It Doesn't Matter.

William Burns may have been, once, long time ago, an acceptable diplomat and CIA asset in Moscow, but military thinker he is not, as are not those people in CIA who "plan" those 404 "operations". 

Senior intelligence officials warned on Monday that without additional American aid, Ukraine faced the prospect of continued battlefield losses as Russia relies on a network of critical arms suppliers and drastically increases its supply of technology from China. In public testimony during the annual survey of worldwide threats facing the United States, the officials predicted that any continued delay of U.S. aid to Ukraine would lead to additional territorial gains by Russia over the next year, the consequences of which would be felt not only in Europe but also in the Pacific. “If we’re seen to be walking away from support for Ukraine, not only is that going to feed doubts amongst our allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific; it’s going to stoke the ambitions of the Chinese leadership in contingencies ranging from Taiwan to the South China Sea,” William J. Burns, the C.I.A. director, told Congress.

The US may unfreeze those $61 billion, she may even try to supply more of the same, more Patriots, more M1 Abrams et al--it doesn't matter. This is what they cannot grasp due to low level of education and culture. This is a new paradigm for them--all of them are "graduates" of the school of "beating the crap from defenseless nations" strategic "studies", and with the level of economic "science" in the West they cannot grasp how this all unfolds. They panic, they propose some band-aid to the patient stricken with the 4th stage cancer, all in vain--it is a different warrior culture they cannot grasp, they simply have no reference points. The United States never had Alexander Nevsky, Kutuzov or Zhukov. They fear what they cannot understand, but the question is--did they ever try? Nope... Burns wasted his time in Moscow, he learned absolutely nothing. 

Well, That's CIA For Ya...

 ... US media increasingly begin to look like a North Korean TV and, in fact, this comparison is not a stretch. As any US legacy media, Foreign Affairs should not be taken seriously other than the propaganda and ideology rag, similar to the CPSU main ideological magazine Communist. Here is proof--Mr.Burns, current CIA's boss shares his analytical wisdowm about Russia. 

Putin’s war has already been a failure for Russia on many levels. His original goal of seizing Kyiv and subjugating Ukraine proved foolish and illusory. His military has suffered immense damage. At least 315,000 Russian soldiers have been killed or wounded, two-thirds of Russia’s prewar tank inventory has been destroyed, and Putin’s vaunted decades-long military modernization program has been hollowed out. All this is a direct result of Ukrainian soldiers’ valor and skill, backed up by Western support. Meanwhile, Russia’s economy is suffering long-term setbacks, and the country is sealing its fate as China’s economic vassal. Putin’s overblown ambitions have backfired in another way, too: they have prompted NATO to grow larger and stronger. 

These are some of the pearls by this guy who is running CIA and that explains why the US cannot beat Taliban or doesn't have any clear picture of the events around the world. Burns has been the US Ambassador to Russia and while there he learned absolutely nothing, which is the feature, not a bug, of what passes in the US for diplomacy, and now he toes the party line spreading incompetent and, frankly, sore loser's BS. 

The key to success lies in preserving Western aid for Ukraine. At less than five percent of the U.S. defense budget, it is a relatively modest investment with significant geopolitical returns for the United States and notable returns for American industry. Keeping the arms flowing will put Ukraine in a stronger position if an opportunity for serious negotiations emerges. It offers a chance to ensure a long-term win for Ukraine and a strategic loss for Russia; Ukraine could safeguard its sovereignty and rebuild, while Russia would be left to deal with the enduring costs of Putin’s folly. For the United States to walk away from the conflict at this crucial moment and cut off support to Ukraine would be an own goal of historic proportions. 

Somebody needs to give this guy basic intro into Strategy, REAL US military history, not its Hollywood version, and also explain what real industrial economy is and how it relates to modern warfare. The whole piece is a pathetic exercise in delusion and palliative therapy for the extreme case of  butt-hurt. So, here is your CIA boss self-medicating by fantasizing. With spies like these, who needs enemies. 

Larry On Bakhmut (Artemovsk)...

Yesterday a good sitrep from Larry with, finally, proper map with the scale. 

Larry asks the question:

Is Russia Closing the Cauldron Around Bakhmut?

This morning we have the answer--yes. Morning reports tell already about tactical, not just operational, envelopment of Bakhmut and trapping there by unreliable 404 sources of 2,500 VSU (primarily from Western Ukraine (in Russian)), by other, much more reliable sources (I know them personally), of about at least 3-4 times this number. Also, officially is reported that the number of bodies of VSU littering the battlefields around Bakhmut is simply appalling and Wagner Group formed special teams for removing those corpses in order to prevent further decomposition and smell with the risk of infections. 

But by far more important news is this bit of CIA Director Burns complaining that:

Burns said on CBS that the meeting with Naryshkin was “pretty dispiriting,” describing the Russian as “defiant” and displaying “cockiness.” “There was a very defiant attitude on the part of Mr. Naryshkin,” Burns said. “A sense of cockiness and hubris, in sense reflecting Putin’s own view … that he can make time work for him, that he believes he can grind down Ukrainians, that he can wear down our European allies, that political fatigue will eventually set in.”

Somebody has to explain to Burns that he should be grateful that Naryshkin agreed to meet him at all, especially on the BS occasion of the US "warning" Russia against the use of... nuclear weapons. Naryshkin's attitude is indicative not just of Putin but of the fact that Russian military-political elite views, absolutely correctly, present US Administration as a collection of amateurs, ideologues and fanatics. Burns, who is a classic modern US "diplomat", meaning ignorant, uncultured and a political appointee, as a current Director of CIA should learn things other than how to conduct PR BS and study Russian military doctrine and, surprise-surprise, the actual state of the affairs in the United States. 

But then again, anyone who agreed to serve in Biden's Admin should be automatically disqualified as professional and a person with integrity. Burns' tenure as US Ambassador to Russia didn't contribute to his education in the matter. Per military part--most people within the Beltway are clueless in such matters and Burns is an Exhibit A of this. In other words, Naryshkin, when speaking to Burns, was talking to an amateur who wouldn't know shit from shineola and there is no other way anymore to talk to Biden Admin's people. In related news, another train in the US has derailed today. Is anyone in Biden's cabinet minding the country which literally tears at the seams?

Bernhard Did An Excellent Write-up.

On this whole situation with VSU's "victories" and how Western media are beginning to recognize a horrendous truth (for them) behind demolishing of VSU, which at this stage is literally being pummeled into utter submission. Bernhard discusses fighting doctrines of Russia and NATO and notes (correctly):

'Western' doctrine, which is essentially U.S. doctrine, is betting on air supremacy. The enemy's air defenses get destroyed in first few days of the war. After that enemy formations get wiped out by applying a huge amount of aerial bombing against them. Russian doctrine never has believed in air supremacy. Russia itself has excellent air defenses so it knows what it is talking about. To destroy enemy formations Russia applies artillery, lots of it.

He also compares combat organization of the main fighting units of Russian and US armies and, again correctly, arrives to the state-of-the-affairs for VSU. 

Unless the defending forces are fully under armor or extremely well dug in, as they had been for eight years at the Donetsk frontline, they have no hope to hold out against Russian artillery. Since the Russian army broke through the immediate frontline the Ukrainians have lost the protection of fortified dugouts and are on the run.  None of the above is new and it was the reason why I and other could easily predicted that the Ukrainian army would lose the war.

Read the whole thing, it is an excellent write up from Moon of Alabama. 

In related news, as was anticipated, the US decided not to play with fire and the danger of own annihilation and stopped any silly talks about sending HIMARS to 404 and it is all for the better. The US still wants to send some kind of MLRS (maybe even same HIMARS) but with much shorter range munitions. As Dmitry Medvedev noted today: 

«Разумно. Иначе при атаке на наши города Вооруженные силы России исполнили бы свою угрозу и нанесли удары по центрам принятия этих преступных решений. Часть из них находится совсем не в Киеве. Что дальше – объяснять не надо»

Translation: Makes sense. Otherwise, upon attacks on our cities, Russia's Armed Forces would have delivered on their threat to strike these criminal decision making centers. Part of those centers is located absolutely not in Kiev. What would follow--no explanation is needed. 

So, there you go. Meanwhile VSU continues to do what it was doing for the last 8 years--using civilians as human shield an shelling civilian areas of liberated cities and towns in Donbass. In other news, Denmark and Netherlands decided not to pay for Russian gas in Rubles. Sure, no problem.

The threat of cutting off gas supplies, if not being paid in Rubles, is taking another casualty. Russian gas giant Gazprom has announced that it will stop gas supplies to the Netherlands by Wednesday, in a reaction to the refusal by Dutch energy trader GasTerra to pay in rubles.

Evidently, the concept of money and paying for goods and services is still not developed in these two nations at this stage of their historic development, but, I think, in a few centuries they may figure this principle out and whatever will be left of them will join the family of civilized nations. Same goes for the present CIA big honcho William Burns (the US so called "diplomat"), who tries to wax Russia "insiderish" but fails miserably due to an extremely low professionalism of the current US "diplomacy" and "foreign service", so, he triers himself as Putinologist--a euphemism for ignorant US "diplomats" who, as it is normal now, know nothing about Russia. Even after being ambassador to Russia as Burns did.  So, he states:

Half of Washington, D.C., is in the business of analyzing Vladimir Putin’s every word and move these days. But when CIA Director William Burns speaks of the Russian leader, an autocrat waging a brutal war on Ukraine, his words carry unusual weight. Putin is the epitome of a “peculiarly Russian combination of qualities”: “cocky, cranky, aggrieved and insecure,” Burns has written. The Kremlin chief is “an apostle of payback,” Burns has declared.

But even this sophomoric "journalism" from Politico notes:

Burns may be a good Putinologist, but even he didn’t predict how much the Russian leader would scramble the Biden administration’s foreign policy agenda.

I have news for these US "diplomats" and "journos"--there are NO real "Putinologists", let alone good level specialists on Russia, anywhere in D.C. Because there is no US diplomacy as art and as noble profession in principle. Most what US foreign policy establishment, including its "elite" schools produces as its "diplomats" is a grey mass of under-educated ignoramuses who learn absolutely nothing about outside world and the same goes pretty much to any institution in D.C., including CIA. Burns is not an exception. 

It is the clock-work of the US "elite" education and selection mechanism which is completely broken and, as a result, produces people who are utterly unqualified to carry out any tasks related to any actual governance, be it in political, economic, diplomatic or military spheres. So, whenever the phrase such as "but even he" is used nowadays I always smile, "even they" in D.C. drove the United States to the precipice due to their corruption, careerism and lack of any professionalism. May be they should stop trying to be "Putinologists" and concentrate on their immediate professional responsibilities, instead of spewing PR BS through media which are as ignorant and amoral as they are. Nah, not gonna happen...