Never In the Ballpark.

I get it, alright, it is all done with the best of the intentions. Plus, The American Conservative, despite its gaping holes in knowledge of Russia, tries to position itself as a "realist" publication, and once in a while they do produce a sound idea or two, but in general they suffer from the same ailment characteristic to most modern "intellectual" publications--a complete inadequacy of experiences past and of understanding a modern world beyond the bounds of a few popular talking points such as West's moral decay and "economy" and "diplomacy". It is a feature now, even of those who position themselves as Anglo-American "realists", or, even, people who try to find some higher moral meaning in the chaos of a contemporary Western politics. 

Anatol Lieven is a fine example of a field which I personally do not even consider a viable realm of expertise or study on any issue pertaining what we all know today as geopolitics and one would expect Lieven, who has a Ph.D in precisely this fraudulent political "science" to have issues with adequately grasping the modern day reality. Lieven is extensively quoted in the article in the said TAC by Bradley Delvin who is extremely critical of this:

Over a dozen House Republicans recently signed a letter to President Joe Biden encouraging the president to take stronger military action to help Ukraine defend itself against the possibility of further Russian intervention. While the Biden administration has not gone as far as these House Republicans would like, which is essentially impossible given an election year is just around the corner, the foreign policy establishment continues to make miscalculations that could become more than costly in the event of further escalation with Russia.   

It is all fine and dandy, and I agree that those republicans are essentially neocons and that the US Congress is a collection of primarily bruised egos and war-mongers. We shouldn't be surprised with that--it is a well-established fact. What is fascinating that while speaking about "miscalculations" and, obviously, self-defeating policies, Delvin gives a wide berth to Lieven's "interpretations", which in many respects prove without a shadow of a doubt that "miscalculations", if not delusions are as wide-spread among the so called Anglo-American "realists" as they are among neocons. I'll start with Lieven's rather wrong assessment of the situation of NS2. This is not to say that Russia doesn't care, of course she does and wants NS2 to work--it goes without saying. But Lieven thinks that:

“The biggest deterrent by far is the threat of greatly intensified sanctions,” Lieven said. “Russia is anxious about its Nord Stream pipeline to Germany. Clearly in the event of a new war with Ukraine, that simply stops and goes out the window, and there are many, many more things that the U.S. or Europe could do that could harm Russia very badly in terms of its economic well-being.”

I don't know what Lieven's qualifications are for this type of conclusions, but he obviously contradicts a number of Russian experts, not least of them Rostislav Ischenko, a former employee of Ukraine's Government and a man who is situationally aware on the issues of Ukraine and NS2 order of magnitude better than Lieven will ever be, who in unison (I am one of those) repeat the point for years, that since roughly 2016-17 and on, the sabotage of the NS2, if it succeeds, means merely a discomfort for Russia which will be overcome, while for Germany and  Europe it will be a catastrophe. I wrote so much about it for years, just type Nord Stream 2 in search bar in this blog. Moreover, I don't know how Lieven missed an obvious major shift of Russia's hydrocarbons' extraction and processing industry away from western borders towards the Far East. Everybody sees it, evidently not Lieven.

But that is not the main issue, in the end, if Europe wants to commit suicide it is not for Russia to prevent it. But Lieven decides to wax all strategic and military and says this:

“If America was planning to seriously prepare for a ground war with Russia, it would have to re-deploy tens or hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops to Europe with full air cover, and station them in European countries, which might very well not be willing to receive them,” Lieven told TAC. “In addition, this would mean either preparing to fight a war of two fronts simultaneously with China and Russia, because if the United States goes to war with Russia, there can be no doubt whatsoever that China would move to take Taiwan the next day, and the U.S. would have to either fight on two fronts, give up on one front, or lose on both fronts.”

I deliberately highlight and underline what Liven states on the size of the force the United States will need to fight a "ground war" with Russia.  It is not a detail which could be attributed to my nit-picking. It is not, it is very serious when a person who is viewed by many as an "expert" makes such a gaffe. Of course, I don't know WHY the United States will fight a "ground war" with Russia, I presume in Ukraine, but Lieven better ask Andrew Bacevich, his boss in Quincy Institute, and a former cadre officer (Colonel) of the US Army with combat experience. Maybe, I am not saying it will happen with 100% probability, he explains to Lieven what force will be needed to "fight" Russia near Russia's borders. 

Of course, a lot depends on HOW the victory will be defined by the US, but judging by Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan (among many others) it could be defined anywhere between total and partial defeats inflicted by enemies on the US. Russia, however, is a bit different case here, EVEN if we assume that the US will not escalate to a nuclear threshold after a week or two of fighting this "ground war". Even if we assume that both sides do not use nukes, be them tactical or strategic, the purely conventional "ground war" against Russia in Ukraine will require at least one million of combat troops on the American side, granted Russia will even allow those to be shipped to Europe. I am, however, not 100% positive on the "cut off" number of the US troops (it could be 200,000 or somewhere near 400,000) concentrating in Europe before Russia will blow to smithereens most of the ports capable to receive US transports and then simply destroy airfields with whatever will be there. 

I wrote about those wet dreams by US a few years ago. There, Ochmanek, evidently, was pulling numbers, pardon my French, out of his ass, still being enamored by a turkey shoot of a backward Iraqi Army. But exactly two years later he dramatically, to his credit, changed his tune and admitted:

We lose a lot of people. We lose a lot of equipment. We usually fail to achieve our objective of preventing aggression by the adversary,” RAND analyst David Ochmanek told a security conference on Thursday. “In our games, when we fight Russia and China, blue gets its ass handed to it.”

Unsurprisingly, those admissions came on the heels of Vladimir Putin's address to Federal Assembly on 1March 2018 whose historic significance many people still cannot grasp. So, yes, million(s) of US (NATO) combat troops if NATO decides to commit suicide conventionally and see Washington and European Capitals' government quarters in ruins. There is no worse than some Ivy League or Oxford Ph.D in political "science" beginning to wax military and "miscalculating" by order of magnitude on the scale of force and, hence, slaughterhouse which will unfold if the US decides to fight a ground war with a "peer" and not some illiterate Arab soldier or Taliban. This is not a "miscalculation, it is a tour de force of military ignorance which defines modern Western politicum be they from "realist" wing or the neocon one. They better listen to this, again, between 7:00 and 16:00 minutes and see reactions of his political "science" interlocutors. 

I will elaborate on the required force when speaking on the Salvo Model and why even million plus troops even within purely conventional scenario in Ukraine will not prevent NATO from sustaining catastrophic defeat accompanied by catastrophic losses in people and in materiel. I am not even going to discuss mobilization policies and measures of Russia, of which Lieven has very little, if any, understanding. But even Wilkerson fails to grasp what real modern conventional war is--he can't, US never fought a peer since 1945 on the ground successfully without several overwhelming advantages in technology. Well... even speaking in generalities has to have a well defined and competent point, which at least provides a ballpark accuracy to a point one wants to get across with whatever intentions.   

P.S. Wilkerson spoke about "ultimately winning", he really needs to refresh his memory on American wars of the 20th century. 

It Was So Difficult To Predict, Not.

Obviously, the issue of causality is not well-known to EU leaders, because in their make-believe world you just wish things and they magically appear out of a thin air. The fact that actions have consequences is too difficult for them to grasp. 

Power and gas prices are hitting fresh records almost daily, and some energy-intensive companies have temporarily shut operations because they’re becoming too expensive to run. As winter approaches and Europeans start to turn on their heaters, the squeeze will intensify, pushing more executives into tough decisions about keeping plants open. Ammonia producer SKW Stickstoffwerke Piesteritz GmbH is among those that’s been forced into drastic steps. The German company, which burns through 640 gigawatt hours of natural gas each year, equivalent to about 50,000 households, said Tuesday it will cut production by 20% to offset rising gas prices. “It doesn’t make sense to make ammonia at these price levels,” said Chief Executive Officer Petr Cingr. “A complete production stop looms if the government doesn’t act.” On Wednesday, the European Union issued a fresh warning and said it will outline measures including tax cuts and state aid that governments can use to help. “This price shock cannot be underestimated,” EU energy chief Kadri Simson said. “If left unchecked, it risks compromising Europe’s recovery.”

At this stage it doesn't matter how one tries to rationalize this clusterfuck but you can bet your ass on Russia, in the end, being blamed for all of it, including bad education of European "elites" who have no grasp of the modern world and how it operates. I say, go even greener, that will show them all how to run any country...into the ground. Yet, morons remain (and will remain) morons. 

Already hurt by coronavirus lockdowns, many of Germany’s smaller firms decided against securing long-term energy supplies earlier this year and can’t afford to catch up now as gas prices are so high, according to Andreas Loeschel, professor of resource economics at Ruhr-University Bochum. “So much depends on the the demand side of the equation,” he said, referring to the potential for a colder-than-expected winter. “A number of unlikely events are building up to cause a situation we’ve never seen before.”

No shit! I have a question to this "professor"--has it occurred to him that there are such things in the world as "contingency planning", "good engineering", "sound energy policies" and other things of this nature which are called in the world of normal people "preparedness". No? Never heard of it? Obviously not, because in the world of European in general, and German in particular, totalitarian politics loyalty to ideological radical orthodoxy of "Green Energy", LGBTQIRS madness which fill in the voids left by serious professionals and scientists who do not want to fight (I don't blame them) human insanity, is more important than seeking the truth. 

One would expect this in a third world but when one of the top 10 German universities produces such "specialists" in, and you may have guessed it already, "economics", what do you expect?

An der Universität Duisburg-Essen sollen gute Prüfungsnoten gegen Bargeld verkauft worden sein. Die Staatsanwalt Essen ermittele "im Bereich der Korruptionsdelikte", sagte ein Sprecher der Behörde. Aus ermittlungstaktischen Gründen wollte die Staatsanwaltschaft "zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt" keine weiteren Details nennen. Die Universität habe selbst Strafanzeige erstattet. Mit rund 40.000 Studierenden ist die Universität Duisburg-Essen eine der zehn größten deutschen Unis. Nach Informationen der "Westdeutschen Allgemeinen Zeitung" geht es um Prüfungen der Fakultät für Wirtschaftswissenschaften. Ermittelt werde gegen eine Verwaltungsmitarbeiterin der auf dem Essener Campus angesiedelten Fakultät sowie gegen rund 50 Studierende. Diese sollen der Sachbearbeiterin jeweils 800 Euro in bar überreicht haben, damit sie im Computersystem der Uni aus einer nicht bestandenen Prüfung (Note 5) eine bestandene machte (Note 4). Ausgelöst worden seien die Ermittlungen durch einen anonymen Hinweis

Translation:  Good exam grades are said to have been sold for cash at the University of Duisburg-Essen. The public prosecutor of Essen is investigating "into the area of ​​corruption offenses," said a spokesman for the authority. For tactical reasons, the public prosecutor did not want to give any further details "at this point in time". The university itself filed a criminal complaint. With around 40,000 students, the University of Duisburg-Essen is one of the ten largest German universities. According to information from the "Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung", it is about exams for the Faculty of Economics. The investigation will be carried out against an administrative employee of the faculty located on the Essen campus and against around 50 students. These are said to have given the clerk 800 euros each in cash so that she can turn a failed exam (grade 5) into a passed exam (grade 4) in the university's computer system. The investigation was triggered by an anonymous tip.

I think those 50 students are the perfect candidates for the top political positions in Germany (and EU) and I am sure with such excellent backgrounds they will contribute immensely to furthering insane suicidal economic, foreign policy and cultural agendas born primarily in the deep recesses of the European (and American) radical left because of a difficulty of serious STEM education and a relative ease of a "humanities" one. Education in design and engineering of nuclear power station is much more difficult (orders of magnitude) than forays into the pseudo-scientific demagoguery of Derrida or the study of monetarism. Hence, more free time is allocated to radicalization and developing a desire to destroy anything good, productive or beautiful. It is especially easy to do when it takes only 800 Euros to get a passing grade in the subject which is not even real economics as Michael Hudson (correctly) describes.  

My point was that the way the economy is described in the press and in University courses has very little to do with how the economy really works. The press and journalistic reports use a terminology made of well crafted euphemisms to confuse understanding of how the economy works.

Yes, and that is why Europe is going down, while China will pay ANY price for the resources which she desperately needs. In this, EU loses, China wins. Recall my table, China has a severe deficit of energy. Europe doesn't want Russia and Russia doesn't want Europe anymore, certainly not EU. Even Merkel concedes today:

(Bloomberg) -- Outgoing German Chancellor Angela Merkel dismissed charges that Russian leader Vladimir Putin is partly to blame for the record spikes in European gas prices.  “To my knowledge, there are no orders where Russia has said we won’t deliver it to you, especially not with regard to the pipeline in Ukraine,” Merkel told reporters Wednesday. “Russia can only deliver gas on the basis of contractual obligations, and not just only like that.”  

Europe did it to herself,  she made her bed, now she must sleep in it. Russia is orienting her energy towards China and Asia in general. Russia will work with European nations on a bi-lateral bases, such as recent contract with Hungary, and considering what modern European elites are, there are virtually no chances of normal relations between Europe and Russia, only minimal needed and Russia will hold her nose. In related news--nothing new:

Officials from NATO have reportedly decided to slash the size of the permanent Russian delegation working to build ties with the US-led military bloc at its headquarters in Brussels, revoking the credentials of eight envoys. 

Same as this: 

The Russian authorities have hit back at suggestions by four US senators that American President Joe Biden should expel 300 diplomats, and warned that Moscow would close all of Washington’s missions on Russian soil in retaliation.“There aren’t even that many Russian diplomats in Washington,” the Foreign Ministry stated. “Those who propose such steps are apparently pushing for the closure of American offices in Russia. They should understand that the responsibility for this will be theirs.”On Tuesday, Senators Bob Menendez, Marco Rubio, Mark Warner and Jim Risch wrote a letter to Biden, urging him to take “immediate action to increase staffing at the US embassy in Moscow.” The American mission has been faced with a personnel shortage since the US was listed on Moscow’s official list of ‘unfriendly countries,’ meaning that it is banned from employing locals.

You cannot talk to these people. You cannot reason with them because they do not live in the real world and are people utterly unqualified for any serious activity in foreign affairs because they do not understand the outside world. They can't, they lack basic mechanisms of developing the awareness--a defining feature of America's political class. But then again, in the United States there is no way you can buy your passing grade in the university, like never. Right, right?