You underestimate Putin it’s China that needs Russia for security resources markets and belt and road, So no bargain basement prices Russia can exist without any external markets if it has to for a year or more, china can’t period. I am very sure that any agreements Will mutually benefit both countries as Putin and XI are both realists. The dollar must be destroyed Russia has done the military side in weakening NATO ( Defeat) China must now finish the economic side no money no wars
I’ve learned over the last years, to temper my expectations for a game changing global environment. Everything takes soooo much longer than many of us expected & hoped. On military affairs I’ve pretty much stopped listening to Scott Ritter, and on BRICS I’ve pretty much stopped listening to Pepe Escobar. I think I was a bit naive about the latent condition of the US Empire, and underestimated its resilience. Let’s face it, Nazi Germany was defeated by the end of 42, and facing ferocious military, economic, and political pressure, but it still survived for another 2.5years. Now, having said all that, I remain of the view that all current trends are in the right direction for a new world order that has the USA playing no more than the part of a regular (if powerful) state in the 21st century concert of nations. The decline of US hegemony has been going on for decades, and whilst it is obviously no more, the aftershocks of the unipolar moment will likely be felt for years to come. Of course, a massive shock like a serious hiding from Iran, timing with a clear defeat in Ukraine, would accelerate things mightily - IMO.
I like the conclusion paragraph, and agree with the commentator "Mark". Even if a big bundle of agreements is signed, they will be mutually beneficial, and the critical portion will NOT activate until either (1) NATO raises military action to start an embargo against Russia and conscription, probably also needs the US to "re-enter" the Ukraine War, or (2) US officially starting military provocation using Taiwan or Phillipine as proxy. And even then, the agreements will be more active about economics and trade.
Russians may need NK shells and Iranian drones in the first year of the war. But Russia can certainly single-handedly finish the war. Even if NATO raises its profile to pseudo-war, it is hard to be much tougher than what has already happened. Russia has a pool of called-up reserves through a year of training, waiting on the sidelines to deal with NATO intervention. NATO cannot even come up with an expedition force to match this Russian "Reserve Front". The US cannot afford to re-enter the Ukraine War without hurting its strategic decision to suppress China. China's governmental investment since 2022 has been more focused on China's northwest and southwest areas (mountainous, mineral-rich, less populated), on wartime infrastructure, similar to what the Chinese Nationalist government did during the China-Japan War (1937-1945). China's economic strength is not as strong as some alternative-media pundits have said.
However, the available US economic and military punch is not as strong as the US elites had hoped. They still wish bluffing against China would work, as they think they smelled weakness in China's position. But the strategy of "closing the door to trap and beat the dog" would just help China to morph from a sick dragon into a cornered dragon. China would need the Russians' economic help for at least the first year, after the US military clearly pivots to Asia. But if the US Navy cannot handle Yemen, then there is no chance they can suppress Iran, let alone pivot to China. That is why US admirals only predicted war with China in 2027. By then US will finish its planned preparation. But so will China. If Americans use land-based airpower from SK, Japan, or Taiwan, strong nationalist emotions can be used to boost the Chinese Communist control. By aircraft carriers alone, the USN does not have sufficient combat power unless the US concentrates 4 or more aircraft carrier groups.
The aircraft carriers would be of limited use in a modern war against level powers. With the current antiship missile technology, they would risk sinking before getting within the range of their planes.
Wasn't it like 3 months ago that Trump was criticizing the predecessor administration acting in Biden's name for creating a water-tight Russia-China partnership? It would be a bit funny if instead of trying to peel of Russia off China, Trump would make such a partnership even stronger by escalating.
But hey, it is possible. So I think a guarded expectation of an escalation for the next 6 months - 1 year while continuing with Ukrainian attrition is probably correct. There isn't much the West could do in addition - send Polish, French and British troops?
One real power Trump has for sure is to deny most basic consumer goods from the American public by disconnecting from Chinese imports. If he does so, he will almost surely be rewarded with a domestic revolt. If he pushes China to the point of no return he will speed up the process of depriving the US from a superpower status, turning it to be an undisputed ruler of the South American Banana Republics. Trump has a tendency to float things before he considers all the possible consequences. During his first term he threatened to to cut welfare food checks to the US public and feed them with military leftover food supplies. Suddenly a million welfare queens went on record stating that as soon as they receive the first shipment they will send it to the (Formerly) White House. And we never heard of the Grand Plan ever again.
Ok then why comment? To the best of my knowledge, I'm the most credentialed American in Russia for analyzing this country's foreign policy. I have an MA in International Relations and a PhD in Political Science from the Russian MFA-run Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO) along with plenty of media and think tank experience here (as well as a variety of associated contacts).
My views are always strictly my own, and I don't believe in people blindly accepting so-called "arguments from authority" (and I am indeed a universally recognized authority on this subject), but arrogantly dismissing my insight solely because of your arbitrary dislike of a single word belies your ignorance. It's very disappointing whenever I'm reminded of how unintelligent some of my readers are.
I'd therefore prefer for you to unsubscribe from my Substack instead of wasting my time by trolling. I don't have to interact with my audience but I do so out of respect for the good-natured ones who share constructive but respectfully expressed critiques whenever I have the time and interest in responding. You're not welcome in my community if you're going to continue behaving the way that you are.
I ask myself, why do you feel offended that much that you enroll all your achievements (congrats on them!) and awards here? Did I question your Master of Arts? Did I question that you are cited by many? No. So, if I did not at all attack you - why do you feel the need to defend yourself?
My stance was just to say I give more on facts than on rumours. And, true, I give credits to you for being very active on reporting on the rumors. If that is what you want, it is fine with me.
BTW I achieved an M.A. (german Masters of Arts) in History and also in Political Sciences. So what? This does not make me superiour to anyone. Greetings to Moscow, and have a great day.
You made a facetious remark. Dr. Korybko likes to weigh possible outcomes and is clearly no admirer of China. It is generous of him to share his reasoning on so many geopolitical issues.
Excuse me for meddling, but I think you are misunderstanding something. Maybe your English isn't so firm. Andrew Korybko doesn't report on rumours. He looks at the known facts and analyses what might come of them. Like a chess player considering different ways to move his pieces and how his opponent might react.
The question is why did Trump make this his war in the first place?
What's there to win for him? If it's about no losing face, walk away but don't escalate to de-escalate.
It's just as silly as all those European leaders who sent weapons to Ukraine under the slogan, "More weapons will bring peace" . Well no, more weapons mean more deaths, only.
Because Trump is weak, stupid and easily manipulated.
Remember Syria? Lots of hot air, two attacks, in the end, nothing changed because Trump thought that there was an opportunity to steal oil.
That Syrian oil wasn't even a rounding error doesn't matter.
Now we get to play the same stupid game with "Ukrainian rare earths". Trump hasn't learned jack, since that would require admitting that he got fooled.
If Ukraine manage to hit the parade won't that trigger war with China? Xi might use that to train it's army in a real war cenario and with overwhelming amount of Chinese soldiers the territory can be massive. Thus furthering away Europe and China, or pressuring Europe to force Ukraine into a deal
Thanks for your generosity in sharing these well informed and insightful articles.
I very much appreciate this.
You underestimate Putin it’s China that needs Russia for security resources markets and belt and road, So no bargain basement prices Russia can exist without any external markets if it has to for a year or more, china can’t period. I am very sure that any agreements Will mutually benefit both countries as Putin and XI are both realists. The dollar must be destroyed Russia has done the military side in weakening NATO ( Defeat) China must now finish the economic side no money no wars
There is no evidence that China is currently buying US treasuries. Or even EU treasuries.
I’ve learned over the last years, to temper my expectations for a game changing global environment. Everything takes soooo much longer than many of us expected & hoped. On military affairs I’ve pretty much stopped listening to Scott Ritter, and on BRICS I’ve pretty much stopped listening to Pepe Escobar. I think I was a bit naive about the latent condition of the US Empire, and underestimated its resilience. Let’s face it, Nazi Germany was defeated by the end of 42, and facing ferocious military, economic, and political pressure, but it still survived for another 2.5years. Now, having said all that, I remain of the view that all current trends are in the right direction for a new world order that has the USA playing no more than the part of a regular (if powerful) state in the 21st century concert of nations. The decline of US hegemony has been going on for decades, and whilst it is obviously no more, the aftershocks of the unipolar moment will likely be felt for years to come. Of course, a massive shock like a serious hiding from Iran, timing with a clear defeat in Ukraine, would accelerate things mightily - IMO.
I like the conclusion paragraph, and agree with the commentator "Mark". Even if a big bundle of agreements is signed, they will be mutually beneficial, and the critical portion will NOT activate until either (1) NATO raises military action to start an embargo against Russia and conscription, probably also needs the US to "re-enter" the Ukraine War, or (2) US officially starting military provocation using Taiwan or Phillipine as proxy. And even then, the agreements will be more active about economics and trade.
Russians may need NK shells and Iranian drones in the first year of the war. But Russia can certainly single-handedly finish the war. Even if NATO raises its profile to pseudo-war, it is hard to be much tougher than what has already happened. Russia has a pool of called-up reserves through a year of training, waiting on the sidelines to deal with NATO intervention. NATO cannot even come up with an expedition force to match this Russian "Reserve Front". The US cannot afford to re-enter the Ukraine War without hurting its strategic decision to suppress China. China's governmental investment since 2022 has been more focused on China's northwest and southwest areas (mountainous, mineral-rich, less populated), on wartime infrastructure, similar to what the Chinese Nationalist government did during the China-Japan War (1937-1945). China's economic strength is not as strong as some alternative-media pundits have said.
However, the available US economic and military punch is not as strong as the US elites had hoped. They still wish bluffing against China would work, as they think they smelled weakness in China's position. But the strategy of "closing the door to trap and beat the dog" would just help China to morph from a sick dragon into a cornered dragon. China would need the Russians' economic help for at least the first year, after the US military clearly pivots to Asia. But if the US Navy cannot handle Yemen, then there is no chance they can suppress Iran, let alone pivot to China. That is why US admirals only predicted war with China in 2027. By then US will finish its planned preparation. But so will China. If Americans use land-based airpower from SK, Japan, or Taiwan, strong nationalist emotions can be used to boost the Chinese Communist control. By aircraft carriers alone, the USN does not have sufficient combat power unless the US concentrates 4 or more aircraft carrier groups.
The aircraft carriers would be of limited use in a modern war against level powers. With the current antiship missile technology, they would risk sinking before getting within the range of their planes.
Great piece.
Xi will undoubtedly meticulously assess the cost-benefit ratio prior to taking any action.
Putin must value Xi's steadfastness in honouring the invitation despite the threats.
Wasn't it like 3 months ago that Trump was criticizing the predecessor administration acting in Biden's name for creating a water-tight Russia-China partnership? It would be a bit funny if instead of trying to peel of Russia off China, Trump would make such a partnership even stronger by escalating.
But hey, it is possible. So I think a guarded expectation of an escalation for the next 6 months - 1 year while continuing with Ukrainian attrition is probably correct. There isn't much the West could do in addition - send Polish, French and British troops?
On a related topic: Do you think the recent almost admission by Trump to a question by Zerohedge that the US destroyed North Stream a is escalatory or de-escalatory? https://www.zerohedge.com/political/zerohedge-white-house-certain-people-know-exactly-who-blew-nord-stream-trump-says
One real power Trump has for sure is to deny most basic consumer goods from the American public by disconnecting from Chinese imports. If he does so, he will almost surely be rewarded with a domestic revolt. If he pushes China to the point of no return he will speed up the process of depriving the US from a superpower status, turning it to be an undisputed ruler of the South American Banana Republics. Trump has a tendency to float things before he considers all the possible consequences. During his first term he threatened to to cut welfare food checks to the US public and feed them with military leftover food supplies. Suddenly a million welfare queens went on record stating that as soon as they receive the first shipment they will send it to the (Formerly) White House. And we never heard of the Grand Plan ever again.
The real Murikan "Welfare Queens" are the Murikan Klepto-Corporatocracy !
(C) on above...
"Puting & XI Might..." Whenever I read "might" - I stop reading.
Ok then why comment? To the best of my knowledge, I'm the most credentialed American in Russia for analyzing this country's foreign policy. I have an MA in International Relations and a PhD in Political Science from the Russian MFA-run Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO) along with plenty of media and think tank experience here (as well as a variety of associated contacts).
My views are always strictly my own, and I don't believe in people blindly accepting so-called "arguments from authority" (and I am indeed a universally recognized authority on this subject), but arrogantly dismissing my insight solely because of your arbitrary dislike of a single word belies your ignorance. It's very disappointing whenever I'm reminded of how unintelligent some of my readers are.
I'd therefore prefer for you to unsubscribe from my Substack instead of wasting my time by trolling. I don't have to interact with my audience but I do so out of respect for the good-natured ones who share constructive but respectfully expressed critiques whenever I have the time and interest in responding. You're not welcome in my community if you're going to continue behaving the way that you are.
Thank you very much for the info about yourself.
I ask myself, why do you feel offended that much that you enroll all your achievements (congrats on them!) and awards here? Did I question your Master of Arts? Did I question that you are cited by many? No. So, if I did not at all attack you - why do you feel the need to defend yourself?
My stance was just to say I give more on facts than on rumours. And, true, I give credits to you for being very active on reporting on the rumors. If that is what you want, it is fine with me.
BTW I achieved an M.A. (german Masters of Arts) in History and also in Political Sciences. So what? This does not make me superiour to anyone. Greetings to Moscow, and have a great day.
You made a facetious remark. Dr. Korybko likes to weigh possible outcomes and is clearly no admirer of China. It is generous of him to share his reasoning on so many geopolitical issues.
Excuse me for meddling, but I think you are misunderstanding something. Maybe your English isn't so firm. Andrew Korybko doesn't report on rumours. He looks at the known facts and analyses what might come of them. Like a chess player considering different ways to move his pieces and how his opponent might react.
Putin shouldn't trust Trump at all. It's not just Trump though. It's the whole U.S. government.
What's in those other 2 parts of the minerals deal? Why isn't the financial accounting of the deal subject to outside auditing?
The U.S. clearly has every intent to continue financial and military support for Ukraine so how can the U.S. claim to be pursuing peace?
Trump is just tapping Putin along. There's never been a peace process taking place. It's all smoke and mirrors, a distraction.
The Orange-Tapper !
The question is why did Trump make this his war in the first place?
What's there to win for him? If it's about no losing face, walk away but don't escalate to de-escalate.
It's just as silly as all those European leaders who sent weapons to Ukraine under the slogan, "More weapons will bring peace" . Well no, more weapons mean more deaths, only.
Because Trump is weak, stupid and easily manipulated.
Remember Syria? Lots of hot air, two attacks, in the end, nothing changed because Trump thought that there was an opportunity to steal oil.
That Syrian oil wasn't even a rounding error doesn't matter.
Now we get to play the same stupid game with "Ukrainian rare earths". Trump hasn't learned jack, since that would require admitting that he got fooled.
If Ukraine manage to hit the parade won't that trigger war with China? Xi might use that to train it's army in a real war cenario and with overwhelming amount of Chinese soldiers the territory can be massive. Thus furthering away Europe and China, or pressuring Europe to force Ukraine into a deal
It's "You're", you Dumb-Arse !