Professor John Mearsheimer is the man who predicted the Ukraine crisis. In a new, must-watch video discussion with the American Committee for U.S.-Russia Accord, he explains why the West’s current strategy is so dangerous.
Mearsheimer begins by noting that “what we have here is a war between the United States and Russia”. Wait, isn’t this a war between Ukraine and Russia? Yes it is, insofar as all the combatants are from those two countries (aside from a few mercenaries and foreign volunteers).
But just because there aren’t U.S. troops on the ground, doesn’t mean that country isn’t deeply involved in the conflict – to the extent that one can speak of a ‘proxy war’ between the U.S. and Russia. The argument is laid out in these two articles by the journalist Aaron Maté, who says “the U.S. provoked Putin’s war”.
Both of Maté’s articles are worth reading in full, but here are some of the most relevant facts:
• Prior to the 2014 Western-backed coup, a phone call was leaked in which two U.S. officials (Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt) explicitly discuss whom they’re going to install in the next Ukrainian Government.
• In 2017, Senator Lindsay Graham told a group of Ukrainian soldiers, “Your fight is our fight. 2017 will be the year of offence.” Likewise, Senator John McCain said, “We are with you, your fight is our fight and we will win together.”
• In 2019, the RAND Corporation examined options that the U.S. could pursue to “overextend and unbalance” Russia’s economy and armed forces. It concluded that “Providing lethal aid to Ukraine” would yield high benefits by exploiting “Russia’s greatest point of external vulnerability”.
• In January of 2020, the Congressman Adam Schiff openly stated, “The United States aids Ukraine and her people so that we can fight Russia over there, and we don’t have to fight Russia here.”
• In February of 2022, Zelensky’s former National Security Advisor revealed to Time magazine that Zelensky’s decision in February of last year to shut down three pro-Russian TV stations was “calculated to fit in with the U.S. agenda”.
• In addition to sending billions of dollars of military aid to Ukraine, the U.S. spent years training the country’s armed forces, and has been providing ‘real time’ battlefield intelligence since the conflict began.
Returning to John Mearsheimer’s comments, he says the war in Ukraine is “the most dangerous crisis since the Second World War” and is actually “more dangerous than the Cuban crisis” owing to the risk of nuclear escalation. But why is there a genuine risk of nuclear escalation?
The reason is that Putin and many Russians perceive NATO expansion into Ukraine as an “existential threat” to Russia. Many Western commentators dispute that the expansion is such an existential threat. But what they think is “irrelevant”, says Mearsheimer, because “the only thing that matters is what Putin and his fellow Russians think”.
From Putin’s point of view, therefore, “he cannot lose”. In other words, losing the war is simply not an option. Meanwhile, the U.S. and its NATO allies are banking on a total Russian defeat, up to and including regime change. They have decided, “we have to win”.
And when two nuclear-armed powers each decide that losing is not an option, the risk of nuclear escalation rises considerably. Note: even if the risk of nuclear escalation is only, say, 10%, that’s still a disturbingly high chance of such a catastrophic outcome.
Shouldn’t we be doing what we can to reach a compromise, even if that involves concessions to Russia like recognising Crimea and ruling out NATO membership for Ukraine? Simply waiting for Russia to lose, and hoping there’s no a nuclear war, doesn’t seem like a very good strategy.
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Good article- we need more like this to get the truth across!
bullshit story.
first define “russia losing”.
as long as there are no ukrainian troops marching for moscow russia is not losing.
putin can withdraw all the troops within a day and in doing so stop the war.
but as long as he sees chances of winning the war he will not do so.
and sending western weapons and support to ukraine makes it that his chances of winning are getting slimmer by the day.
every russian tank destroyed in ukraine will not be there when putin invades the next victim…..
It’s just as ‘dangerous’ as it needs to be.
Mearsheimer is an apologist for Russia and it seems Marxism
Based on !!
If it’s true that the Zelensky government is an illegitimate puppet regime, why did the Ukrainian people overwhelmingly vote for him in 2019 (in a proper election, not a Russia-type election)?
The Russian invasion simply demonstrates how correct Zelensky was to want to join NATO. If Ukraine has done so prior to the invasion, Putin would never have dared invade. Ukraine would be at peace, not a single one of those poor people dead, not a single building destroyed, every town and city beautiful and intact.
All those poor people would still be alive, going about their normal daily business.
So there’s a list of the West’s evil machinations, but no list of the aggressive actions, the invasions and assassinations by Putin’s Russia over the years?
The omission of such vital contextual material means Noah has written yet another flawed and biased article. Why? Because he is apparently infected by the same cultural self-loathing that drives the liberal left in the West. If there’s a problem, be it racism, climate change or the war in Ukraine, it MUST be our fault!
A good series of extracts from various discussions of Russia’s intentions and motivations, from Bernhard at MoonofAlabama:
The Reasons For And Dangers Behind The War In Ukraine
…
Sergey Karaganov is a high level Russian political scientist and commentator who is also a presidential advisor in Moscow. He was interviewed (in English) by the Italian Corriere Della Sera:
“since that time [2008] Ukraine has been integrated into NATO. It was pumped up by weaponry and its troops were trained by NATO, their army getting stronger and stronger day by day. In addition we saw a very rapid increase of neo-Nazi sentiment especially among the military, the society and the ruling elite. It was clear that Ukraine had become something like Germany around 1936-1937. The war was inevitable, they were a spearhead of NATO. We made the very hard decision to strike first, before the threat becomes deadlier”
…
It was clear that Ukraine had become something like Germany around 1936-1937,” said Karaganov. The ‘western’ public has difficulties to understand that. But it is the prevailing Russian view and when analyzing the developments in the Ukraine over the last years with Russian history in mind one can easily come to the same conclusion.
… Read more »
Ritter is right. The Russians didn’t go into Ukraine thinking they could lose a war against a fourth rate military power with limited budget and no backup.
Amongst all the negotiations over the years about the country, Russia has been planning this invasion down to the nth degree.
So what happens ultimately?
Russia is somehow defeated in Ukraine, slinks back home and in retaliation reduces western Europe to a wasteland, within weeks, by switching off their gas.
Expensive for Russia, but a damn site more expensive for western Europe which can’t afford for Russia to be defeated.
Few in the west barely knew where Ukraine was, far less cared. So much so that whilst wailing about ethnic cleansing across the world, not a peep from them about the Donbass. Why might that be? Because it was Russian’s who were being murdered and politically, the Russians must remain the bogey man.
The danger sign for the past eight years has been that the US and its satellites refused to recognise the results of the thoroughly legitimate referendums in Luhansk (96% pro independence) and Donetsk (89%), both with a 75% turnout, and instead they turned a blind eye (to put it mildly) to the neo-Nazi forces who have been fighting against those republics, neo-Nazis who are no longer paramilitary because they are part of the Ukrainian army. Said forces are now highly battle-hardened. Meanwhile in the Crimea 97% voted to rejoin the Russian Federation, on an 83% turnout, but the western position on the Crimea (“occupied by Russia”) is mostly propagandistic icing on the cake, aimed at idiots in their home audiences who can’t be a*sed to find out a single thing about that part of the world, rather than translating to legitimising one side in a war there that isn’t being fought.
That the US rulers want escalation is clear from what their NATO mouthpiece has been saying and doing…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbr3CiOhTO8
“Russia has been in a near constant state of war or military expansionism since the 1500s. “
The US Has Been at war 225 out of 243 years since 1776.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/595752-the-us-has-been-at-war-225-out-of-243-years-since-1776
Dishonest or moronic.
He basically creates a fantasy about what he declares the Russians “require”, escalating from the Russians saying “no NATO forces positioned in” to “de facto Russian control of”.
In fact the Russians have been quite prepared to tolerate plenty of NATO presence, without liking it but without causing trouble over it for years. As Mearsheimer points out, they swallowed essentially all of first three waves of NATO expansion, but balked at Ukraine and Georgia.
He also openly lies, talking about “civilian obliteration program” and “reducing cities to rubble”, when only nazi occupied Mariupol has even been assaulted so far, the rest either peacefully occupied or bypassed.
Embarrassing stuff!
Oh please, find some professional news channel to watch, this is ridiculous
Get lost troll.
You have a situation where in physical terms, those wishing for war are those who are the least well-built for combat. What does that tell you? Perhaps you should look into the idea of egregores. They never teach us about occultism.
Dear Professor Mearsheimer, can you please either hide in your basement in case these children’s scare stories scare you or stop retelling them because they’re not scaring anyone else and the moral bankruptcy of believing Ukraine is one of your toys you can barter away (or not) at your chosing is very annoying. After a statement which basically parses as Reality is irrelevant, only what I tell you about what Putin must be believing matters! further statements of opinion from you about any particular topic are not being requested.
We’ve really had enough of this childish propaganda during the so-called Corona pandemic. It doesn’t get any better when employed by other parties.
All politicians who get into power want to impose their views on others, some for the good of all but mostly for the good of themselves, and press to expand their influence into other countries, through diplomacy, bribery, financial takeover or conflict. Countries are tribal. Most borders reflect the result of war between tribes. That the USA and Russia manoeuvred to influence Ukraine is hardly unexpected. That NATO had any designs on Russia is laughable; their only crime was to be a defensive alliance that stood in the way of Putin’s ambitions to forge a new empire.
Putin had a chip on his shoulder over the collapse of the USSR and has had for decades worked to reform a Russian empire. He has used all means, fair and foul, to take over Ukraine, this invasion being a final throw of the dice.
Responsibility for the invasion and the horrors of Russian occupation lies with Putin alone. He was aided and abetted by a naive Europe, particularly Germany, who fooled themselves into thinking that international trade would bind him into playing by their rules. There is no easy solution and the fallout will last for decades.
China’s laughing all the… Read more »
It makes no sense whatsoever that the largest country in the world would want a few acres of Ukrainian land to somehow expand it empire.
Utter nonsense.
Primary school analysis
Zelensky Says Unnamed Leader of EU Member State Asked for Proof Bucha Wasn’t Staged
https://dailystormer.cn/zelensky-says-unnamed-leader-of-eu-member-state-asked-for-proof-bucha-wasnt-staged/
Andrew Anglin
Stand by the road for freedom with our Yellow Boards next events
Tuesday 12th April 5.30pm to 6.30pm
Yellow Boards
Junction Broad Lane/
A3095 Bagshot Lane
Bracknell RG12 9NW
Thursday 14th April 3pm to 4pm
Yellow Boards
Junction A329 Reading Rd
& Station Approach
Wokingham RG41 1EH
Stand in the Park Sundays from 10am – make friends & keep sane
Wokingham Howard Palmer Gardens
(Cockpit Path car park free on Sunday)
Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Bracknell
South Hill Park, Rear Lawn, RG12 7PA
Telegram http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
I like his perspicacity but I would argue that the chances of nuclear confrontation are closer to forty percent. There is a view that has become very widespread in recent decades that a nuclear war is essentially winnable. A billion might die but who cares as long as strategic objectives are met. There is also the Thanatos drive, the yearning for annihilation that many people feel and understandably so. They wish that we could escape this kaleidoscope of hell and somehow start again, the vaxxed more gung-ho for war for whatever reason. I think that in the coming months there will be increasing acquiesence to the idea of nuclear war as a relief from the hell of existence.
Any sign the anti-war left has hit the pavements? I’m looking, but I see no sign of the principled left on the pavements. Am I missing something? Could it be that all along the ‘anti-war’ rhetoric really meant, ‘Well, only the wars unsuited to our ideology’?
Take a moment to marvel at the principled left. Love ’em.
Addendum: I understand there will be principled leftists on here. I’m not bashing you.
Quite honestly, MR – I have no idea what’s happened to them. Perhaps, like old soldiers, they haven’t died; they’ve just faded away.
There were never that many genuine peaceniks. Most had sympathies with one side or another; or at least against one side. The left used to be deeply suspicious of the United States. Now, as far as I know, their enemies are people who don’t take “saving the planet” seriously, or are not sensitive and sympathetic to gender identity issues.
Some of them were bloody good sorts. You’d have liked them. Prone to singing “The people’s flag is deepest red” at the drop of a hat and calling people “Comrade” at meetings, but actually doing the hard yards on things like affordable housing.
But come on now folks… all of this…all of everything that WE hear, read and see so clearly…it’s all simply governmental incompetence. Globally.!
More colour on the ‘strategists’, realism etc. below.
The strategists might have thought they could reach their goals by provoking only, without actually getting a hot war, although they really don’t care if they get one either.
Their huge mistake was their hubris-born neglect of the consequences of pushing Russia into the corner: the alliance with China, India etc., exacerbated by their illegal, criminal and only suicidal sanctions leading to de-dollarization and, soon, social unrest in the West, possibly followed by its division when Hungary, Romania and Poland accept Ukraimian territory and when Germans refuse to continue to commit US/UK ordered harakiri.
Again, with nihilist idi*ts like them, who needs enemies?!
But the MIC and OGMC in the West certainly actively schemed for and deliberately WANTED this invasion to actually happen, that’s what even the realists like Mearsheimer can’t bring themselves to admit yet, despite it being so obvious and being the main answer to asking Cui bono?.
https://chrishedges.substack.com/p/the-pimps-of-war?s=r
https://wemeantwell.com/blog/2022/04/10/draft-speech-deterrence-china-and-the-u-s/
https://www.anti-spiegel.ru/2022/wie-geopolitik-funktioniert-und-worum-es-in-der-ukraine-wirklich-geht/?doing_wp_cron=1649668023.7548010349273681640625
Why would Russia bother with nuclear weapons when an even more effective method of driving the whole of western Europe into complete chaos would be to switch off the gas?
There is no justification for nuclear retaliation by the west.
If America wanted to help Europe it would be forced to abandon all Biden’s plans for a green and pleasant future, and reinstate fracking and oil/gas production. Even then, Germany has no port facilities to land LPG.
Why would any country engage in an entirely self destructive nuclear conflict when the result would be that the gas supply would be entirely disrupted anyway?
Who are ‘we’? Perhaps the USA’s cohorts in crime like the UK, each flooding Zelensky’s slave trading utopia with more and more weapons, but never having the spine to openly declare war against Russia? Then again the UK was collaborating with Nazi Germany up until the inconvenient Polish invasion.
BTW, Crimea voted overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia, it’s a done deal and nothing to do with Ukraine let alone NATO anymore. Not that such a democratic choice stopped the US puppet government in Kiev from denying fresh water supplies to Crimea for years until Russia blew up the dam last month.
Or do you mean concessions like slapping Azov on the wrist and telling them to stop blanket bombing and land-mining the two self declared Donbass republics?
The undemocratic Kiev puppet government is openly corrupt and more than casually fascist, and the UK should be sanctioning it not Russia. But nobody on the DS team seems to be able to stray beyond the ‘Russia bad’ western narrative, as this absurdly naive article once again demonstrates.
https://www.thepostil.com/the-military-situation-in-the-ukraine/
The USA’s foreign policy over the past 50 years, has been a disgrace. It has brought untold misery to millions.
100 years actually.
Even according to Churchill. https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/elite-arrogance-incompetence-and-willful-ignorance-leading-to-unintended-consequences/
And the UK has dutifully supported each carnage the USA has illegally unleashed in the expectation it will get a few crumbs from post conflict reparations contracts or weapons sales. Or simply at an individual level, whereby our spineless lackey leader of the day can have their poodle legacy via lecture tours or peace foundations. After Covid and the vaxx outrage the UK should be sanctioning itself, especially its political elites.
In fairness, there’s not much separation between the US and UK elites.
Like any dog on a leash there’s about two to three yards of separation, but unlike many often independently minded sovereign pooches the UK can only dutifully follow behind their transatlantic masters; except when forced to play fetch with live munitions.
It’s time for the sun to set on the USA. They’ve caused enough misery in the world.
Let someone else have a turn?
If we are ever going to rise to something better, we really need to stop describing the actions of a small group of elites as the actions of a country.
Russia didn’t invade Ukraine. Putin and his people did. Regardless of what polls might say now, I’m sure you ask Russian people back in February whether they should invade Ukraine and most would have said no.
The US and UK didn’t invade Iraq. The neo-con establishment did. I don’t feel at all represented by Blair or his actions in Iraq. I didn’t invade Iraq. He did.
Aspects of what the USA has are worth preserving – the belief in small government is more widespread there than in many places.
The belief is nice, but the reality is the CIA and FBI etc. have simply been coopted to run the country with no democratic overview.
By the way – thank you for your piece, Noah. Your analysis is brief, but correct.
Yet more pro-Kremlin / pro-invasion propaganda on Daily Sceptic – a site originally set up as Lockdown Sceptics to challenge state oppression, not promote the most extreme examples of this such as the mass destruction and murder currently being carried out in Ukraine on behalf of one of the world’s most tyrannical regimes.
A couple of specifics, re ‘Professor John Mearsheimer is the man who predicted the Ukraine crisis’
Quite the opposite in the speech being cited from September 2015 he stated “If you really want to wreck Russia, what you should do is to encourage it to try to conquer Ukraine. Putin is much too smart to try that”
So if nothing else he clearly believes the invasion of Ukraine to be an act of puppet-like stupidity (I don’t take such a personal approach, just look at the pros and cons of ideas and practices).
Also “The reason is that Putin and many Russians perceive NATO expansion into Ukraine as an ‘existential threat’ to Russia. Many Western commentators dispute this. But what they believe is ‘irrelevant’, says Mearsheimer, because “the only thing that matters is what Putin and his fellow Russians think”.
That could be taken back in time… Read more »
“Yet more pro-Kremlin / pro-invasion propaganda on Daily Sceptic – a site originally set up as Lockdown Sceptics to challenge state oppression, not promote the most extreme examples of this such as the mass destruction and murder currently being carried out in Ukraine on behalf of one of the world’s most tyrannical regimes.”
Well I think the ATL pieces have been fairly evenly split between pro and anti Kremlin, and indeed the site owner is much more on the “anti” side, but evidently believes in freedom of speech and open debate.
I have absolutely no problem with publishing articles like this, it is always useful to be aware of all perspectives, and where relevant be able to challenge propagandist material. I continue to be very grateful to Mr Young and others behind this site for facilitating this and general dialogue.
The ‘Yet more pro-Kremlin / pro-invasion propaganda on Daily Sceptic’ statement referred to the overwhelming pre-ponderance of user comments and upticks (sometimes dozens to zero) from that perspective rather than main articles.
I see. Well, one way of looking at it is that trust in government and other “mainstream” sources of information has been irreparably damaged for generations by the covid lies. I don’t know much about Russia and Ukraine, but I think I know hysteria and suppression of debate when I see it, and I also struggle to see the compelling UK interest in the conflict, and wonder if we are doing ourselves more harm than good.
I was absolutely shocked by the degree of tyranny suddenly introduced into nominally democratic countries such as the UK (lockdowns etc) using the excuse of a relatively minor viral disease.
On the other hand it must be acknowledged that the coronavirus restrictions were not mainly imposed top-down but rather eagerly embraced by majorities of populations who for decades had increasingly bought into the whole ultra-health (a subset of the environmentalism) concepts underpinning them.
In any case we should simply look at each issue or policy as objectively as possible, rather than ascribing permanently malign motivations to any individuals or groupings involved (including so-called ‘mainstream media’) and automatically adopting an opposite position.
That really is to hand over our freedom of thought.
“On the other hand it must be acknowledged that the coronavirus restrictions were not mainly imposed top-down but rather eagerly embraced by majorities of populations “
Populations that had been subjected to systematic propaganda manipulation by professional behavioural manipulators, with massive media spend and active suppression of dissent.
“we should simply look at each issue or policy as objectively as possible, rather than ascribing permanently malign motivations to any individuals or groupings involved (including so-called ‘mainstream media’) and automatically adopting an opposite position.“
The point is precisely not about “automatically adopting an opposite position”, but rather about not accepting the mainstream position merely because it is so overwhelmingly pushed, and listening to alternative arguments.
However, that said, you can go further than that and say that experience suggests that added scepticism is justified when there is a massive mainstream media push in a particular direction – covid, BLM, climate alarmism, Ukraine…
For myself, I already knew the mainstream narrative on the Ukraine was false before it blew up again recently, because I’ve been following events there, and the wider US sphere foreign policy of interventionism, regime change and war, for decades
These are all very interesting points. I have never really thought about this before but ‘scepticism’ is probably not a useful concept in general as alongside the free-thinking aspect it implies a pre-disposition to suspicion and rejection – in other words a bias, not really free-thinking at all.
In any case I wasn’t suggesting that everyone has come to question the generally anti Russian invasion positions held in eg the UK due to a knee-jerk rejection of ‘the narrative’ –
But rather that ‘the Western mainstream media argues this case therefore it must be wrong’ is a widely used meme within pro ‘Special Military Operation’ propaganda.
And those putting this non-argument forward never mention the vastly more controlled and biased Russian ‘mainstream media’, for obvious reasons.
“I have never really thought about this before but ‘scepticism’ is probably not a useful concept in general as alongside the free-thinking aspect it implies a pre-disposition to suspicion and rejection – in other words a bias, not really free-thinking at all.”
I’d suggest you probably need to think that through further.
“But rather that ‘the Western mainstream media argues this case therefore it must be wrong’ is a widely used meme within pro ‘Special Military Operation’ propaganda.”
If you say so….
“And those putting this non-argument forward never mention the vastly more controlled and biased Russian ‘mainstream media’, for obvious reasons.”
Probably because those people, presumably, don’t live in Russia and aren’t subjected to whatever regime of control and bias they might impose.
In fact, in many US sphere countries the views of Russian media are actively censored.
Looks like our rulers don’t trust us to make up our own minds…
I’d suggest you probably need to think that through further
If you wish to try and refute something without any content to back it up neater (but equally unconvincing) just to say ‘wrong’
if you say so…
See the above.
Probably because those people, presumably, don’t live in Russia and aren’t subjected to whatever regime of control and bias they might impose.
What a strange presumption. People can post on the internet from anywhere in the world (if necessary through VPNs) and propaganda promoters are clearly capable of lying about their location. That is not meant as an accusation against any specific individuals.
In any case my point about Russian ‘mainstream media’ not being mentioned was not related to pro-invasion posters’ geographical location, but rather to highlight the fact that the ‘mainstream media’ inherently wrong argument would have to be turned on its head if it was.
In fact, in many US sphere countries the views of Russian media are actively censored.
I have no idea what you mean by ‘US sphere countries’ but I don’t support censorship in general (including of Russian state-controlled media, ie all of it) except for direct calls for violence against individuals etc.
Well at least you mentioned Yemen.
But you could also have mentioned many other countries the US in particular has tried to “liberate and democratise” – Iraq, Syria, Libya, Palestine, Vietnam, Korea.
Whenever any US president has tried to take on its industrial/arms cabal they’ve been bumped off (Kennedy, Vietnam) or silenced (Trump ).
All those exercises resulted only in countless death and destruction.
One cannot blame Russia for being a little worried that the same could happen to them.
“The whole conflict inducing nation-state system should be replaced with peaceable regional administrations”
Yes, let’s have the technocrats in charge and reduce democracy so that it only has the power to decide whether our sugar free juice is red or blue – like the adult toddlers the technocrats see the rest of society as.
That’s working so well in the European Union.
By regional I simply meant localised, and that could include current countries – but transformed from their nation-state structure ultimately resting on armed force (having an army is a prerequisite of UN membership) into peaceable administrations similar to current local government.
The EU was originally set up to encourage trade and reduce national enmities, I am entirely opposed to its attempts to turn itself into a largely non-democratic super-state.
Technocracies (such the USSR and communist China, the modern UK’s imposition of poverty-inducing measures based on the pseudo-science of Climate Change plus its recent elevation of SAGE to a near totalitarian status) rest on the ultimately violence-based nation state system which I wish to see replaced with peaceful administrations.
No, the Daily Sceptic should be focused on analysing narratives being conveyed by the UK establishment and media.
And whether you agree with the Russian action or not, you’d have to be blind or brainwashed to say that what we’re seeing employed isn’t straight from the Covid playbook – one single narrative, alternative views shut down, dissenters persecuted and pure emotive propaganda.
At least you’ve reached the correct conclusion in wishing for a speedy ceasefire and peace settlement, unlike the fat war criminal in Number 10 and the rest of this disgraceful establishment.
I also have issues with the nation state system and nationalism, but unfortunately international institutions have been hijacked and at present represent a far greater threat to our future than the nation state model.
The reason is that Putin and many Russians perceive NATO expansion into Ukraine as an “existential threat” to Russia. Many Western commentators dispute this. But what they believe is “irrelevant”, says Mearsheimer, because “the only thing that matters is what Putin and his fellow Russians think”.
Indeed. And this is and has come to the forefront now due to hypersonic weapons and the too far reduced response time through them.
If the West/Europe wants to continue to live in peace, it should restrict itself to the old line of missile launch systems, meanin none East of Germany/Italy and be grateful that they were able to sneak them into Turkey eventually, and dismantle the existing ones in Romania and Poland ASAP.
Let alone moving them into the Baltic states, a recipe for the next escalation and war, or accepting Finland and Sweden as NATO members.
One could add into the mix Nigel Farage’s 2014 characteristically ‘On the money’ speech to the European Parliament, predicting war in Ukraine as a result of the West’s / the EU’s involvement in the Maidan coup. ‘YOU SHOULD ALL FEEL GUILTY!’ were his words. Zelensky was subsequently pressured by the threats of nationalists into dropping the Minsk accords, thousands of Russian speaking civilians were killed/tortured/murdered by sadistic Ukrainian nationalists in the east of Ukraine – including children – and the rest is history / hypocrisy. It is truly appalling. Yet again, we sceptics (truth seekers) are here trying to get people to wake up. Very sad. Look up ‘The Alley of Angels’ in Donetsk. Films – Oliver Stone, ‘Ukraine on Fire’, and another one ‘Ukraine, yesterday, today and tomorrow’.
Dr Vernon Coleman – We have eight months.
Looking at the very high level of strategy, it seems that there are three major power groups amongst the world’s military – the West, Russia and China.
It is hard to see why the West (aka the US) wants to fight Russia to a standstill. The only reason I can think of is the classic two-front tactic that Germany used in WW1 – beat one enemy so comprehensively that they cannot get up again, and then you can put all your resource into fighting enemy number two.
I fear that this is what the US is trying to do at the moment – clear the way for a global war with China.
The US and UK’s interests are very different here and with regard to Russia in general than EUrope’s and in particular Germany’s.
Sadly, only Orban currently seems to be able to recognize this and that the US and UK are doing nothing but deliberstely throwing EUrope and Germany under the bus.
Plus ça change….
Pretty good summary, I’d say, though Russia is only comparable with China in purely military technology terms, power wise. Longer term, China is massively more powerful.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, and with the rise of a new rival in China, the US needed to win Russia over to its side against China. Doing so by diplomatic means proved too inconvenient for those setting US policy, so they set out to crush Russia into submission instead.
It isn’t looking like a wise policy choice, but then again it was made by the people who brought us Iraq, Libya and Syria, so expectations shouldn’t be high..
Putin came to power and courted the West, see his speech in the Bundestag 2001.
The West, in particular the US and UK strategists, MIC and OGMC would have none of it, for strategic power reasons (Mackinder, Brzeszinski), fearing that Russia/Germany tieup in particular, and for obvious financial reasons, so they all sabotaged it and left out no chance to weaken and humiliate Russia ever since.
Putin is a wolf, but he offered to be the West’s wolf then and we kicked him when he was down.
We expected him to die, instead he grew stronger, reluctantly went on to search and now found another, much, much stronger, pack to team up with.
With strategists like this, who needs enemies?!
Ukraine played a bad hand poorly.
It was hijacked by a few oligarchs and naively went all-in on a reckless bet, relying on a very unreliable partner whose interests are very different than its own.
It will now have to pay the price for that folly and arrogance.
If it had stayed neutral, done a 3way trade deal and treated the Russian speakers well instead, it would now be thriving and secure.
This and it should serve as a warning… Read more »
Finland’s Railways have re-started running freight trains between Finland-Russia. There’s your ‘solidarity’ for Ukraine!
Don’t worry I’m sure they’ll be stampeded into NATO.
where does Finland get it’s energy from EF? Does it trade O&G with the Ruskies or hydro from the Noggies?
Well said. It is such a tragedy. Russians really do feel this to be an existential threat, and are extremely sad and worried by the long-standing vicious attitudes to them in the West. They will have no choice but to seek other allies.
Sound summary.
Sounds about right, read another excellent analysis here :https://delingpole.substack.com/p/on-the-bucha-massacre-and-whats-really?s=r
Yesterday I read that the fat tw@t Boris was giving away British anti-ship missiles to Ukraine – he is generous isn’t he, (perhaps he will send them some of his wall paper and invite them to some of the garden parties that he never has?).
I decided to look into this because there was no detail in the MSM.
It turns out that the UK only has obselte harpoon anti ship missiles and that the UK government/MOD has completely guffed up aquiring a replacement missile system.
So whilst Boris is busy given away all our anti tank missiles, loads of anti air missiles and our obselete (but all we have) harpoon missiles , our glorious navy can’t sink any enemy ships.
I was reading about this in the linked publication, they are using some delightful language to describe this colossal cock up, they are calling it ‘a capability holiday’.
Gross incompetence sounds so much better when dressed in soft language doesn’t it?
https://www.navylookout.com/royal-navy-rows-back-on-plans-to-acquire-new-anti-ship-missiles-before-2030s/
Be reasonable! After all, we live in a land of milk and honey where there is no suffering or need whatsoever, so why should our rulers not expend our resources helping people they like overseas?
Now that’s the spirit!
After all, look how the US saved us all in two world wars. I saw some of their films They definitely did..