8 Comments
Aug 12Liked by Andrew Korybko

As ever, a helpful and perceptive account. Thank you,

Expand full comment
author

You're welcome!

Expand full comment
Aug 12·edited Aug 12Liked by Andrew Korybko

Great piece. Thank you! There's one reference I don't understand. Does "Ukraine's Samson Option" imply that the West/NATO has given Ukraine nuclear weapons?

Expand full comment
author

No, what I meant to convey was that Ukraine could try to take everyone down with it by provoking a hot NATO-Russian war through attacks against Belarus, Moldova, and Russia's pre-2014 territory at the same time if it's convinced that it'll inevitably lose the conflict.

Expand full comment
author

If NATO approaches the brink of a hot war with Russia, however, then nuclear weapons could be used in the worst-case scenario.

Expand full comment

Understand. Since the "Samson Option" is Israeli Nuclear Doctrine, I was not sure if I'd missed the latest escalatory insanity. Thanks. Enjoy your reporting!!!

Expand full comment

I imagine the most likely reason for the Belarus deployment of forces to the border would be an attempt, at the request of Russia, to pose a potential threat to Ukraine further west--essentially a feint--in order to fix Ukrainian forces on their side of the border and strategic reserves in place and minimize the number of additional Ukrainian troops that could be committed into the Kursk fight.

The Ukrainian drone ISR over Belarus was probably meant to assess what kind of threat might be developing from that direction in the context of the Ukrainian commitment of limited reserves towards Kursk.

Expand full comment

What is the need for hit piece against yermak by USA as if it is some kind of neutral high judge?

Expand full comment