To be clear, the Valdai Club only represents one of Russia’s policymaking factions and their insight might not accurately reflect Putin’s calculations, which could always change in any case.
“Russia would not risk its own socioeconomic stability for a decisive victory in a military conflict. One exception is direct full-scale aggression, but the probability of such an action against a nuclear superpower is close to zero…"
Those who watched the speeches in yesterday's Copenhagen EU/UK/NATO leaders meeting, would not come to such a conclusion - the meeting resembled a posse filled with delusional, hysterical leaders demanding blood - Russian blood. Their goal to re-arm in the quickest possible way, financing partly by Russian frozen assets theft, building on the re-entry of Trump into the ultimate defeat of Russia, is an existential threat for Russia - not to be dealt with lightly. The prospect of Zelensky receiving intel and Tomahawk missiles to destroy infrastructure deep into Russia, is a threat of potential nuclear capability. Trump's decision to arm Ukraine with these misseles shows he can not be trusted, just like Merkel and other Western leaders.
Hysterical - yes. However, Russian assets don't really matter since - even if you confiscate and sell them, you only incur liabilities. Who from outside the Big West (USA, 5 Eyes, S Korea and Japan) is then going to invest newly in Euroclear-managed securities? I guess Britain and France already quietly confiscated and liquidated the securities that were deposited directly there to fund the previous operations.
So it basically runs down to deficit spending to finance the Ukrainian war. However, there is deficit spending when people from outside buy your additional treasuries, and deficit spending when they don't. Which is now the case - both in the EU and in the USA.
The Valdai speeches were kind of olive branch. Maybe it's going to be taken, maybe not. Just like the Gaza plan from Trump (probably not).
Trump's comments at Valdai about Tomahawks raised a question. He said it was impossible for Ukrainians to operate these missiles themselves, so their use would represent direct conflict between the U.S. and Russia. But isn't it true of other American-supplied weapons the Ukrainians are currently using that they require American personnel to operate them?
It sounds like a red line that's similar to a previous red line that's already been crossed. And Putin also warned about the French stopping ships headed to or from Russia, but there too, it seems like his words offer little deterrent.
Putin's comments were no different in spirit than what he said a year ago, and we all saw how there was no significant retaliatory escalation on Russia's side after that "red line" was crossed.
While it's true that he authorized the first-ever and thus far only use of the Oreshniks in partial response to that, he hasn't used them since and it's unclear whether he'd finally unleash a lot of them in an attempt to finally bring this conflict to a speedy close if the Tomahawks are transferred and used against Russia.
Time and again, with the abovementioned example being the only notable exception, we've observed Putin exercising restraint in the face of increasing provocations clearly aimed at prompting the response that many of his own supporters have wanted for a while.
I agree completely. If nuclear weapons are the reason we don't have full wars, then why doesn't Russia go shock and awe on the Ukraine? Ukraine doesn't have nuclear weapons and is not under any nuclear shields of another country.
Don't tell me it's out of brotherly love because killing every single Ukrainian male between 25 and 75 years old is not "brotherly love". That's the path taken, wipe out the Ukrainian male population completely.
There seems to be major financial motives here that most writers dance around. They very well explain Russia's choices during this "SMO".
And going after the elite of the Ukraine would end the war pretty fast too.
Instead, the elite in all the other former Soviet countries have lost all fear of Moscow and it's really starting to show!
The political elite in the Ukraine are right now getting filthy rich and fully expecting to retire to Miami or some other similar location. And Russia is effectively telling them that's fine. Now ask yourself why.
I honestly doubt that money is what is motivating the Kremlin. They could make far more money acting as compadors to the West.
My straight SWAG is that the Russian elites do not make war on the West because they want to join it. "But we're *europeans* we are cultured, we write symphonies, we write plays!" they tell themselves.
Needless to say, that hesitation has the West licking their chops. And no, it's not money that they are after, either. It is power.
You could be right. But keep in mind that the model all these elites follow is that they make their initial fortune in their own county but they turn around and invest it into western, particularly American, businesses. Look at the Saudis buying out EA right now.
They expect to multiply their wealth five or ten times over by putting it into western markets.
They really don't want to be cut off from that opportunity. Look at how the US stock market dominates all other stock markets. Sure it's in a bubble, but there's a lot of people making absolute fortunes on the way up!
The Russian elites already were buying trophies in the West before the war.
And they make more money back home. Western investments are for security and prestige.
Simon Johnson (I think) described the phenomenon well - the compadors too often overpay for western assets, probably because the skills that made them fabulously rich back home don't necessarily translate to another jurisdiction.
For that matter, when I lived in Ukraine, a lot of investment came from Russia. It was a legal system that Russian elites understood, but at the same time, safe from the authorities back home.
In this context, a new interpretation intended to make excuses.
You often complain that I am repetitive and insifficently positive. The first step towards solving a problem is to be honest with yourself and admit that there is a problem and it's not going to just go away.
At risk of arguing by cliche, when you find you have dug yourself into a hole, you need to stop digging.
I know this song. You speak about keep on digging and you're right but it's not a solution neither to lay in fetal position with thumb in mouth in shouting repeatedly that this hole is to deep.
And it's exclusively what you do since I've been reading you.
I have said it many times here and elsewhere. This is by no means comprehensive, but start with this - that Ukraine has a single bridge left standing anywhere is a testament to Russian indecision. That Ukraine is able to fly any aircraft, that they have any port facilities, any power plants, any railroad engines, etc..
And you still have not answered my question - what would you have me do?
It is a phrase derived from US television. In long-running TV series it often became necessary to change the backstory of a character. For example, an evil character may suddenly turn out to be good after all (because the public liked the character more than expected). This might then be explained by him having been blackmailed or something like that. RETroactive CONtinuity.
Russia shouldn’t aim for a 20 year war like the US/Afghanistan debacle. Wars are expensive and even if Russia is making money off this ( they aren’t) the human toll is going to cost Putin or whomever else comes next will have many detractors whether in public or behind closed doors. If this is an olive branch than Putin needs to get on the phone because reading the tea leaves isn’t something the globalists wish to do.
One point on the Poutine's brief yesterday and his disgusting words about Trump's plan in Palestine. Bravo to Andrew who was the only analyst in AMC to say that Russia was Israel friendly and not at all the Palestinian's protector.
When you listen the head of Russia saying that there is no other alternative that Trump's plan( and sanction? Stop trading? Others?) one can scratch the head.
Of course Russia is Israel-friendly. There are not that many Western countries that are Russia-friendly: just Hungary, Slovakia and Israel. Besides, all of them are being ostracized by the EU, whether they are in the EU (Hungary, Slovakia) or not (Israel).
On the surface, it seems neither the Valdai Club nor Putin has changed their position or assessment of the Ukraine War. I probably missed some finer points in Valdai's paper or the way Andrew elaborated his opinions. I suspect there are two major psychological factors at work here and against long-term interest of Russia, albeit mostly or completely out of good intentions.
(1) The Russian people have suffered a lot from the final USSR years through the first decade of Putin's rule. For a bunch of nationalistic forward planners, the Valdai group and Putin cherish this relative peace and prosperity due to a recovery from the bottom. Further progress to go beyond past peak requires huge investment (such as ship-building and factory automation, etc.) But the more conservative thinkers worry that they have not accumulated enough resources to move ahead while carrying the war burden.
(2) People a thousand miles away from the front line tend to think of Ukrainians as fellow Russians with a different dialect. The schism might have been much deeper and never effectively healed since the Stalin era. But such a schism is difficult to comprehend from Moscow. It is likely easier to see from the perspectives of frontline soldiers and people of Donetsk and Lugansk. Either way, now Ukraine is worn thin to the verge of breaking. Europeans are depleted of weapons. Americans have weapons, but not enough to cover two wars (Ukraine and the Middle East), let alone the third one on the horizon. If Russians do not take this opportunity to break through but rather leave room to Ukraine to breathe and recover, the War can go on longer. In other words, it is correct in the first three years of war to move cautiously, preserve manpower, and aggressively attrit the NATO weaponry and Ukrainian manpower. But it is not quite as good a strategy when battleground reality has changed. Breakthrough will require more liberal use of sheer brute force, and hence higher casualties on both sides, including civilians. Lyndon Johnson could barely afford to do so during the Vietnam war. I don't think Russia can really afford doing both at the same time now.
There may be another factor that Putin and Valdai group think the European MIC has peaked and not a real issue. However, if European nations can successfully mobilize their MIC (not total military or economic mobilization), the European nations can produce more weapons. Young men can be drafted not into the army but into MIC factories. But by then Russia can damp such effort by asking its energy customers not to resell Russian energy products. The Gulf countries will increase their production for Europe, but that supply line is also tenuous as long as Houthis are supplied.
Showing a gentleman's etiquette is usually a good thing, but not so when one is fighting off a group of rabid dogs. Conservative approach was right at the beginning, but not at a time when Ukraine is on the brink of break.
When I listen Poutine yesterday or the hallucinating article of Valdaï club I have the impression that Russian "elite" lives in Wonderland where everybody is nice and gentle, where Russia leave in peace and his not surrounded by crazy and desperate dogs which want to tear it in ten.
Either Poutine and those jesters take others for fools either ...
I think it shows Andrew was right in his earlier post that Putin started SMO with a set of fairly limited objectives, and these objectives are within reach now. Even if they understood the Western hostility, they don't plan to do more unless the West forces them to react. I think Putin intends to wrap up this war when he leaves office and retire. The next guy has to finish the job. However, the new guy has to spend a couple of years to consolidate power, then react to another Western provocation after the West has taken a breather.
Three years, probably more than 200 000 Russians killed and 500 000 wounded, and "limited" purposes is even not yet achieved?
And Poutine publicy cuddling the worst and deadly harasser of Russia?
And showing in front of all the world that concerning Palestinian fate, Russia has no more dignity, honor and sens of justice that the worst westerner?
Are you serious?
Poutine just showed that Russia was not better than West.
not true. Russia started SMO with fewer troops (not counting the two independent republics, but probably on par with Ukraine when counting local militia). Russia started the war on peace footing, while Ukraine was on war footing. Ukraine was backed by NATO and initially had many NATO trained troops (if not most of them, as Ukraine started the war using mostly soviet-designed weapons) and NATO commanders, satellite intelligence. Plus Western special forces on the ground. So Russia was not fighting an isolated Ukraine. It takes some casualties to washout incompetent combat leaders (not an attribute easily detected from peacetime operation.) I think NATO folks were counting on a 3-month campaign to drive out the militia from the two independent republics, which was pre-empted by Russia's attack. Ukraine needed a major infusion of weaponry and NATO trainers to prep the troop, before the famed counter-attack, which did not go very far.
Yes, there was no Bagration. So far Russia does not have that kind of manpower as enlarged forces have to split out to deal with Baltics and Finnish fronts. True, these four nations do not pose immediate threats by themselves, but US and NATO main force can move into these nations any time. When counting everything together, Putin is still significantly better than all the political leaders of the "West". Putin is neither Stalin nor Zhukov, but the SMO is not WW2 either, and Russia is not WW2-era USSR.
Those folks are absolutely crazy, dumb. Don't they understand that a deadly foe want Russia's splitting and the most abject submission?
Are they spitting on the corps of the hundreds thousands russian soldiers death and wounded?
Disgusting.
Revolting .
And when you hear the astonishingly weak words of Poutine yesterday, one can think that those deadly jesters and traitors to the russian people are ruling the outing ear.
Is it the true turning point?
Has China said to Poutine" now, it's enough"?
Has russian "elite" said to Poutine " now it's enough"?
Now I'm ok with Finnster, with such presidential briefs in time of war and such articles of Russian (shitty) thinkers, west smell blood and it will encourage the western list deadly actions.
putin's "operation" is the ~5th largest war since WW2, by number of mobilized combatants; Korea, Vietnam, Iran-Iraq then this little dustup, presently with somewhere between 1.1 and 1.3 million active combatants, at least 500K Russian.
Yom Kippur War involved < 1.2 million
Then at ~1-million were India-Pakistan 1971, China-Vietnam 1979, the "Congo Wars" 1996-2003, and Gulf War 1990-1991.
Thank you for your insight into those Russian policy-influencers' insights. I was prevented from entering Russia in April 2023 after having let the visa issuing office at a Consulate that I intended to try and speak at some RT show. Their answer, which arrived over a week later in spite of the harassment I was being subject to by a MOSSAD gang - - of which the Russian diplomats has been informed by me - -, was that 'the Department of Defense in Moscow has decided that you cannot travel to Russia', which sounded funny as I had never discussed security or military issues in public. The problem is the money system and its predicament since Richard A. Werner 'a 2014 revelation in his 'Can banks individually create money out of nothing? The theories and the empirical evidence'. And that global problem of the Western usury system is at the heart of each of the major conflicts, as they are all manufactured under the same guidance and with the same objective, however elusive the latter may prove. Imagine certain degrees of boredom that can only be overcome by taking part in particularly daring adventures... What about conquering world power? The existence of that other group of policy influencers in Russia, explaining as it does the limitations in the limited Ukrainian war, is also consistent with events as the firing of Sergey Glazyev from his post at Putin's economic advisory council. For he had been pointing for over a decade at the policies of the CBR and their conflict with Russia's national interest. The CBR which was reported by the assassinated Stephen Mitford Goodson (see his books on the history of central banking) as controlled by the Rothschilds after the demise of the Soviet Union. The limitation of Russia's aims in Ukraine can also be understood as meaning some sort of understanding with the powers-that-be behind both NATO and the US, an understanding which is consistent with the very soft power stance taken by the BRICS Leaders in their recent Río Declaration, where they talked about reforming and reinforcing the Bretton Woods Institutions, however strange this may ring in the BRICS- led and - defended Global South. Russia's legal system certainly still has principles enabling court action to be taken against usury and fraud, which are both at the heart of the financial system organizing the present state of global threat and management by mass deception and psyops. Read carefully Richard A. Werner, and remember his main discovery (money creation by credit) was made after some desperate prayer, as he eloquently admitted in his 2024 interview to Glenn Beck, available in Youtube. The multipolar world can also be a globalist Plan B where the poles are very few and well connected by the oldest connecting device in its new, hardly understandable, digital forms. Russian freedom-loving lawyers and attorneys are still in time to attack the core of financial power (private lending) if they really want to preserve national sovereignty or, at least, a certain degree of power restraint, at the same time as they would be contributing to limit the little-understood power of zionism. The 'financial artists' referred to by Theodor Herzl have only increased their clout on societies of all latitudes and colors since the end of the 19th century when he wrote. And the digital tools now available, already in their service (as the US GENIUS Act of this year has proven once more) for the Future Money systems devised at the BBC of the BIS, are efficient means to achieve the global power reasonably required to retain certain privileges, the ones that ensure the survival of injustice, material need and the resulting power itself. For it is the powerfu and their absurd power that are threatened by contemporary common sense.
Well, it seems Putin being a suicidal traitor can be considered to be confirmed.
The oligarchs truly still reign supreme in today's Russia, nothing fundamentally changed from the 90s and the sacrifices of the russian people and soldiers have been for nothing.
In this case, if the russian military doesn't put an end to this madness and treason (and Putin up against a wall) they deserve to be destroyed.
The callousness of “Russia would not risk its own socioeconomic stability for a decisive victory in a military conflict" is on par with Marie Antoinette's "let them eat cake"
Russia is conscripting people's kids, and sending them to die not for a meaningful existential struggle, that yields survival and greatness -- but for the political games of its rulers.
People tried to force change (Wagner's rebellion), but the State was too powerful
Now Russia is walking into a broken social contract, treating its own people this way
A broken social contract is safe and effective for the citizenry. Everyone doing their bare minimum. Shirking duties. Stealing. Nobody wants to end up like the poor Wagner guys. Much easier to just put some tires on the wings of strategic bombers and report to bosses that they were protected with all means available (true).
If the government is doing the bare minimum about the war, the people will notice and also do that.
A broken social contract ended the mighty Soviet Union. A broken social contract forced the American ZOG to do a 180 on DEI.
The West noticed this weakness in Russia. This is why fuel shortages are being induced in Russia by bombing refineries. Reminds people that the dweller of the Kremlin is an idiot who started a war based on wishful thinking, leaving the VDV to die on the Kiev airport for nothing. That the meatgrinder is running every day for nothing. The people will feel nauseated and social contract gets torn a bit more every day.
I think team Putin chose wisely. They could have decided to raze Ukraine but then they'd had a had a failed state filled with Nazi's on their border, a perfect playground for western special forces. Alternately, if they took it over, they'd be faced with domestic terrorism similar to Afghanistan. I used to think Putin was just trying to keep a lid on escalation, now I think he simply took the strategically best path forward. Russians cryi g for a more punishing approach to Ukr should really thing harder about the aftermath of that approach.
Putin got involved in Ukraine to assure that Ukraine does not join NATO. It has not nor will Russia allow this to happen. The Bandera gang in Ukraine is the key group that hates Russia. Most ukrainians do not have this feeling. Slowly bur surely Ukraine will eventually join Russia & become the biggest country in the World, richest in mineral and energy resources & 80% of the worlds "BLACK EARTH" Ukrainians say put a shovel in the ground ans it will grow.
The analysts' take is quite interesting, and worth exploring deeper. However, it should be noted that de-dollarisation is quite the "fundamental restructuring of the global order".
Thank for elucidating the current thinking in Russia. I concur with the Valdai club. But what would this mean? A ceasefire by Russia? I don't think Russia should fight to the point where it is forced to start a global nuclear war myself. If the conflict could be frozen with some retreat, that would be good realistically speaking.
“It appears that the era of grand ideas, overarching theories, comprehensive programmes, and great expectations is over…national plans – even the most ambitious – are based on existing opportunities and realistic, accessible means of expanding them; they do not require a fundamental restructuring of the global order.”
Peak energy? Peak population? Over 50% of the world's population living in cities? Or perhaps everyone is just broke. It seems there is increasing recognition that "things ain't what they used to be." ☯
“Russia would not risk its own socioeconomic stability for a decisive victory in a military conflict. One exception is direct full-scale aggression, but the probability of such an action against a nuclear superpower is close to zero…"
Those who watched the speeches in yesterday's Copenhagen EU/UK/NATO leaders meeting, would not come to such a conclusion - the meeting resembled a posse filled with delusional, hysterical leaders demanding blood - Russian blood. Their goal to re-arm in the quickest possible way, financing partly by Russian frozen assets theft, building on the re-entry of Trump into the ultimate defeat of Russia, is an existential threat for Russia - not to be dealt with lightly. The prospect of Zelensky receiving intel and Tomahawk missiles to destroy infrastructure deep into Russia, is a threat of potential nuclear capability. Trump's decision to arm Ukraine with these misseles shows he can not be trusted, just like Merkel and other Western leaders.
Refer also to my substack article: https://leonvermeulen.substack.com/p/a-war-cry-in-copenhagen-a-tomahawk
I had it figured out in 2022 that Russian waffling would lead to this.
The sociopaths who rule the Empire respect only power, and see the Kremlin's hesitations as contemptible weakness.
Don't argue with strawmen.
Hysterical - yes. However, Russian assets don't really matter since - even if you confiscate and sell them, you only incur liabilities. Who from outside the Big West (USA, 5 Eyes, S Korea and Japan) is then going to invest newly in Euroclear-managed securities? I guess Britain and France already quietly confiscated and liquidated the securities that were deposited directly there to fund the previous operations.
So it basically runs down to deficit spending to finance the Ukrainian war. However, there is deficit spending when people from outside buy your additional treasuries, and deficit spending when they don't. Which is now the case - both in the EU and in the USA.
The Valdai speeches were kind of olive branch. Maybe it's going to be taken, maybe not. Just like the Gaza plan from Trump (probably not).
" The Valdai speeches were kind of olive branch "
More like a white flag.
Trump's comments at Valdai about Tomahawks raised a question. He said it was impossible for Ukrainians to operate these missiles themselves, so their use would represent direct conflict between the U.S. and Russia. But isn't it true of other American-supplied weapons the Ukrainians are currently using that they require American personnel to operate them?
It sounds like a red line that's similar to a previous red line that's already been crossed. And Putin also warned about the French stopping ships headed to or from Russia, but there too, it seems like his words offer little deterrent.
Putin's comments were no different in spirit than what he said a year ago, and we all saw how there was no significant retaliatory escalation on Russia's side after that "red line" was crossed.
While it's true that he authorized the first-ever and thus far only use of the Oreshniks in partial response to that, he hasn't used them since and it's unclear whether he'd finally unleash a lot of them in an attempt to finally bring this conflict to a speedy close if the Tomahawks are transferred and used against Russia.
Time and again, with the abovementioned example being the only notable exception, we've observed Putin exercising restraint in the face of increasing provocations clearly aimed at prompting the response that many of his own supporters have wanted for a while.
The Tomahawks are a mirage. And any actual deployment, should America really go for it, is AT LEAST a year away.
(Currently there is no land based Tomahawk platform in mass production.)
The Neocons are just pushing this narrative to stir the pot, and Putin very wisely chose not to take the bait.
Why should Putin beat war drums and make red lines and ultimatums over something that won’t happen in the immediate future.
Who do you think operates those Patriot batteries, those ATACMS and HIMARS?
The West has lost all fear of Russia.
The Tomahawks are a mirage. It’s a talking point that won’t happen.
How are Ukrainians supposed to even fire them? Tomahawks are carried by naval ships and submarines.
I think there is little deterrent at the beginning, and then you are suddenly faced with an SMO.
The policy statement seems like a retcon to me.
I agree completely. If nuclear weapons are the reason we don't have full wars, then why doesn't Russia go shock and awe on the Ukraine? Ukraine doesn't have nuclear weapons and is not under any nuclear shields of another country.
Don't tell me it's out of brotherly love because killing every single Ukrainian male between 25 and 75 years old is not "brotherly love". That's the path taken, wipe out the Ukrainian male population completely.
There seems to be major financial motives here that most writers dance around. They very well explain Russia's choices during this "SMO".
If brotherly love were really the motivator, going Shock And Awe would kill a lot fewer Ukrainians than this piecemeal war of attrition bullshit.
The usual excuse we hear is that attrition is necessary because guerilla war.
Bull.
The one thing every successful insurgency has in common is a young population. The median age in Ukraine was over 40, and that from before the war.
It's just another cope.
Exactly my feline friend.
And going after the elite of the Ukraine would end the war pretty fast too.
Instead, the elite in all the other former Soviet countries have lost all fear of Moscow and it's really starting to show!
The political elite in the Ukraine are right now getting filthy rich and fully expecting to retire to Miami or some other similar location. And Russia is effectively telling them that's fine. Now ask yourself why.
I honestly doubt that money is what is motivating the Kremlin. They could make far more money acting as compadors to the West.
My straight SWAG is that the Russian elites do not make war on the West because they want to join it. "But we're *europeans* we are cultured, we write symphonies, we write plays!" they tell themselves.
Needless to say, that hesitation has the West licking their chops. And no, it's not money that they are after, either. It is power.
You could be right. But keep in mind that the model all these elites follow is that they make their initial fortune in their own county but they turn around and invest it into western, particularly American, businesses. Look at the Saudis buying out EA right now.
They expect to multiply their wealth five or ten times over by putting it into western markets.
They really don't want to be cut off from that opportunity. Look at how the US stock market dominates all other stock markets. Sure it's in a bubble, but there's a lot of people making absolute fortunes on the way up!
The Russian elites already were buying trophies in the West before the war.
And they make more money back home. Western investments are for security and prestige.
Simon Johnson (I think) described the phenomenon well - the compadors too often overpay for western assets, probably because the skills that made them fabulously rich back home don't necessarily translate to another jurisdiction.
For that matter, when I lived in Ukraine, a lot of investment came from Russia. It was a legal system that Russian elites understood, but at the same time, safe from the authorities back home.
" There seems to be major financial motives here that most writers dance around. "
Maybe, but they are minor compared to the overall plan, which you actually addressed.
" killing every single Ukrainian male between 25 and 75 years old "
Russian dead are just icing on the cake.
What is a retcon please
In this context, a new interpretation intended to make excuses.
You often complain that I am repetitive and insifficently positive. The first step towards solving a problem is to be honest with yourself and admit that there is a problem and it's not going to just go away.
At risk of arguing by cliche, when you find you have dug yourself into a hole, you need to stop digging.
I know this song. You speak about keep on digging and you're right but it's not a solution neither to lay in fetal position with thumb in mouth in shouting repeatedly that this hole is to deep.
And it's exclusively what you do since I've been reading you.
I have long said that Russia needs to be decisive and proactive, not "ly in a fetal position".
I am not in the Kremlin, and as far as I know, nobody in the Russia leadership reads my words. So what would you have me do?
Yes but it's a little easy.
What precisely Russia would have done proactively?
I have said it many times here and elsewhere. This is by no means comprehensive, but start with this - that Ukraine has a single bridge left standing anywhere is a testament to Russian indecision. That Ukraine is able to fly any aircraft, that they have any port facilities, any power plants, any railroad engines, etc..
And you still have not answered my question - what would you have me do?
Hella depressing, but the world and its rulers are indifferent at best to my wishes.
It is a phrase derived from US television. In long-running TV series it often became necessary to change the backstory of a character. For example, an evil character may suddenly turn out to be good after all (because the public liked the character more than expected). This might then be explained by him having been blackmailed or something like that. RETroactive CONtinuity.
Russia shouldn’t aim for a 20 year war like the US/Afghanistan debacle. Wars are expensive and even if Russia is making money off this ( they aren’t) the human toll is going to cost Putin or whomever else comes next will have many detractors whether in public or behind closed doors. If this is an olive branch than Putin needs to get on the phone because reading the tea leaves isn’t something the globalists wish to do.
One point on the Poutine's brief yesterday and his disgusting words about Trump's plan in Palestine. Bravo to Andrew who was the only analyst in AMC to say that Russia was Israel friendly and not at all the Palestinian's protector.
When you listen the head of Russia saying that there is no other alternative that Trump's plan( and sanction? Stop trading? Others?) one can scratch the head.
Of course Russia is Israel-friendly. There are not that many Western countries that are Russia-friendly: just Hungary, Slovakia and Israel. Besides, all of them are being ostracized by the EU, whether they are in the EU (Hungary, Slovakia) or not (Israel).
Israel Russian friendly ?
" Earlier, Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated that Ukraine received a Patriot air defense system from Israel a month ago, with two more systems “on the way.”
And?
This is how you build multipolar coalitions based on real give and take. Ever heard of raison d'etat?
Congratulations Darras.
Step 1 is realizing that this person was not who you thought they were. Step 2 is asking yourself, ok then who are they?
I'm not being sarcastic here either. It's hard to separate truth from propaganda in the AMC too.
On the surface, it seems neither the Valdai Club nor Putin has changed their position or assessment of the Ukraine War. I probably missed some finer points in Valdai's paper or the way Andrew elaborated his opinions. I suspect there are two major psychological factors at work here and against long-term interest of Russia, albeit mostly or completely out of good intentions.
(1) The Russian people have suffered a lot from the final USSR years through the first decade of Putin's rule. For a bunch of nationalistic forward planners, the Valdai group and Putin cherish this relative peace and prosperity due to a recovery from the bottom. Further progress to go beyond past peak requires huge investment (such as ship-building and factory automation, etc.) But the more conservative thinkers worry that they have not accumulated enough resources to move ahead while carrying the war burden.
(2) People a thousand miles away from the front line tend to think of Ukrainians as fellow Russians with a different dialect. The schism might have been much deeper and never effectively healed since the Stalin era. But such a schism is difficult to comprehend from Moscow. It is likely easier to see from the perspectives of frontline soldiers and people of Donetsk and Lugansk. Either way, now Ukraine is worn thin to the verge of breaking. Europeans are depleted of weapons. Americans have weapons, but not enough to cover two wars (Ukraine and the Middle East), let alone the third one on the horizon. If Russians do not take this opportunity to break through but rather leave room to Ukraine to breathe and recover, the War can go on longer. In other words, it is correct in the first three years of war to move cautiously, preserve manpower, and aggressively attrit the NATO weaponry and Ukrainian manpower. But it is not quite as good a strategy when battleground reality has changed. Breakthrough will require more liberal use of sheer brute force, and hence higher casualties on both sides, including civilians. Lyndon Johnson could barely afford to do so during the Vietnam war. I don't think Russia can really afford doing both at the same time now.
There may be another factor that Putin and Valdai group think the European MIC has peaked and not a real issue. However, if European nations can successfully mobilize their MIC (not total military or economic mobilization), the European nations can produce more weapons. Young men can be drafted not into the army but into MIC factories. But by then Russia can damp such effort by asking its energy customers not to resell Russian energy products. The Gulf countries will increase their production for Europe, but that supply line is also tenuous as long as Houthis are supplied.
Showing a gentleman's etiquette is usually a good thing, but not so when one is fighting off a group of rabid dogs. Conservative approach was right at the beginning, but not at a time when Ukraine is on the brink of break.
Poutine changed his words.
Don't you remember?
" We have our back against the wall".
"We can't move back more"
When I listen Poutine yesterday or the hallucinating article of Valdaï club I have the impression that Russian "elite" lives in Wonderland where everybody is nice and gentle, where Russia leave in peace and his not surrounded by crazy and desperate dogs which want to tear it in ten.
Either Poutine and those jesters take others for fools either ...
I think it shows Andrew was right in his earlier post that Putin started SMO with a set of fairly limited objectives, and these objectives are within reach now. Even if they understood the Western hostility, they don't plan to do more unless the West forces them to react. I think Putin intends to wrap up this war when he leaves office and retire. The next guy has to finish the job. However, the new guy has to spend a couple of years to consolidate power, then react to another Western provocation after the West has taken a breather.
Three years, probably more than 200 000 Russians killed and 500 000 wounded, and "limited" purposes is even not yet achieved?
And Poutine publicy cuddling the worst and deadly harasser of Russia?
And showing in front of all the world that concerning Palestinian fate, Russia has no more dignity, honor and sens of justice that the worst westerner?
Are you serious?
Poutine just showed that Russia was not better than West.
not true. Russia started SMO with fewer troops (not counting the two independent republics, but probably on par with Ukraine when counting local militia). Russia started the war on peace footing, while Ukraine was on war footing. Ukraine was backed by NATO and initially had many NATO trained troops (if not most of them, as Ukraine started the war using mostly soviet-designed weapons) and NATO commanders, satellite intelligence. Plus Western special forces on the ground. So Russia was not fighting an isolated Ukraine. It takes some casualties to washout incompetent combat leaders (not an attribute easily detected from peacetime operation.) I think NATO folks were counting on a 3-month campaign to drive out the militia from the two independent republics, which was pre-empted by Russia's attack. Ukraine needed a major infusion of weaponry and NATO trainers to prep the troop, before the famed counter-attack, which did not go very far.
Yes, there was no Bagration. So far Russia does not have that kind of manpower as enlarged forces have to split out to deal with Baltics and Finnish fronts. True, these four nations do not pose immediate threats by themselves, but US and NATO main force can move into these nations any time. When counting everything together, Putin is still significantly better than all the political leaders of the "West". Putin is neither Stalin nor Zhukov, but the SMO is not WW2 either, and Russia is not WW2-era USSR.
My friend, when you throw a glove in a face, you know how it begins but no how it ends .
In entering Ukraine, Russia threw it's glove in NATO face.
If Russia is not able to escalate, it should had better stay quiet and don't send hundreds thousands Russian to death for nothing.
Very good point. I think Putin and other Russian leaders knew that. Given the circumstances, I still think they have done all right.
Those folks are absolutely crazy, dumb. Don't they understand that a deadly foe want Russia's splitting and the most abject submission?
Are they spitting on the corps of the hundreds thousands russian soldiers death and wounded?
Disgusting.
Revolting .
And when you hear the astonishingly weak words of Poutine yesterday, one can think that those deadly jesters and traitors to the russian people are ruling the outing ear.
Is it the true turning point?
Has China said to Poutine" now, it's enough"?
Has russian "elite" said to Poutine " now it's enough"?
Abject
The elites who rule the West respect only power. Russian corpses are to them a bonus, not a tragedy.
To them, Western corpses are also a bonus, provided it's not their near ones.
Now I'm ok with Finnster, with such presidential briefs in time of war and such articles of Russian (shitty) thinkers, west smell blood and it will encourage the western list deadly actions.
Unbelievable.
I had it figured out in 2022, and have been called all sorts of names for it ever since, but developments have only proven me correct.
And believe me, I'd love to be wrong.
Is Poutine preparing an agreement with will very look liked a surrender?
Why having launched this war and destroy so much Russian lives for that?
The 90's and Elstine times were not enough for them?
Can't they see that after this war, it will be hugely worse.
Russia is desperately trying to avoid war. This causes the West to smell blood, europeans like dogs baiting a bear.
> Russia is desperately trying to avoid war
Russia _started_ the war. They literally sent tanks over the border.
Hell, the United States has invaded countries for less.
However, no nation ever sanctioned the US for it. Nor would they dare.
Oh sure. Geopolitics now is not Good vs Evil. It's Dumb and Dumber.
putin's "operation" is the ~5th largest war since WW2, by number of mobilized combatants; Korea, Vietnam, Iran-Iraq then this little dustup, presently with somewhere between 1.1 and 1.3 million active combatants, at least 500K Russian.
Yom Kippur War involved < 1.2 million
Then at ~1-million were India-Pakistan 1971, China-Vietnam 1979, the "Congo Wars" 1996-2003, and Gulf War 1990-1991.
Ok and?
And your contention was preposterous - "Russia is desperately trying to avoid war."
putin's desperately trying to avoid a massive mobilization. That's all.
Thank you for your insight into those Russian policy-influencers' insights. I was prevented from entering Russia in April 2023 after having let the visa issuing office at a Consulate that I intended to try and speak at some RT show. Their answer, which arrived over a week later in spite of the harassment I was being subject to by a MOSSAD gang - - of which the Russian diplomats has been informed by me - -, was that 'the Department of Defense in Moscow has decided that you cannot travel to Russia', which sounded funny as I had never discussed security or military issues in public. The problem is the money system and its predicament since Richard A. Werner 'a 2014 revelation in his 'Can banks individually create money out of nothing? The theories and the empirical evidence'. And that global problem of the Western usury system is at the heart of each of the major conflicts, as they are all manufactured under the same guidance and with the same objective, however elusive the latter may prove. Imagine certain degrees of boredom that can only be overcome by taking part in particularly daring adventures... What about conquering world power? The existence of that other group of policy influencers in Russia, explaining as it does the limitations in the limited Ukrainian war, is also consistent with events as the firing of Sergey Glazyev from his post at Putin's economic advisory council. For he had been pointing for over a decade at the policies of the CBR and their conflict with Russia's national interest. The CBR which was reported by the assassinated Stephen Mitford Goodson (see his books on the history of central banking) as controlled by the Rothschilds after the demise of the Soviet Union. The limitation of Russia's aims in Ukraine can also be understood as meaning some sort of understanding with the powers-that-be behind both NATO and the US, an understanding which is consistent with the very soft power stance taken by the BRICS Leaders in their recent Río Declaration, where they talked about reforming and reinforcing the Bretton Woods Institutions, however strange this may ring in the BRICS- led and - defended Global South. Russia's legal system certainly still has principles enabling court action to be taken against usury and fraud, which are both at the heart of the financial system organizing the present state of global threat and management by mass deception and psyops. Read carefully Richard A. Werner, and remember his main discovery (money creation by credit) was made after some desperate prayer, as he eloquently admitted in his 2024 interview to Glenn Beck, available in Youtube. The multipolar world can also be a globalist Plan B where the poles are very few and well connected by the oldest connecting device in its new, hardly understandable, digital forms. Russian freedom-loving lawyers and attorneys are still in time to attack the core of financial power (private lending) if they really want to preserve national sovereignty or, at least, a certain degree of power restraint, at the same time as they would be contributing to limit the little-understood power of zionism. The 'financial artists' referred to by Theodor Herzl have only increased their clout on societies of all latitudes and colors since the end of the 19th century when he wrote. And the digital tools now available, already in their service (as the US GENIUS Act of this year has proven once more) for the Future Money systems devised at the BBC of the BIS, are efficient means to achieve the global power reasonably required to retain certain privileges, the ones that ensure the survival of injustice, material need and the resulting power itself. For it is the powerfu and their absurd power that are threatened by contemporary common sense.
Well, it seems Putin being a suicidal traitor can be considered to be confirmed.
The oligarchs truly still reign supreme in today's Russia, nothing fundamentally changed from the 90s and the sacrifices of the russian people and soldiers have been for nothing.
In this case, if the russian military doesn't put an end to this madness and treason (and Putin up against a wall) they deserve to be destroyed.
The callousness of “Russia would not risk its own socioeconomic stability for a decisive victory in a military conflict" is on par with Marie Antoinette's "let them eat cake"
Russia is conscripting people's kids, and sending them to die not for a meaningful existential struggle, that yields survival and greatness -- but for the political games of its rulers.
People tried to force change (Wagner's rebellion), but the State was too powerful
Now Russia is walking into a broken social contract, treating its own people this way
A broken social contract is safe and effective for the citizenry. Everyone doing their bare minimum. Shirking duties. Stealing. Nobody wants to end up like the poor Wagner guys. Much easier to just put some tires on the wings of strategic bombers and report to bosses that they were protected with all means available (true).
If the government is doing the bare minimum about the war, the people will notice and also do that.
A broken social contract ended the mighty Soviet Union. A broken social contract forced the American ZOG to do a 180 on DEI.
The West noticed this weakness in Russia. This is why fuel shortages are being induced in Russia by bombing refineries. Reminds people that the dweller of the Kremlin is an idiot who started a war based on wishful thinking, leaving the VDV to die on the Kiev airport for nothing. That the meatgrinder is running every day for nothing. The people will feel nauseated and social contract gets torn a bit more every day.
I think team Putin chose wisely. They could have decided to raze Ukraine but then they'd had a had a failed state filled with Nazi's on their border, a perfect playground for western special forces. Alternately, if they took it over, they'd be faced with domestic terrorism similar to Afghanistan. I used to think Putin was just trying to keep a lid on escalation, now I think he simply took the strategically best path forward. Russians cryi g for a more punishing approach to Ukr should really thing harder about the aftermath of that approach.
" a perfect playground for western special forces. "
There are no special forces there now ? No mercenaries ? No western volunteers ?
> then they'd had a had a failed state filled with Nazi's on their border
And what do they have now?
A non-failed state whose leaders can be held accountable for the vast number of people who are now dead.
Putin got involved in Ukraine to assure that Ukraine does not join NATO. It has not nor will Russia allow this to happen. The Bandera gang in Ukraine is the key group that hates Russia. Most ukrainians do not have this feeling. Slowly bur surely Ukraine will eventually join Russia & become the biggest country in the World, richest in mineral and energy resources & 80% of the worlds "BLACK EARTH" Ukrainians say put a shovel in the ground ans it will grow.
> Putin got involved in Ukraine to assure that Ukraine does not join NATO
Putin starting the war ensured instead that NATO joined Ukraine...
The analysts' take is quite interesting, and worth exploring deeper. However, it should be noted that de-dollarisation is quite the "fundamental restructuring of the global order".
The armies are slowly shrinking due to demographic collapse. No nation has a million farmhands to throw into battle.
The nature of war clearly has to change, as the possible outcomes become more difficult to achieve.
Thank for elucidating the current thinking in Russia. I concur with the Valdai club. But what would this mean? A ceasefire by Russia? I don't think Russia should fight to the point where it is forced to start a global nuclear war myself. If the conflict could be frozen with some retreat, that would be good realistically speaking.
Ok, you can remove your false nose. 😂
“It appears that the era of grand ideas, overarching theories, comprehensive programmes, and great expectations is over…national plans – even the most ambitious – are based on existing opportunities and realistic, accessible means of expanding them; they do not require a fundamental restructuring of the global order.”
Peak energy? Peak population? Over 50% of the world's population living in cities? Or perhaps everyone is just broke. It seems there is increasing recognition that "things ain't what they used to be." ☯