He promised to attend the next Peace Board meeting despite the US humiliating him by refusing to grant his representatives visas to the inaugural one that he couldn’t attend, insists that the US “never intended” to divide Belarus and Russia, and might soon be invited to the White House or Mar-a-Lago.
At minimum, he seems to suggest -- whether intentionally or not -- that Russia should begin an era of "managed decline" because I don't know how else to interpret his delusional denial of newly revived Great Power competition all along Russia's southern periphery nor his continued conspicuous ignoring of TRIPP.
I think he thinks very highly of himself, you can tell by how he writes and conducts himself during conferences (you can find videos online). I also met him once in person years ago when I co-anchored a weekly analytical show at Radio Sputnik.
My co-anchor was a semi-famous Russian journalist with lots of contacts and we'd always have one Russian expert in the studio to interview every Friday. I'd then talk to them off the record about various matters in between recording the show's segments.
Bordachev came off as conceited, that's for sure, but I kinda forgot about him for some reasons till he recently became more prominent at Valdai. I now believe that he's either in denial about Russia's precarious geostrategic position along its southern periphery or wants to "manage the decline".
I don't believe that he's a traitor nor tasked by anyone with influencing the public. Rather, if anything, he seems to have assumed the task of trying to convince decisionmakers to go along with his proposals, namely doing nothing in the face of what's objectively a renewed competition there.
What I've noticed about Bordachev in his articles is the narrowing of his perspective. He tends to exclude essential, critical topics to such an extent that one might even think he's a propagandist himself.
This is indeed a development in him that one doesn't observe in others like Strelnikov or Restchikov.
It's less about party loyalty. It's much more about the fact that, for example, in February an article on the balance of power in the Caucasus was published by Yuri Mavashev in Vzglyad, which, while also downplaying the issue in a rather strange way, didn't give me the impression that he had lost sight of the bigger picture or was even deliberately pushing a narrative.
He addressed it with a similar openness to what I've come to expect from Andrew here.
This certainly raises questions about how the Foreign Ministry intends to deal with this. They should have learned their lessons from the Escobar affair. The southern flank, in particular, is a powder keg. Powder kegs are usually ignited through media manipulation and opinion-shaping. Downplaying the significance of TRIPP for Russia, for example, and failing to address the root causes of the deal, is, in my view, more or less a license for Western imposition.
He speaks and writes exactly like if he didn't see the constant harassment of West against Russia.
Exactly like a fool speaking with the captain of Titanic, about the way to deal with a less good weather tomorrow, or a bad salinity of the see, while he looks at the iceberg coming in refusing to see it.
I notice that very often, russian officials( and not only) seem very happy of themselves.
Russian officials, unfortunately—and this has to be said, and I say it diplomatically—are very susceptible to bribery, especially in the provinces. And this is still the case. And sadly, it's very widespread. What's being revealed here in the fake epidemic scandal surrounding beef in the Novosibirsk region is already on par with the situation in Ukraine. Unfortunately, this has to be said. Apparently, it's so bad that they're only now intervening—far too late.
But only because a prominent lawyer exerted pressure through widespread publicity on social media. Russia has a major problem here—and I'm very sorry to say so.
I read somewhere a declaration by some Iranian officials that they will not tolerate a US presence or control over TRIPP on their border.
Also, Azerbaijian seems to have taken back its initial threatening stance against Iran and appears to even make some efforts to show support. (Did anyone tap on their shoulder from Turkey or from Russia?).
So the outcome of the Gulf war may also have implications on the TRIPP.
However honestly I can't see any reference to the TRIPP in the Iran requests.
They haven't done anything to stop TRIPP nor are they in a position to do so since they reasonably fear that a war with Azerbaijan would drag in its Turkish ally.
Those statements though, if memory serves, were about territorial changes in an allusion to speculation of Azerbaijan annexing Armenia's Syunik Region.
Armenia itself agreed to TRIPP, however, so any hypothetical Iranian attack on that basis would technically be a naked act of aggression.
I also recently accounted for Azerbaijan's restraint after the Nakhchivan incident here:
"Azerbaijan’s economy is dependent on energy exports whose infrastructure could easily be damaged just like the Gulf Kingdoms’ have been, not to mention destroyed, thus sparking an economic and possibly political crisis."
Returning to the rest of your post, I honestly don't believe that the outcome of the Third Gulf War would in any way adversely affect TRIPP.
This megaproject is going to be implemented whether Iran likes it or not, and Iran isn't going to wage war with Turkiye over a corridor that Armenia agreed to.
That's another reason why Iran isn't making any demands of TRIPP in connection with the conflict, it simply has no realistic means to derail it.
-AMC jesters: Belarus and Russia are friends for eternity( like they said for Aliyev and then Armenia few years ago)
- Lavrov: "they are not nice, bouhouhou"
-CNN: "the grandson of former Belarus president, just got his PhD of political science in Harvard with a general level of 19,95/20 and came back to his grandpa wonderful luxury resort in Florida."
The fact that he'd lie through his teeth and claim that the US "never intended" to divide Belarus and Russia makes me very, very uneasy. It's such a blatant lie and he could have conveyed pro-US sentiment in a more semi-credible way than discredit himself like this.
I began to be concerned by summer 2022, then there were the setbacks in Kharkov and Kherson later that fall, and finally I saw Russia promoting top "Non-Russian Pro-Russian" (NRPR) influencers who espouse what I've described as "Potemkinism" and knew right then that Russia's already unviable feedback loops would become even more dysfunctional after wishful thinking alternative realities were recycled into the loop that policymakers and decisionmakers rely up:
From early 2023 onwards, I very closely monitored everything and arrived at the conclusion that Russian policymakers and decisionmakers had begun to believe their own literal propaganda that was pushed by the abovementioned top NRPR Potemkinists but was always supposed to remain strictly externally focused, never directed inward toward the domestic audience, let alone their class. It then took some time, but inevitably, Russia's setbacks began to spiral, unfortunately.
I don't believe that it's in a "doom spiral", however, but the setbacks that Russia experienced over the past year -- Assad's downfall (December 2024 but I count it as occurring within the last year), TRIPP and all of its implications for Russia's entire southern periphery (which experts like Valdai's Bordachev are still oblivious of...), Maduro's capture, and now the Third Gulf War might be irreversible.
What Russia urgently needs is a whole new strategic paradigm at the highest levels of the state on down, but there are way too many vested interested within the bureaucracy for that to happen naturally. Likewise, there aren't enough capable people to replace those who could hypothetically be purged therein, so any Russian "reformists" are stuck working with the same people who contributed to this foreign policy catastrophe even in the "best-case scenario".
I might admittedly be naive, but what prevents me from "dooming" is the hope that far-reaching reforms might follow the end of the SMO whenever that is and regardless of the terms that accompany it. If everything remains the way that it is, and the existing paradigm reigns supreme from here on out, then I truly fear for this country's future, and I say this as someone with enormous stakes in it, unlike other top NRPRs (who I don't consider my "peers" since most lack my credentials, experience, and documented track record of analytical accuracy).
My wife and two kids are Russian citizens, we own our apartment, and my life savings is in rubles. I've also lived here for 12.5 years, so around 1/3 of my life. Contrast this with the top NRPRs who get flown out to Russia with the red carpet, white glove treatment, set up in the swankiest hotels for a week or two, are likely very generously remunerated, and just parrot low-IQ talking points to their state media, official, diplomatic, and expert hosts.
Those people don't really care about this country, they're just piggybacking off of Russia's cause for clout since it's popular in Alt-Media, but most (importantly not all!) aren't actual Russophiles in the sense of having learned the language, knowing anything about the history beyond the basics (if that!), reading its literature (even if only translated into English), learning about its diverse people's customs, etc., they're more or less "tourists" and will always remain so.
It therefore beggars belief that they'd be paraded around as celebrities AND given prestigious audiences by state media, officials, diplomats, and experts who invest their valuable limited time in listening to these people, essentially relying on them as unofficial advisors, and each and every one of them either reiterates a variation of the "5D chess master plan" conspiracy theory that "everything is going according to plan" or clownishly demands that Russia nukes the West.
Add to the fact that a significant share are tied to foreign intelligence agencies or Foreign Ministries, whether through their previous employment or existing contacts that they boast about like Pepe bragged about being in touch with three (!!!) foreign intel agencies (thus making him their "asset" by the dictionary definition of the term), and it certainly looks like something very foul is going on which makes my skin crawl every time that I think about it.
What's your view point on Iran? I dont really have high hopes for them either. One of the things that bugs me is they go on Television announcing who there gonna attack similar tactics as Russia.
I'm impressed with their bold attacks against Israel, the GCC, and the US' regional bases, which has been more devastating for its adversaries than Russia's purposely restrained attacks against Ukraine due to it officially waging a "SMO" and not a "war", but they haven't sunk any ships like they hyped everyone up to expect and therefore haven't inflicted any unacceptable damage to the US.
It's unclear whether they simply lack the capabilities (e.g. their anti-ship missiles and associated capabilities might be subpar) or are also restraining themselves for escalation-control purposes to avoid a scenario where the US responds with absolutely outmatched retaliation that would totally destroy the country (or will finally attempt this if the US does that first).
Anyhow, while they've inflicted some serious damage on their adversaries, I don't foresee them "winning" in the sense of getting the US to end the conflict without any significant concessions on Iran's part, which Trump just suggested and I earlier forecast would likely have to entail US proxy control over Iran's energy industry as further leverage over China:
If China retains access to Iranian resources, let alone if a so-called "petroyuan tolling system" is set up for crossing Hormuz, then the US would have indisputably lost in a strategic sense no matter how much it destroyed Iran, though that wouldn't mean that Iran itself won, but rather China. The US has inflicted tremendous damage on Iran that will take years to recover from no matter all the coping from its online supporters that it'll supposedly bounce back right away due to its prior resilience.
So all in all, what I see is most definitely an Iranian loss in the sense of the country having been destroyed (and there'll likely be reverberating consequences throughout the coming years that could further weaken it more than it already is), and possible US or Chinese strategic victories depending on what I described above. Nevertheless, I don't doubt for a minute that most of the Alt-Media Community will spin any outcome as a maximum Iranian victory and maximum US loss, they're that dishonest.
Given Trump's erratic , dishonest and often abusive nature it is hard to comprehend why any national leader would be willing to risk converting their nation's status from independent sovereignty to a vassal of US hegemony.
There are three overarching rules that should be considered in this matter:
1. The USA sows discord everywhere (see George Friedman's famous speech on Europe).
2. Russia can only trust itself.
3. The decisive phase doesn't concern Lukashenko and Putin, but their successors.
If Lukashenko and Putin keep this in mind and don't allow themselves to be lulled into complacency, they will find strength with other countries outside the Western Hemisphere.
Yes, the USA is powerful.
But if no one listens to them anymore and people are willing to accept disadvantages for a relatively short time, the USA will collapse to such an extent that they will be so preoccupied with the internal threat that they will be happy to stay home.
That must be the world's goal if it wants to continue to exist.
Because the USA is the mother of global terrorism and world wars.
Lukashenko is indeed more or less a liability. It's not the first time he treads where he shouldn't (the arrest of Wagner soldiers, some years ago allowing Belarus to circumvent Russian trade barriers and moving in EU goods while sanctioned Russia couldn't, ...). And indeed his Kazach counterpart, who's ass had to be saved by the Russians some years ago, is even worse.
Somehow these "leaders" seem to take way too much for granted. Yanukovych' Ukraine is where this leads to! I wonder if he feels any shame for all the death, suffering and misery that has unfolded.
This kind of corrupted autocrats ( because Russia friendly or not, they are corrupted autocrats) don't know shame and don't give a fuck of their people, nation or country.
Andrew, have you read Bordachev today on RT about central Asia?
Astonishing.
Is this man a fool? A blind man? A traitor to his country? Or is he missioned to prepare russian public to a surrender to west?
Unbelievable.
Yeah, I saw it at Valdai last week, which is where RT republished it from (they forgot to mention it at the end of their article):
https://valdaiclub.com/a/highlights/eurasia-s-ghosts-of-the-great-game/
I was sorely disappointed that he still didn't even passively reference TRIPP. I really wonder what his deal is. It's very difficult to trust him.
At minimum, he seems to suggest -- whether intentionally or not -- that Russia should begin an era of "managed decline" because I don't know how else to interpret his delusional denial of newly revived Great Power competition all along Russia's southern periphery nor his continued conspicuous ignoring of TRIPP.
Yes, I do 't know what I prefer:
- a proud and arrogant fool?
- a traitor who is missioned to blind russian leaders?
- a messenger of russian leaders to prepare the public to surrender?
But it's amazing to see a so-called great expert so distant with reality despite all the evidences of those last years, months and even days.
If all Russian direction is on this path, Russia is done .
When you read the sad and pessimistic article of Trenine yesterday on RT, it seems that the Bordachev gang have won the battle of influence.
I think he thinks very highly of himself, you can tell by how he writes and conducts himself during conferences (you can find videos online). I also met him once in person years ago when I co-anchored a weekly analytical show at Radio Sputnik.
My co-anchor was a semi-famous Russian journalist with lots of contacts and we'd always have one Russian expert in the studio to interview every Friday. I'd then talk to them off the record about various matters in between recording the show's segments.
Bordachev came off as conceited, that's for sure, but I kinda forgot about him for some reasons till he recently became more prominent at Valdai. I now believe that he's either in denial about Russia's precarious geostrategic position along its southern periphery or wants to "manage the decline".
I don't believe that he's a traitor nor tasked by anyone with influencing the public. Rather, if anything, he seems to have assumed the task of trying to convince decisionmakers to go along with his proposals, namely doing nothing in the face of what's objectively a renewed competition there.
What I've noticed about Bordachev in his articles is the narrowing of his perspective. He tends to exclude essential, critical topics to such an extent that one might even think he's a propagandist himself.
This is indeed a development in him that one doesn't observe in others like Strelnikov or Restchikov.
It's less about party loyalty. It's much more about the fact that, for example, in February an article on the balance of power in the Caucasus was published by Yuri Mavashev in Vzglyad, which, while also downplaying the issue in a rather strange way, didn't give me the impression that he had lost sight of the bigger picture or was even deliberately pushing a narrative.
He addressed it with a similar openness to what I've come to expect from Andrew here.
This certainly raises questions about how the Foreign Ministry intends to deal with this. They should have learned their lessons from the Escobar affair. The southern flank, in particular, is a powder keg. Powder kegs are usually ignited through media manipulation and opinion-shaping. Downplaying the significance of TRIPP for Russia, for example, and failing to address the root causes of the deal, is, in my view, more or less a license for Western imposition.
He speaks and writes exactly like if he didn't see the constant harassment of West against Russia.
Exactly like a fool speaking with the captain of Titanic, about the way to deal with a less good weather tomorrow, or a bad salinity of the see, while he looks at the iceberg coming in refusing to see it.
I notice that very often, russian officials( and not only) seem very happy of themselves.
Russian officials, unfortunately—and this has to be said, and I say it diplomatically—are very susceptible to bribery, especially in the provinces. And this is still the case. And sadly, it's very widespread. What's being revealed here in the fake epidemic scandal surrounding beef in the Novosibirsk region is already on par with the situation in Ukraine. Unfortunately, this has to be said. Apparently, it's so bad that they're only now intervening—far too late.
But only because a prominent lawyer exerted pressure through widespread publicity on social media. Russia has a major problem here—and I'm very sorry to say so.
I read somewhere a declaration by some Iranian officials that they will not tolerate a US presence or control over TRIPP on their border.
Also, Azerbaijian seems to have taken back its initial threatening stance against Iran and appears to even make some efforts to show support. (Did anyone tap on their shoulder from Turkey or from Russia?).
So the outcome of the Gulf war may also have implications on the TRIPP.
However honestly I can't see any reference to the TRIPP in the Iran requests.
They haven't done anything to stop TRIPP nor are they in a position to do so since they reasonably fear that a war with Azerbaijan would drag in its Turkish ally.
Those statements though, if memory serves, were about territorial changes in an allusion to speculation of Azerbaijan annexing Armenia's Syunik Region.
Armenia itself agreed to TRIPP, however, so any hypothetical Iranian attack on that basis would technically be a naked act of aggression.
I also recently accounted for Azerbaijan's restraint after the Nakhchivan incident here:
"Azerbaijan’s economy is dependent on energy exports whose infrastructure could easily be damaged just like the Gulf Kingdoms’ have been, not to mention destroyed, thus sparking an economic and possibly political crisis."
https://korybko.substack.com/p/israels-strikes-against-irans-caspian
Returning to the rest of your post, I honestly don't believe that the outcome of the Third Gulf War would in any way adversely affect TRIPP.
This megaproject is going to be implemented whether Iran likes it or not, and Iran isn't going to wage war with Turkiye over a corridor that Armenia agreed to.
That's another reason why Iran isn't making any demands of TRIPP in connection with the conflict, it simply has no realistic means to derail it.
Here is what we will hear soon.
-AMC jesters: Belarus and Russia are friends for eternity( like they said for Aliyev and then Armenia few years ago)
- Lavrov: "they are not nice, bouhouhou"
-CNN: "the grandson of former Belarus president, just got his PhD of political science in Harvard with a general level of 19,95/20 and came back to his grandpa wonderful luxury resort in Florida."
LOL!
Lukashenko should tell the US to take a hike.
The fact that he'd lie through his teeth and claim that the US "never intended" to divide Belarus and Russia makes me very, very uneasy. It's such a blatant lie and he could have conveyed pro-US sentiment in a more semi-credible way than discredit himself like this.
Its not look for Russia and Belarus. I been pretty pessimstic since Russell Bently was murdered.
I began to be concerned by summer 2022, then there were the setbacks in Kharkov and Kherson later that fall, and finally I saw Russia promoting top "Non-Russian Pro-Russian" (NRPR) influencers who espouse what I've described as "Potemkinism" and knew right then that Russia's already unviable feedback loops would become even more dysfunctional after wishful thinking alternative realities were recycled into the loop that policymakers and decisionmakers rely up:
https://korybko.substack.com/p/potemkinism-is-responsible-for-false
From early 2023 onwards, I very closely monitored everything and arrived at the conclusion that Russian policymakers and decisionmakers had begun to believe their own literal propaganda that was pushed by the abovementioned top NRPR Potemkinists but was always supposed to remain strictly externally focused, never directed inward toward the domestic audience, let alone their class. It then took some time, but inevitably, Russia's setbacks began to spiral, unfortunately.
I don't believe that it's in a "doom spiral", however, but the setbacks that Russia experienced over the past year -- Assad's downfall (December 2024 but I count it as occurring within the last year), TRIPP and all of its implications for Russia's entire southern periphery (which experts like Valdai's Bordachev are still oblivious of...), Maduro's capture, and now the Third Gulf War might be irreversible.
What Russia urgently needs is a whole new strategic paradigm at the highest levels of the state on down, but there are way too many vested interested within the bureaucracy for that to happen naturally. Likewise, there aren't enough capable people to replace those who could hypothetically be purged therein, so any Russian "reformists" are stuck working with the same people who contributed to this foreign policy catastrophe even in the "best-case scenario".
I might admittedly be naive, but what prevents me from "dooming" is the hope that far-reaching reforms might follow the end of the SMO whenever that is and regardless of the terms that accompany it. If everything remains the way that it is, and the existing paradigm reigns supreme from here on out, then I truly fear for this country's future, and I say this as someone with enormous stakes in it, unlike other top NRPRs (who I don't consider my "peers" since most lack my credentials, experience, and documented track record of analytical accuracy).
My wife and two kids are Russian citizens, we own our apartment, and my life savings is in rubles. I've also lived here for 12.5 years, so around 1/3 of my life. Contrast this with the top NRPRs who get flown out to Russia with the red carpet, white glove treatment, set up in the swankiest hotels for a week or two, are likely very generously remunerated, and just parrot low-IQ talking points to their state media, official, diplomatic, and expert hosts.
Those people don't really care about this country, they're just piggybacking off of Russia's cause for clout since it's popular in Alt-Media, but most (importantly not all!) aren't actual Russophiles in the sense of having learned the language, knowing anything about the history beyond the basics (if that!), reading its literature (even if only translated into English), learning about its diverse people's customs, etc., they're more or less "tourists" and will always remain so.
It therefore beggars belief that they'd be paraded around as celebrities AND given prestigious audiences by state media, officials, diplomats, and experts who invest their valuable limited time in listening to these people, essentially relying on them as unofficial advisors, and each and every one of them either reiterates a variation of the "5D chess master plan" conspiracy theory that "everything is going according to plan" or clownishly demands that Russia nukes the West.
Add to the fact that a significant share are tied to foreign intelligence agencies or Foreign Ministries, whether through their previous employment or existing contacts that they boast about like Pepe bragged about being in touch with three (!!!) foreign intel agencies (thus making him their "asset" by the dictionary definition of the term), and it certainly looks like something very foul is going on which makes my skin crawl every time that I think about it.
What's your view point on Iran? I dont really have high hopes for them either. One of the things that bugs me is they go on Television announcing who there gonna attack similar tactics as Russia.
I'm impressed with their bold attacks against Israel, the GCC, and the US' regional bases, which has been more devastating for its adversaries than Russia's purposely restrained attacks against Ukraine due to it officially waging a "SMO" and not a "war", but they haven't sunk any ships like they hyped everyone up to expect and therefore haven't inflicted any unacceptable damage to the US.
It's unclear whether they simply lack the capabilities (e.g. their anti-ship missiles and associated capabilities might be subpar) or are also restraining themselves for escalation-control purposes to avoid a scenario where the US responds with absolutely outmatched retaliation that would totally destroy the country (or will finally attempt this if the US does that first).
Anyhow, while they've inflicted some serious damage on their adversaries, I don't foresee them "winning" in the sense of getting the US to end the conflict without any significant concessions on Iran's part, which Trump just suggested and I earlier forecast would likely have to entail US proxy control over Iran's energy industry as further leverage over China:
https://archive.is/aNDG4
If China retains access to Iranian resources, let alone if a so-called "petroyuan tolling system" is set up for crossing Hormuz, then the US would have indisputably lost in a strategic sense no matter how much it destroyed Iran, though that wouldn't mean that Iran itself won, but rather China. The US has inflicted tremendous damage on Iran that will take years to recover from no matter all the coping from its online supporters that it'll supposedly bounce back right away due to its prior resilience.
So all in all, what I see is most definitely an Iranian loss in the sense of the country having been destroyed (and there'll likely be reverberating consequences throughout the coming years that could further weaken it more than it already is), and possible US or Chinese strategic victories depending on what I described above. Nevertheless, I don't doubt for a minute that most of the Alt-Media Community will spin any outcome as a maximum Iranian victory and maximum US loss, they're that dishonest.
Andrew, you're not fair with Iran. If they didn't yet sink a US ship it's only because those are pitifully hiding to far for that.
Exactly like coalition planes which don't dare fly over Iran.
They tell Russian officials what they want to hear.
Given Trump's erratic , dishonest and often abusive nature it is hard to comprehend why any national leader would be willing to risk converting their nation's status from independent sovereignty to a vassal of US hegemony.
Because they crave American carrot and they fear American stick.
One of the reasons I wanted Kamala in because I knew how niave Putin was.
There are three overarching rules that should be considered in this matter:
1. The USA sows discord everywhere (see George Friedman's famous speech on Europe).
2. Russia can only trust itself.
3. The decisive phase doesn't concern Lukashenko and Putin, but their successors.
If Lukashenko and Putin keep this in mind and don't allow themselves to be lulled into complacency, they will find strength with other countries outside the Western Hemisphere.
Yes, the USA is powerful.
But if no one listens to them anymore and people are willing to accept disadvantages for a relatively short time, the USA will collapse to such an extent that they will be so preoccupied with the internal threat that they will be happy to stay home.
That must be the world's goal if it wants to continue to exist.
Because the USA is the mother of global terrorism and world wars.
Lukashenko is indeed more or less a liability. It's not the first time he treads where he shouldn't (the arrest of Wagner soldiers, some years ago allowing Belarus to circumvent Russian trade barriers and moving in EU goods while sanctioned Russia couldn't, ...). And indeed his Kazach counterpart, who's ass had to be saved by the Russians some years ago, is even worse.
Somehow these "leaders" seem to take way too much for granted. Yanukovych' Ukraine is where this leads to! I wonder if he feels any shame for all the death, suffering and misery that has unfolded.
This kind of corrupted autocrats ( because Russia friendly or not, they are corrupted autocrats) don't know shame and don't give a fuck of their people, nation or country.
A nice Spy...
Is next Ukraine .
Dangle out a few token concessions and they come right up....
Russians over the centures have been the defenders of the Slavic RACE against enemies . L UK get you r head screwed on right. STAY with RUSSIA.