This week in Ukraine, members of the Orthodox Church celebrate Christmas. Putin unilaterally calling for a Christmas ceasefire to allow worshippers to celebrate. A ceasefire he did not deliver on. Russian troops continued operations and even gained ground, north of Bakhmut capturing the Soledar salt mine. The Ukrainians never took the offer seriously, President Zelenskyy immediately rejecting it. The Christmas ceasefire drama helps us to understand Putin’s position at home.
In recent weeks the main stream media has spent plenty of effort worrying about a Russian offensive from Belarus, Russia’s continuing bombardment of Ukraine’s cities and Putin’s occasional nuclear sabre rattling. This week Ukraine’s intelligence service stated that they believe that Putin is planning further mobilisation; possibly increasing the size of his army by another 500,000 soldiers. At this point Russia’s first large group of conscripts is reaching the end of its initial training cycle, roughly three months after being called up in September; fuelling commentary about the possibility of a new Russian offensive either from Belarus or from the contested south and east of Ukraine.
However, the real story is less exciting. Russia is militarily spent. Even after mobilisation, it currently lacks the military power for an offensive of sufficient size to change the course of the war. It may be able to launch small operations, but is unlikely to be able to generate the combat power needed to achieve sufficient success on the battlefield to change the course of the war. When we discuss ‘combat power’ we are looking at more than the number of soldiers available. We need to understand if they are motivated, well-equipped, logistically supported and well-led? Or are they an ineffective rabble?
A key strategic indicator that Russian combat power is waning is France and Germany’s recent increase in military support to Ukraine. Throughout the conflict both countries ‘dragged their feet’ providing only limited military support for Ukraine. Now suddenly, both nations are committing to providing sophisticated and powerful armoured fighting vehicles. France committing to sending AMX 10-RC heavy armoured cars. Six-wheeled, exceptionally mobile and sporting a powerful 105mm gun. A gun able to destroy most Russian tanks a kilometre away. The Germans are supplying the Marder, infantry fighting vehicle. Often judged one of the best of its kind it is fast, well-protected and well-armed. But what is most important is that these vehicles will likely have current generation technology. GPS, thermal imaging, digital data and a range of other important technology that puts them generations ahead of most Russian equipment.
It seems clear that the Germans and French have ‘done the math’ and realised that:
- The chance of a nuclear escalation is negligible; and
- Ukraine is going to win the land war.
Both countries want to make sure that they are in the ‘winners circle’ and have the political capital to be able to influence the post-war rebuilding of Ukraine (and Eastern Europe) appreciating that at this point there is a low-risk of an upset and that Russia will lose.
Unfortunately, it has taken many observers a long-time to understand Russia’s weakness because generations of European politicians and generals were cowed by the size and scale of Russia. This feeling was summed up by Germany’s greatest statesman Otto Von Bismark who described fighting Russia as follows “Even the most favourable outcome of the war will never lead to the decomposition of the main forces of Russia, which is based on millions of Russians”. History showed that those who challenged Russia inevitably failed. Napoleon and Hitler were both humbled Russia’s vastness and willingness to sacrifice its people. The world has changed though, and now military power is no-longer based solely on big battalions but rather on smart soldiers using smart weapons.
Putin likely understands this situation. His only remaining cards are time and willingness to sacrifice Russia’s youth. If he can hold on and tire Ukraine and Europe out, he may be able to achieve a negotiated settlement.
But; he needs to maintain an aura of strength within Russia. A key feature of Russia’s political landscape are its powerful military bloggers, many are veterans and are comprehensively ‘calling out’ the Kremlin’s ‘spin’. In a society suffering from a heavily censored main stream media these alternative voices attract a large following. Most of the military bloggers are aggressive nationalists who would generally support Putin but the war has created a split between them and the President.
Especially, after the New Year’s Day attack on Russian troops in Makiivka, Dontesk. The attack killed lots of recently mobilised Russian conscripts; the Russians admitted 89 deaths and the Ukrainians claim 400. Somewhere in the middle is the truth. Casualties were increased because the Russians had an ammunition dump co-located with the accommodation. Something that would never happen in any competent army and this issue provides fuel for the political fire lit by Russian military bloggers. Putin’s ‘ceasefire’ is likely to be a ‘sop’ to this generally nationalist and pro-Orthodox group of ‘influencers. By proposing a Christmas ceasefire Putin, demonstrated his nationalism and religiosity probably distancing himself from a terrible tactical mistake that has cost many young Russian lives. The ceasefire discussion indicates how important it is for Putin to maintain this groups support and that he is worried about losing it.
Regardless of how many soldiers Putin mobilises, the situation won’t change because a key feature of this war is the culmination; in conventional operations, of the ‘Revolution in Military Affairs’ that was predicted in the early 1990s. Then theorists discussed the idea that wars would become ‘network centric’ and that armies would rely on instantaneous digital passage of information between ‘sensors’ – soldiers, armoured vehicles, aircraft, electronic intelligence gathering and drones and ‘shooters’ – artillery, aircraft and precision guided missiles.
Further, they postulated that there would be an evolution in the way we fought. Forward units dispersing over large areas looking for targets that could not only be engaged by long-range artillery and aircraft but could be destroyed by long-range precision guided fire. Armies operating this way needed new doctrine, or ways of operating that devolved authority allowing tactical flexibility and ‘mission command’ tactics emphasising flexibility and empowered junior leaders became the norm in modern armies.
The price of any evolution is experience; and the price of experience is pain. NATO’s armies spent twenty years painfully developing and testing this doctrine in battle across the globe from Iraq and Afghanistan to Somalia and Mali. In this war, the Ukrainians are proving concepts theorised about thirty years ago. Fortunately, for Ukraine (and for NATO) the Russians missed this revolution. Although, they paid lip-service to these ideas they didn’t invest time or money in the organisational transformation required to become network centric or to use mission command tactics.
Essentially, the Russians are fighting the same way their Soviet ancestors did in the 1980s and today the Russian army lacks key elements required for success on a modern battlefield including:
- Junior leadership. The Russian’s do not have a cadre of long-serving, highly motivated junior leaders. The corporals and sergeants that make sure the soldiery are maintaining their equipment, advising on tactics and making sure that their man keep moving forward on the attack and stand steadfast in defence.
- Digitisation. Modern armies communicate using digital data. GPS is common place and allows for the rapid transmission of accurate data between ‘sensors’ and ‘shooters’. Drones are able to provide real-time targeting information because they are supported by digital networks. Captured Russian soldiers and vehicles consistently lack digital connectivity.
- Logistics. Not just the ability to move food, fuel and ammunition around but also the ability to fix and maintain vehicles and equipment. Throughout the war we have seen reports of Russian logistic failures. And; in network centric war logistics becomes even more important because every piece of communication infra-structure or tech needs to be maintained and supported. Armies used to march on their stomachs, now it is on batteries!
- Doctrine. Russian doctrine is dated and predicated on managing a large, poorly trained force. Decision-making is not devolved so Russian forces are inflexible and unable to exploit fleeting opportunities. Instead, they flounder on the battlefield lacking leadership.
None of these factors is going to change quickly. The Ukrainians have been building their army since 2014, coached by British and American mentors who have been able to provide them with the benefit of twenty years of hard-won experience. Six years building the Ukrainian army’s leadership into a cadre able to fight a modern war. Russia, would need longer because its army is larger and more conservative. Chances are that a change of the significance required is generational; or enough time for current junior leaders to learn a new way of war then as they achieve higher levels of command modernise their army. In short, a tough task in a competent well-governed army that is made impossible in Russia by corruption and political interference.
In summary the factors outlined above mean that at the start of 2023 Ukraine holds the initiative. Ukraine will choose where and when the next major offensive starts. This said there may be small Russian offensives, perhaps even a push from Belarus. If Russia does launch small offensives, I do not think that they will be large or successful; instead a small offensive will further dissipate and deplete Russian reserves. Small offensives are a mistake; providing an opportunity for the Ukrainians to defeat Russian forces in detail and preventing development of a large, new field army able to transfer to offensive operations.
The campaign’s ‘vital ground’ (the land that if held by one side the other side can’t win) is the area in southern Ukraine, currently held by Russia that links Crimea to Donetsk. The ‘Crimean land bridge’, that if lost makes Russia’s hold on Crimea untenable.
Therefore the next significant step in this war will be related to this piece of land. A Ukrainian offensive into this area is very likely early in 2023. Possible objectives are Melitopol or Mariupol both of which are important cities and capturing either would effectively cut the land bridge. Either option will be a tough fight so be ready for a deception; an attack elsewhere or a fixing battle somewhere like Kremina or Bakhmut. It is only a matter of time, especially when countries like France and Germany start to provide effective military support.
Ben Morgan is a tired Gen X interested in international politics. He is TDB’s Military analyst.
Ukraine has already received billions of dollars in military support, continues to receive more and more lethal weaponry, satellite targeting, mercenaries and “volunteers” from combined EU, US,UK and outlying loyal servants of the US empire.In the face of a less numerous army, poorly trained, poorly fed and motivated, poorly equipped with hopeless Battlefield tactics, “scared and exhausted” why has NATO trained and supported Ukraine so spectacularly failed in driving Russia back inside its own borders?
Simple reason is to bleed dry the Russian economy and to hasten the split up off the Russian federation.
Pushing back the Russians right now makes no long term sense in geopolitical terms. Long term the west and China want to see the ability of the Russia to rebuild their armed forces diminished to such an extend that economically they are no longer a super power. Only China and USA will be left in that category. There never was room for three nuclear super powers (why China is not happy with India).
With a second wave of conscription about to start and disquiet spreading in the population (especially from the mothers) about the 600 (or 90 depended upon sources) casualties of the latest Ukrainian bombing of a conscripts barrack, Putin is becoming more and more isolated.
Much disquiet too in the Russian hinterland that there is enough money for more tanks and bombs, but not enough for rural village sewerage systems, electricity generation, better roading or access to the rail network.
How much longer can the two Russia’s (glittering Moscow/St Petersburg versus gloomy rural hinterland) co-exist when conscripts are mainly sourced from the rural hinterland (where to body bags are returned to)?
Worth a read; https://warontherocks.com/2019/12/why-russian-military-expenditure-is-much-higher-than-commonly-understood-as-is-chinas/
“Using PPP, one finds that Russia’s effective military expenditure actually ranged between $150 billion and $180 billion annually over the last five years. That figure is conservative; taking into account hidden or obfuscated military expenditure, Russia may well come in at around $200 billion.”
The infrastructure poor Russian rural hinterland sure would not have minded a few less tanks but sure would have appreciated treated water and sewerage systems instead of communal wells and long drop out houses.
Bit of honesty from Gerit, he wants to break up the Russian Federation. Nice, very neo Con.
Just an observation. Not a wish. The federation will be asking; what has Russia done for us. Nothing neo-con or liberal about the observation.
If the Belarusian puppet regime falls (and it may well do if they physically join Russia in invading Ukraine) than the federation is on real shaky ground.
Worth a read; https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/russia-may-not-survive-putins-disastrous-decision-to-invade-ukraine/
“…….contends that the Russian Federation has been unable to transform itself into a nation-state, a civic state, or even a stable imperial state. The approaching rupture of the Russian Federation will be the third phase of imperial collapse following the unraveling of the Soviet bloc in Eastern Europe and the disintegration of the Soviet Union in the late 1980s and early 1990s.”
and
“Moves toward separation by any of the 22 non-Russian republics would be likely to provoke similar demands for self-determination among several regions with ethnic Russian majorities. This would significantly weaken the center and lessen the likelihood of maintaining an autocratic state. Instructively, in the early 1990s when the Soviet Union began to unravel, 40% of the predominantly ethnic Russian regions pressed for greater autonomy and some veered toward sovereignty similar to the national republics. Separatist movements often start with demands for economic decentralization and then escalate in response to central government actions along with soaring elite and public aspirations.”
Like a said, simple observations not linked to a belief system of neo-con or liberal.
Do you know the Atlantic Councils lineage?
Yes; and that to you means? RU TV have a link to support your linear thinking?
Good word linear. I’m not sure that you know what it means in describing my thinking.
“less numerous army”? The Russians have troops & equipment but the equipment is outdated & the soldiers lack experience. Maybe you should visit the area to comprehend the real-world difficulty involved in winning a war before claiming Ukraine has “so spectacularly failed in driving Russia back”? As of November 2022, Ukraine had reclaimed 54 percent of the land Russia has captured since the beginning of the war so they are going in the right direction.
Most of what happens in the war, you don’t see. But here is a rundown by a US General: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYnFLq3ZWFs
Pretty soon you will see a dramatic change, Russian logistics have failed.
The entire point of the West’s “strategy” in Ukraine is an attempt to bleed Russia dry of money, military resources, and resolve – i.e. it’s meant to bankrupt and demoralise Russia. Further, the US also want Europe to completely decouple from Russian resources and thus become more dependent on the US. It’s a big gambit, and imo is so far failing to achieve these goals.
Great commentary Ben. Thanks.
The meat grinder that is the Donetsk front needs to end in order to minimize further suffering on both sides, and the only way to do that is to give the Ukrainians the ability to deliver a ‘coup de grace’ to the Russians. Improved armour will help but they also need drones that cannot be jammed and more effective air power.
Breaking the land bridge between Crimea and the Donbas does not make Russia’s hold on Crimea untenable. The main supply route to Crimea is across the Kerch bridge and adjacent ports.
However, breaking the land bridge certainly be a major defeat for Russia. Can Ukraine do it?
Well, they will certainly try, most likely in the next three months. I predict they won’t succeed. Russian defence will be too strong. Defence is an easier task for less well trained troops. In the event that Ukraine does not succeed then I believe there will be armistice negotiations. However if Ukraine does succeed then the war will go onto next winter.
The next hurdle for Ukraine would be Crimea. I don’t there is any realistic prospect for Ukraine to take Crimea. Those who are encouraging it, such as General Hodges, are not doing Ukraine a service by doing so.
In this regard, I think Kissinger is correct. There needs to be a credible path out. Yes, Russia started the war, but it is unrealistic to expect Russia to be utterly defeated and to treat them as of they were the Nazi’s. That is not a credible approach in respect of the great powers. The US started the 2003 war against Iraq. But they were able to exit under a new government led by President Obama. Though the lack of consequences for the US reflects the overall depth of US international relationships. They have wide and deep support among many dozens of advanced nations. Russia does not, and that is fuelling fantasies that they should be utterly humbled, without any serious thought of the consequences of that.
Quite right Wayne. Crimea is not a realistic goal but of course Zelensky will continue to state his determination to take back Ukraine as a negotiating tactic when the peace talks take place – hopefully this year.
“Breaking the land bridge between Crimea and the Donbas does not make Russia’s hold on Crimea untenable.”
It actually does, for two reasons:
>Firstly, Kherson controls the water supply to Crimea
>Secondly, the Ukraine has already demonstrated its ability to knock out the Kerch bridge – the rail line is still out of action after the last attack. Once Ukraine takes back control of the entire Kherson Oblast, the bridge is within missile and drone range.
As the Americans said in Vietnam. ‘We won every battle but we lost the war’
Fast forward to the war in Ukraine – Russia is not even winning every battle.
Both sides are settling in for a long war.
Russia’s defeat won’t come solely on the battlefield, but on the home front as well. My estimation is that Russia’s defeat will be a combination of military setbacks in Ukraine and revolt/revulsion against the war on the home front.
Ukraine’s continued resistance is the key, As long as Ukraine resists anti-war sentiment inside the Russian Federation will grow to a point where it can no longer be contained.
Igor Girkin is a prominent Russian pro-war mil-blogger who supports Russia’s Special Military Operation in Ukraine.
Girkin was asked whether he thought unrest will break out in Russia, if the Russian Federation loses the war in Ukraine.
Girkin replied that it will be the unrest that will lead to defeat in Ukraine, not the other way round.
“….I do not believe defeat in Ukraine will be suffered before the start of unrest in the Russian Federation.
It is precisely the turmoil in the Russia Federation that can lead to defeat in Ukraine.
Yes, individual defeats at the front can become a detonator – even next year – to start unrest here.” Igor Girkin
This is also my view of how the war will end. The Russian people themselves will end it.
Just as the Vietnam war ended with millions of American citizens protesting against it, the war will not end because Russia is defeated on the battlefield, or because they ran out of missiles and shells, or even conscripts, but because the Russian people just won’t tolerate it anymore. If Girkin is right it may be as soon as next year. Girkin’s views may be being a bit pessimistic., (or optimistic according to your view).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JQGCMgLn28&ab_channel=Andromeda
No doubt this coming social explosion inside Russia will spread into the armed forces as well.
What is the most important thing in the world?
He Tangata, He Tangata, He Tangata
Can’t believe you’ve taken Girkin aka Igor Strelkov seriously.He has had a beef with Putin since Putin in 2014 pulled him back from eastern Ukraine where he’d gone freelance. It was widely covered at the time
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/05/russias-valiant-hero-in-ukraine-turns-his-fire-on-vladimir-putin
He was pissed off that Putin didn’t go far enough after Crimea, said he should have gone for bust .He’s a nationalist and quite possibly a war criminal.He feels that Putin is being too soft.And this is the person you think has credibility?No way is he against the war, he wants it to be more savage
You do realise he’s been indicted for MH17?Putin should allow him to be extradited, get rid of a pain in the arse
Putin would never hand him over but you are quite right Francesca, Girkin is a war criminal.
Of course a gruesome & deadly war is not needed by working class people at any time let alone in the third decade of the 21st century as Climate Disaster threatens human viability itself. It will be negotiation one way or another however that ultimately ends this armed conflict.
Many months have now passed as our little weekend soldier Ben has issued reports on the imminent collapse of the Russian military in Ukraine (“Scud” on The Standard by the way outed Ben as an NZ military reservist of some kind, is this actually true?)
Make no mistake–this is a US Imperialist proxy war–as much as the media channels try to portray it as a brave struggle of an embattled populace (it is that too of course if you are a civilian with few options). There is layer upon layer of Ukraine history over several hundred years to take into account before you side with the Yanks on this. With US Corporates and finance capital under pressure world wide, the US Military Industrial grouping desperately wants to take down China and Russia before the BRICs group gains momentum.
Yes Russia needs to withdraw, and yes the US needs to stop providing mind boggling amounts of weapons, ammo and logistics while its own working class back home is suffering. Don’t fall into the trap of supporting “our” as in NZ’s, imperialist power, which of course by virtue of the Anglosphere and 5 Eyes is the USA.
“Neither Washington, Moscow or Beijing” is the working class internationalist slogan. When those warmongering over Ukraine from keyboards start supporting other struggles such as West Papua and Palestine they might be taken more seriously.
Defending Ukraine against attack is not warmongering. Who started the war for God’s sake? Peaceniks like you are cowards -there will never be utopia unless you fight for it Tiger Mountain.
So we must fight for peace, must we Gadfly? This reminds me of the irony of slogans like “Stamp out violence!”
Maybe you need to stop accepting over-simplifications, and look more deeply into the matter of just who did start the war…
Vino, obviously you think you know more than I do on this subject. You don’t! You just have a different opinion coloured by all the propaganda you have imbibed. We had to fight WW2 for peace! Don’t be an idiot.
USA fomented this war. USA has cheered it on from go to woe. And its military and industrial arms complex profits from it.
All it would have taken to avoid (and now, to stop) the war was for NATO not to continue its eastward expansion, an undertaking the USA made over two decades ago.
The word of USA is worthless. in both geopolitics and in trade.
For sometime now pre-emptive attack has not been considered ‘starting a war’.
That may seem a cynical proposition to some, but reality backs it up. The leader of the pack in pre-emptive strikes, attacks, destabilisations and invasions is none other than the United States of America. A number of US off shore military bases and facilities butt right up against Russia, China and Iran to enforce their “strategic” interests.
Imagine the reaction if China had even one base in say Canada…Beijing providing aid to tiny Pacific nations provoked a major diplomatic campaign by the US, Britain and Australia, with NZ tagging along.
None of this means I support Mr Putin or authoritarianism in Russia. The Russian people have to sort it out ultimately. Look beyond your noses though and see the detail of the lead up, it was pretty clear what NATO and others were up to.
“Many months have now passed as our little weekend soldier Ben has issued reports on the imminent collapse of the Russian military in Ukraine (“Scud” on The Standard by the way outed Ben as an NZ military reservist of some kind, is this actually true?)”
So essentially a loser with zero military experience is criticizing someone with part-time military experience on military matters?
It has not been established if Ben Morgan, as described by this site… (Ben Morgan is a tired Gen X interested in international politics. He is TDB’s Military analyst.) is somehow involved in NZ Military because no one has answered my question yet.
“Scud” on The Standard Blog 18 Dec. 2022. says…
“Ben, is a Reservist (TF in old money) Gunner (incl the Officers) in the Royal NZ Artillery Regt.
There are different set rules for Reservists including Reserve Officers compared to the Regular Force Personal to comment/ writing on Social Media platforms.
Ben would’ve sort permission from his Chain of Command & understand the rules at what he can & can’t say on SM as well.”
Now, your other contention is pathetic, you do not know what my background is unless you are from Pipitea St. or something, and TDB readers do not know what military experience Ben may or may not have.
Scud is wrong.
Fine by me, thank you for the clarification.
Scud does have a hard time of things now and then by his own statements, but was not going to let it go unremarked on.
As usual its the ordinary people that continue to suffer.
Lifes not so bad for Zelensky’swife though…a 40k shopping spree in Paris….all done in the…best possible..taste!
That story has been found to be lacking in credibility by Newsweek fact checking . but if you want to believe it go ahead .
Newsweek has indeed refuted the story…His wife was definitely in Paris…Newsweek asked her for comment…she did not respond to deny or confirm any shopping.
AFAIK she is not a Ukrainian politician and it would be very unusual if she did not go shopping while in Paris imo.
In answer to those who support Putin, Slavoj Zizek, Slovenian Marxist philosopher has said: ‘Denazification should begin at home – in Russia. In Russia they are dangerously approaching a new version of Nazism.’
In answer to those who support Putin, Slavoj Zizek, Slovenian Marxist philosopher has said: ‘Denazification should begin at home – in Russia. In Russia they are dangerously approaching a new version of Nazism.’
You don’t have to tell me things twice, Gadfly.
Nope – you don’t have to tell me things twice.
Good old Zizek eh ?
Capitalism’s court jester
https://newcoldwar.org/capitalisms-court-jester-slavoj-zizek/
You won’t much like it , but its a terrific essay that others might enjoy
Funny as
This is likely one of the many reasons why the neo-Nazi leader Richard Spencer declared: “Slavoj Žižek is my favorite leftist. He has more to teach the alt Right than a million American conservative douches.”
Well you would know all about neo-Nazis Nick J.
I took the trouble to read this piece of flawed sophistry and the assumptions that this critique are founded upon are erroneous and mischievous. To deny the significance of Mao Zedong’s Great Leap Forward in which 15-55 million Chinese starved to their deaths or to mock Zizek’s description of life in communist Slovenia as worse than in the west is arrogance personified.
If Ukraine fail to carry out a winter offensive would you consider your previous estimates of the Russian forces to be incorrect and that you were wrong? or are you just posting propaganda like the NZ Herald and should not be taken very seriously.
The Russians seem quite happy to slowly grind away until the Kiev coup regime runs out of men. I understand the big deployments of reservists haven’t arrived yet?
No heavy aerial bombing yet either. They will be happy with the superior overall kill ratio.
It will be interesting to see what the Americans do next.
Are they seriously thinking about trying to fight both Russia and China at the same time?
The strategy to remain sole world superpower isn’t going too well. Trying to take out Russia’s allies in the Middle East was a failure. The whole neocon idea of breaking Russia and China into pieces has barely progressed at all.
They are running out of time. The longer they wait to launch their attack on China, the less chance they have of winning.
Some comment is going to look pretty silly in 6 months time.
Key statement 11 minutes into this interview: Crimea will be Ukraine’s by August
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7l0xoRU6YBw
[Ben Hodges bio: Frederick Benjamin “Ben” Hodges is a retired United States Army officer who served as commanding general, United States Army Europe. He is currently the Pershing Chair in Strategic Studies at the Center for European Policy Analysis].
Ben underestimates the throw away line that Wagner now controls the Soledar salt mines. With Wagner now controlling mines 1 and 3 its a short hop skip and jump to controlling the entire mines and with it Ukraine’s main weapons storage facility. Its a major setback for country 404, numerous Telegram channels are reporting serious losses for Ukraine. Must be more Ukrainian “Winning”
“Putin unilaterally calling for a Christmas ceasefire to allow worshippers to celebrate. A ceasefire he did not deliver on. …. The Ukrainians never took the offer seriously, President Zelenskyy immediately rejecting it. The Christmas ceasefire drama helps us to understand Putin’s position at home. ”
Let’s get this straight. Putin offers a ceasefire, Zelensky immediately (your term) rejects it and so therefore Putin was the one who didn’t deliver.
Because, you know, Putin.
“Putin unilaterally calling for a Christmas ceasefire to allow worshippers to celebrate. A ceasefire he did not deliver on.”
Zelensky rejected the offer of a ceasefire. How can you castigate Putin for not delivering a ceasefire!
Commentors like Ben keep telling us Ukraine is winning. Commentarors like Scott Ritter tell us Russia cant lose. So it will be a long 10 or 20 year war. The MIC and Banks are like marginal returns from Afghanistan and mainstream media ads for the taxpayers were in the toilet. This Ukraine plan is going gangbusters. Over $120 billion in 11months – top work old chaps.
I concur Ben, Melitopol or mariupol was always the essential ground in this war and I dont believe Ukraine will ever consider settling without it/them.
By Ukraine you mean the rump state of ultra nationalist Galicia which is all that will be left, owned lock stock and barrel by Blackrock and owing zillions.
The Ukrainians are pretty keen on decommunising.As it was Stalin who placed eastern Galicia in Ukraine,they should be happy to give it back to Poland.
The industrialisation of eastern Ukraine , placed in Ukraine from Russia by Lenin in the 20,s began in the 30,s., under the communist soviet regime. If the Ukrainians really want to decommunise they should shuck off the reminders of the USSR and let those regions return to Russia.
I see all the usual fantasists dreaming of fighting til the last Ukrainian. Happy New Year.
You are the fantasist Nick J with your schizo-fascist opinions. When was Russia going to take Odessa again?
Fuck off fool.
Ho Ho Ho! Resorting to abuse when you’ve lost the argument!
No, the foolish thing is to argue with a fool, so fuck off is so much easier.
You should be ashamed of yourself using such terms of abuse but I shouldn’t be surprised seeing its coming from a lowly schizo-fascist with little brain.
Meanwhile ,Nato’s biggest army in Europe’s side of the world, Turkey , is having Rosatom ,Russia’s state run energy company, build a massive nuclear power plant.Another coup for Erdogan on the way?
The previous failed coup attempt swung Turkey back Russia’s way.Nato huh?
As united as ever. lol
The foreign leaders of Turkey, Syria and Russia have recently met in Moscow to hash out a peace plan in Syria
No US official need apply.
Erdogan and Assad plan to meet and reconcile, with Russia as broker.I don’t see Russia being increasingly isolated ,as the cliche goes, anytime soon.
And according to Foreign Policy magazine, US trained Afghan soldiers, left in the lurch by the US, are steadily being recruited by Wagner for the fight in Ukraine.If Wagner trains them, they’ll be a good addition
Sounds like blowback to me, all over again .When will the US learn
The USAngloZionist Empire will never learn. It is incapable of learning, incapable of negotiation, incapable of agreement. Merkel’s recent revelation on the Minsk agreement shows the fundamental cheating, lying duplicity at the heart of the said Empire.
The Great Game has never ceased. ” ‘Keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down’ – those were the words of Nato’s first Secretary General, Lord Ismay, when explaining the aims behind the new military alliance (as it was then). Simple rhetoric it may well be, but Ismay’s words seem to be of haunting significance in the world we inhabit more than half a century later.”
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/12/22/ffci-d22.html
https://www.counterfire.org/article/keep-the-russians-out-the-americans-in
Ben admits that the West built the Ukrainian army. This supposedly superior cadre is now enmasse interred in graves.
Now with the aid of scouring for children, old men, Poles, a second army is being raised, to be fed into new cemeteries. Superiority nil, life expectancy brief.
Ben’s last contention is that Germany and France need to provide effective assistance (which sounds like an admission of defeat). Defined as weapons? Nothing available there. Troops? That would be to declare open war. I don’t think Europe’s governments would survive that.
Bahkmut, Soledar, who is watching those hopeless Russians?
Comments are closed.