The Kremlin responded to the statement by saying that it saw “nothing new” in yet another threat of sanctions made by Washington. During his first presidential term, Trump had often resorted to sanctions, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists on Thursday, adding that the US president “likes such methods.” Moscow is still ready for an equal and respectful dialogue, Peskov said, adding that Trump had engaged in that kind of exchange with Putin during his first term in office. Now, Russia is waiting for similar signals but has not seen any so far, according to the spokesman.
Translation:Moscow considers the actions of the Joe Biden administration in many areas, including policy in Ukraine, to be crimes, not mistakes, said Maria Zakharova.
This is correct definition of what Biden and cabal of his handlers were doing both domestically and internationally can only be qualified as crimes, ranging from war crimes to crimes against humanity. So, the SMO continues.
P.S. Yes, getting basic math of SMO would certainly help Trump when making any decisions.
I wonder what are the "professional" requirements for getting a "journo" job in Der Spiegel. Something tells me that one has to have a prior professional experience in famous German movie industry with emphasis on plumbers. You know, the documentaries where German men and women indulge in close encounters or, depending on situation, on counters as a celebration of a well done plumbing, if you know what I mean. I don't think that other types work in Western media, especially German one. No other needed.
As I am on record--Patriot PAC3 is not made for fighting real enemies, which have stand off weapons, not to speak about supersonic and hypersonic weapons. Nor, for that matter, this system is capable to handle a salvo of Iskanders, so, as usual, it is all about PR. Not to mention the fact of inability to build real integrated AD system (emphasis on "system"). There are reasons for PR--situation in Bakhmut is dire for VSU and its NATO handlers and desperate times call for desperate measures. Bakhmut is crucial not just for PR reasons , but because it is an extremely important transportation node for the whole Donetsk operational direction. This is Operational Art 101.
I explained huge technical issues for any iteration of Patriot AD systems six weeks ago here:
So, the only benefit here is for the Raytheon and Lockheed to obtain some REAL war data and maybe (maybe) incorporate some lessons learned, which is a whole other can of worms when speaking about learning curve of the US weapon systems designers and manufacturers, in order to improve on what already sustained serious reputational damage due to its constant failures to perform against even backward opponent. So, another day--another NATO wunderwaffe for former Ukraine. All reminiscent of using a band-aid on a blown up body. Here is Brian Berletic making the case precisely on this issue.
Now, per this nauseating "Iranian Drones" BS. Even Iran is getting tired:
As I already stated many times--it is difficult to explain to most people without background in the field a gigantic gap in industrial capabilities between Russia and Iran and how Russian economy operates.
Wielomski believes that in the current geopolitical situation, Poland
has two options: either to be a transmission and trade-belt on the
Beijing-Moscow-Berlin-Paris axis and benefit from it, given its
geographical location, or become nothing more than “a spoiler of the
United States in Eurasia.” The Polish elites chose the second option.
“They may be right; but I, for one, was not convinced. To be frank, they
didn’t even try to convince anyone, because after 1989 there was no
debate on this issue in Poland. The government was taken over by people
who had been in opposition until 1989 and who took money from the CIA
for their activities, pacifying not only opposing views but even calls
for a debate on this issue.”
Pay attention to a geopolitical arrangement which should have been but never materialized. In general, read the whole thing--it is excellent.
Washington Post has its motto as "Democracy Dies In Darkness". Ironically, it goes without saying that on both counts Washington Post succeeded immensely--it created enough darkness thus ensuring that whatever passes nowadays for "democracy" in the US dies faster and in painful convulsion. The creeps now need to spin the events in 404 in a different way.
Three media whores, there are no other types in Western establishment media, who wrote this drivel spinning a debunked therapeutic myth about Russian T-62s, cannot deny anymore strategic and operational realities, even despite continuing to sing from 404's propaganda script cooked in large part in London. The butt-hurt is palpable, not to mention the fact of constant mutually exclusive points they make in this piece. But what do you expect from WaPo or any globalist rag in the West? Many of you already noted that lapdogs in London, whose Armed Forces and indigenous military technology are a joke, started to spin another BS, about Kh-22 (X-22) missile.
Somebody, please, explain to ignorant UK Defense Ministry BSers who command a toy army of a toy country, that Kh-22 (and I know way more than they about this thing) was and remains a high precision weapon which active radar seeker gives a hint about. That automatically translates to the ability (for latest versions) of Kh-22 to strike radio-contrast land targets--the feature all Soviet/Russian anti-shipping missiles are known for from venerable and removed from service P-6/35 to a much more advanced P-700 Granit which WAS used and is being used in training striking land-based targets.
But then again, what do you expect from London where the prime minister is, obviously, not a very bright fellow and foreign secretary is a certified idiot. I would assume that very little of competence remains in UK Defense Ministry and, as is confirmed empirically, the only war they can fight is propaganda and PR. That, plus killing innocents, but that is more along the lines of Mi-6. But, as I stated, the butt-hurt is palpable and it is time for the UK to resign itself to the fact that, as I spoke many times before, that it is a pip-squeak of a country with backward economy and the time to put to rest great power ambitions and being the plug in every asshole is nigh. UK's place is that of a nation with limited resources, limited geopolitical influence and puny military capability, that is of what soon will be defined as "second world" countries. Yes, English Premier League is still good. I'll give them that.
I know Byron would hate me saying this, but this Harvard-trained geologist and a former cadre US naval officer with massive experience, when he speaks resources and money--you can take it to the bank. Yes, he is that good. Here is Byron's latest on the geopolitics of the resources and gold-based Ruble.
It is an excellent piece, which you can read by following the link in the quote and it explains the larger framework of what Russia is doing in Ukraine and why this operation has a massive global impact. I stress it all the time, including in my videos, keep your eyes on the main prize and this prize is a demolition of the remnants of Pax Americana and establishment of a truly new world order where nations will be free to trade how they want and could be treated fairly instead of being bombed into stone age--that is the main prize. This is why such a level of neocon and American "exceptionalists" rage, impotent rage. I highly recommend this article.
Pentagon complains and it is good that they do, because I am all for both militaries to keeping in touch. As I said, I feel much safer when Gerasimov and Milley talk to each-other, than when even Lavrov talks to Blinken.
Let me forward a theory on why Russians do not respond. Here it is: unlike the portrayal in Hollywood of Russians being either soulless automatons such as Ivan Drago or drunk lowlifes and criminals, or simpletons, Russians in general, and Russian military in particular, while as anywhere else have their share of characters from Solzhenitsyn's writings, they live by much more than primitive creed which Westerners so love to imagine. Red Army soldiers "raping" 2.5 million German women in 1945 is a figment of imagination (well paid by MI-6) of such "historians" as Antony Beavor, while in reality humanism (sometimes completely detrimental to Russians themselves) towards enemy civilians was and is burned into Russian psyche and one can recall famous Stalin's quote: "Hitlers come and go, Germany remains."
The core of Western propaganda in the last 8 years was this idea, projection really (Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki) of shelling indiscriminately civilian areas of Donbass and now, with the start of combat operations of February 24, shelling and killing own Ukrainian civilians all over the place--all is well documented. Moreover, using them as a human shield has become a trade mark of VSU, which, for the last 8 years, was, and you already guessed it, "trained", armed and advised by primarily US and UK military personnel. US also provides assistance in terms of communications and some C2 and ISR to VSU. Moreover, discovery of bioweapons labs in Ukraine which operated under the auspices of Pentagon just adds weight to Russian decision not to talk to people who lost all remnants of honor and are, in fact, main facilitators, together with State Department and intel organizations of the wholesale crimes against humanity and war crimes in Donbass and Ukraine as a whole. Russians didn't negotiate anything with Nazis in 1945, they merely presented them with articles of unconditional surrender.
Russians do not negotiate or communicate with those who view it normal to use civilians as human shield and develop bioweapons, including confirmed mass cases of testing them on humans. Kirby quips:
At a March 30 press briefing, Pentagon spokesman John Kirby admitted there had been “no conversations to speak to” with the Russian military, but professed a “willingness to have those discussions,” after a reporter asked whether Washington had been “in touch” with Russia’s military leadership. “But
it's a two-way street. The Russians have to be willing to pick up the
phone and thus far they have not been willing to do that,” Kirby added.
That's the key, Russians are not willing anymore. If they, in Pentagon, don't understand the reasons and morality behind Russian military not willing to communicate, they better start learning Russian military history of the 20th century and I mean the real one, not BS by Beavor, Ziemke, Pipes and this kind of "historians". If not, there is nothing to talk about, Russians do not use civilians as human shield. Everything else will be answered at War Crimes tribunal tentatively set to start in June, in Crimea. The United States made its choice, so did Pentagon, the rest is history. I warned about it long time ago, US military stained itself completely by supporting Neo-Nazis.
Here is my talking head today:
Many in the US forgot Decatur's famous words amended by Senator Carl Shurz in the mid-1800s, especially second half of the legendary expression.
Flew back in today with our flight from Fort Lauderdale to Seattle literally running out of fuel after fighting severe head winds (up to 120 mph). Had to divert to Portland where we refueled, then took off and finally landed in soggy Seattle. We had enough fuel to make it to Seattle directly but barely and the weather was, well, fog, alright. So, we simply had nothing, empty tanks, for holding if need be. Better safe than sorry. So, I am back on the home turf, completely exhausted, however...
Immediately, I don't know why all this fuss about among all those so called US "realists" that Russia somehow is "not winning", when the latest--one will see now how a huge cauldron around Mariupol will be reduced and Russian and LDNR forces are literally into hostage rescue situation with civilians in Mariupol being taken hostage by Nazis. What a "lovely" ally the West created for itself. For update now, Andrei Raevsky does an excellent job of cutting through Ukie and West's propaganda and fakes and here is his latest:
I totally concur, from what I observe now, by far the most interesting (from psychiatric point of view) is the reaction of the West to its own bullshit in which it got caught and doesn't know how to escape. Militarily, however, this operation will be studied in (real) military academies for a long time as a classic way of removing a rogue armed forces and regime with clinical accuracy. This also explains to a large degree the hysteria in the West's media and political establishment. So, anyway, I am now in the jet lag fighting mode but I am back.
In reality directly connected--I am about 3M22 Zircon. Its official combat range has been revealed: the surface launched version of 3M22 has a range of 1,500 kilometers (in Russian). And while VSU destroys dozens of Russian armored columns, kills Chechens in thousands and shoots down tens upon tens of SU-35s and SU-57s, and while many US military "experts" parade themselves as amateurs who never learned the subject, Kharkov is taken and mopping up operations are in progress, Berdyansk is taken (see the map), a gigantic cauldron in Donbass is almost formed. But yes, rumors of Russia getting ready to surrender, Gerasimov is fired and Anglo-American "advisers" will get them the "plan"... Ah, wait, it is all for CNN and fakes.
But reality is such that the real warfare, not some propaganda BS in public spaces (the only "warfare" the West is good at), aka psyops, changed so dramatically, that the only thing is left for the West is impose sanctions, which hurt the West more than Russia. Some people in the West know that but prefer to keep silent because most of the Western politics is conducted for the consumption of the brainwashed and uneducated public. Anything tangible in any field increasingly dissipates into the virtual reality and loses the property of being tangible. The only hope for Washington is to somehow "prolong" Russia's operation--this is the extent of strategic vision in D.C. But that is not how it works, they already saw how it works in Afghanistan, Vietnam, you name it--all those wars which the United States lost while remaining "the finest fighting force in history". They only think in cliches. An incredible paradox--the more you get your ass kicked, the more you humiliate your own country, the better you become at what you constantly fail at. An incredible "logic". But then again, I am on record for years--they don't learn. They need to constantly lie to themselves. And so they do. Details--later.
Strategy is a buzz word among politicos and journos because it is "loaded" and it gives an impression of something really mysterious and cool. I will be talking about it in my next video. Strategy as a "plan" of achieving political aims in anything, however, in the field of practical geopolitics of the second half of the 20th and the 21st centuries is a bit more than a "plan". As in military campaigns, one cannot become a "strategist" without having tactical and operational background and that is why all advanced military education in the world is structured around taking an officer from the tactical, to operational to strategic level of thinking, thus providing a pivot around which all strategic decisions, with inputs form tactical and operational levels, will revolve. This is not how modern political "science" and what passes for "strategic decision making" in the West works.
Modern geopolitics as primarily the realm of raw power of the states projected against the geographic background is unknown to Western governing class. It cannot be known due to a radical lack of comprehension of instruments which dictate geopolitical reality--physical economy and military. These ARE very complex fields and at some point of time West's "intellectual elite", which is grown and brought up primarily within the confines of "humanities" departments of the US Ivy League and UK's old educational institutions, simply ran out of expertise which already was lacking even by the end of 19th century. In the 21st century--explaining to Vicky Nuland or Jake Sullivan what is combat networks' topology (granted basic course in the Graph Theory is taught) and how it is no less important than raw firepower--this is a fool's errand and an exercise in futility.
But this is just one small segment out of very many of modern day reality which is more important to practical geopolitics and global power balance than what comes down to personal opinions of incompetent people with zero backgrounds in real strategy development and governance. And it is this and many other factors, not some abstract political concepts, which drive modern real strategies. US "elites" don't do strategies, they do strategy and doctrine-mongering which exist in a virtual world of illiterate personal passions, vendettas and ambitions and results of such "strategies" are telling--the country, the US is being run into the ground by people who literally do not know how the world works. Read Bernhard's excellent piece. It explains how those "strategies" fail. The US needs better "strategists", not political hacks operating on a white board "strategies" which fail time after time because they are detached from reality. But then again, that brings us to a larger question of US "political elites" being adequate to the task. The answer is obvious--they are not.
But it is inevitable that points that really matter will be brought up. It is also not surprising that Tucker is the one who brings them. While I somewhat disagree with overly alarmist points about the US being sucked into the war with Russia, it goes without saying that at least some people in Pentagon and CIA have an idea about what it means, and, frankly, Tucker speaks about. But what he says between 4:50 and 4:58 is the point hidden deeply, away from the attention of the American public.
The whole mythology of the "finest fighting force in history" is built around a single event of beating the shit out of the backward third world Saddam's Army after half-a-year of assembling and predeploying Coalition Troops in the area while bombing the shit out of Iraq with impunity, because of the ancient Iraqi air-defense and de facto non-functional air force. That's it. It's like a credit history and they don't want to remind about it to Americans by means of obfuscating facts. The military where pompous mediocrity Patton is considered a "great tactician", never mind he never fought a first rate Wehrmacht at the top of its power, not to mention sappy sentimental, completely contrived, BS of totally mythical, non-existent that is, "Patton-Rommel rivalry", is a good indicator that something is wrong with facts on the ground. I am not even sure Rommel, himself grossly inflated in his abilities by Monty and Churchill to inflate their role in WW II, knew who Patton was. And that's just one example out of many. Tucker said it, loud and clear. So, Tucker, yes, there are many of those who lost those five wars who still think that they can win a modern 21st century war with the 20th century force structure and TOE.
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:
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:
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.
As you may know, I hate historical parallels--most of them lack necessary depth and context. Yet, Vladimir Putin yesterday drew a direct MO parallel between Soviet Union and the United States.
This moment has come already in 2014 and since then, as you all know, things were not going that well for the United States, especially in the field in which the United States proclaimed itself "the finest fighting force in the history of the world". Why the United States arrived to this conclusion is the question I am trying to answer in my books and this blog for 7 years now. But Putin is correct insofar as pointing out great, if not gross, limitations of the American power, which, for starters, as any power, is not static and undergoes transformation non-stop. This Putin's statement, as well as his dramatic "we are not obliged to feed everyone" (in Russian),
and a very satisfied expression on Gerhard Schroder's face (starting at 1:42) are good indicators of Russia's position for the upcoming summit in Geneva and it is a very bad news for Ukraine. Well, this plus the fact that the first stage of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline is completed. That amounts, actually, to Ukraine's worst nightmare because Russia, indeed, doesn't want to support Ukraine economically in anyway and the main issue today is WHO will pay for Ukraine's mess. Certainly not Russia. US' feeble attempts to convince Germany to allow Ukraine to be a party of US-German negotiations on NS2 is just a political circus, because nobody wants this shithole of a country on their balance. The United States obviously wants to continue to use Ukraine as a ram against Russia, but...but...but one has to have at least some bang for a buck and in Ukraine this is simply not possible, because it is against Russia, not Iraq.
The sooner all those ignoramuses in the State Department, especially its Russia "section", headed by Kagan's cabal, understand that, the better it will be for the United States which is in no position to press Russia through Ukraine, because if pushed too far, Russia will react and that will make the United States look very weak. Well, that is the main reason for the American side stalking Russians trying to obtain the agreement on holding the summit. While I do not agree with recent events around Ukraine being compared to Cuban Missile Crisis, there was no doubt that the only option the United States had if Russia would "deal" with Ukraine was to escalate to nuclear threshold in desperate attempts to mitigate enormous political and reputational losses the United States would incur after Russia would annihilate both VSU and current Ukrainian statehood. Even ignorant and possessed neocons in D.C. understand that and want to live. The upcoming summit will be primarily about that--somebody in D.C. got the message and got scared.
I still cannot wrap my brain around the whole proceedings in Geneva in terms of how Putin would communicate with Biden, but it is what it is, so I don't really care. As long as US exceptionalists begin to understand that they are not that exceptional--good, we all may avoid a major war and it is all for the better. Putin, obviously, knows the present state of the United States and the talk we hear from Moscow today indicates that Russia is absolutely confident and means what she states. As long as the United States will not do stupid things in Ukraine, like trying to "rebuild" Ukrainian Army--a dubious proposition in a better times for the US, forget about now--things should be fine and Europe will get its gas, thus giving Germany a small fighting economic chance before Bundestag will get filled with woke globalist shills from the Green Party whose main objective is to turn already badly mauled Germany into the third world shithole. But that is a strictly internal German affair--people deserve the government they elect. In this sense, Putin drawing parallels with the Soviet Union are not incorrect and as I wrote recently, the United States simply reached limits, which cannot be pushed anymore. It is a completely new paradigm.
I will not mince words here: Russia doesn't need meeting with Biden (or whoever is running this POTUS avatar), US establishment (large portion of it), on the other hand, needs this meeting badly. Both sides know it, but Russians, who learned to calculate the US actions (not that difficult, actually) several steps ahead are perfectly fine with playing such a role. Russia does not need the US for a number of reasons, few main of which are:
1. Russia is largely secure economically from the US. De facto allied relations with China and friendly relations with with Asia more than compensate for whatever Russia may lose (or already lost) in her trade with combined West;
2. Militarily, Russia has the edge over the United States even the Soviet Union couldn't have dreamed about;
3. Russians know damn well that US crisis (I write about it for years) is systemic and even under the worst global circumstances short of all out thermonuclear war, Russia has all the time she needs and may even not strain herself doing much observing this train-wreck of a combined West exiting global stage as a decisive force.
4. Last, but not least... Russians know that the US needs this summit. Russians even know why the US needs this summit and Russia is content with playing the role of a hard to get maiden, who wouldn't? Especially knowing that whatever may be negotiated and settled with the US at this possible summit will not be worth the paper it will be written on. It never is, because the US is non-agreement capable.
But the US needs this summit to demonstrate own significance to her European vassals and maybe, just maybe, introduce a degree of strain into Russian-Chinese relations. After all, US political top and media are packed with pathological liars and it wouldn't take them any effort to spread and spin all kinds of BS about this possible summit. To a detriment of Russian-Chinese relations, of course. In the end, Biden's appearance next to Putin (for the photo-op mostly) increases Biden's mojo, not Putin's, whose scale as a statesman is long ago secured in Russia and globally.
So, today, in Iceland, about 35 years since the first meeting of Gorbachev and Reagan there, the dance starts:
The main question is, of course, what's in it for Russia? Putin is not going to attend possible summit for the photo-op only, which is absolutely the case for Biden. Putin's scale and position today is such that the only equal to him statesmanship-wise figure globally is Comrade Xi. Biden for Putin at this stage is a "marrying down" option. Not to mention the fact that Putin represents an ascending power, while Biden is an EPITOME and embodiment of the America's departure from largely self-proclaimed position of hegemon. Recall what I wrote four and a half years ago. I will remind you:
Remember what was the title of that post? It was Does United States Have Enough Currency? To buy Russia, of course. The US didn't have it then, today--it is not even close. No matter how one tries to spin it, but even the Nord Stream 2 pipeline has for Russia primarily geopolitical, not economic significance. This pipe-line is a life-line for Germany. Deny Germany this life-line and, well:
This is not a charity move on Biden's side. Not at all, nor is it along the lines of reduction of tensions between the US and Russia Biden's people so love to talk about as of lately. Much of this decision is driven by Germany's sudden allocation of at least rudimentary spine and making sure that the US gets the message that it is risking a lot if it succeeds in sabotaging NS2 and that, as you may have guessed it already, plays into the Russian hands yet again because of major political repercussions in Germany even if the Bundestag gets to be much "greener", because at stake is an issue of Germany remaining the first world nation and EU's largest economy. Even utterly corrupt and stupid globalist shills such as German Greens are not ready to play with this. Not yet, anyway. Zugzwang, ladies and gentlemen. No matter what you do--you lose. And those damn Russians win one way or another. Don't tell me that I didn't warn you.
I know, I know, it is so fvcking frustrating to be an American diplomat nowadays, because you come to meet Russians and those SOBs stare at you with their smug faces (wink, wink) and already know what and how you will be saying and doing not only now but later. It is infuriating for American exceptionalists and neocons because they literally are impotent to do anything about it. Not only US "diplomats" are not real diplomats--they are merely conduits for Washington's diktat--and are outclassed by Russia's and China's real diplomats, but they don't have on their side what they thought they always had, when talking to third world shitholes and confused and weakened Russia of 1990s, who was suffering from a self-inflicted wound--a real military and economic power.
In some bizarre way, I think, the United States performed a great service to Russia and her people when, being driven by incompetence, myopia and thirst for instant gratification, unleashed a mayhem in Ukraine in 2014. They awoken in Russians this ever-present but unseen by strangers what Tolstoy described as a "warm light of patriotism" and that was it. Ukraine's bloody coup finally opened eyes of Russians on their own fate and attitudes to life and former "brotherly nations" and freed them from any illusions on this account. It also pushed long overdue economic transition into the overdrive and we see the results of that every day. As a Russian I say this with a great pride and a sense of achievement. As an American citizen I cannot deny also a sadness from seeing what has been done to the United States in the last 25 years and how Russian-American relations have been practically destroyed, being slaughtered as a sacrificial lamb at the altar of America's hubris, self-delusion and exceptionalism. Today the United States reached its absolute limits in power and influence and it is probing them, only to recognize that those limits are one massive concrete wall which cannot be breached, no matter the scale of an effort. This is the reality and it seems that someone in D.C. begins to recognize it.
In related news, Biden calls "killer Putin" and offers to hold a summit to discuss you know...that thing(c), whatever that is. Putin should be very cautious when meeting good ol' (literally) Joe, since if Biden, God forbids, dies, Putin will be blamed because he is, you know, a killer.
I mean, it is a good development, no doubt about it, it is better to talk than fight, plus Russia is really leaving West for good, after Lavrov's confirmation in his interview to Iranian IRNA yesterday (in Russian) that Russia basically is ready to discard Western pay systems such as Visa and Mastercard and, of course, insulating Russia from other sanction risks from the US and EU. Obviously, the course on the dedollarization was also reiterated. Now Biden, or rather those who control him, suddenly want "stable and predictable relations with Russia". Dudes, supporting a Nazi shithole like Ukraine and calling the President of a superpower "a killer" is a very wrong way of going about it. Again, Russia's departure from the West cannot be stopped any more and for that US "diplomacy" and "intelligence", or whatever passes in the US for these, otherwise respectable and real professionals'-oriented, occupations are responsible together with a cesspool of lowlifes known in the US as main stream media. You get what you paid for, folks.
The main issue here is this puzzle: what is the message? I assume that 230 mph slow drone, capable to launch "whole" 25-kilometer range guided munition should terrify Russians. In reality, it is nothing more than trying to self-medicate and simulate some sort of activity for the consumption of the NATO members. Of course, gathering intel is always a worthy cause but the issue here is that Russia sees every aircraft at all Europe's airfields even before they take off. So, militarily this move is primarily for propaganda purposes, BUT there is one contingency which must not be discounted.
The United States is desperate to involve Russia into something big (relatively) and the only semi-realistic path to that is to set-up provocations in Transdnistrya against Russians, including 2000 Russian peacekeepers. False flags seem to offer more promising results than mere moving laughable drone assets around the Black Sea and that, if provocation succeeds, may involve a serious Russian reaction. The United States is desperate for serious Russia's reaction. It is the only way the US conducts its foreign policy, because direct confrontation with Russian means the end of US presence in Europe and de facto the end of NATO, in case nuclear escalation could be avoided. So, it is, in the end, about Ukraine which, in case of any harm to Russians in Transdnistrya, gets into serious trouble. I am not going to speculate on the scale of these troubles but Russia can "solve" the issue of Transdnistrya once and for all. But, judging by the latest events in the US, considering a good probability of chaos spreading, who knows, in coming years, if not months, the concern for safety of US nuclear arsenal and people in charge of it, could become an overriding concern. But then again, I am on record for years that the United States is ungovernable and we can see indications of that today, live.
It it sad, but it is also hilarious. A video is worth a thousand words. Serbia's President Vucic is being had (together with Serbia) in every hole. This video is already making rounds and poor Masha Zaharova was forced (Russians usually keep their cool under most circumstances) to clarify after she posted this in her Facebook. Serbs were incensed, probably because of this being true, and video is hilarious and proves that it is true.
Well, as I say non-stop, you cannot save people from themselves. In the end, one is ultimately responsible for choices one makes. Saker posted a good write up on this whole bizarre affair at his blog and I suggest you acquaint yourself with this excellent guest analysis.
In related news, Ukraine's Foreign Minister Kuleba concluded that this was Ukraine which brought civilization to Russia. We know that Ukraine is run from D.C. and Brussels (in different proportions, I don't care to calculate) and that Ukrainian "elites", while cruder and dumber are still a reflection of say, America's "elites", which are also crude and dumb and installed own likeness, but the point is that huge percentage of Ukrainian population, including Russian-speakers shares this point of view. That explains, yet again, why not only Russia didn't go into Ukraine in 2014 but why iron curtain between Russia and Ukraine is ultimately required, including removal of many seasonal Ukrainian workers from Russia and blocking their return. The issue is not only of some of them being SBU assets, for that there is FSB, but with the overall virus of Ukrainian insanity and perfidy which needs to be contained outside Russia's borders. As I repeat ad nauseam--Ukraine did happen as a political nation and nothing could, or should, be done about it. Russians and Ukrainians are, indeed, different and that is all for the better. Europe has plenty of strawberry farms and toilet bowls needing tending to and Ukraine fits perfectly to this function. In the end, there is always Canada, where they love svidomys.
Meanwhile, Pentagon issued a report to US Congress on China's military capability. You all know my attitude to Pentagon's "analysis", plus you know that I am not a Sinophile by any stretch of imagination--I do not even pretend to be a specialist in China--but something tells me that D.C. long ago lost any touch with the reality and as historic record shows, as Patrick Armstrong observed, the US is a slower learner in matters of real war. I will have to endure digging into all those pages of data to have my opinion on the issue Interesting still to read between the lines in such kind of reports.
Let me address the issue which many, as it should be the case in our world of unsolicited "expertise", tried to comment on. This huge elephant-like white gorilla in the room is Belarus. Let me state immediately my personal position regarding the events there--I don't care. When Ukraine happened almost 7 years ago and Crimea returned home in 2014, I was initially ambivalent on the issue, which many "pundits", allegedly of the "patriotic" Russian variety, pushed for--full-blown invasion of Ukraine and "regime change" to suit Russia's geopolitical objectives. It was then that the term "Putin Vse Slil", meaning Putin failed miserably, was coined. As it turned out, Kremlin's decision to support Donbas and leave Ukraine be was a strategic master-stroke, which allowed Russia to accumulate resources and start playing much larger than Ukraine "game of thrones" globally.
Russia has NO obligations to support, often largely anti-Russian populations of her former "brotherly" Soviet Republics. As I am also on record, collective Putin's main task is to care about 146 million of Russia's own citizens, not to support people who want to remain nationalistic at the expense of Russia. As Ukrainian experience has shown--all those pro-Russian sentiments among some segments of Ukraine and, now we can add her here, Belarus, are skin-deep and are largely secondary if not tertiary factors of what essentially formed as a cabal of freeloaders in 1990s and 2000s. Enter Belarus. Remove Russia from Belarus economy--a process which is ongoing as I type this--meaning closing Russia's market for Belarus's few products which have been already substituted by Russia, and you have a bankrupt backward economy.
As people with good political sense say nowadays, Belarus will either become Russia's region, or some other form of administrative subdivision, or it will cease to exist. It is simple as that. Obviously Belarus is yet another good reminder of West's malfeasance in its addiction to color revolutions and regime change, but we should not also forget about Lukashenko being nothing more than a narrow-minded clownish autocrat who in his attempts to hold on to power will destroy Belarus. But, the truth is--if to imagine the opposition coming to power in Belarus, the result will be absolutely the same. Belarus has no good options. Now to this ever important geopolitical and military issue: what if NATO moves in, some people will ask. OK. Russia then will move in too. NATO knows this. If Brussels or Warsaw want to feel the heat--they will, but for Russia, if push comes to shove, it will be much easier to take over Belarus militarily, than that would have been the case with Ukraine.
Belarus is much smaller geographically and population-wise than Ukraine, but we are not talking about this scenario yet. Russia is more interested in seeing how current events play out, because Lukashenko IS NOT Russia's own Son of a Bitch anymore. He stopped being such a couple years ago (it was a process of unbecoming) and the title and a position of Russia's own SOB are increasingly valuable and sought after privileges. Lukashenko didn't want to follow Russia's advice on unified state formation, he was warned, he ignored warnings and now he is a definition of a used condom, which must be disposed of. Lukashenko may yet hold on to power but he is done and Russia is not going to spend her resources on supporting Belarus' economy. Same way as Russia refused and followed through with decoupling from Ukraine's economy. We all know the result of this decoupling for Ukraine and for Russia, the difference couldn't have been starker. Same goes for Belarus. Russia doesn't owe anything to anyone, she spent too much time supporting and feeding people who hate her in return. This time is over. And yes, I don't buy this "brotherly" or "same" people thesis at all. Putin says that because he has to placate all kinds of headless "patriots" inside Russia. It is understandable.
So, here it is--my position on this Belarus issue. The scenario is always the same, the playbook of color revolutions is fairly warn by now and, finally, Russia consistently looks out for her own national interests, not somebody else's and it is about freaking time. Not to mention, that the only emotion Lukashenko may evoke is that of a condescending squeamishness one feels when approached by unwashed, stinking arrogant homeless beggar on the street demanding the pocket change. Simple as that.
