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

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10873
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 28, 2024 12:15 pm

Agreements and disagreements in the Black Sea
POSTED BY @NSANZO ⋅ 28/04/2024

Image

The situation of apparent blockade on the front has led to the publication of several articles that have asked what President Zelensky's options are or even raise why the negotiation remains unacceptable. In reality, the paralysis of the front is not so much, with Russia trying to take advantage of the Ukrainian weakness of the lack of American military assistance, while the reasons why dialogue is impossible became clear in 2022. The war continues with its dynamics of attacks in the rear and battles on the line of contact, especially the Chasov Yar and western Avdeevka sectors. In both cases, Ukrainian sources confirm Russian reports of progress by Russian troops. kyiv is especially concerned about the Artyomovsk front, where it fears that, thanks to the significant imbalance in artillery potential and the use of aviation, the advance on Chasov Yar, a strategic city in the north of Donetsk, will be faster than the approach to Avdeevka at the end of last year.

The rear, also the scene of an important struggle, is being equally relevant, although perhaps not in a way that will condition the development of the land war, the main element of the conflict. Ukraine is focusing on attacks on Russian refineries in a tactic that has upset even its American partners. Compared to bases and other military objectives, these infrastructures are easier to hit due to less anti-aircraft protection. Russia, for its part, insists on undermining Ukrainian electricity production, partly to hinder the movement of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, but also to prevent the normal functioning of the industry, especially the military, the only one in which the Government of kyiv is interested in the current circumstances. And periodically, Ukrainian troops, especially Kirilo Budanov's GUR, attack the Russian Black Sea fleet, which, given the danger posed by drones and missiles, has been left in a position far removed from the prominence that Russia expected it to have.

The Black Sea has been the scene of attacks that have caused significant losses, significant casualties and have given a feeling of Russian weakness on its own coasts. But it has also been the place where Russia and Ukraine have reached the only agreement that was maintained for an extended period of time, a year in which Russia gained some control of transit through searches carried out in Turkey and Ukraine. The freedom of circulation of civil products was guaranteed. The agreement, in which Russia considered it had not obtained what it was promised - the unblocking of its agricultural exports - was considered for a year as a practical example that it was possible to negotiate. kyiv and Moscow ratified the document through a negotiation carried out through Turkey, with the participation of the UN and a signature that was carried out separately. Communication was indirect and limited by circumstances, although it continued.

After the breakdown of the agreement, Ukraine chose to maintain circulation despite the danger posed by passage through mined waters and, with the help of its foreign partners, has managed to resume its exports at a relatively high level. The constant threat of drone attacks has meant practically no participation by the Russian fleet, which never had the intention of attacking ships sailing through the Black Sea corridor and only Ukraine has attacked a clearly civilian ship in the region. In the time since the breakdown of the navigation agreement, kyiv and its partners have presented Ukraine's ability to maintain transit as one of the great achievements of 2023. The failure of the land counteroffensive has caused Ukraine's allies to seek , elsewhere, successes on which to build the victory speech while the attacks on the fleet and the sharp increase in maritime exports have been enough argument to present the Black Sea as the main achievement of recent months.

However, the danger of navigation without an agreement between the parties in conflict to guarantee transit security exists and this is why, despite the state of relations between the two countries, Russia and Ukraine have returned to negotiations. The news was published last Monday and does not narrate the search for an understanding but the failure of an initiative that had not been reported in the media. “The Black Sea is a key route for both Russia and Ukraine to transport the bulk of products such as grain, fertilizers and oil to the world market, although volumes have fallen significantly with the war,” writes Reuters , the media that has revealed the news. With this statement, he breaks with Western discourse, which insists that Ukraine has recovered pre-war export levels. “The text of the agreement, a copy of which has been seen by Reuters , said that Turkey “as part of its mediation efforts” had reached agreements with Ukraine and Russia “to ensure the free and safe navigation of merchant ships in the Black Sea.” in compliance with the Montreux Convention on the Straits Regime,” the article explains, showing that the process was carried out thanks to the participation of the same country that made the original agreement possible.

Ukraine and Russia not only negotiated, but, according to Reuters , reached an agreement in March “to guarantee the security of merchant trade in the Black Sea” and, despite not wanting to formally sign it, “Kiev gave its approval for the President Turkish [Recep] Tayyip Erdoğan will announce it on March 30, one day before decisive regional elections.” The pre-agreement existed, but, similar to what happened in Istanbul with a potential peace agreement, the understanding was abruptly broken. “At the very last minute, Ukraine suddenly withdrew and the agreement was scuttled,” says Reuters, making it clear who took the initiative. The three media sources familiar with the negotiations and the terms of the agreement claim not to know what the reasons for this unilateral break were.

“According to the agreement almost announced on March 30, both Moscow and kyiv would have offered security guarantees to merchant ships in the Black Sea, committing not to attack or seize or search them while they were empty or had declared non-military cargo,” he explains. the article giving the few details available about an agreement that was not possible. The episode once again shows that Russia and Ukraine are capable of negotiating - even if it must be done indirectly - but also that any agreement can be so ephemeral that it is not even announced. The path of force continues to be the priority.

https://slavyangrad.es/2024/04/28/acuer ... mar-negro/

Google Translator

*****

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Forwarded from
Maryana Batkovna
IF THEY SHOOT, IT’S NO LONGER SCARY, IT’S OUR WORK:
“It was very scary in 1914, my husband and I left for a while, but then we returned. We spent the whole war here, together, in our house.
You can’t leave your house, he’s also offended. Here we are, Everything around was destroyed, but the house was almost intact, thank God. Now we have electricity, gas, the Internet, mobile communications, like everywhere else, are intermittent, they provide water every day. And if they shoot, we are no longer afraid, these are mostly our guys. they work. And we know that we are Russia, that Russia is with us. We are happy, even if this is not clear to many...”

The front line in the Avdeevka area was pushed back almost ten kilometers, and for the first time in many years, the few locals who remained in their homes. residents of the recent “red zone” do not have to worry about the arrival of a shell at any moment.
So far the picture is bleak - craters on the roads, destroyed houses, deserted streets, but life in the long-suffering villages is glimmering and hope remains.
Our reports from the outskirts of Donetsk airport (Spartak and Vesyoloye) can be viewed here - first, second, third, fourth.
More photos in the photo album.
Watch, listen, subscribe - this is only the truth.
My RUTUBE

Your Maryana Naumova

***

Colonelcassad
Summary of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation (for the period from April 20 to April 27, 2024) The main thing:

- The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 360 military personnel and 8 US-made M777 howitzers in a week from the actions of the Dnepr group of troops;

- Units of the Southern Group of the Russian Armed Forces repelled 19 counterattacks by assault groups of the Armed Forces of Ukraine during the week;

- Units of the Southern Group of the Russian Armed Forces liberated Novomikhailovka and Bogdanovka in the DPR within a week and advanced into the depths of the enemy’s defense;

- Units of the Southern Group of the Russian Armed Forces defeated the manpower and equipment of 16 brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine within a week;

- Russian troops destroyed 8 Ukrainian MLRS HIMARS, Vampire and Grad in a week;

- The Armed Forces of Ukraine in the zone of responsibility of the Russian military grouping “Vostok” lost up to 825 military personnel, two tanks, and seven armored fighting vehicles in a week;

- The Dnepr group of troops defeated ten Ukrainian brigades in a week;

- The Russian Armed Forces destroyed 17 electronic warfare stations of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the area of ​​responsibility of the Southern Group of the Russian Armed Forces;

- The Armed Forces of Ukraine lost more than 3,890 servicemen in a week in the area of ​​responsibility of the Southern Group of the Russian Armed Forces;

- Units of the Central Group of the Russian Armed Forces have improved the situation along the front line over the past week;

- Russian air defense systems shot down MiG-29 and Su-25, 18 Hammer guided bombs and 1.7 thousand Ukrainian UAVs in a week;

- Units of the "Center" group repelled 63 counterattacks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and defeated 12 brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in a week;

- The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost more than 2,950 military personnel in the area of ​​responsibility of the Central Group of the Russian Armed Forces in a week;

- Within a week, the launcher of the S-300PS air defense system, two combat vehicles of the Hawk and Osa-AKM air defense systems of Ukraine were destroyed.

▫️Units of the Vostok group of forces improved the tactical position and defeated the formations of the 58th motorized infantry, 72nd mechanized brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, 102nd, 106th, 128th terrestrial defense brigades and the 1st brigade of the National Guard of Ukraine in the areas of Ugledar settlements , Urozhaynoye, Staromayorskoye of the Donetsk People's Republic, Chervonoye and Gulyai Field of the Zaporozhye region.

Enemy losses amounted to up to 825 military personnel, two tanks, seven armored combat vehicles, 28 vehicles, 11 field artillery guns, including nine howitzers made in the USA, Great Britain, France and Poland, five electronic warfare stations (Nota, Enclave) , "Bukovel-AD") and four field ammunition depots.

▫️The coordinated actions of units of the Dnepr group of troops defeated the manpower and equipment of five brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, a marine brigade, three brigades of the national defense, as well as a brigade of the National Guard of Ukraine in the areas of the settlements of Malaya Tokmachka, Rabotino, Novoandreevka, Shcherbaki of the Zaporozhye region, Mikhailovka, Ivanovka, Republican and Berislav of the Kherson region.

The enemy lost up to 360 troops, an armored combat vehicle, 30 vehicles and 20 field artillery pieces, including eight US-made M777 howitzers.

The missile forces, artillery and unmanned aerial vehicles of the troops of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation destroyed at the base airfield a MiG-29 aircraft of the Ukrainian Air Force, eight combat vehicles of the HIMARS, Vampire and Grad multiple launch rocket systems, a launcher with a control center and a radar anti-aircraft missile system S-300PS, two combat vehicles of anti-aircraft missile systems: Hawk and Osa-AKM, as well as two radar stations: Pelican and P-18.

During the week, aviation and air defense systems shot down Mig-29 and Su-25 aircraft of the Ukrainian Air Force, 18 Hammer guided bombs made in France, a Tochka-U tactical missile, 35 HIMARS, Alder and Hurricane missiles. , as well as 1,659 unmanned aerial vehicles.

Within a week, 15 Ukrainian servicemen surrendered.

In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the following have been destroyed: 593 aircraft, 270 helicopters, 23,541 unmanned aerial vehicles, 509 anti-aircraft missile systems, 15,864 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 1,275 combat vehicles of multiple launch rocket systems, 9,167 field artillery guns and mortars, as well as 21,336 units of special military vehicles.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Ukraine Weekly Update
26th April 2024

DR. ROB CAMPBELL
APR 26, 2024

Image
Is the bear finally awakening

<snip>

Bandera v Lenin

Image

The above map (from Harvard University) shows the distribution of statues of Bandera and Lenin throughout Ukraine and provides a guide to where the sympathies of the people lay.

Ukraine Accused of Human Rights Violations

Image
Gimme the nukes and it will all go BOOM.

The US State Department has accused Ukraine of human rights violations including torture and kidnapping during 2023 - according to Slavyangrad. Ukraine is condemned because it did nothing to punish the perpetrators. According to the US State Department:

There are credible reports of enforced disappearances, torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, harsh and life-threatening detention conditions during arrest or detention, and serious problems with the independence of the judiciary.

Concerns were also expressed about infringements on free speech, persecution of journalists, censorship, corruption in government and ‘the worse forms of laboral exploitation of minors’. That sounds like the West to me.

This is a departure from ‘Ukraine is snow white’ narrative that has predominated hitherto and I wonder why this change has happened. This parallels revelations that the once great Z may not be the saint everyone thought he was. It appears that efforts are being made to undo the enthusiastic support for Ukraine that the previous narratives engendered - so that once the West dumps Ukraine there will be less of a public uproar. It wouldn’t surprise me if revelations about Ukraine’s Nazis could also be forthcoming shortly.

Ukraine - Open Air Prison

Image
‘You can never leave’.

Some are calling Ukraine an open air prison because the administration is increasing its border guard strength by 15,000 to 75,000. In most countries border guards are meant to keep illegals out but in Ukraine they are employed to keep people in - according to Slavyangrad.

Bishop Arrested

Image

Zelensky has arrested Bishop Arseny of the pro Russian Ukrainian Orthodox Church on suspicion of revealing the locations of Ukraine Army checkpoints in Donetsk. He could face up to 8 years in Jail. Unexpectedly, the Anglican Church in England has criticised Z’s efforts to ban the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC). Both the Bishop of Leeds and the Archbishop of Canterbury have condemned Zelensky’s Law 8371 (banning the UOC) as discriminatory.

Zaluzhny Held?

Image

It is possible that Valeri Zaluzhny was arrested about a month ago and is being held by the SBU under heavy security after refusing to take up his post as ambassador to the UK. According to Slavyangrad, the arrest was designed to eliminate a political opponent. Although I have not had confirmation of this story, it is certainly true that Zaluzhny has not yet taken up his post as ambassador to the UK.

Image
Butter wouldn’t melt in her mouth.

According to Info Defence, Irena said:

It is unacceptable to speak Russian in public places in Ukraine. A ruling by Ukraine's Constitutional Court on July 14, 2021, stated that there is 'no Russian-speaking population in Ukraine' legally. Russian speakers are considered marginal and defective people.

I can relate to this especially because my Welsh mother was prevented from speaking Welsh (her native language) in her South Wales school by the use of the Welsh Not.

Image
This was a board passed on from child to child who were caught speaking Welsh in school. The pupil who ended the day with the Not was punished.

Scary Tale - From Z

Image

I am sure that if Ukraine falls, then Putin will indeed invade the Baltic states. And talking about his strategy, Putin does not hide his desire to return to the Soviet Union and dominate all former Soviet republics, which are independent now, regardless of whether they are NATO members. And yes, this is his strategy. And after the Baltic states, he will attack Poland and Germany.

You can watch the short interview here. The once great Z looks triumphant but the woman interviewing him from NBC doesn’t appear to be convinced. The BBC was less triumphant, claiming that the aid package will slow the Russian advance rather than taking back ground. The narrative has changed.

Ukrainians in Poverty

Image
Many Ukrainian people, especially the elderly, displaced and disabled, have fallen into poverty since the SMO began. A survey carried out last November showed that 9% of people had run out of food at some point during the previous 30 days, while 23% were in a state of food insecurity. Pensioners (one third of the population) have been hard hit due to inflation which has increased somewhat from the 2022 figure of 26%. The figure for those claiming disability was 3 millions but this has increased by 300,000 due to injured soldiers. Unemployment has increased substantially and wages have fallen. You can read more here.

Jails Overflowing
Some say that at least two things are overflowing in Ukraine: the cemeteries and the prisons. The relevant authorities estimate that 33,000 prison places are available but more than this number are expected to be imprisoned for evading military service.

Kuleba

Image
This man (Ukraine’s Foreign Minister) is a complete monster if such a thing exists. With total disregard for the people who fled Ukraine in the past two years to avoid the conflict he condemned these refugees as traitors.

Ukraine will not provide services to its citizens who have fled abroad, because they have shown their indifference to the issue of the survival of the state.

Consular support has been withdrawn from Ukrainians of military age living abroad - which will make it difficult for them to exist thereby encouraging them to come home. This measure applies to those who have been abroad since before the SMO began. It is possible that many will change citizenship rather than returning to Ukraine as cannon fodder. Arestovich believes that Putin could offer these Ukrainians Russian passports.

By the way, denying people passports conflicts with both European and Ukrainian law, according to some - including Alexander Mercouris.

Lost Children

Image

You may remember that some time ago the International Criminal Court condemned Russia for kidnapping Ukrainian children. Many of us believed that this was nonsense and now we know that it was nonsense since the 161 ‘kidnapped’ children have turned up in Germany You can read more at Fearless John.

Ukraine Terrorist Attacks (i.e. attacks that target civilians)
19th/20th April Overnight

Image

The Two Majors gave this report:

The Enemy conducted a massive UAV attack at night. Enemy drones were shot down over the Tula, Bryansk and Kursk regions. In the Belgorod region, two civilians died after being hit by enemy drops from copters in the locality of Poroz of the Grayvoron urban district. An airplane-type UAV crashed into a house in the locality of Istobnoye, Gubkin urban district, there were no casualties. In the Kaluga region, an energy facility has been damaged. In the Smolensk region, after the fall of the AFU UAV, there was a fire at the facility of the fuel and energy complex.

The village of Novato Tavolzhanka (Belgorod) was also shelled, killing a pregnant woman and injuring two others.

103 rounds of ammunition was launched into the DPR and explosives dropped from drones killed two and injured another three.

21st/22nd April

Belgorod, Tyotkino and Kursk regions suffered shelling overnight. A Tochka-U missile was shot down over Belgorod region on the afternoon of the 22nd April.

22nd/23rd April

Belgorod suffered a massive attack overnight with many drones being shot down. Bryansk was also attacked along with the DPR which received 53 projectiles. Only one casualty was reported.

23rd/24th April

Image

Slavyangrad is reporting that a Ukrainian drone hit a car in the village of Mirnoye in Zaporozhye killing three people and injuring another. The Two Majors gave this short report:

The AFU, at nightfall, attempted a massive UAV attack on the regions of Russia. One UAV crashed in the Lipetsk industrial zone. At least 4 were shot down in the Voronezh region. In the village of Volokonovka, Belgorod region, a roof was damaged and windows were broken in a private residential building.

Belgorod, Smolensk and Kursk suffered shelling and drone attacks while drones attacking Pskov oblast were disabled electronically. 73 round were launched at the DPR injuring two women.

24th/25th April

On the 24th April, the village of Shebekino in Belgorod was attacked injuring four civilians. Villages in Kursk region also came under fire along with the DPR where two civilians were injured.

25th/26th April

Kirovsky village in Donetsk came under attack overnight killing two and wounding five others including a child. In Bryansk region, four civilians were injured by shelling. Villages in Kursk also came under fire. Korovyakovka was among those villages that suffered shelling, killing one person and damaging houses and a gas pipe.

<snip>

The Fronts

Image

Chasiv Yar

Image

The battle for Chasiv Yar continues and the Wall Street Journal is reporting that the Ukrainian troops in this direction are exhausted due to lack of rotation and are unable to resist the slow Russian advance.

Donetsk/Krasnogorivka

Image

By the end of the week, the Russians had advanced to the centre of Krasnogorovka taking control of the refractory brick plant.

Vuhledar

Image

Novomykhailivka was liberated on the 22nd April, according to Rybar. This will allow the Russians to make further advances towards Kostyantynivka, the capture of which will cause the Ukrainians logistical problems in the Vuhledar direction.

Ocheretyne

Image

The Ukrainians are attempting to prevent the encirclement of their remaining troops in Berdychi - according to southfront. It will not be long before the Ukrainians will need to abandon the defence line they created following the collapse of Avdeevka. They will fall back to another line further west - but these defences will be weaker than the defences the Russians have breached in places such as Avdeevka and Bakhmut. Some say the Ukrainians could be forced back to the Dnieper before the autumn leaves begin to fall.

Zaporozhye - Robotyne

Image

By the end of the week, the Russians had created a pocket in the Novoprokopovka area between Verbove and Rabotino where heavy fighting continues.

Kherson

Image

Fighting continues at Krynki and Antonovsky bridge but there has been little change in the line of contact.

(Much more at link>)

https://robcampbell.substack.com/p/ukra ... update-4e9

******

Sikorski Went Overboard With His Reaffirmation Of Ukraine’s Western Borders

Image

ANDREW KORYBKO
APR 27, 2024

His decision to use the Ukrainian name of an historically Polish-controlled region implies that it was illegally occupied by the Poles for centuries with all that entails.

Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski went out of his way to pronounce the Ukrainian name of an historically Polish-controlled region when reaffirming his country’s recognition of its neighbor’s western borders. He told the Sejm that “Russia is lying about Poland's alleged plans to annex part of Ukraine. Donbas is Ukraine; Crimea is Ukraine. Lviv, Volyn, and the former Eastern Halychyna are also Ukraine. So I’m repeating this so that the Kremlin can hear it: Lviv is Ukraine”, with the last part said in Ukrainian.

“Lviv” is known in Polish as Lwów (pronounced “Lvoof”) and was part of the Polish Crown for over 400 years as explained here in late March. At the time, Sikorski quipped that “Ukraine and Poland have been one country for 400 years. [Conventionally intervening in Ukraine] would provide fodder for Russian propaganda. Therefore, we should be the last ones to do so.” This is only accurate with respect to Western Ukraine though as that piece proved.

In any case, Sikorski repeated his general point while speaking at the Sejm, but he went overboard by pronouncing the Ukrainian name of that historically Polish-controlled region. This implies that it was illegally occupied by the Poles for centuries, thus discrediting his country’s official claims that it and other regions were integral parts of the Crown. It also suggests that the partitions were a form of justice and that Poland’s restoration of control over those regions during the interwar period was illegitimate.

Even worse, this innuendo erodes Poland’s official claim that the mass killing of Poles by Ukrainian ultra-nationalists during World War II was a genocide. After all, if these lands were illegitimately controlled by Poland, then even the most radically violent forms of so-called “resistance” can be spun as “acceptable”. Sikorski could have avoided this scandal by sticking with the Polish pronunciation of those regions or simply not naming them at all.

Instead, he was so carried away with virtue signaling his support of Ukraine’s post-Soviet borders that he didn’t think about the consequences of pronouncing one of its historically Polish-controlled regions in that neighboring country’s language, which greatly harmed Poland’s national interests. He dealt more damage to them than any so-called “Russian propaganda” ever could since he’s his country’s top diplomat and should know better than to speak recklessly after being caught up with emotions.

Quite clearly, Russian claims of Polish plans in Western Ukraine have gotten under Sikorski’s skin so much that he can no longer keep his cool, thus explaining why he just inadvertently undermined Poland’s official historical narratives. This was done at the expense of possibly “legitimizing” interwar Ukrainian terrorism in the Second Polish Republic and the genocide of Poles by Ukrainian ultra-nationalists during World War II. Ukrainians wildly applaud what he just did while Polish patriots are completely disgusted.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/sikorski ... d-with-his

******

TARIK CYRIL AMAR: UKRAINE’S MILITARY IS LOSING THE FIGHT NOT ONLY AGAINST RUSSIA BUT ALSO AGAINST A GAMBLING ADDICTION EPIDEMIC.
APRIL 26, 2024 LEAVE A COMMENT
By Tarik Cyril Amar, Website, 3/30/24

Ukraine is now on the verge of a catastrophic defeat. On the ground, recent Russian advances – especially since the fall of the key town (really, fortress) of Avdeevka – may not (yet) look rapid, but they are steady and have become highly predictable. Russia has the initiative, and it is a matter of Moscow’s decisions how fast the Ukrainian crumbling will be exploited. Once the Russian military commits its reserves (no, they have not yet entered the scene), the map could change with the kind of speed that will shock out of their dreams even the most propagandized victims of Western information warfare. This may happen very soon or a little bit later. But this war is now very unlikely to last into 2025.

We are also seeing clear signs of panic in the West and Kyiv/Kiev: Talk about the possibility of defeat has reached mainstream media and conformist “experts” – such as the German Christian Mölling – who have spent the last two years as relentless war boosters are rushing for the rhetorical exits. The blame game almost starts among those who have most to be ashamed of.

Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelensky, meanwhile, has told the public that he can imagine a peace based on the territorial status quo before the escalation into all-out-war of February 2022. For that, it is, of course, far too late. That solution – highly favorable to Ukraine, as its own then chief-negotiator has recently admitted – was on the table in the spring of 2022. But Kyiv/Kiev chose to be misled by the West which urged it to continue the war. As recent statements by the Russian leadership – all the way up to President Vladimir Putin – have made clear, such an offer will not be made again. This war will now end on terms much worse for Ukraine.

Against this dismal backdrop, Strana.ua, one of Ukraine’s most important and popular news websites, is reporting that the Ukrainian military is struggling with an online gambling “epidemic.” And make no mistake, this is not a “scourge,” as Strana.ua puts it, restricted to those serving in the rear. According to prominent Ukrainian lawmaker Oleksy Honcharenko, 90 percent of those on the “frontlines” are gambling and betting so badly that they lose enough to go into debt. He believes that the problem is pervasive and severe enough to “destroy the morale” of the troops. Their return into civilian life – if they are lucky enough to return, of course – is marred by having “nothing,” and they’ll be “ideal targets for the world of crime.” So Honcharenko. [https://strana.news/news/461179-kak-ihr ... armii.html]

An army of men and women abused for a Western proxy war, indoctrinated and also often enough brutally cajoled by a regime that has sold out Ukraine’s interests and hundreds of thousands of lives to the (still) neocon strategies of Washington – and all that for what?

To be admitted into NATO? But that will not happen and was never a good idea to begin with. To defend democracy and “civil society”? But Ukraine has no democracy; it is a regime every bit as personal as that of Russia, and, if anything, more corrupt. “Civil society”? A label for those with decent English and good connections to Westerners. It means nothing for the many others churned up in a meatgrinder of a war. To join “the West”? Wait for the backlash once this war is over – probably soon – and Ukrainians will have to process the fact that the West has used them and then dropped them.

In short, there is nothing really surprising about the fact that Ukrainian soldiers have found a destructive form of escapism. As one of them puts it, “the longer the war is lasting, the more you want to distract yourself from the things going on around you, just forget about everything.” Soviet troops in Afghanistan and American ones in Vietnam used drugs for the same purpose. And yet, there is something almost too symbolic about the Ukrainians’ choice of self-ruin: Gambling and betting. They are imitating the sins of their leaders, as if in a collective gesture of despair as well as what is left of defiance. And, of course, having an addiction that eats up everything you may want if you survive, is a way of saying that you don’t much believe in your surviving, or – perhaps even worse – that you have stopped caring.

Ukrainians do not deserve their government of shortsighted gamblers – and losers. They do not deserve to have become dispensable chips in a geopolitical game that the West has bet on – and is losing. They deserve a rapid end to this war and a return to a life in peace that they enjoy enough not to want to gamble it away.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2024/04/tar ... -epidemic/

******

Then we broke our promises...
April 27, 23:16

Image

German businessman and activist Kim Dotcom:

“In World War II, 27 million Soviet citizens died. Despite this loss, Russia decided to become our partner, withdrew its troops from East Germany and gave us reunification. Then we broke our promises, supported the American coup in In order to expand NATO, they supplied Ukraine with weapons to kill Russians in the US proxy war. "Shame."

One day, Germany will have to pay for this.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9121410.html

The current regime in Ukraine must certainly be destroyed
April 27, 19:05

Image

My interview for the Donetsk News Agency.

The current regime in Ukraine must certainly be destroyed

We recently celebrated the tenth anniversary of the beginning of the Russian Spring and the reunification of Crimea with Russia. Did you then, in 2014, have a feeling that these changes would affect not only your native Crimea and Russia, but would also lead to a restructuring of the world order?

After it became clear that Russia would intervene and a referendum would be held in Crimea, it was obvious that the “end of history” according to Fukuyama was completely canceled and the world order was entering a period of transformation. By 2024 this has become obvious to everyone. The old world order has collapsed, and we are living in a period of formation of a new world order, which largely depends on the outcome of military operations in Ukraine, although not only on this.

In your opinion, what were the main prerequisites for the beginning of the Russian Spring, what became the main trigger, the boiling point for the residents of Crimea and Donbass?

The main trigger, of course, was the Euromaidan, without which Crimea and Donbass would still be part of Ukraine. The coming to power of the Nazis in Kyiv and the course they proclaimed towards de-Russification and de-communization launched the processes of the disintegration of Ukraine, which continues to this day. Apart from war and terror, the Ukrainian Nazis and their sponsors had nothing to offer the people, so the departure of Crimea and Donbass after the coup was inevitable.

What is your personal most vivid memory of the Russian Spring?

If we talk about the events in Crimea, then, probably, the day of the appearance of “polite people”, when the full realization came that the struggle that had already been waged would end in success. If we talk about the Russian Spring as a whole, then this is, of course, the Odessa Khatyn, after which it became obvious that the old Ukraine burned down in the House of Trade Unions and there was a difficult and bloody war ahead with Nazism, with which there could and should not be any compromise.

Now, 10 years after the reunification of Crimea with Russia, the Kiev regime formally continues to lay claim to the peninsula. If you follow the Ukrainian information space, how is this topic presented there now?

The enemy continues to feed fantasies about the return of Crimea and Donbass, emphasizing that he needs territories, not people. In relation to the people living there, they openly proclaim their intentions to carry out ethnic cleansing there, turning into the ethnocide of Russians and Russian-speaking people. Accordingly, all military propaganda of the Zelensky regime is built on theses related to the need to seize Crimea and Donbass and carry out ethnocide there.

How do you generally assess the picture of the world that Ukrainian information resources form for their audience? It is clear that this picture is fantastic, in many ways defiantly divorced from reality, but do the residents of Ukraine notice this? Aren't they tired of propaganda, which, in fact, only pushes them towards self-destruction?

Ukrainian resources can currently only exist under an information cloak in the absence of freedom of speech and opinion. By replicating the most monstrous lies, they are now not much different from the media of the Third Reich, whose population also lived under an information cap - adjusted for the technological level - and was completely confident in “victory over the Bolsheviks.”
In much the same way as Ukrainians driven to the front are treated to fables about a “quick victory over Russia,” we just have to endure another 100-200-300 thousand killed. The real denazification of Ukraine must be accompanied by the elimination of all such propaganda mouthpieces of the Nazi regime and the bringing to justice of those who were dirty in promoting the ideas and actions of Zelensky’s Nazi regime.

In terms of the information confrontation between Russia and the Kyiv regime: do you think it makes sense for Russian media to work with the Ukrainian audience now? What is the percentage of people there who are susceptible, or likely to become susceptible in the foreseeable future, to common sense? Or did those who were ready to be critical of the Ukrainian government long ago leave for Russia and other countries?

Such work has been carried out, is being carried out and will continue to be carried out. Many people really think about what is actually happening in Ukraine, but it is important to remember that they live under conditions of actual internal occupation, when a regime of open terror has been established on the streets against any dissenters. Russia is certainly working in this direction, and it is producing results.

The rejection of forced mobilization in Ukraine is also, to some extent, the result of this work. The number of underground workers helping our military in Nazi-occupied territories has also increased. The partisans have become more active and have successfully attacked the enemy’s military and logistics infrastructure. And the further it goes, the greater the role that internal Ukrainian resistance to the Zelensky regime will play. This resistance must be worked with and supported.

Nazism in Ukraine began to be cultivated long before the Maidan, but after 2014 it became an openly approved ideology, and then an almost obligatory norm: in order to participate in public life, it is necessary to consider Hitler’s accomplices as “heroes” and demonize the Soviet Union. Do you think there is a clear parallel between modern Ukrainian Nazis and Bandera during the Great Patriotic War, or does this phenomenon now have a different scale or meaning?

These are direct successors of the work of Bandera and Hitler, which they themselves do not particularly hide. And Western sponsors are often the same ones who in the 30s armed Hitler for the “crusade against Bolshevism” and who in the 40s and 50s armed Bandera’s followers for the war against the USSR. Our old enemy has not changed, and Nazism has always been and remains one of the tools in its arsenal. Therefore, the current regime in Ukraine must certainly be destroyed.

Do you think that after the end of hostilities there will be a need for a tribunal against the Ukrainian Nazis, military and political leadership, or will these figures not survive our victory?

Those who cannot be destroyed during hostilities, if caught, must be tried, including through the application of the restored death penalty for crimes committed against peace and humanity.

Those who flee and hide will need to be caught and eliminated for a long time and systematically, as was the case with the militants of Basayev, Raduev and Maskhadov who escaped from Chechnya. The Russian special services have such experience.

Now we see that the bravado of Western countries regarding Ukraine is ending; it is becoming increasingly difficult for them to beg for money and means of waging war. In your opinion, could it turn out that the United States has collected all the economic and geopolitical bonuses and is ready to reset the map of Ukraine, leaving the Kiev regime alone with its problems?

At the current stage, the United States is not ready to abandon its support for the war in Ukraine, since, from their point of view, the longer the hostilities go on, the more they weaken Europe and Russia. At the same time, the costs of Ukraine for the United States are not fundamental.

The question remains of cutting costs and shifting them to the US’s European satellites, as well as compensating them by intensifying the plunder of Ukraine. This process has not yet been completed. The United States will not simply abandon Ukraine, because from Washington’s point of view, Ukraine is American prey. But predators don’t just give up their prey. To believe otherwise would be vain self-deception.

What is known about the dynamics of arms supplies to Kyiv from its sponsors? Which item of these supplies most clearly affects the actual balance of forces in the war zone?

The enemy is now seeking to increase the supply of 122, 152, 155 mm shells, air defense missiles, various drones, as well as wheeled armored vehicles. The issue with the supply of heavy armored vehicles and self-propelled guns, as well as air defense systems, is more complex. Much depends on the issue of budgetary funding from the United States, as well as the pace of deployment of ammunition production in Europe. The transfer of aviation is expected in the summer-autumn of 2024.

How do you assess the pace of adaptation of the Russian army to the realities of modern armed conflict? For example, how is the situation changing in terms of providing modern means of communication, supplying UAVs to troops, and training personnel to use them? Does the pace allow us to hope for a radical turnaround in the situation in the conflict zone in favor of Russia?

Over the past year, the pace of adaptation of the RF Armed Forces has increased significantly, which was facilitated, among other things, by the efforts of the Russian military-industrial complex, which is increasing both the volume of military production and expanding the range of production of the latest weapons, created taking into account the experience of the Northern Military District. This is already contributing to changing the dynamics of events at the front.

Regarding the issue of providing communications equipment and UAVs: compared to 2022, tangible progress is visible, but it is still not sufficient to fully saturate the troops with modern communications equipment, drones and electronic warfare systems. There is still a lot of work ahead. It is also worth noting the role of military humanitarian workers, who meet some of the targeted needs of the troops, complementing the efforts of the Russian Defense Ministry and the military-industrial complex. The guarantee of victory lies in the unity of efforts of the front and rear.

In addition to direct military confrontation, we also face another challenge. The tragedy in Crocus City Hall raises with new urgency the question of the terrorist essence of the Kyiv regime: although the investigation has yet to clarify all the details, the very fact of the terrorists’ connection with Ukraine is beyond doubt. Do Kyiv's resources allow it to further increase terrorist activity on Russian territory?

The involvement of the Nazi regime in Kyiv and its sponsors in the West in the terrorist attack at Crocus seems unconditional. The enemy will not give up terror and will strive to continue acts of terror on Russian territory. The resources necessary for this will be provided by the United States and NATO. But in the event of a military defeat on the battlefield, this will not save the enemy. Such terror is the weapon of the doomed.

Just like the crimes of terrorists from ISIS* (explosions in Russia or a terrorist attack on board an airliner over the Sinai) did not save their “Islamic State”*, which declared war on Russia and was destroyed in Syria. The terrorists remained, but their quasi-state disappeared. This should be the case with regard to the Ukrainian terrorist state.

Persons involved in such terror are subject to destruction, since they themselves have long ago placed themselves beyond the bounds of the law and humanity. The methods of fighting them must be identical to the methods of fighting terrorists in Chechnya and ISIS terrorists*. The SBU and GUR MOU must be recognized as terrorist organizations.

And if we talk about the development of the situation on the battlefield, does the Russian Armed Forces now have enough forces to significantly push back the front line - for example, in the Kharkov region, in order to secure Belgorod?

At the moment, the main emphasis in recruiting troops is on contract soldiers and volunteers, of whom up to 30-35 thousand people are added monthly, which makes it possible to compensate for losses and increase the capabilities of grouping troops in Ukraine. At the same time, its numbers still seem insufficient for large-scale strategic operations related to the advance to the Dnieper.

https://dan-news.ru/interview/boris-roz ... ichtozhen/ - zinc

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9120891.html

Keramik and Novokalinovo all
April 27, 17:10

Image

It is reported that the enemy abandoned Keramik and fled. This means that Novokalinovo is also everything.
We are waiting for confirming photos/videos from both settlements. Sources from the field confirm the ongoing cleanup.
Next is Arkhangelskoe. As it is not difficult to notice from the terrain, the enemy will not hold on to it for long. The defense will most likely be kept at the heights to the west and northwest of Arkhangelsk.

Also today, the Russian Armed Forces made progress in Krasnogorovka, on the outskirts of Netailovo, north of Berdychi, in Kislovka (a village in the process of coming under our control).
In general, things are going well.

Dynamics of the offensive in the Avdeevsky direction https://t.me/boris_rozhin/121656

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9120562.html

On attracting Ukrainian refugees
April 28, 7:47

Image

On attracting Ukrainian refugees

Regarding the debate on the topic of whether it is necessary to attract to Russia those whom the cocaine Fuhrer has actually deprived of Ukrainian citizenship, a reasonable balance is needed here between the desire to attract additional workers to the country and security considerations, so that agents of Ukrainian terrorists are not among those attracted.

On the one hand, it is necessary to expand the possibilities for Ukrainian refugees to submit applications to obtain a residence permit in Russia. On the other hand, expanded filtering measures are needed in order to control the expanding flow of applicants.

Of interest are skilled workers, engineers, and programmers. Those categories that are problematic to replace with migrants from Central Asia. But again, with an eye to the issue of filtering.

It is also worth considering that the Overton window works in both directions, so active work with this contingent in the interests of recruitment/obtaining information (including through relatives) is also possible through our intelligence services.

It is worth remembering that among the refugees there are both those who are quite capable of easily integrating into Russian society and who can be called our people, as well as various Raguli who escaped from the war. Ensuring sifting is the task of the state. So far, the state has not made any specific decision.

The positions of “let everyone in” and “keep no one in” are seen as divorced from reason.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9121989.html

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

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10873
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 29, 2024 12:07 pm

Contrasts in the military city
POSTED BY @NSANZO ⋅ 04/29/2024
Original Article: Denis Grigoriuk

Image

Donetsk's inconsistencies are something that was discussed a lot before 2014. On the one hand, it is the largest industrial city, which by logic should be dark and dirty, but is clean and tidy, with green parks and squares. For a long time, an image of Donetsk's poorly educated cattle was created in the Ukrainian media , but the stereotype did not stand the test when I got to know not only the city, but higher education institutions, theaters, stadiums and other cultural and cultural places. of leisure, as well as its inhabitants, which were very different from what Ukraine presented.

With the outbreak of hostilities, Donetsk adopted new contrasts. Since 2014, the capital of the mining region has been inevitably linked to the image of war: destroyed buildings, exhausted faces, residents suffering from bombings, empty shelves in stores, lack of transportation on the roads and other common aspects of the life in a military city. Knowing this, those who come to Donetsk are surprised by a different reality in which, under the roar of cannon fire, people working for housing and communal services clean the streets, plant flowers in all areas, young people walk through the picturesque walk along the river and to see the destruction you have to make an effort, get closer to the front or ask the population about the hole in the side of a children's slide that claimed the life of a child.

This is something that enemy propaganda has used for a long time. The lack of serious damage in the center of Donetsk has been presented as a form of mercy from the Ukrainian Armed Forces who, supposedly, do not attack civilian infrastructure. But it is not due to the humanity of the Ukrainian troops, but to the fact that they were not allowed to enter the city and do what they would have done, turn it into ruins. They could only hit what was in their hand. For a time, they were used to their full advantage when they had Western systems that allowed them to attack from a distance. Propagandists forget to mention this when they give the facts that suit them best and deliberately hide the reason and context of what is happening.

In fact, anyone who lives in or has visited the city of Donetsk can talk about the daily shelling of the front and nearby areas, including residential areas, but also the attacks in parts of Donetsk far from the line of contact. Not to mention the towns located directly on the front, where the bombings were not news but an integral part of life, something that had to be gotten used to and learned to live with. This is how Donbass lived for many years, combining war and peace and industry with parks and clean streets.

Image

The period of the special military operation brought changes to the already contrasting life of Donetsk. Walking through the Kalinin district I thought that the city has acquired a new contradiction. Although the area is not close to the front, its consequences are felt enough. The Ukrainian Armed Forces have launched all types of Western projectiles at residential homes here, wherever they could reach. Hence the damaged buildings, the boarded-up windows, the holes in the walls or the destroyed partitions under the building. That may impress those arriving in the city, but not the population residing in Donetsk, who see it daily and for whom the consequences of the Ukrainian attacks have become an integral part of the overall picture.

What really catches the eye is the presence of construction equipment and work equipment. Construction crews pave streets, repair potholes and underground utilities, and build new parks and plazas for the population from scratch. It is done not only in the Kalinin district, but also in the others. Of course, things are different on the front and nearby areas due to the military situation. Construction images may seem unrealistic, at least for those who have lived in a military reality for almost ten years. The images of destruction that appear in newspaper reports have settled into the collective consciousness. I am also partly to blame, since I have focused on the battle and have forgotten the other part of the life of Donetsk, which is there despite the lack of attention of the audience.

The level of construction cannot be compared with that of Mariupol, which is at a considerable distance from enemy artillery, but the fact that a city in which shelling takes place daily, where cannons roar, air defense works and in parallel parks and squares being built cannot but surprise. Not only are the damage next to the bombed sites being repaired, but something new is being created. Until 2022, this seemed like something distant that, if it happened, would be in a life after ours. But now it is our reality. I don't want to be overly optimistic, so I have to insist that the fight continues with all the problems it entails. So don't fool yourself and fall into false ideas about what is happening. It's just that life in a military city is more complicated than it might seem. It can turn into hell like the one that the Ukrainian gunners caused in the market of the Tekstiknik microdistrict in January, but restaurants and cafes are also working, children go to school and in the yards where the windows are covered with plastic after a bombing, a Mime dressed as a polar bear can perform for children. All of this can exist at once in a military city. These are the contrasts of Donetsk.

https://slavyangrad.es/2024/04/29/contr ... d-militar/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Summary of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation (as of April 28, 2024) The main thing:

- Russian air defense shot down 5 ATACMS missiles and 46 drones of the Ukrainian Armed Forces during the day;

— Units of the “East”, “South”, “West” groupings of the Russian Armed Forces took more advantageous positions within 24 hours and improved the position along the front line;

— Within 24 hours, the Russian Armed Forces hit the temporary deployment points of foreign mercenaries in Ukraine;

— Within 24 hours, the Russian Armed Forces destroyed warehouses with aircraft and ammunition at the airfields of Priluki and Starokonstantinov;

— The “West” group of the Russian Armed Forces repelled three counterattacks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in one day, the enemy lost up to 270 people;

— The “Center” group repelled 10 counterattacks in one day, the Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 380 people.

operational-tactical aviation, missile forces and artillery of groupings of troops of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation destroyed hangars with attack unmanned aerial vehicles at the Kamenka airfield in the Dnepropetrovsk region .

In addition, warehouses with aviation ammunition and aircraft equipment at the airfields of Priluki in the Chernihiv region and Starokonstantinov in the Khmelnytsky region, temporary deployment points for foreign mercenaries, manpower and military equipment of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the 121st region were hit.

During the day, air defense systems shot down 46 Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles and five US-made ATACMS operational-tactical missiles.

▫️Units of the Vostok group of forces occupied more advantageous positions and defeated the manpower and equipment of the 58th motorized infantry brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the 108th terrestrial defense brigade in the areas of the settlements of Pavlovka and Lugovskoye, Zaporozhye region.

The losses of the Armed Forces of Ukraine amounted to up to 85 military personnel, four pickup trucks, a 122-mm self-propelled artillery mount "PzH-2000" made in Germany and a 122-mm self-propelled artillery mount "Gvozdika" .

Also destroyed : the Enclave-N electronic warfare station and a field ammunition depot .

▫️Units of the Dnepr group of troops inflicted fire on concentrations of manpower of the 65th mechanized, 128th mountain assault brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the 126th terrestrial defense brigade in the areas of the settlements of Kamenskoye, Rabotino, Zaporozhye region, Ivanovka and Olgovka, Kherson region.

The enemy lost up to 50 military personnel, two vehicles, a US-made M777 155-mm howitzer and an Enclave-N electronic warfare station .

▫️ Operational-tactical aviation, missile forces and artillery of groupings of troops of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation destroyed hangars with attack unmanned aerial vehicles at the Kamenka airfield in the Dnepropetrovsk region .

In addition, warehouses with aviation ammunition and aircraft equipment at the airfields of Priluki in the Chernihiv region and Starokonstantinov in the Khmelnytsky region, temporary deployment points for foreign mercenaries, manpower and military equipment of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the 121st region were hit.

During the day, air defense systems shot down 46 Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles and five US-made ATACMS operational-tactical missiles .

▫️In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the following have been destroyed : 593 aircraft, 270 helicopters, 23,587 unmanned aerial vehicles, 509 anti-aircraft missile systems, 15,869 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 1,275 combat vehicles of multiple launch rocket systems, 9,189 field artillery guns and mortars, as well as 21,372 units of special military vehicles.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Ukraine’s Top Five Challenges Are Unsolvable

Image

ANDREW KORYBKO
APR 28, 2024

Ukraine’s problems are immense and multifaceted, but they’re all connected one way or another to the five following factors.

It’s beginning to dawn on most Westerners that the US’ long-delayed aid to Ukraine isn’t all that it was hyped up to be and will only at most temporarily slow down the pace of Russia’s increasingly rapid advances. The conflict’s tempo has gradually intensified as Russia exploited Ukraine’s disastrous counteroffensive to regain the military-strategic initiative. Ukraine’s problems are immense and multifaceted, but they’re all connected one way or another to the five following factors:

----------

1. Russia’s Military-Industrial Complex Continues Outproducing NATO’s

Russia won the “race of logistics”/“war of attrition” with NATO long ago and that’s why it continued gaining ground over the past 18 months. The sanctions failed to bankrupt the Kremlin, required resources for production remain readily available, and sabotage had no impact on the assembly lines. Not only has NATO been unable to stop Russia’s military-industrial complex, but it couldn’t ramp up its own during this time either, thus creating an unbridgeable gap that weakens Ukraine more by the week.

2. Ukraine Is Struggling To Replenish Its Depleted Military Ranks

NATO’s loss in the abovementioned military-industrial competition with Russia, the consequent failure of Ukraine’s counteroffensive, and Russia’s subsequent on-the-ground gains combined to scare Ukrainian men away from joining the armed forces and helping to replenish their depleted ranks. Without enough soldiers, Ukraine can’t confidently hold off Russia’s advances, thus risking an impending collapse along the front. At the end of the day, it’s just a numbers game, and Ukraine’s continue trending downward.

3. Less Equipment & Troops Mean More Difficulty Building New Defenses

The pace with which Russia has recently gained ground in Donbass is stressing Ukraine’s existing defensive lines like never before, thus compelling it to build newer ones further behind the front lines. Although Zelensky demanded this be done late last year, little progress has been made due to the lack of equipment and troops for holding off the Russian advance while simultaneously accomplishing this task. The breakthrough that the Ukrainian Intelligence Committee warned about is now more likely than ever.

4. Political Instability Is Still A Damocles’ Sword Hanging Over Ukraine

The Committee also warned in their same message from February that political unrest might explode next month around the time that Zelensky’s term expires on 21 May. They of course claimed that Russia would be behind it, which he also preconditioned his partners to falsely believe late last year, but this would actually be a genuine response to growing problems. Authoritarianism, corruption, forcible conscription, serious economic troubles, and the lack of a realistic endgame all enrage Ukrainians.

5. Ukraine Continues Thinking That It Knows Better Than The US

The Washington Post’s two-part post-mortem report on last summer’s failed counteroffensive revealed that one of the reasons why it flopped was because Ukraine refused to listen to the US’ advice. This problem is attributable to Zelensky and most recently took the form of him ordering his forces to attack Russian energy infrastructure in defiance of the US at the expense of more tactically significant targets. It’s actually the US’ own fault, though, since their media convinced him that he was a “god among men”.

----------

These unsolvable challenges have converged to create a full-fledged crisis for Ukraine that Commander-in-Chief Syrsky is unable to resolve, which is why he candidly informed Ukraine’s partners that “the difficult operational and strategic situation…has a tendency to get worse.” Unless Ukraine agrees to demilitarize the regions still under its control east of the Dnieper and turn them into a buffer zone, the front might collapse by summertime, which could either lead to capitulation or a NATO intervention.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/ukraines ... lenges-are

******

There is no need to be afraid that our population will become smaller
April 29, 13:12

Image

News of recycling of the population of Ukraine.

“And there is no need to be afraid that our population will suddenly become smaller. This is also manipulation. Who ever said that it is good for the country to have a high population?
What if, on the contrary, a spacious and sparsely populated territory will be a more acceptable place to live? It’s

already cannon fodder they explain in plain text that its disposal is a good thing. In fact, they promote the thesis that the ongoing decline in the population of Ukraine is a good thing.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9124226.html

Google Translator

******

SITREP 4/27/24: U.S. Admits Top Weapons Failures to Superior Russian EW

SIMPLICIUS
APR 27, 2024
A relatively scattered update today more as a filler piece and addendum to the last SitRep for which there have been a few interesting topical updates.

Firstly, last time I had posted Ukraine’s head of aerial reconnaissance support, Maria Berlinskaya, stating how Western systems in Ukraine have proven worthless because of the power of Russian EW. In fact, I’m going to post it again just to have it all under one roof for those who haven’t read the previous SitRep, and because I think this particular thread is that important: (Video at link.)

Well, now, we have the highest level confirmation of the above from an actual U.S. official. The Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, William Laplante, just dropped a major bombshell which should dim any hopes of major ATACMS triumphs, as so many are emptily looking forward to:

Image

Image

Image

That’s right—on a panel for the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Laplante outright admitted that the much-hyped GLSDBs have proven an abject failure due to Russian jamming environments. Some have rightfully proposed this is due to the fact that an SDB glide-bomb is pretty slow once it detaches from the HIMARS booster rocket. And thus, as it slows while gliding toward the target, it must overfly a lot of EW contested airspace which gradually degrades its GPS course correction more and more until its targeting is way off by the time it reaches the actual target.

A detailed technical explanation was given by The Right People Z Telegram channel:

Image

The antennas of the GPS correction modules integrated into the guidance and control systems of the GBU-39/B hybrid 227mm GLSDB guided missiles have been confirmed to have low interference immunity. This was once again reminded by US Undersecretary of Defence for Acquisition and Supply Bill LaPlante during the US Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) conference.

It is obvious that the GPS receiver presented by the Boeing Corporation as anti-jam GPS has completely lost its effectiveness in the difficult jamming situation in the airspace over Donbass.

Even in spite of the top-oriented position of these antenna modules, EW complexes "Zhitel" ("Житель"), "Field-21" ("Поле-21") and "Serp-VS5" ("Серп-ВС5") easily suppress their receiving channel, which leads to an increase in the circular probable deviation of GBU-39/B bombs from 1.5 - 3 to several tens of metres, reducing their effectiveness to unacceptable levels.

On the contrary, domestic GLONASS/GPS-antennas "Kometa-A/M/R8" ("Комета-А/М/Р8") are able to withstand interference from the majority of enemy EW means operating in the L-band.

This has a number of very important implications, as this is one of NATO's main air-to-ground strike weapons and due to its use in Ukraine, it has become ineffective, which will make its future use against rivals such as China or Iran and even more local actors ineffective.[/img]

Other weapons systems not only fly faster and spend less time under the influence of EW, but they also have other targeting redundancies which the simplified systems like the GLSDB and JDAM-ER lack. For instance, more sophisticated systems like cruise missiles (Storm Shadow, Kh-101s, etc.) or even some ballistic missiles like Israel’s recently used ROCKS (Sparrow) or Russian Iskander have terminal opto-electric guidance in the form of DSMAC (Digital Scene-matching Area Correlator) which allow them to view the target with a camera and match it with a pre-programmed image of it to course correct. That means even if GPS is jammed, they could still accurately hit the target by what is effectively an AI visual guidance mode. But these systems are extremely sophisticated and expensive, and the whole point of the GLSDB was that it was billed as a cheap alternative, using old stockpiles of super cheap SDB bombs fitted onto HIMARS boosters.

This is likely the same reason JDAM-ERs have proven a dismal failure, as they function almost identically to the gliding SDBs and have already long been known to be highly susceptible to EW by the U.S. Pentagon, even long before the Ukraine war.

But here’s where the Russian defense industry has shown its ingenuity and robust adaptability in one: while Russian UMPK glide-bombs would theoretically suffer from the same exact issue, and likely did, which would explain some of the earliest reports of their “inaccuracy” by the Ukrainian side, Russian engineers quickly adapted. Recall my previous reports about the new Kometa-M satellite transceiver modules being found installed not only on Iskanders but UMPKs as well.

Image

Russian UMPKs likewise started with only 4 or less Kometa receivers, and after some time were upgraded to 8, which now make them far more impervious to EW signals and therefore much more accurate, as the Glonass/GPS correction is not as degraded when overflying an EMI environment.

And on that topic, we have the latest:

Image

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/ap-u ... 35092.html
That’s right, Ukraine has now officially pulled its Abrams off the line because they have proven ineffective. From the article:

The official spoke on the condition of anonymity to provide an update on U.S. weapons support for Ukraine before Friday's Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting.

For now, the tanks have been moved from the front lines, and the U.S. will work with the Ukrainians to reset tactics, said Joint Chiefs of Staff Vice Chairman Adm. Christopher Grady and a third defense official who confirmed the move on the condition of anonymity.

“When you think about the way the fight has evolved, massed armor in an environment where unmanned aerial systems are ubiquitous can be at risk," Grady told the AP in an interview this week, adding that tanks are still important.

“Now, there is a way to do it," he said. "We’ll work with our Ukrainian partners, and other partners on the ground, to help them think through how they might use that, in that kind of changed environment now, where everything is seen immediately.”


All of this comes on the heels of another interesting article from the NYTimes:

Image

Some may recall I covered such efforts as the DOD’s Project Maven before, in articles like this one.

But in the new article, David E. Sanger writes that the results of this combined Google-DARPA effort to institute an AI-driven ‘back-end’ to process vast troves of battlefield surveillance data have in fact been ‘mixed’.

How’s this for admissions?

Image

The first two years of the conflict have also shown that Russia is adapting, much more quickly than anticipated, to the technology that gave Ukraine an initial edge.

And another which corroborates the earlier GLSDB snafu:

In the first year of the war, Russia barely used its electronic warfare capabilities. Today it has made full use of them, confusing the waves of drones the United States has helped provide. Even the fearsome HIMARS missiles that President Biden agonized over giving to Kyiv, which were supposed to make a huge difference on the battlefield, have been misdirected at times as the Russians learned how to interfere with guidance systems.

The article goes on to name and describe the physical heart of this NATO ‘backend’ I’ve described for over a year now:

Image

It names ex-Google CEO Schmidt as being the main impetus behind Ukraine’s new push toward autonomous AI drones which can hunt human targets on their own after their signal has been cut by EW.

Ultimately though the article confesses that these technological leaps will not be enough to defeat Russia, which is adapting just as quickly to battlefield developments, yet actually has the manufacturing girding on top of that which Ukraine lacks. In short: both sides hold key asymmetrical advantages over the other, but Russia is inching on the West’s advantage of satellite ISR—particularly the constellation of Starlink satellites—while Ukraine is not making any headway toward Russia’s massive munitions and armor manufacturing overmatch.


Next, let’s briefly mention some of the ongoing battlefield developments. The situation in the north/west Avdeevka sector continues to deteriorate for the AFU with a constant stream of revealing and sometimes urgent complaints from their channels giving us insight.

Here’s a soldier from the AFU’s 115th Brigade giving an update:

Image

Read what he says: “My company was literally destroyed.”

He complains about leadership throwing them away like meat, and he goes on:

Image

Image

Image

This was followed by statements from some of the most well-known pro-UA OSINT accounts with the highest followers:

Image

Image

And MSM chimed in about the ongoing situation:

Image

Image

The foregoing has culminated in a situation where everything between Ocheretyne and Novokalinov is now in a boiler, with Keramik said to have been totally abandoned by retreating AFU today:

Image

Reports yesterday indicated that Russian troops were already entering the outskirts of Arkhangelske as well.

It has gotten even the most ardent Ukraine ‘experts’ and supporters admitting that the AFU may have to drastically fall back to a new defensive line behind the Vovcha River, abandoning at least a dozen or more kilometers of land:

Image

Image

Recall in my last report I relayed the words of a Ukrainian officer who feared Russia is slowly positioning to put Pokrovsk under the tip of a spear. It seemed unlikely then because Pokrovsk still appears a way off. But should the AFU fall back to the Vovcha, it would put Russian forces about 20km+ away across sparsely defended land which has not been fortified like the area now being overrun:

Image

In fact, below one can see the blue line terminates at its west edge on what is reportedly Ukraine’s most recent defensive fortifications, constructed in Jan-Feb of this year. That means Russian forces are already about 1.5km from it:

Image

Much farther west in the map above, between Prohres and Vesele, you can see a gigantic tank ditch which Ukraine constructed which was meant to be its main line of defense before the Pokrovsk front.

By the way, speaking of tank ditches, remember all the rumors about the embezzlement of funds when it came to building defensive fortifications? A timely Freudian slip on Ukrainian TV pretty much confirmed our suspicions: (Video at link.)


Just south of there, Russian forces continue climbing through Krasnogorovka, making their way toward the center of the larger town:

Image

A prominent Ukrainian soldier gives a dismal and bitter update from the Ocheretyne front: (Video at link.)


Russian advances in Avdeevka sector since ~October of last year when the assault began: (Video at link.)




In other news, Russia again struck 4 Ukrainian thermal power plants last night with a range of weapons, from Kinzhals, to Kalibr cruise missiles fired from the sea, to Kh-101s from Tu-95s, as per usual.

Image

The enemy confirms the defeat of thermal power plants in the Ivano-Frankivsk, Dnepropetrovsk, and Lvov regions. In total, arrivals were reported at 4 power plants.

Image

Image

(Video at link.)



Ukraine, too, struck a Russian oil refinery in Krasnodar: (Video at link.)


But you can clearly see the difference in damage. A few fuel tanks which can be replaced in hours or days versus an entire power plant assembly with turbine hall, which is virtually irreplaceable.

Also, Russia has allegedly begun putting ‘cope cages’ or systems of netting on refinery tanks:

Image



In another bizarre development, Ukraine has apparently used a Yak-52 propeller plane to shoot down a Russian Orlan drone in the West of the country:

(Video at link.)

Image

I guess those F-16s were no where to be found.

(Much more at link.)

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/sit ... op-weapons
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10873
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 30, 2024 11:20 am

looking for spies
POSTED BY @NSANZO ⋅ 04/30/2024

Image

Last week, Germany, and with it the entire Western press, announced the capture of two Russian spies. “As announced by the German Federal Prosecutor's Office in Karlsruhe, the two people are accused, among other things, of acting as agents for the purposes of sabotage and preparation of explosives,” wrote Deutsche Welle , which also reported that the Russian ambassador , Sergey Nechaev, had been called in for consultations. According to the Russian embassy, ​​German authorities did not offer any evidence to justify the arrests. Without the slightest presumption of innocence, Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock wrote on social media that “we will not allow Putin to bring his terror to Germany.”

According to Reuters , the two men, both Russian and German nationals, were detained on suspicion of “planning sabotage attacks, including against U.S. military facilities, in what authorities have called a major effort to undermine military support for Ukraine". Although vague, the accusations have been sufficient so that there is no doubt about the guilt of the two detainees, their plans to attack sensitive facilities in Germany and the implications of the Russian Federation or, if one must read literally the tweet of the leader of German diplomacy, Vladimir Putin. “We will never accept that such espionage activities take place in Germany,” added Chancellor Olaf Scholz, also assuming the guilt of those detained. According to Deutsche Welle , there are “strong suspicions” that one of the detainees “was a soldier in an armed unit of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) in eastern Ukraine between December 2014 and September 2016,” i.e. during the Ukrainian aggression against Donbass.

The arrests that have occurred in Germany, and in which it is not explained how a series of explosions in military bases will undermine support for military assistance to Ukraine, join another that occurred just a few hours earlier in neighboring Poland. “A Polish man has been detained and accused of planning cooperation with Russian intelligence services to contribute to a possible assassination of Volodymyr Zelensky, authorities reported. Polish prosecutors said the man, named Pawel K, was allegedly tasked with collecting information about an airport in Poland used by the president of Ukraine. It is not the first time that Poland claims to have detained a Russian spy. That is the accusation for which journalist Pablo González, of Spanish and Russian nationality, has been kept in preventive detention since February 2022. Despite the fact that the Spanish Minister of Foreign Affairs has repeatedly referred to the “serious charges” that accused of him, Poland has periodically extended the detention during those more than two years without even having officially filed the charges.

The actions of the two countries, Germany and Poland, since the Russian invasion have in no way undermined their credibility in the eyes of the media, which have not hesitated to accept as true the accusations of the European authorities against these four citizens, three detained in the last days and the journalist “captured”, as propaganda media such as Nexta claimed , the first week of the Russo-Ukrainian war. Poland's role in delaying the trial against Pablo González as much as possible to guarantee his long-term stay in prison in harsh conditions has gone completely unnoticed in the European Union, which is willing to take for granted the guilt of any person accused by the bloc's authorities. to work for Russia.

Espionage activities undoubtedly exist, and it is more than likely that Russia carries out such activities in European countries and vice versa. However, spies and espionage do not always come from enemy powers. In the past, Germany, for example, has had to endure without blushing the scandal of American tapping into the phone of its then Chancellor Angela Merkel. Sabotage activities are also present in the countries directly or indirectly involved in the current war. The sabotage activities carried out by Kirilo Budanov's partisans trying to derail trains in Russian territory are well known.

But even in the European Union, such sabotage has caused serious problems. Once again, Germany has been the country that has had to put on a good face and move forward without publicly insisting on knowing what happened at the bottom of the Baltic Sea in September 2022. As I recalled when faced with the news of the arrest of the two alleged spies Russians, the American journalist Mark Ames, in August 2023, months after the events, the German Interior Minister Nancy Faeser stated that she hoped “that the federal prosecutor's office will find sufficient evidence to charge the perpetrators” of the explosions of three of the four Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines. “We must bring such crimes to court,” the minister insisted, adding that “it also increases citizens' trust in the State when it succeeds in clarifying such complex cases.” Denmark and Sweden have since closed their investigations, leaving only the German investigation ongoing.

In recent months, details about the status of the case have been sporadic and limited. However, the monitoring carried out by various European and American media has revealed the German Government's interest in being up to date on the development of an investigation that has not looked at Russia in search of culprits for a long time. What's more, Boris Pistorius, Germany's Defense Minister, seems to be the last person still grasping at the straws of the false flag of the Russian Federation. From the beginning of 2023, to counter Seymour Hersh's theory, which directly accused the United States, the media began to target a pro-Ukrainian group first and then active members of the Ukrainian military. In that version defended by such important newspapers as Der Spiegel or The Washington Post , the conspiracy to explode the pipelines would have been carried out without the knowledge of Volodymyr Zaluzhny, although the possibility has always been left open that the then commander in chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Valery Zaluzhny, was aware of the plans.

A year and a half after the events, Germany maintains a silence that contrasts with the anger of the European authorities in the first hours after the attack, when Moscow's hand was still being sought . In a complicated situation as the second provider of military assistance to Ukraine, Berlin cannot afford to admit that all the evidence presented by the Western press, including the German one, does not point to Russia but to kyiv, which would have carried out the attack from Poland. , perhaps with their collaboration or impassiveness. According to publications in recent months, unlike Sweden and Denmark, Warsaw rejected German requests to hand over the evidence at its disposal to the investigation. The media was surprised that the new pro-European government of Poland, headed by Donald Tusk and Radek Sikorski, who celebrated the explosion with a “thank you, United States”, had not collaborated with Berlin either.

The arrests of people accused of being part of Russian spy networks show the hypocrisy of those countries willing to use these cases for their own propaganda or political agenda, while they remain silent and try to hide those who uncover their miseries. After all, it is always easier to score a success by accusing men of being spies for the opponent than to investigate in search of spies or culprits of acts of international terrorism in allied countries, including the one whose flag flies in front of the city hall of your capital, or among their own ranks, not enemies.

https://slavyangrad.es/2024/04/30/29652/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Summary of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation (as of April 29, 2024) Main thing:

Units of the Southern Group of Forces have improved the situation along the front line;

— Units of the “West” group occupied more advantageous positions and defeated the manpower of three brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the National Guard;

— The Ukrainian Armed Forces in the area of ​​responsibility of the Southern Group of the Russian Armed Forces lost up to 395 servicemen per day;

— Units of the Central Group of the Russian Armed Forces repelled 10 counterattacks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces;

— The losses of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the zone of responsibility of the Central Group of Forces amounted to up to 370 military personnel per day;

— Russian air defense shot down 22 UAVs per day;

— The Vostok group defeated the Ukrainian Armed Forces and Terrestrial Defense brigades near Staromayorsky and Vodyanoy in the DPR and occupied more advantageous positions;

— The Russian Armed Forces hit the assembly shop of Ukrainian drones, as well as manpower and military equipment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in 110 regions.

In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the following have been destroyed: 593 aircraft, 270 helicopters, 23,609 unmanned aerial vehicles, 509 anti-aircraft missile systems, 15,880 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 1,275 combat vehicles of multiple launch rocket systems, 9,209 field artillery guns and mortars, as well as 21,387 units of special military vehicles.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

*****

COL. BRUCE D. SLAWTER: JOE BIDEN’S WAR (UKRAINE)
APRIL 28, 2024 NATYLIESB 2 COMMENTS
By Col. Bruce D. Slawter, Blue Eagle at Dawn, 4/18/24

Bruce D. Slawter, Colonel, USAF (Ret.), lived and traveled in Russia, Ukraine, and the newly independent states of the former USSR for 25 years on U.S. Government assignments. He served a total of 44 months (two tours) at U.S. Embassy, Moscow; taught Russian military strategy at the Air Command & Staff College; led U.S. teams on treaty inspections in Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus; and established two Pentagon organizations for normalizing relations with Russia, Ukraine, and Eurasia (Air Staff and Joint Staff). As director of the Department of Energy’s warhead security program for Russia and director for international nuclear energy policy, his teams upgraded the security and safety of over 85 military storage sites and civilian reactors in Russia and Ukraine containing large quantities of nuclear weapons, weapons-grade material, and nuclear fuel.

What follows is a letter and analysis of the War in Ukraine Slawter sent to the Honorable Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House of Representatives, and other Members of Congress prior to their vote on more military assistance to Ukraine.

Subject: The Case for Cutting Off Funds for Ukraine

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Funds for Kyiv need to be cut off in order to send a signal to the Biden Administration that it must initiate direct talks with Moscow to end the carnage and save what is left of Ukraine. This dramatic step must go beyond the curtailing of funds for Ukraine’s civil servants – and include the elimination of draw-down authorities, assistance for weapon systems, and loans for Ukraine.

Thanks for reading Blue Eagle at Dawn! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Putin knows that Biden’s team pulls all the strings; he will no longer waste time dealing with President Zelensky only to risk a White House veto of an agreement – as happened less than two months into the conflict. Moscow’s political-military elites believe they have been double-crossed before by Kyiv – during the Minsk I & II negotiations in 2015 and during negotiations that Washington and London managed to scuttle six weeks after the Russian invasion began two years ago. Direct talks must begin ASAP – despite resistance from Zelensky.

The Russians will not be duped into negotiating a mere truce or Korea-like “freeze,” as some have suggested. The strategic advantage has shifted decisively in Moscow’s favor. Washington must agree in advance to Putin’s pre-condition that Ukraine remain neutral and out of NATO (Ukraine’s near-term accession into NATO being the proximate “casus belli” of Russia’s invasion in February 2022). If Washington does not, Putin will soon unleash his reconstituted army, now that he has been re-elected (March 17, 2024), to destroy what remains of Zelensky’s military capability.

President Biden, however, is incapable for political reasons of conceding that his administration’s project of degrading Russia’s military capabilities and removing Putin from power has been a failure. His only strategy at this point is to run out the clock – e.g., delay Ukraine’s capitulation until after November 2024.

Biden and his cheerleaders in the media are undertaking an unprecedented campaign to frighten the American public and “virtue-shame” Republican Members of Congress into rubber-stamping the President’s request for an additional $61 billion for Ukraine. However, any funds appropriated would not alter the outcome of the war; they would only delay it. 30,000 Ukrainian soldiers continue to die or become horribly wounded each month that Washington refuses to initiate peace talks. Ukraine can no longer sustain such losses.

The Biden Administration is outrageously blaming recent Ukrainian defeats – such as the collapse of the highly fortified city of Avdiivka – on House Republicans’ failure to approve further assistance. This is nonsense. Any additional funding for Ukraine will take many months, if not a year or more, to have any effect on the battlefield. The issue is not our delay in printing more money. The central problems are the collective West’s chronic inability to produce weapons that have already been used up in the war; Kyiv’s critical manpower shortage; and the poor strategic and tactical decisions made by President Zelensky, his top generals, and the White House.

Ukraine was running out of ammo and men just two months into its six-month-long “counter-offensive” – after the U.S. and NATO had provided just about every piece of war materiel Kyiv requested. The West’s chronic supply-line problems replacing what the Ukrainians expended and the Russians destroyed were well known long before President Biden made his current request.

Biden, Defense Secretary Austin, and NSC Spokesman Kirby have brazenly warned that U.S. troops may have to engage with Russian forces in combat if Congress does not comply with the President’s funding request. GOP members need to push back on this hyperbolic forecast.

Putin has no intention of invading a NATO county. This is one of several straw-man scenarios fabricated by Democrats and Russophobes to frighten American and European publics into salvaging the Washington-Brussels scheme to unseat Putin. The rhetoric is specifically motivated to force you and the Republican majority in the House to approve billions more for Ukraine.

While Putin will not initiate action against Western military forces stationed outside Ukrainian territory, Zelensky may indeed undertake some reckless act of sabotage or Biden might approve the deployment of NATO assets in such a provocative manner that the result would be a direct clash between U.S. and Russian troops. French President Macron just proposed sending a European Union expeditionary force to Ukraine and ignoring all “red lines” regarding offensive weapons. While most Europeans reacted with alarm, Macron’s proposals are not off the table.

A “hail Mary” stunt might extend the war to beyond the U.S. elections; but the conflict would become exponentially more dangerous for the U.S. and its European allies than it is now, and the loss of life and destruction of Ukraine would intensify.

Unlike in Russia, where 420,000 fighting-age males volunteered to join the army in 2023 alone, Zelensky is experiencing a major challenge replenishing his losses – a task which he is now pursuing almost exclusively through a highly unpopular draft. The Ukrainian parliament has passed a series of ineffective bills that will not fix the problem. The average age of a Ukrainian soldier is now 43. Even 72-year-olds have been observed serving at the front. A Ukrainian sniper featured on the front page of the Wall Street Journal last fall was 58.

Reminiscent of kidnappings by Royal Navy press gangs during the Napoleonic Wars, right-wing groups are stepping up their roaming of the streets of Ukraine’s cities – grabbing males and taking them directly to military processing centers. As a throwback to one of the worst totalitarian practices of the German Democratic Republic during the Cold War, guards are patrolling the fence lines along Ukraine’s border with Romania, apprehending draft-age males attempting to escape to the West through the rugged Carpathian Mountains. Zelensky is now insisting that European countries, such as Poland and Germany, forcibly repatriate Ukrainian males who have sought refuge from the war.

On January 11, the DoD IG released a report stating that the U.S. was unable to track over $1B – an astounding 59 percent – of just the sample of “Enhanced End-Use Monitoring” articles sent to Ukraine. A comprehensive audit must be initiated to track the more fungible financial and humanitarian aid that the U.S. has provided to Kyiv ($30.3B as of September 2023, according to the Council on Foreign Relations). This audit needs to determine, among other things, whether any U.S. assistance has been used to suppress the free speech of Americans or lobby for additional taxpayer funds for the war. Statutory restrictions should restrict this. However, since its independence in 1991, Ukraine has earned a reputation among U.S. Federal program managers as a country where U.S. taxpayer funds tend to disappear.

The House Oversight Committee disclosed several months ago that the SBU (the Ukrainian KGB) provided the FBI with a list of individuals and organizations it claims to have been spreading “disinformation” about the conflict; and the FBI evidently responded by forwarding the list to the media giants for action. One important issue is whether the U.S. taxpayer is funding the salaries of Ukrainian counter-intelligence organizations or their outside contractors, who are collecting information on U.S. citizens. A number of Americans believe that they have been placed on a Kyiv-sponsored proscription list for challenging the prevailing narrative about the origins of the war and Ukraine’s prospects for victory. This includes one U.S. citizen who died on January 11, having been denied medical treatment while under the arrest of the Zelensky government.

Throughout most of the conflict, the Biden Administration has perpetuated the following three myths to keep U.S. taxpayer funds flowing: (a) Putin initiated a full-scale invasion of Ukraine 24 months ago – “with his entire army” – in a “unprovoked act of aggression” (and by inference with little warning); (b) Russia’s intent was to conquer all of Ukraine, and next to invade our East European NATO allies; and (c) Putin would be overthrown and the Russian military would be significantly degraded (with the Russian economy laid prostrate) as a result of Ukrainian heroism, Western-supplied military equipment, and “crippling sanctions.” Serious analysts – those who are not beholden to the Washington foreign policy elites, the defense industry, or the legacy press – have had an uphill climb debunking these central tenets of the prevailing narrative.

Historians will conclude that the “trigger” for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was primarily the Biden Administration’s acceleration of Ukraine’s accession into NATO. The prospect of Ukraine hosting permanent NATO bases was the “Red Line” that the Russians and U.S. foreign policy specialists alike had been warning about for more than a decade. The entire political-military class of Russia (not just Putin) simply could not tolerate the prospect of U.S./NATO aircraft stationed at airfields located a 35-minute flight from the Kremlin – or the deployment to Ukraine of U.S. intermediate-range missiles capable of decapitating Moscow’s political-military leadership and a large part of its strategic nuclear forces. We almost went to war with the Soviet Union in October 1962 for a similar reason.

Putin offered a reasonable starting point for negotiations in December 2021 – but Biden’s Neocons rejected the overture out-of-hand. Putin’s invasion in February 2022 with just 190,000 untrained conscripts and regional militias (about one-fifth of his army) was a pre-emptive military operation, much like the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 – except that the end-game of Moscow’s coercive diplomacy was never to occupy all of Ukraine but to force Kyiv and the West to the negotiating table. Russian military doctrine required a minimum of 1,200,000 ground troops if Putin’s initial intent had been to conquer the entire Ukraine and 800,000 troops afterwards to occupy it.

Moscow’s policy was initially successful and resulted in a draft armistice reached in April 2022 in Istanbul. However, Washington and London, promising military assistance from the West “as long as it takes,” convinced Zelensky to tear it up. Over 500,000 Ukrainians have died or have been severely wounded since then.

Two years later, the dynamics of the war have fundamentally shifted in Moscow’s favor – yet the Biden Administration refuses to initiate negotiations, because doing so would be tantamount to admitting that its project to effect regime change in Moscow on the backs of Ukrainian soldiers and civilians has failed.

Several hundred thousand more Ukrainians and Russians will have to suffer – unless we take dramatic measures to end the war by cutting off further assistance. This is the only means of compelling Biden to pick up the phone, call Putin, and initiate negotiations.

* * * * *

Dear Speaker Johnson:

I am writing to recommend the termination of funding for the Ukraine War. This action is required to send a clear message to the Biden Administration that it must begin direct talks with Moscow, the principal objectives of which would be to end the administration’s devastating proxy war with Russia and save what is left of Ukraine.

This approach may seem counter-intuitive. President Biden, however, is incapable for political reasons of admitting that his administration’s project of degrading Russia’s military capabilities and removing Putin from power on the backs of the Ukrainians has been a failure. His only strategy at this point is to run out the clock – e.g., delay Ukraine’s capitulation until after November 2024. This cynical approach will only make matters worse for the Ukrainians, as Putin will probably not oblige him. Time is of the essence in order to prevent further bloodshed and avoid the catastrophe now unfolding on the Ukrainian Steppe.

My Motives for Writing This

I have spent 25 years living and working in Russia and Ukraine on U.S. government business. I served two tours as a U.S. Air Force attaché at American Embassy Moscow. I have led U.S. teams on treaty inspections inside Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine. I was the military representative of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff advising Defense Secretary Bill Perry during negotiations that led to the Trilateral Nuclear Statement of 1994, in which Ukraine agreed to give up its nuclear weapons in exchange for commercial nuclear fuel rods and political assurances. As a result, Ukraine acceded to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. During the Administration of George W. Bush, I managed the Energy Department’s largest nuclear non-proliferation program in Russia – securing over 80 of Moscow’s most sensitive storage sites containing thousands of nuclear warheads. I also taught Russian military strategy at the Air Command and Staff College.

I mention my background only to emphasize that I am not naïve in coming to my conclusions; nor am I an apologist for Putin. While serving in Russia, I was subject to some of the most extreme indignities imposed by the police state. However, I also experienced numerous positive outcomes working with the militaries of both Ukraine and Russia. I am convinced that Americans are not natural enemies of the Russian people – nor of its political and military classes. The Biden and Zelensky Administrations nevertheless continue to fan Russophobia as a means by which to salvage their unattainable goal of defeating Russian forces, removing Putin, and making Ukraine a full member of NATO.

I am expressing my views to you because I believe that President Biden and his advisors have pursued this terrible conflict for the wrong motives. Ukraine’s chances of surviving as a sovereign state diminishes every day the war continues. I want to do everything in my power to end the carnage on both sides and preserve what remains of Ukraine.

Earlier Missed Opportunities for Negotiations

Presidents Biden and Zelensky have become ensnared in a “Thucydides’s Trap”* of their own making. They dismissed as frivolous a draft proposal from Putin to negotiate a solution on the eve of the war (December 2021). Barely one month into the conflict, Biden and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson then derailed a draft peace plan hammered out by the combatants in Moscow, Gomel (Belarus), and Istanbul. The negotiations had been facilitated by Turkish President Recep Erdoğan and Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett.

According to Bennett, the two central issues of the negotiations were the following: Ukraine’s potential entry into NATO, and whether Ukraine would become an unarmed-neutral nation. In a breakthrough moment, Zelensky agreed to renounce NATO membership for Ukraine in exchange for “security guarantees” by the “big nations.” The Ukrainian president proposed that such guarantees would only need to come into effect seven years after the treaty’s entry-into-force. In exchange, Putin agreed to “limited armed-neutrality” for Ukraine.

The outlines of the draft agreement reached in early April 2022 in Istanbul patterned the “Austrian State Treaty” of 1955 supported by President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Soviet Communist Party Chief Nikita S. Khrushchev during the height of the Cold War. That earlier solution has ensured Austria’s neutrality, sovereignty, and prosperity for over 68 years. Bennet believed that the only details left to be negotiated in the Spring of 2022 were the types and numbers of military equipment that Ukraine could retain for self-defense.

After first consulting with their NATO allies, the Biden Administration and the Johnson Government persuaded Zelensky to tear up the draft agreement. They ensured him that, with massive amounts of Western aid, Ukraine would be able to defeat the Russians and drive them back to the 1991 borders. The clear subtext of their message was that Western aid would be cut off if Zelensky agreed to the deal.

Biden and Johnson cited reports of alleged atrocities by Russian soldiers in the town of Bucha as the chief reason why Putin could not be trusted. This intervention by Washington and London proved disastrous. With the initial Russian invasion force facing unexpected Ukrainian resistance at the time, Zelensky had actually been in a much better bargaining position than he is today to preserve Ukraine’s independence. With hundreds of thousands more Ukrainians dead and wounded – and Russian forces now on the move – the Istanbul agreement offered much better terms in April 2022 than Kyiv will now get from Moscow.

Failing to Admit Defeat, Biden and Zelensky Are Leading the West into the Most Dangerous Phase of the War

The Biden Administration has all but lost its proxy war against Putin. The trends are obvious: Even if additional funds were to be approved by Congress, it would take a number of months, if not years, for U.S. and European arms manufacturers to respond to the demand. The math is simple: The U.S. and NATO cannot make up for the quantitative deficiencies in materiel required to rebuild the combat capability squandered by Kyiv during its failed counteroffensive. Moreover, this war-industry challenge is compounded by Ukraine’s chronic shortage of manpower.

However, nearly two years after its beginning, President Biden might order the deployment of NATO assets in such a provocative manner – or President Zelensky may undertake some reckless act of sabotage – so that Russia’s survival interests become threatened. It all depends upon the risks that Washington, Kyiv, or the Europeans are willing to take to delay the inevitable collapse. In early March 2024, even French President Macron proposed escalating the conflict by sending a European Union expeditionary force to Ukraine and to ignore all “red lines” on offensive strike weapons. While most European leaders were alarmed at these proposals, the concepts are not completely off the table.

Any event – borne out of desperation – could alter the trajectory of the conflict by provoking direct combat between U.S. and Russian forces – a result that Zelensky so desires; and the duration of the war could very well extend to beyond the U.S. elections, as Biden needs it to be. However, the conflict would become far more dangerous for the U.S. and its European allies than it is at present.

Always Looking for “Wonder Weapons”

Despite the trends, Western elites continue to search for an eleventh-hour “game-changer.” While the stocks of war materiel that Ukraine needs to stay in the fight is in a state of decline, arm-chair strategists on both sides of the Atlantic continue to push for supplying Kyiv with weapons possessing greater lethality and longer ranges. Several of the systems being considered can reach deep inside Russia.

Since the beginning of the conflict, President Biden has allowed himself to be seduced by his advisors’ belief that the war could be won if only the Ukrainians possessed the right technology. The routine was always the same: Citing fears of escalating the conflict, the President would first hold back on providing weapons demanded by Zelensky and his supporters – whether the request was for tanks (M1 Abrams), aircraft (MiG-29s and F-16s), or tactical missiles (HIMARS and ATACMS). Then a short time later, he would authorize their transfer or sale. None of these systems have proven to be pivotal in the war.

Thus far, Putin has exhibited considerable restraint responding to Biden’s side-shuffling incrementalism; however, Moscow’s collective political-military leadership – not just Putin – has its limits.

Providing even more technologically advanced capabilities to Ukraine at this late stage in the conflict might translate into a fleeting morale-booster for the Zelensky government; but they would not make a difference on the outcome of the decisive ground war – due to their expense and limited numbers. However, if weapons with greater range and lethality are sent to Kyiv to support one of the problematic operational concepts now being circulated, they could spark a wider conflict and indeed result in a direct confrontation between U.S. and Russian forces. That is an absolute non-starter!

Horizontal Escalation

Retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General Ben Hodges is one of the half-dozen former flag officers who predicted that, with the infusion of NATO armaments and a quick course in U.S. Army Combined Armed Operations – a concept demonstrated only against the third-rate Iraqi army – Ukraine’s forces would be able to slice through Russian defenses and sever Moscow’s land bridge to Crimea in less than two-weeks’ time. Having fallen short on that prediction, Gen. Hodges is now misreading Russia’s movement of its Black Sea Fleet to beyond the range of Ukrainian drones and missiles as a sign of Russian weakness. Hodges sees this as an opening to “evict” Russia from Crimea.

Ignoring the fact that the Russian navy continues to launch devastating Kalibr cruise missile attacks against Ukrainian sea-ports from secure locations, Hodges has seized upon the chimera that Ukraine can still win the war by first “isolating” then “liberating” the Crimean Peninsula. He seems confident that Ukraine can at least “make it difficult for the Russians to stay”; however, the West needs to provide Ukraine with the right weapons to do this.

To advance his new strategy, Hodges has been advocating that the Biden Administration provide Kyiv with the 300-kilometer variant of the ATACMS missile system and “long-range precision” strike fires, such as the 400-kilometer-plus Precision Strike Missile (PrSM). The U.S. Army received its first limited allocation of PrSMs in December 2023.

Hodges is also proposing that Germany provide Ukraine with Taurus Air-Launched Cruise-Missiles (ALCMS) – systems with maximum ranges of more than 500 kilometers. Hodges estimates that 60-70 of these advanced systems – “backed up by airpower” – should be sufficient. So far, Berlin has been slow-rolling its decision to provide the Taurus due to supply challenges and production issues.

In late February 2024, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced that Taurus missiles could not be provided to Ukraine, because they would require German personnel to operate them. Unfortunately, the German chancellor is known for his chronic addiction to political dissembling – then his caving into Zelensky’s and Biden’s demands. This was borne out in early March 2024, when a leak exposed a conversation between senior German military officers regarding plans to use Taurus missiles to attack the Kerch Bridge linking Crimea to the Krasnodar district of the Russian Federation – and also to strike at Russian depots located further to the east. Moreover, the compromised conversation indicated that NATO personnel were already present in Ukraine assisting Kyiv’s forces in operating Western systems. It had been rumored for months that U.S. and NATO personnel have been operating or assisting Ukrainians with their air defense and offensive missile launches – and the leaked conference call lent credence to these reports.

One of the problems about Gen. Hodges’s recipe for victory is that each of these advanced systems is so expensive that their employment against Russian forces would not be particularly cost-effective.

For instance, if used to interdict Russian ships dispersed on patrol, a few ATACMS or Taurus missiles might get through the air defenses and sink a few ships; however, these high-cost systems would become attritted over time. Russian Navy ports located on the eastern coast of the Black Sea would be mostly out of range (450-700 kilometers).

In addition, even if Russian naval power in the Black Sea were to be reduced by these more lethal missile systems, Ukraine would have no amphibious capability with which to make a complex Inchon-like end-run around Russian forces located on the Kherson “land-bridge” and disembark troops and supporting armor on Crimea’s beaches. Kyiv cannot even mount a successful crossing of the Dnipro River (read below). Such an invasion of the Crimean Peninsula would necessitate the direct employment of significant NATO naval assets.

Admiral Sir Benjamin John Key, the First Sea Lord of the Royal Navy, may share some of Gen. Ben Hodges’s enthusiasm for taking on the Russians in the Black Sea – although, as a senior NATO commander still on active service, he is more reticent about pushing the envelope. He did signal his willingness to use Royal Navy combatants to support the transit of ships steaming in and out of the port of Odessa. Speaking at the Royal United Services Institute in September 2023, according to the Mirror, Adm. Key told military and security experts the following:

“. . . whilst we could clearly play a role with our mine countermeasures expertise, that is not one we are being asked to do currently because of the geopolitical position. I don’t criticize that, and I think the reasons for that are good. But clearly, working with our NATO partners in the Eastern Mediterranean, we continue to keep under review the options of where we may – if asked – could go and help and operate, and I don’t rule anything in or out at this stage.”

The Paradox of Providing More Lethal Weapons – Although Few in Number

If provided with long-range ATACMS, PrSMs, and Taurus ALCMs as General Hodges is recommending, Ukraine’s leadership would probably turn around and use these more lethal systems for deep strikes into Russian Federation territory to the north. This is a capability that Washington and the Europeans have hoped to deny Kyiv up until now, because it would directly threaten Moscow’s survival interests. (In a statement in February 2024, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg shockingly remarked that it was now time for Ukraine to be able to strike deep inside Russia with NATO-supplied long-range offensive systems.)

The problem is that long-range strike capabilities provided by NATO would be matched in numbers several times over with similar systems already fielded by Russian land and naval forces located throughout the theater of military operations. The result would be disastrous for the Ukrainians.

The implications of Russia’s vast superiority in numbers and diversity of its drones and missile systems were demonstrated during its recent aerospace campaign, which reached a peak on December 29, 2023, with follow-up strikes on January 2 and 8. While these attacks had targeted a spectrum of Ukrainian military infrastructure, including missile and drone production facilities, their secondary purpose was to further degrade the capabilities of Ukraine’s air defenses.

The Ukrainians claimed that over 50 civilians had been killed and 150 had been injured during the first Russian attack (other sources reported the death count at 21 and those injured at 80). Despite the hype in the Western press, the attacks had not specifically targeted Ukrainian civilians. If they had, given the massive scale of the Russian drone and missile strikes, the civilian loss of life would have been multiple times over the reported numbers.

The next day, December 30, Ukraine retaliated with a much smaller attack on Belgorod, the nearest Russian city, which is situated only 20 miles north of the border. According to Russian authorities, 24 civilians were killed and over 100 injured, with far fewer Ukrainian missile strikes. The Russian Ministry of Defense insisted that there were no legitimate military targets in the city center where many of Ukraine’s weapons landed. The Russian MoD challenged the Ukrainian military to identify its intended military targets; but as expected, no reply was forthcoming.

On January 2 and January 8, Russia retaliated with more waves of drone and missile attacks – again on military infrastructure, principally in Kyiv and Kharkiv, Ukraine’s largest cities. The attacks resulted in additional civilian deaths and injuries.

The unfortunate loss of life and injuries over the New Year period illustrated a central principle about the relative combat potential of each of the two active combatants: Although the West may be able to provide Ukraine with more advanced missile systems in 2024, the number of units would be limited by costs and production timelines. The inventory of such weapons would be depleted quickly – if used solely against military targets. Faced with this dilemma, Kyiv would soon conclude that it needed to husband these longer-range variants of ATACMS, PrSMs, and Taurus ALCMs – and use them principally as political weapons against “counter-value” targets deep inside Russia. In other words, they would become instruments of “mass terror” – not counter-force weapons used to destroy military capability.

Attacking Russian cities that contain relatively few military targets may produce bigger headlines for the Zelensky government; however, any such missile campaign would underscore Kyiv’s overall weakness. Striking soft targets deep behind Russian lines would have little effect on the overall trajectory of the conflict. It would only serve to harden Moscow’s resolve that it needs to end the war on its terms.

General Ingo Gerhartz, the German air force chief, underscored this point in the leaked recording of military officials discussing how Ukraine might destroy the Kerch Bridge between Russia and the Crimean Peninsula. He said, “This [the use of the Taurus missiles against Russian targets] will not change the course of the war, we must be clear about that.”

As President Barrack Obama correctly summed up this “correlation of forces” dynamic in an interview back in 2014: “. . . Russia will always be able to maintain escalatory dominance.”

Other Washington-Hatched Schemes for Prolonging the Conflict

Congress should keep a sharp eye out for other conflict-widening initiatives that might be cooked up by Washington elites. These include (a) the use of sanctuary airfields in Poland from which to launch F-16 sorties into Ukraine or Russia; (b) the employment of NATO personnel for maintaining and arming aircraft (whether stationed in Poland or Ukraine); and (c) the piloting of Ukrainian F-16s by experienced U.S./NATO volunteers.*** Any one of these notions would be discovered by Moscow and could send Russia’s political-military class over the edge.

The Biden Administration has floated two other initiatives that are alarmingly provocative:

First, in his press briefing on January 4, NSC Spokesman John Kirby hyped-up the implications of the Russians’ reported use of DPRK-supplied missiles in recent attacks. In doing so, he was implying that the Russians were running short of their own longer-range missile – which is blatantly false. More importantly, he tip-toed around an argument that Moscow’s use of systems provided by the sinister Pyongyang regime necessitated a Western response to provide analogous weapons to Kyiv.

Was Kirby laying the groundwork for breaking the genie out of the bottle by providing Ukraine with a significantly more lethal class of weapons, such as the U.S. Navy’s Tomahawk Land-Attack Missile (TLAM)? Is the Administration really prepared to provide the Ukrainians at this late stage in the conflict with systems capable of attacking Red Square?

Second, having failed to bring Russia to its knees on its various sanctions regimes instituted since February 2022, the Biden Administration is now seeking European support to seize external Russian assets that had been “frozen” in foreign institutions since the beginning of the war and use them to fund the conflict. According to experts in international law, only belligerent-parties to a conflict may appropriate frozen assets in such a manner. Will this vindictive financial initiative – one contrary to the rules-based order President Biden claims to champion – be viewed by Putin as a flagrant act of war?

The central question remains: How much longer is the White House going to play chicken with a nuclear power over what has clearly become a lost cause?

Feeling Increasingly Cornered, What Risks Would Zelensky Take?

As frantic as the White House seems to be about the Ukraine project collapsing before the November elections, President Zelensky is arguably more worried. Given his army’s losses on the battlefronts, the devastating Russian drone and missile attacks, and mounting criticism by political rivals, he might be induced into committing some tragic miscalculation – one that escalates the conflict far beyond anything the Biden Administration may be cooking up.

Throughout most of 2023, Zelensky was involved in an acrimonious dispute with General Valery Zaluzhny, the Commander in Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Gen. Zaluzhny was finally fired in early February 2024. Before then, in a widely circulated interview in The Economist (Nov. 1, 2023), Zaluzhny complained openly about his boss’s mis-management of the war – in particular, Zelensky’s ignoring of the downsides of the counter-offensive of 2023, his insistence that Ukrainian troops hold insignificant towns, and his increasing “bunker mentality.”

Several weeks later, under mysterious circumstances, Major Gennady Chastiakov, Gen. Zaluzhny’s military aide, was killed when a birthday gift – a glass decanter shaped like a hand-grenade – exploded during a birthday party. The story was that the alleged murder of the aide may have been intended as a warning to Gen. Zaluzhny. Rumors took on new currency after the wife of Gen. Kirilo Budanov, Chief of Military Intelligence, was hospitalized for having ingested a toxic metallic substance placed in her cocktail. The implications were that Budanov, a staunch loyalist of Zelensky, had first sent the glass grenade to Zaluzhny’s aide; and then one of Zaluzhny’s operatives retaliated against Budanov. There is no way to confirm whether the two incidents were related, or the real motives involved. However, the circulation of this tragicomedy in Kyiv served to underscore ongoing reports that the relationship between President Zelensky and Gen. Zaluzhny had reached a dangerous boiling point.

Tensions between the two national leaders reached their zenith when Zelensky, after having prevaricated about firing his unfaithful military chief for several months, signaled in early February that he was finally prepared to demand Zaluzhny’s resignation. As expected, Zaluzhny refused to go. If the infighting had sparked a coup in Kyiv on the eve of the Senate’s vote on President Biden’s funding package for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan (e.g., the bill absent the package for the U.S. southern border), that would have been the end of further U.S. financial support for the war in Ukraine. To head off that foreign policy disaster, Victoria Nuland, the U.S. point-person for the conflict, immediately flew to Kyiv to mediate a less-explosive exit for Ukraine’s top military officer. Zaluzhny quietly stepped down.

Under Secretary of State Nuland’s intervention in Kyiv might have been the final service she would ever render to the Biden Presidency. On March 5, 2024, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken suddenly announced her retirement from the State Department, effective the end of the month. While the reasons for her unanticipated departure were unclear, speculation is that Nuland – who, since the Bush-43 Administration, was the chief U.S. advocate for confronting Putin and Russia over Ukraine – was no longer in synch with the White House on the course of the very war for which she was the chief architect. Was this a signal that the Biden Administration was cooling towards its own rhetoric that Ukraine could still win the conflict? Is it quietly pivoting toward the Asia-Pacific? Or is it just that, when in Kyiv, Nuland freelanced too far beyond her brief and promised the Ukrainians some advanced strike weapon to avoid a coup – a capability that the White House was not yet prepared to extend?

Weeks after stepping down, Gen. Zaluzhny remains a national hero and popular among his troops – while Zelensky’s poll numbers continue to fall. Even before his dismissal, the General had emerged as one of the leading figures to step in as President, should Zelensky falter. Then, after the Russian route of Ukraine’s forces from Avdiivka, Zaluzhny’s former subordinates began demanding his re-instatement. Avoiding this, Zelensky just announced that he was sending Zaluzhny to London to serve as ambassador.

Other long-time enemies of Zelensky who are boldly signaling their readiness to take over the reins of power include Petro Poroshenko, the former President of Ukraine (2014-2019); Yulia Timoshenko, former Ukrainian Prime Minister (2007-2010), who announced that it was time for “Plan-B” (meaning peace negotiations); and sports legend Vitaly Klitschko, the popular Mayor of Kyiv (2014-present).

The most controversial figure to throw his hat into the ring of Ukrainian presidential politics is Oleksy Arestovich. Having once served in Zelensky’s inner circle, Arestovich is now considered to be the President’s leading political “turn-coat.” Fearing arrest or assassination by Budanov, Arestovich relocated last year to Crimea.

Before assuming his position as National Security Communications Advisor to President Zelensky (2020-2023), Arestovich predicted in a 2019 interview that Russia would invade Ukraine to prevent it from joining NATO.

According to Arestovich, Russia would be pushed into a major operation against Ukraine if Kyiv began working on its requested NATO Membership Application Plan. “With a probability of 99.9 percent,” the one-time Zelensky confidant predicted, “our price for joining NATO is a full-scale war with Russia.” His prophecy proved to be correct.

Arestovich was forced to resign his position as one of Zelensky’s top national security advisors in January 2023 after revealing that a Russian missile, which had demolished an entire apartment building in Dnipro, had been knocked off course by a Ukrainian air defense missile. Since then, Arestovich has joined the chorus of Zelensky detractors blaming the President for the failed counter-offensive – and demanding a change of the nation’s leadership.

Before Zelensky canceled the upcoming March 2024 presidential election, Arestovich declared his candidacy for the nation’s highest office. Adding insult to injury, Arestovich recently declared that the West had lost interest in the conflict, and that it was time for Ukraine to re-align its interests with those of Russia.

Resorting to Sabotage

Faced with competing requirements in the Middle East, Ukraine’s internal manpower shortages, waning financial support from both the U.S. and Europe, and mounting political discontent, Zelensky might turn to sabotage as a means for changing headlines and bringing U.S. troops into direct confrontation with Russian forces. Zelensky would rely on the corporate press in the U.S. and Europe to come to his rescue by blaming Moscow for any catastrophic consequences.

On September 26, 2022, three-out-of-four of the Nord Stream pipelines were severed, causing a loss of revenue for Moscow and a huge environmental problem in the Baltic Sea. The damage was immediately blamed on the Russians, although considering Moscow’s loss of income, that initial conclusion had made little sense.

Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Seymour Hersh claimed that the operation had been planned by the White House and carried out secretly by instructors from the Naval Diving and Salvage Training Center in Panama City, Florida. Later, German investigators pointed to the Ukrainians as saboteurs; and several months ago, Kyiv arrested a Colonel Roman Chervinsky of the Special Operations Command on corruption charges, and conveniently fingered him as the culprit. The CIA revealed that it had foreknowledge of the Ukrainian operation but had played no role in it. The U.S. vetoed a U.N. Security Council Resolution to conduct an international probe that might otherwise have gotten to truth about the Nord Stream sabotage operation. Sweden and Denmark conducted their own investigations; but before their findings had been made known, their probes were mysteriously “deep-sixed.”

According to the Wall Street Journal (Jan. 9, 2024), a separate ongoing investigation by the Germans could deepen cracks within NATO, if it were to be revealed that Warsaw had played a role, as Berlin suspects, in helping the Ukrainians destroy a major energy project in which Germany had a major stake. Given the crisis in NATO over the current course of the West’s proxy war in Ukraine, one should not expect a full report from German investigators in the near future.

At the very least, the severing of the Nord Stream pipelines advanced the Biden Administration’s goals of weaning the Europeans off fossil fuels; moreover, it complemented the Washington and European sanctions strategy targeting Russia.

Kyiv and the Western press also accused the Russians of causing another major environmental catastrophe – this time, along the Dnipro River in the Kherson Oblast, when the Kakhovka Dam collapsed on June 6, 2023. Ignoring reports that the Ukrainians had been conducting target practice on the southeastern (Russian-held) portion of the dam – or that an explosion may have been caused by a spark from the dam’s chronically unsafe electrical system – John Kirby side-stepped the issue by simply replying that the U.S. could not determine the cause of the breach, but it was “still under investigation.”

As the case with the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines, there was no advantage to the Russians resulting from the dam’s destruction. The opposite was true. The flooding of the river downstream demolished Russian defenses constructed on the east side of the Dnipro. The Ukrainians tried to take advantage of this by pursuing a limited amphibious operation near the village of Krinky (discussed below). Moreover, as the water level of the reservoir north of the dam lowered, Russian engineers overseeing the large Zaporizhzhiya Nuclear Power Plant in Moscow-occupied territory had to take immediate measures to ensure that the reactors had sufficient water in their cooling ponds.

Kyiv did take responsibility for one recent act of sabotage. At the end of December 2023, Ukrainian special operators attempted to blow up part of the 10-mile-long Severomuysky tunnel in Siberia. Located near Lake Baikal, the tunnel was the longest underground passage on the Baikal-Amur-Mainline (used for shipping between the Russian Far East and Europe). While the attempt failed, it nevertheless demonstrated Ukraine’s capabilities to conduct covert sabotage operations deep inside Russian territory.

A Ukrainian Gotterdammerung?

On Dec 29, 2023, President Zelensky’s spokesman Milhailo Podolyak made a cryptic prediction. He stated, “Victory will be achieved. . . Ukraine would give an ultimatum to Russia, and Russia would capitulate.”

What exactly did he mean? Was he implying that some ambitious sabotage operation was in the planning stages?

Having managed U.S. technical teams working with the Russian military to upgrade the security of over eighty of its most sensitive sites (when it was U.S. policy to do so), I can think of few scenarios – although it is best not to be too specific.

First, the Zaporizhzhiya Nuclear Power Plant (mentioned above) offers a relatively soft target for a Ukrainian sabotage operation. While five of the six VVER-1000 Pressurized Light-Water Reactors are in a state of “cold-shutdown,” one is kept in “hot-shutdown” to generate enough electrical power for the entire facility. A Ukrainian special operations team might be able to overwhelm the Russian security detachment and take over control the plant for a period of time.

The operation would draw the world’s attention; but it would be difficult to imagine what long-term effect it might have on the conflict. A hit-and-run raid, which generated a radioactive event, might well be blamed on supposed Russian incompetence. However, a release of radioactivity would affect Ukraine to a greater extent than Russia. Thus, such a risky venture seems problematic.

NOTE: On 7 April 2024, the Zelensky government launched a significant drone attack on the Zaporizhzhiya nuclear facility. As expected, the Western press immediately blamed it on the Russians. In an artfully dissembling statement, State Department spokesman Matt Miller said:

“Our belief is that Russia is playing a very dangerous game with its military seizure of Ukraine’s nuclear power plant, which is the largest in Europe. It’s dangerous that they’ve done that, and we continue to call on Russia to withdraw its military and civilian personnel from the plant, to return full control of the plant to the competent Ukrainian authorities, and refrain from taking any actions that could result in a nuclear incident at the plant.”

Miller made no mention that Kyiv – not Moscow – was clearly behind the attack.

Three other “doomsday scenarios” come to mind: (a) the surreptitious theft of a single Russian nuclear warhead, (b) the temporary seizure of a Russian nuclear weapons storage site, and (c) the detonation of a nuclear warhead at its storage site, near an ICBM silo, or on a bomber base. While none of these scenarios would envision a thermonuclear detonation, their potential for creating a major radiological event resulting from a conventional explosion of a nuclear warhead would be significant. Back in the 1990s and 2000s, the Departments of Energy and Defense worked tirelessly with Russian counterparts to mitigate these threats. Our cooperative programs, however, were terminated during the Obama years. No American group of technical experts has visited any of these facilities in over a decade. We really do not know the state of their security today.

NOTE: On the eve of the Russian presidential elections in mid-March 2024, Ukrainian forces were repelled by troops of the Russian border guard service while attempting to cross over into the Kursk and Belgorod regions. Unconfirmed reports were that one of the objectives of the Ukrainian incursion was to capture a tactical nuclear storage facility that had been temporarily set up in southern Russia.

Back to the Battle Fronts – Where the Fate of Ukraine Is Being Decided

Russia’s armed forces have undergone a dramatic transformation since they first invaded Ukraine in February 2022 with a minimum force of mainly unprepared conscripts. They are now fully armed, manned, trained, and well-led. After initial losses, the Russian military and its defense industry complex quickly adapted to the conditions and the new technologies required for success on large-scale 21st Century battlefields. Western sanctions have not slowed down Russian arms producers or their technological innovations by one beat. They have had the opposite effect.

Despite the “happy talk” by the Biden Administration and the corporate press about the Ukrainians advancing “slowly but methodically” during their six-month-long “Spring Counter-Offensive,” Kyiv in fact achieved little during the operation beyond a tragic loss of tens of thousands of its soldiers. Hundreds of NATO-supplied armored vehicles were left smoldering on the battlefields of the eastern Ukrainian Steppe. So many Western-made infantry fighting vehicles remain disabled on two of the battlefields that Russian soldiers sarcastically refer to these burnt-out patches of farmland as “Bradley Square” and the “Bradley Parking Lot.”

Often, it was the case of small squads of Ukrainian infantry temporarily moving into abandoned rural hamlets located in the no-man’s land in front of Russia’s robust Surovikin Defensive Line – then having to withdraw after being decimated by Russian artillery or hunted down by drones. During this Washington-prompted fiasco that ended in December 2023, Ukrainians lost between 60,000 and 80,000 troops killed-in-action, unrecoverable wounded, and those who surrendered.** Russian losses by comparison, fighting on the defensive, were relatively low and easily replenished.

By the time that Kyiv had called off its NATO-sponsored campaign, the Ukrainians had captured a mere 336 square kilometers along a 500-mile front, while the Russians, improving their defensive positions, had captured 504 square kilometers. In essence, Kyiv managed a net loss of the equivalent of 65 square miles. That equates to 1,200 Ukrainian soldiers taken out of the war for each square mile given up to the Russians, who were on the defensive.

(Much more at link.)

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2024/04/cai ... ields-lie/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10873
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 May 01, 2024 11:51 am

Why is diplomacy impossible?
POSTED BY @NSANZO ⋅ 05/01/2024

Image

“After more than two years of fighting, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has bogged down in a bloody dead end,” Foreign Policy writes about the state of the war, not just that of Russian troops. “Both countries continue to spend considerable resources to gain territory, but their progress is sporadic and limited. Sometimes they reverse quickly. Neither side has the resources necessary to achieve a decisive victory on the battlefield. “Both suffer numerous casualties every day,” add the two university professors of Political Science who signed the article. Although published in April, this scenario does not describe the current scenario but rather the one that Zaluzhny lamented in his article last November in The Economist and that ended up costing him his job. In reality, that text also reflected a past reality, since by that time, Russia had defeated the Ukrainian offensive on the Zaporozhie front and regained the initiative in the land war (although not necessarily in other aspects, such as the confrontation at the Black Sea). The moment the then commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces uttered the forbidden words, stalemate , Russian progress was already beginning to be seen in a particularly important sector of this war, that of Donetsk. And that is where the advances of the troops of the Russian Federation have stopped being sporadic and so limited.

The article starts from a premise that, true a few months ago, is not so true now, so it is not surprising that it reaches a conclusion that is also wrong. According to the authors, Russia will continue trying to conquer the maximum territory of Ukraine, while kyiv tries to defend itself without either country being expected to have sufficient strength to definitively impose itself on the other. Of these conclusions, only the last seems to fit the current situation, a moment in which a collapse would be necessary for the Russian tricolor to be raised in cities like kyiv or Odessa or the Ukrainian blue and yellow in Donetsk or Yalta. Ukraine has made it clear that it is seeking financing and assistance to carry out a new offensive, while Russia continues with a war of attrition in which it is increasingly evident that its objectives are much more limited than what the West and Ukraine warn about.

Despite starting from a wrong premise and reaching conclusions that do not fit the acts and intentions of the parties in conflict, the Foreign Policy article mentions an aspect of interest. Referring to the impasse in which there is actually no longer a war, the authors add that “scholars typically describe these situations as “mutually damaging stalemates,” which often foster the conditions that lead the parties to negotiate. If belligerent actors lack the means to alter the trajectory of fighting, they often reconsider how much they can achieve by force. And if they face an increasingly costly and indefinite stalemate, they begin to consider previously unpleasant concessions. The result may be a space for negotiation that did not exist before.”

With no possibility so far of achieving a negotiated resolution between kyiv and Moscow, the options for ending the war depend on the military defeat of one of the parties or the inability of both to continue fighting, either because they are exhausted and have exhausted their resources or due to the mutual perception that the battle is not going to change the situation. That moment may come in the future, but there are no signs of it at the moment. “This war has not reached a stage where a negotiated termination is possible, even in principle. To achieve peace in a conflict, both parties have to be willing to accept the minimum demands of the other. And despite the lack of progress, neither Russia nor Ukraine can tolerate the other's demands. kyiv, for example, cannot accept the Russian demand for new leadership. Moscow cannot agree to the Ukrainian demand for reparations. “None of the parties will give up territory,” the two academics offer as a reason.

The statements from both sides deny the reasons cited for the rejection of diplomatic channels. It must also be remembered that, as Ukrainian negotiator David Arajamia has confirmed, it was Ukraine and not Russia that definitively broke off the Istanbul negotiations despite the Russian attempt, especially its president, to reach an agreement. Subsequently, exploiting the events of the war and the certainty that he already had the support of his partners to continue fighting, Volodymyr Zelensky prohibited by decree all negotiations with Vladimir Putin, who, according to the Ukrainian delegation itself, was the person most interested in achieving a agreement. Since then, Ukraine has insisted on a return to the 1991 borders as a prerequisite for a negotiation, which would only consist of imposing Ukrainian demands for reparations and war tribunals so that only the Russian military and politicians would be held accountable for a war that It did not start in 2022 but in April 2014.

Just a few hours after addressing Donald Trump to demand the continuation of funding for the war in terms that the former president could understand, appealing to Ronald Reagan's fight against “the Soviet Union and Russia,” which he defined as “the empire of the bad”, Andriy Ermak once again insisted on the refusal of any compromise, which is also the rejection of any negotiated route, an option that causes less and less rejection even among the Ukrainian population. “People can say they are tired, but if you ask them if they want to reach a compromise with Russia, they are adamant and say no,” said Ermak, without paying attention to the polling data, in an interview with Politico . Among that population is not, of course, those from Crimea or Donbass, whose opinion does not count for kyiv, but is used to justify the need to return to the internationally recognized borders of Ukraine. “The fact that people remain in Ukraine with their families is confirmation that, in general, the mood of the people remains strong,” Ermak added with an argument that can also be used against Ukraine: the fact that the The population of Crimea and Donbass has remained there for a decade despite the blockade, sanctions or war shows rejection of kyiv.

The reason for the Ukrainian rejection of the negotiation is not, as Foreign Policy claims , it is the political decision to fight to the end regardless of the cost it has for the country and its population and not the refusal to grant territories and a regime change that Russia does not demands. The need to allege Russian objectives that go far beyond reality to justify the increase in military spending has caused European and North American capitals and kyiv to announce major Russian offensives and the intention to go “beyond Ukraine” in case to win the war. This not only contrasts with the Russian proposal in Istanbul, the only real attempt to reach the signing of a peace treaty between the two countries, but also with its subsequent actions. One of them has occurred recently and it is not simply the periodic Russian statements about the willingness to negotiate, which have been repeated even at moments of greatest Russian vulnerability. For the first time in months, the defense ministers of the Russian Federation and France, currently the country with the most belligerent stance in Europe, held a telephone conversation that has been the source of opposing interpretations. While France has highlighted the warning to Russia not to instrumentalize the terrorist attack that cost the lives of almost 150 people, Moscow stated in its statement that the parties had discussed the possibility of negotiating on Ukraine, a dialogue in which "the starting point “It could be based on the Istanbul peace initiative.”

Although France denied that the conversation dealt with such a topic, the Russian mention of the Istanbul points as a basis for a possible negotiation, for which Russia appears willing, is significant. As has been known since the negotiations broke down, both with the publication of the points proposed by Ukraine and by the statements of people who participated or led the Ukrainian negotiating delegation, the basis of that principle of agreement that Moscow believed it had reached was, in addition to neutrality and security guarantees, a minimal change to Ukraine's borders. The Russian demand, which did not include a change of regime in kyiv, did not go beyond maintaining Crimea, whose population had declared itself in favor of Moscow in 2014, and Donbass, at war against kyiv since that same year. And even there, Moscow did not demand all the territory from Ukraine, but rather the borders would be subject to a negotiation between Volodymyr Zelensky and Vladimir Putin.

Since then, Russian advances in Donbass are not excessive in territorial terms, but there are important sectors in which Moscow has managed to distance the front from cities like Donetsk and even Avdeevka. Russia continues to try to reach the administrative borders of the former Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts in a war of attrition in which, for the moment, there are no signs of an offensive in other sectors. The fact that Moscow included the reference to Istanbul in its statement suggests that reaching a deal may be more important than any territorial aspirations Russia had in February 2022. However, that is not enough for kyiv and its foreign partners, willing to fight to the last Ukrainian for an increasingly improbable military victory. That is the real obstacle to the possibility of a negotiation taking place.

https://slavyangrad.es/2024/05/01/por-q ... iplomacia/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Summary of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation (as of April 30, 2024)

- Units of the West group of forces occupied more advantageous positions and defeated the manpower and equipment of the 30th, 63rd mechanized, 57th 1st motorized infantry brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the 12th special purpose brigade "Azov" in the areas of the settlements of Sinkovka, Kharkov region, Grigorovka, Donetsk People's Republic and Chervonaya Dibrova, Lugansk People's Republic.

Over the past 24 hours, five counterattacks by formations of the 77th airmobile, 44th mechanized brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the 1st brigade of the National Guard were repelled in the areas of the settlements of Stelmakhovka, Raigorodka of the Lugansk People's Republic and Krakhmalnoye of the Kharkov region.

The enemy lost up to 90 troops, three vehicles and a US-made 155-mm M777 howitzer.

— Units of the “Southern” group of forces improved the situation along the front line, and also inflicted fire damage on manpower and equipment of the 30th, 93rd mechanized, 80th, 92nd air assault, 46th airmobile brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and 241 2nd brigade of the defense in the areas of the settlements of Razdolovka, Zaliznyanskoe, Krasnogorovka and Kleshcheevka of the Donetsk People's Republic.

Enemy losses amounted to up to 440 military personnel, two tanks, an armored combat vehicle, two cars, a US-made 155-mm M198 howitzer, a 122-mm D-30 howitzer and an electronic reconnaissance station.

— Units of the “Center” group of troops improved the tactical situation and defeated the formations of the 23rd, 115th mechanized and 92nd assault brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the areas of the settlements of Novobakhmutovka and Ocheretino of the Donetsk People’s Republic.

Nine counterattacks of assault groups of the 24th, 100th mechanized, 142nd infantry, 98th assault, 68th Jaeger brigades and the 78th separate air assault regiment of the Ukrainian Armed Forces were repelled in the areas of the settlements of Novgorodskoye, Semenovka, Netailovo, Novokalinovo , Shumy, Leninskoe and Berdychi of the Donetsk People's Republic.

The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 145 military personnel, three US-made Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, two vehicles, a US-made 155-mm M109 Paladin self-propelled artillery mount and a US-made 105-mm M101 light howitzer.

— Units of the Vostok grouping of forces occupied more advantageous positions, and also defeated the manpower and equipment of the 72nd mechanized brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the 123rd terrestrial defense brigade in the areas of the settlements of Staromayorskoye and Vodyanoye of the Donetsk People’s Republic.

The losses of the Ukrainian Armed Forces amounted to up to 100 military personnel, two pickup trucks and two 155-mm M777 howitzers made in the USA.

— Units of the Dnepr group of troops inflicted fire damage on concentrations of manpowerThe 65th mechanized brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the 36th Marine Brigade in the areas of the settlements of Rabotino, Zaporozhye region and Novotyaginka, Kherson region.

The enemy lost over 20 military personnel.

— Operational-tactical aviation, missile forces and artillery from groupings of troops of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation hit a hangar for the assembly of light-engine attack unmanned aircraft, two warehouses for military-technical equipment, as well as manpower and military equipment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in 108 regions. — Air defense systems shot down ten Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles, six ATACMS operational-tactical missiles made in the USA and two Hammer guided bombs made in France

within 24 hours .

📊In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the following have been destroyed: 593 aircraft, 270 helicopters, 23,619 unmanned aerial vehicles, 509 anti-aircraft missile systems, 15,888 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 1,275 combat vehicles of multiple launch rocket systems, 9,216 field artillery guns and mortars, as well as 21,396 units of special military vehicles

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

UK Unveils “Lethal” Challenger 3, Failing to Learn Lessons from Ukraine
Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on APRIL 29, 2024
Brian Berletic

Image

UK Unveils “Lethal” Challenger 3, Failing to Learn Lessons from Ukraine The United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defense announced that the “UK’s most lethal tank” has rolled off the production line. The same statement would claim that British Army soldiers are “one step closer to getting their hands on one of Europe’s most lethal tanks – the Challenger 3.”

However, with few exceptions, the details of the Challenger 3 main battle tank produced under a nearly $990 million contract with Rheinmetall BAE Systems provides only the latest example of Western military industrial production emphasizing profit over purpose and demonstrating that the British government and armed forces have failed to learn key lessons from the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.

The Challenger 3 is not Really “New”

While the initial announcement and price tag suggests the Challenger 3 is a newly produced tank, it is, in fact, the refurbishment and modernization of existing Challenger 2 tanks.

The BBC, in an April 2024 article titled, “UK’s most lethal tank enters testing,” would claim the British army’s existing 221 Challenger 2 tanks will be “slimmed down” to 127 refurbished/modernized Challenger 3s. The Ministry of Defense’s statement claims up to 148 Challenger 3’s will be handed over in total.

Despite being refurbished and modernized from existing tanks, the $990 million program equates to about $6-8 million per tank, which is several times more expensive than refurbished/modernized Russian T-72B3, T-90M, or T-80BVM tanks, and almost as expensive as Russia’s newest tank, the T-14 Armata which is believed to cost between $5-9 million according to a recent Business Insider article.

Refurbished and modernized main battle tanks can still perform effectively on the battlefield. A tank’s most important characteristics are its firepower, protection and mobility, all of which are often upgraded during modernization programs.

Russia has proven refurbishment and modernization programs can field large quantities of effective armor on the battlefield, but the key to the success of such programs is that the process is done quickly and cheaply. Novaya Gazeta, a Western-funded media platform, in a November 2022 article titled, “The barren barrels,” would claim that Russia’s tank industry was capable of producing up to 250 new vehicles and modernizing up to 600 more a year. This is a vastly larger quantity than the total planned number of all Challenger 3 tanks until the year 2040.

Doubling Down on an Obsolete Design Philosophy

There is no evidence that Britain’s Challenger 3 tanks can justify their high price and low quantity. No matter how effective the tanks are, their small numbers will put them at a disadvantage in any large-scale operation with a peer or near-peer adversary.

The Challenger 2 main battle tank, upon which the Challenger 3 is based, was already put to the test and performed poorly in Ukraine. Because of the overall small number of Challenger 2s in the UK’s inventory, only 14 could be transferred to Ukrainian forces for use in combat. In September 2023 amid Ukraine’s failing offensive, British media reported the first Challenger 2 destroyed by Russian forces, likely by a mine.

While there was speculation that Ukraine was holding its Challenger 2 tanks in reserve for a “breakthrough” amid its 2023 offensive, no such operation took place.

Instead, reports claimed the Challenger 2 was being used as an expensive, heavy, and overly complex assault gun to attack frontline fortifications. Similar reports criticized the Challenger 2 as being “too heavy,” lacking protection, and needing “too much support.” Its heavy weight combined with a relatively underpowered engine reportedly rendered the tank immobile in Ukraine’s muddy terrain. The weight also poses problems in traversing bridges across the battlefield unable to support the tank.

Other Western main battle tanks using similar design philosophies suffered the same setbacks.

And like other Western main battle tanks, many systems on the Challenger 2 were unnecessarily complex. The tank uses hydropneumatic suspension instead of torsion bars like most modern tanks. The complex system of suspension supposedly improves the accuracy of the main gun. The added complexity of the suspension meant more complex maintenance was required along with a larger number of replacement parts for repairs, complicating Ukraine’s already dire logistical challenges.

Because the Challenger 2 used a unique rifled main gun as opposed to 120mm smooth bore guns used by other NATO tank designs, a separate supply of ammunition was required, making it even more difficult to sustain the tank on the battlefield.

The Challenger 3 is actually heavier than the Challenger 2 but is expected to use an engine of similar size and power, meaning that traversing difficult terrain will be even more problematic, as will finding bridges capable of supporting the extra weight. The Challenger 3 will be using an upgraded version of the complex hydropneumatic suspension of the Challenger 2.

One design decision that is an overall improvement is the use of a 120mm smooth bore gun allowing the Challenger 3 to use NATO standard ammunition, easing the logistical burden of upgraded tanks on a joint-operation exercise or battlefield.

Overall, the Challenger 3 represents the doubling down on an obsolete design philosophy, where smaller numbers of complex tanks were meant to gain an advantage over lower quality but more numerous enemy counterparts. Today, modern Russian main battle tanks are just as capable of firing over a range of several kilometers and hitting their target on the first shot. Because Russian main battle tanks also fire anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs) from their main guns, they can actually engage targets outside the range of Western tanks.

But as Ukraine has proven, tank-on-tank combat is relatively rare. Both sides use highly portable ATGMs mounted on a wide range of mobile platforms, and kamikaze drones in the anti-tank role. Tanks are instead used in assaults on enemy defenses and as long-range direct fire weapons. Neither of these roles require the expensive and complex features included in either the Challenger 2 or 3’s designs.

Instead, because of the greater likelihood that main battle tanks will be hit and either severely damaged or destroyed, the nation capable of producing effective tanks the fastest and cheapest gains an advantage in what is essentially a strategy of attrition.

The Challenger 3 represents a complete failure to learn any of these lessons.

The Challenger 3 along with its other Western counterparts including the American M1 Abrams and the German Leopard 2, represent an approach developed during decades of “small wars” using combined arms against poorly organized and inadequately armed militants. Even in that role, the West’s large, heavy, complex design philosophy began to fall prey to cheap and effective Russian ATGMs proliferating across the world’s battlefields.

The motivation to continue building upgraded versions of these large, complex, expensive main battle tanks stems mainly from a desire for financial profit rather than a focus on battlefield effectiveness. Developing an entirely new main battle tank requires large sums of money for research and development as well as new tooling to eventually manufacture them that could be pocketed by doing far less extensive (but also far less effective) upgrades to existing tanks no matter how inappropriate they are on the modern battlefield.

The BBC in its article would quote Defense Secretary Grant Shapps regarding the rollout of the first Challenger 3s, saying:

In a more dangerous world, the need for vehicles such as the Challenger 3 is imperative, as the threats facing the UK evolve.

However, the many wars and proxy wars the UK and its American and European allies have fought over the past two decades have all been conflicts of choice – interventions often sold to the public based on deliberate lies regarding “threats” that the collective West supposedly faced.

In reality, it is this profit-over-purpose mindset diverting public resources from infrastructure, education, and healthcare to overpriced, useless weapons programs like the “imperative” Challenger 3 that pose the greatest threat to the welfare and happiness of the Western public.

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2024/04/ ... m-ukraine/

******

Work of Ukrainian air defense in Odessa
April 30, 7:58

Image

As a result of yesterday's air defense work in Odessa, 5 people + 1 dog were killed. 23 people were injured, including Kivalov.
The “Kivalov Palace” was also partially burned out.
The main cause of casualties was the damaging elements of the Ukrainian air defense. To hide this fact, IPSO tried to pass off the striking elements of the Buk air defense missile systems as the striking elements of the Iskander OTRK. As has been said more than once, the placement and operation of air defense systems within the city poses a direct threat to the local population.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9125931.html

"Abrams" on Poklonnaya Hill
May 1, 9:44

Image

"Here comes Johnny..."

Image

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9128278.html

Google Translator

******

The Kiev regime must not get away with it

Stephen Karganovic

April 30, 2024

It is impermissible for civilians to be used as props for political propaganda narratives.

The neo-Nazi regime in Kiev engages in an unperceived, generously glossed over but extremely grave violation of humanitarian principles. It is one of many breaches in that regard, of course. But it must be held to account for this and ultimately for every single one.

In the zone the regime still controls in Ukraine, as Russian troops advance the neo-Nazi junta compels the local population to abandon its habitations and to withdraw alongside the retreating Ukrainian armed forces. Since generally that occurs in predominantly ethnically Russian areas, the reluctance of the population to withdraw with what it regards as occupation troops is understandable. For that reason, this hideous practice on the part of the Ukrainian authorities also unmistakably exhibits the legal elements of ethnic cleansing.

The political objective behind these compulsory population movements is to project the propaganda illusion that the civilian population in Ukraine are averse to the arrival of Russian forces and would prefer to live under Kiev regime rule.

Reports of forced deportation of local residents are plentiful (also see here, here, and here). A quick search of the internet will yield much additional evidence.

Western governments and “human rights monitors” have remained utterly silent about this egregious conduct, which in the past they would have denounced vociferously whenever the perpetrators could be presented as actors hostile to the collective West’s political interests. In the present case, however, the perpetrators happen to be their Ukrainian proxies, recently rewarded with another tranche of multibillion dollar largesse. Hence the studious silence of the Western governments and media. The enablers are loath to publicise their vassals’ transgressions.

What does international humanitarian law have to say about the forced displacement of civilians during armed conflict?

Individual or mass deportations are prohibited, regardless of their motive, by the Fourth Geneva Convention (Art. 49). Deportation refers to the forced transfer of civilians (or other persons protected by the Geneva Conventions) from the territory where they reside to the territory of the occupying power or to any other territory, whether occupied or not. Such acts are prosecutable according to the universal jurisdiction principle (Geneva Convention IV on Civilians, Art. 147). They can also be constitutive elements of crimes such as ethnic cleansing and genocide.

There is a degree of ambiguity in the scope and application of the norm, which in Article 49 holds that “individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.”

The presence of the related concept of “population transfer” further complicates the legal analysis because it seems to describe a forced movement of the population which takes place within the national territory and thus, perhaps, under the direction of the domestic authorities.

The norm as stated in the Convention is of little practical effect in the absence of credible jurisprudence, in the form of authoritative judicial interpretation. In the instant case, what we have in the way of interpretation originates mainly from the Hague Tribunal (ICTY) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) which are hardly politically independent legal sources.

With those caveats, it nevertheless appears that the reprehensible practice of forced deportation of civilians when the Kiev regime, as the domestic authority, engages in it formally may not be a violation of Article 49 as it is currently interpreted. That, however, is for reasons which are entirely of a technical nature and have nothing to do with the substance of the matter. International humanitarian law is silent on the regime’s practice because the lawgiver could not possibly have conceived of the circumstances at hand. This is a situation where domestic authorities, charged with the duty of care for the local civilian population, which includes respect for their elementary human right to express a preference with regard to where they wish to be, are acting in the manner that normally would be expected of a foreign Occupying Power. If foreign occupation authorities treated a local population which was unwilling to leave their homes and refused compulsory “evacuation” the way the Kiev regime treats its own citizens, that would clearly be prohibited and would constitute an indisputable violation of international humanitarian law. It is important to observe that the impact on the civilian population does not vary based on which party in the conflict, foreign or domestic, is engaging in involuntary deportation. To those who are impacted, it makes no substantive difference whether the same act is being committed by foreign forces or by agents of the “domestic authorities.” Both forms of identical conduct should therefore be regarded as equally illegal and culpable. And in both cases the perpetrators must be identified and punished.

The issue under consideration is of extreme humanitarian concern and must be addressed, if not by Western controlled mechanisms such as ICC then certainly by Russia’s war crimes investigative Committee because it falls squarely under the latter’s purview.

Until now the harsh practice in Ukraine of moving civilians around like pieces on a chessboard has mainly affected inhabitants of small towns and rural settlements near the line of contact. But one rightfully fears what may be in store for large population centres such as Kharkov as the Russian advance inexorably proceeds. Will the neo-Nazi regime as it retreats forcibly vacate those cities as well of their inhabitants, in emulation of what Pol Pot had done in Phnom Penh?

Recognition of the gravity of this issue highlights once again the critical importance of formulating well in advance an adequate jurisdictional basis for the Committee’s work. Forced deportation of civilians against their will on territory controlled by the Kiev authorities technically may not be illegal, but if so that exposes a loophole in existing international humanitarian law. The war crimes investigative Committee has the option of expanding the reach of the existing prohibition by also making compulsory deportation ordered by domestic authorities a legitimate subject of criminal investigation. Once it is established, the war crimes Tribunal must be empowered under the terms of its mandate to judge acts of compulsory deportation by whatever party committed, and regardless of the deficiencies of international humanitarian law, as it now stands, on that subject.

The pending Ukrainian war crimes proceedings are a prime opportunity to affirm the right of civilians that their preferences with regard to remaining or evacuating must be respected by the warring parties. One assumes that a certain number of civilians who sympathise with the Kiev regime may voluntarily decide to withdraw with its forces, and their wishes must also be respected.

It is impermissible for civilians to be used as props for political propaganda narratives. Unfortunately, in this case international humanitarian law inadvertently makes that possible. That loophole must be plugged, immediately and decisively. The investigative and judicial organs that will be scrutinising war crimes committed in Ukraine have an unparalleled opportunity to set an important precedent by bringing the normative situation as it currently stands in line with reality.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/ ... y-with-it/

******

Standard Target...

... albeit the Crimean Bridge was closed for 45 minutes to make sure civilian drivers are safe. After 45 minutes normal operation resumed.

Украинские военные ночью нанесли ракетный удар по Крыму, используя ракеты ATACMS, российская система ПВО успешно отразила атаку, сообщил глава комиссии по вопросам суверенитета Общественной палаты России Владимир Рогов. В своем Telegram-канале он указал, что украинские боевики применили несколько баллистических ракет ATACMS для удара по Крыму – перед атакой на полуострове была объявлена тревога, перекрыт Крымский мост. Российская система ПВО отработала над Джанкоем и Симферополем, отразив все ракеты ВСУ.

Translation: The Ukrainian military launched a missile attack on Crimea at night using ATACMS missiles; the Russian air defense system successfully repelled the attack, said Vladimir Rogov, head of the commission on sovereignty of the Public Chamber of Russia. In his Telegram channel, he indicated that Ukrainian militants used several ATACMS ballistic missiles to attack Crimea - before the attack, an alarm was declared on the peninsula and the Crimean bridge was blocked. The Russian air defense system worked over Dzhankoy and Simferopol, repelling all Ukrainian Armed Forces missiles.

I will reiterate (how many times now, LOL) ATACMS is a standard target for Russian AD. It doesn't mean that they cannot get some lucky shot, of course it may happen, but there is NOT a single NATO weapon system, bar nuclear weapons, which can make any operational, forget about strategic difference for Russia. None, do not exist. But yes, three important events for Russians are coming and the only thing they can dream about is to spoil those events. That's impotent rage. Not in Kiev, in Washington and London. ATACMS have been in 404 for months now. Not much success...

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2024/04 ... arget.html

******

The Uniparty’s Next Trick Might Be A Ten-Year-Long Taiwan-Like Security Pact With Ukraine

Image

ANDREW KORYBKO
MAY 01, 2024

Tying the President’s hands in terms of how they de-escalate this conflict predetermines that it’ll continue kindling even if the front lines informally freeze for a significant length of time, thus keeping the Damocles’ sword of Armageddon hanging over everyone’s head for the next decade at least.

The “Republicans In Name Only” (RINOs) and the Democrats came together as the “uniparty” to push through the US’ latest Ukraine aid package in late April, which prompted Zelensky to disclose that their countries are negotiating a ten-year-long security pact. He then elaborated over the weekend that it’ll include “armed support, financial, political, and joint arms production.” An agreement like that will almost certainly require congressional approval, ergo where the uniparty comes back in.

Billionaire entrepreneur David Sacks reacted to this on X by writing that “The $61 billion was just the beginning. The next two U.S. presidents won’t be able to switch it off”, to which Elon Musk responded with “This is insane. The forever war.” It was observed back in early January that “Ukraine’s Hoped-For ‘Security Guarantees’ Aren’t All That They Were Hyped Up To Be” after the first such pact was reached with the UK but didn’t include promised troop deployments like Kiev had earlier sought to clinch.

Subsequent bilateral agreements with other NATO countries also didn’t include those promises either, but what’s so concerning about the similar pact being negotiated with the US is that it might take the form of a bill modeled off of the 1979 “Taiwan Relations Act” and thenceforth enter into law. The aforementioned is deliberately ambiguous about the US’ mutual defense commitment to that rogue Chinese island but mandates continued arms sales to it and pressures the president to act if it’s attacked.

In the event that the ongoing negotiations culminate in something of the sort for Ukraine, then Sacks’ prediction would be proven correct with all that entails for locking in this front of the New Cold War. If Trump returns to office, which can’t be taken for grated given the Biden Administration’s persecution of him and fears of election-rigging, his hands will be tied and he couldn’t de-escalate even if he wants to. Any move in that direction could lead to another round of impeachment proceedings against him.

The RINOs and Democrats might therefore drop the façade of their false competition once more in order to legally mandate a full ten years’ worth of “armed support, financial, political, and joint arms production” with Ukraine. As the cherry on top, they might also codify similarly ambiguous Taiwan-like language about the US’ mutual defense commitment to that country. The only way to prevent this from being weaponized against Trump is for MAGA Republicans to win as many seats in November as possible.

If the RINOs and Democrats don’t have the numbers, then they can’t force him out of office but only symbolically impeach him like they already did two times already if he reneges on this agreement. His envisaged federal government reforms, should they be successful, could reduce the number of internal saboteurs who’d try to subvert his diplomatic policy for advancing US interests. To be sure, there are a lot of uncertainties for Trump in this scenario, but it’s still better than if the uniparty remains in total power.

What should be most important for every patriotic American is that the President, whoever they may be at any given time, retains the right to formulate foreign policy in line with the Constitution. Checks and balances are important to maintain, but what the uniparty might be attempting to do via Congress is override the next two Presidents by locking their foreign policy in place just like they did with Taiwan. That precedent was already legally contentious enough but it was still passed during peace with China.

By contrast, what appears to be in the pipeline with Ukraine is being negotiated in the context of the NATO-Russian proxy war that’s being waged in that former Soviet Republic, which risks World War III by miscalculation. Tying the President’s hands in terms of how they de-escalate this conflict predetermines that it’ll continue kindling even if the front lines informally freeze for a significant length of time, thus keeping the Damocles’ sword of Armageddon hanging over everyone’s head for the next decade at least.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/the-unip ... k-might-be

Holding yer breath for Trump is silly, Andrew. And I think you'd prefer a stalemate rather than Russia settling the matter.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10873
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 May 02, 2024 11:58 am

Ten years since the Odessa massacre
POSTED BY @NSANZO ⋅ 05/02/2024

Image

Anniversary season, the current spring commemorates ten years of events that have changed the development of events at the local, national and, in many cases, also international levels. The Maidan coup d'état kicked off a chain of events that, little by little, have created a conflict with internal and external components that finally gave rise to the war of 2022. Nothing was inevitable and there is no straight line between February 24, 2014 and the same day eight years later, but there is a path with multiple changes of direction in which there was always a different exit that was not taken. Step by step, without the will to recognize the potential turning points that could have stopped the escalation, circumstances led to political decisions that made the war of ten years ago, predecessor of the current one, inevitable. In that drift that led to the catastrophe first in Donbass and then in all of Ukraine, May 2, which is now a decade ago, plays a special role.

One of the news centers of greatest interest on a continental level at that time, Ukraine then concentrated large numbers of foreign correspondents who had covered the process of secession and accession to Russia of Crimea and later the protests in Donbass, which quickly gave rise to a revolutionary situation in which the State lost the monopoly on the use of force and effective control of the territory. Faced with the possibility of a repeat of the Crimean scenario and waiting for the little Russian men in green , political and war journalists gathered in Donetsk, Kharkiv, Odessa and Slavyansk in search of headlines and cover stories with which to carve a story. career. On May 2, the major media outlets that had invested more resources in what already seemed like the most important story of that year managed to be present on the ground in the two places where steps were being taken that were going to be definitive. “Clashes in Odessa: dozens dead after building fire,” headlined Howard Amos in Odessa and Harriet Salem in Slavyansk for The Guardian . Amos, from the Kulikovo Camp, was one of the first journalists to warn of the violence that was occurring. Privileged witness of what happened, he was able to narrate live what was going to be a massacre. Hundreds of kilometers away, Salem added that “Interior Minister Arsen Avakov stated that Ukrainian forces have taken control of the television tower in Kramatorsk, near the rebel stronghold of Slavyansk, where heavy fighting has taken place.” They were the first combats of a war that would no longer stop in Donbass and without which the current situation cannot be understood. “We will not stop,” Avakov added.

Ukraine's intentions were clear and no argument was going to change that drift. Nor a massacre that should have opened the eyes of every minimally reasonable government. Even at that time, it was possible to stop the violence and return to a scenario of dialogue that would prevent further bloodshed. The dramatic images that could be seen in the media after May 2 should have been enough argument for both the Ukrainian Government and its allies to bring about a change. However, as in Maidan, death became an argument for escalation, not the need to prevent it. In that sense, if the celestial century was the ultimate trigger for the coup d'état, the 46 deaths in the Odessa House of Unions were only the prelude to the war.

That day and the following week showed the red lines that the Ukrainian Government and the extreme right that had acted as the Maidan shock force were willing to cross. The nationalist agenda of the executive born from the coup d'état had been clear from the first day, with the attempt to repeal the law on the use of the language to withdraw the regional co-official status of Russian, vehicular in those oblasts , but the government's actions around The events in Odessa showed the limits to which that position reached. It was not only about rebuilding the country at the service of nationalism and rewriting its history to make the nationalist discourse official as the only possible national discourse, but also about allowing the extreme right to act in the name of the State to physically destroy any group that defended another path.

What happened in Odessa was the maximum expression of the use of the extreme right to do what the State was not capable of doing that had occurred until now. In Kharkiv, a large city with a presence of both pro-Russian actors and the nationalist extreme right, the authorities used what was going to be the germ of Andriy Biletsky's Azov to put an end to any attempt to simulate what happened in Donetsk and Lugansk, cities in those in which the limited implementation of nationalism was not able to present an alternative or battle to the anti-government protests. In Odessa, a city in which local identity dominates over Russian cultural identification or Ukrainian nationalism, the division was very different. But, above all, the big difference was that there was not a single far-right group capable of presenting opposition to the eclectic and diverse group that formed throughout the spring of 2014 in Kulikovo Field. That movement, which in the face of accusations of separatism that were used by the State and the extreme right that acted under its auspices, only sought signatures for a referendum on the federalization of the country, was the center of a political and media campaign to demonize the entire alternative option to the nationalism that was beginning to prevail from kyiv. Formed by groups so diverse that it was difficult to glimpse a political coherence that could make it a germ of a political movement beyond that common objective, communists, anarchists, local remnants of the Party of Regions individually and Russian nationalists collaborated. The risk that this configuration would come together for something further or that it would be supported militarily by Russia - which did not have the access to the city that it had had in Crimea or that it could have in Donbass - was non-existent. However, the idea of ​​a counterproposal that would overshadow the idea of ​​centralist nationalism coming from kyiv was threat enough for the Maidan Government, still weak and as internally incoherent as Kulikovo. This is how the campaign to discredit and demonize everything related to that movement, but also with the attitude of the city of Odessa in general, which occurred throughout the spring of 2014 and which was the prelude to the attempt to destroy the camp by force.

Throughout the month of April, messages proliferated on the networks calling to defend Odessa , assuming an invasion that would come, no matter how incredible it might seem to anyone with a minimal knowledge of the Russian group there, in Transnistria. Infiltration, destabilization or invasion from Tiraspol, added to the alert of internal separatism were the arguments used by Svoboda, then in the Government, and other political and paramilitary groups to demand mobilization and creation of vigilante groups - in the American sense of the term. to avoid the Crimea scenario . The demonization of any alternative to the official Maidan discourse and the ease with which these messages of hate towards a part of the country's population were consolidated in the information sphere created the situation of tension necessary for violence to break out. When he did so, just a few days after the extreme right called for mobilization in Odessa and Andriy Parubiy, then president of the National Security and Defense Council, arrived in the city to deliver bulletproof vests to his people and warn of Russian plans , the State acted without doing so.

Without enough strength to put an end to the Kulikovo movement autonomously, the local extreme right needed external support that was generated thanks to the football connection. The match between the local Chernomorets and Kharkiv Metalist made possible the massive arrival of far-right groups that quickly mobilized in the city center. While Kulikovo carried out its political activity in front of the House of Unions, the nationalist extreme right was concentrated in the city center, in front of its cathedral. The component of defense of the interests of certain classes is an element that was always clear, but to which due attention was not paid.

After months of tension incited by sectors related to the Government and without action by the State to avoid it, the confrontation was practically inevitable. The riots in the center of the city came to the fore: the attack by the extreme right on the Kulikovo Camp with the clear intention of destroying both the camp and the political alternative. Before the human mass armed with different types of instruments approaching from the center of the city, where several deaths had already occurred that morning, the most recognizable voice of Kulikovo, the deputy Vyacheslav Markin, former member of the Party of Regions, took the initiative and appealed to minors, adults and women to leave the place. Faced with the attack, the only real alternative was to protect themselves in the closest building, that of the House of Unions. But the intentions of at least part of these extreme right shock forces went beyond destroying a camp, as witnessed by the fact that the lateral accesses were blocked and activists, unionists and ordinary citizens were trapped in the building with no other way out than to jump out of the windows. Molotov cocktails thrown from outside did the rest. The fire at the plant caused chaos and, unable to leave the place, the activists took cover on upper floors, where the fire also spread. All of this happened without the intervention of the firefighters, just four blocks away, and before the eyes of the extreme right, who only at the end, with the massacre already underway, helped a handful of people leave the building after having beaten them. , in some cases to death, to survivors who had jumped out of the windows.

Image

The days after the massacre were as representative as the events themselves, in which 46 people were burned alive due to the fall or subsequently beaten. The arrests did not affect those who locked dozens of people in a burning building and did not act until the tragedy was over to help them, but rather the victims and survivors. Ukraine blamed the fire on the wind or Molotov cocktails thrown by Kulikovo activists from the roof of the House of Unions towards the outside. Anything but admitting that the fire had been caused by Molotov cocktails prepared outside and thrown into a building closed and blocked by the extreme right, whose job was to act for the State by destroying a group that had launched the idea of federalization, opposed to the nationalist centralism that Maidan worked to impose.

In those days after the Odessa massacre, the raison d'être of the extreme right could be observed: to act by and for the State where the authorities could not do so. What the extreme right did not achieve was later done by the police, arresting survivors and activists who had not already fled the city due to the explicit threat of nationalist paramilitary groups. The Odessa federalist movement, and with it the possibility of a public conversation about the possibility of a more decentralized model, was defeated and demonized, caricatured as a tool of Moscow. Faced with the silence of the State, the disinterest and absolute contempt for non-nationalist victims, the extreme right easily imposed the idea of ​​May 2 in Odessa as an unmitigated victory against the hand of Moscow . Murdering compatriots, Odessa residents whose sin was thinking differently, was presented as a defense.

On the other side of what was already beginning to be a war front, the Odessa massacre was perceived in a completely different way. It was the end of the illusion of the possibility of a Ukraine that was not necessarily anti-Russian and in which cultural identity did not have to be subordinated to a nationalism that was seen as something alien. In that sense, Odessa was the most repeated argument of militiamen when asked by journalists why they had taken up arms to defend the People's Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk in 2014, created precisely against this new way of understanding the State. and its reason for being. May 2 thus became the event that definitively polarized society and marked the point of no return and the beginning of a drift that has been catastrophic for the country and its population.

https://slavyangrad.es/2024/05/02/diez- ... de-odessa/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
⚡️ Summary of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation (as of May 1, 2024)

The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation continue to conduct a special military operation.

- Units of the “West” group of troops improved the situation along the front line and defeated the manpower and equipment of the 14th, 63rd mechanized, 57th motorized infantry brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the areas of the settlements of Zagoruykovka in the Kharkov region, Yampolovka in the Donetsk People’s Republic and Chervonaya Dibrova in Lugansk People's Republic.

The enemy lost up to 30 military personnel, five vehicles, a 155-mm FN-70 howitzer made in Great Britain, a 152-mm D-20 gun , as well as a 122-mm Gvozdika self-propelled artillery mount .

- Units of the “Southern” group of forces occupied more advantageous positions, and also inflicted fire damage on manpower and equipment of the 72nd, 93rd mechanized, 92nd assault and 46th airmobile brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the areas of the settlements of Andreevka, Kurdyumovka and Konstantinovka Donetsk People's Republic.

Enemy losses amounted to up to 400 military personnel, seven vehicles, two 122-mm D-30 howitzers , two electronic warfare stations “Nota” and “Enklav” , as well as a counter-battery radar station made in the USA AN/TPQ-50 .

- Units of the “Center” group of troops improved the tactical situation and defeated the formations of the 24th, 100th mechanized and 142nd infantry brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the areas of the settlements of Leninskoye, Keramik and Ocheretino of the Donetsk People’s Republic.

Nine counterattacks of assault groups of the 23rd mechanized, 92nd assault, 68th and 71st ranger brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces were repelled in the areas of the settlements of Novgorodskoye, Solovyevo, Semenovka, Netailovo, Novokalinovo, Shumy and Berdychi of the Donetsk People's Republic.

The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 410 military personnel, a tank , an infantry fighting vehicle , an armored combat vehicle , three vehicles, a Czech-made 155-mm DANA 2 self-propelled artillery mount , a US-made 105-mm M102 light howitzer , and a 152-mm Msta-B howitzer. and a 122-mm Gvozdika self-propelled artillery mount. - Units of the Vostok group of troops occupied more advantageous positions and defeated manpower and equipment

The 72nd mechanized brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the 108th defense brigade in the areas of the settlements of Lugovskoye, Zaporozhye region and Staromayorskoye, Donetsk People's Republic.

Enemy losses amounted to up to 110 military personnel, two pickup trucks, a 155-mm FN-70 howitzer made in Great Britain, a 122-mm Gvozdika self-propelled artillery mount and a Bukovel-AD electronic warfare station .

- Units of the Dnepr group of troops inflicted fire on concentrations of manpower of the 128th mountain assault brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the 35th Marine Brigade in the areas of the settlements of Kamenskoye, Zaporozhye region, Ivanovka and Stepovoe, Kherson region.

The enemy lost up to 20 troops and a US-made M777 155-mm howitzer .

- Operational-tactical aviation, missile forces and artillery from groupings of troops of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation hit the headquarters of the operational command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine "South", as well as enemy personnel and military equipment in 112 regions.

Air defense systems shot down 29 Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles , five Hammer guided bombs made in France, and a rocket from the Uragan multiple launch rocket system .

- In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the following have been destroyed : 593 aircraft, 270 helicopters, 23,648 unmanned aerial vehicles, 509 anti-aircraft missile systems, 15,891 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 1,275 combat vehicles of multiple launch rocket systems, 9,230 field artillery guns and mortars, and also 21,413 units of special military vehicles.

***

On April 29, the Russian Armed Forces attacked the Odessa pier with a 9M723K missile launched by the Iskander-M OTRK, where preparations were being made for the launch of unmanned boats of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

As a result of the strike, not a single civilian in Odessa was injured.

However, the “talented” air defense officers of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, trying to intercept the missile, launched a strike from the BUK-M1 air defense system at the palace of students of the Odessa Law Academy. This is evidenced by the numerous elements of destruction found at the scene of the incident that are inherent in the missile of this complex. As a result of the operation of the Ukrainian Armed Forces air defense system, 5 people were killed, 32 people were injured, and civilian infrastructure was also damaged.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Burial Sites of Tortured Civilians Discovered in Avdeyevka – Russian Investigative Committee
APRIL 30, 2024

Image

Burial sites of civilians showing signs of torture have been discovered in the city of Avdeyevka in the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR). Investigators have begun an investigation, the Investigative Committee of Russia reports.

“Investigators of the Investigative Committee of Russia will investigate another crime committed by the armed formations of Ukraine against civilians of the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, as well as the Donetsk People’s Republic… It is reported that burial sites of civilians showing signs of torture have been discovered in Avdeyevka (DPR),” the report published on the committee’s Telegram channel said.

The department will establish all the circumstances of the incident and those involved in the commission of the crimes.



Avdeyevka, a northern suburb of Donetsk turned into a powerful fortified area by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, was liberated by the Russian army on February 17.

On February 20, Special Representative of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs for Crimes of the Kiev Regime Rodion Miroshnik told Sputnik that, according to preliminary information, secret torture chambers and burial sites were located in Avdeyevka, where Kiev held residents in detention for political reasons.

(Sputnik)

https://orinocotribune.com/burial-sites ... committee/

******

10 years of Odessa Khatyn
May 2, 10:00 a.m

Image

10 years ago, the Nazis burned Odessa residents in the House of Trade Unions.
Old post-Soviet Ukraine burned down in the House of Trade Unions.
The war against Nazism in Ukraine became inevitable.

Image

Evening arrivals in Odessa are one of the consequences of the House of Trade Unions. There will be others.

Odessa must certainly be liberated from Nazi occupation.
Those responsible for the Odessa Khatyn must be met with retribution in one way or another.

Remember Odessa Khatyn.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9130397.html

Google Translator

******

BRITISH KNIGHT UNHORSED – LAWRENCE FREEDMAN WINS BATTLES AND WARS BY TAKING MONEY TO CALL DEFEAT VICTORY

Image

by John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

The kings of Europe used to pay clever men to pretend to be fools in order to make jokes to amuse the monarch and his court. They were called jesters. A man who pretends to be cleverer than he is, and who tells jokes in order to fool others into making himself rich – they are hucksters.

In the Jewish garment trade their merchandise is known as schmattes. This means “rags”; it was a Polish word before it was picked up in Yiddish — something cheap to make to be sold dear. By extension, peddling anything cheap and fast on false pretences is schmatte business. The Gentile word for this is a hustle.

For the merchandise Sir Lawrence Freedman of London has been selling, he has been well paid personally, and the corporation he used to run when he was a professor of “war studies” at King’s College is now a multimillion-pound business. To collect money for himself, and also for his son, Freedman has used company identities whose financial reports can be read at the UK Companies House registry. The operation optimizes on its tax liabilities to the UK Inland Revenue by following the advice of Judith Freedman, a professor of taxation at Oxford; she is Freedman’s wife.

The turnover, costs, tax, and profit lines of the Freedman businesses give a glimpse into how it possible for him to appear regularly in books, newspapers, and corporate conventions in order to announce, as he advertised last week in a London newspaper, that the new US military supplies for the Ukraine will give the allies time to “restore [Kiev’s] battlefield fortunes”; solve the Ukrainian “manpower problems…as new recruits don’t face the prospects of being sent to fight with insufficient ammunition”; “time before they will have the strength to start liberating substantial amounts of territory”; and time to compel President Vladimir Putin to “contemplate the possibility that [the war] might yet again swing towards Ukraine”.

The subjunctive “might” on the punchline is Freedman’s slip – he reveals he isn’t sure of the value of what he is selling.

Freedman was the British government’s official historian of the Falklands War and then a member of the Chilcot committee of inquiry on the British war against Iraq. He has also been a career-long Russia threat faker and fighter of the war his side keeps losing, as he keeps insisting on the reverse.

This isn’t jestering, it’s huckstering. Freedman is for hire through an organ called All American Entertainment (AAE), which describes itself as “a full-service talent booking agency, specifically focused on the needs of event professionals looking to book keynote speakers and corporate entertainment for their events.” His pro-US credentials for fighting the war against Russia, and his pro-Israel credentials for fighting the war against the Arabs and Iran have earned him an engagement at a Zionist-financed think-tank in Australia which calls Freedman “the foremost authority on modern war in the English-speaking world.” Small world, if viewed from Sydney, Tel Aviv, or London.

Starting with a PhD entitled “The definition of the Soviet threat in strategic arms decisions of the United States: 1961–1974” – that’s the US targeting version of Russia — Freedman has monetized his war-fighting line through incorporation of a company called King’s College Business Limited, UK company number 02714181. Founded in 1992 with the name KCL Enterprises Ltd, it said it was an investment and commercial trading company without an express purpose, apart from making money. Freedman became a director in 1998 when he gave a home address in Wimbledon. On Freedman’s street, local realtors value the average house price at the moment to be £1.9 million; this is down 15% from its peak in 2017.

War with Russia has been much more profitable for Freedman. Losing the war, that’s to say.

In 2007 Freedman was chairman of the board of directors of KCL Enterprises when it was decided to make the King’s College brand name more visible. According to the audited financial report for that year, the purpose of the company was “to assist King’s College London to market its research and consultancy capabilities.” The report reveals that turnover in 2007 was £2.3 million; it then grew by 55% in 2008 to £3.5 million. “Administrative expenses” came to almost the same total, meaning the company was operating for tax and expense optimization through which directors and King’s College academics like Freedman were running their consultancy and other fees. When Freedman retired from King’s College at the end of 2008, he also left the company board. It has gone on to quadruple its turnover in 2023 to £12.6 million. War against Russia is very good for business.

Image
Source: UK Companies House

Freedman meanwhile kept a seat as director of a subsidiary of the US government-funded RAND think tank called RAND Europe. This registered as a charity in the UK in 2001. In 2010 it was turning over £5.4 million in consultancy fees, including Freedman. In more recent years the charity’s official filing reports next to no money coming in or going out.

Another director’s seat was prepared for Freedman at an entity called the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence. This was also a spinoff from King’s College, but it reported no employees, no turnover when Freedman joined in 2015. It has turned into a partnership with US universities and a private Israeli university.

Freedman created his newest trading identity just after Russia launched the Special Military Operation in February 2022. This is named by Freedman with his own name.

Image
Source: https://find-and-update.company-informa ... ce.gov.uk/

This entity describes its business as “publishing of consumer and business journals and periodicals [and] media representation services.” Except for Freedman and son Samuel as directors, there are no employees. In its first year the company has reported holding cash at the bank of £105,669. At the same time, it reported owing creditors £60,556 and the tax and social security authorities £19,952. One of its products for sale is this. According to Freedman junior, there are 41,000 buyers paying £35 per annum – that should amount to £1.4 million on the balance sheet.

Samuel Freedman has listed himself in several parallel employments. One of them is as senior advisor and trustee of the Ambition Institute, a £21 million contractor to the UK government for coaching teachers; and director and executive at the Holocaust Educational Trust. Created as a charity in 2019, three years later in 2022 it took in more than £6.5 million; spent £2.8 million; and grew richer with £8.4 million in the bank or in investments.

This money was spent on promoting the defence of Israel and of the Israeli genocide in Gaza, and fighting political, media and courtroom criticism by labelling it antisemitism of the German kind. In its latest financial report, Freedman junior’s group claims “the Hamas massacre on the 7th October [2023] in Israel was the deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust. There has been a huge surge of antisemitism on our streets, online and even in the classroom…we will continue to work to ensure that young people know where antisemitism can lead, and that this hatred has no place in British society.”

Freedman senior’s hatred for Russia has an official place in that society – his clients include the British government and the Crown, which has rewarded him with a knighthood and other medals. These have been officially gazetted “for service to Defence Studies” That’s military camouflage — Freedman teaches offence and attack against Russia, not defence.

Why pursue the Freedman money trail so precisely? Because jesters don’t get degrees and tenured professorships from universities; Buckingham Palace doesn’t create knights of the realm with seats on its Privy Council for ignoramuses. Money, however, can explain how a career of making mistakes in the war against Russia can last so long, and of repeating the mistakes so lucratively that there is no profit in correcting them.

For example, in 2018 Freedman published a book called The Future of War: A History. Four years into the NATO advance across the Ukraine towards the Russian border, these were the lessons Freedman aimed to inculcate:

US air superiority — “It is a long time since [US forces] have faced serious threats from the air”.
US firepower – “in most contingencies [the US] would enjoy an overwhelming advantage in firepower.”
US technological superiority in precision-guidance weapons, drones, and robots enables the US military to conduct wars which don’t risk popular resistance or Congressional disapproval because there is “minimal risk of casualties.”
Click for more examples.

Image
Source: https://johnhelmer.net/

On Freedman’s table of most frequent references to his evidence, there’s himself on top; followed by a former Marine colonel and several others from Pentagon and NATO-financed think tanks. References Freedman doesn’t agree with, he disparages; for example, he tags Noam Chomsky as a “left-wing polemicist”. Edward Luttwak, an American strategist of Israeli background and consultancy rival of Freedman’s, is dismissed with the line: “there were obvious counter-examples to Luttwak’s examples.”

In 2023, following the first year of the Special Military Operation, Freeman produced a book he called Command: The Politics of Military Operations from Korea to Ukraine. In this work Freedman’s principal source of military evidence is himself: 24 citations. As his source on the Russian General Staff, only the New York Times is more often cited – 37 times. After the newspaper and himself, the authorized state reporter Bob Woodward gets 15 cites; the Washington Post, 15; RAND and the BBC tie with 7 each; followed by NATO’s Bellingcat disinformation operation with 4. Read more here.

Image
Source: https://johnhelmer.net/

As the 20th century American hustler (jester) Larry Flynt once taught to the US Supreme Court, a hustle can be repeated over and over to great profit if it draws laughter, criticism, and acrimony. There has been no criticism of Freedman’s war against Russia, and no acrimony over his defeats. Also no laughter — except in Moscow, Beijing, Tehran, Damascus.

In last week’s Financial Times, the Japanese-owned mouth organ for war against Russia, China, Iran, and Palestine, Freedman continues irrepressibly for the clientele, unstoppable by the evidence:

“Chronic shortages in ammunition and air defences had led to limited but potentially significant Russian advances.”
“Manpower problems, which remain chronic, should be eased as new recruits don’t face the prospect of being sent to fight with insufficient ammunition.”
“A variety of projects to get extra ammunition, Patriot air defence systems and F-16 aircraft to Ukraine are moving ahead.”
“It will take time to recover from the difficult first months of this year… it is going to be some time before they will have the strength to start liberating substantial amounts of territory.”
“For now, Ukraine’s best way of keeping up the fight against Russia is to carry on with the sort of attacks it has been mounting regularly of late. These have used long-range drones against oil refineries and other targets with some strategic value in Russia…”
“Putin must now contemplate the possibility that it might yet again swing towards Ukraine.”

Image
Source: https://www.ft.com/

Freedman reveals no evidence that he has studied the position maps of each of the five Russian army group operations along the line of contact, the daily Ukrainian air alarm maps and strikes of the Electric War campaign, and the reporting from both sides of the deep penetration attacks between Kiev and Lvov. Freedman appears not to read the Russian military bloggers, their Ukrainian counterparts, or the US aggregators republishing both. The difficulty of covering up the westward acceleration of the defeat is visible across the frontier in Poland. Fearful of a new surge of Ukrainian refugees into Poland, the Polish Border Guard stopped publication of its cross-border counts on April 19.

So long as this is the battlefield assessment of “the foremost authority on modern war in the English-speaking world”, what more needs to be said in English? Battlefield Russian isn’t a language Freedman can understand. It’s unprofitable for him to click for automatic translation by Translate.ru.

https://johnhelmer.net/british-knight-u ... more-89834

******

Yes, The Guys Need Money...

... by now blowing up NATO armor to smithereens becomes somewhat stale, plus RuAF and Air Defense are getting envious.


US-made F-16 fighter jets could start arriving in Ukraine as early as this month, a senior Ukrainian military official has said. Speaking on national TV on Wednesday, Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Ilya Evlash predicted that Kiev could receive the first batch of the advanced jets after Orthodox Easter, which is celebrated on May 5 this year. Still, he cautioned against getting hopes up. “We are not guessing the future, because the date has been changed several times. That’s why we are waiting,” Evlash. The official stressed that the timeline for F-16 deliveries is out of Ukraine’s hands, and that Kiev’s military “will work with what it is given to it.”

Oh, come on--R 1 million buys you a lot of fun, till now;))


Житель Санкт-Петербурга, вернувшийся с СВО, заявил в полицию после списания с его счета почти миллиона рублей, однако, как выяснилось потом, мужчина добровольно потратил деньги на трех проституток после ссоры с супругой, передает «Фонтанка». По информации издания, он обратился к правоохранителям, потому что его заставила жена, которая не знала о похождениях мужа и была уверена, что его просто обокрали.

Translation: A resident of St. Petersburg, who returned from SVO, reported to the police after almost a million rubles were written off from his account, however, as it turned out later, the man voluntarily spent the money on three prostitutes after a quarrel with his wife, Fontanka reports. According to the publication, he turned to law enforcement because his wife, who did not know about her husband’s adventures and was sure that he was simply robbed, forced him to do so.

You see, blowing M1 Abrams up doesn't pay that much anymore. F-16, now you are talking! You can get, probably, four of five St. Petersburg prostitutes for that. That's what I am talking about! What is sad, though, Russian and US pilots would have been great at getting drunk and chasing the tail, some of them, anyway. Not anymore...

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2024/05 ... money.html



http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2024/05 ... hread.html
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10873
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 May 03, 2024 12:00 pm

Ocheretino, Chasov Yar and the Donbass front
POSTED BY @NSANZO ⋅ 03/05/2024

Image

“Ukraine received a much-needed boost in its war against Russia when the US Congress approved a $61 billion aid package last week. However, in an interview with CNN on Sunday, Mark Herlting, a former US lieutenant general, said that Ukraine continues to face serious obstacles in its attempt to reclaim territory seized by Russia, and that a shortage of recruits is one of the main reasons. problems,” writes Business Insider , reflecting the practically general feeling of the Western press today. After months of pleas, demands that sounded like blackmail, and exaggerated warnings of Russian invasions of NATO countries, kyiv has obtained approval for a military assistance package linked to Ukraine worth almost $61 billion. However, with problems that are not solved quickly or simply with a checkbook, Ukraine continues to demand more and the press observes for the first time how the promises of more financing do not achieve the objective of automatically raising the morale of the troops and the population.

“Russian troops have captured or entered a half-dozen villages on Ukraine's eastern front over the past week, highlighting the deteriorating situation in the region for outnumbered and outgunned Ukrainian forces. awaits much-needed American military aid,” warns The New York Times in relation to the local offensive in the region west of Avdeevka. Yesterday, almost a week after Ukrainian media confirmed that the only presence of its troops was limited to the western outskirts, Ukraine confirmed, for example, the loss of Ocheretino, a town from which Russia plans to consolidate its superiority.

In this sector, Russian troops have managed to expand their area of ​​control, move the front away from their important cities and bring it dangerously close to the geographical barriers that are expected to slow down the advance, but that would place the line of contact within a short distance of a logistical hub and important tactic for Ukraine, Krasnoarmeisk, now Pokrovsk. The situation is repeated a few kilometers east of that position, around Chasov Yar, where the Ukrainian mayor confirmed yesterday that the battle has reached the outskirts of the important town, the loss of which would put Russia in a favorable position to advance on Konstantinovka, the last barrier before the fort that makes up the urban agglomeration of Slavyansk and Kramatorsk.

Due to the type of advance and the tactics that are being used to pressure Ukraine in both directions, it can be deduced that the objective is not to break the front and collapse the defenses of a sector but to put pressure on kyiv's troops at their most logistical points. important aspects of the Donbass front, a priority for Russia in the ground war. This is a war of attrition that, judging by the current media concern about the shortage of soldiers in Ukraine, is obtaining the desired result. It is not about seeking a lightning advance that would be impossible in the most fortified sector of the front and for which Russia would have to have a number of resources and personnel that it does not have in each sector of a front of hundreds of kilometers, but to prevent the attack and defense of Ukraine based on the attrition of its best combat units. Although this idea has been repeated throughout the more than two years of Russian participation in the war, it is now that it can be said to begin to work in a way that it had not done in the past.

The situation shows the significant Russian superiority in the ground war at the moment. American assistance has arrived in the midst of a crisis for Ukrainian troops both in terms of weapons, which have proven to be not superior to those available to Russia, and personnel. “Lack of ammunition is forcing outnumbered Ukrainian soldiers to retreat, one village after another, including three that surrendered on Sunday, as intense fighting shakes the countryside around Avdiivka almost three months after the strategic town fell into the hands of Russia," AP wrote yesterday in an article that highlights that the withdrawal does not remove the danger, since "the defensive lines in the rear that were supposed to cover them are practically non-existent" according to the sources of the article, soldiers who are on the land. The deficiencies are found in weapons, personnel and defense capabilities, that is, planning.

Even so, the desire to present the Ukrainian narrative as true has not completely disappeared in the press. “Serhii Kuzan, president of the Ukrainian Center for Security and Cooperation, a non-governmental research group, stated that the Ukrainian command had to make “a choice between a bad situation and an even worse one” and decided to lose territories instead of soldiers. says, for example, The New York Times . As happened in Avdeevka, Ukraine has withdrawn its troops from the different towns it lost this week when the battle was already lost and human and material resources were spent, as witnessed by markedly pro-Ukrainian media, in reference to the wear and tear of the brigades involved. Every Ukrainian withdrawal these days has been caused by Russian superiority and after having suffered casualties that the American media prefers to believe have been avoided.

The medium goes beyond the official version, without denying the current difficult situation, to present good future prospects. To do this, it relies on the analysis of one of the institutions most cited by the Western press, the neocon Institute for the Study of War (ISW), which monitors the war on a daily basis, generally from the perspective of seeing the situation in its own right. which at every moment benefits Ukraine more. A few weeks ago, for example, the think-tank exploited the danger of Ukrainian defeat to demand weapons for Kiev, while now it sees a difficult situation that can be overcome if an even greater Western supply of weapons is guaranteed. The current defensive phase would occur while waiting for an offensive planned for 2025 or even the end of this year, an option that already at the end of 2023 seemed unviable in the eyes of Ukraine's partners.

It was the first week of December when the media first published the plans of kyiv's partners: to propose the year 2024 as a key year for defense to consider the possibility of an offensive in 2025. Since then, the situation in Ukraine has not It has only not improved but has significantly worsened with the Russian improvement and the increased use of aviation, which is undermining both Ukraine's fighting capabilities and the morale of its troops. In reference to the ISW report, the Russian opposition journalist Leonid Ragozin, openly pro-Ukraine, collected the impressions of Bakhmutsky Demon , “a popular Ukrainian war blog supposedly managed by soldiers deployed in Chasov Yar”, which “asks journalists not having the ISW as a reliable source.” The blogger states that “this analysis of a parallel reality sounds ridiculous. Quoting him you sound like idiots. Nothing that is there corresponds to reality, nothing at all.”

The second consequence of the worsening situation for Ukraine is the demand for even greater commitment from its allies despite promises of several tens of millions, the announcement of the shipment of long-range missiles with which Kiev hopes to destroy the infrastructure of Crimea - especially the Kerch bridge - and the commitment to increase production to keep the war years away. Zelensky no longer demands seven Patriot systems, but the necessary number has become “at least” seven. Each arms concession implies an increase in requests.

In this, the Ukrainian president has the benefit of the press's doubt and NATO's willingness to navigate between the risk of defeat and certain success to achieve a greater presence in the war and guarantee its continuation. “It is important to visit kyiv again and meet with President Zelensky. The situation is difficult, but it is not too late for Ukraine to prevail and more support is on the way. “NATO is also taking steps forward in the long term, putting Ukraine on an irreversible path towards the Alliance,” said Jens Stoltenberg in his last visit to the Ukrainian capital, in which he discussed with Zelensky the idea of ​​​​creating a fund of $100 billion in long-term military assistance. The war must continue if Ukraine and its partners aspire to achieve part of their objectives, among which is reaching a resolution without concessions in a negotiation in which kyiv could address Russia in the language of ultimatum, something today so realistic as the optimistic forecasts of the Institute for the Study of War.

https://slavyangrad.es/2024/05/03/29675/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Rybar : How can we improve the defense of Crimea?

After several consecutive strikes by the Ukrainian Armed Forces on Crimea , there was a slight lull. Judging by the activity of NATO intelligence structures, at this stage preparations are underway for new attacks, which are highly likely to overshadow the inauguration and celebration of Victory Day.

The last three raids with ATACMS operational-tactical missiles showed that despite the presence of modern anti-missile systems, there are nuances with the timely detection of a target during launch. The problem seems especially acute during a massive impact .

It is quite clear that saturating forward positions with additional radar posts will help increase the combat capabilities of air defense. However, the appearance of new radars will not go unnoticed by pro-Ukrainian citizens, and additional trained personnel will be needed. So what should we do?

Part of the problem that has arisen can be solved by placing forward autonomous posts at sea in the direction of possible enemy attacks: that is, from the western north-western coast of Crimea, starting from Sevastopol and ending with Steregushchiy .

For this purpose, decommissioned barges or cargo ships that are no longer suitable for use can be used. They have a sufficient area, they are not so easy to flood (which is very convenient when attacking with BECs) , and there are plenty of such “floating troughs”.

On these barges you need to place old P-18 or P-37 radars . There are plenty of them at storage bases and they can be quickly put into operation.

And the most important thing is that such posts do not necessarily require a calculation. The position can be made autonomous , and it will function from a remote control. In addition, constant data transfer is not even necessary: ​​the most important thing is to get the first marks. This will reduce the time for making a decision by ±40 seconds , which is quite significant during ballistic missile attacks.

We are not saying that this is the only possible solution. This is just one of the options that can help our units repel attacks by Ukrainian formations. It is important to understand that there will be attacks on Crimea and the bridge (preparations are in full swing) , and sitting idly by is not the best idea.

As with airfield hangars and shelters, it is the same here: it is better to make relatively small efforts to make it easier to identify targets than to then waste huge resources for new aircraft and anti-aircraft missile systems, as well as personnel training.

Image

***

Colonelcassad
Summary of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation (as of May 2, 2024 ) | The main thing:

- Units of the "Center" group of troops , as a result of active actions, completely liberated the village of Berdychi of the Donetsk People's Republic, and also improved the tactical situation and defeated the formations of the 59th motorized infantry , 42nd , 47th mechanized brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the 109th Terrestrial defense brigades in the areas of the settlements of Vozdvizhenka, Kalinovo, Sokol, Novopokrovskoye and Progress of the Donetsk People's Republic.

— The “South” group occupied more advantageous positions; in its area of ​​responsibility, the Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 270 military personnel;

— Russian air defense shot down 25 UAVs, 2 guided bombs, 3 MLRS shells per day;

— Units of the “West” improved the situation along the front line, defeated five brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the National Guard in the Kharkov region;

— The “West” group of the Russian Armed Forces improved the position along the front line, repulsed five counterattacks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces;

— Units of the Eastern Group of the Russian Armed Forces occupied more advantageous positions and defeated the formations of two brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine;

— The Russian Armed Forces destroyed in one day two US-made HIMARS MLRS combat vehicles, a missile production shop and a missile and artillery weapons warehouse of the Ukrainian Armed Forces;

— The losses of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the zone of responsibility of the Eastern Group of the Russian Armed Forces per day amounted to up to 100 military personnel;

— The Dnepr group of troops defeated the formations of four Ukrainian brigades;

— The Russian Armed Forces group “West” destroyed over 150 military personnel and 13 units of equipment of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in 24 hours.

Units of the Vostok group of forces occupied more advantageous positions and defeated the formations of the 58th motorized infantry and 72nd mechanized brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the areas of the settlements of Urozhainoye, Makarovka and Vodyanoye of the Donetsk People's Republic.

They repelled a counterattack by the assault group of the 128th Terrestrial Defense Brigade in the area of ​​the village of Staromayorskoye, Donetsk People's Republic.

Enemy losses amounted to up to 100 military personnel, two 155 mm M777 howitzers and a 155 mm M198 howitzer made in the USA.

▫️Units of the Dnepr group of troops inflicted fire on concentrations of manpower of the 35th , 37th Marine Brigades , 121st and 126th Terrestrial Defense Brigades in the areas of the settlements of Orekhov, Zaporozhye region, Mikhailovka, Ivanovka and Tyaginka, Kherson region.

The enemy lost up to 30 military personnel, two vehicles and a 105 mm M119 gun made in the USA.

▫️Operational-tactical aviation , missile forces and artillery of groupings of troops of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation destroyed two combat vehicles of the US-made HIMARS multiple launch rocket system , a workshop for the production of missiles and ammunition, a warehouse of missile and artillery weapons of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, and also defeated manpower and military personnel. enemy equipment in 117 regions.

▫️During the course of 24 hours, air defense systems shot down 25 Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles, two Hammer guided bombs made in France, as well as three HIMARS missiles made in the USA and Hurricane .

▫️ In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the following have been destroyed : 593 aircraft, 270 helicopters, 23,673 unmanned aerial vehicles, 509 anti-aircraft missile systems, 15,898 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 1,277 combat vehicles of multiple launch rocket systems, 9,246 field artillery guns and mortars, as well as 21,441 units of special military vehicles.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

SITREP 5/1/24: The Russian Steamroller Rolls On as Ukraine Braces for Impact

SIMPLICIUS
MAY 02, 2024

Let’s start things a little differently this time and go straight to battlefield updates, as the Russian forces continue to make headway in a number of key sectors.

On the Avdeevka axis there have been several noteworthy gains since last time.

Firstly, the large gap area between Arkhangelsk and Keramik has been completely taken, circled in yellow below:

Image

Arkhangelske itself is now also being stormed with a portion of it reportedly occupied by Russian troops, seen above the yellow arrow.

Image

And now even Sokol/Sokil on the west side is being approached, with Russian troops moving up Karl Marx Avenue from Soloviev and engaging in battles with AFU troops on the outskirts of the small settlement.

Zooming out, we can once again see that the key hub of the region, Kostantinovka, is slowly being enveloped by the salients pushing in from Ocheretino and Chasov Yar, with the Ocheretino, the southern portion of the pincer now 10km from cutting Konstantinovka’s MSR:

Image

In the north, RF units of the 98th Airborne Division advance in Chasov Yar not only directly head on, but bypassing the easternmost portion to the south where Russian troops have now been geolocated to passing over the Seversky-Donets canal highlighted in white below:

Image

This means they appear to be attempting to put the main body of Chasov Yar into a pincer like so:

Image

Spiegel:

Image

Ukrainian militants are preparing for a quick retreat from the Chasov Yar area - Spiegel

“If the enemy occupies a height in the area of the village of Ivanovskoye, then he will be able to bring his anti-aircraft systems closer and hide his equipment between buildings, and we will be forced to withdraw firepower,” an Ukrainian Armed Forces officer told the German publication.

AFU soldiers complained about problems with supplies, as well as frequent strikes by Russian artillery and aviation.

According to the authors of the article, after the retreat from Chashi Yar, the northern part of the Donbass front may collapse. The situation for Kyiv is aggravated by the flight of militants from Ocheretino.

Observers of The Wall Street Journal agree with their German colleagues, who wrote that the advance of the Russian Armed Forces revealed the vulnerabilities of the positions of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.


Julian Ropcke at Bild is likewise despondent:

Soon the army will enter Chasov Yar: it is approaching the city from the South, - BILD

During the attack on Chasov Yar, the army uses double strike tactics, BILD military expert Julian Röpcke previously reported. The Armed Forces directly attack the Kanal microdistrict to the east of the city and also bypass it from the North and South, passing through the villages of Bogdanovka and Ivanovskoye (Krasnoye). In the center and north, the Armed Forces maintain the line.

Now, on the southern flank of the Armed Forces, they managed to cross the Seversky Donets - Donbass canal and advance towards the city.

"The Forces have crossed the canal at Chasov Yar, 1 km southeast of the town. It is only a matter of time before they enter the town through the East or the South,” writes Röpcke.


Bild further writes:

The Ukrainian Armed Forces do not have enough soldiers to stop the advance of the Russian Armed Forces, reports the German Bild.

"The best soldiers have been killed, wounded or on almost continuous duty. Many are absolutely exhausted because rest and recovery phases are impossible due to lack of personnel. This reduces their combat effectiveness and morale," the publication notes.

A new wave of mobilization will not be able to solve the personnel shortage, because the recruits do not receive good training and do not know how to use weapons.


In fact, here’s how the often-prescient Arestovich predicted the upcoming Russian efforts for this summer:

The events of the summer, according to Arestovich, will develop like this. The Russian army makes a breakthrough to Konstantinovka west of Chasova Yar, and in the Ocheretino area develops an offensive towards Pokrovsk. It is unclear what will happen further north in the area of Belogorovka-Seversk. The final task is to reach the Kramatorsk-Konstantinovka-Toretsk line by the end of June, and in September-November the battle for Slavyansk.

You can see that the two extremely key cities of Pokrovsk and Konstantinovka are nearly equidistant from the latest Ocheretino salient, so it’s likely Russian forces will continue developing both directions at the same time, finding the freest gaps to advance through like water flowing through areas of least resistance:

Image

There are other advances in Urozhaynoye (Harvest), Rabotino, and even Kupyansk region, but for now this will suffice.

<snip>

A brief mention about the Kerch Bridge. There continue to be ‘reports’ that Ukraine is gearing up to strike the bridge as early as May 7-9 in time for Putin’s inauguration, in order to mar it.

Foreign SIM systems confirm the transfer of at least 100 modified ATACMS missiles to Ukraine for a range of 300 kilometers. Taking into account the use of ADM-160 MALD deception missiles, the Ukrainian Armed Forces have a powerful arsenal to attack the Crimea. The next attack is expected in early May for Putin's inauguration on May 7 and May 9. Crimea is saturated with air defense systems, our people are waiting for an attack and preparing.

From Rezident UA:

Our source in the OP General Staff said that the first introductory instructions for the Ukrainian Armed Forces units on Operation Crimean Bridge have been received. A combined strike from water/underwater/aerial UAVs, ATACMS and Storm Shadow missile launches is being prepared.

And from Legitimny:

Our source reports that, for significant damage to the Crimean bridge, it is necessary to expend almost all the long-range missiles transferred by the partners. And then, this will put the bridge out of action for 2-3 months.

This, of course, will partially disrupt the holiday season in Crimea, but will not affect the course of hostilities in any way. It will just be a loud and expensive PR campaign. Ukraine will spend a lot of resources, but will receive minimal profit; in the long run this will turn out to be a huge problem and another miscalculation of the OP.

The only thing that experts cannot say now is what the Kremlin’s response will be to the next increase in the stakes in the game (someone is deliberately provoking it).

More likely:
- Ukraine will be cut off by 70% of all electricity and distribution stations will be constantly hit.
- Ukraine will be deprived of its gas trump card. Most likely, the UGC will somehow be disabled.
- the infrastructure of railways and bridges will be more severely destroyed. Perhaps the bridges will be hit with something very large and powerful, in order to immediately “topple” them with one blow.
- they will start hitting the ports hard again.

Overall: life in Ukraine will become even worse and more difficult for the population. The Ukrainian authorities know this, but they carry out the instructions of those who pay for this “holiday” and pay office fees for this “cinema.” Take care of yourself! For the authorities, you are just a tool for PR and making money.


Ever since Ukraine has received new ATACMs batches, there have been several large-scale strike attempts already recorded, including one in Crimea days ago which had inconclusive results. One report pointed to Russian AD successfully intercepting 10-12 ATACMs missiles, while grainy satellite images did show some ‘questionable’ marks on the airfields which could have potentially been ‘semi-successful’ hits, but no one is quite certain.

Today, a new video showed an ATACMs striking a concentration of Russian troops in Lugansk, again with questionable results.

But the point is: Ukraine has them and has been using them. A strike on the Kerch is not out of the question as the above rumor mill indicates. But it’s unlikely to succeed as the accuracy of the missiles is not high enough to do concentrated damage.

Furthermore, reports continue to stream out about just how badly Western tech has been degraded by Russia’s progressively improving EW capabilities.

Last time we wrote about the GLSDB debacle, now the vaunted Excalibur GPS-guided 155mm artillery round has been exposed as well:

The effectiveness of Ukraine's Excalibur GPS-guided rounds decreased from 70% to 6% within six weeks as Russia adapted and employed various EW assets to counter them. Source: https://congress.gov/118/meeting/house/ ... 240313.pdf

Image

The Excalibur was reduced to 6% effectiveness? That’s virtually useless.

By the way, that goes to show why Russia’s Krasnopol is superior: it has laser-guided capability which is un-jammable in the same way.


Finally, this all dovetails with continued speculations about the next Russian offensive.

I’ll share a few rumblings and rustlings vis-a-vis the Kharkov direction in particular, which is increasingly a focal point of worry for Ukraine.

First, the Financial Times has now thrown its hat in the ring for the Kharkov direction:

🇷🇺⚔️🇺🇦 The Russian Federation is preparing for a major offensive at the end of May or in June, sources in the Ukrainian General Staff told the Financial Times.

According to them, ahead of this operation, Russia is launching missile strikes on Kharkov and other strategically important cities, "softening the battlefield."

A source in the Ukrainian Armed Forces told Bild that he fears an attack on Kharkov involving 20-40 thousand Russian soldiers.

💬 "Then we will have to decide whether we want to defend the north or the east. It is impossible to do both," he said.


Image
https://archive.ph/vkzxc
Interestingly, satellite photos reportedly show Russia building a new airfield right on the opposite side of the Kharkov border:

Western media, citing Satellite images, report that Russia has started building a new Airfield 70 km from Ukraine in the Belgorod region.

The length of the runway is approximately 1800 meters. This is sufficient for different types of Aircraft.

This confirms the Plans to shift the front from the border to the west.


Image

Could it be in preparation for increased aerial support for a new northern campaign?

As the above FT article noted, some are claiming Russia would utilize only 20-40k troops to enter from the north—hypothetically. This isn’t enough to capture the entire region or Kharkov city itself, however that may not be the point.

As the implication goes, the force may merely be to divert Ukrainian troops from the deteriorating Donbass line in order to create much bigger breakthroughs. The Ukrainian officer in the article admitted they don’t have enough troops to effectively resist in both areas.

This would once again be part and parcel to the Russian piecemeal strategy of ‘nibbling’ Ukraine away little by little in the grand attritional war—death by a thousand cuts from every side.

Bild reports on Ukraine’s fortifications in anticipation: (Video at link.)


Here’s a thread on the fortifications which includes videos showing that Russia is actively bombing the Kharkov fortifications right on the Russian border:

Image

And Zelensky likewise echoed that Russia is ‘preparing for an offensive’: (Video at link.)


But many are not confident for Ukraine’s prospects. Swiss paper Blick:

Image

Image

“The Russians will take over Donbass by October, then the conflict will freeze and we will have to negotiate with Putin,” the publication quotes the words of an officer of the 5th assault brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, which holds the defense in Chasovy Yar.

(Much more at link.)

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/sit ... teamroller

Dunno that I'd bet on a major offensive in the Kharkov direction. Unlike the arrogant fools in Kiev the Russians just might know something of misdirection....And that Uke officer is whistling past the graveyard, this cannot end with Donbass. Novorussia or bust!

******

10 years of injustice: Anti-fascist leader recounts Odessa massacre
May 2, 2024 Melinda Butterfield

Image
After driving activists into the Odessa House of Trade Unions, Ukrainian neo-Nazis set fire to the building. Then they shot and beat to death people trying to escape the inferno.

May 2 marks the 10th anniversary of one of the biggest crimes of 21st century fascism – the massacre of nearly 50 activists at the House of Trade Unions in Odessa, Ukraine. Despite extensive video and photographic evidence, the Ukrainian government has never prosecuted any of those responsible. This attack on the anti-fascist resistance paved the way for today’s U.S. proxy war against Russia and the Donbass republics.

The following interview with massacre survivor Alexey Albu was conducted by Struggle-La Lucha co-editor Melinda Butterfield in Simferopol, Crimea, in September 2014, and was originally published in October of that year.

Odessa Regional Council Deputy Alexey Albu, a member of the Ukrainian Marxist organization Borotba (Struggle), was a leader of the city’s Anti-Maidan movement against the U.S.-backed coup of February 2014. Albu survived the May 2, 2014, massacre, when at least 48 people were killed by neo-Nazi gangs at the House of Trade Unions. Albu and his family were forced to flee to Crimea, where he continues his work as co-founder of the Committee for the Liberation of Odessa and leads an independent investigation of May 2. I spoke with Albu about his experiences.

Melinda Butterfield: How did you become active in the anti-fascist movement?

Alexey Albu: I first joined Komsomol, the youth organization of the Communist Party of Ukraine (KPU). Later, I became a member of the KPU and organized its youth wing. I also took part in several local elections in Odessa. So I was always involved in political life as a communist.

The leaders of the KPU were afraid of openly demonstrating anti-fascist views. They didn’t want to take responsibility for an open confrontation with the neo-Nazis or the actions of young people who were strongly against fascism. They took an opportunistic position.

In 2011, I accompanied friends who were members of Borotba to a couple of anti-fascist rallies. When the KPU leaders learned of my attendance at these protests, they planned to expel me.

I left the KPU and became a member of Borotba. I didn’t plan to take people with me. Nevertheless, several comrades left the KPU and joined Borotba. One of them was Vlad Wojciechowski, who is now a political prisoner. Another was Andrey Brazhevsky, who was killed by the Nazis on May 2.

Borotba’s role in Odessa

MB: What kind of work did Borotba carry out in Odessa?

AA: I was an elected deputy of the regional council, so I had the opportunity to speak for Borotba in the local government. We also had the opportunity to create an organizational headquarters in Odessa. Many people came to our organization. Odessa residents got to know us and our symbols, and a lot of journalists covered our activities.

We organized solidarity actions with Ukrainian sailors in England and supported the struggle of dockworkers in the Odessa region. We organized anti-fascist meetings and demonstrations. We held a lot of protest rallies against the local government. We also helped organize immigration and education centers.

All of our protests were directed against the government of President Victor Yanukovych. But when the Euromaidan movement started, we understood that the people who wanted to use it to get power were even worse. Bourgeois democratic law was preferable to direct rule of Nazis and oligarchs. We were against them from the very beginning.

[Euromaidan was the pro-imperialist movement which took its name from Maidan, the central square of Kiev, the Ukrainian capital, where it held protests in late 2013 and early 2014. The backbone of this movement, which received extensive funding and political support from the U.S. government, were neo-Nazi gangs and political parties. Euromaidan culminated in the overthrow of President Victor Yanukovych in February. – MB]

When Euromaidan activists tried to occupy the Odessa Regional State Administration, our comrades protected the building. During the defense of the RSA, I became good friends with Regional Council Deputy Vyacheslav Markin, who was later killed at the House of Trade Unions.

Markin and I were the only deputies who openly said we were against the Nazis, the Euromaidan, the junta and all the crimes this movement brought to Ukraine.

Protest encampment

MB: How did the Anti-Maidan movement and the protest encampment develop?

AA: After Yanukovych was overthrown in February, the Anti-Maidan movement grew and became quite broad. It was based among common people who were not connected with any party. It was organized from below, from the people. The coordinators of this movement included members of many organizations, including Borotba. Borotba was not the most powerful organization; it was just one of those that influenced the Odessa Anti-Maidan.

The biggest parties of Ukraine, the Communist Party and the Party of Regions, didn’t participate in Anti-Maidan, although many of their members did.

The tent camp at Kulikovo Field [similar to the 2011 Occupy Wall Street encampments or the current student Gaza Solidarity Encampments in the U.S.] was the creation of all the groups that took part in the Anti-Maidan movement. For example, one group set up the area where people held speakouts. Others brought tents and supplies.

MB: How did you use your position as a regional deputy to help the movement?

AA: There was a lot of publicity when I introduced a draft law in the Regional State Administration, with help from Deputy Markin, calling for autonomy for the Odessa Region within Ukraine. This made Borotba very popular in Odessa. But unfortunately, most of the delegates didn’t vote for the law.

By ignoring this draft law, the regional deputies forced people to protest. On March 3, they came to the RSA building and started clashing with police. I tried to bring the people into the building to give them the opportunity to speak with the deputies. I was injured trying to get people inside.

Afterward, I had problems with the Security Service of Ukraine [SBU, political police whose role is similar to the FBI in the U.S.]. They searched my apartment and tried to interrogate me. The growing repression had a great impact in Odessa society. By the end of April, the Anti-Maidan protests had become smaller. Fewer people came to Kulikovo.

People were also disappointed because they came to Kulikovo every day, or every weekend, and saw that the leaders of the organizations couldn’t agree with each other. Instead, one by one, these groups started to make deals with the government.

The local government wanted to remove the camp, using the annual May 9 Victory Day parade as an excuse. Some organizations agreed to remove their tents, but others decided to stay.

Target: Odessa

MB: Why do you think the Kiev junta and the fascists targeted Odessa on May 2?

AA: First of all, I should explain that the Odessa region is very important for the Ukrainian economy. [The administrative subdivision of] Odessa has seven seaports and 70% of the country’s imports come through there.

Supporters of the junta in the local government wanted to stop the Anti-Maidan movement. They brought in neo-Nazis from Kiev in the middle of the night. They organized checkpoints inside the city, with 10 or 15 people at each checkpoint. They operated in around-the-clock shifts. They were fed by the government, and they earned money.

On April 29-30, Andriy Parubiy, head of the Defense and National Security Council, even presented the people at the checkpoints with bulletproof vests.

On one hand, they wanted the people from Kiev to radicalize the local Euromaidan movement, to ensure that they would enforce the new government’s orders. On the other hand, they wanted to remove the activists from Kulikovo Field, to make sure there would be no organized opposition.

I don’t think the government necessarily planned to kill people and cause so many casualties. But they organized everything and set the events in motion.

MB: Before the massacre on May 2, you planned to run for mayor of Odessa.

AA: What happened was that we held a strong anti-fascist demonstration on May Day, which worried the local government. That day, a lot of people from the Odessa Anti-Maidan movement agreed to back my campaign for mayor as the candidate of Kulikovo Field.

The following day, May 2, the tragedy began.

Deputy Markin was my campaign manager. He was killed by the Nazis. Afterward, anyone who tried to agitate for the candidate of Kulikovo Field was attacked by the fascists. So I decided to stop the campaign. I couldn’t take part in such elections.

Anyway, I was soon forced to leave Odessa. The local government spread lies, saying that I was responsible for the deaths at the House of Trade Unions. They claimed I took people into the building and subsequently the building burned, so I was guilty. They planned to arrest me.

Actually, I was one of the last people to enter the building. Never mind the fascists who threw Molotov cocktails, shot people and beat to death those who leapt from the burning building!

Kiev suppresses evidence

MB: Along with other Odessa political exiles, you have been conducting an independent investigation of the May 2 tragedy. Can you describe your work?

AA: The main problem for us is that a lot of information was lost the day after the tragedy. Many people went there. The House of Trade Unions was cleaned out before facts and evidence could be gathered.

Also, all the material recorded by the police and Security Service of Ukraine was never published and is classified top secret. So we have to look for information from open sources or solicit people who witnessed the massacre to share information. And of course many have been coerced by the new regime to remain silent or change their stories.

Our committee is sure that there were more than 48 victims on May 2. For one thing, the mother of an activist told us that when she went to the morgue to identify her child, the police showed her more than 60 bodies.

Officials of the government, the Security Service and the police do not provide any information, not even to the official investigation committee set up by the Ukrainian parliament. The leaders of the ultranationalist Ukrainian militia do not comment or make any statements. They are trying to avoid all questions about this tragedy.

But under the law they have to answer all the questions and turn over all the evidence and facts they have to the investigation committee.

MB: Do you have any parting message for workers and youth in the U.S.?

AA: The government in Kiev is doing everything in order to hide the real causes of this terrible tragedy and the real culprits of the massacre. We declare that we will pursue the investigation anyhow, and everyone guilty will answer for it and will be punished.

We are grateful to all the comrades who support the struggle of the Ukrainian people against the oligarchy and the Nazis. We are grateful to everyone who is helping us, and we call for solidarity because only together, by joint efforts, can we defeat the world capitalist system.

¡No pasarán!

https://www.struggle-la-lucha.org/2024/ ... -massacre/

******

Odessa after the massacre: nine years later the wounds are still fresh

The west continues to ignore, downplay and misrepresent the trade unionists who were burned alive in Odessa’s trade union building by Nato’s fascist stormtroopers.

Image
The burning alive of antifascist protestors in Odessa’s trade union building on 2 May 2014 sent shock waves round the world. But the perpetrators of this heinous crime, far from being brought to book, have been rewarded with promotions and immunity. These are the ‘democrats’ our rulers are funding in their obsessive quest to destroy Russia.
Steve Sweeney

Tuesday 2 May 2023

This exclusive interview with an Odessa massacre survivor was carried out for Proletarian by Steve Sweeney in Russia.

*****

Sasha gently rolls back the sleeve of her jumper to reveal scarred and damaged skin.

“It still hurts me sometimes even now,” she tells me as we sip coffee in a Moscow cafe. “Doctors said it would be like this for some time. But it has been nearly ten years.”

Sasha [not her real name] was one of the hundreds injured in the Odessa Trade Union House massacre on 2 May 2014.

“I was lucky, I managed to escape. They tried to burn us all alive. The police stood and watched as they shot at us and beat us.

“Many jumped from the windows and were attacked as they hit the ground. It was like hell,” she says.

At least 48 people were killed as far-right Ukrainians set the building alight after pro-Russians took shelter there from a baying mob.

Fighting for the truth
Nine years later, the survivors and the victims’ families are still seeking truth and justice for their loved ones amid a cover-up by the state and the connivance of western institutions including the Council of Europe, the European Union and others.

In fact, the only criminal cases that have been opened by the Kiev administration are against those who were attacked, as Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov explained earlier this year.

“We know the truth,” Sasha says. “We know who did this and they are being protected. But we will not give up. Those who died deserve justice. We need to heal the pain.”

She was on the streets of Odessa just months after the democratically elected government of President Viktor Yanukovych was overthrown in a US-backed coup after he refused to sign a deal integrating Ukraine more closely into the European Union.

“We objected to this meddling, this was not what we wanted. Fascists were taking over the country because of the west. They were helping them to control Ukraine and to kill us,” she says.

“I will never forget that day for as long as I am alive. The Banderists and fascists were killing people and the whole world looked away,” Sasha continues. “All we wanted was to be treated like humans, but they treated us like animals, cockroaches. This was terrorism.”

Fascist pogrom organised by Nato’s puppets
The pogrom was coordinated by the Right Sector, a coalition of ultranationalist forces founded by Dmytro Yarosh, a virulent antisemite and supporter of Ukrainian wartime Nazi-collaborator Stepan Bandera.

They took advantage of a football match held between Odessa and Metallist Kharkiv on the day of the massacre, rallying the support of right-wing ultras from both teams’ supporters.

“We knew there was going to be trouble on the day of the match. These teams had a reputation for violence, but police did nothing to stop them. It started when they marched in the city,” she explains.

There had been an agreement reached to peacefully clear the Kulikov field, the site of a pro-Russian encampment that had been set up in the months after the Maidan coup.

This was reportedly to make way for Victory Day celebrations on 9 May, the date which marks the Soviet Union’s defeat of Nazi Germany.

But as the violence started, the camp was set ablaze, causing people to flee to the nearby trade union building for shelter.

“It is ironic we agreed to move out of the camp but then it was attacked by the Ukrainian nazis, the same people defeated [in 1945]. But here [in Ukraine] they did not go away,” Sasha says

Hundreds gathered there, and soon after it too came under attack.

“I was in a room that was filled with smoke very quickly. We could hardly breathe. As I left there were bodies on the floor. I could not help them.

“Some people started jumping out of the windows. I heard the sound of their bodies hitting the floor and they were beaten to death.

“On the ground [outside] people stopped us from leaving. I could hear the football fans chanting, singing Ukraine’s anthem …

“Nobody was coming to help. The fire was spreading and there was shooting too. I thought I was going to die,” she recalls.

The Ukrainian police were not passive bystanders – although they did nothing to help, they were filmed firing their guns into the trade union building.

Crowds below chanted “Burn, Colorado, burn”, a reference to the pro-Russian colours of ribbons worn by some of the protesters. As the fire tore through the building, the Ukrainian national anthem was sung by those gathered outside, taunting those trapped inside as they burned to death.

The Nazi-era slogan – Slava Ukraini, now frequently to be heard on the lips of Kiev’s western sponsors – was shouted as people were dying inside the building, whose walls were daubed with swastikas and the name “Galician SS”.

“We escaped, but nobody helped us,” Sasha says, adding: “It was terrifying. After the attacks people were afraid to leave their homes. We didn’t want to go outside for weeks.”

No retribution for the perpetrators
Despite the admissions and footage clearly identifying many of those responsible, the perpetrators remained free.

In the aftermath of the fire, the Right Sector celebrated the deaths, describing the massacre as “yet another bright page in our fatherland’s history”.

Yarosh, whose organisation claimed responsibility for “coordinating” the attack, even became a candidate for the Ukrainian presidency and later an MP. He was never investigated by Ukrainian authorities – and he was not alone.

Svoboda party MP Irina Farion declared: “Bravo Odessa … Let the devils burn in hell’ – yet she also was not charged.

Fatherland party lawmaker Lesya Orobets published a statement on her Facebook page on 2 May celebrating the “liquidation” of the oppositionist kolorady – a derogatory term for those who hold pro-Russian views. She accompanied her post with several photographs of headless corpses.

Aleksey Goncharenko, who took part in the Odessa protests, was later elected to the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe.

These are the so-called democrats backed by the west.

Sasha made her way to the roof as the blaze spread. Exactly what happened inside the building is unclear. Many died there, some of them outside, their bodies found riddled with bullets.

“They [Ukrainian authorities] did nothing while these people celebrated the burning. They hate us and do not have respect for life. We know who our killers are. They are the government.”

The United Nations has criticised Kiev for its unwillingness to carry out proper investigations into the massacre. But, unsurprisingly, there has been a concerted effort to cover up the truth by western powers, which have tried to shift the blame onto Russia.

Petro Poroshenko, who was later to be installed as Ukrainian president, led the charge accusing ‘Russian provocateurs’ and supporters ‘shipped in from Transnistria’ of coming to Odessa to foment violence.

He even accused Moscow of placing gas canisters in the trade union building to deliberately increase the number of casualties. But this has been widely dismissed, including by those not allied with Moscow.

An eyewitness report for the CIA-backed Radio Liberty said: “On 2 May, 48 people died. None of them were ‘Russian saboteurs’ or ‘Transnistrian fighters’ or ‘bussed-in Bandera anarchists’. All were residents of Odessa and the surrounding suburbs.”

Sasha confirmed this and said the only outsiders were the hundreds that had been bussed in the night before the provocations started, along with the football supporters who had been urged to join in with the attacks.

Western media and politicians continue to look the other way
On today’s anniversary, commemoration events have been banned in Odessa once again, as pro-Kiev forces seek to erase the event from memory. Ukraine’s western backers have also colluded in order to downplay the role of far-right Ukrainian forces in the attack.

The Council of Europe’s international advisory panel described the events of May 2014 as “clashes”, as if both groups were equally responsible for the massacre.

But the IAP drew its conclusions from the May 2 Group – made up of journalists and others – many of whom justify the actions of the Ukrainian government while denouncing criticism of Kiev as “pro-Russian propaganda”.

Solidarity for the victims of this heinous massacre has also been in short supply from ‘Ukrainiacs’. Last year passed without a mention from most of those displaying the yellow and blue flag in their social media profile pictures.

The British-based so-called ‘Ukraine Solidarity Campaign’ – in reality a front for the social-imperialist Alliance for Workers Liberty – has gone so far as shamefully to recycle claims that describing the attack as a massacre is “Russian propaganda”, blaming the victims for their own deaths.

It was, of course, these opportunists that organised the poorly attended demonstration last year which saw a handful of trade unionists chanting “Arm, arm, arm Ukraine!” as they marched through the streets of London – just as then prime minister Boris Johnson was in Kiev promising to do exactly that.

We now also know that he was there to strongarm puppet actor-president Volodymyr Zelensky and prevent him from signing a peace deal or entering negotiations with Russia to bring an end to the conflict.

Of course, these supporters of the Kiev regime cannot draw attention to the massacre, or admit who was responsible – to do so would blow a major hole in the narrative that there are no fascists or neo-nazis in Ukraine, which they hail instead as a beacon of freedom and democracy.

Nine years on from the attack, the victims of the Odessa massacre have largely been forgotten by the west, sacrificed as pawns in its proxy war against Russia and abandoned by those who claim to stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine.

The events in Odessa were just one part of an orgy of far-right violence unleashed in the wake of the western-backed Maidan coup.

The Ukrainian neo-nazis – emboldened after the Odessa massacre – carried out another attack in the city just seven days later on Victory Day, shooting dead an unknown number of unarmed demonstrators in an incident that was not even reported in the west.

The rest is history. Today the conflict continues, having escalated into a Nato proxy war and the battle being waged in the areas now incorporated into the Russian Federation.

But for those who lost loved ones in the Odessa Trade Union House massacre, and for those who survived, the struggle for justice continues.

“Please raise our voices. Tell the world not to forget the people of Odessa and our struggle for justice,” Sasha says. “Only then can we put out the flames that continue to burn."

https://thecommunists.org/2023/05/02/ne ... r-fascism/

*******

A Ukrainian terrorist was eliminated in the Leningrad region
May 3, 12:14 p.m

Image

Security forces have eliminated a Ukrainian military intelligence agent who was preparing a series of terrorist attacks in Russia, including against Defense Ministry facilities, the FSB reported.
The department noted that the Ukrainian saboteur was planning terrorist attacks against members of one of the volunteer battalions and its volunteer center in St. Petersburg.

(Videos at link.)

The Ukrainian saboteur neutralized in the Leningrad region was trained in Lithuania, the FSB TsOS reported. When examining his phone, “correspondence with the curator was discovered, confirming the preparation of a terrorist attack in the Leningrad region.
It also became known about plans to “completely eradicate everything Russian” in the Baltic countries and the planning of terrorist attacks in Orthodox churches and in places of residence of Russian-speaking residents, in particular, the arson of a cinema in Riga during the film screening."

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9132543.html

Google Translator

******

The United States-Ukraine security pact is lipstick on a bloody defeat for NATO

Finian Cunningham

May 2, 2024

The security pact with Ukraine is a cosmetic gain to conceal what is in reality a shameful defeat to Russia.



The United States and Ukraine are moving toward signing a 10-year bilateral security pact. But former Pentagon analyst David Pyne sees it as a sign that Washington realizes Russia is near to outright victory in the conflict.

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has this week renewed talk about signing a long-term security alliance with the United States. The Biden administration seems to be amenable to signing off on the pact.

Such a move may appear to give the U.S. a long-term foothold in Ukraine but, says Pyne, it is being proposed from a position of weakness, not strength.

Russia has all but won the war that escalated in February 2022. Earlier predictions by NATO states that Ukraine would defeat Russia are shown to be a cruel fantasy.

Despite massive supplies of weapons to Ukraine from the United States and its NATO allies, Russia is prevailing militarily. David Pyne reckons that Russia’s anticipated offensive over the summer dry period will result in a decisive victory before the end of the year.

The signing of a security pact between the U.S. and Ukraine is a way to put lipstick on what is otherwise a crushing defeat for the NATO side.

Pyne points out that Russia will be in a dominant position to make sure that Ukraine does not become a member of NATO. That has always been a key demand by Moscow

That has always been a key demand by Russia. The proposed U.S.-Ukraine security pact is a prelude to the Kiev regime coming to the negotiating table on Russia’s terms and giving the West a semblance of obtaining a gain from the war – a war that has cost 500,000 Ukrainian military lives and hundreds of billions of dollars for Western taxpayers.

This conflict – the worst in Europe since the Second World War – could have been avoided altogether if the U.S. and NATO allies had accepted Russia’s security terms at the end of 2021. But the Biden administration chose instead to make war at a terrible price.

In a tight election year, President Biden needs some good news from an otherwise disastrous conflict in Ukraine. The security pact with Ukraine is a cosmetic gain to conceal what is in reality a shameful defeat to Russia.

David Pyne is Executive Vice President of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security. He has long advocated a mutual security treaty with Russia based on a rational recognition of Russia’s legitimate national security interests due to the provocative expansion of NATO around Russian borders.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/ ... -for-nato/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10873
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 May 04, 2024 11:51 am

Sanctions, escapes and returns
POSTED BY @NSANZO ⋅ 05/04/2024

Image

For a decade, the European Union and the United States have tried to use the economic weapon of sanctions as a tool of pressure against Russia. First introduced after the accession of Crimea to the Russian Federation against the opinion of kyiv but with the approval of the population, the first packages of measures were limited to personal sanctions, freezing of assets in the countries of the European Union and sectoral restrictions without the capacity to excessively undermine the Russian economy or cause the continental breakup to which the United States already aspired. The Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 allowed Washington, Brussels and their allies to introduce a series of measures that had been impossible until then. In addition to the economic objective of destroying the Russian economy and preventing Moscow from continuing the war, there were political motivations to destroy any possibility of a commercial and diplomatic relationship between Moscow and the other European regional powers. That year, as Joe Biden or Victoria Nuland had announced in the event of war, Nord Stream-2 was sidelined without any possibility of coming into operation. Seven months later, an attack ruled out any possibility of resuming gas supplies between Russia and Germany in the clearest symbol of the continental divide and it was clear that there would be no resumption of a minimally normal relationship between Berlin and Moscow even if the war ended. .

Two years after the introduction of the first of a dozen sanctions packages with the explicit objective of destroying the Russian economy, the debate over whether the measures have had the expected effect has now disappeared from the media conversation. In the first months, every piece of information - whether the rise or fall in the value of the ruble - was understood in terms of the effects of the sanctions. But while there have certainly been economic consequences from the virtually complete breakdown of direct trade and dealing between Russia and Western countries (Gazprom has posted losses for the first time in decades, for example), even the countries that applied the sanctions have been forced to admit their failure, at least in the short and medium term. There is still hope in Brussels and Washington that the expected immediate effect will occur in the future, although, for the moment, there are no signs that the desired change will occur.

Nor have the justifications of the press, political elites or think-tanks , which have tried to cast doubt on the data and statistics provided by the Russian Federation, been useful so far . This attempt to present the sanctions as a successful action has clashed with the data offered by international organizations that can hardly be described as pro-Russian, such as the World Bank or the International Monetary Fund. To the forecasts of these institutions, which foresee a growth of the Russian economy above that of Germany, the United States or the United Kingdom, are added the increase in real wages and the decrease in unemployment, at the cost, of course, of a high inflation. In recent times, especially at times when Ukraine's allies have wanted to exaggerate the Russian danger to press for more financing for kyiv, the Western press has also highlighted Russian production capacity. In contrast to the speech two years ago, which promised that Moscow would not be able to continue producing military material and saw dependence on its industry as a weakness rather than a sign of independence, the United States and its allies now emphasize that the military industry Russia produces in three shifts and there are no indications that supply will cease in the short or medium term future.

In the absence of economic data with which to justify themselves, Western countries have seized on other aspects to see in the sanctions a success that they have not had. In the same way, it has acted when it comes to seeing, by action or omission, every act of Russian society as a sign of rejection of its Government. In 2022, the departure of thousands of Russian men of draft age was understood as an open rejection of the war in Ukraine. These were the months in which, after the military defeat in Kharkiv, Moscow understood the seriousness of its situation and wanted to balance its forces based on partial mobilization with which to recruit 300,000 men. The potential brain drain, something that Russia has suffered during the decades of reestablishing capitalism without it appearing to be a problem for the West, which benefited from the arrival of a highly qualified population, was presented as an obvious sign of the coming Russian decline. The queues at the borders of Estonia or Kazakhstan and the fleeting increase in the purchase of tickets to destinations such as Serbia, Armenia or Turkey with the intention of continuing the trip to Western countries became opening news topics as a reflection of the Russian social rejection of war. Similar images of the flight of Ukrainian men across the land and river borders of Ukraine to avoid recruitment were then avoided, and the march of millions of people to European countries was presented as a sign of the country's strength and not of weakness.

A year and a half later, stories about the growing trend of young Ukrainians risking their lives to flee being drafted to be sent to the front lines of a war that fewer and fewer people believe they can win have finally found their way into the press. Periodically, the media from different countries also confirm the intention of refugee families in Western countries to remain there even after the end of the war. This trend is likely to increase as the consequences of Ukraine's decision to suspend consular services to military-age men residing, temporarily or permanently, abroad become apparent. This population, which Zelensky has defined as the basis of economic recovery after the war, seems to be increasingly distant from returning to a Ukraine in which the war threatens to become chronic.

This situation contrasts with what was published this week by Business Insider in relation to the Russian population that left the country in 2022. “Up to a million Russians fled abroad during the first year of the Kremlin's invasion of Ukraine. Now, thousands of them return to their country, which represents a propaganda victory for President Vladimir Putin and a boost for his war economy," writes the article, which recounts the difficulties that this population has suffered in the countries in which they expected to be received in the same way as the Ukrainian refugees were. This false perception was based on seeing themselves as politically useful to European and North American countries when it came to showing the Kremlin's weakness and underestimating the nuance of ethnic and racial hatred historically present in those countries in relation to Russia.

“The outflow has slowed, if not reversed. In June, the Kremlin boasted that half of all those who fled in those early days had already returned, and that appears to reflect available statistics from the most popular destination countries, as well as data from relocation companies. According to client data from a Moscow-based relocation company, Finion, an estimated 40% to 45% of those who left in 2022 have returned to Russia, said the company's director, Vyacheslav Kartamyshev. , adds Business Insider to detail stories in which aspiring refugees recount the lack of Western interest and, sometimes, the rejection felt in the countries that were supposed to welcome them. In many cases, for the West, the Russian enemy is not only in the Kremlin and the entire population is considered a potential enemy and viewed with suspicion.

“Several European countries, especially in the East, have made it very difficult for Russians to obtain or renew temporary residence permits, as has Turkey, which has surprised tens of thousands of Russians, who have been forced to choose between return to their country or look for another,” admits the article, which attempts, however, to downplay the economic effect that the return of an important part of those people who the press described as exiles will have. The barriers between Russia and Western countries are not limited to the Kremlin, the regime or the part of Russia that supports its Government in the war, but extends, in many cases, to the entire Russian population in what can also be considered an effect of the sanctions and the objective of Washington, Brussels and their allies to build a barrier that prevents political and economic, but also social, communication between Moscow and the rest of the continent.

https://slavyangrad.es/2024/05/04/sanci ... -regresos/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Summary of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation (as of May 3, 2024) | The main thing:

- Russian air defense shot down 40 Ukrainian Armed Forces drones and three Hammer bombs in one day;

— Units of the Southern Group of Forces occupied more advantageous positions within 24 hours, the losses of the Ukrainian Armed Forces amounted to up to 340 military personnel;

— The Russian Forces Group “West” improved the position along the front line and repelled three attacks by the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the Kharkov region and LPR;

— Units of the Eastern Group of the Russian Armed Forces occupied more advantageous positions, repelled three counterattacks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the enemy lost up to 135 military personnel;

— The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 355 military personnel in the zone of responsibility of the West group of troops, nine pieces of equipment were hit during the counter-battery fight;

— Units of the “Center” group repelled 10 counterattacks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces during the day;

— The Russian Armed Forces destroyed Ukrainian illumination and guidance radars with two S-300PT air defense missile launchers, as well as an IRIS-T air defense missile launcher;

— The Russian Armed Forces hit the Balovnoye oil depot, from which the military units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were supplied with fuColonelcassad
Summary of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation (as of May 3, 2024) | The main thing:

- Russian air defense shot down 40 Ukrainian Armed Forces drones and three Hammer bombs in one day;

— Units of the Southern Group of Forces occupied more advantageous positions within 24 hours, the losses of the Ukrainian Armed Forces amounted to up to 340 military personnel;

— The Russian Forces Group “West” improved the position along the front line and repelled three attacks by the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the Kharkov region and LPR;

— Units of the Eastern Group of the Russian Armed Forces occupied more advantageous positions, repelled three counterattacks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the enemy lost up to 135 military personnel;

— The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 355 military personnel in the zone of responsibility of the West group of troops, nine pieces of equipment were hit during the counter-battery fight;

— Units of the “Center” group repelled 10 counterattacks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces during the day;

— The Russian Armed Forces destroyed Ukrainian illumination and guidance radars with two S-300PT air defense missile launchers, as well as an IRIS-T air defense missile launcher;

— The Russian Armed Forces hit the Balovnoye oil depot, from which the military units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were supplied with fuel.

Operational-tactical aviation, missile forces and artillery of troop groups of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation destroyed: an illumination and guidance radar with two launchers of the S-300PT anti-aircraft missile system, as well as a launcher of the IRIS-T anti-aircraft missile system manufactured in Germany.

In addition, the Balovnoye oil depot was hit, from which fuel was supplied to military units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, as well as enemy manpower and military equipment in 102 districts.

▫️During the day, air defense systems shot down 40 Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles, as well as three Hammer guided bombs made in France.

📊In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the following have been destroyed: 593 aircraft, 270 helicopters, 23,713 unmanned aerial vehicles, 512 anti-aircraft missile systems, 15,908 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 1,278 combat vehicles of multiple launch rocket systems, 9,276 field artillery guns and mortars, as well as 21,457 units of special military vehicles.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Ukraine SitRep: Niu-York Cauldron - Sumi Diversion - Supplying Crimea

A current look at the map in the east of Ukraine:

April 03, 2024

Image

May 03, 2024

Image

The above maps are of the eastern front in Ukraine on April 3 and May 3. Opening them side by side one can see two significant moves by Russian forces. In the north the forces are moving west towards Chasiv Yar which is a high ground controlling anything further west of it.

On the southern part of the map, north of Avdiivka, the Russian forces have taken Ocheretyne and Keramik.

Both movements together let one anticipate a larger two pronged plan:

From Chasiv Yar a move west roughly along the H32 road towards Konstantynivka.
From Keramik a move north roughly along the H-20 road.
This would form a pincer which would envelope the large mining conglomerate around Niu-York, west of Horlivka. The area has been on the frontline since 2014. It is thus heavily fortified. Surrounding it is much more convenient and less bloody than storming it outright.

The Economist had a talk (archived) with Vadym Skibitsky, the deputy head of Ukraine’s military intelligence.

He seems to have already given up on Chasiv Yar:

Ukraine’s immediate concern is its high-ground stronghold in the town of Chasiv Yar, which holds the keys to an onward Russian advance to the last large cities in the Donetsk region (see map). It is probably a matter of time before that city falls in a similar way to Avdiivka, bombed to oblivion by the Russians in February, says the general. “Not today or tomorrow, of course, but all depending on our reserves and supplies.”

Russia has already won a tactical success in the south-west in the village of Ocheretyne, where a recent Ukrainian troop rotation was bungled. Russian forces succeeded in breaking through a first line of defence and have created a salient 25 square kilometres in size. Ukraine is some way from stabilising the situation, while Russia is throwing “everything” it has to achieve a bigger gain. The Russian army is not the hubristic organisation it was in 2022, says the general, and is now operating as a “single body, with a clear plan, and under a single command”.


Mr. Skibitsky is in a generally gloomy mood:

General Skibitsky says he does not see a way for Ukraine to win the war on the battlefield alone. Even if it were able to push Russian forces back to the borders—an increasingly distant prospect—it wouldn’t end the war. Such wars can only end with treaties, he says.
It is good to finally see some realism reaching Kiev.



Some Russian forces are ready to (again) enter Ukraine from the north to threaten the cities of Sumy and Kharkiv. I see this as a diversion attempt, not as a serious operation to take those cities. It is binding Ukrainian forces in the north while the eastern frontlines are too thinly occupied to hold off further attacks.

One fixation of the Ukrainian side has been the Kerch bridge which connects the larger Russia with Crimea. It was hoped that any destruction of the bridge would hamper the Russian logistics. But a map of the new railway tracks Russia has build on the northern side of the Sea of Asov shows that there are now several redundant ways to supply Crimea. A destruction of the Kerch bridge now would be a just-for-show moment without any significant consequences for the Russian positions.

Image

Posted by b on May 3, 2024 at 8:09 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2024/05/u ... rimea.html

*******

CANADA IS LOSING ITS WAR AGAINST RUSSIA SO IT HAS THREATENED SENIOR ARMY OFFICERS WITH COURT MARTIAL FOR “DISLOYALTY”

Image

by John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

A senior Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) officer, who is the Assistant Chief of Staff at the NATO Allied Rapid Reaction Corps (ARRC), faces court martial, “dismissal with disgrace”, and loss of his military pension for having disagreed with Canadian, American, and British military planners of Ukrainian battlefield operations against Russia. His disagreement was in private, when the officers were asking for his professional assessment, and didn’t like what he told them.

Colonel Robert Kearney was charged by the Canadian military police on April 23. The charge sheet says he faces “five (5) x counts of Conduct Prejudice to the Good Order and Discipline pursuant to section 129 of the National Defence Act.”

Public disclosure was delayed by the Department of National Defence in Ottawa until Monday, April 29, when a press release claimed Kearney had been under investigation since another officer filed a complaint against Kearney last November. According to the ministry statement, the military police had “received a complaint of a senior CAF officer allegedly making derogatory and disloyal comments about Senior CAF and NATO members.”

Section 129 of the law refers to “any act, conduct, disorder or neglect”, but it doesn’t define what “good order or discipline” means in the Kiev and Lvov bunkers where Canadians tell the Ukrainians what to do. Canadian sources believe the law has rarely been used against an officer of colonel’s rank, and never in a court martial of an officer for warning that military plans risked loss of Canadian lives and resources.

Canadian military sources believe Kearney is being court-martialed now because the Canadian government’s policy to finance, arm, train, plan, and direct Ukrainian operations against Russia is being defeated, and that the military collapse east of Kiev now risks loss of more territory and the lives of Canadians currently working in the Ukraine and at cross-border bases in Poland and Romania. At least one thousand Canadians have been counted by the Russian Defense Ministry on the battlefield since the start of the Special Military Operation; by March of this year, 422 had been confirmed killed in action.

“The timing of the alleged offences,” says a Canadian veteran who served with US and NATO units in Afghanistan, “was when the Germans took over command of NATO’s rapid reaction force which has been building up men and materiel, including heavy tanks and F-16s, in Romania for a plan to attack Russian forces around Odessa. Kearney’s court martial is a warning to his fellow officers not to object or predict destruction of the NATO forces engaged.”

“Kearney said things that clearly offended the top decision-makers in Ottawa,” the source says. “Criticizing the mission meant criticizing [Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia] Freeland [lead image, left] and the UCC [Ukrainian Canadian Congress]. Criticizing how the mission was being conducted also meant criticizing the Americans and British. That’s what has drawn the charge of disloyalty.”

Image
Left: Colonel Robert Kearney from a social media posting; right, Kearney’s Meritorious Service Medal citation of May 2012. An earlier MSM was awarded to Kearney in October 2008. This medal is a US military award to foreign, allied soldiers. Following his first medal citation Kearney was promoted from command of a CAF training base for snipers, tankers, and artillerymen to a divisional headquarters in Toronto.

Colonel Kearney’s first offence allegedly occurred in December of 2021; this was nine months after Kearney had been promoted to the ARRC staff post in the UK, replacing another Canadian colonel.

Kearney’s four subsequent offences allegedly followed between January 2023 and November 2023. The offences reportedly took place at the British staff headquarters of the ARRC in Gloucestershire, and then in Romania where the unit has been training for cross-border operations against the Russian Army.

Since 1945, ARRC has been a British-led land-attack unit aimed at Russia, when “the scale of the Red Threat it faced was daunting.” While British generals lead the ARRC, Canadian officers staff the deputy posts, and troops from several European states fill the ranks. In the past they have been despatched to fight against Serbia and Bosnia, against the Iraqis in Iraq and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Since 2022, the unit has been focusing on operations in the Ukraine. In February 2023, a lance corporal whose name was kept secret was awarded a unit medal for “exceptionally rigorous analysis and sound judgement to the chain of command supporting commanders’ decision making up to the most senior levels…Without his dedication, skill as an intelligencer and confidence as a team member, the HQ would not have been on the front foot throughout the Ukraine crisis.”


By then the difference between Kearney’s assessments and the lance corporal’s had begun to be noticed. Kearney reported to the AARC chief of staff, Major General Mike Keating, a British army helicopter pilot who saw action in Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Iraq, and Afghanistan. He was then vetted for a general’s command by the Pentagon before his promotion to a US unit in Texas, and then assignment to the ARRC in May 2023. As a graduate student at King’s College in London, he studied under the Russia academic warfighter Lawrence Freedman.

“Kearney is a competent officer, the charges are bullshit, and General Keating sacrificed his subordinate,” speculates a Canadian military source. “Maybe the Ukrainians heard what was being said, and put pressure on Keating to stop the rot. I mean, the truth.”

There is no reference to Kearney as Keating’s deputy in the ARRC archive; the Canadian Defence Ministry press release is keeping secret what disagreements Kearney had with Keating and other officers on the ARRC staff over plans, operations, and intelligence on the war against Russia in the Ukraine. “This case will now proceed through the Military Justice System and no further information can be released at this time”, the ministry has said.

By publishing the offence allegations and concealing Kearney’s criticisms, the Canadian government and the ARRC have eliminated the presumption of Kearney’s innocence, and ensured his court martial conviction. By keeping the case particulars secret, the political bomb Kearney’s case represents is being defused. No Canadian journalist dares to investigate.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s (CBC) military propaganda reporter, Murray Brewster, claims Kearney was “prolific on social media, Kearney’s posts were mostly personal and when he did comment on the military or allies, it was with congratulatory notes wishing various units a happy anniversary.” Brewster also acknowledges that Kearney’s professional reputation was positive. “Kearney, a veteran of the Afghan war who served as a strategic adviser to former chief of the [Canadian] defence staff [Army General] Jonathan Vance, was known in military circles for his blunt, clear-eyed assessments of complex military and leadership issues.”

For “complex military and leadership issues” read fighting the Russian Army, says a Canadian military source. “Look at the dates of the alleged offences. The first was December 2021 – when the US was preparing the Ukrainians and the NATO support units to go to war against Russia in a surprise attack on Donetsk and Lugansk. Then Kearney allegedly got more emphatic and negative between January and November last year. This was when even the US Joint Chiefs of Staff were warning the White House not to support the Kiev regime’s counteroffensive of that summer. That disaster was obvious by the time Kearney was saying so in November 2023, and the court martial preparations began against him.”

Reporting from Ottawa, Brewster implies that Kearney’s prosecution is the first of its kind.

A Washington source points out that between September 2022 and March 2023 a spate of detailed warnings against the Ukrainian disaster from the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) were leaked into the media by a US National Guard airman first-class named Jack Teixeira; he has subsequently been convicted and sent to prison for his leaks.

Kearney’s Facebook, Linked-in and Twitter accounts have been censored. He and his lawyer have refused to speak to the Canadian press.


David Puglies, a military reporter in Ottawa for the Ottawa Citizen and National Post syndicate, has been reporting on the sex scandals and abuse of women which have forced the retirements of several Canadian military commanders, and a cancelled rape prosecution for Lieutenant General Trevor Cadieu, an advisor on tank and artillery operations in the Ukraine.

According to Pugliese, “Kearney had previously raised concerns about Canada’s military leaders in 2022 after serving senior Canadian military officers gave a standing ovation to a speech by a retired general who criticized everything from the removal of historical statues to government climate change policies. Retired Lt.-Gen. Michel Maisonneuve made the controversial speech while accepting a top defence award from the Conference of Defence Associations Institute.”

“Kearney was one of the few military officers taking issue with the speech. He wrote on Facebook that the Vimy Gala ‘was sullied with arrogance, entitlement, and not in keeping with the humility & spirit of the event. I hope that folks that have worn/wear the uniform, past & present, will not think that all senior leaders support the hubris & arrogance displayed, over being humble, appreciative, and showing humility in such a forum. I also hope that more senior folks, (retired & serving), will speak out in the future. Canada deserves better.’ ”


Pugliese left out what had been the military targets of Kearney’s criticism of Maisonneuve’s speech in November 2022. “A great leader”, Maisonneuve had declared to applause, “can take a seemingly insurmountable objective and make it possible to achieve in the hearts and minds of their followers. Thankfully these leaders still do exist in today’s world and there is no better example than Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. In his nightly address he clearly, continuously, and passionately articulates the mission to his fellow Ukrainians. Dismissed early on as ‘an actor, a comedian, a dancer,’ President Zelenskyy has rallied the world to his just cause. He surrounded himself with good people, made difficult decisions and by communicating, has captured our hearts and souls with Ukraine’s plight. God speed Mr. President and Slava Ukraini.”

A storm of public criticism followed Maisonneuve’s remarks, forcing him to respond with a denial that he had been attacking the government or the generals commanding the CAF for promoting woke culture inside the Canadian military. “I am astonished,” he wrote in the National Post on December 1, 2022, “at how my remarks upon accepting the Vimy Award three weeks ago have been misrepresented and distorted. Some organizations I worked with have decided to cut ties with me as a result.” He reiterated his backing for Canada’s war against Russia. “I stand by my challenge to the leaders of today — take a page from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s playbook: strive to unite us; not divide us.”

Pugliese was asked to clarify what he or his military sources know but he has not reported on the Kearney case yet.

“1. You refer to the date of lodgement of the complaint as five months ago, on November 29, 2023. You don’t identify whether the complaint originated with a German, American or British officer in a position in the UK and Romania to have heard Kearney make the alleged “derogatory and disloyal comments about Senior CAF and NATO members” dating once in December 2021 and four times during 2023? Did the allegations and alleged evidence originate outside the CAF?

2. Did you have access to Maisonneuve’s “controversial speech” as you appear to have reported nothing about it when it occurred or since?

3. You report that “Kearney was one of the few military officers taking issue with the speech.” For sourcing your adjective “few”, you will have been professionally obliged to contact several — say, more than three — CAF officers. Did you?

4. Your adjective “few” implies that there were others, in addition to Kearney. Is that your understanding?

5. If there were others, have you confirmed that the others have not been charged with any offence?”

The questions were framed for the reporter to answer yes or no. Pugliese has refused to reply.

The wording of the law which is being used to prosecute Kearney is vague.

Image
Source: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/

Image
Source: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/

Like the two Canadian military reporters, no serving or retired Canadian military officer has attempted to identify what exactly Kearney had said or written to trigger the military police investigation, and what was the nationality of the officers involved.

The Canadian veteran of the NATO mission in Afghanistan observes that “instead of more insight regarding Kearney’s position, we are getting nothing but a list of charges within a temporal context only a few of us can identify as significant. Four of the five counts he’s charged with occurred January to November 2023, when the grand Ukrainian counter-offensive had turned into a grand Ukrainian slaughter and NATO defeat. His apparent griping also became noticeable to ‘senior NATO members’ after the NATO Rapid Reaction Force came under German command and deployed to Romania. After seeing the US and NATO performance in Afghanistan, he knew damn well that beating the Russians, even with an army of Ukrainian zombies, was a pipe dream.”

The source notes that during Kearney’s time on the staff of Canadian General Jonathan Vance he had seen “up close the aberrant behavior”. Criticism of sexual misconduct by Vance and other senior Canadian officers has been widespread throughout the active and retired Canadian services.

Image
Source: https://www.espritdecorps.ca/

The capture of the state by the Ukrainian lobby led by Freeland, and of the chiefs of Defence Staff by the Pentagon has produced one of the most race-hating governments in the NATO group; click to read more here.

The source notes that the first charge against Kearney dated in December 2021 is “interesting as well. That was during the time of NATO preparations to back a Ukrainian offensive into the Donetsk and Lugansk republics and into Russia proper. More than likely, Kearney told his fellow staffers that the operational plan was a hugely dangerous idea. Colonel Kearney was seeing the writing on the wall, how NATO wasn’t at all ready, and he didn’t keep it to himself. By November 2023, when the fifth charge is alleged, he had probably said ‘I told you so’ four times too many.

https://johnhelmer.net/canada-is-losing ... more-89851

******

About Odessa...

... May 2, 2014. There is a good material in Ria on that grim anniversary (in Russian, use Google translate). What is correctly noted, for many Russians this was the event which changed everything. Later those events will be "explained" by the onset of the war in Ukraine. So, keep in mind, while SMO started in February of 2022, the conflict was ongoing for the last 10 years. It is then when I completely lost any "brotherly" feelings. Why I do not consider, as many still try (for Putin it is obvious, he has to project moderation and historical wisdom) to convince that Ukrainians and Russians are "brothers"--ethnically, yes, culturally, no--them to be largely not brotherly at all, bar people from what historically was Malorossiya, is long to explain. New generations of Ukies are people radically different from Russians and it is not just the matter of propaganda. Long story short--it is a debilitating envy and complex of inferiority which is in the foundation of Ukrainian nation. I am on record--Ukrainian nation DID happen. It is a real nation, which only now is getting the whiff of its own demise.

On May 2, 2014 if anyone had any doubts they have been dispelled by the events in Odessa. The rest are details, however horrifying, of the first major war crime of Kiev regime and its curators against Russian civilians. I just want to say--the records are well kept and updated in Russia. To understand how 404 and majority of her people have been brought down to this pathetic state, one has to look into the roots of not just banderite fascism, but read the pathetic attempt on scholarship by former Ukie President Leonid Kuchma, Ukraine is Not Russia, to understand a sheer delusion of 404 about own existence.

Now, about this Dugin guy. Here is he with you know the guy is:

Image

This is Dugin's MO, hassle, and due to his very limited intellect, he uses demagoguery as his main tool. Here he "debunks" late Stephen Hawking, because you know...



This is the guy who will have difficulty taking first derivative from a polynomial function, but here he is--"debunking" Hawking and astrophysics. Life is easy when your father was general of GRU. Some continue to buy this BS.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2024/05 ... dessa.html

******

DMITRI KOVALEVICH: TEN-YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF THE ANTI-COUP REBELLION EASTERN UKRAINE, AS RUSSIAN FORCES ADVANCE IN DONETSK
MAY 2, 2024

By Dmitri Kovalevich, Al Mayadeen (Beirut), 4/23/24

Dmitri Kovalevich is the special correspondent in Ukraine for Al Mayadeen English. He writes military-political situation reports from there.

April 2014 was a pivotal month for the people of the Donbass region in what was then still part of Ukraine. It was then that the governing regime was newly installed in Kiev by a coup d’état on February 20/21embarked on military hostilities against the people of the region. The coup overthrew Ukraine’s elected president and legislature. It sparked rebellion in Crimea, Donbass (Lugansk and Donetsk), and in towns and cities in other regions of eastern and southern Ukraine.

The coup installed a pro-Western, anti-Russia government. Police actions by the new regime to suppress opposition to the coup only deepened the rebellions, whose consequences are still felt today.

On April 10, 2014, a group of communists in the city of Lugansk seized the local headquarters of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), the national police agency of Ukraine. They issued demands for the release of opponents of the U.S.-supported coup who had been jailed for upholding Ukraine’s shaky constitutional foundation and opposing the coup, whose epicenter was Maidan Square in central Kiev.

Uprisings against the coup government quickly spread throughout southern and eastern Ukraine, including in Crimea, the two Donbass oblasts (provinces) of Lugansk and Donetsk, and, to a lesser degree, in Odessa and other cities and towns.

No one could have imagined in Lugansk in early April 2014 that hostilities could end in full-scale warfare by Kiev with essential political and military backing by the United States and the NATO military alliance it leads. But that is exactly what unfolded. The attempt by Kiev to suppress opposition to the coup in Donbass soon escalated into an eight-year war by Kiev. In early 2022, that war escalated into today’s large-scale conflict with Russia.

Elsewhere in Ukraine, the people of Crimea avoided war by voting on March 16 to secede from the coup Ukraine and join the Russian Federation. The people of Odessa city were not so lucky. On May 2, a day of anti-coup protest in the city ended in tragedy when right-wing paramilitaries who had traveled to the city from elsewhere in Ukraine for the purpose of violent provocations set fire to the large building in the center of the city where protesters had taken refuge from paramilitary violence. More than 45 protesters died.

The hypocrisy of democracy – some are allowed to have it, others not so

On April 10 in Lugansk, hundreds of local residents took up the call of the local Communist Party activists. One of the main arguments for storming the SBU building was the example set by coup fomenters in late 2013 and early 2014 in seizing police stations (and their arsenals of weapons) in western Ukraine, for example in the city of Lviv, the sixth largest city in Ukraine at the time, with a population of some 750,000. The communists in Lugansk argued that opponents of the coup should take similar actions to those of the coup makers months earlier.

The Western powers were watching events very closely. For them, violence and the seizure of weapons by some groups (right-wing paramilitaries) was justified, while for others (anti-coup protesters) it was totally ‘illegal’. This policy of double standards was on full display as the violent assault by Kiev against the population of Donbass began in earnest in April 2014. Locals became all the more convinced that all the talk coming from Western leaders and institutions about ‘equality’ and ‘democracy’ for Ukraine was nothing more than empty words.

Goal was autonomy; the accusations of ‘separatism’ were false

As rebellion quickly grew in Donbass, far-right paramilitary formations which were already formed in the west of the country to carry out the coup, or which rapidly developed following it, threatened violent, armed actions to suppress the developing protests in Kharkiv, Donetsk, Lugansk, and Zaporizhzhya oblasts and in other locations in the south and east. But the paramilitaries were only partly ‘successful’ (for example, one month later in Odessa).

In Lugansk and Donetsk cities, the local police offered little or no resistance to the anti-coup rebellions. This was parallel to how police in the western regions of Ukraine had largely stood by as the coming coup gained momentum in late 2013. As it turned out, much of the existing police and army personnel in Lugansk and Donetsk crossed over to the side of anti-coup protests, bringing their weapons with them. This was a major blow to Kiev and the West. Additionally, the soldiers of the Ukraine army as a whole were proving to be reluctant to follow orders to fire on anti-coup protesters. The paramilitaries responded to this by forming their own, military battalions, while the coup regime in Kiev embarked on a transformation of army personnel as a whole. In the coming years, the paramilitary formations would receive official status as autonomous constituents of the army and national police.

The BBC’s Ukraine service reported on the seizure of the SBU headquarters in Lugansk on April 10, 2014, writing, “The police did not interfere with the takeover and left the building to the applause of pro-Russian [sic] activists who had gathered in the square. The crowd chanted ‘Russia’ and ‘referendum’.”

The BBC report went on to cite the broadcast of a leader of the anti-coup protests in Lugansk, Vyacheslav Petrov, who appealed to the population. “I ask you not to panic. Everything will be fine. We are preparing for a referendum, which will take place on May 11. For that, everyone must think and make a choice.” The BBC continued, “The demands [of the anti-coup protest in Lugnsk] included an amnesty for all political prisoners, a referendum [on autonomy], the abolition of price and tariff increases, and giving the Russian language an official status of state language.”[1]

‘Pro-Russian’ or anti-coup?

Anti-coup protesters in Donbass wanted a referendum to decide the future of the territory. They were inspired by the events taking place in Crimea. There, the government of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea (ARC) responded promptly to the threats by Ukraine authorities and paramilitaries to invade the territory and suppress opposition to the coup. With the cooperation of Russian leaders in Moscow and Russian armed forces long established in Crimea by a 1997 ‘treaty of friendship’ (Wikipedia) between Russia and Ukraine, the ARC government held a referendum on March 16, 2014, on the future status of the territory. An overwhelming majority voted to secede from Ukraine and join the Russian Federation. Polling showed that even a majority of ethnic Ukrainians residing in the peninsula voted in favor.

Thus ended Ukraine’s unpopular and unconstitutional governance of Crimea, ‘bestowed’ upon Ukraine by the leaders of the Soviet Union (USSR) in 1954, albeit with no vote offered to the local population. Crimea was the only region of Ukraine to have a regional, autonomous government. This meant that the very strong anti-coup sentiment in early 2014 had an immediate solution in the form of a referendum organized by the ARC, which was a fully constitutional entity of Ukraine.

Unfortunately, no such quick and democratic option was available to the other anti-coup regions of Ukraine, notably in Donbass. That’s because these regions lacked any strong forms of local or regional government that could step into the breach once the elected and constitutional government in Kiev was overthrown. It was also because the existing political parties in the anti-coup regions, as in the rest of Ukraine, largely represented only the economic elites.[2]

‘Separatism’ or political autonomy?

Western governments and media responded to the anti-coup protests in central and eastern Ukraine with epithets, calling them ‘separatist’. This was utterly false. The republics of Lugansk and Donetsk are, indeed, today constituents of the Russian Federation. The reason for this is the obstinance of Ukraine’s coup leaders. Following its military defeat in Donbass in early 2015, the Kiev regime signed the ‘Minsk 2’ peace agreement of February 12, 2015 (text here). It contained sweeping autonomy measures for Lugansk and Donetsk. The UN Security Council endorsed the agreement unanimously a short five days later. But as subsequent events proved, Kiev and its foreign backers, notably France and Germany who, like Russia, co-signed Minsk 2 as ‘guarantors’. But unlike Russia, the two EU powers never intended to implement it. As subsequent revelations showed, Kiev and its EU ‘co-signers’ never intended to implement Minsk 2; they signed it in order to ‘buy time’ for Ukraine’s army and paramilitaries to regroup and re-arm.

The claim that the ‘pro-autonomy movement’ in Donbass, to give it its proper name, was ‘pro-Russian’ was another of the Ukrainian and Western epithets. Of course, there was widespread pro-Russian sentiment in Donbass. Historically, the region had always been Russian in its ethnic composition. It always had positive economic relations with the Russian Federation and the Russian Soviet Republic before that. Where was the crime in that? But for the rulers of Ukraine and the West, this was, indeed, a ‘crime’ because they were embarked on a course to weaken Russia and to displace it entirely from Donbass and other regions of Ukraine. They wanted Ukraine to totally uproot its economic relations with Russia and become an economic subordinate to the EU and the United States.

Battle for Chasov Yar

After ten years, the territory of Lugansk is fully under the control of the Lugansk People’s Republic and it is a constituent of the Russian Federation. Next door in Donetsk, a battle is taking place in and around the town of Chasov Yar, app. 100 kilometers north of Donetsk city. This follows the capture by Russian forces of the city of Avdeevka several weeks ago, barely 20 km north of Donetsk, and the capture of the larger city of Artemivsk (called ‘Bakhmut’ in Ukraine, also app. 100 km north of Donetsk) in May 2023.

The tactics being used by the Russian Armed Forces at Chasov Yar (pre-war population 12,000) are similar to those at Avdeevka (barely 20 km north of Donetsk) and Artemivsk. Ukrainian troop positions are hit with heavy aerial bombs that destroy underground fortifications. Assault groups then surround the city from three sides, leaving only one way out: retreat westward toward Ukraine.

The ‘Kholodnyi Yar’ telegram channel of the 93rd Brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine is circulating a video in which a resident of Chasov Yar says he is waiting hopefully for the Russians to come. “He says that he is waiting for Russia and that he has relatives who live there. He says he cannot leave the town because our soldiers shoot all those wanting to cross over to territory held by the Russians.”

The liberation of Chasov Yar by the Russian army may become a turning point in the Russian Special Military Operation (SMO) overall. It certainly opens highly unpredictable scenarios in the entire conflict. Russian military correspondent Alexander Sladkov believes that from Chasov Yar, the Russian offensive will advance in a straight line to the major industrial cities of Kramatorsk, a key railway junction 45 kilometers further east with a pre-war population of 160,000, and nearby Sloviansk. “Kramatorsk is the next city of Donbass that we will liberate,” he predicts.

Forcing Ukrainians to fight for NATO

In this context, it is becoming increasingly difficult for the Kiev regime to conduct its forced military conscription. The most common practice by Ukrainian men of military age [3] to avoid military recruiters is to hide in their homes or in ruins and wait for a chance to surrender to Russian forces. The Strana online news outlet in Ukraine published a report on April 2 by an officer of the AFU under the nickname ‘Night Stalker’ describing common methods used by the Ukraine army to pressure its soldiers who are reluctant to fight (and quite possibly die). It wrote, “How to motivate a recruit to fight who would otherwise choose to lie down in the trench on his belly and wait to surrender? The officer replied that ‘a conversation is enough for some. For others, a beating by the company officer or shooting over the soldier’s head may be needed.’ “

The officer noted that there are also harsher methods of influence, but the report did not elaborate.

As more and more AFU soldiers are forcibly conscripted (abducted) from their homes or from streets or shops, the number of ‘refuseniks’ – soldiers who refuse to go into combat – is growing in Ukrainian units. As a rule, refuseniks are arrested and then held in cramped, damp cages. The Ukrainian Telegram channel ‘Legitimny’ writes that according to its sources, rising numbers of Ukrainian soldiers are refusing to fight because that “no one wants to fight for the governing regime in Kiev and its leaders since it treats its people as slaves.”

In early April, the German state news outlet Deutsche Welle published a video report from Luzanivka in the Cherkasy region (central Ukraine), explaining there are no men left of military service age in the village. “If someone happens to die, there is no one left here to dig their grave,” says village council chairman Serhiy Nikolaenko. DW reports that about 50 men have been conscripted from the village of 400 people.

Strana cites Deutsche Welle in reporting from the village of Valentina. A resident explains, “In our small village, there are already so many missing and dead. Imagine for the whole of Ukraine!” The resident says both of his sons have been conscripted into the army.

Despite all this, President Volodymyr Zelensky and his government continue to try and ‘sell’ to Western media and politicians that a new ‘counteroffensive’ by the AFU may be launched. This is at a time when the human resources to replace the soldiers being lost to death, injury, or desertion are all but exhausted. “Yes, we have a plan for a counteroffensive. We will definitely win; we have no other alternative. But I can’t promise it and I can’t name a date,” Zelensky stressed in an interview with Germany’s BILD daily newspaper on April 9.

Oleksandr Dubinsky, a former MP from Zelensky’s Servant of the People party, adds that as long as the Ukrainian army is in retreat, it will be difficult to negotiate financial aid. In other words, the Ukraine regime plans to throw yet more Ukrainians into the slaughter so that the Ukrainian elite can maintain its economic ties with the West and continue to receive funding from it.

How neoliberalism has undermined Western hegemony

Another reason for the impossibility of an AFU ‘counteroffensive’ is the shortage of ammunition, which neither the West nor Ukraine are able to replenish. In Ukraine and the West, deindustrialization processes have undermined the ability to quickly organize production facilities.

Russian political scientist Malek Dudakov writes that it is extremely difficult for European Union countries to now boost their production of armaments. The EU countries today buy 80 percent of their armaments from outside their borders; 60 percent of that comes from the United States. “Euro bureaucrats miraculously want to reduce dependence on armaments imports to 50 percent by 2030. This is in the context of a severe crisis already happening in the European economy, due largely to deindustrialization. Even the production of shells faces problems because of the shortages of nitrocellulose (also known as ‘guncotton’) and other cotton products purchased from China,” he writes.

In early April, police searches were conducted in Ukraine and Poland amidst investigations by the Ukraine Defense Ministry of overpriced arms purchases. In 2022, the Ukrainian Defense Ministry signed several contracts with the Polish-registered firm Alfa for the supply of ammunition worth tens of millions of euros. Despite the fact that the firm failed to fulfill the terms of the first several contracts, the Ministry continued to cooperate with it. As of the beginning of 2023, Alfa owed the Defense Ministry more than 3.5 billion hryvnias (US$89 million) for arms purchases never received.

In late February, Zelensky claimed that global prices for artillery shells have increased five times (500%) since the start of the war with the Russian Federation. “Because of the war in Ukraine, even an ordinary artillery shell which cost $1500 at the beginning of the war can cost $4000 to $8000 today. So much for the war. For some it is a war, while for others it is just big business”, he said.

The Wall Street Journal reported on April 10 that U.S. drones produced in California’s Silicon Valley have not performed well in Ukraine. “U.S.-made UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] tend to be expensive, faulty and complicated to repair, say drone company executives, Ukrainians on the front lines, Ukrainian government officials, and some former U.S. military officials.”

In general, the entire Western world is oriented to produce small numbers of expensive products, with high involvement of private middlemen. This model turns out to be highly ineffective in modern military conflicts, which require cheap and quick production on a mass scale. The only two ways, then, for Western firms to compete is to exploit the countries of the Global South for cheap production or to lower their own production standards.

Russia, meanwhile, has been undergoing processes of de-privatization, that is the return of manufacturing by private enterprises to state ownership. This helps to eliminate middlemen and make production cheaper. Since 2020, the number of cases in which the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office has challenged the legalities of privatizations during the privatization wave of the 1990s has grown eight times, according to the Russian TV channel RTVI.

The chief of Sweden’s SAAB arms producer, Micael Johansson, recently told the Financial Times that shortages of nitrocellulose were an example of why companies producing armaments need to build new supply chains in today’s “multipolar world” where “not only the Western,’ rules-based order’ will be present”. He added: “We have to think about like-minded countries who we can trust and with whom we can work with in the long term.”

Reading between the lines, the SAAB official’s words mean increased pressure by Western countries on the Global South to locate more and more production there on the cheap. Effectively, it means a continuation of colonialist practices against smaller and less developed countries.

It has been fashionable in recent years for capitalist ideologues and commentators in the imperialist countries to criticize and even condemn the ‘offshoring’ of their manufacturing to China and other countries. But the drive to maximize profits takes precedence, and so offshoring remains an attractive practice. The capitalist system of production serves private interests, not public needs. Thus it has always been and will always remain.

Notes:

1. In post-Soviet Ukraine, there was and remains only one official language: Ukrainian. This was even true in Crimea where ethnic Ukrainians composed only some 15% of the population. In today’s Crimea (Russian Federation), there are three official languages: Russian, Crimean Tatar, and Ukrainian.

2. Crimea’s autonomous status dates back to the Russian Revolution of 1917, which implemented sweeping forms of political self-determination for the many nationalities that comprised the pre-Revolution Russian Empire. This was and remains the origin of independent Ukraine. ‘Soviet’ Ukraine was formed during the harsh years of civil war from 1918 to 1920. It went on to become a founding constituent of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in 1922. Officials of Soviet Ukraine led a secession from the USSR in 1990/1991. The country had already won its independence 70 years earlier.

3. Military registration is obligatory in Ukraine for all men between the ages of 18 and 65. The age of military service (conscription) is 25 to 60 (recently reduced from 27.)

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2024/05/dmi ... n-donetsk/

******

The United States-Ukraine security pact is lipstick on a bloody defeat for NATO

Finian Cunningham

May 2, 2024

The security pact with Ukraine is a cosmetic gain to conceal what is in reality a shameful defeat to Russia.



The United States and Ukraine are moving toward signing a 10-year bilateral security pact. But former Pentagon analyst David Pyne sees it as a sign that Washington realizes Russia is near to outright victory in the conflict.

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has this week renewed talk about signing a long-term security alliance with the United States. The Biden administration seems to be amenable to signing off on the pact.

Such a move may appear to give the U.S. a long-term foothold in Ukraine but, says Pyne, it is being proposed from a position of weakness, not strength.

Russia has all but won the war that escalated in February 2022. Earlier predictions by NATO states that Ukraine would defeat Russia are shown to be a cruel fantasy.

Despite massive supplies of weapons to Ukraine from the United States and its NATO allies, Russia is prevailing militarily. David Pyne reckons that Russia’s anticipated offensive over the summer dry period will result in a decisive victory before the end of the year.

The signing of a security pact between the U.S. and Ukraine is a way to put lipstick on what is otherwise a crushing defeat for the NATO side.

Pyne points out that Russia will be in a dominant position to make sure that Ukraine does not become a member of NATO. That has always been a key demand by Moscow

That has always been a key demand by Russia. The proposed U.S.-Ukraine security pact is a prelude to the Kiev regime coming to the negotiating table on Russia’s terms and giving the West a semblance of obtaining a gain from the war – a war that has cost 500,000 Ukrainian military lives and hundreds of billions of dollars for Western taxpayers.

This conflict – the worst in Europe since the Second World War – could have been avoided altogether if the U.S. and NATO allies had accepted Russia’s security terms at the end of 2021. But the Biden administration chose instead to make war at a terrible price.

In a tight election year, President Biden needs some good news from an otherwise disastrous conflict in Ukraine. The security pact with Ukraine is a cosmetic gain to conceal what is in reality a shameful defeat to Russia.

David Pyne is Executive Vice President of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security. He has long advocated a mutual security treaty with Russia based on a rational recognition of Russia’s legitimate national security interests due to the provocative expansion of NATO around Russian borders.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/ ... -for-nato/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10873
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 May 05, 2024 12:28 pm

At the service of the narrative
POSTED BY @NSANZO ⋅ 05/05/2024

Image

Certainly at its most vulnerable since the summer of 2022, Ukraine is striving to use the situation to consolidate its position as the subject of perpetual assistance and attention from the great American power and its European allies. To do this, announcing danger, protection and victory at the same time, kyiv has the invaluable help of the press, willing to offer its space for the dissemination of the Ukrainian narrative. What's more, at this moment of military weakness, in which Russia advances in two sensitive areas for Ukraine - west of Donetsk and Artyomovsk - and important Ukrainian logistical points are in danger, propaganda is even more important than in moments of victory. Hence, kyiv diplomacy is making an extra effort to reaffirm itself with its partners and make common priorities clear.

The clearest example of the use of the media to impose their discourse is the interview given by the deputy director of the Ukrainian GUR to The Economist journalist Ollie Carroll, a veteran of the information of this war since its outbreak in 2014 and a regular defender of the idea. to take at face value the information, real or not, provided by its sources. Speech has always been more important than facts, so Carroll did not hesitate, for example, to deny the reality of the fall of the Donetsk airport when his sources stated that they needed immediate help to maintain control. At that time, the DPR militias were already making visits to the airport to show the related press their success in the battle. It was the winter of 2015 and the situation was similar to today: Ukraine was ready to use its desperate situation to beg its partners for help. Then, as now, maintaining favor with the press was a priority. At that time, with the European countries more involved than the United States and with Merkel willing to force Ukraine to make concessions - even if they were only commitments that there was no intention of fulfilling - the result was a rescue of the Ukrainian Armed Forces through of the signing of the second Minsk agreements. The ceasefire did not prevent the loss of Debaltsevo, an important communications hub that made transportation viable between Donetsk and Lugansk, essential for the long-term survival of the Popular Republics, but it did prevent a collapse that seemed possible.

The situation is, in some ways, similar to what happened then, although there is currently no risk of diplomacy forcing kyiv into a compromise, at least for the moment. In his story about General Vadym Skibitsky, Ollie Carroll does the same work he did nine years ago to ensure that Ukraine is able to place his story in the major international media. “Ukraine is on the brink of the abyss, says a high-ranking general,” headlines the journalist in an article in which Kirilo Budanov's second in the Ukrainian GUR admits the possibility that Chasov Yar, “falls in a similar way to Avdeevka, bombed into oblivion by the Russians in February,” a loss that could call into question the northern defense lines of the Donetsk region. “It won't be today or tomorrow, of course, but everything depends on our reserves and supplies,” the general adds, suggesting that Ukraine demands more ammunition and weapons from its partners. This discourse is not only not new but is repeated practically daily.

From another point of view, this time highlighting the importance of what was obtained as a way to raise the morale of the troops and the country, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine responded to Foreign Policy 's question about the impact of the approval of the package of assistance from the United States stating that “it was certainly a morale boost for the Ukrainian soldiers, and also for the people of Ukraine.” But after giving the answer that the journalist expected, Kuleba added that “if the package that was announced immediately after the approval of the law had included a battery of Patriots, this impulse would have been even greater among the population, because the Ukrainians are the who suffer the most from Russian missile attacks.”

Patriots and extreme speed in deliveries are the two most repeated themes from Ukraine. “There is a time lag between the announcement of the package and the moment when a Ukrainian gunner has more shells to return fire at the Russian invaders. And that moment has not yet arrived, because everything that was announced - we thank and appreciate it - is still on the way. And therefore, in this time interval, bad things can happen, such as the advance of Russian forces on the ground,” insisted the minister, who reaches the same conclusion as Skibitsky in his report in The Economist . kyiv cannot right now promise more results than an extreme situation on a front that, regardless of its dreams of future offensives, it only aspires to consolidate at a time when the initiative is not in its hands but in those of its opponent.

In that speech, the issue of the use of missiles takes on special importance, an aspect in which Russia has an important comparative advantage. It should not be forgotten that every mention of Russian missiles seeks, above all, to beg the United States and Germany to send long-range missiles to, among other things, destroy the Kerch bridge. But faced with a defensive phase, Ukraine also tries to highlight that aspect. “Russian ballistic missiles are the real scourge of this war. Lately they have been used mainly to destroy our energy system,” says Kuleba, whose complaints contrast with the perception that the military authorities have tried to present throughout this war. The images of the damage that Russian attacks have caused in recent months and the need to use them as an argument to demand Patriot systems from their partners have caused kyiv to exaggerate to the extreme the use, effectiveness and intention of Russian missiles.

Regarding the latest missile attack against Odessa, Mijailo Podolyak stated, for example, that its objective was threefold: propaganda, humiliation and deliberate mass murder of civilians. Although the attack caused minimal casualties, the advisor to the President's Office sees genocidal objectives in it. “In Ukraine we face a genocidal war waged by the Russian Federation against us. Where all your actions are well thought out, systematic and clearly understood. The experts (because they lack the will to call a spade a spade) argue about the genocide criteria established by the UN. But most scholars have no doubt that, by any standard, the Russian war to exterminate the Ukrainians must be described as a genocide,” he had written hours earlier. Narrative may overshadow reality, but it does not make facts disappear: if there is a debate about whether there are genocidal intentions in a current war, it is not in Ukraine. What's more, both in terms of civilian deaths and the level of destruction, the situation in Ukraine does not reach the alarming levels that Israel's war against the population of Gaza has reached in just seven months. The 10,810 civilian deaths in the war (a possibly incomplete figure, so the real figure may be higher) in more than two years of battle do not even reach the number of minors killed by Israel since last October. The data provided by the United Nations, which this week specifically stated that the destruction is much greater than that which has occurred in Ukraine in more than two years of fighting between two heavily armed armies - and not in the war of one army against a guerrilla -, also point in the same direction.

A defensive phase also failed
Trying to justify a situation much worse than expected when Zelensky announced last November the move to a defensive phase, after which several lines have been weakened and the poor Ukrainian preparation for the possibility of Russian attacks has been demonstrated, Ukraine is betting on announcing Russian offensives. In his use of The Economist to place the Ukrainian discourse in the world press, General Skibitsky insists, according to Carroll, that “Russia will first press ahead with its plan to liberate all of the eastern Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, a task that will not has changed since 2022.” The objective is evident and has been explicit from the moment Vladimir Putin announced the recognition of the independence of the DPR and the LPR.

However, kyiv always tries to give a symbolic aspect to the facts and looks for intentions in Russian actions that generally do not correspond to reality. “He says Russia has given the order to take something in time for the Victory Day pageantry in Moscow on May 9 or, failing that, before Vladimir Putin's visit to Beijing a week later. The speed and success of the advance will determine when and where the Russians will attack next,” adds the journalist. Two years ago, Russia adopted - either mistakenly or as the only option available considering its resources - the war of attrition as a strategy and there has not been a moment in which it has tried to accelerate events with the aim of announcing successes. on important dates.

“Our problem is very simple,” adds Skibitsky: “we don't have weapons. “They always knew April and May would be difficult for us.” These difficulties are not due to the Russian attempt to declare victory before May 9, but to the natural development of events after months of Russian pressure on the Ukrainian lines of Donbass with greater use of aviation, drones and taking advantage of the attrition suffered by the Ukrainian opponent in the 2023 counteroffensive. In this situation, Ukraine can demand more weapons from its partners and warn of coming dangers, whether real or not. That is the work of intelligence, which has media like The Economist as the ideal place for its dissemination.

In his article, Carroll gives Skibitsky the space to present a “three-layer plan to destabilize the country” that Russia intends to implement. In addition to the military factor, for which he blames Congress's delay in approving new funds for the war, the GUR general adds the attempt to isolate Ukraine internationally and a disinformation campaign aimed at delegitimizing the mobilization process, two aspects that They have large doses of projection of what Ukraine is trying to do against Russia. In his speech, Skibitsky does not find any objection in The Economist , which at no time states that the mobilization difficulties that Ukraine suffers have nothing to do with Russian actions nor that the attempted destabilization and isolation of the opponent is an explicit objective of Kiev for a decade now. And it is natural that he does not do so taking into account that disinformation is, in reality, presenting the discourse of intelligence as news. In this, the Western press far surpasses the Russian press.

https://esslavyangrad.files.wordpress.c ... .png?w=880

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Summary of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation (as of May 4, 2024) | The main thing:

- Over the course of a week, the Russian Armed Forces carried out 25 group strikes with high-precision weapons and UAVs against energy facilities and the military-industrial complex of Ukraine;

- Units of the Southern Group of Forces continued to advance into the depths of the enemy’s defenses and defeated 14 brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in a week;

- The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 745 military personnel and a field ammunition depot in a week due to the actions of the Vostok group of troops;

- The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost over 2,325 military personnel in the area of ​​responsibility of the “South” group;

- The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 215 military personnel in a week due to the actions of the Dnepr group of troops;

- Within a week, units of the “Center” group improved the situation along the front line and liberated Novobakhmutovka, Semyonovka, Berdychi in the DPR;

- Losses of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Kharkov region, LPR and DPR, in the zone of the West grouping of forces amounted to 975 military personnel;

- The grouping of Russian troops “West” repelled 23 counterattacks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the Kharkov region, LPR and DPR;

- Within a week, the Russian Armed Forces destroyed 2 HIMARS MLRS, 2 S-300PT air defense systems with radar, an IRIS-T air defense system, a fuel depot, and a train with Western equipment;

- Within a week, 14 Ukrainian servicemen surrendered on the line of combat contact;

- Aviation and air defense during the week shot down 15 ATACMS missiles, 17 Hammer guided bombs, 6 GLSDB, HIMARS and Uragan shells, 201 UAVs;

- Over the course of a week, the Ukrainian Armed Forces lost more than 2,405 military personnel, an Abrams tank, and 4 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles in the area of ​​responsibility of the Center group.

▫️Units of the Vostok group of forces, having improved the tactical situation, defeated the formations of the 58th motorized infantry, 72nd mechanized brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, 102nd and 128th terrestrial defense brigades in the areas of the settlements of Chervonoye, Gulyai Pole of the Zaporozhye region, Ugledar, Urozhainoe and Staromayorskoe, Donetsk People's Republic.

Enemy losses amounted to up to 745 military personnel, 15 vehicles, 15 field artillery guns, two electronic warfare stations "Enklav" and "Bukovel-AD" , as well as a field ammunition depot .

▫️During the week, units of the Dnepr group of troops defeated the manpower and equipment of four brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, a brigade of marines, three brigades of military defense and a brigade of the National Guard in the areas of the settlements of Malaya Tokmachka, Rabotino, Novoandreevka, Shcherbaki of the Zaporozhye region, Mikhailovka, Ivanovka, Tyaginka and Berislav, Kherson region.

The enemy lost up to 215 troops, nine vehicles and six field artillery pieces.

▫️ Over the course of a week, missile forces, artillery and unmanned aerial vehicles of groups of troops of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation destroyed two combat vehicles of the US-made HIMARS multiple launch rocket system , two launchers of the S-300PT anti-aircraft missile system with illumination and guidance radar, and a launcher of the IRIS anti-aircraft missile system -T" manufactured in Germany, as well as a fuel warehouse for military equipment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. In addition, a military train with Western-made equipment and weapons supplied to Ukraine by NATO countries was hit.



▫️Aviation and air defense systems shot down 15 ATACMS operational-tactical missiles made in the USA, 17 Hammer guided bombs made in France, six GLSDB , HIMARS and Hurricane missiles , as well as 201 unmanned aerial vehicles.

Within a week, 14 Ukrainian servicemen surrendered on the line of combat contact.

▫️In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the following have been destroyed : 593 aircraft, 270 helicopters, 23,742 unmanned aerial vehicles, 512 anti-aircraft missile systems, 15,911 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 1,279 combat vehicles of multiple launch rocket systems, 9,289 field artillery guns and mortars, as well as 21,471 units of special military vehicles.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

RUSI Report Quietly Validates Russia's Strategic Superiority: A Breakdown

SIMPLICIUS
MAY 04, 2024

This is the latest in my roughly bimonthly paid article series. It’s one you do not want to miss as the findings in this report even blew me away for reasons you’ll discover by the end of the piece.

It covers the latest RUSI release about how modern wars should be fought and won, and why the West is light years behind Russia—though the latter point is ever-implicitly made.

It’s another doorstopper in size, at nearly ~6800 words, and I’ve made about the first ~1900 free to the public.


It’s not often that I vaingloriously feather my own cap, but this occasion will count among the rare ones that necessarily must highlight the many accuracies of our previous reporting, whose validation is only now coming to light by the laggardly verifications of Western military pundits.

The following will be a breakdown of one of the latest RUSI reports on lessons learned from the Ukrainian war:

Image
https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/p ... ar-ukraine

As reminder, RUSI is the Royal United Services Institute, and claims to be “the world’s oldest and the UK’s leading defence and security think tank.” And not to be confused with a prominent Russian politician of the same name serving in the Duma, the article’s author Alex Vershinin’s credentials are listed as follows:

Lt Col (Retd) Alex Vershinin has 10 years of frontline experience in Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan. For the last decade before his retirement, he worked as a modelling and simulations officer in concept development and experimentation for NATO and the US Army.


The very ethos of the arguments they make is stated outright from the beginning:

Image

The entire report revolves around an urgent plea for the West to remold its strategic concept of warfare, which has been badly degraded and fallen out with the times by several decades of lazy misallocation of resources and reorientation toward colonial policing actions.

In the following paragraph, the author defines precisely the difference between ‘maneuver’ wars and classic attritional wars, which is relevant in understanding the rest of the exegesis:

Attritional wars require their own ‘Art of War’ and are fought with a ‘force-centric’ approach, unlike wars of manoeuvre which are ‘terrain-focused’. They are rooted in massive industrial capacity to enable the replacement of losses, geographical depth to absorb a series of defeats, and technological conditions that prevent rapid ground movement. In attritional wars, military operations are shaped by a state’s ability to replace losses and generate new formations, not tactical and operational manoeuvres. The side that accepts the attritional nature of war and focuses on destroying enemy forces rather than gaining terrain is most likely to win.

In particular, re-read the last statement:

The side that accepts the attritional nature of war and focuses on destroying enemy forces rather than gaining terrain is most likely to win.

This appears a major admission of Russia’s strategy. After all, recall how Ukraine’s strategy famously centers on “not one step back”, because even a single lost yard represents unbearable reputational costs for Zelensky’s much-admired ‘international community’. This has led to generals like Syrsky being dubbed “General 200” for his no step back attitude in prosecuting defenses like that of Bakhmut and Avdeevka, among others.

Russia on the other hand has notably used strategic retreat to such a vast extent it has left the military commentariat befuddled, as in the case of the large-scale back-to-back Kherson and Kharkov region withdrawals, not to mention the late March 2022 rerouting action from the entire north of the Kiev, Sumy, and Chernigov regions.

What this amounts to is the bitter admission that Russia has in fact been ahead of the mark all this while. Despite full-throated attempts to disparage Russia’s military choices throughout the course of the war, it has only now in retrospect become obvious to ‘experts’ that Russia has in fact been utilizing the superior common sense strategy all along, while waging the correct war.

What has it amounted to? It’s clear to see: just read the headlines. For Russia, the headlines talk incessantly of an “over abundance” of manpower and materiel. In the case of Ukraine, it’s the total opposite, the dire dearth of men. One side has competently pursued the strategy outlined by RUSI above: “The side that accepts the attritional nature of war and focuses on destroying enemy forces rather than gaining terrain is most likely to win.”

I’ve said since the beginning that most of Russia’s objectives in the war will be reached not by territorial gains but attritional ones. For instance, there’s almost no feasibly realistic way for Russia to “capture” Odessa via kinetic and direct physical assault. Going cross-river is unlikely, and having to come down from the north in Kiev would hypothetically take years. But simply baiting Ukraine to throw in all its blood and treasure into the Donbass killbox and meatgrinder, Russia stands to attrit the AFU both militarily, materially, economically, and morally to the point of exhaustion and collapse, allowing the subsequent capture of required territories via Ukrainian capitulation.

RUSI goes on with another big admission:

The West is not prepared for this kind of war. To most Western experts, attritional strategy is counterintuitive. Historically, the West preferred the short ‘winner takes all’ clash of professional armies. Recent war games such as CSIS’s war over Taiwan covered one month of fighting. The possibility that the war would go on never entered the discussion. This is a reflection of a common Western attitude. Wars of attrition are treated as exceptions, something to be avoided at all costs and generally products of leaders’ ineptitude. Unfortunately, wars between near-peer powers are likely to be attritional, thanks to a large pool of resources available to replace initial losses. The attritional nature of combat, including the erosion of professionalism due to casualties, levels the battlefield no matter which army started with better trained forces. As conflict drags on, the war is won by economies, not armies. States that grasp this and fight such a war via an attritional strategy aimed at exhausting enemy resources while preserving their own are more likely to win. The fastest way to lose a war of attrition is to focus on manoeuvre, expending valuable resources on near-term territorial objectives. Recognising that wars of attrition have their own art is vital to winning them without sustaining crippling losses.

There’s a lot of truth to unpack just in that above statement. But let’s keep it minimal by highlighting the most salient points:

The West continues thinking long attritional wars are an exception rather than the rule in near-peer conflicts.

This appears to indicate that Western military structures are no longer systemically and institutionally capable of approaching war in a manner beyond one ingrained into them in the low-intensity COIN/policing action years of the past few decades. This has been highlighted recently as the realization slowly sets in, for instance from yesterday:

Image
https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-spent-muc ... 01537.html

Western mercenaries who visited Ukraine admitted that their combat skills had “atrophied”

This was reported by the Business Insider portal with reference to the American military.

"We've become so accustomed to the idea of fighting guerrilla wars, fighting terrorists and everyone else, that we've forgotten what it's really like to fight a peer war," said one American mercenary.


In the above article, the U.S. mercenary says no U.S. soldier is being trained or prepared properly for a modern war like Ukraine:

He said that he has seen a lot of Western soldiers struggle in Ukraine as "they already have a set idea about how things should be and everything, and it's just not that way out in Ukraine."

Another American veteran in Ukraine told BI this month that he had similar concerns. He said that his friends still in the US Army ask him for tips on how to fight with drones or in trenches, as they aren't getting training that fully reflects what is happening in Ukraine.


He explains the key difference and then echoes my own words:

He said that in many places where he fought in Ukraine, "there is nowhere that is safe," while when he was in Afghanistan and Iraq, if you were half a mile behind the front line, "you could stand outside and have a barbecue, a sandwich, and drink."

Unfortunately for the West, once an action has been repeated for that long, it becomes reflexive and institutionalized to such a deeply embedded level that there appears almost no way to come back out of it.


The reason is, multiple generations of both leaders and servicemen have been inculcated with a particular set of skills, mindsets, and approaches to the point it’s become axiomatic by nature. Furthermore, the ancillary institutional appendages which function as symbiotic conduits to the corpus of the military structure have all likewise atrophied or have simply been rerouted to totally new paradigms of functioning completely antithetical to the ‘total war’ attritional approach.

In simple terms, this obviously means that all the attendant MIC suppliers and manufacturers have built their architectures, production lines, and supply chains around the concepts inherent to the ‘Western’ style of colonial war: low quantity, high precision, high cost systems which excel at individual targeting of terrorist leaders and such, but are too finicky and expensive to maintain in attritional conflicts. This has calcified within their structures to an institutional degree.

I spoke about this at length before:
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. There’s an inherent misconception about the conceptual differences between Soviet/Russian military systems (read: weapons) and those of NATO/Western equivalents. Endless debate has been made not only about w…

Read full story
One of the key overlooked concepts I mentioned above is not simply that Russian systems are cheaper and easier to maintain, but rather that they’re built around an entirely different philosophical paradigm for warfare.

The most important of these is that the systems are built with the express understanding and expectation that they will have to someday be manned by under-trained conscripts, and thus have to be designed around the philosophy of extreme ease of use and intuitiveness. The famous example I used to highlight this is how, from the U.S. Army’s own Fort Benning reports, the Javelin had a less than 19% combat effectiveness, owing mostly to its complicated use and the recruits’ inability to fully internalize its combat parameters, such as minimum engagement distances, locking procedures, etc.:

Image

I shared videos of AFU POWs complaining their ‘fragile’ Javelins either broke before use, or simply were discarded before Ukrainians could figure out their complex use. Russian systems are designed to be picked up and fired. This is the concept of ‘total war’—ingrained into the ethos is the basic assumption that heavy attrition of troops will eventually degrade the quality of conscripts, which will have a snowballing effect on effective usage of “complex” machinery. Ukraine is currently experiencing this, with an already totally eroded manpower resource being teased with offerings like the F-16 and other highly complex systems that would take even a seasoned veteran during peacetime a huge amount of effort to learn.

I further highlighted how Russian systems are made to be interoperable and versatile for precisely this reason: when your human capital is being attritioned, you want systems which can be picked up by anyone, including—if need be—troops from other adjacent combat roles.

(Paywall but free sample.)

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/rus ... es-russias

******

Speaking Of Air Defense...

... and Crimea.

МОСКВА, 4 мая — РИА Новости. Дежурные средства ПВО уничтожили над Крымом четыре выпущенные ВСУ оперативно-тактические ракеты ATACMS, сообщили в Минобороны России. «В течение прошедшей ночи пресечена попытка киевского режима совершить террористическую атаку с применением американских оперативно-тактических ракет ATACMS по объектам на территории Российской Федерации", — рассказали в ведомстве. Средства ПВО сбили над территорией Крыма четыре ракеты американского производства, добавили в Минобороны.

Translation: MOSCOW, May 4 – RIA Novosti. On watch air defense systems destroyed four ATACMS operational-tactical missiles fired by the Ukrainian Armed Forces over Crimea, the Russian Ministry of Defense reported. “Over the past night, an attempt by the Kyiv regime to carry out a terrorist attack using American ATACMS operational-tactical missiles against targets on the territory of the Russian Federation was stopped,” the department said. Air defense systems shot down four American-made missiles over the territory of Crimea, the Ministry of Defense added.

Vladimir Putin's Inauguration is on May 7, so these NATO cowards will continue their efforts to spoil it.

Meanwhile lament and suffering in Washington:

Opinion: The U.S. — and its troops abroad — are vulnerable to low-flying drones

As always, the solutions are about for everything good against everything bad.

Service members deployed overseas are increasingly facing threats from these uncrewed systems, too. The three American soldiers targeted in an attack in Jordan this January lost their lives to a small Iranian UAS. These systems have become a significant security problem, for which the U.S. military has minimal countermeasures. Iran’s attack on Israel this month only underscored the threat. In classified briefings and open settings, our committee has examined the threat posed by high-altitude craft and low-altitude drones. We discovered a series of underlying issues complicating an effective response to them. The first problem is that our nation lacks adequate drone detection capability. We still rely on the early warning radars that served us so well during the Cold War. Today, though, they are unable to detect, identify and track small aircraft at both high and low altitudes. Inside the United States, we can hardly track anything other than commercial aircraft. Almost none of our domestic military bases have the sensors to identify small drones.

Well, same goes for low-flying cruise missiles. Most of them fly much faster than drones, many of them fly with supersonic speeds, if you know what I mean. Some of them fly with hypersonic speeds, high and attack vertically down. To face such a challenge--and it is a challenge, no one argues with that--one needs short to medium range AD systems and integrated with them EW complex. But, of course, having this:

Image

Is out of the question, albeit the US managed to get one in Libya. But then again, it was first version of it. Latest Pantsirs differ dramatically from their first versions. But it is too little, too late anyway because one has to have a whole arsenal of means from modern AAA to the whole spectrum of missile AD systems. Meanwhile:

[/color=red]JERUSALEM — After 40 years in use to defend the nation, the Israel Defense Forces will soon say goodbye to their American-made Patriot air defense systems, the IDF announced Tuesday. The move comes as Israel’s indigenous defenses, notably the Iron Dome, Arrow and David’s Sling systems, increasingly take on the role of home defender. It also comes days after Israel’s systems and aircraft, along with help from American, French, British and Jordanian militaries, managed to stymie an Iranian broadside of drones and missiles. The Israel Air Force had first revealed the reduction in Israel’s use of the Patriot batteries in February when the air force said that “as part of the processes of operational efficiency in the Air Force, it was decided that several batteries of the ‘Yahlom’ (Patriot) system will go out of use and its personnel will undergo a several-week conversion to operate the Iron Dome defense system.” The Israeli Air Force said at the time that this would lead to the establishment of additional Iron Dome batteries.[/color]

I am sure SMO and the way Patriots (and other NATO AD systems) have been "dealing" with Russian missiles, especially hypersonic ones (we know that Patriots shoot them all down, none ever hits the target) has nothing to do with that, wink, wink. Plus, of course, those Iranian missiles which all, that's what ever honest reports tell us, have been intercepted. Of course, Iron Dome is useless against real enemy with advanced strike systems, plus Arrow (Boeing) and David's Sling (Raytheon and Israeli RAFAEL) are same ol', same ol' US systems. With David's Sling being... well, pretty much same glorified Patriot PAC3. All those systems are still useless against modern strike means especially speedy ones.Now, the question who will be the next batch of NATO "advisers" who will die in 404.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2024/05 ... fense.html

Daniel Davis...

... really had it. Thanks to Civ Adrian who noted this video. You can almost sense the desperation of Lt. Colonel when he speaks about it. Some purely humanitarian part in him also shines through. It is unconscionable on part of the US establishment to continue to exercise illusions on the issue of SMO. There are some who still do, and the reason they do is because they have no real grasp of anything which happens beyond their illiterate and ignorant echo chamber in Washington.

Image

Speaking of this Russia's surge capacity. What many people still do not get, it is the fact that Russia expands while continuing all OTHER programs which are not related to SMO and they include expansion of the Black Sea Fleet with three new pr. 22800 Karakurt, additional one will go to Baltic Fleet (in Russian). In terms of new UAVs... well, SMO birthed a monster of combat and recon UAVs, and loitering munitions, producer in Russia. So, there is a lot to talk about in this respect, but it seems that two chihuahuas, France and UK, you know, still want to remain slightly pregnant.


Sending NATO soldiers to fight the Russian army in Ukraine would be too dangerous, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron said on Friday. He made his comments as European leaders have reignited the debate on whether the US-led alliance should consider a more direct involvement in the conflict. Speaking to Sky News on Friday, Cameron said that the UK must continue to deliver weapons to Kiev and focus on replenishing own stocks “as a national priority.” “But I wouldn’t have NATO soldiers in the country because I think that could be a dangerous escalation,” the prime minister added. “We’ve trained – I think – almost 60,000 Ukrainian soldiers.” The foreign secretary’s statement came after French President Emmanauel Macron once again refused to rule out a potential deployment of NATO soldiers in Ukraine. “We mustn’t rule anything out because our objective is that Russia must never be able to win in Ukraine,” he told the Economist in an interview published this week. Macron argued that the question of NATO boots on the ground could arise “if the Russians were to break through the front lines” and if Kiev would request help.

Of course it would be dangerous to those UK and French troops because they will be annihilated and UK and France will do nothing about it because they are, well, chihuahuas. Once kicked by the Russian boot they will run squealing to their master, who himself is circling the drain. So, what's left for UK is to do the only thing they know--to live vicariously through their Ukie cannon fodder and try to attack Crimea, especially on May 9th. What will Russia do?


Any Western-backed Ukrainian attack against Russia’s Crimean Bridge or Crimea itself will be met with a powerful revenge strike from Moscow, Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. The warning follows a recent post by Ukraine’s envoy to the UN, Sergey Kislitsa, which had a threatening tone, implying that the bridge connecting the Russian peninsula to the Krasnodar Region will not be standing by the end of the year. According to Zakharova, Kiev is openly preparing for a new attack on the Crimean Bridge, with the support of the West. She told a press briefing on Friday that, on the eve of May 9, Russia’s annual Great Victory Day commemorating the Soviet defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945, “the Kiev regime and its Western masters are hatching plans for new terrorist attacks on Russian territory.”I would like to again warn Washington, London, Brussels, that any aggressive actions against Crimea are not only doomed to failure, but will also be met with a retaliatory blow,” the diplomat said.

Well, locations of British and French advisers are known, as is of General Aguto's people and Kinzhal nowadays is carried not just by MiG-31K but by SU-34s. Zircon is fired, likely, from Bastion complex launchers, maybe frigates. One will have about three minutes to run. But don't trust me, UK's deputy permanent representative at UNSC James Kariuki was unequivocal:


James Kariuki, the United Kingdom's deputy permanent representative to the United Nations, said during a U.N. Security Council meeting in New York on Monday that Moscow's military had been "set back 18 years" after nearly two years of war. Kariuki condemned Russia for obtaining weapons and equipment from countries like North Korea and Iran while dismissing Russia's claim of "protecting the rights of Russian-speakers in Ukraine." "Russian military modernization has been set back 18 years," Kariuki said. "Now Russia's defense industry strips down fridges for parts...And for what? To lose more than half of the land it seized since February 2022 and a fifth of its Black Sea Fleet?" "This war benefits no one, not Russians, and certainly not Ukrainians," he added. "The only threat to any civilian in Ukraine continues to come from Russia."

Why eighteen, why not seventeen or twenty four? But then again, who am I to question British "diplomacy" and its intellect and diligence in following facts. Nah, I am screwing with you--those vaunted British "elite" educational institutions produce today only imbeciles.

Image

Remember him? That's British "elite."

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2024/05 ... davis.html

******

About the meaning of the Hours of Yar
May 4, 3:22 p.m

Image

The liberation of Chasov Yar provides direct access to the Slavic-Kramatorsk agglomeration.

It is approximately 10 km to Konstantinovka, 20-25 km to Druzhkovka and Kramatorsk, 30-35 km to Slavyansk.

Hence the enemy’s efforts to hold the city, the loss of which would have severe operational consequences for the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

At the moment, the battles for the city and surrounding heights are already in full swing.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9135364.html

Google Translator.

********

Is Zelensky’s Life In Danger Now That He’s On Russia’s Wanted List?

Image

ANDREW KORYBKO
MAY 05, 2024

The impending end of Zelensky’s term on 21 May sets the backdrop against which to analyze this development.

There’s been a lot of speculation about why Russia just put Zelensky, new National Security and Defense Council chief Litvinenko, former President Poroshenko, and two former financial officials on its Interior Ministry’s wanted list, among the others that have already been on it. The West generally considers it a symbolic move while some in the Alt-Media Community are convinced that Russia plans to secretly rendition or possibly even assassinate them.

The impending end of Zelensky’s term on 21 May sets the backdrop against which to analyze this development. Former Israeli Prime Minister Bennett claimed in early 2023 that President Putin promised him the year prior not to harm his Ukrainian counterpart, but some believe that this “security guarantee” will only last so long as Zelensky’s term remains legitimate. Clinging to power after 21 May on legally dubious pretexts, they believe, could lead to the Russian leader reconsidering his stance.

Foreign Minister Lavrov’s remark in late March that “Perhaps, we won’t need to recognize anything” after that day was interpreted by some as implying that he might already be overthrown or killed before that happens. Poland’s arrest last month of a man who they accused of passing along details of Rzeszow Airport’s security to Russia with a view towards helping it assassinate Zelensky during his next visit there lent credence to this theory among some despite this arguably being a case of Ukrainian entrapment.

Former Russian President and incumbent Deputy Chair of the Security Council Medvedev, however, reacted to the aforementioned news by wondering whether “It may be the first piece of evidence that people in the West have made a decision to liquidate him.” Basically, while President Putin might keep his promise not to harm Zelensky even if he clings to power after 21 May, Medvedev hinted that the West might actually kill him but then possibly try to frame Russia.

Another factor to keep in mind when assessing Russia’s motives for placing Zelensky and those other officials, both presently serving and former, on its wanted list at this precise moment in time is the worst-case scenario that the Ukrainian Intelligence Committee warned about in late February. They expect that Russia could achieve a military breakthrough later this month or next, which might coincide with the supposedly Russian-backed protest-driven political collapse of the Ukrainian government.

The timing might also overlap with next month’s Swiss “peace talks” in mid-June and thus transform them from a planned morale-boosting stunt into a panicked powwow of Western leaders over the terms of Ukraine’s negotiated surrender to Russia. Even if the Ukrainian government doesn’t collapse, any Russian military breakthrough might still lead to urgently renewed interest in resuming talks with Russia, but Moscow wouldn’t be able to do so with any of the figures on its wanted list due to domestic law.

Therein lies the likely purpose of placing them on there since Russia is a stickler for legal technicalities due to President Putin’s lawyer background no matter what the West claims. Just like the Rada passed a measure in late 2022 prohibiting Zelensky from negotiating with him, so too has the Russian Interior Ministry (almost certainly with President Putin’s tacit approval) practically just done the same with prohibiting their country’s representatives from negotiating with the Ukrainian leader and others.

If the military-strategic dynamics continue trending in Russia’s favor to the point where the West finally authorizes Ukraine to desperately resume negotiations aimed at freezing the conflict by capitulating to some of their opponent’s terms, then this could only be done via figures that aren’t on its wanted list. Should Zelensky still cling to power by that time, then he’d undermine his own self-proclaimed legal authority by having to appoint someone else, which he’d be loathe to do in any case for reasons of ego.

It also can’t be taken for granted that members of the most hawkish Western factions won’t kill him in a false-flag assassination blamed on Russia in order to rally more support behind Ukraine during that dire moment in the conflict and to foil any attempt by their factional rivals to end it with talks. What’s most important for Russia isn’t bringing Zelensky to justice by any means, but ensuring its national security interests in the ongoing conflict, albeit without deigning to negotiate with an illegitimate puppet.

Poroshenko’s inclusion on its wanted list is probably meant to signal that it won’t be duped by a Western switcheroo in the event that they seek to replace Zelensky with him as part of a “controlled opposition”-backed protest-driven regime change aimed at defusing public anger and offsetting a genuine revolution. After all, he was responsible for failing to implement the Minsk Accords that he himself agreed to, so no real diplomatic solution to the latest conflict is possible with him at the helm of the state once again.

With this in mind, Russia might be pressuring the West to introduce “fresh blood” into the Ukrainian elite or elevate largely unknown figures without the same level of blood on their hands if they’re going to stage a regime change against Zelensky, who defied their demands not to target energy infrastructure. As was earlier written, Zelensky’s false-flag assassination could sabotage this quasi-regime change process aimed at creating the “face-saving” pretext for peace, so his benefactors should be on alert.

His inclusion on Russia’s wanted list therefore isn’t meant to create the legal pretext for his secret rendition or assassination by the Kremlin, but to create one for at least a symbolic shake-up of the Ukrainian elite for facilitating peace talks, though it could be exploited to undermine that as explained. The real threat to Zelensky’s life comes from the West’s most hawkish anti-Russian factions, which aren’t below killing him if they think that it’s required for prompting a conventional NATO intervention.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/is-zelen ... r-now-that

More likely Zelensky will be killed by Nazis.

******

DELUSION THAT IT CAN CONTINUE TO SEND MORE POWERFUL WEAPONS TO UKRAINE WITHOUT RUSSIAN RETALIATION IS DANGEROUS
MAY 4, 2024
By Glenn Diesen, Twitter/X, 4/24/24

Glenn Diesen is a Norwegian academic and political scientist. He is a professor at the School of Business of the University of South-Eastern Norway.

The idea that NATO can continue to send ever-more powerful and long-range weapons to Ukraine without any retaliation from Russia is premised on the dangerous self-delusion that NATO is not a participant in the conflict.

But if we accept that this is also a NATO War, then it is obvious that Russia will eventually feel compelled to retaliate against NATO to restore deterrence, which could trigger a nuclear war.

Consider the following:

– Immediately after President Yanukovich had been toppled with the support of the US, the first thing the new US-backed Ukrainian intelligence chief did was to call CIA & MI6 for a partnership against Russia – and secret CIA bases were established along the Russian border (this partnership was established before Russia responded by taking back Crimea). (NY Times)

– This occurred as the US asserted ever-greater control over the Ukrainian government and its policies: The leaked Nuland call revealed that Washington dictated who would be part of the post-coup government and who had to stay out. American citizens also took several top positions in the new government (such as the finance minister post). Ukraine’s General Prosecutor Shokin argued the US was running Ukraine as a colony as new appointments had to be approved by Washington. Biden even fired Shokin when he investigated the Ukrainian energy company Burisma where Biden had placed his son Hunter

– Over the next decade, the US and its allies built a powerful Ukrainian army while sabotaging the Minsk agreement and later (after the Russian invasion) also sabotaged the Istanbul negotiations. Weapon systems poured in, Ukrainian ports were modernised to fit American warships, and Ukraine was becoming a de facto NATO member. Top Ukrainian officials like Arestovich argued openly they were preparing for a war with Russia. A top adviser to former president Nicolas Sarkozy, warned that the US-Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership of November 2021 “convinced Russia that it must attack or be attacked” (NY Times)

– Since the Russian invasion, the mantra from NATO has since been that weapons are the path to peace while refusing to engage in negotiations or diplomacy for more than 2 years. Our media keeps ignoring the horrific Ukrainian losses and instead chant that Ukraine is winning to maintain public support for the war. NATO has supplied the weapons, intelligence, and participated in in the war planning. A source in the Ukrainian general staff even argued that NATO pressured Ukraine to carry out disastrous counter-offensives.

https://www.economist.com/europe/2023/0 ... ublic-mood

– More powerful and long-range weapons are now sent and Blinken argues that Ukraine can use them to strike inside Russian territory. Leaked calls from German officers reveal that long-range missiles are to be used to destroy the Crimean bridge and that either Germans or Americans can assist in operating them

https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/russia ... e-a3a02cc3

– Putin is saying that the US objective was “to spark a war in Europe, and to eliminate competitors by using a proxy force… They plan to finish us once and for all”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... -documents

– The US should ask itself: How would Washington respond if Russia was engaged in a similar proxy war against the US on its borders in Mexico? The conviction in our own virtue, that we are merely “helping Ukraine”, blinds us to the fact that we are taking giant steps toward nuclear war.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2024/05/gle ... dangerous/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10873
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 May 06, 2024 11:34 am

The precedent of diplomacy
POSTED BY @NSANZO ⋅ 05/06/2024

Image

In an uncharacteristic statement, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitro Kuleba recently stated that, following the meeting that Ukraine and its partners are preparing for June in Switzerland to promote Zelensky's peace plan , Russia would be invited to the negotiation. . The reasoning is that ending a war requires a treaty, a logical conclusion that has been ignored for almost two years. General Skibitsky, deputy director of Ukrainian military intelligence, stated along the same lines in an interview with The Economist , who according to Oliver Carroll “says that he does not see a way for Ukraine to win the war only on the battlefield. Even if she managed to push Russian forces back to the borders - an increasingly distant possibility - the war would not end. These wars can only end with treaties, he claims. "At this time, both parties are vying for "the most favorable position" regarding possible talks." In both cases, the mention of negotiation and the search for a treaty has been understood as an opening to diplomacy, which it is not. Both the Swiss summit and the words of Kirilo Budanov's second in the GUR refer to the need to impose a definitive solution to the war, which does not involve understanding that the war cannot be won and seeking a diplomatic resolution, but rather demanding more weapons to its partners to find itself in a position to impose its will and not face a peace with concessions.

To this objective, understanding that Ukraine faces a war that will continue for a long time, is due to the Ukrainian requests for long-term security guarantees, continuous supply of weapons beyond 2024 and even 2025 and mobilization of the industry. European and American military to maintain combat capability at the international level. None of these aspects, nor the spirit of the statements and actions related to the Swiss peace summit , point to diplomacy and negotiation, but to the continuation of the war until a resolution acceptable to Ukraine. This is confirmed by the part of Skibitsky's words that are least highlighted by the media. As Carroll writes, for the general, “negotiations will not be able to begin until the second half of 2025, at the earliest.” “By then, Russia will face serious “headwinds.” Russian military production capacity has increased, but will plateau in early 2026, he estimates, due to shortages of material and engineers. Both sides could end up without weapons. But if nothing changes in other aspects, Ukraine will run out of them first.” The objective is clear: to strengthen itself in the short, medium and long term to defeat Russia on the Ukrainian front, a success that kyiv sees increasingly distant but which it does not renounce. This is the reason for the mention of the 1991 borders, the achievement of which would not imply, according to the GUR general, the end of the war. The comment indicates Ukraine's intentions to achieve concessions beyond the recovery of its borders and although Skibitsky does not detail those objectives, access to NATO, reparations from Russia or even demilitarization have been mentioned in this sense in the past. of the Russian territories bordering Ukraine.

The objectives are not always consistent with the possibilities and the realism of the 1991 border recovery plan is scarce, which would have to be carried out against the opinion of the population of Crimea and Donbass, as was already demonstrated with the counteroffensive of 2023. In Referring to the impossibility of holding negotiations for more than a year, the Russian opposition journalist Leonid Ragozin wrote: “Let the European war industry catch up with the Russian one. Well it could be. Whether Western funding remains at the same level: I doubt it. That the mobilization will be a great success: who knows, it may lead to regional Maidans, as we can judge from the daily interactions between press gangs and civilians, especially in Transcarpathia and Odessa.” With the prerequisites to even consider the possibility of negotiating with Russia being remote possibilities or very distant in time, the general's words do not indicate a willingness to negotiate, but rather a reaffirmation of the position taken by Ukraine almost two years ago now with the rejection of the principle of the Istanbul agreement and the closure of the diplomatic channel.

This precedent of negotiation between the parties in search of an agreement has recently been recovered by Samuel Charap and Sergey Radchenko, two American academics who have had access to the working documents and sources close to the negotiation. Published by Foreign Policy and showing a part of the analyzed texts, the article presents various data on the process of the breakdown of the negotiation, analyzes the reasons for the failure and studies the positions of both sides to try to reach an optimistic conclusion: Although there was finally no agreement, the work carried out shows the objectives of Kiev and Moscow and represents, according to the authors, preliminary work on which to build a future negotiation at the moment in which Russia and Ukraine finally aspire to a resolution. diplomat. That retrospective look is relevant now that the possibility of negotiating and the certainty that the war will only end with the signing of a treaty timidly and sometimes deceptively appears in public conversation.

The starting point is the surprise that “in the context of Moscow's unprecedented aggression, Russians and Ukrainians were on the verge of closing an agreement that would have ended the war and provided Ukraine with multilateral security guarantees, paving the way for path towards its permanent neutrality and, later, its accession to the EU.” The Istanbul summit produced a document called “Key provisions of the Treaty on Security Guarantees of Ukraine,” to which the authors add that, “according to the participants we interviewed, the Ukrainians had largely drafted the communiqué and the "The Russians provisionally accepted the idea of ​​using it as a framework for a treaty." Nothing reported by academics is new and both ideas, that of a relatively beneficial agreement for Ukraine and the fact that it was Kiev who wrote the initial draft, were perfectly known since 2022. What's more, the 10 points of the proposal Ukrainian law that has been repeatedly confirmed as the basis for negotiations, were published by Meduza on March 29 of that year, that is, during the negotiations.

Russia and Ukraine were negotiating four fundamental aspects: the territorial issue, security guarantees, neutrality and limitation of Ukraine's offensive weapons and a series of legal, political and social aspects of lesser international interest but important at the local level. With the agreement in principle reached in Istanbul, kyiv would have obtained security guarantees from Russia and other international powers in exchange for neutrality and limitation of weapons, a prohibition on establishing foreign military bases and renunciation of resolving the Crimean issue by force. Support for the country's accession to the European Union was explicitly mentioned and participation in military alliances was limited only. The territorial question and the delimitation of the borders, perhaps the most complicated element, were left aside as final issues to be determined in a meeting between the two presidents, Putin and Zelensky, after which a treaty would be signed. In any case, the application of security guarantees to the entire territory of Ukraine with the exception of Crimea and a yet-to-be-determined part of Donbass implied Russia's willingness to abandon all territories then under its control beyond those two regions.

The terms, the form and the moment in which the negotiation took place give a good idea of ​​what the objectives of the Russian Federation were at that time, which was willing to give up important territorial advances in exchange for its real objective: to consolidate its control over Crimea and the part of Donbass that had refused to be Ukrainian, paralyze NATO's expansion towards its borders and sign a treaty that would end a war that had begun eight years earlier and that Ukraine had never wanted to end through the Minsk compromise .

The drafts analyzed by the two American academics “contain several articles that were added to the treaty at the behest of Russia, but were not part of the communiqué and related to issues that Ukraine refused to discuss. They demand that Ukraine prohibit "fascism, Nazism, neo-Nazism and aggressive nationalism" and, to this end, repeal (in whole or in part) six Ukrainian laws that dealt, in general terms, with controversial aspects of the history of the Soviet era, in particular the role of Ukrainian nationalists during World War II.” In this, a series of concessions in defense of the Russian-speaking population and of those who have not rejected the legacy of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic as a predecessor state to independent Ukraine, the authors see an external interference that, naturally, kyiv I didn't want to accept. This position forgets that the Russian demands did not go beyond the electoral proposals of candidate Zelensky, who in the electoral campaign presented himself as the moderate option that would reverse part of the excessively nationalist agenda of his predecessor.

First of all, this demand for the elimination of historical revisionism of the imposition of the nationalist narrative as the only official one answers the question that the authors had previously asked themselves: “What did the Russians want to achieve by invading Ukraine? On February 24, 2022, Putin gave a speech in which he justified the invasion by mentioning the vague goal of "denazification" of the country. The most reasonable interpretation of “denazification” was that Putin intended to overthrow the government in kyiv, possibly killing or capturing Zelensky in the process.” Taking into account the speed with which Russia began the negotiation process in search of a treaty to resolve the conflict between the two countries, which required the signature of a legitimate president, it is not unreasonable to think that this regime change that experts have seen the attack on Kiev as actually military pressure to reach a security agreement and territorial commitment in which denazification would mean the banning of paramilitary groups such as Azov or Praviy Sektor and the elimination of the attempt to erase Soviet memory and fight against fascism of the national narrative to replace it with the discourse of perpetual struggle against Russia.

Reality prevailed over the will to reach an agreement and in the end there was neither a meeting between the two presidents nor a negotiation process that lasted beyond the weeks of spring and part of the summer of 2022, when the war was already at the point. of no return in which it currently remains. To explain what factors determined the agreement was not possible, Foreign Policy explains that “the mood of Ukrainian public opinion hardened with the discovery of Russian atrocities in Irpin and Bucha. And with the Russian siege of kyiv failing, President Volodymyr Zelensky became confident that, with enough Western support, he could win the war on the battlefield. Finally, although the parties' attempt to resolve long-standing disputes over the security architecture offered the prospect of a lasting resolution to the war and lasting regional stability, they aimed too high, too soon. “They tried to reach a global agreement even when a basic ceasefire proved unattainable.” The reality of war, with increasing civilian casualties, the perception of a possible victory and the difficulty of resolving a complex conflict are the three factors that are repeated throughout the text.

To them we must add a fourth, which is not new either. As already noted at that time, the renunciation of joining NATO had to be made in exchange for security guarantees that involved more countries than those that were negotiating them. Russia and Ukraine were thus planning security measures that had to be ratified by third countries that, in several cases such as the United States and the United Kingdom, were not willing to compromise. “Western partners were reluctant to be drawn into a negotiation with Russia, especially one that would have created new commitments for them to ensure Ukraine's security,” the authors write. That is, perhaps, the greatest contribution of the research. The agreement not only required concessions on the part of kyiv and Moscow, but also the willingness of Western countries, primarily the United States, to deal with Russia through diplomatic channels, a willingness that, as the article admits, simply did not exist.

Image

Two years after the definitive rupture of diplomatic channels, with an enormous level of destruction accumulated and with a casualty count difficult to calculate, the possibilities of dialogue continue to seem distant. This weekend, the United States National Security Advisor stated that Washington's contribution will allow Ukraine to plan a counteroffensive by 2025. David Cameron, for his part, has promised $3.5 billion in annual assistance to kyiv "for as long as possible." necessary". Nor has the European Union shown interest in diplomacy. The absence of political will that Western countries showed for a negotiated resolution to the Ukrainian conflict in 2022 and in the years of the Minsk process continues to this day, with war and an end without concessions as the only acceptable path for both kyiv and the capitals of the arms supplying countries.

This position, which is also the one shown by General Skibitsky when referring to the need for a treaty even if Ukraine were to recover its 1991 borders, sees the continuation of a war that can hardly be won as more beneficial to its interests. Currently, with Russian troops reinforced by learning from the mistakes made and as battle-hardened as the Ukrainian ones, the risk of exhausting resources to fight in a less favorable context increases significantly compared to what Russia offered in Istanbul. “The calculations at the time, when the previous talks were disrupted by the Ukrainian side in May 2022, were based on the assumption that both the Russian economy and its military machinery would soon collapse due to their inefficiency and technological backwardness. Today, it is the high-tech side of the war in which Russia is making the greatest advances. This prominently includes unmanned aircraft technology and electronic warfare,” Russian opposition journalist Leonid Ragozin wrote this weekend.

However, kyiv, Washington, London and Brussels are willing to run the risk of finding themselves in a worse negotiating position in the future and continue to see war and not diplomacy as the way to obtain the supremacy that will turn the negotiation of a treaty in an imposition of peace according to its own terms and without any concession to Russia or to the population that in these years has preferred to be Russian than Ukrainian.

https://slavyangrad.es/2024/05/06/el-pr ... iplomacia/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Near Chasov Yar, French and German mercenaries entered the battle.

Local reports indicate that in the forestry area, on the southern approaches to Chasov Yar, paratroopers clashed with groups of mercenaries in a shooting battle. However, now these are no longer the same tik-tok soldiers of foreign countries who came to Ukraine to earn money and, at the first threat to their lives, fled from their positions, packed their bags and went back. Now trained, highly motivated and ideological fighters, in other words, professional military personnel of NATO countries, are entering the battle.

The first reports (based on radio interceptions) about the arrival of foreign mercenaries in Chasov Yar arrived about a month ago, but then it was completely unclear what kind of units they were. We dare to assume that the paratroopers met with representatives of the French Foreign Legion, who, according to Military Chronicle , had previously been transferred to Slavyansk. Apparently, the unit, which was originally planned to be used in the defense of Slavyansk (in the event of a front breakthrough), is now involved in the defense of Chasov Yar, where the situation for the Ukrainian Armed Forces is worsening every day.

If this is indeed the case, then yesterday the French Foreign Legion suffered its first losses (up to 7 people)

***

Colonelcassad
🧭Summary of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation (as of May 5, 2024)

Units of the “Southern” group of forces occupied more advantageous positions and inflicted fire damage on manpower and equipment. Enemy losses amounted to 290 military personnel, two vehicles, 155 mm M777 howitzer made in the USA, three 122 mm D-30 howitzers, 122 mm Gvozdika self-propelled artillery mount, as well as a 100 mm MT-12 Rapier anti-tank gun.

Units of the "Center" group of troops: During the day, eight counterattacks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces assault groups were repelled; they lost up to 380 military personnel, a US-made Abrams tank, two infantry fighting vehicles, including a US-made Bradley, an armored combat vehicle and three pickup trucks.

Units of the Vostok group of troops: Enemy losses amounted to up to 135 military personnel, three pickup trucks, a 155 mm FN-70 howitzer made in Great Britain, a 152 mm Msta-B howitzer and a 100 mm MT-12 Rapier anti-tank gun.

Air defense systems shot down 20 Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles and two Hammer guided bombs made in France.

Units of the Dnepr group of troops inflicted fire on accumulations of manpower and equipment of the 44th artillery brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the 35th Marine Brigade and the 121st Terrestrial Defense Brigade in the areas of the settlements of Pavlovka, Zaporozhye region, Ivanovka, Mikhailovka and Zolotaya Balka, Kherson region.

A counterattack by the assault group of the 118th mechanized brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces north of the village of Rabotino, Zaporozhye region, was repelled.

The enemy lost up to 45 military personnel, a 155 mm US-made M109 “Paladin” self-propelled artillery mount, a US-made 155 mm M777 howitzer and a 122 mm D-30 howitzer.

▫️ Over the past 24 hours, operational-tactical aviation, missile forces and artillery of groupings of troops of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation have destroyed : a warehouse of Western-made missile weapons in the area of ​​​​the city of Odessa, as well as a radar station for detecting and tracking air targets P-19 in the area of ​​​​the village of Kozyutovka, Kharkov region.

In addition, the fuel depot of the 218th joint logistics center of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, rocket fuel production workshops, as well as weapons for unmanned aerial vehicles, manpower and military equipment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in 108 regions were hit .

▫️ Air defense systems shot down 20 Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles and two Hammer guided bombs made in France.

In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the following have been destroyed : 593 aircraft, 270 helicopters, 23,762 unmanned aerial vehicles, 512 anti-aircraft missile systems, 15,917 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 1,279 combat vehicles of multiple launch rocket systems, 9,314 field artillery guns and mortars, as well as 21,479 units of special military vehicles.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Ukraine Weekly Update
3rd May 2024
DR. ROB CAMPBELL

Image
May Celebrations in Moscow with Western Trophies

<snip>

Shoigu Demands More Supplies

Image

Tass is reporting that at a meeting with his military chiefs on May 1st, Defence Minister, Sergei Shoigu demanded more supplies for the fronts ‘to support the needed rate of advance in the special operations zone’. This appears to be saying that the current rate of advance will be maintained or even increased as part of an offensive. Shoigu also said that this would be done in accordance with the ‘plan’ that is part of the SMO. Shoigu also pointed out that the Ukrainians have lost 111,000 troops this year.

<snip>

ATACMS
The US has been supplying these long range missiles for a while, apparently. Efforts have been made to convince the general public that Ukraine has a right to kill and maim the innocent civilians who will become victims of these missiles on Russian soil. No one should be surprised by this because it is part of Western flexibility when it comes to morality. I know - I have said this before. Let’s face it, Western leaders who can allow the genocide in Gaza to continue or the complete elimination of Ukraine’s manhood to be achieved are not moral in any sense.

‘We Have Nothing!’ - Krivonos

Image

General Sergei Krivonos exclaimed angrily on live TV that the Ukrainians have no ammunition for artillery. There are even shortages of small arms ammunition. Military operations cannot rely solely on the sacrifice of soldiers’ lives he said. Abandoned factories should have been converted to produce arms but corruption got in the way of this:

If we (the Ukrainian authorities) had not embezzled funds but instead invested them, we could have allocated 25-35 million - no more, but unfortunately, this is not the case! We have numerous factories capable of quickly repairing equipment, but unfortunately, this is not happening.

Where Are Our Defences? Ukrainians ask.

Image

Ukrainian soldiers are lamenting the fact that the defences to their rear, on which they were hoping to rely once they are forced to retreat - are not there. Apparently, companies charged with building these defences are not doing so, due to the risks involved, or are exaggerating the strength of those defences they have built.

‘Donbass Will Fall in October’ - Ukraine Commanders

Image

A Swiss news outlet, in an interview with several Ukrainian army officers asked for their views on the conflict. They suggested that defeat was inevitable and that the Donbass would fall in October when the Ukrainians will be obliged to negotiate with Putin, according to Blick. Another Ukrainian, deputy head of the GUR, Skibitsky, is equally pessimistic. He expects a Russian offensive by the end of May which will bring ‘dark days’ to Kharkov followed by the Russian capture of the Baltic States within a week. Wow! He certainly knows nothing about Russia’s capabilities yet alone her ambitions. But he may be correct in predicting a Russian offensive in Sumy and Kharkov regions and in accepting the strategic significance of Chasiv Yar. Some say that Bakhmut was significant strategically because it allowed access to the defensive citadel that is Chasov Yar, the most important link in the chain that constitutes the Donbass defence structure. The fall of Chasiv Yar, he said, is inevitable - as we all know. Skibitsky suggests that Ukraine cannot prevail without increased Western support.

Ukrainian Soldiers Appeal to the People
According to Geroman:

Soldiers of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd companies, the second battalion of the 68th Jaeger Brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces express collective distrust of the brigade command and ask for the support of the people.

Desertions - Ukraine
According to Slavyangrad, 150,000 Ukrainians have deserted since the start of the SMO, mostly in the past six months. Cases against 4,000 deserters are registered every month and are clogging up the courts while the desertion rate is increasing.

According to Ukrainian channel legitimniy, training of military men in the West has been suspended due to desertions. They are running away from training bases and refusing to return home. This was happening last year, the source says, when morale in the army was average but now that the majority of soldiers are being forced to fight the problem will be much greater.

Conflict Within Ukraine’s Army
Some Ukrainian Telegram Channels are reporting a split within the army as elite Azov units (i.e. the Third Assault Brigade) refused Syrsky’s orders to defend Chasov Yar.. The Brigade also refused Syrsky’s orders to defend Ocheretino. According to legitimniy, Ermak and Z have been trying to ‘clean up’ the Azov type Brigades by sending them into the meat grinder. They are concerned that these Nazi Brigades could march on Kiev.

Russian Tank Production Up 350%

Image

There seems to be lots of bad news for Ukraine this week, including the fact that Russian tank production/refurbishment has increased by 350% since 2022. To add insult to this injury, Russian output of ammunition rounds for tanks and infantry fighting vehicles increased by 900%, artillery shells by 600%, and munitions for MLRS by 800%. Three times as many unguided rockets for heavy flamethrower systems are also being produced.

Ukraine Terror Attacks
Many people out there, especially Russians, are fearful of an increase in Ukrainian terror attacks on Russian soil and it must be said that this is likely rather than merely possible. Ukraine’s army is too weak to make any significant and visible impact on the Russian army so the only way Ukraine’s administration can get the country seen is by attacking civilians or civilian infrastructure with the Kerch Bridge as the prize cow. Oh - and a nuclear catastrophe at Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant, which the Ukrainians are still attacking, may raise an eyebrow or two!

And Ukraine needs to be seen because it can exist only as a parasite; it needs the people of donor countries to be convinced that Ukraine can win in order to receive the aid that sustains it. The destruction of a part of the Kerch Bridge may do this to a gullible public led by the legacy media propagandists. Kerch could be Ukraine’s Kursk - at least that’s how much the MSM will try to beef the story up. ‘Russia’s military artery severed’, the headlines will shout. ‘Russia could face supply problems after the Kerch bridge collapses’ the gullible will be led to believe. But we know the truth: Kerch does not supply military goods to Ukraine, these come via other routes.

Boris Rozhin shares this realistic view that terrorist attacks will increase significantly and so will this section of the Update, maybe.

26th/27th April

Belgorod was shelled overnight and a power transmission line was damaged while industrial enterprises were attacked in Tyotkino (Kursk) causing a fire in one. Many villages were attacked in Kursk by shelling and drones, many of which were shot down or disabled electronically. 53 rounds were launched into the DPR where an explosive dropped from a drone killed one individual while two others were injured by drones. 66 drones were shot down at night over Krasnador.

28th April

On the afternoon of the 28th, a church in Alexandrovka (DPR) was attacked during the palm Sunday service killing at least one and injuring many others.

28th/29th April

According to the Two Majors, Belgorod and Kursk were shelled overnight along with the DPR where one civilian was killed and another wounded. In the Russian Republic of Karachay-Cherkessia (the Caucasus) near the village of Mara Ayagyu, terrorists attacked a traffic police post. Two officers were killed and four others injured but five of the assailants were also killed while another had his legs blown off. In a similar incident a week earlier two police officers were killed in their patrol car.

30th April at night

According to the Two Majors:

Over Belgorod in the morning an aerial target was shot down. Constant shelling of the region continues. In the Kursk region, Glushkovo, Gordeyevka, the Byrdina Farm, and Tyotkino were shelled.

In Kozino (Kursk) one woman was killed and another injured by shrapnel. Later, two more civilians were injured by shelling - according to Tass.

1st/2nd May

Belgorod and Kursk regions have constantly suffered shelling and drone attacks causing some damage but no casualties. 131 projectiles were launched into the DPR causing only one casualty. Smolensk, Bryansk, Oryol and Rostov were also attacked.

2nd/3rd May

8 ‘aircraft type’ drones were shot down over Belgorod. The Two Majors provided the following report which does not include casualties or damage but gives an idea of how widespread the attacks have been:

In the Kursk region, the villages of Gordeyevka in the Korenevka district, the villages of Gueyvo and Gornal in the Sudzhansky district, the village of Yelizavetovka, the Zarya Farm, the settlements of Krasnooktyabrsky and Novy Put in the Glushkovsky district, and the village of Iskra in the Khomutovsky district. Enemy drones were neutralised by EW equipment near the village of Begoshcha, Rylsky district, the village of Vnesazapnoye and the village of Gordeyevka, Korenevsky district, the village of Gornal, Sudzhansky district, the village of Dronovka and the village of Novy Put, Glushkovsky district. An explosive device was dropped from an AFU UAV in Tyotkino.

Two people were injured in the attacks on Belgorod and a petrol (gas) filling station was set alight in Shebekino.

<snip>

Luhansk - Seversk

Image

Fighting in this direction is concentrated on Kislovka and Terny.

Western Donetsk - Vuhledar

Image

The Russians have managed to occupy the village of Urozhaynoye, which was taken by the Ukrainians in their summer offensive.

Kherson

Image

There has been little change on this front during the past week. Fierce fighting continues around Krynki and the Antonovsky bridge.

Ocheretino

Image
Beautiful map.

The Russians are now fighting west of Ocheretino and are 13 km away from the Pokrovsk - Konstantinovka highway. Once they reach the highway they will cut off Ukrainian logistics in the area. By the end of the week part of the village of Arkhangelskoye (Arkhanhelske) had been occupied by the Russians. There is a danger that large numbers Ukrainian soldiers could be cut off around Arkhangelskoye as the map below suggests.

Image
Map courtesy of Geroman.

Zaporozhye - Rabotino

Image

On the 30th April, the Russians hoisted a flag on a building in the northern section of Rabotino - according to the Military Summary Channel. It appears that the Ukrainians have abandoned the village but sources conflict on this.

Image
What’s left of Rabotino

Chasov Yar

Image

Chasov Yar, situated on high ground, is a hugely important settlement strategically because its capture would allow the Russians to achieve artillery dominance over the surrounding areas and advance westward into places the Ukrainians would have difficulty defending - according to Alexander Mercouris. Once Chasov Yar is taken, it is possible that the defence structure in the Donbass could collapse. Marat Khairullin has stated that 30,000 worn out Ukrainians are crammed into Chasov Yar.

Chasiv Yar - Ocheretino Pincer Movement

Image
The above map is from Simplicius who provided a detailed and excellent Sitrep on May 1st. The map shows a possible Russian pincer movement from Chasov Yar and Ocheretino towards Konstantinovka. This is also discussed by b at the Moon of Alabama - May 3rd.

(Much more at link.)

https://robcampbell.substack.com/p/ukra ... update-210

******

Will the NATO war games on Russia’s borders trigger a nuclear response? Discussion on Iran’s Press TV
Yesterday evening’s brief interview on Iran’s Press TV alongside panelist Don Debar from the USA focused on one question: what risks to the peace are presented by the ongoing massive NATO military exercises at Russia’s borders in which more than 90,000 soldiers are participating and which Moscow considers a provocation.

I say here directly that if the exercises were to be turned into an actual attack on Russia to distract Moscow from the battleground in Donbas then I envision the Russian response to be a strike with tactical nuclear weapons that would decimate the NATO forces instantaneously. Unlike my fellow panelist, I do not see such a Russian response, which is clearly laid out in Russian warnings over the past six months or more, as triggering a full scale nuclear war, because Washington knows full well that whatever damage it may do to Russia in such an exchange, there will be nothing but ashes left of the USA, with no one left to vote for Joe Biden in November.

It is regrettable that our interview was cut short for the sake of live coverage of an Iranian diplomatic mission in Africa, because I intended to move the discussion on to the question of why NATO is staging such a provocation now, just as why there were 4 ATACMS long range missiles launched a day ago by the Ukrainians for the Russians to shoot down over Crimea and why there is talk in Kiev of blowing up the Kerch (Crimea) bridge as an urgent mission. The reason for all of these intended acts of aggression and terror is to distract world attention from the ongoing daily Russian advance and Ukrainian retreat along the line of contact in the Donetsk region.

Some in the West are characterizing the Russian moves on the battlefield as the prelude to a massive Russian offensive in the coming month or two. Others use these facts to shame U.S. legislators for holding back their approval of the 61 billion dollar aid package to Kiev for so long, leaving the Ukrainians short of artillery shells and air defense equipment. However, a better explanation is that Kiev made a strategic blunder over the past year by placing so many resources in Avdeevka, which they and their NATO advisers believed was impregnable, and did not do what they should have done, namely build solid second and tertiary lines of defense to the west of Avdeevka. The Russians now are simply pressing their advantage and putting the Ukrainian forces on the run. In my next installment of Travel Notes, I will explain who was the author of this interpretation.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2024

See

Ukraine war | Urmedium

https://www.urmedium.net/c/presstv/129382

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2024/05/05/ ... -press-tv/

******

From global village to cosmic battle, part one of three

The rules based international order and Ukraine

EVENTS IN UKRAINE
MAY 03, 2024

Introduction
The end of the cold war was once said to mean the end of ideological opposition. The violent politicization of the 20th century was over, replaced by benevolent market technocracy.

But despite its overwhelming economic, military superiority following the Soviet Union’s (auto)liquidation, the Western ‘civilization of values’ seemed ever further militarized and insecure. Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya. The rampages of NATO allies in the Congo and the Levant. And today, Ukraine.

The abstract division of the 20th century wasn’t replaced by a homogenous global village, but by the ‘rules-based international order’ and its Others. It is the peculiar tendency of this order towards exclusivity and violence that this essay will examine.

In the name of what is the world being torn apart between ‘democracy and autocracy’? Answers can be found by looking at the metropolitan centre, their think tanks and political statements. But the old and new cold wars were never merely fought between two superpowers. The space of their confrontation was the third world, the ‘undecided’ states.

The cold war differed qualitatively from the old European colonialism in that both sides tried to appeal to significant sections of the third world societies. The modern global chessboard has witnessed unprecedented attempts at societal programming in frontline states.

Ours is the era of unconventional, hybrid warfare. The western world has bet hard on liberal democratic ideology – ‘a human software virus’ or ‘political contagion’, in the words of Russian security analyst Andrew Korybko. Those infected ‘have truly been led to believe that their actions are spontaneous and ‘natural’, and that they represent the inevitable ‘progress’ that all areas of the world are bound to experience sooner or later’. What happens when this inevitable progress is halted?

This ideological battle has been harshly fought in Ukraine. In 2012-3, as few as 13% of Ukrainians supported joining NATO and only 48% were for joining the EU, while another 40% advocated joining the Eurasian Customs Union with Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. The Western nations did not focus on reprogramming the entire population, but instead on the intellectual middle classes.

They appealed to the Eurocentrism that is perhaps natural to the middle classes of a poor nation. They created and fostered an entire ecosystem of ‘civil society’ journalists and NGO activists dependent on western grant money. IT professionals that worked for western companies needed little more encouragement. At crucial moments, the Euro-Atlantic metropole was able to mobilize significant sections of society to go along with the middle-class avant-garde it had fostered over the years.

This article will examine the worldview of those Ukrainians who advocated their country’s integration into Euro-Atlantic structures, to join ‘the rules-based order’ of ‘Western civilization’.

What is the ‘rules based international order’? How are conflicts resolved within it? Why is it that a peculiarly unrefined militarism seeps through this ‘liberal’ discourse?

Theories of international liberalism and realism
In 2018 Robert Kagan – scion of his neo-conservative dynasty, husband of Victoria Nuland, and leading intellectual proponent of unipolar liberal idealism – published a book called the Jungle Grows Back. He argued that a liberal international order – the rules based international order – with universal freedom for capital and lack of large military confrontations between rival states, is a historically rare exception.

The Jungle Grows Back by Robert Kagan - Penguin Books Australia
It was only because of the post-1945 differential in power between the USA and the rest of the world that it has been possible, and even more so after 1990. According to him, the norm of human history is ‘the law of the jungle’ – a world of competing nationalistic states, constantly engaged in destructive wars of conquest and mutual annihilation. To stop the nigh-inexorable growth of the nihilistic jungle, supposedly exemplified by Russia and China, US global power must be upheld by any means possible.

John Mearsheimer, leading advocate of a realist approach to international politics, argued instead in books such as the Great Delusion that attempts at erecting an international order were doomed to failure. This is because legal systems only exist when there is a state that can enforce them. This is operative at the national level, where citizens theoretically assent to being citizens of their state. This is manifestly not the case on the international level, where no global state exists.

Attempts to impose ‘international law’ will thereby be perceived as unconsented impositions by one state over others, leading to justified retaliation by the victims. This is why Mearsheimer, in contrast to Kagan, argues that any attempt to impose a liberal international order exacerbates global military instability. Liberalism can work at the national level but becomes self-destructive if applied internationally.

From theory to practice
The idea of international law became extremely popular in Ukraine following the 2014 annexation of Crimea by Russia. The new crop of Ukrainian state officials and intellectuals that took power in the 2014 EuroMaidan revolution/coup ceaselessly referred to the scriptures of international law to justify increased sanctions on Russia, military support to Ukraine, and the importance of Ukraine as a frontline state against jungle tyrannies.

The clash between geopolitical realists and liberal idealists took an intensely local character. In 2014, the democratically elected government of Viktor Yanukovych left power through non-electoral means following mysterious mass violence events on the 20th of February 2014. Political activists and politicians who supported the divisive platform EU-integration took power, embracing radical ethnonationalism with economic shock therapy as the side dish.

The eastern regions of Ukraine took to the streets in response. They had always supported social democrat politicians like Yanukovych, who embraced a more pluralistic (albeit vague) conception of Ukrainian identity. The eastern regions were economically dependent on the remaining soviet industry, whose reliance on trade with Russia and state economic protectionism was threatened by Euro-Atlantic integration.

Russia annexed Crimea. Around 50 anti-maidan protestors, all of Ukrainian citizenship and largely pensioners, were burned to death in Odessa on the 2nd of May 2014. In April, local separatists in the Donbass, assisted by Russian military adventurers like Igor Strelkov, ‘Pulled the trigger of war’, in Strelkov’s famous words. A harsh Ukrainian military response did much to feed the flames of conflict. After separatist military defeats – such as Strelkov’s July 2014 withdrawal from Slavyansk - the Russian federation began more concrete military aid. By late 2014 and early 2015, the Ukrainian army was savagely defeated in several battles. While regular Russian forces did not enter the fray, covert Russian military officers played an important role.

As has been the case in human conflicts over thousands of years, military reality forced one side to give in to the demands of its stronger enemy. One could say whatever about international law, but as usual, the balance of military strength decided events. In August 2014, Ukrainian forces were surrounded and methodically destroyed in the town of Ilovaisk. Ukrainian forces began withdrawing in surrounding villages. Ukrainian, Russian and separatist leaders met in Minsk, capital of Belarus. In September 2014, the first Minsk agreements were signed.

Fighting continued, until an even more crushing military catastrophe at Debaltsevo in January-February 2015. Anywhere from several hundred to several thousand Ukrainian soldiers were surrounded and killed. The second Minsk agreements were signed on February 12, 2015. Ukrainian president Poroshenko was constantly updated about the status of the battle in Debaltsevo throughout the Minsk negotiations, with mounting casualties and encirclement in the village leaving him no choice but to sign the agreements to prevent further collapse. Debaltsevo would fall five days later, with Ukrainian troops making a bloody retreat.

Image
The aftermath at Debaltsevo. Ria Novosti, 2015

The Minsk agreements were highly unpopular among the forces that had just fought their way to power in the Euromaidan revolution. Around a hundred people had died on the streets of Kiev in December-February 2014, and thousands had died on the Donbass steppe in the name of Ukraine’s European future.

In the words of Ukrainian Truth in June 2014, a sort of Ukrainian New York Times that I will often reference, ‘‘We must understand that the war in the east is in fact a war against Russia for Ukraine and her European future… The world must know that Europe ends with us.’ A March 2022 editorial in the magazine ‘Zahid’ reiterated the sentiment – ‘This is a war for Europe’.

The Euromaidan movement had fought through blood, snow and mud to join the EU, and now eastern Ukrainians and the ‘northern wind’ were preventing them from doing so, with the Minsk agreements giving enhanced political rights to the (anti-EU) Donbass region. This was interpreted by Ukrainian liberals as Russia’s way of vetoing Ukraine’s euro-Atlantic ambitions.

EU and NATO membership had always been controversial or even unpopular throughout Ukraine. Were Donbass part of Ukraine, let alone with special political rights, there was every likelihood that the economic shock therapy embraced by the Euro-Atlantic liberals would have lost out to geopolitically realist, social democratic forces in the next elections. Even without Donbass, a perverted version of this outcome seemed to have taken place in 2019 with Zelensky’s victory.

Minsk, like any peace treaty, reflected the objective balance of forces. Ukraine’s army was weak, demotivated. The separatists were much more motivated and had support from proficient Russian military officers. Russia’s economy remained central to the global economy, while Ukraine’s GDP per capita was sliced in half from 2013 to 2015 and the twin blows of trade liberalization with the EU and war profoundly deindustrializing it.

Ukraine became a local battleground in the global clash between realist and liberal forces.

On the one side, the remnants of the Yanukovych and old business elite. Electorally supported by the industrial working class of the south-east, they advocated implementation of the Minsk agreements. The Ukrainian industrial oligarchy, despite having originally supported maidan to blunt Yanukovych’s threatening centralizing tendencies, began lobbying for an implementation of Minsk because of the economic suffering the war had caused them.

A pragmatic, realist approach – EU accession is unlikely, its economic liberalization destructive, and peace – as well as a resumption of trade with Russia – must be the top priority to regain a measure of prosperity and growth. By 2016, Ukraine had hunger levels higher than Brazil. Its GDP dropped from $190 billion in 2013 to $156 billion in 2020, only to momentarily ‘recover’ due to the rising raw material prices created by the covid quarantine.

On the other side, the liberal idealists. Squarely in power since 2014 and supported by the urban middle classes and pro-western ‘civil society’, they pushed hard against any implementation of Minsk. Implementation of Minsk was out of the question, since it ruined the Euro-Atlantic Ukrainian polity which guaranteed their status as protected elites.

At most, as ‘minister in charge of reintegration of the occupied territories’ Iryna Heraschenko and President Petro Poroshenko said, Minsk was a way to temporarily delay Russia’s military offensive and buy time to build up the Ukrainian army.

While that might seem to be a somewhat ‘realist’ argument, the reality is otherwise. Ukraine was never able to reach anything close to the economic and military potential of Russia, a country with a population four times larger and export revenues six times higher.

Ukraine’s entry into the rules-based international order thereby required the exclusion of the realist sections of society. There was a war of attrition against the old industrial elite through economic liberalization and the onslaught of Western-funded ‘Anti-Corruption’ organs. Electoral disenfranchisement of millions of problematic eastern Ukrainians became the norm. Articles appeared in the top liberal publications arguing that ‘only those who make rational, ethical choices can be given human rights’. To borrow from Evola - who seems paradoxically at home in ultraliberal Ukraine - the new Warrior society would have debased itself by extending suffrage to the Merchant and Slave caste.

https://eventsinukraine.substack.com/p/ ... mic-battle

******

Medvedev Has A Point About How Next Month’s Swiss “Peace Talks” Could Backfire On Ukraine

Image

ANDREW KORYBKO
MAY 05, 2024

Nobody seriously believes that they’ll convince Russia to withdraw from the territory that Kiev claims as its own, nor that they’ll reshape the military-strategic dynamics of this conflict in the West’s favor.

Former Russian President and incumbent Deputy Chair of the Security Council Dmitry Medvedev listed three benefits on Telegram that his country expects to derive from next month’s Swiss “peace talks”. Russia isn’t invited to the meeting, which will only concern Zelensky’s so-called “peace formula” ultimatums. According to him, this spectacle will expose the hollowness of Ukraine’s plans, the impotence of the Western elite, and ultimately won’t stop his country’s on-the-ground gains.

These are all reasonable expectations. Beginning with the first, it was never realistic to imagine that Ukraine could coerce Russia into agreeing to Zelensky’s maximalist demands, which even include charging its own officials with war crimes. These were always just slogans for keeping Western and Ukrainian morale high, but they no longer serve that purpose after last summer’s failed counteroffensive. Continuing to chant them only further discredits those two’s cause in this proxy war.

The second point builds upon the first since the Western elite were unable to harness the resources required for Ukraine to inflict its envisaged strategic defeat on Russia. This was due to Russia beating NATO in their “race of logistics”/“war of attrition”. Extrapolating further, this outcome was completely predictable, thus meaning that the West never had a chance of achieving its maximum demands. Everything was dependent on the sanctions crushing the Russian economy, which was always unlikely.

As for the last point, “Ukraine’s Top Five Challenges Are Unsolvable”, and only suing for peace as soon as possible by unilaterally implementing a demilitarized buffer zone in the parts of Ukraine that are still under Kiev’s control east of the Dnieper could possibly get Russia to agree to freeze the conflict. That’s not being seriously considered, however, which is why the Ukrainian Intelligence Committee’s worst-case scenario of a Russian breakthrough coupled with a political uprising in Kiev is becoming more probable.

Viewed in this way, the upcoming Swiss peace talks will indeed backfire on Ukraine. Nobody seriously believes that they’ll convince Russia to withdraw from the territory that Kiev claims as its own, nor that they’ll reshape the military-strategic dynamics of this conflict in the West’s favor. They’re only going through with this spectacle for misguided soft power purposes that’ll further discredit their cause once they fail to amount to anything of tangible significance.

Even worse, the self-inflicted opportunity cost of devoting finite diplomatic resources to this doomed initiative is that the West will be even more poorly prepared than before for helping Ukraine negotiate the terms of its defeat once that moment inevitably arrives. That should be their diplomatic focus at present since it aligns with their objective interests instead of chasing the political fantasy of Russia’s defeat. This just goes to show how delusional Western diplomacy has become.

Russia might throw a wrench in the works though if it manages to achieve a military breakthrough before mid-June’s meeting, especially if this coincides with a political uprising in Kiev driven by Zelensky clinging to power on legally dubious pretexts after his term expires on May 21. In that event, the participants might be forced to seriously consider the terms of Ukraine’s negotiated defeat for the first time ever, after which the Istanbul peace process might soon resume in a new form to wrap it all up.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/medvedev ... t-how-next
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10873
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 May 07, 2024 11:37 am

Question of troopsPOSTED BY @NSANZO ⋅ 05/07/2024

Image

Installed at the forefront of the most belligerent leaders, Emmanuel Macron, the last president who tried to negotiate with Vladimir Putin to avoid war, continues to reaffirm the idea of ​​not ruling out the possibility of sending Western troops to Ukraine. This is what he repeated again in an interview with The Economist , in which he once again raised the conditions under which France could intervene directly in the war: the French president would value it in the event that Russia broke the Ukrainian defense lines and under a formal request from Kiev. The starting point is the same as that of most of the European and North American establishment , which insists on the possibility that a breach of the front would lead to a Russian victory and the danger that the Russian Federation could reach the borders of Poland or Romania, something crazy today, when Russian troops are fighting to advance on Chasov Yar or Krasnoarmeisk, not on Odessa, Lviv or even Kiev or Kharkov. Despite its lack of realism considering the circumstances of the war, the argument is alarming enough to justify resource mobilization, rearmament and militarization plans and even ideas that, like that of the French president, have not yet found favor of other regional powers.

The news of Macron's insistence on not ruling out the possibility of sending Western troops to the war, which would join the small contingents of forces known to be on the ground - intelligence personnel and, as revealed by Olaf Scholz, those involved in the use of certain Western weapons, such as Storm Shadow missiles, coincides with a rumor that has circulated in the Russian press in recent days. According to Asian Times , 1,500 Foreign Legion troops have already arrived in Ukraine. As Professor Ivan Katchanovski indicated, there is no type of corroboration of this arrival and the medium does not offer any source, so everything indicates that it is fake news that could seem credible only due to the verbal escalation and the constant crossing of red lines in which the actors who participate directly and indirectly are located.

However, the reality of war, of a much higher intensity than any of the Western armies has experienced in recent decades, makes it unfeasible to send a contingent that actively participates in a trench battle for which they are not prepared. . Hence, even Ukraine, always ready to demand new concessions from its partners, has never raised this possibility. Yesterday, the Prime Minister of Ukraine, Denis Shmygal, reacted to Macron's insistence on the possibility by admitting that Ukraine would be grateful, although he did not go further. kyiv is aware that its personnel needs have to be covered in another way and has only sought foreign troops in the case of aviation, when the then Minister of Defense Oleksiy Reznikov appealed to F-16 pilots to volunteer and accelerate thus the arrival of the precious fighters to Ukraine. And although kyiv has accepted, especially in moments of greatest vulnerability, foreign volunteers, the number of casualties, some of them murdered, and the limited effectiveness of having soldiers with communication difficulties have made the work difficult.

For the moment, even with the capacity to mobilize men, the possibility of expanding recruitment to women and the apparent maintenance of reserves, kyiv has not required its allies to send troops. What's more, Ukraine has presented itself as the West's army against Russia. With this, kyiv wanted to present itself as the defense against the common enemy and make this its main argument to consider itself "one step away from NATO" as Denis Shmygal stated yesterday. Although changing discourse has never been a difficulty for kyiv, its priorities are different. Ukraine is not seeking, at least for now, to send Western troops, but rather to increase the population from which it is able to recruit.

"The European Union will adopt a joint decision on the return of Ukrainian men of draft age to their homeland." Such a statement was made by Mykhailo Podolyak, advisor to the head of the President's Office," the Ukrainian media Facty reported last week , adding that "in his opinion, this is an absolutely correct initiative to find a common solution that covers all members of the European Union on the issue of the return of men of military age to the territory of Ukraine.” For several months and especially since Zelensky signed the new law on mobilization, kyiv's obsession has been to achieve the return of men of military age who are abroad.

The proposal quickly gained the favor of countries such as Poland or Lithuania, but also the silence of others such as Germany, where the interest in maintaining an affordable and educated workforce in the country is greater than in the two previous cases, which see the presence of Ukrainian refugee families as something temporary. It must be remembered that German interest in specialists from Ukraine - for example in railway matters - precedes 2022. Given the lack of a method that could make repatriation feasible, Germany has not commented on the matter, although it did so months ago when the idea was raised for the first time. The silence seems to indicate that Berlin has not changed its position against facilitating the sending of refugees to war.

Faced with the fanaticism of some countries, willing to facilitate the return of the Ukrainian population to be sent to war, countries considered further to the right on the European spectrum present themselves as axes of moderation. “Hungary will not extradite refugees to Ukraine. We will not investigate whether, according to the Ukrainians, the person is recruited or not. Based on basic humanity, we will not allow them to be sent to their deaths,” Hungarian Prime Minister Zsolt Semjen stated, according to several media outlets yesterday. To the rejection of Hungary is added that of Italy, which in turn adds to the silence of a large part of the continent, with Germany at the head. But even there the issue is reaching the media. Yesterday, Der Spiegel reported the statements of the Hesse Minister of the Interior, who was in favor of helping Ukraine with recruitment, an argument that, coming from the CDU, is a tool of pressure against Olaf Scholz.

Ukraine's insistence on achieving the return of its male population abroad responds to the need to expand its recruitment capabilities especially with a view to the future. The military age begins at 18 and the recruiting age at 25, so it seems obvious that kyiv is seeking to create a reserve from which to recruit in the future. References to the possible sending of European troops to the war work in terms of creating nervousness in Russia and raising tension, but they do not seem to be the Ukrainian objective today. kyiv needs seasoned troops with the ability to communicate, trained ranks in which quality matters more than quantity. The differences with the first months of the Russo-Ukrainian war, when Ukraine appealed to anyone to go to the front, are evident.

Despite the almost constant references, it is unlikely that Western countries are going to consider, at least in the current phase of the war, sending troops. The argument is threefold. First, the Western troops needed for Ukraine are already on the ground. These are special forces, troops protecting Western interests and, as the German Chancellor revealed, those that operate certain foreign equipment. Second, kyiv still has reserves and recruiting capacity to meet its needs. Finally, none of the Western armies are prepared to fight a conventional ground war like the one currently being fought in the trenches of Donbass and Zaporozhie.

Every mention of a more direct participation of the West in the war immediately causes an adverse Russian reaction, which cannot avoid the nervousness of the possibility of an escalation that is difficult to control. The argument thus becomes a very useful destabilization tool for countries like France, willing to stretch the rope even at the risk of it breaking.

https://slavyangrad.es/2024/05/07/cuestion-de-tropas/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Summary of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation (as of May 6, 2024) The main thing:

Air defense systems shot down a Su-27 aircraft of the Ukrainian Air Force;

— The Vostok group occupied more advantageous positions; in its area of ​​responsibility, the Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 160 military personnel;

— The Armed Forces of Ukraine in the zone of responsibility of the Russian military grouping “West” lost up to 120 military personnel, 2 tanks, including a Leopard, in one day;

— The Black Sea Fleet destroyed 5 Ukrainian naval drones off the northwestern coast of Crimea within 24 hours;

— The “South” group of troops occupied more advantageous positions, the enemy’s losses amounted to up to 275 military personnel;

— The Russian Armed Forces destroyed two Ukrainian enterprises producing attack drones;

— The “Center” group of troops repelled seven counterattacks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in one day, the enemy lost up to 370 troops.

Operational-tactical aviation, missile forces and artillery of groupings of troops of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation destroyed two enterprises for the production of attack UAVs, and also defeated enemy personnel and military equipment in 122 regions.

A Su-27 aircraft of the Ukrainian Air Force was shot down by air defense systems.

In addition, 23 unmanned aerial vehicles and seven US-made HIMARS multiple launch rocket systems were destroyed.

▫️The forces of the Black Sea Fleet destroyed five unmanned boats of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the area of ​​the northwestern coast of the Crimean Peninsula.

📊 In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the following have been destroyed: 594 aircraft, 270 helicopters, 23,785 unmanned aerial vehicles, 512 anti-aircraft missile systems, 15,923 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 1,279 combat vehicles of multiple launch rocket systems, 9,339 field artillery guns and mortars, as well as 21,508 units of special military vehicles.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

ISRAEL’S NOT SO LITTLE WAR AGAINST RUSSIA

Image

by John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

Since last November the regime of Vladimir Zelensky (lead image, left) in Kiev has been advertising the products of a company called Piranha-Tech for newly developed electronic warfare (EW) technologies which the Israeli government of Benjamin Netanyahu (right) is now supplying the Ukraine for operations against Russia.

According to a Russian military blogger report published on May 4, Israeli companies specializing in electronic jamming and drone technologies are behind a Ukrainian government, US, and UK-funded drone production line and deployment of the weapons on the Ukrainian battlefield. Piranha-Tech, according to this source, is 49% owned by Israeli shareholders, who developed the technology, and 51% owned by Ukrainians who are managing the battlefield supplies. Piranha-Tech anti-drone guns and jammers are based on Israeli military technologies, the report claims.

The first official disclosure came from Kiev on November 2, 2023. According to a tweet published by Mikhail Fedorov, a cyber technology specialist with government rank in Kiev, “efficient protection from Russian UAVs for armored vehicles & personnel. Quite unique electronic warfare system — Piranha AVD 360. It creates protective dome up to 600 meters around & jams satellite navigation systems, such as RuGLONASS. New tech supported by @BRAVE1ua”.

BRAVE1 stands for “Ukrainian Defense Innovations”, a Ukrainian government coordinating agency for “stakeholders of the defense tech industry by providing them with organizational, informational, and financial support for defense tech projects.”

Image
Source: https://twitter.com/fedorovmykhailo?lang=en

Image
Source: https://twitter.com/FedorovMykhailo/

A US and Ukraine-based defence technology blog picked up the story immediately. The report called the Piranha-Tech system “a cutting-edge electronic warfare system designed to safeguard armored vehicles from Russian drones, has successfully completed field trials and is now poised for mass production.” It added: “the Piranha system disrupts satellite navigation systems, including Russia’s GLONASS.” According to the American outlet, Piranha Tech was an “achievement in Ukrainian defense technology.” There was no mention of the Israeli military base for the Ukrainian operation.

Image
Left, source: https://defence-blog.com/
Right: Dylan Malyasov wearing US and Ukrainian loyalty patches and claiming to be press. Malyasov, the author of the promotional piece, says that “as a journalist and volunteer, he was awarded the "For Assistance to the Armed Forces of Ukraine" medal. The order of award was signed by the Minister of Defense of Ukraine, Oleksiy Reznikov, on January 19, 2023.”

The Israeli links behind Piranha Tech were first published in Paris on May 3, 2024.

Image
Source: https://www.intelligenceonline.com/

The Paris-based website called Intelligence Online reported that the Ukrainian Piranha-Tech technology is in fact Israeli. “Behind the Ukrainian company supplying anti-drone equipment to the Ukrainian armed forces and the government of Myanmar is a network of Israeli electronic warfare companies.” Intelligence Online is a product of Indigo, a media group owned by Maurice Botbol, who is of Moroccan Jewish extraction. In the competitive London corporate investigations market, Botbol’s Intelligence Online has a controversial reputation. In the past, it was favourable to the press operations of a Russian metals oligarch now under US sanctions.

In Moscow, The Militarist, a widely read military news and analysis blog, followed with an extensive report of the Israeli operation of Piranha-Tech on May 4. The Russian report says: “While Ukraine continues to develop its EW [electronic warfare] technologies as much as possible, incubators working in this field, such as Brave1 attract foreign specialists. Brave1 provides substantial support and subsidies to Piranha Tech, in particular, for its UAV [Unmanned Aerial Vehicles] Piranha AVD 360 anti-UAV system, which is used by the APU [Armed Forces of Ukraine]. The Ukrainian company, whose Ukrainian anti-UAV systems are praised on social media by the talkative Minister of Digital Transformation of Ukraine, Mikhail Fedorov, seems to have close ties with Israel.”

Image
Source: https://t.me/s/infantmilitario posted on May 4 at 20:25.

“Piranha Tech is registered in Ukraine in 2019. Its founders are citizens of Israel Bad Vyacheslav (10%) and Oren Flax (39 %), as well as two Ukrainians Yury Pavlovich Momot (15%) and Alexander Ruzhinsky (36%). Flax and Vyacheslav are also the founders and shareholders of the Ukrainian subsidiary of Kavit Electronics, registered in 2018. Kavit is controlled by the Flax family. Its headquarters is in Rishon LeZion in Israel, and its executive director is Yitzhak [Isaac] Flax. Another evidence of Piranha Tech’s close ties to Israel is that the phone number by default on the contact page on the website has an Israeli prefix.”

“Thus, Piranha Tech can be considered a cover and supplier of Israeli equipment delivering to the UK Logix Security International, which supplies the military authorities of Myanmar, as well as Ukraine and Poland. It supplies equipment to cyber-intelligence companies such as the Israeli Rayzone Group in the Philippines and SatusGlobal in Abu Dhabi, as well as to government customers such as the UAE Armed Forces and the Ivoirian Ministry of Defense.”

“It receives electronic components from LCSC Electronics in Hong Kong and Shenzhen E-Fire Technology in China, as well as from U.S. companies such as Mouser Electronics and DigiKey. According to the Ukrainian news website, Piranha Tech is also collaborating with Israeli company Airfence Solutions, known today as ApolloShield, a company listed in Tel Aviv and specializing in drone control systems.”

“The company was founded in 1994 and specializes in interception and suppression of telecommunications. It sells IMSI interceptors, mufflers and encrypted communications. The company has been a partner of Motorola since 1998 and supplies its equipment, in particular to Ecuador, where its distributor is the engineer Eduardo Francisco Torres Asu, and to Mexico, where its local distributor is VX Comunicaciones.”

The milblogger does not mention Intelligence Online and cites no other sources for his report. Tracking on the internet of the Israeli drone warfare companies, such as Kavit Electronics and Airfence Solutions, which lists a Palo Alto, California, address here, is limited by their secrecy.

Partial confirmation of the Paris and Moscow reports’ reference to Yury Momot, one of the Piranha manager shareholders, has been found in a Christian Science Monitor publication in Boston from a “special correspondent” in Kiev on December 23, 2023: “ ‘Three or four years ago, nobody would have thought that drones would play such a big role in daily warfare,’ observes Yuri Momot, deputy general of Piranha-Tech, a company developing jamming systems to take down Russian drones. ‘The war itself is a big trigger for progress.’”

The Monitor, which backs the war against Russia, headlines its story, “War on a budget: Ukraine becomes hotbed for drone tech”, but the newspaper reports no estimate of the amount of money being spent on drone technology, testing of prototypes, production lines, and battlefield deployment. The newspaper implies that it is a multi-national, multi-milliondollar business. Fedorov was reported by the Guardian in London as saying the UK is spending “£325m to help buy at least 10,000 drones for Ukraine’s military.”

Pentagon spending for US-made drones and anti-drone systems has been reported here. “The Pentagon announced Friday morning,” reported Defense News on February 23, 2024, “ it would send more drones to Ukraine as part of a new $2 billion package to help in the country’s fight against Russia on the first anniversary of the invasion. The new $2 billion in aid includes more ammunition for High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, more ammunition for 155mm artillery and more munitions for unspecified laser-guided rocket systems. It also includes unspecified counter-drone and electronic warfare detection equipment.”

According to the Monitor, “Ukraine has become a giant testing ground for drones from all over the world – the United States, Germany, Poland, and other partner countries. Countless new companies are taking shape around the technology; teams of engineers are tinkering on prototypes, trying to clear the Ministry of Defense and NATO checklists of technical requirements, hoping to nail a military contract…Oleksandr Yakovenko, CEO of TAF Drones [said] the company already has four factories spread out across Ukraine – despite suffering a sabotage attack that destroyed equipment worth $300,000 in July. The bulk of its supplies (90%) come from China or Taiwan. The remainder comes from suppliers in Europe and the U.S. ‘We have to create products that are cheaper than the targets,’ he says. ‘Otherwise, we will not win because our enemy has more resources than our country.’ ”

UK government records for a parallel-named Piranha Tech company, operating in the Liverpool area on “computer related activities” and “information technology consultancy activities”, indicate the possibility that the Israelis and their Ukrainian partners were considering a British company front during their start-up.

The British Piranha Tech company first opened for business in Cardiff, Wales, and registered the company name, Piranha Tech Limited, at UK Companies House on September 20, 2007. Its registration number was 06377583. The company’s address on file is 10 Walpole Avenue, Whiston, Prescot, Merseyside. This was the home of Colin Jones, who is listed as the company’s director with the occupation of “consultant.”

The company’s business was reported officially as “other computer related activities”. In addition to Jones, Lisa Gregory was registered as the company secretary at another personal address nearby. This is as modest in real estate value as the Jones address.

No filing of financials and trading activities followed, and on October 10, 2009, the company was gazetted for compulsory strike-off. Piranha Tech was dissolved formally on February 2, 2010.

Jones then re-registered the company as Piranha Tech Ltd in May 2016 – almost identical name, new company number 10195607. He listed the company’s business and himself at the same home address on Walpole Avenue. Jones was the only employee. In 2017 the financial report indicated profit of £15,968. In 2022 the cash in the bank had grown to £32,011. In February 2023 Jones filed for voluntary strike-off of the company, and in May of that year, Piranha Tech ceased to exist for the second time.

To check what relationship, if any, Jones and Gregory may have had with the Israelis and Ukrainians in drone warfare, it has been impossible to trace and contact them to date.

There is no sign in the UK Company House records of the Israeli business whose website advertises business addresses at Krivoy Rog, close to the front line; in Rzeszow, Poland, close to the western Ukrainian border, and in Slovenia. Piranha-Tech’s logo flies the Ukrainian flag and the usual war slogan. According to Alex Ruzhinsky, calling himself the “Piranha Tech CEO”: “We started working in 2014. Since then, we have learned to work with small and large orders. We consistently monitor the quality of our products. Our products are used in 25 countries around the world."

https://johnhelmer.net/israels-not-so-l ... more-89866

*****

What 10 Years of U.S. Meddling in Ukraine Have Wrought (Spoiler Alert: Not Democracy)
By Aaron Maté, RealClearInvestigations
April 30, 2024

April 30, 2024
In successfully lobbying Congress for an additional $61 billion in Ukraine war funding, an effort that ended this month with celebratory Democrats waving Ukrainian flags in the House chamber, President Biden has cast his administration’s standoff with Russia as an existential test for democracy.

Image
Flag-waving Democrats in the House chamber. That is, Ukrainian flag-waving Democrats.
Free Press Journal/YouTube

“What makes our moment rare is that freedom and democracy are under attack, both at home and overseas,” Biden declared in his State of the Union address in March. “History is watching, just like history watched three years ago on January 6th.”

While Biden’s narrative is widely accepted by Washington’s political establishment, a close examination of the president and his top principals’ record dating back to the Obama administration reveals a different picture. Far from protecting democracy from Kyiv to Washington, their role in Ukraine looks more like epic meddling resulting in political upheaval for both countries.

Over the last decade, Ukraine has been the battleground in a proxy war between the U.S. and Russia – a conflict massively escalated by the Kremlin’s invasion in 2022. The fight erupted in early 2014, when Biden and his team, then serving in the Obama administration, supported the overthrow of Ukraine’s elected president, Viktor Yanukovych. Leveraging billions of dollars in U.S. assistance, Washington has shaped the personnel and policies of subsequent Ukrainian governments, all while expanding its military and intelligence presence in Ukraine via the CIA and NATO. During this period, Ukraine has not become an independent self-sustaining democracy, but a client state heavily dependent on European and U.S. support, which has not protected it from the ravages of war.

Image
Biden: "Freedom and democracy are under attack, both at home and overseas. History is watching. ..."
AP

The Biden-Obama team’s meddling in Ukraine has also had a boomerang effect at home.

As well-connected Washington Beltway insiders such as Hunter Biden have exploited it for personal enrichment, Ukraine has become a source of foreign interference in the U.S. political system – with questions of unsavory dealings arising in the 2016 and 2020 elections as well as the first impeachment of Donald Trump. After years of secrecy, CIA sources have only recently confirmed that Ukrainian intelligence helped generate the Russian interference allegations that engulfed Trump’s presidency. House Democrats' initial attempt to impeach Trump, undertaken in the fall of 2019, came in response to his efforts to scrutinize Ukraine’s Russiagate connection.

This account of U.S. interference in Ukraine, which can be traced to fateful decisions made by the Obama administration, including then-Vice President Biden and his top aides, is based on often overlooked public disclosures. It also relies on the personal testimony of Andrii Telizhenko, a former Ukrainian diplomat and Democratic Party-tied political consultant who worked closely with U.S. officials to promote regime change in Ukraine.

Although he once welcomed Washington’s influence in Ukraine, Telizhenko now takes a different view. “I'm a Ukrainian who knew how Ukraine was 30 years ago, and what it became today,” he says. “For me, it's a total failed state.” In his view, Ukraine has been “used directly by the United States to fight a [proxy] war with Russia” and “as a rag to make money for people like Biden and his family.”

The State Department has accused Telizhenko being part of a "Russia-linked foreign influence network." In Sept. 2020 it revoked his visa to travel to the United States. Telizhenko, who now lives in a western European country where he was granted political asylum, denies working with Russia and says that he is a whistleblower speaking out to expose how U.S. interference has ravaged his country. RealClearInvestigations has confirmed that he worked closely with top American officials while they advanced policies aimed at severing Ukraine’s ties to Russia. No official contacted for this article – including former CIA chief John Brennan and senior State Department official Victoria Nuland – disputed any of his claims.

Image
November 2013: Seated, far-right Oleh Tyahnybok with more moderate opposition leaders Arseniy Yatsenyuk and Vitali Klitschko in Maidan square. The European Parliament condemned Tyahnybok's party for “racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic views,” but for Washington he represented an opportunity.
Ivan Bandura/Wikimedia

The Biden team’s path to influencing Ukraine began with the eruption of anti-government unrest in November 2013. That month, protesters began filling Kyiv’s Maidan Nezalezhnosti (Independence Square) after then-President Viktor Yanukovych, a notoriously corrupt leader, delayed signing a European Union (EU) trade pact. To members of what came to be known as the Maidan movement, Yanukovych’s decision was a betrayal of his pledge to strengthen Western ties, and a worrying sign of Russian allegiance in a country haunted by its Soviet past.

Image
A movement soon co-opted by nationalist forces, which encouraged a violent insurrection.
AP

The reality was more complex. Yanukovych was hoping to maintain relations with both Russia and Europe – and use competition between them to Ukraine’s advantage. He also worried that the EU’s terms, which demanded reduced trade with Russia, would alienate his political base in the east and south, home to millions of ethnic Russians. As the International Crisis Group noted, these Yanukovych-supporting Ukrainians feared that the EU terms “would hurt their livelihoods, a large number of which were tied to trade and close relations with Russia.” Despite claims that the Maidan movement represented a “popular revolution,” polls from that period showed that Ukrainians were evenly split on it, or even majority opposed.

After an initial period of peaceful protest, the Maidan movement was soon co-opted by nationalist forces, which encouraged a violent insurrection for regime change. Leading Maidan’s hardline contingent was Oleh Tyahnybok of the Svoboda party, who had once urged his supporters to fight what he called the “Muscovite-Jewish mafia running Ukraine.” Tyahnybok’s followers were joined by Right Sector, a coalition of ultra-nationalist groups whose members openly sported Nazi insignia. One year before, the European Parliament condemned Svoboda for “racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic views” and urged Ukrainian political parties “not to associate with, endorse or form coalitions with this party.”

Powerful figures in Washington took a different view: For them, the Maidan movement represented an opportunity to achieve a longtime goal of pulling Ukraine into the Western orbit. Given Ukraine’s historical ties to Russia, its integration with the West could also be used to undermine the rule of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

As the-late Zbigniew Brzezinski, the influential former national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter, once wrote: “Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire.” Two months before the Kyiv protests erupted, Carl Gershman, head of the National Endowment for Democracy, dubbed Ukraine “the biggest prize” in the West’s rivalry with Russia. Absorbing Ukraine, Gershman explained, could leave Putin “on the losing end not just in the near abroad" – i.e, its former Soviet satellites – "but within Russia itself.” Shortly after, senior State Department official Nuland boasted that the U.S. had “invested more than $5 billion” to help pro-Western “civil society” groups achieve a “secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine.”

Seeking to capitalize on the unrest, U.S. figures including Nuland, Republican Sen. John McCain, and Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy visited Maidan Square. In a show of support for the movement’s hardline faction, which went beyond supporting the EU trade deal to demand Yanukovych’s ouster, the trio met privately with Tyahnybok and appeared with him on stage. The senators' mission, Murphy said, was to “bring about a peaceful transition here.”

The Maidan Movement’s most significant U.S. endorsement came from then-Vice President Joe Biden. “Nothing would have greater impact for securing our interests and the world’s interests in Europe than to see a democratic, prosperous, and independent Ukraine in the region,” Biden said.

Image
Andrii Telizhenko, left, organized meetings for important foreign visitors such as Sen. John McCain.

According to Andrii Telizhenko, a former Ukrainian government official who worked closely with Western officials during this period, the U.S. government’s role went far beyond those high-profile displays of solidarity.

“As soon as it grew into something, into the bigger Maidan, in the beginning of December, it basically was full coordination with the U.S. Embassy,” Telizhenko recalls. “Full, full.”

When the protests erupted, Telizhenko was working as an adviser to a Ukrainian member of Parliament. Having spent part of his youth in Canada and the United States, Telizhenko’s fluent English and Western connections landed him a position helping to oversee the Maidan Movement’s international relations. In this role, he organized meetings with and coordinated security arrangements for foreign visitors, including U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt, Nuland, and McCain. Most of their briefings were held at Kyiv’s Trade Unions Building, the movement’s de-facto headquarters in the city’s center.

Telizhenko says Pyatt routinely coordinated with Maidan leaders on protest strategy. In one encounter, the ambassador observed Right Sector members assembling Molotov cocktails that would later be thrown at riot police attempting to enter the building. Sometimes, the U.S. ambassador disapproved of his counterparts’ tactics. “The U.S. embassy would criticize if something would happen more radical than it was supposed to go by plan, because it's bad for the picture,” Telizhenko said..

That winter was marked by a series of escalating clashes. On February 20, 2014, snipers fatally shot dozens of protesters in Maidan square. Western governments attributed the killings to Yanukovych's forces. But an intercepted phone call between NATO officials told a different story.

In the recorded conversation, Estonian foreign minister Urmas Paet told EU foreign secretary Catherine Ashton that he believed pro-Maidan forces were behind the slaughter. In Kyiv, Paet reported, “there is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovych, but it was somebody from the new [opposition] coalition.”

Image
All smiles, February 2014: Ukraine's President Viktor Yanukovych, left, and U.S. diplomat Victoria Nuland, in Kiev. Soon he would have to flee the capital.
AP

In a bid to resolve the Maidan crisis and avoid more bloodshed, European officials brokered a compromise between Yanukovich and the opposition. The Feb. 21 deal called for a new national unity government that would keep him in office, with reduced powers, until early elections at year’s end. It also called for the disarmament of the Maidan forces and a withdrawal of riot police. Holding up its end of the bargain, government security forces pulled back. But the Maidan encampment's ultra-nationalist contingent had no interest in compromise.

“We don’t want to see Yanukovych in power,” Maidan Movement squadron leader Vladimir Parasyuk declared that same day. “… And unless this morning you come up with a statement demanding that he steps down, then we will take arms and go, I swear.”

In insisting on regime change, the far-right contingent was also usurping the leadership of more moderate opposition leaders such as Vitali Klitschko, who supported the power-sharing agreement.

“The goal was to overthrow the government,” Telizhenko says. “That was the first goal. And it was all green-lighted by the U.S. Embassy. They basically supported all this, because they did not tell them to stop. If they told them [Maidan leaders] to stop, they would stop.”

Yet another leaked phone call bolstered suspicions that the U.S. endorsed regime change. On the recording, presumably intercepted in January by Russian or Ukrainian intelligence, Nuland and Pyatt discussed their choice of leaders in a proposed power-sharing government with Yanukovich. Their conversation showed that the U.S. exerted considerable influence with the faction seeking the Ukrainian president’s ouster.

Image
All smiles, June 2014: Nuland and U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt greet Ukrainian President-elect Petro Poroshenko in Warsaw after the U.S.-backed Maidan coup.
State Department/Wikimedia

Tyahnybok, the openly antisemitic head of Svodova, would be a “problem” in office, Nuland worried, and better “on the outside.” Klitschko, the more moderate Maidan member, was ruled out as well. “I don’t think Klitsch should go into government,” Nuland said. “I don’t think it’s necessary. I don’t think it’s a good idea.” One reason was Klitschko's proximity to the European Union. Despite her government’s warm words for the European Union in public, Nuland told Pyatt: “Fuck the EU.”

The two U.S. officials settled on technocrat Arseniy Yatsenyuk. “I think Yats is the guy,” Nuland said. By that point, Yatsenyuk had endorsed violent insurrection. The government’s rejection of Maidan demands, he said, meant that “people had acquired the right to move from non-violent to violent means of protest.”

The only outstanding matter, Pyatt relayed, was securing “somebody with an international personality to come out here and help to midwife this thing.” Nuland replied that Vice President Joe Biden and his senior aide, Jake Sullivan, who now serves as Biden’s National Security Adviser, had signed on to provide “an atta-boy and to get the deets [details] to stick.”

Just hours after the power-sharing agreement was reached, Nuland’s wishes were granted. Yanukovich, no longer protected by his armed forces, fled the capital. Emboldened by their sabotage of an EU-brokered power-sharing truce, Maidan Movement members stormed the Ukrainian Parliament and pushed through the formation of a new government. In violation of parliamentary rules on impeachment proceedings, and lacking a sufficient quorum, Oleksandr Turchynov was named the new acting president. The Nuland-backed Yatsenyuk was appointed Prime Minister.

Image
Ben Rhodes, top Obama aide: Wrote in his memoir that Nuland and Pyatt “sounded as if they were picking a new government.”
AP

In a reflection of their influence, at least five post-coup cabinet posts in national security, defense, and law enforcement were given to members of Svoboda and its far-right ally Right Sector.

“The uncomfortable truth is that a sizeable portion of Kyiv’s current government – and the protesters who brought it to power – are, indeed, fascists,” wrote Andrew Foxall, now a British defense official, and Oren Kessler, a Tel Aviv-based analyst, in Foreign Policy the following month. While denying any role in Yanukovich’s ouster, the Obama administration immediately endorsed it, as Secretary of State John Kerry expressed “strong support” for the new government.

In his memoir, former senior Obama aide Ben Rhodes acknowledged that Nuland and Pyatt “sounded as if they were picking a new government as they evaluated different Ukrainian leaders.” Rather than dispel that impression, he acknowledged that some of the Maidan “leaders received grants from U.S. democracy promotion programs.”

In 2012, one pro-Maidan group, Center UA, received most of its more than $500,000 in donations from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the National Endowment for Democracy, eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, and financier George Soros.

Image
Jeffrey Sachs: "They were describing to me: ‘Oh we paid for this, we paid for that. We funded this insurrection.’ It turned my stomach.”
Wikipedia

By its own count, Soros’ International Renaissance Foundation spent over $109 million in Ukraine between 2004 and 2014. In leaked documents, a former IRF board member even bragged that its partners “were the main driving force and the foundation of the Maidan movement,” and that without Soros’ funding, “the revolution might not have succeeded.” Weeks after the coup, an IRF strategy document noted, “Like during the Maidan protests, IRF representatives are in the midst of Ukraine’s transition process.”

Jeffrey Sachs, a Columbia University professor who advised Ukraine on economic policy in the early 1990s, visited Kyiv shortly after the coup to consult with the new government.

“I was taken around the Maidan where people were still milling around,” Sachs recalls. “And the American NGOs were around there, and they were describing to me: ‘Oh we paid for this, we paid for that. We funded this insurrection.’ It turned my stomach.” Sachs believes that these groups were acting at the behest of U.S. intelligence. To go about “funding this uprising,” he says, “they didn't do that on their own as nice NGOs. This is off-budget financing for a U.S. regime-change operation.”

Weeks after vowing to bring about a “transition” in Ukraine, Sen. Murphy openly took credit for it. “I really think that the clear position of the United States has in part been what has helped lead to this change in regime,” Murphy said. “I think it was our role, including sanctions and threats of sanctions, that forced, in part, Yanukovych from office.

(Much, much more at link.)

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com ... 27411.html

(Well, there's some Republican partisanship going on here....notable by the 'sin of omission', as though the Ukraine debacle was a wholly Democratic project. As we well know imperialism is bipartisan. Indeed, the Trumpster signed off on the latest bill, though ya wouldn't know it from this piece.)

*****

NATO's "Red Lines".

These clowns still pretend that they matter. And here is la Repubblica today:


È la prima volta, dall’inizio della guerra. La Nato, in maniera molto riservata e senza comunicazioni ufficiali, ha fissato almeno due linee rosse, superate le quali ci potrebbe essere un intervento diretto nel conflitto in Ucraina. Al momento, va sottolineato, non esistono piani operativi che prevedano l’invio di uomini, ma soltanto valutazioni su possibili piani d’emergenza - una vera e propria extrema ratio - nel caso ci fosse il coinvolgimento di soggetti terzi nella guerra.

Translation: It's the first time since the beginning of the war. NATO, in a very confidential manner and without official communications, has established at least two red lines, beyond which there could be direct intervention in the conflict in Ukraine. At the moment, it should be underlined, there are no operational plans that provide for the sending of men, but only assessments of possible emergency plans - a true last resort - in the event of the involvement of third parties in the war.

Immediately one has to question the whole nature of those "red lines" because "red lines", a propaganda meme invented by journos, are called such because they are made public precisely for the articulation to the enemy what is not allowed to do. So, the immediate conclusion is that this whole thing is... pure propaganda with the purpose to convey that NATO is somehow in charge of the situation. It is not and never has been due to what many of us, yours truly included, repeated ad nauseam--NATO has no resources to fight real war. Least of all European chihuahuas with the ground forces the size of brigade or a single division and with industrial base of financialized economies operating through blowing bubbles.

So, NATO identifies these two "red lines" as:

1. Penetration of Kiev's "line of defense" and involvement of the "third party" in the war;

2. "Provocation" against Baltic statelets or Poland, or direct attack on... Moldova.

This is all sounds too familiar--a bunch of decrepit impotents with severe erectile dysfunction trying to plot how they will gang bang and impress a porn star who "did Dallas". NATO's operational and strategic "prowess" is now a butt of jokes across all strata of Russian society. As Larry points out:

The bottomline is simple — the United States and NATO are not equipped, organized or trained to fight a peer force like Russia or China in a war of attrition. One of the biggest short-comings are the costly, fragile weapons that account for NATO’s supposedly premier means for pursuing a war.

War, meaning a real war is a damn serious business of real economies and wills. I doubt anyone can match Russian will anymore in fighting NATO in 404 and destroying it. It also goes without saying that NATO and Pentagon are simply out of the realm of real operations for the XXI century battlefield, which is concerning because time after time very many NATO officers exhibited a complete unfamiliarity with the technological aspects of modern battlefield, trying to interpret glimpses into TOE of Russian Armed Forces as some kind of revelation, while the problem, of course, is cultural and is unbridgeable, not across the board anyway. It would be pretty naive to expect some Sandhurst 44 week long or USMA at West Point graduate brought up on the fairy tales of Gulf War or Patton "defeating Hitler" to grasp innards of Russian "way of war" starting from the level of the General Staff down to tactical units. A few competent Western scholars on the matter are exceptions which merely proves the rule of a wholesale ignorance of NATO.

(More...)

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2024/05 ... lines.html

******

About Exercise Steadfast Defender
May 6, 22:16

Image

In words, training - in fact, preparation for war

The four-month NATO exercise, in which the military alliance and the US Armed Forces take part, is scheduled to end on May 31, 2024.

These maneuvers take place in close proximity to the borders with Belarus and Russia. More than 90 thousand military personnel and thousands of military equipment units take part in them. It is noteworthy that these forces have been withdrawn to areas of combat use.

Moreover, NATO draws its own “red lines” and does not hide the fact that it is preparing for an armed conflict with the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus.

It is also known that most of the military units will remain in the so-called. "NATO's eastern flank" and will be located there on a permanent basis.

In addition, some heads of European states have declared their readiness, and even intention, to send their armed forces to Ukraine. That is, in fact, pit NATO troops against the Russian Armed Forces.

This is clearly a new stage in the growing tension - unprecedented and requiring special attention and response. In addition, those “red lines” that the Russian leadership previously spoke about now seem at least frivolous.

Thus, de facto, NATO military personnel are already present in the Northwestern Military District zone in Ukraine.

At the same time, a potential NATO attack on Russia could include air-ground, aerospace and air-sea operations - within the framework of the “global strike” concept.

In addition, we assume that NATO air power will play a major role. Thus, every day we note the training of tanker aircraft and tactical aircraft for in-flight refueling ( https://t.me/Belarus_VPO/60110 ), since airfields in Ukraine are not ready to fully support NATO aviation.

For its part, the Russian Defense Ministry has begun exercises with missile formations in order to increase the readiness of non-strategic nuclear forces.


@Belarus_VPO - zinc

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9139591.html

The targets will be any British military installations in Ukraine and beyond.
May 6, 18:05

Image

The Russian Foreign Ministry announced Russia's readiness to attack British assets outside Ukraine in response to British attacks from the territory of Ukraine.

On May 6, the British Ambassador to Moscow N. Casey was summoned to the Russian Foreign Ministry, to whom a strong protest was expressed in connection with the recent statement by British Foreign Secretary D. Cameron in an interview with Reuters about Ukraine’s right to strike Russian territory using British weapons.

N. Casey firmly pointed out that D. Cameron's hostile attack directly contradicts the previously sounded assurances of the British side when transferring long-range cruise missiles to the Kyiv regime, that under no circumstances would they be used on Russian territory. Thus, the head of the Foreign Office disavowed this position, de facto recognizing his country as a party to the conflict.

The ambassador was told that the Russian side views D. Cameron's words as evidence of a serious escalation and confirmation of London's increasing involvement in military operations on the side of Kyiv. N. Casey was warned that the response to Ukrainian strikes using British weapons on Russian territory could be any British military facilities and equipment on the territory of Ukraine and beyond its borders.

The Ambassador was called upon to think about the inevitable catastrophic consequences of such hostile steps from London and to immediately refute in the most decisive and unequivocal manner the bellicose provocative statements of the head of the Foreign Office.


(c) Russian Foreign Ministry

A little earlier, Medvedev spoke in a similar style.

The chorus of irresponsible
scoundrels from among the Western political elite, calling for sending their troops to a non-existent country, is expanding. Now it includes representatives of the US Congress, French and British leadership, and individual madmen from the Baltic states and Poland. They also call for the active use of their missile weapons, which they supplied to Bandera’s supporters, throughout Russia.
And this is not a spring aggravation, but a cynical calculation for political dividends. There is some kind of total degradation of the ruling class in the West. This class really does not want to logically connect elementary things. Sending your troops to the territory of b. Ukraine will entail the direct entry of their countries into the war, to which we will have to respond. And, alas, not in the territory of b. Ukraine.

In this case, none of them will be able to hide either on Capitol Hill, or in the Elysee Palace, or on Downing Street 10. A world catastrophe will come.
By the way, Kennedy and Khrushchev were able to understand this more than 60 years ago. But the current infantile morons who have seized power in the West do not want to understand.

And that is why today the General Staff began preparations for the exercises, including activities for practical testing of the preparation and use of non-strategic nuclear weapons.


You don’t have to worry, things won’t happen without another incarnation of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9139431.html

Google Translator

Will our Owners risk nuclear annihilation to preserve their hegemony?

******

Could Ukraine resort to terrorism against Russian and pro-Russian targets around the world?

Raphael Machado

May 5, 2024

In many of the suspected Ukrainian terrorist actions, some degree of contribution from Western intelligence agencies is suspected, Raphael Machado writes.

On April 26th, it was reported that the Russian embassy in Brazil had received a phone call informing of a bomb presence on the premises. The Military Police of the Federal District was activated and headed to the location to conduct searches.

After several hours of searching, no explosive device was found within or around the embassy. Nevertheless, even if the “alert” was false, the case warrants a deeper investigation, along with reflections on the risks surrounding Russians and “friends of Russia” abroad, given the current geopolitical climate.

In this specific case, despite no explosive device being found, it falls under Brazilian legislation on terrorism, as our laws also encompass the threat of an attack (and mere insinuation constitutes a threat). Hence, “terrorism” is established, regardless of the presence of an actual device at the embassy.

However, it would be imprudent to consider the matter “closed” for several reasons.

Firstly, attention is drawn to the degeneration of the Ukrainian state into a terrorist institutional apparatus, with its security services having been involved in numerous terrorist attacks inside and outside Ukraine.

Ukraine’s degeneration into normalizing terrorism as a state practice accompanies its inability to confront Russia through regular warfare methods. It is predicted that the degradation of the Ukrainian armed forces will be accompanied by a proportional increase in terrorism usage by its security apparatus. Everyone remembers the terrorist attacks that killed Daria Dugina, Vladlen Tatarsky, and the Crocus City Hall attack. Threats to various Russian public figures are constant.

But it is necessary to question whether Ukrainian terrorism (but not only Ukrainian) could extend beyond the Russian-Ukrainian borders and overflow into other nations. Consider, for example, the waves of Russophobia immediately stirred up after the start of the Russian special military operation.

This wave of Russophobia saw not only the cancellation of artistic and academic presentations linked to the Russian World but also physical attacks on some individuals in various countries. Needless to enumerate cases, it suffices to point out that even in Brazil, there were acts of vandalism against Russian Orthodox churches.

To this adds the presence of dozens of Brazilian mercenaries in Ukraine, fighting for Atlanticism. Some of these mercenaries are neo-Nazis, others are neoconservatives, many others are merely useful idiots deceived by unscrupulous influencers on social media. Recently, one of these mercenaries already returned to Brazil, named João Bercle (who, however, according to field information, was never on the front line), stated that Ukraine would “go after” Russians and “defenders of Russia” worldwide, insinuating the possibility of violence fomented, financed, and/or orchestrated from Kiev.

Furthermore, journalist Lucas Leiroz demonstrated in a thread on X (former Twitter) that Brazilian President Lula was listed as a “target” on the infamous Myrotvorets website, an authentic “death list” indicating supposed “enemies of Ukraine” to be targeted through terrorist attacks or kidnappings. Many other foreign citizens have also been included on this list.

Well, personalizing the reflection, the author writing this article has indeed received death threats through anonymous accounts on the internet, including threats containing personal information and photos of family members.

Returning, therefore, to the bomb threat at the Russian embassy in Brazil, it is crucial to seriously consider the possibilities, paying attention to future risks.

In any case of such a threat, one must always consider the possibility of it being a troll or a madman or, in general, a person with no specific ideological or collective connections. But the fact that we are in such a geopolitically turbulent period forces us to also insist on other possibilities.

If the origin of the threat is not a troll, then the first suspicion could only fall on Ukrainian security services, such as the SBU and the SZRU, whose involvement in the aforementioned terrorist attacks is at least suspected.

It is notorious that the SBU operates in Brazil, infiltrating the Ukrainian-Brazilian community, which is relatively large, albeit discreet. Years ago, this author learned from a primary source that relatives of Brazilians who fought for the Donbass in Ukraine between 2014-2016 received death threats, with the primary suspicion at the time falling on the SBU.

In this sense, it is evident that the SBU would be the main suspect. And that directly or indirectly.

Indirectly, it is necessary to consider, first of all, Brazilian neo-Nazi groups, most of which have links with analogous organizations in Ukraine and even with the security sectors of that country, such as members of the Misanthropic Division Brazil, especially since some of these Brazilian neo-Nazis fought for the Ukrainian side in the past or went there for training, as reported by the Brazilian mainstream media several times.

The instrumentalization of members of these groups for terrorist attacks against Russian or pro-Russian targets in Brazil would not be particularly difficult. They would require little persuasion and encouragement.

Naturally, if we are still thinking about native Brazilians who could be instrumentalized for this type of terrorism, it would be necessary to observe those who have indeed been engaged in spreading widespread Russophobia and who see Russia as the embodiment of evil.

In this regard, the ferment of neoconservatism and ultraliberalism, proliferated over the last few years in Brazil, with its tendencies toward conspiracy theories, coupled with various behavioral disorders and the possibility of conscious or unconscious cooptation by some intelligence service, opens up the possibility of something in this direction.

Of course, in many of the suspected Ukrainian terrorist actions, some degree of contribution from Western intelligence agencies is suspected.

In this sense, and even considering threats to the President of Brazil, it would be essential to strengthen the counterintelligence work of Brazilian security agencies, as well as to monitor possible connections between neo-Nazi groups or extremist factions of neoconservatism with Ukraine or other intelligence services of NATO countries.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/ ... the-world/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply