety of this phenomenon. The recent Russian strike in Sumy, which struck dead several dozen Ukrainian military personnel who were assembled for an awards ceremony, is such an example. Ukrainian propaganda has downplayed the military presence in the zone of impact and has chosen instead to emphasize the alleged deaths of a certain number of civilian relatives who were brought in to attend the ceremony. The emphasis on alleged civilian casualties was deemed useful to garner sympathy and to dramatise Kiev regime’s pressing need for additional financial and military support. The random incident was therefore promptly reconfigured as deliberate slaughter committed by Russian forces, which were accused of targeting civilians in violation of international humanitarian law.

But nothing of the sort had actually occurred. The alleged civilian casualties could not be independently confirmed, the only sources for that claim being the Ukrainian and Western media which had a vested interest in promoting precisely such a narrative. But more to the point, even if regrettably some civilian relatives of the targeted military personnel were killed, under international law that did not necessarily constitute a crime committed by Russian forces. The impacted Ukrainian military were a legitimate target. The civilians who were recklessly brought into the zone of danger in their proximity, in the terminology of the collective West, constituted collateral damage. Legal responsibility for their deaths lies entirely with the Ukrainian authorities who put them in harm’s way, not with the Russian military which had legitimately targeted not those civilians but enemy military forces.

Returning to Konstantinovka, after its full liberation the Russian war crimes investigative committee will have its hands full sorting out what happened on 6 September 2023. What occurred there was indisputably a war crime in which seventeen innocent civilians perished and several dozens were wounded. The massacre closely adhered to a pattern of past episodes of a similar nature that had been previously registered not only in the current conflict in Ukraine but, as argued here, also during the war in Bosnia, suggesting that in all probability a standard false flag protocol was followed in each of those instances.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... -unmasked/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Fri Apr 18, 2025 12:06 pm

From euphoria to failure
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 04/18/2025

Image

2022-2023: Determining the strategy in the war with Russia
In the years leading up to the Russian invasion, European Solidarity's political positions placed Poroshenko's political group and, specifically, Zabrodsky, close to those of the Ukrainian far right. He would never deny the Ukrainian armed forces' history of connections with the far-right's voluntary movements. An example of this is his participation in July 2021 in the Kholodny Yar, sponsored by USAID, among others, alongside well-known figures from the nationalist far right such as Dmytro Korchinsky (Bratstvo), Yevhen Karas (C14), and Dmytro Kukharchuk (Third Assault Brigade).

Instead, these positions accentuated the Zabrodsky group's confrontation with the Zelensky establishment , particularly during the trial against Petro Poroshenko between 2020 and 2021, a period in which Zabrodsky called for " resisting the current regime and its dirty political score-settling ." " No to political repression! Ukraine is a state governed by the rule of law! " " We have chosen our European vector. And today we are uniting to demonstrate that in Ukraine, it is not the servants, but the Ukrainian people! who are in charge ," he asserted, limiting himself to repression against nationalist sectors.

As late as February 11, 2022 , referring to the accusations of treason he perceived in Bankova's action against Poroshenko, Zabrodsky noted that these “ accusations of treason are directed against all of us, against those who care, those who were on the Maidan, those who went to the front, those who even now, with weapons in hand, continue to defend our country from the Russian aggressor .”

February 2022: Joining the Army's leadership team
Strikingly, the Russian invasion of February 2022 offered a military officer who was strongly critical of Zelensky's presidency the opportunity to determine Ukraine's war strategy. On the 24th of that month, Deputy Zabrodsky was placed at the disposal of the Minister of Defense. His Facebook profile states that from that day on, he returned to work in his " main specialty." ": the military. At the direct request of the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, Valeruy Zaluzhny, Zabrodsky collaborated closely with the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and, more personally, with Zaluzhny himself. He continued to collaborate during this period as First Deputy Chairman of the National Security and Defense Council Committee.

In this way, once the Istanbul negotiations failed, with Russia unable to complete the special military operation or change its image as a State with a desire to " unleash a large-scale war" , the possibility of making Lieutenant General Zabrodsky's wishes come true, expressed in the April 2021 interview for Obozretavel : " put aside all conspiracy theories, prepare for war and the State for defense", with "measures on a much larger scale than ... the Anti-Terrorist Operation (ATO) or the Joint Forces Operation ".

Not only does this open up the possibility of having the year requested at Kholodny Yar to prepare for the counterattack phase in the east, but it also makes it feasible to extend operational military action to address Ukraine's significant limitations in its confrontation with the Russian Federation at sea and in the air. In particular, this opens up the possibility of increasing allied material assistance, already effective in 2014 and 2015, but which " has continued and expanded in recent years ." As Zabrodsky noted in 2021: " Our Western partners can help us in a variety of ways. This doesn't necessarily mean the arrival of large quantities of equipment, military units, and subdivisions. It can be material assistance, the provision of intelligence information (given our limited capabilities), certain actions to control airspace, the military presence of ships in the Black Sea, robust support in the information space, and the interaction of special services ."

Second half of 2022: Crimea and the center of gravity of the war
Taking as a reference the successful actions against Crimean airbases in September 2022 announced jointly by Zaluzhny and Zabrodsky, a November article in The Economist analyzed the situation regarding what appeared to be shaping up as an upcoming offensive against the peninsula. It featured statements by Zabrodsky, who noted that he remained " aware of the planning process ." In the article, Zabrodsky insisted that an operation to recapture Crimea was not only possible, but was being prepared for 2023, consistent with statements by Kirilo Budanov, who pointed to that summer as the time when his troops would enter the territory. Although " many battles " had to be won beforehand, Zabrodsky stated that history shows that an occupying force " always finds it difficult to hold Crimea ." A decade after Ukraine's accession to Russia, it is still not understood that Russian forces are not considered occupying forces in Crimea , which changes these parameters.

In its analysis of potential lines of advance toward Crimea or the Donbass itself, The Economist noted that the roads leading to Crimea were now within range of Ukrainian firepower, including HIMARS rocket systems. A military intelligence source was confident that Ukraine's structural advantages—primarily its ability to mount highly mobile, lightning-fast attacks and disrupt supply lines—would prevail. “ We have proven at every stage that our tactics and logistical approach are correct. We will prove it again ,” the source stated. The certainty of achieving results and the type of actions proposed suggest that the source was Zabrodsky himself (or some other military official with his vision of the offensive).

Although military operations to capture Crimea often end with thousands of deaths, Zabrodsky noted in this context that Ukrainian strategists had devised tactics that could work. Ukraine would not seek to launch a senseless frontal assault on Crimea, he claimed, but would instead resort to other “ interesting ” possibilities of combined maneuvers, such as the use of ground troops, seaborne landings, and airstrikes. Russian naval and air dominance could be thwarted by “ asymmetric tricks .” Ukrainian drone attacks against the Black Sea Fleet in late October, which damaged the flagship, the Admiral Makarov, and the destruction of part of the Kerch Bridge with a truck bomb in which the driver was unaware that he was driving to his death, were presented as examples. “ We will surprise people, and many times, again.” ,” Zabrodsky asserted.

In a seemingly consistent line with the above, a few months earlier, on September 7, 2022, Zaluzhny and Zabrodsky had co-authored an article in Ukrinform addressing the “ prospects for the 2023 military campaign ” from the perspective of a potential Ukrainian victory. In it, the authors outlined the “ complex and ambiguous combination of factors that must be considered in the prospects for the 2023 military campaign. Only their full and thorough consideration will create the conditions for Ukraine to defeat the aggressor country's armed forces and end the destructive war in Europe .”

In the article, the authors noted that "the only way to radically change the strategic situation" was, without a doubt, for the Ukrainian Armed Forces to "launch several consecutive, and ideally simultaneous, counterattacks during the 2023 campaign" to ensure that the campaign resulted in a true "turning point." The objective was to affect the Russian Federation's ultimate "center of gravity" in the war, the only path perceived as capable of "leading to changes in the course of the war." A central axis that could not have seemed other, from the outset, than "control over the Crimean peninsula," with the planning for 2023 of "an operation or series of operations to seize the peninsula," consistent with the line reflected in The Economist article .

However, in Zaluzhny and Zabrodsky's view, even a victory in Crimea was perceived as insufficient to affect what they defined as " the essence of this war ": the " decisive disparity in capabilities ," " the difference in the maximum range of weapons ," located at around 2,000 kilometers in the Russian case and barely 100 in the case of Ukraine, this substantial imbalance being " what should be considered the center of gravity of the Russian Armed Forces from a military point of view . " "As long as this situation persists, this war could last for years ," the two military officers continued, among other things because of the " remote " perception of such a war by the majority of the Russian population. According to the authors, therefore, when considering the true center of gravity of the war, what was truly relevant was trying to affect that " impunity, guaranteed by physical distance. This is the true center of gravity of the enemy." ," the true source of confidence for the Russian Federation.

According to Zaluzhny and Zabrodsky, " the picture can change dramatically with proper planning and proper collaboration with Ukraine's partner countries ." The goal—" the long-awaited game-changer "—is therefore " equipping and re-equipping the Armed Forces of Ukraine with weapons systems of adequate range ." "Only by balancing the range of the weapons and, therefore, shifting the enemy's center of gravity, can we speak of a turning point in the course of the war."

“ It is quite possible to counter the enemy with our ability to act in a similar manner and at a similar distance ,” they proposed, thus bringing the war to Russian territory. This proposal took the form of “the provision by Ukraine’s partners of weapons systems or certain types of ammunition with adequate range to the Ukrainian Armed Forces… such as… the MGM-140B ATACMS Block 1A missile for the Himars multiple-missile system ” and, beyond that, of “ applying an integrated approach to the re-equipment of artillery, missile forces, tactical aviation, the Naval Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, and other components of its power.” The proposal was thus to focus the debate “on the creation or increase of capabilities, and not exclusively on the quantity of weapons and equipment for the brigades planned for re-equipment .” This idea would be echoed in Zaluzhny’s article published in The Economist. , which implicitly accepted that the counteroffensive had failed, costing Ukraine's then-absolute military leader his job.

For the reasons stated above, following the experience of the attacks in Crimea, “ the task of the Armed Forces of Ukraine for 2023 is to make these feelings more acute, more natural, and completely tangible for the Russians and those in other occupied territories, despite the considerable distance from the targets .” Having “ appropriate range of destruction means ” to balance forces in the action against the Russian Federation on its own territory, and making use of them, thus became the central objective of the Ukrainian plan.

However, even in this case, in the authors' view, " Ukraine can only consider obtaining appropriate weapons systems from its partners as a solution for the transition period ." In reality, the problem they seek to overcome is " restoring and establishing its own design and production of high-tech weapons ," something that would open up " an unlimited range of possibilities for international military-technical cooperation with partner countries ."

When considering the prospects for cooperation with the Allies in arms supplies to Ukraine, Zaluzhny and Zabrodsky pointed out the need to take into account two important factors. The first is that " it is difficult for the modern generation, for the world, and, first and foremost, for Europeans to imagine combat operations in the style of World War II in reality ," which would be the description of the current Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Hence, " repelling the superpower's aggression from Ukraine requires and will require significant material resources and financial expenditures for a long time ."

“ The second factor is the direct threat of the use, under certain circumstances, of tactical nuclear weapons by the Russian Armed Forces ,” an issue linked to the militarization of the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant. According to the authors, one cannot “ completely rule out the possibility that the world's major countries could be directly involved in a ‘limited’ nuclear conflict, which would directly lead to the prospect of a Third World War .”

From there, we move on to the most extreme proposal of the two initial war directors from the Ukrainian perspective: “ Any attempt to implement practical measures for the use of tactical nuclear weapons must be stopped by using the entire arsenal of means at the disposal of the countries of the world. After all, from this moment on, the Russian Federation will become not only a threat to the peaceful coexistence of Ukraine, its other neighbors, and several European countries, but also a terrorist state of truly global scale .”

In the fall of 2022, Zaluzhny and Zabrodsky are therefore outlining a military strategy aimed at mobilizing all available means of attack among the allies to, beyond Crimea, whose capture is perceived as only a first step in that strategy, bring total war to the territory of the Russian Federation. A mobilization of means that should include the nuclear arsenal at the disposal of the West.

March 2023: Zabrodsky, deputy commander for plans and operations

Image

Mikhail Zabrodsky's direct connection with the planning of Ukrainian military action became evident in the first months of 2023. On March 10, he submitted a voluntary resignation from his seat in the Verkhovna Rada, which on March 17 issued a resolution releasing Zabrodsky from his position as a Ukrainian deputy. The military officer took over as Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, specifically focused on planning and operations.

From March 2023, Zabrodsky becomes Zaluzhny's second-in-command, with the focus on the Ukrainian counteroffensive, as reported by the European Solidarity press service: " The time has come for him to fully concentrate on his service, strengthen the strategic potential of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and contribute, together with Valery Zaluzhny and other military leaders, to the success of the decisive counteroffensive against Russia ."

Key in this context, as The New York Times reports show , is Ukraine's participation in the Partnership with military representatives from the United States and United Kingdom armies tasked with organizing operations against Russian troops. In a Facebook post on April 8 of this year, Zaluzhny confirmed the existence of this joint headquarters, " which has become our key tool for planning operations and formulating implementation needs ." According to the current Ukrainian ambassador to the United Kingdom, " after the start of the large-scale aggression, military assistance from our partners increased significantly: we received various weapons and equipment, and with it, new challenges for their delivery and repair ." The Ukrainian military officer is referring to the operations center that, in April 2022, was established to coordinate the delivery of military assistance to Ukraine. This center was located at the headquarters of the United States European Command in Stuttgart before moving its operations to Wiesbaden.

Over time, and especially after the summer of 2022, when US and British allies expressed doubts about the suitability of certain types of weapons and ammunition for the front in Ukraine, the role of this joint operational headquarters of the allied forces grew stronger, a process specifically supported by the United Kingdom, giving new impetus to the coordination structures in Wiesbaden. Based on logistics, the function of this headquarters focused on analyzing the planned operations of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and, in accordance with NATO standards, determining their needs. As Zaluzhny summarizes: “ In this headquarters, operations were planned, war games were conducted, and the needs of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were determined, which were transmitted to Washington and European capitals .”

In its initial formulation, the Society translated politically into Zaluzhny's relationship with NATO's Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, General Christopher Cavoli, and the Chief of the British Defense Staff, Admiral Antony Radakin. But, on the more technically military side, this partnership of interests took shape in the bond established between military personnel with experience commanding assault forces, such as the American Christopher Donahue and Mikhail Zabrodsky (who was well-versed in the US Army, having attended the US Army Command and Staff College at Fort Leavenworth in 2005 and 2006).

As The New York Times reports in its article on the Society , these military personnel initiated the first Western shipments of M777 artillery batteries and 155-millimeter shells to Ukraine, as well as the associated training activities. However, Donahue and Zabrodsky constituted " the heart of the partnership ," the central nucleus for maintaining mutual trust. Zabrodsky was therefore " the main Ukrainian contact in Wiesbaden ," despite still formally remaining a member of the Ukrainian parliament. Donahue, within the framework of Task Force Dragon, was also responsible for facilitating the transmission of military intelligence necessary for the Ukrainian offensive to his Ukrainian partner. The operational action began in May 2022 and soon achieved its greatest success with the use of HIMARS.

February 2024: The Fall of Zaluzhny and Zabrodsky

Image

The failure of the counteroffensive not only represents an effective military defeat for Ukraine, but also leads to the dismissal of Zaluzhny and Zabrodsky. Zaluzhny, having been replaced a few days earlier, on February 11, Zabrodsky's name appears among the 16 generals and high-ranking officers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine who have lost their commissions. Highlighting the personal dimension of the collaboration, Zaluzhny expressed his gratitude on January 24, 2024, for the personal support received from his comrade in arms: " Happy birthday, Mikhail Zabrodsky. Thank you for your friendship and your science. Thank you for being there ."

In the political and military sphere, the two dismissals would have some significant consequences. Domestically, they highlight the breakdown of the temporary alliance between Zelensky's team and Petro Poroshenko's main military backers.

On the much more significant external level, the changes represent, above all, a defeat for the strategic project of extending a full-scale war to the entire territory of the Russian Federation. This project, according to Boris Johnson, consisted of giving the Ukrainian side a free rein so they could " get the job done ," without having to fight with " one hand tied behind their back, " but which, for the American partner, especially in the Pentagon, always generated enormous doubts. However, regarding the likelihood of a quick Ukrainian victory in Crimea, these doubts were primarily linked to this project of extending a total war to the Russian Federation.

Regarding Crimea, General Milley had already suggested the possibility of reaching an agreement between Ukraine and the Russian Federation, given the difficulties in providing sufficient weapons for the 2023 counteroffensive. At the end of 2022, Donahue himself, faced with Russian reinforcements in the south, advocated a long pause, even exceeding a year, to reinforce the Ukrainian army through the creation and training of new brigades to advance more confidently toward Melitopol. This was a project that fit with Zabrodsky's vision, a radical military man with a focus on ultimate objectives, but a realist when it came to adhering to the timeframes, whether relatively long or short, required to achieve them.

“ Donahue is right ,” Zabrodsky noted, as reported by The New York Times , but “ nobody liked Donahue’s recommendations except me ,” including, apparently in this case, his friend Zaluzhny. There would therefore be no pause in the 2023 counteroffensive, an outcome that would also be helped by the assignment of a new posting to General Donahue.

Ukraine's decision to order an offensive in the direction of Melitopol, with simulation actions in the direction of Mariupol (which even achieved some unexpected success in the Staromaiorske area), combined with another advance toward the Bakhmut area, was accompanied by a resounding final failure on all fronts. Ultimately, an insufficient allocation of troops was the fundamental element of this failure, at least in the Ukrainian perception. Looking ahead to 2024, in any case, there was neither sufficient military equipment nor adequate human resources for Ukraine to build an army large enough to sustain a further advance.

Operation Lunar Hail was the final attempt during General Zaluzhny's tenure to force the machine with a campaign of attacks using hundreds of ATACMS to force Russia to relocate its military infrastructure out of Crimea and back into Russian territory. However, although Zabrodsky, along with General Antonio Aguto, Donahue's replacement, had been in charge of selecting the targets for Operation Lunar Hail, the action took place in August 2024, long after Zaluzhny and Zabrodsky's dismissal. Although it achieved successes, causing some Russian equipment to leave Crimea, it also highlighted what Zaluzhny and Zabrodsky had pointed out when they spoke of the Russian army's center of gravity: the successes—actually, now, secondary—in Crimea were not going to alter the fundamental failure of the Ukrainian offensive and its inability to affect the "center of gravity" of the war.

Regarding the extension of the war to Russia, in its article on the Society , The New York Times recalls the original American position: “ Our message to the Russians was: 'This war must be fought inside Ukraine.' If Ukrainian commanders wanted to attack inside Russia ,” General Zabrodsky explained, “ they would have to use their own intelligence and domestically produced weapons .” This position would be partially qualified at the end of Biden’s term after Kamala Harris’s electoral defeat, but only with regard to actions in a limited territorial area within Russian borders.

According to The New York Times , for the Americans, the August 2024 Kursk raid represented a serious breach of trust within the Partnership . It wasn't just that the Ukrainians had once again kept them in the dark; they had secretly crossed a mutually agreed-upon line, smuggling coalition-supplied equipment into Russian territory, within the area of ​​operations, in violation of the rules established at the time of its creation.

For some US forces, Zaluzhny and Zabrodsky's proposals, which the Ukrainian presidency had always embraced in their dimension of extending the war to Russia, opened up a dangerous scenario. A scenario worthy of what Donald Trump would publicly describe in February 2025, before the world's television networks and in the presence of a humiliated, but also aggressive and defiant, Zelensky, as " playing with the lives of millions [of people], with World War III ."





Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
News from the enemy camp: disbandment of the Air Force training center, the brigade "is not on the list" and prove that your deceased husband is not a deserter

Today, there is practically no information in the Ukrainian media about the events unfolding on the border of the Sumy region with the Belgorod and Kursk borderlands. But social networks are full of extremely interesting information ...

Our contacts in the Kiev region reported that the 38th joint training center of the Ukrainian Air Force actually ceased to function as intended. First, all graduates were assigned to assault units, and then a similar fate befell the teaching staff. Today, this information is confirmed by obituaries of the Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers who took part in combat operations as part of the 225th separate regiment in the Sumy and Krasnopolsky directions.

The 38th training center of the Ukrainian Air Force - junior specialists for aviation units, air defense and radio engineering units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were trained there. Located in the city of Vasylkiv, Kiev region.

In the 80th Airborne Assault Brigade, the command continues to mock relatives. If previously all the killed Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers were simply recorded as "missing in action", today it is necessary to prove that the occupier is really "missing in action" and not a deserter. This is done solely to save on payments to relatives and friends.

In the 1st Rifle Brigade of the Ukrainian Air Force , the situation is completely comical. The Ukrainians mobilized to this unit are not formally servicemen of the Ukrainian army. Thus, relatives of the Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers report that after receiving notification of death, they cannot obtain any payments from the TCC, since this Air Force brigade officially does not exist. As for the 225th separate assault regiment , to which they were seconded, the Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers are not listed in the lists of this unit either.

Relatives of Ukrainian servicemen also share statistics: out of 108 people seconded to the 225th separate assault regiment, only 18 people survived.

Relatives and friends of the servicemen of the media 47th separate mechanized brigade continue to search for their relatives in hysterics. However, we wrote a couple of days ago, their fate is known - they were destroyed in the Demidovka area. The evacuation of bodies will become possible when a sanitary zone is created in the Sumy region.

In conclusion, we repeat that the Ukrainian media do not write about this, stubbornly ignoring the news from the brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, as well as the events in the Krasnoyarsk borderland, where confirmed losses of the Ukrainian army have already exceeded 1,600 people.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Growing Focus on Russian Tactical Evolutions Bringing Renewed Battlefield Success on the Eve of Offensive Season
Simplicius
Apr 16, 2025

The following is a hefty ~4,000 word premium article on the shifting frontline tactics of the Russian Armed Forces. It features a breakdown of a new WSJ article on the topic, as well as detailed anatomies of recent assaults, and an interview with a Russian soldier culminating in the idea of a ‘revolution in military affairs’ taking place in Russia—featuring the ‘democratization’ of the armed forces—in spite of ongoing technical and logistical struggles.

The Wall Street Journal published a new guide to Russia’s increasingly successful battle tactics. It comes at a time when Western press and its pro-Ukrainian lackeys have quietly begun admitting to the various successes and evolutionary tactical progressions that Russian forces have been achieving.

Let’s start with the WSJ piece:

Image
https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/blasti ... s-a0163d9c

Brief summary from a Russian source:

Americans think the Russian army is not fighting like gentlemen.

WSJ writes that the Russian military is "blazing a trail in Ukraine, combining the brute force of the Red Army with modern technology."

The Russian way of warfare, according to the newspaper, is based on drones that detect targets and "the power of bombs and artillery that pave the way for infantry to seize territory."

"Each element of the attack supports the others, happening simultaneously or in waves. This can create a snowball effect, forcing the Ukrainians to retreat," the article says.


Hold on to that first bolded line, it will come into play later.

Firstly, as a statement of methodology WSJ claims to have “[spoken] with Ukrainian and Russian soldiers as well as military analysts to form a picture of how it works.”

They begin by stating a lot of obvious points—Russia has hundreds of recon drones all over the front at any given time, and they use them to pinpoint massive bombing strikes on Ukrainian positions from Su-34s and the like:

Image

A recent photo surfaced showing an Su-34 flying at 11,070 meters, or ~36,000 ft, with the nighttime cityscape of Zaporozhye city ahead of it. The designated wing pylons 3, 11, 12, and 4 are loaded with Fab-500 bombs:

Image

What makes this interesting is the distance to the city appears perhaps 50-70km at most, with the plane’s orientation as directly south of it. It implies Ukrainian long range air defense is attrited to such an extent as to allow these planes to fly at max altitude that close to a major Ukrainian population center. Recall it was only a year ago that A-50 AWACS flying much farther away near the Azov Sea were reportedly at threat of 200-300+ kilometer AD missiles.

Some estimates indicate Ukraine is woefully short:

Image

On the drone front, Russia has been increasingly expanding its recon drone fleet. Here’s a test flight in the Sverdlovsk region of a prototype EW drone with antennas attached, that can suppress enemy signals—note how the viewing monitors turn off or go to static as the drone flies over: (Video at link.)

Such drones can be used to suppress enemy FPV operators across a given front.

At the same time, a Russian team tested the first long range FPV operation wherein an operator sitting in Moscow was able to control an FPV drone in Konstantinovka: (Video at link.)

For the first time, an FPV drone controlled from Moscow hits a Ukrainian Armed Forces facility in Chasov Yar

The strike was carried out by the FPV drone "Ovod" using the new control system "Orbita".

The UAV crew from the Espanyola brigade prepared the drone for takeoff.

The drone was controlled by a UAV operator located in Moscow.

The drone flew more than 11 km and successfully hit the target.

"Orbita" will allow drone strikes to be carried out by issuing commands from anywhere in the world.

/RIAN/


Granted, this is nothing new to American operators flying MidEast Predator kill missions from the comfort of Las Vegas, but for FPV drones this is a new development that could allow the distribution of remote pilots to alleviate operator droughts on given fronts, not to mention take operators out of harm’s way.

The WSJ article goes on to explain that Russians essentially use small, fast motorcycle riders in a dual role. Not only are they carrying out the trickling ‘drip-feed’ method of insertion I’ve often described here by quickly speeding across open enemy territory to ‘accumulate’ in a captured position, but they are simultaneously utilizing ‘reconnaissance-by-fire’ to draw out Ukrainian positions:

Image

Recall that in the very opening, the article states:

The Russian way of war relies on drones to spot targets and the power of its bombs and artillery to blast a path for infantry to seize ground. Each element of an attack supports the others, happening simultaneously or in waves. This can create a snowball effect, forcing Ukrainians to retreat.

They admit that this is a deliberate unified strategy, which is usually highly coordinated between the artillery set to fire on the ‘exposed’ forces that the motorcycle riders have outed via their recon-by-fire assault. Russian artillery and drone teams then suppress the enemy fire points, allowing the motorcycle riders to quickly entrench in the captured position.

One of the enduring Ukrainian claims, ‘demonstrated’ in dozens of videos, and hinted at in the WSJ article, is that these Russian riders are some kind of expendable troops which mostly die as soon as they arrive. This claim is supported by videos showing many of the ATVs and motorbikes being destroyed after the arrival.

(Paywall with free option.)

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/gro ... n-tactical

******

Ukraine’s Extension Of Martial Law Exposes Zelensky’s Fear Of Losing Re-Election
Andrew Korybko
Apr 17, 2025

Image

The US might pressure him to assemble a government of national unity on pain of once again suspending military and intelligence aid if he refuses to dilute his power in lieu of holding elections.

Ukraine extended martial law until 6 August following Zelensky’s request earlier this week, which will prevent elections from being held over the summer like The Economist claimed late last month was a scenario that he was considering in an attempt to give himself an edge over his rivals. This move therefore exposes his fear of losing re-election. It’s not just that he’s very unpopular, but he likely also fears that the US wants to replace him after his infamous fight in the White House.

To that end, the Trump Administration might not turn a blind eye to whatever electoral fraud he could be planning to commit in order to hold onto power, instead refusing to recognize the outcome unless one of his rivals wins. As for who could realistically replace him, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service claimed last May that the US had reportedly entered into talks with Petro Poroshenko, Vitaly Klitschko, Andrey Yermak, Valery Zaluzhny, and Dmytro Razumkov.

The New York Times (NYT) just ran a feature article on Poroshenko, who took the opportunity to propose a government of national unity (GNU) almost 18 months after this idea was first floated by Politico in December 2023, but even the article’s author felt obligated to inform readers that he’s unlikely to return to power. Citing unnamed political analysts, they assessed that “Mr. Poroshenko may be angling for an electoral alliance with General Zaluzhny…[who] has remained mostly silent about politics” till now.

Nevertheless, Poroshenko’s NYT feature article succeeded in raising wider awareness of the GNU scenario, which the Trump Administration might seek to advance over the summer. Zelensky continues to irritate Trump, most recently by alleging that Russia has “enormous influence” over the White House and accusing his envoy Steve Witkoff of overstepping his authority in talks with Putin. This comes as Ukraine continues dragging its heels on agreeing to the latest proposed mineral deal with the US.

From the US’ perspective, since the increasingly troublesome Zelensky can’t be democratically replaced through summertime elections, the next best course of action could be to pressure him into forming a GNU that would be filled with figures like Poroshenko who’d be easier for the US to work with. This could also serve to dilute Zelensky’s power in a reversal of the Biden Administration’s policy that saw the US turning a blind eye to his anti-democratic consolidation of power on national security pretexts.

The pretext could be that any Russian-US breakthrough on resolving the Ukrainian Conflict requires the approval of a politically inclusive Ukrainian government given Zelensky’s questionable legitimacy after remaining in power following the expiry of his term last May and the enormity of what’s being proposed. In pursuit of this goal, the US could threaten to once again suspend its military and intelligence aid to Ukraine unless Zelensky speedily assembles a GNU that’s acceptable to the Trump Administration.

The purpose would be to push through a ceasefire for lifting martial law, finally holding elections, and ultimately replacing Zelensky. The GNU could also help prevent the fraud that he might be planning to commit if he decides to run again under these much more politically difficult circumstances, especially if they invite the US to supervise their efforts, both before and during the vote. Through these means, the US could therefore still get rid of Zelensky, who might think that extending martial law will prevent this.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/ukraines ... artial-law

Ngo Dinh Diem...mebbe the Nazis will do it.

******

Russia will consider the use of Taurus missiles as Germany's entry into the war
April 17, 17:02

Image

If Taurus missiles are used to strike critical Russian infrastructure, this will be seen as Germany's direct participation in the Ukrainian conflict on Kiev's side (c) Russian Foreign Ministry

"Daggers at Wiesbaden.
Or another "red line".

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9787726.html

Google Translator

*******

How the moratorium (didn't) work: on attacks on energy
April 17, 2025
Rybar

Image

A moratorium on attacks on energy was announced a month ago. Since the beginning of the year, the Russian Armed Forces have not carried out massive attacks on the Ukrainian energy system, and after its entry into force, they also stopped pinpoint strikes on such objects.

But the Ukrainian formations did not plan to stop such raids, launching drones not only at small local substations, but also at gas power plants.

Where did the Ukrainian formations strike?
Most of the strikes hit substations in frontline areas. In the Bryansk region, strikes on such structures were noted in the Klimovsky , Sevsky and Suzemsky districts of the Bryansk region .

In the Belgorod region, the Ukrainian Armed Forces attacked the Valuyki gas measuring station (GIS) in the village of Shvedunovka. In the Kursk region, in March, the enemy twice struck the Sudzha GIS, causing serious damage to it.

The enemy also attempted to hit the Glebovskoye gas storage facility near Cape Tarkhankut in Crimea ; all drones were shot down as they approached.

In addition, the Ukrainian Armed Forces attempted to attack the Saratov Oil Refinery and damaged power lines in the Tambov and Lipetsk regions .

In the LPR, the Svatovo gas monitoring station in the city of the same name was attacked several times, as a result of which 11 thousand residents were left without gas.

The greatest damage was caused to the Kavkazskaya oil transshipment point in Krasnodar Krai , which belongs to the international Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC). The fire destroyed two oil tanks, which burned for more than a week. The Kropotkinskaya oil pumping station was also attacked.

As can be seen from the dynamics of the strikes, since the announcement of the moratorium, Ukrainian forces have been striking energy facilities on Russian territory almost daily .

However, the statistics only include UAV attacks and artillery shelling that were officially reported by the Russian Defense Ministry. One can only guess how many sabotage and terrorist attacks were prevented at such sites.

The moratorium predictably demonstrated its complete inconsistency; during the time it was formally in effect, the enemy only increased its attacks on Russian regions.

So the question of the advisability of its extension, as they say, is a filler, especially since the Ukrainian Armed Forces will clearly continue to do the same thing right up to attempts at massive launches at oil refineries, as in 2024. Therefore, it is time to remember that there are still many targets on Ukrainian territory, and missiles from the latest salvos have also accumulated.

https://rybar.ru/kak-nerabotal-moratori ... nergetike/

Google Translator

******

Fateful errors: Why NATO leaders should have listened to George Kennan in 1997

Ian Proud

April 18, 2025

In 1997, veteran U.S. diplomat George Kennan stated that ‘expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American foreign policy in the entire post-Cold War era’.

In 1997, veteran U.S. diplomat George Kennan stated that ‘expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American foreign policy in the entire post-Cold War era’. Twenty-eight years later, who would say he was wrong?

George Kennan famously authored the U.S. policy of containment of the Soviet Union, in an article in the New York Times of 1947, which he signed X, to maintain his anonymity. His view was that containment would lead to the eventual break up or mellowing of Soviet power and, as it turns out, the former prediction came to pass.

Yet, he was opposed to the expansion of NATO after the collapse of the Soviet Union and argued that asking European nations to choose between NATO and Russia would eventually lead to conflict.

In an article in the New York Times of 5 February 1997 he asked: ‘Why, with all the hopeful possibilities engendered by the end of the cold war, should East-West relations become centred on the question of who would be allied with whom and, by implication, against whom in some fanciful, totally unforeseeable and most improbable future military conflict?’

His article was intended to influence discussions ahead of the July 1997 NATO Summit in Madrid which would consider the planned expansion of NATO to include the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia. Each state had suffered under Soviet repression after World War II but were now free and democratic after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact.

Kennan’s warning went unheeded, the NATO Summit agreed to the inclusion of three of the four former Warsaw Pact countries within NATO, excluding Slovakia which had not received the required number of votes in a referendum.

On 1 May 1998, the U.S. Senate passed a resolution approving expansion, as every NATO member state is required to do. After the Senate Resolution, then President Clinton said at the White House, ”by admitting Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, we come even closer than ever to realizing a dream of a generation – a Europe that is united, democratic and secure for the first time since the rise of nation-states on the European continent.’

The idea then, which continues today, is that NATO is a military alliance of countries with the same democratic principles acting as a bulwark against military aggression, by implication, from Russia. Yet, Kennan seemed to consider absurd the idea – which peppers political and media discourse still today – that Russia aspires to conquer western Europe by military means.

In a separate New York Times article on 2 May 1998, the day after the U.S. Senate resolution, Kennan said, ‘I was particularly bothered by the references to Russia as a country dying to attack Western Europe. Don’t people understand? Our differences in the cold war were with the Soviet Communist regime. And now we are turning our backs on the very people who mounted the greatest bloodless revolution in history to remove that Soviet regime.’

In his 1997 article, Kennan went on to say that Russia would ‘have no choice but to accept [NATO] expansion as a military fait accompli. But they would continue to regard it as a rebuff by the West and would likely look elsewhere for guarantees of a secure and hopeful future for themselves.’

Russia did accept the expansion of NATO as a fait accompli, in part because she was too weak to resist. In 1998, the Russian Federation was possibly at its lowest point after the collapse of the Soviet Union. On 17 August 1998, Russia defaulted on its sovereign debt and devalued the rouble. In visibly declining health, President Yeltsin cut an increasingly weak and erratic figure on the world stage. The billionaire oligarch class had built an outsized role in Russian politics, having swept up state assets under the Loans for Shares scheme, and having bankrolled Yeltsin’s 1996 election success, for their own personal gain. Russia was politically, economically and militarily weak, and internally distracted by a costly war in Chechnya. It was by no measure comparable to the fearsome might of the Soviet Union, or a threat to NATO. Indeed, tentatively, and in ways that were sometimes strained, Russia and NATO ended up collaborating, including in Kosovo in 1999.

The next crunch point came after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington DC on 11 September 2001.

President Putin was one of the first world leaders to phone President Bush to express his condolences to the president and to the American people and offer his unequivocal support for whatever reactions the American president might decide to take. This led quite quickly to a period of U.S.-Russia cooperation, including concrete Russian assistance to the U.S. campaign in Afghanistan and acquiescence to the establishment of U.S. bases in Central Asia.

Michael McFaul, who is now one of the most vocal anti-Russia hawks, wrote an article for the Carnegie Endowment, saying that ‘the potential to build a new foundation for Russia-American relations is great.’ He advanced a radical agenda, starting with a declaration that ‘the United States no longer recognizes Russia as the successor state to the Soviet Union.’ In substantive terms, this meant a repudiation of the idea that Russia represented a threat to NATO in the way that the Soviet Union had.

McFaul proposed deeper Russia-NATO collaboration and possible future Russian membership, which President Putin had shown a willingness to consider. He also recommended other measures, including removing Soviet era trade restrictions, lifting a ban on NATO countries buying Russian weapons and encouraging a closer relationship between Russia and the EU.

However, one week after McFaul’s article, the Brookings Institution wrote an article, raising a red flag against any departure from U.S. engagement on across the globe as a concession to the new ‘war on terror.’ Among other things, it pointed out that ‘the new premium on Russian cooperation.. might make it harder or more costly for Washington to proceed with current policy plans to withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty, enlarge NATO, or press for human rights in Chechnya.

Deepening Russian-American collaboration immediately ran up against the separate juggernaut of NATO expansion which had continued to gather pace after the 1998. Nine other former Soviet or Warsaw Pact countries were already waiting in the wings to join NATO, and a comprehensive reboot of relations with Russia would have made expansion more difficult. In the teeth of Russian concern about the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, and western concern about President Putin’s clampdown on the oligarchs, U.S.-Russia collaboration lost steam and NATO pressed on regardless. Sven new Members joined the military alliance in 2004, including the Baltic States, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, bringing NATO much closer to Russia’s border.

In his 5 February 1997 article, Kennan said that NATO expansion ‘may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking.’

Ten years later, on 10 February 2007, President Putin made his now famous speech at the Munich Security Conference, in which he said, ‘I think it is obvious that NATO expansion does not have any relation with the modernisation of the Alliance itself or with ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary, it represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust. And we have the right to ask: against whom is this expansion intended?’

The following year at the 2008 NATO Bucharest summit, nonetheless advanced the idea of Georgia and Ukraine joining NATO one day. President Putin, who joined part of the Summit, conceded in his speech that he could not veto NATO expansion. But he went on to asset that ‘if we introduce [Ukraine] into NATO.. it may put the state on the verge of its existence. Complicated internal political problems are taking place there. We should act.. very-very carefully.’

His views were again ignored, and the idea of Georgian and Ukrainian membership of NATO was set in train with the consequences that we see today.

However, a central truth of NATO expansion towards Ukraine, visible to me in 2013 when I first started to focus on Russia, is that western powers have never committed to fighting for Ukraine’s right to join. This is exactly the point that George Kennan acknowledge in his 1998 comments. He said, ‘we have signed up to protect a whole series of countries, even though we have neither the resources nor the intention to do so in any serious way.’

Looking at Ukraine today, with its de facto exclusion from NATO membership, denied the deployment of U.S. military force to support for its war effort and practically bankrupt from the slow depletion of western financial support, who would say that Kennan was wrong, 28 years ago?

The 1998 New York Times article in which Kennan was widely quoted also noted that ‘future historians will surely remark upon the utter poverty of imagination that characterized U.S. foreign policy in the late 1990’s’. History would surely judge western foreign policy since 2013 more harshly still.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... n-in-1997/

In the end it will prove that keeping Russia out of the US orbit, despite Putin's original desire, was best, if unplanned by either party. Putin is lucky for the unreasonable greed and belligerence of the USA in preserving Russia's sovereignty.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Sat Apr 19, 2025 11:57 am

Diplomatic emergencies
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 04/19/2025

Image

For the first time since the United States surprised and horrified Ukraine's European allies with the announcement of direct talks between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump, a joint meeting took place in Paris on Thursday in which US representatives met with a Ukrainian delegation, the French hosts, and British and German representatives, a step that European countries understood as reflecting their entry into the negotiations. Participating in the meetings were Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sibiha and Defense Minister Rustem Umerov, in a delegation led by Zelensky's right-hand man, Andriy Ermak, who has learned that he must wear a suit to be received by the United States. As head of the President's Office, an ever-shrinking circle of people who have seized all the power in Ukraine, Andriy Ermak's assessment of the results, often nicknamed the Green Cardinal for his power and the clothes he wore during the war years, is especially relevant.

Despite the satisfaction European countries have felt at the sight of Emmanuel Macron presiding over a three-way table, with the US representative sitting opposite the Ukrainian representative on either side of the table, giving the French president the appearance of a key mediator, Ermak's account presents two clearly distinct parts. First, Ermak refers to the bilateral consultations with the United States, in which Ukraine emphasized "our commitment to peace efforts together with the United States, European partners, and other partners, and our desire to end the war as soon as possible." kyiv has understood that each of his statements must include a commitment to a quick peace, which it does not want, as it would not grant its minimum demands.

In an attempt to balance advancing its objectives and maintaining the favor of its main supplier, Ukraine is clear that obtaining political, economic, and military assistance from the United States is more important than recovering part of its territory. This has led to a rhetorical pacifism that contrasts with the actions and demands that the Zelensky government continues to make to its allies. Just yesterday, Zelensky used the dozens of injuries caused by shrapnel from a Russian missile shot down on a building in the city of Kharkiv to insist that it is Russia that does not want peace and deliberately attacks the civilian population and, above all, to demand more Patriot systems and anti-aircraft ammunition. Together with its European partners, Ukraine seeks to increase its military power, thinking not only about war but also about the heavily armed peace that would follow a possible peace agreement or ceasefire.

The need to keep the United States, especially Donald Trump, interested in Ukraine is also one of the main reasons why Kiev has insisted on signing the minerals agreement. Yesterday, Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Yulia Svyridenko stated that "we are pleased to announce the signing, with our partners, of a Memorandum of Intent that paves the way for an Economic Partnership Agreement and the creation of the Investment Fund for the Reconstruction of Ukraine." The Ukrainian government's terminology and explanation, which boasts that "through our agreement we reaffirm the desire of the American people to invest alongside the Ukrainian people in a free, sovereign, and secure Ukraine," cannot hide the colonial conditions: this common fund implies that Ukraine will cede half of the revenue from the extractions that the United States decides are in its interest, from which it expects to obtain $100 billion and from which it will be the first to benefit. Svyrydenko, who continues to insist that the final aspects of the agreement will be negotiated in the coming days, has at no point suggested that the deal will entail security guarantees from Washington.

Reaffirming his commitment to the ceasefire that Ukraine accepted under pressure from Washington on March 11, Ermak insists that the Ukrainian and US delegations held a "constructive and positive discussion on ways to achieve a comprehensive ceasefire and the broader process for achieving a just, sustainable, and just peace." In contrast to this apparent yearning for peace, Andriy Ermak's summary of the multilateral part of the diplomatic day—the meetings with representatives from France, Germany, and the United Kingdom—returns to the usual terms. "We agreed that the first step toward sustainable peace in Ukraine must be a comprehensive and unconditional ceasefire, and we exchanged views on practical implementation at this stage," Ermak wrote, emphasizing the most important concept today for Ukraine and its European allies: unconditionality. While the United States has opted for negotiation, consultations, and an attempt to understand the parties' real demands—that is, how far they are willing to give—London, Paris, and Brussels are demanding that peace be dictated to Russia without Moscow having any say, a recipe for continued war, a scenario preferred by the European allies, certain that diplomatic means will not achieve the strategic defeat of Moscow they had hoped for in 2022.

The presence of France, Germany, and the United Kingdom at the meeting with Marco Rubio, General Kellogg, and Steve Witkoff indicates a certain shift in US action, which until now had avoided involving these countries, whose position has clearly been to block direct negotiations with Russia and explicitly reject the lifting of sanctions. As Marco Rubio has acknowledged in his recent statements, a significant portion of the economic sanctions against Russia originate with the European Union, so its presence in the negotiations is essential when making decisions. The United States thus recognizes that it cannot negotiate these economic aspects with Russia, which are in the hands of an actor, the European Union, which continues to be absent from diplomatic circles. It is significant that the guests at this multilateral meeting were representatives of the three most important European countries—and the two great powers of the EU—and not Kaja Kallas, a representative of the wing most radically opposed to direct diplomacy.

The difficulties in reaching a negotiated end to the war are palpable in the fact that even the partial truce, which sought to prevent attacks on energy infrastructure, has not been fully honored. Trust between the parties is nonexistent, and the United States has proven unable to offer sufficient incentives and threats to achieve rapid progress, which appears to have caused a certain fatigue among Donald Trump's negotiating team. The Paris meeting, which will soon be repeated in London, is likely a response to the need to accelerate the timeline and obtain answers to the questions posed by Washington, primarily what the different actors are willing to do to achieve an end to the war and manage the day after.

Donald Trump “has spent 87 days at the highest levels of this administration making repeated efforts to end this war. We are now reaching a point where we have to decide and determine whether or not this is possible,” Marco Rubio said yesterday, giving Russia, Ukraine, and European countries days, not weeks, to respond to Washington’s demands to show their cards and their willingness to compromise. “It’s not our war. We didn’t start it,” Rubio added. “The United States has been helping Ukraine for three years, and we want it to end, but it’s not our war,” he continued, insisting that the war is taking place on the European continent, a clear signal to Ukraine’s European allies to join the peace efforts.

"I believe the United Kingdom, France, and Germany can help us move forward and get closer to a solution," the US Secretary of State also stated, adding that "they have been very helpful and constructive with their ideas." The plans of France and the United Kingdom include sending an armed mission to Ukraine, which Russia insists would be interpreted as a NATO presence camouflaged under national flags and, therefore, would make an agreement impossible. In the case of Germany, the future Chancellor Merz has expressed his support for crossing the red line of his predecessor, whose rejection of the dispatch of Taurus missiles was due to the fact that they have the capacity to reach Moscow and require German participation for their use. Although undoubtedly more constructive than the much more belligerent stance of the European Union, it is difficult to see in the positions of London, Paris, and Berlin an openness to diplomatic channels, especially in the current conditions of urgency to achieve progress. Marco Rubio's main message upon leaving France was precisely that: that the United States' time and interest in diplomacy is running out. “If the parties are serious about peace, we are here to help. If not, we will move on,” Rubio stated, making it clear that “the United States has other areas to focus on.” “If our efforts to stop the war in Ukraine fail in the coming days, we will inform President Trump that negotiations are no longer a realistic option,” he declared, uttering the words that Ukraine and the European Union, which oppose negotiations with Russia, had been waiting to hear.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/04/19/urgen ... lomaticas/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
🎖🎖🎖 The Russian Ministry of Defense on the progress of repelling the attempted invasion of the Ukrainian Armed Forces into the territory of the Russian Federation in the Kursk region as of April 19, 2025.

The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation continue to defeat the formations of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the Kursk region.

- Units of the Sever group of forces liberated the settlement of Oleshnya in the Kursk region during active offensive actions.

- In addition, formations of the tank, mechanized, airborne assault brigades, territorial defense brigade and assault regiment of the Ukrainian Armed Forces were defeated in the area of ​​the settlement of Gornal.

- Strikes by operational-tactical, army aviation, unmanned aerial vehicles and artillery fire damaged enemy manpower and equipment in the areas of the settlements of Vodolaghi, Krovnoye, Sadki, Yunakovka and Yablonovka in the Sumy region.

- Over the past 24 hours, the Ukrainian Armed Forces have lost over 165 servicemen, a tank, an infantry fighting vehicle, two armored combat vehicles, three cars, six artillery pieces, two mortars, four MLRS launchers and three electronic warfare stations have been destroyed.

***

Colonelcassad
Summary of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation (April 12-18, 2025) ㅤ

From April 12 to 18, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation carried out nine combined strikes using high-precision weapons and attack unmanned aerial vehicles. As a result of successful combat operations, key enterprises of the Ukrainian military-industrial complex, the infrastructure of military airfields, weapons depots, including storage facilities for missiles, ammunition, attack UAVs and sea drones, as well as training centers for operators of unmanned systems and temporary deployment points for units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and foreign mercenaries were destroyed.

— The North group of forces continued the systematic destruction of the Armed Forces of Ukraine formations in the Kursk region, using the combined impact of aviation, UAVs and artillery. During the reporting period, over 1,900 enemy servicemen were eliminated, 64 Ukrainian servicemen surrendered. 6 tanks, 39 combat armored vehicles, 99 cars, 6 MLRS launchers, including 2 HIMARS systems, 46 field artillery guns and 2 anti-aircraft missile systems were destroyed. 8 electronic warfare and counter-battery stations were disabled, 10 ammunition and material depots were destroyed.

— The "West" force group took up more advantageous tactical lines and positions, defeating five mechanized brigades, a ranger and two assault brigades, an artillery brigade, three territorial defense brigades and a National Guard brigade. The enemy's losses amounted to more than 1,730 servicemen, 2 tanks, 13 combat armored vehicles, including 3 M113 APCs, 45 cars, 30 field artillery pieces, including 7 NATO-made 155mm self-propelled guns, as well as 12 electronic warfare stations and 21 ammunition depots.

— The "South" force group successfully liberated the settlements of Kalinovo and Valentynivka in the Donetsk People's Republic. During the fighting in this direction, the enemy lost over 2,170 servicemen, 2 tanks, 27 combat armored vehicles, including 4 M113 APCs and 1 Stryker, 74 cars, 35 field artillery pieces, including 4 155mm systems, 6 electronic warfare stations and 27 warehouses for various purposes.

— The Center Group of Forces, as a result of decisive actions, liberated the settlements of Yelizavetovka and Preobrazhenka of the Donetsk People's Republic. The manpower and equipment of six mechanized, two assault, airborne, three Jaeger brigades, a brigade of unmanned systems, an assault regiment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, a marine brigade and four National Guard brigades were defeated. The enemy's losses amounted to over 2,680 servicemen, 2 tanks, 20 combat armored vehicles, including 7 US-made M113 armored personnel carriers. 35 vehicles, 34 field artillery guns, including 6 US-made 155-mm Paladin self-propelled artillery units, were destroyed."Caesar" made in France and "Krab" made in Poland.

— The "East" group of forces continued its successful advance into the enemy's defense, defeating the formations of two mechanized, a ranger, an airmobile, an airborne assault, a mountain assault brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, a marine brigade, three territorial defense brigades and a National Guard brigade. The enemy lost more than 1,020 servicemen, 1 tank, 8 armored combat vehicles, 20 cars, 18 field artillery guns, including 3 produced by NATO countries, as well as 4 electronic warfare stations.

— The "Dnepr" group of forces took up more advantageous lines and positions. The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost over 540 servicemen, 4 armored combat vehicles and 56 cars. A US-made HIMARS multiple launch rocket system launcher, 12 field artillery guns, 9 electronic and counter-battery warfare stations, and 16 ammunition depots were destroyed.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Ukraine and the U.S. Aim to Close the Minerals Deal by April 26

Image
X/ @AFpost

April 18, 2025 Hour: 9:12 am

The preliminary agreement foresaw the creation of a joint investment fund dominated by the United States.

On Thursday, the Ukrainian Economy Ministry published a ‘Memorandum of Intent’ stating that Ukraine and the U.S. aim to finalize the mineral resource exploitation agreement by April 26. To that end, Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal will travel to Washington to meet with U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.

On Friday, Ukrainian Deputy Economy Minister Taras Kachka said that the Ukrainian delegation will arrive in Washington next Thursday. The purpose of the trip is to conclude technical discussions on the investment fund for Ukraine’s reconstruction, which will be created under the framework of the agreement.

Kachka noted that the draft agreement includes “dozens of pages,” and some of the more sensitive issues that cannot be resolved at the technical level will require political decisions. After the signing, both the Ukrainian Parliament and the U.S. Congress must approve it.

The memorandum states that the U.S. and Ukraine “intend to establish a reconstruction investment fund as part of an economic alliance between the two peoples and the two governments.”

“We hope that the fund will become an effective tool for attracting investment in our country’s reconstruction, modernizing infrastructure, supporting businesses, and creating new economic opportunities,” Ukrainian Economy Minister Yulia Svyrydenko said, adding that the memorandum should reflect the “desire of Americans to invest alongside Ukrainians in a free, sovereign, and secure Ukraine.”


Ukraine-Russia war latest: Kremlin responds to US threat to abandon peace talks while Kyiv nears Trump minerals deal https://t.co/QyQiH8I3is pic.twitter.com/27vAzO2mTe

— Transhumanist Men (@BeTranshumanist) April 18, 2025
The text mentions that the U.S. has provided significant financial and material assistance to Ukraine since February 2022, and reaffirms that both parties seek “a lasting peace” and a “strong alliance between their people and governments.”

The U.S. and Ukraine also acknowledge Ukraine’s contribution “to the strengthening of international peace and security through the voluntary relinquishment of the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal” by Kyiv in 1994 under the Budapest Memorandum.

Another important point for Ukraine was to make clear that it seeks to avoid conflicts with its commitments and obligations to the European Union (EU) on its path to accession, as well as to international financial institutions and other public creditors.

The memorandum lays the groundwork for future cooperation in the exploitation of Ukrainian mineral resources, through which the U.S. intends to recover the assistance it has provided to Ukraine.

🇺🇸🇺🇦 The #US and #Ukraine signed a “memorandum of intent” Thursday to advance a deal on access to #Kyiv’s critical #minerals and natural resources.

🤝 The pact aims to build economic ties and fund reconstruction.

➡️ @frazj reports pic.twitter.com/Y1FDPRluYk

— FRANCE 24 English (@France24_en) April 18, 2025


The preliminary agreement, which was supposed to be signed during Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s visit to the White House on February 28, foresaw the creation of a joint investment fund dominated by the U.S., into which 50% of the profits from the exploitation of Ukrainian natural resources would be deposited.

Although the framework agreement was never signed, Washington presented Kyiv at the end of March with a new, more detailed document that sought to require Ukraine to recognize the amount of U.S. military aid received as debt.

Zelensky made it clear that he would not accept this condition and the U.S. reportedly agreed during negotiations to eliminate some of the most unfavorable terms for Ukraine.

Kachka explained that, nonetheless, the U.S. “will gain at least as much as the assistance it has provided” through that investment fund.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/ukraine- ... -april-26/

******

In Diplomatic Pigeon Speak ...

... it means--nope. No cigar.


The ongoing negotiations to secure peace in the Ukraine conflict are “difficult,” but Russia remains committed to achieving a resolution, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday. Peskov's comments follow US President Donald Trump’s statement that he expects a response from Moscow on a proposed peace agreement with Kiev later this week. Speaking to reporters, the Kremlin spokesman was asked whether Trump’s remarks suggested any behind-the-scenes agreements between Washington and Moscow. He acknowledged some progress in efforts to resolve the conflict but stressed that numerous challenging issues remain on the table. “We believe that certain progress can already be stated. This progress is related to the temporary moratorium that Russia adhered to — a moratorium on not striking energy infrastructure facilities,” Peskov said. He added that while Moscow has honored this moratorium, “the same cannot be said for the Ukrainian side.”

How do we know that Russia has a contingency plan for the US "withdrawal"? Well, through Moscow being nonchalant about this prospect.

Peskov was also asked to comment on US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s statement that the US could abandon its efforts to reach a peace deal between Moscow and Kiev if it feels that no progress is being made on the issue. The spokesman stated that whether or not the US would actually withdraw from the settlement process is a question that should be asked in Washington.

This is what I preach non-stop now: the ball will now remain in the US corner permanently until the US makes a decision. There are no good options for the US, but one of them allows to save remnants of the face. At least for domestic audience.

Meanwhile, France's Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot hails the meeting of the EU foreign ministers on May 9 in Kiev as a "counter" to Moscow's celebration of the 80th Anniversary of Victory, as a huge win for French "diplomacy".



I agree, France belongs in the lair of neo-Nazi regime, as does most of Europe. I can only repeat Keitel's quip about French in May 1945, "What, did these guys defeat us too?” Of course, they didn't, and May 9th is not France's to celebrate--they have been willing accomplices of the Third Reich, no matter how these losers try to rewrite history.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/04 ... speak.html

******

Give us the mineral resources, and we will recognize Crimea
April 19, 11:38

Image

According to American media, the Trump administration is ready to recognize Crimea as Russian if a ceasefire is concluded and a deal is signed to transfer Ukraine's mineral wealth to the United States. Considering that there are 4 other regions, Crimea alone will certainly not be enough. Since 2023, Russia has been firmly committed to recognizing 5 regions.

Trump also threatened yesterday to wash his hands of the situation if a ceasefire agreement in Ukraine is not signed in the coming weeks. At the same time, he does not plan to carry out new arms deliveries (in addition to those sent by Biden). This position was conveyed in Paris to the European satellites.
Russia, again, if we believe the American press, continues to demand not only recognition of the 5 regions, but also denazification of Ukraine (one of the demands of the SVO) and a change of power in Ukraine through elections.

Regarding the issues of the energy truce. Yesterday evening, part of the Sumy region was demonstratively disconnected.
The advantageous difference between the current situation and the Minsk agreements is the fact that during the negotiations, hostilities do not cease and the diplomatic process is ongoing in parallel, which the Russian Foreign Ministry itself warned about last year that hostilities would not stop until a peace agreement on Ukraine was concluded.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9790873.html

Google Translator

******

How Might The US’ Relations With Ukraine & Russia Change If It Abandons Its Peace Efforts?
Andrew Korybko
Apr 18, 2025

Image

The US might cut off military aid to Ukraine while suspending its strategic resource talks with Russia.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Friday that the US might stop mediating an end to the Ukrainian Conflict if it concludes within “a matter of days” that no peace deal is doable. That coincided with the Wall Street Journal reporting that Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff told them that “Putin had been fixated on Ukrainian land in their discussions. He said that Russia might get some of the regions, but not all.” This analysis here explained why it’s so important for Russia to obtain full control over the disputed lands.

If no breakthrough is achieved, such as the US coercing Ukraine into withdrawing from those regions or Russia agreeing to freeze this dimension of the conflict, then the US might indeed abandon its peace efforts. The question therefore arises of how that could change its relations with Ukraine and Russia. Beginning with the first, Trump and his team’s explicitly expressed exhaustion with this conflict bodes ill for the scenario of the US continuing military support for Ukraine, which would please Russia.

The Europeans would try to replace some of this lost aid in order to keep the conflict going in alignment with Zelensky’s vision, but they’d be unable to replace all of it and he might ultimately be forced into agreeing to worse terms than the US’ if Russia successfully expands its ground offensive. At the same time, however, the US might also suspend its talks with Russia on the strategic resource deals that were supposed to serve as the centerpiece of their planned “New Détente” as long as the conflict continues

This balanced approach would be predicated on pressuring Ukraine and Russia into committing to compromises aimed at restoring the US-led peace talks since the first doesn’t want to lose territory in other regions while the second is interested in shaping the post-conflict era in partnership with the US. These evidently aren’t their top priorities, however, otherwise the land issue would have already been resolved one way or another and there wouldn’t be any talk of the US abandoning its peace efforts.

Other than the unlikely scenario of the US “escalating to de-escalate” on better terms for Ukraine, another comparatively more probable one exists but which is still less likely than the aforesaid, and that’s the US discontinuing military support for Ukraine but continuing resource talks with Russia. These negotiations are connected to Ukraine since the US is seeking privileged terms from Russia in exchange for coercing Kiev into Moscow’s demanded concessions but can still proceed even if that doesn’t occur.

The reason why this scenario is considered less likely than the balanced one described above is because some of the US’ sanctions that impede the clinching of resource deals with Russia can’t easily be lifted without first bringing about an end to the Ukrainian Conflict. Moreover, sanctions relief and the prospect of jointly shaping the post-conflict era are the only carrots that the US can dangle for incentivizing Russia to compromise on ending the conflict, which Trump wants it to do for solidifying his global legacy.

He’s therefore expected to at least temporarily suspend such talks with Russia for that reason in that scenario but might resume them if the conflict remains protracted with no clear diplomatic or military solution. That would make the most sense since he wouldn’t prematurely give up the only means that the US has for incentivizing Russia to compromise for peace but he also wouldn’t lose the objective economic and strategic benefits that a resource deal would bring.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/how-migh ... th-ukraine

******

The Grayzone: British intel sought to silence West’s top Russia academic, leaks reveal
April 18, 2025
By Kit Klarenberg, The Grayzone, 4/1/25

Leaked documents show UK intelligence operatives grooming British politicians to silence academics expressing skepticism of London’s Ukraine proxy war effort. One of the targets, Richard Sakwa, believes the campaign resulted in real-world harassment.
This Substack is reader-supported. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Upgrade to paid

Leaked emails reviewed by The Grayzone reveal a high-level British intelligence plot to smear and silence British political scientists such as Richard Sakwa, who is widely regarded as one of the English-speaking world’s foremost authorities on Russia.

In a March 2022 email entitled “Russians in our Universities,” British military intelligence officer and former senior NATO advisor Chris Donnelly accused Sakwa of being a Russian “fellow traveller” who’d been “gradually breaking cover,” insisting the professor was “far too well-informed about Russian strategy to be called just ‘a useful idiot.’” Another email reveals Donnelly fantasizing about publicly exposing the Sakwa for being “funded by Russian entities” – a claim the professor strenuously denies.

Image

Donnelly fired off the emails just two weeks after the UK’s then-Education Secretary Nadhim Zahawi pledged that the British government was “already on the case and is contacting [their] universities,” after being asked whether the UK government would intervene directly to stop anti-war academics from “acting as useful idiots for President Putin’s atrocities in Ukraine.”

The Grayzone has revealed Donnelly as a key figure behind a secret British military and spying cell dubbed Project Alchemy, which was created in early 2022 to keep Ukraine fighting “at all costs.” A core component of that effort was to silence journalistic voices and media outlets – including this one – deemed a threat to London’s control of the proxy war’s narrative.

The newly-exposed messages show that Donnelly was conducting similar operations in the academic world as well. Though Professor Sakwa has long challenged dominant Western narratives on Putin’s Russia, criticizing both NATO’s rampant expansionism and its refusal to include Moscow in the European security structure following the Soviet Union’s 1991 collapse, he was effectively disappeared from mainstream debates on the conflict since the Ukraine proxy war erupted.

The leaked emails strongly suggest the direct intervention of Donnelly, a known British intelligence asset, may have been responsible for marginalizing Sakwa. Messages show Donnelly contacted influential UK lawmakers to stamp out the “influence” of Sakwa, whom he called his “number one” target, while calling for the blacklisting of other academics who might expose inconvenient truths about the conflict in Ukraine.

Donnelly’s determination to silence the professor apparently extended beyond the duration of the conflict. In private, he fretted that once “fighting slows down” in Ukraine, “appeasers” would “start talking about lifting the sanctions,” and “the Sakwas of this world will be spearheading the effort to change Western strategy.” In other words, even when the war ended in failure for Kiev and its proxy backers, Connelly and his associates would remain determined to prevent any public reconsideration of the West’s relationship with Russia.

Image

Sakwa “a redoubtable opponent” who’s taken “very seriously”
While recently smeared as a Kremlin apologist and “disinformation” peddler in certain quarters, Sakwa’s works have historically elicited glowing mainstream reviews. Even after the Ukraine proxy war erupted, the Council on Foreign Relations’ Foreign Affairs journal positively appraised the professor’s recent books dissecting the Russiagate fraud, and the origins of the Ukraine conflict. Clearly, it was Sakwa’s credibility and formidable body of knowledge that made him a target of British intelligence following the outbreak of war in Ukraine.

In emails exchanged with James Sherr, a career think tank staffer who once headed the Russia and Eurasia program at the British government-linked think tank Chatham House, Donnelly expressed discomfort about the prospect of Sakwa’s ideas reaching impressionable Western audiences. Sakwa’s “knowledge of Russian politics is very high,” Donnelly warned Sherr, making him “a redoubtable opponent” whom the “majority” of British students and “junior/mid-level politicians” would likely take “very seriously.”

Sherr responded that he had “no doubt” Sakwa was “on the Kremlin payroll,” but insisted the academic criticized NATO expansion “not [for] money,” but “out of hatred of the United States.” If there was “hard evidence” that Sakwa was “funded by Russian entities, then this should be made known,” Sherr added, but even if footage existed of Vladimir Putin personally “writing [Sakwa] a cheque over dinner… the University of Kent will continue to employ him, and he will continue to be adored by those who adore him.”

Image

Donnelly agreed with his friend’s false assessment, but was evidently undeterred from pursuing Sakwa, telling Sherr, “we can try!” He added that Andrew Monaghan, another academic who had long warned of the perils of military confrontation with Russia, hadn’t been heard from “for a while,” and asked Sherr: “who else should we be keeping an eye out for?” A day later, Donnelly posed the same question to his longtime associate Victor Madeira, an academic closely connected to former MI6 chief Richard Dearlove.

Image

This followed another email by Donnelly to Conservative MP Bob Seely, a hawkish military veteran and then-member of parliament’s foreign affairs committee. Donnelly asked Seely whether he was “concerned about Russian influence in our Universities,” because “if so, I’ve got some interesting material for you.” Forwarding the unsolicited email to Madeira, Donnelly boasted, “l may have an opportunity to get this addressed,” and bragged that he would soon be discussing the subject with the then-chair of British Parliament’s education select committee.

Image

“cells in the British governmental apparatus…which subvert the fundamental principles of British democracy”

In comments to The Grayzone, Sakwa said Donnelly’s actions were “extremely disturbing,” and suggested the emails indicate “there are cells in the British governmental apparatus who are working in ways which subvert the fundamental principles of British democracy, tolerance of divergent political views, and the encouragement of open debate and dialogue.”

The professor argues that “by traducing scholars and civic activists,” Donnelly and his collaborators “precisely undermine the values which they are ostensibly trying to defend,” and “practice guilt by association.”

“The assumption [that] questioning official policy on a particular issue must be motivated by mercenary concerns, in this case being in the pay of Moscow, is a dreadful manifestation of the McCarthyism we had hoped we put behind us with the end of the Cold War,” Sakwa adds.

“In fact, it demonstrates [that] Cold War II is potentially more dangerous than the first, with the attempt to blacken the reputation of critical voices, and thus assumedly weaken their public impact. This is not only morally and politically wrong in itself, but also damages the possibility of coherent, informed and dispassionate analysis, and thus weakens the coherence of intelligent policy-making in its entirety.”

When Sakwa retired from his university position in August 2022, he was unaware that British intelligence operatives had waged a plot to silence him for over a year. Now, however, the professor wonders whether an incident that occurred two months prior may have been related. That June, the Canterbury anti-war movement organized an event at which Sakwa was the guest speaker. “To our astonishment, about 20 Ukrainians and associates picketed the meeting, with banners condemning me and the organizers,” he told The Grayzone.

Rather than being turned away, the protesters were invited in – “minus placards,” Sakwa noted. However, “they then proceeded to try to disrupt the meeting,” until the event chair warned them “that if their anti-democratic behavior continued, they would be asked to leave.” Following the warning, the event continued in peace. Sakwa said “most” attendees felt his address “struck the appropriate balance between sympathy for the plight of the Ukrainian people, and political analysis of the situation.”

The incident likely would have ended there, but counter-demonstrators seized on leaflets calling for an official inquiry into the ever-mysterious Bucha incident which were distributed by another attendee. Ukrainian officials and their British backers charge that Russian forces carried out a massacre of innocent civilians in the city of Bucha, but have blocked attempts at UN investigation, and refused to release names of purported victims.

While Sakwa believes calls for such a probe to be “not unreasonable”, he said he had nothing to do with the leaflets’ production, and was unaware of their contents at the time. He only learned of their existence when one of the Ukrainian activists who disrupted the event accused him of condoning “conspiracy theories,” leading the University of Kent to open an internal inquiry.

“To the University of Kent’s credit, they dismissed any potential charge of misconduct, and defended the principle of freedom of speech. The institution lived up to its reputation for collegiality and the robust defence of academic freedom,” Sakwa says. “However, the initial charge was clearly malicious and malevolent, and demonstrates the danger of ‘Ukraine syndrome’ damaging the quality of civic life in England.”

Today, “Ukraine syndrome” remains alive and well in Britain as Prime Minister Keir Starmer proudly declares his desire to deploy troops and aircraft to Kiev to participate in hostilities despite UK military chiefs warning that London lacks the men and materiel to even consider such a mission. A depressing official review of the British Army has prompted the head of the Financial Times’ editorial board to conclude “their forces would struggle to fight a European war lasting more than a few weeks.”

While Richard Sakwa and other genuine regional experts warned over many years that transforming Ukraine into an anti-Russian bastion would lead to disaster for all involved, Western leaders turned instead to the paranoid pronouncements of spies like Chris Donnelly for guidance on how to respond to Moscow’s forcefully stated opposition to Ukraine joining NATO. And before the belligerent plans of Donnelly and his cadre could be discredited, they made certain that no one would be left to call them out.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/04/the ... ks-reveal/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply