President Putin knew that they’d reject the terms of his ceasefire proposal but he still publicly shared them in order to place the responsibility for this summer’s predictable escalation on their shoulders.
Excellent, Andrew. But there is one other thing to be considered. Many economists, and even the CEO of Chase Manhattan Bank, Jamie Dimon, are predicting an imminent collapse of the US economy. With a 34 Trillion dollar debt rising rapidly, inflation, record high personal debt, an infrastructure that is collapsing, a deplorable educational system, and deep divisions politically and culturally across the US, the present US trajectory is not sustainable. My hope is that this scenario happens and none too soon. The US simply will not be able to maintain 800 military bases in some 80 countries, massive fleets in all the oceans, and the enormous price of continuing the war in Ukraine.
I no longer take such predictions seriously after reading hundreds of them over the past decade yet not a single one ever came to fruition.
I'm not denying that the US has very serious structural weaknesses, but it nevertheless still seems to maintain its economic stability in spite of them.
I therefore don't expect any imminent collapse of the US economy and thus don't incorporate it into my analyses of this proxy war.
Thank you for great post, Andrew. I agree that it would be too politically damaging for Kiev and especially the West. While it may be tempting to sign another Minsk Agreement which would allow Ukraine to rearm and resupply under such an agreement, it would come with the recognition of the current contact line and the division of Ukraine. Accepting the loss of territories and pulling out of two major cities recognized by Russia as their territory, while technically still under Ukrainian rule, would be an admission of defeat. Even mainstream media would find it challenging to paint it as a victory.
This is precisely why Putin offered this deal. It’s designed to be rejected, but on the record, it shows that goodwill is on Russia’s side.
I don’t aim to sound like a Putin groopie but he is the premier leader of the world so fuck it.
This is a brilliant move. Let the West save face and end the conflict. That’s the smartest move one like him can make if you one who sees the big picture. Time is not on the Empire’s side. Best to keep those elite on a relaxed schedule. You don’t want them panicking. Let them slowly absorb what is happening to their Empire.
The goal was to kill both UKR and Russians so the Empire could absorb and exploit it (see Lindsey G). Sanctions should do nicely. China would have inevitably bent the knee. And these all knowing elites don’t loose much so their Plan B usually sucks.
Am sorry, most likely the West won’t capitulate anyhow. I would call this probing/phishing. If they go after the offer Putin can always reneg. It’s not like we haven’t 😉
Good article! I've learned a lot from Covid and the Russia-Ukraine conflict. First, is how propagandized America is and how our intelligence agencies are completely embedded in, and completely control, the MSM and Social Media narrative through disinformation and censorship. Second, the anti-war Left aren't really anti-war, they're just anti-capitalism and anti-American. If America goes after a rogue country that is completely autocratic, hates America, trying to harm the US in any way possible, the Marxist Left are up in arms and violently protest it. But go after a country that is Christian, is not "woke" (i.e. supports what used to be Western values), that practices at least some form of capitalism (not perfect, but far from Marxism), and actually tried to befriend America, the Left loves it and wants to break out the nukes. Third, Neocons are not conservative. They never were. They started out as far-Left, anti-Stalinists (farther Left than even Stalin) and have morphed into a kind of Leftist, anti-Russian, socialist imperialism, not unlike Nazi ideology. Fourth, I now understand why the one thing Eisenhower, a WWII hero general and popular two-term US President, chose to address during his farewell speech was to warn us about the evils of the military-industrial complex.
They will definitely use tactical or any other nukes if a conventional NATO intervention in Ukraine poses a significant threat to its security in line with Russia's nuclear doctrine, which could occur if it sends a large invasion force across the Dnieper towards Russia's new regions.
Russia has regularly reaffirmed the relevance of its nuclear doctrine in order to signal how serious it is about resorting to such weapons as a last resort in self-defense if need be, it's not kabuki theater or some "5D chess master plan" like you seem to be implying by doubting it.
I disagree with you on this. If Russia did use nukes, on what would it use them? Ukrainian cities? Just on NATO troops (which would undoubtedly be using Ukrainian cities as staging areas)? Russia doesn't want to destroy Ukrainian cities like Kiev, which Putin views as the cradle of Russian civilization and culture. That is is why Putin has shown such infuriating restraint in his attacks on "enemy" population centers. However, I have no doubt that Zelensky (and eventually his NATO handlers) would use tactical nukes on Russian forces, and they might even deliberately set off a nuke or two inside Kiev and other Ukrainian cities to deny them to Russia. After all, the marginalization and destruction of Russian culture and history IS one of the West's goals.
First rate analysis by Mr. Korybko. One perhaps not so minor note is that a lot of us were rather surprised by Putin's offer. We might have forgotten that in the wake of realization that it was a very good strategic move. That a very good strategic move comes unanticipated is an indication that the player who made the move is maybe a stronger player than one initially thought.
In the 1980s the peace movement found a way to circumvent the war party.. The Nuclear Freeze project was launched and their success is documented in this book (2021) by historian Henry Maar:
Even war hawk Ronald Reagan became a convert. As Maar shows us, The key tactic is direct democracy at the municipal and state levels, with non-binding "advisory referenda" as the primary tactic. The Houston-based ForeignPolicyAliance.org has embraced this playbook....See our Take Action page.
Excellent, Andrew. But there is one other thing to be considered. Many economists, and even the CEO of Chase Manhattan Bank, Jamie Dimon, are predicting an imminent collapse of the US economy. With a 34 Trillion dollar debt rising rapidly, inflation, record high personal debt, an infrastructure that is collapsing, a deplorable educational system, and deep divisions politically and culturally across the US, the present US trajectory is not sustainable. My hope is that this scenario happens and none too soon. The US simply will not be able to maintain 800 military bases in some 80 countries, massive fleets in all the oceans, and the enormous price of continuing the war in Ukraine.
I no longer take such predictions seriously after reading hundreds of them over the past decade yet not a single one ever came to fruition.
I'm not denying that the US has very serious structural weaknesses, but it nevertheless still seems to maintain its economic stability in spite of them.
I therefore don't expect any imminent collapse of the US economy and thus don't incorporate it into my analyses of this proxy war.
Thank you for great post, Andrew. I agree that it would be too politically damaging for Kiev and especially the West. While it may be tempting to sign another Minsk Agreement which would allow Ukraine to rearm and resupply under such an agreement, it would come with the recognition of the current contact line and the division of Ukraine. Accepting the loss of territories and pulling out of two major cities recognized by Russia as their territory, while technically still under Ukrainian rule, would be an admission of defeat. Even mainstream media would find it challenging to paint it as a victory.
This is precisely why Putin offered this deal. It’s designed to be rejected, but on the record, it shows that goodwill is on Russia’s side.
this has put the spotlight on NATO/USA
I don’t aim to sound like a Putin groopie but he is the premier leader of the world so fuck it.
This is a brilliant move. Let the West save face and end the conflict. That’s the smartest move one like him can make if you one who sees the big picture. Time is not on the Empire’s side. Best to keep those elite on a relaxed schedule. You don’t want them panicking. Let them slowly absorb what is happening to their Empire.
The goal was to kill both UKR and Russians so the Empire could absorb and exploit it (see Lindsey G). Sanctions should do nicely. China would have inevitably bent the knee. And these all knowing elites don’t loose much so their Plan B usually sucks.
Am sorry, most likely the West won’t capitulate anyhow. I would call this probing/phishing. If they go after the offer Putin can always reneg. It’s not like we haven’t 😉
not bad, but loses sight of the dollar destruction angle, which is the key to all this, and how it happened in the first place
Good article! I've learned a lot from Covid and the Russia-Ukraine conflict. First, is how propagandized America is and how our intelligence agencies are completely embedded in, and completely control, the MSM and Social Media narrative through disinformation and censorship. Second, the anti-war Left aren't really anti-war, they're just anti-capitalism and anti-American. If America goes after a rogue country that is completely autocratic, hates America, trying to harm the US in any way possible, the Marxist Left are up in arms and violently protest it. But go after a country that is Christian, is not "woke" (i.e. supports what used to be Western values), that practices at least some form of capitalism (not perfect, but far from Marxism), and actually tried to befriend America, the Left loves it and wants to break out the nukes. Third, Neocons are not conservative. They never were. They started out as far-Left, anti-Stalinists (farther Left than even Stalin) and have morphed into a kind of Leftist, anti-Russian, socialist imperialism, not unlike Nazi ideology. Fourth, I now understand why the one thing Eisenhower, a WWII hero general and popular two-term US President, chose to address during his farewell speech was to warn us about the evils of the military-industrial complex.
Russia will not use 'tactical' or any other nukes first
They will definitely use tactical or any other nukes if a conventional NATO intervention in Ukraine poses a significant threat to its security in line with Russia's nuclear doctrine, which could occur if it sends a large invasion force across the Dnieper towards Russia's new regions.
Russia has regularly reaffirmed the relevance of its nuclear doctrine in order to signal how serious it is about resorting to such weapons as a last resort in self-defense if need be, it's not kabuki theater or some "5D chess master plan" like you seem to be implying by doubting it.
I disagree with you on this. If Russia did use nukes, on what would it use them? Ukrainian cities? Just on NATO troops (which would undoubtedly be using Ukrainian cities as staging areas)? Russia doesn't want to destroy Ukrainian cities like Kiev, which Putin views as the cradle of Russian civilization and culture. That is is why Putin has shown such infuriating restraint in his attacks on "enemy" population centers. However, I have no doubt that Zelensky (and eventually his NATO handlers) would use tactical nukes on Russian forces, and they might even deliberately set off a nuke or two inside Kiev and other Ukrainian cities to deny them to Russia. After all, the marginalization and destruction of Russian culture and history IS one of the West's goals.
NATO weapons have already disabled part of the Russian nuclear warning system, yet Putin has not reacted.
If suspected burglars disabled my security alarms I would assume my property was about to be broken into.....
If/when F-16s are used to attack Russian territory there might be an update on Russia's 'no first use' policy, but the West will be warned
First rate analysis by Mr. Korybko. One perhaps not so minor note is that a lot of us were rather surprised by Putin's offer. We might have forgotten that in the wake of realization that it was a very good strategic move. That a very good strategic move comes unanticipated is an indication that the player who made the move is maybe a stronger player than one initially thought.
Very good, but misses the key element which is the dollar
I think it was you who pointed out that Russia has gone all high tech invasive monitoring systems.. 🤷♀️
&/or we need an event for them to roll out all the new AI Security (think neo-biological patriot act).
I just learned about Neo-biology.. & that’s the GLOBAL way forward
They all lost their minds .. the $$ is over & they taking us to war .. that’s all folks
In the 1980s the peace movement found a way to circumvent the war party.. The Nuclear Freeze project was launched and their success is documented in this book (2021) by historian Henry Maar:
"FREEZE! The Grassroots Movement to Halt the Arms Race and End the Cold War" ... https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9781501760884/freeze/#bookTabs=1
Even war hawk Ronald Reagan became a convert. As Maar shows us, The key tactic is direct democracy at the municipal and state levels, with non-binding "advisory referenda" as the primary tactic. The Houston-based ForeignPolicyAliance.org has embraced this playbook....See our Take Action page.
Thx. I’ll read it
JP.... I have experience with direct democracy at the city level.
Let me know if you want details...barrybusybee3@gmail.com
See: Barry Klein: Property Rights Protector
Klein says he “guides activists of all stripes on how to use direct democracy … to bring political reform at the city level.”
https://texasscorecard.com/citizen-profiles/barry-klein-property-rights-protector/
We have friends from Geneva
It's a smallish world!