Anatol Lieven Continues To Parade...

... himself as nincompoop who he is, together with the co-author of this drivel, who, unlike Lieven, has at least some intel background. As I am constantly on record--it is IN THE clockwork of West's "academe" that denies them even remotely contextual view of the world around them, exacerbated with a deep seated belief in some military-economic capabilities of the United States which are not there and, in actuality, never has been. So, Soros-financed Quincy Institute publishes a paper on SMO. 

It is also extremely dangerous for Ukraine’s future. The war is not trending toward a stable stalemate, but toward Ukraine’s eventual collapse.  Russia has corrected many of the problems that plagued its forces during the first year of fighting and adopted an attrition strategy that is gradually exhausting Ukraine’s forces, draining American military stocks, and sapping the West’s political resolve. Sanctions have not crippled Russia’s war effort, and the West cannot fix Ukraine’s acute manpower problems absent direct intervention in the war.  Ukraine’s best hope lies in a negotiated settlement that protects its security, minimizes the risks of renewed attacks or escalation, and promotes broader stability in Europe and the world.   

Skeptics counter that Russia has no incentive to make meaningful concessions in a war it is increasingly winning.  But this belief underestimates the gap between what Russia can accomplish through its own military efforts and what it needs to ensure its broader security and economic prosperity over the longer term.  Russia can probably achieve some of its war aims by force, including blocking Ukraine’s membership in NATO and capturing much of the territory it regards as historically and culturally Russian.  But Russia cannot conquer, let alone govern, the majority of Ukraine, nor can Russia secure itself against the ongoing threats of Ukrainian sabotage or potential NATO strikes absent a costly permanent military buildup that would undermine its civilian economy. Reducing the deep dependence on China created by the invasion will also sooner or later require Russia to seek some form of détente with the West.  As a result, the United States has significant leverage for bringing Russia to the table and forging verifiable agreements to end the fighting.

This is an Exhibit A of, in the words of Orwell, "holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them". This is expected from Lieven who has zero understanding of military and warfare.

1. If, as authors correctly state, war is trending towards Ukraine's eventual collapse, one must ask a question: what is Ukraine for the United States? We have an answer--Ukraine, and the whole NATO-Ukraine project, is the best proxy the United States ever had. So, the formal logic goes (I omit here operational-strategic issues which Lieven will not understand)... Ah, wait. Remember South Vietnam? Correct--US proxy. Remember Afghanistan and the fate of the US proxies there? Well, here comes summary on fingers for people like Lieven and whoever gives tribune to this pseudo-academic shyster: combined all American proxies, multiply them by 10 and even their aggregate defeats will not have an impact equaling US and NATO defeat in 404 in its scope and consequences. The US and combined West are distinct losers. 

2. In this case one has to ask the question: what is this "significant leverage" the United States allegedly has? Correct--none exists, because for Russia it is not about 404, it is about combined West headed by the United States, who, as is the consensus among most real military professionals in the US, are distinct losers in this war. Losers DO NOT dictate conditions or leverage whatever they think they have. They are being dictated what and how to do, of which Russia issued a good plan in December of 2021. 

3. As per "Ukrainian sabotage or potential NATO strikes"--this is a kindergarten level "analysis" by people who obviously do not understand the upcoming end of NATO and that the only "sabotage" which will be happening after the 404 is partitioned the way Russia dictates will be not "sabotage" but pure terrorism financed by people from CIA, MI6 et al. That will be met with appropriate responses. 

4. China: as I already stated--it is difficult to explain to an amateur what COFM is and that the United States lost the arms race to Russia, but NOT to China. China knows it, Lieven and Beebe, evidently do not. Expected, especially for people who do not understand still a huge relevance of the US Navy's submarine forces, for all their increasing issues, in possible war with China, as well as US attempts--they will succeed--to coral Japan and South Korea into this possible fight. China knows that she depends on Russia, not the other way around. But then again--this requires a real knowledge of Russia, real economy, COFM and understanding an intellectual abyss which separates Russian and Chinese diplomats and strategists from their current US counter-parts, many of who do not even have a proper military education. 

I plan to talk about this Russia-China mythology and deteriorating mental state, as this piece demonstrates, of US "realists" many of who still reside in La-La-Land of American exceptionalism and continue to self-medicate themselves with all kind of ignorant bullshit with matters they have no clue about. But by that time they recognize their delusions, we may have on our hands a very real physical disintegration of the United States, which faces a possibility of a very real civil war and departure from the world stage as one of three superpowers. And no, it will not be Russia who will seek detente with the West. Not with this crop of "elites" who are not only non-agreement capable but are ignorant and, in general, people you don't deal with. Lieven should ask to give some lectures about "democracy" say in Higher School of Economics in Moscow--a cesspool of pro-Western liberals, they buy pretty much any BS from the West, for the rest--Russia has plenty of own demagogues. Get in line...