BEN MORGAN – Tri-lateral peace negotiations – Is Putin serious?
In June, we highlighted the dire situation that Putin has created for Russia by invading Ukraine, and predicted volatility as Russia’s cornered leader tries to ‘reset’ the situation.[i] Recent weeks have not disappointed, Russia’s hybrid activity has increased[ii] and there is evidence that Putin is planning a more widespread mobilisation.
On 25 August, CIA Director John Rattcliffe made a surprise visit to Moscow and met with his Russian counter-part Sergei Naryshkin, the head of Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service.[iii] The last time a CIA Director made an unannounced visit to Moscow was in February 2022, immediately prior to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Therefore, the recent visit set off plenty of speculation and discussion, highlighting the uncertainty around Putin’s plans.
Speaking to the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, on 3 September Putin raised the possibility of negotiations stating that “Ultimately, however, the problem must be resolved by the countries involved in the conflict — Russia and Ukraine,” and that “We are grateful to everyone attempting to contribute to a settlement. Is there a chance? In my view, yes, there is.“[iv]After this statement US Special Envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner visited Moscow and Kyiv trying to restart the currently stalled negotiations. The visits generated discussion about re-starting the tri-lateral peace negotiations and Wikoff reported he was “confident that there’ll be a good resolution here.”[v] But what is really going on? And, should Witkoff be so confident?
What does Ratcliffe’s visit mean?
Regardless of President Trump’s statements that the visit was ‘semi routine,’ surprise CIA Director visits to Moscow are not normal activity. Ratcliffe’s visit is difficult to interpret because there are many possible reasons for the visit and all the available information comes from ‘sources’ rather than from his statements or official media releases.
However, the Wall Street Journal reported on 26 August that Ratcliffe’s visit was to warn Russia against escalating its hybrid attacks on Europe. A sober report that ‘rings true’ – contrary to speculation by some commentators that the visit’s objective was to warn Putin against supporting Iran, not to use tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine, or even to broker a deal for Russian support against Iran.
Russia’s hybrid campaign against European countries supporting Ukraine is escalating. In late August, Politico summed the situation up by reporting that “Drones and explosives found in Germany linked to a suspected attack on Leipzig airport. A naval drone shot down near a gas platform in the Black Sea. An assassination plot targeting a European defense executive. Russia’s campaign against Europe looks increasingly brazen.” [vi]
Ratcliffe is a ‘Russia Hawk,’ with a history of supporting Ukraine. Notably, under Ratcliffe the CIA has continued to provide Ukraine with useful information, including advice about targeting Russia’s oil infrastructure.[vii]Therefore it is likely that he carried a strong message to the Kremlin about the risks of its hybrid campaign against Europe, or any plan to attack a NATO country. Scott Lucas a Professor of International Politics at the Clinton Institute, University College Dublin opined recently that another objective of the visit may be to reset Russian expectations of the US position.
He points out that Russia’s recent escalation coincides with the nation losing traction in negotiations and its ability to easily influence US policy, stating in an interview with TVP World that “I think the Kremlin thought throughout this year they could manipulate the Americans again. They could get it back to a position where Trump officials would support the Kremlin in demanding effectively Ukraine’s surrender.”[viii]
Lucas argued that Ratcliffe’s visit may be a tool to indicate that there are still some pro-Ukraine officials keen to make sure that the Whitehouse is not manipulated into making unnecessary concessions to achieve peace with Putin. The visit and its resulting publicity highlighted Russia’s hybrid campaign and demonstrates that not everybody in America buys Putin’s propaganda.
In my opinion, this analysis is thought provoking and indicates that Ratcliffe’s warning may serve several purposes. By ‘calling out’ Russian activity the visit may cause Putin to reconsider escalating hybrid operations in Europe. It also sends a message of support to NATO members. For instance, Kaupo Rosin, Director General of the Estonian Foreign Intelligence Service echoed this sentiment in a recent interview with the Baltic Sentinelwhen he said that “… from the standpoint of NATO’s overall deterrence, the visit certainly did no harm.”[ix]
Additionally, it brings Russia’s escalating hybrid activity to the attention of both media and politicians in the US. This in turn makes it harder for the officials in the Trump administration – that are focussed on getting a quick peace settlement, even at high cost to Ukraine, to argue that Putin’s actions are reasonable or justified.
Mobilisation – When, how and what will it look like?
Another question is whether Russia will mobilise more soldiers after this year’s national elections. Regardless of Putin’s recent declarations that rumours of mobilisation planning are “… complete nonsense” and they are “… an information attack on Russia,”[x] there is evidence that planning is underway, including:
- NATO intelligence agencies reported mobilisation exercises in Kaliningrad Oblast this July.[xi]
- The Rosgvardia, Russia’s National Guard’s recently expanded its operational remit and new laws were passed to enforce business support for mobilisation.[xii]
- Russian human rights organisations are reporting additional requests for assistance from people the government is trying to conscript. [xiii]
- Reports that mobilisation databases are being updated and travel bans imposed.[xiv]
The overall picture is that preparatory work is being conducted for mobilisation. Notably, Putin’s September 2022 mobilisation decree remains in force, so he could recruit more conscripts without issuing a new order. But will he? And if he does what is the impact likely to be?
Several commentators believe that a mobilisation order will be made after the national elections later this month. Although the Russian elections are widely regarded as rigged, Putin historically uses them to provide a political mandate for decisions. Putin’s escalating anti-NATO rhetoric and hybrid attacks on European countries could be synchronised with the elections. A means to trigger a NATO reaction that would confirm to ordinary Russians that the ‘West’ is at war with Russia, as claimed by the Kremlin. A validation to encourage ordinary Russians to vote in favour of accepting the hardships imposed by a larger mobilisation.
And, Russia is losing this war. In July 2026, the Centre for Strategic and International Studies reported that ”The Russia-Ukraine casualty rate has likely risen to nearly 8:1 in the first half of 2026, up from between 2:1 and 3:1 for much of the war.”[xv] Throughout July and August Ukraine’s effectiveness has increased and its forces are inflicting more casualties per month than Russia can recruit.
Russia’s casualty rate is unsustainable, so if Putin is to continue the ‘special military operation’ and have any chance of taking more territory he needs to replace these losses. Therefore, the elections could be used to ‘sell’ the idea that Russia is involved in an existential war with the ‘West,’ encouraging ordinary Russians to vote in favour of accepting the hardships imposed by a larger mobilisation. However, mobilisation is not a forgone conclusion and Estonian intelligence chief, Kaupo Rosin recently pointed out that ‘action’ does not always follow planning and rated the probability of mobilisation at 50-50. [xvi]
And, there is another option. The Kremlin does not need to announce a mobilisation and could use its existing 2022 decree to covertly increase the annual draft. This strategy would provide more soldiers with less publicity. At full mobilisation, Russia could potentially put approx. 3 million soldiers on the frontline but this is probably logistically, politically, and economically unsustainable. Therefore, most commentators believe that Russia’s economy can support mobilisation of approx. 300-600,000 soldiers, and that the lower figure is more likely. The next question is how would these new soldiers be employed?
Russia’s most dangerous course of action
If I was advising the Kremlin, my advice would be to:
- Reduce the tempo of activity at the frontline.
- Instead of attacking, use existing forces to secure the current frontline.
- Let Ukraine to expend resources trying to re-capture territory.
- Use the mobilisation to build up a strong well-trained operational reserve that can used to threaten opening a new axis of attack. Perhaps in the north near Kursk or Kharkiv, forcing Ukraine to draw forces away from the current frontlines to counter potential threats.
This option would take time and require a reassessment of Russia’s current emphasis on capturing the Donetsk Fortress belt. The strategic objective would be to influence negotiations by presenting a credible threat of a new Russian axis of attack. Ukraine is currently defeating Russia’s attack in Donetsk, but could it defend on two axes of attack?
This option would maximise Russia’s bargaining position and minimise casualties. If negotiations do not move in a positive direction, Russia has a reserve ready to deploy; either back into fighting for Donetsk or to open a new axis of attack.
Russia’s most likely course of action
However, history tells us that Russia is unlikely to use newly mobilised troops in a strategic way. Instead, it is more likely that; as they are recruited, they will be fed piecemeal into the Donetsk ‘meatgrinder’ to maintain pressure on Russia’s main effort, capturing the Fortress Belt cites.
Conclusion – Putin’s peace overture is about resetting relationships and buying time
In my opinion, Putin knows he is in trouble and is working hard to generate new options, including mobilisation, and escalating hybrid operations against Europe. Ratcliffe’s visit probably shook Putin’s confidence that he can still manipulate the Whitehouse.
Putin appears to have noted the CIA director’s warning, considered the implications and is adjusting his plans accordingly. Hence the 3 September statement at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok and his re-engagement with Trump’s special envoys on 5 September. He is keen to get to reset the relationship with the Whitehouse and regain influence.
My assessment is that the proposed tri-lateral talks are unlikely to produce a meaningful change in the situation. It is unlikely that Trump will change his position regarding Ukraine, or that Putin’s bargaining position will change. Unfortunately for Putin, being able to manipulate the US President is no longer a path to victory because the hard battlefield reality is that Ukraine is defeating Russia. President Trump’s policy of trying to press Ukraine and Europe into accepting Russian demands has forced these nations to become more self-sufficient and made the US increasingly irrelevant to this negotiation.
Ben Morgan is TDBs Military Blogger. a defence and security analyst specialising in modern warfare, military adaptation, and operational-level conflict analysis. He posts at Substack. If you like this content and want to support it you can ‘Buy me a Coffee’ here – buymeacoffee.com/benmorgan
What you don’t seem to realise Pat, is the power nexus backing IDF/Israeli Genocide of Palestine, are backing the failing NATO regime change op against Russia.
What I realise but you don’t seem to, Nemo, or you realise but don’t want to admit, is that the US/Russia power nexus backing the IDF/Israeli Genocide of Palestine, is backing the failing Kremlin regime change op against Ukraine.
Middle East Eye
The strange love affair of Putin and Netanyahu
Yossi Melman
7 September 2016
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/strange-love-affair-putin-and-netanyahu
… Since August 2015, Netanyahu has travelled to Moscow four times for meetings with Putin, more than he has had with any other world leader….
… Israel provided licences for its advanced technologies. For example, after the end of the Russian-Georgian war in 2008, Russia expressed its anger that Israel sold weapons to Georgia. To compensate Russia, Israel licensed Russia to produce Israeli-made drones….
.What you don’t seem to realise, you pseudonomnymous Kremlin troll, or realise but don’t want to admit, is that the biggest global nexus is between the powerful class of US and Russian billionaire oligarchs who direct, own and benefit from, the massive companies that make up the military and industrial complex, of both powers.
Trump, Witkof and Kushner are busy trying to make business deals with Putin to carve up Ukraine. The representatives of US imperialism went Kyiv to pressure Ukraine to give up territory to Russia, so that US companies can get in and exploit Ukraine’s resources and people in joint Russia/US business ventures.
Meanwhile, Putin is using imperialist hard power to take Ukrainian territory by force, so that Russian companies can get exclusvie rights to exploit Ukraine’s resources and people.
Putin met with Trump in Alaska last year where they discussed a joint venture agreement to exploit Russian oil fields in Russia’s remote Far East.
While Putin was happy to sign a formal decree to allow US investors, specifically the American oil giant ExxonMobil to share in the development of Sakhalin-1 oil project in Russia’s Far East, the Kremlin warlord shows little appetite to share with the Yanks in Ukraine.
After the summit in Siberia, in a separate side deal, billionaire US Oligarch Gentry Beach with ties to the Trump family, took the opportunity to sign a joint independent liquefied natural gas (LNG) agreement with Russia’s Novatek.
This year a Russian billionaire oligarch with ties to Putin, partly funded Trump’s son’s wedding.
This is the nexus the world should be worried about.
The Guardian
Russian oligarch close to Putin paid for part of Donald Trump Jr’s lavish wedding
US president’s eldest child married Palm Beach socialite Bettina Anderson in three-day celebration across two exclusive private islands
Lucy Campbell
Mon 14 Sep 2026
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/sep/14/russian-oligarch-trump-jr-wedding
… Donald Trump Jr and his wife, Bettina, confirmed on Monday that a Russian oligarch close to Vladimir Putin partially paid for the couple’s wedding celebrations in May, following a ProPublica report revealing Umar Kremlev spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on the events….
….ProPublica reported that Kremlev, a member of the Russian president’s circle, footed the bill to rent one of the islands where a reception was held and where guests slept, along with other large expenses, including a huge firework show.
In a statement signed by the couple and shared on Bettina Trump’s Instagram after ProPublica’s report was published, they confirmed Kremlev’s contributions to the celebrations and characterized them as “an extraordinarily generous wedding gift from a friend, and something for which we were and remain incredibly grateful”…..
“War is a massacre of people who don’t know each other for the profit of people who know each other but don’t massacre each other.” Paul Valery
There could be a nexus, one cannot dismiss the likelihood of the billionaire class looking to eliminate us all, with war being but one means of achieving this aim. Can’t dismiss this at all. But I am not seeing anything here but loose ties leading to endless speculation.
Put that up against the many plans produced by the big-wig think tanks (RAND for example) for the carving up of Russia, the on-going control of the Middle East and the containment of China and the plans better reflects today’s world than the speculation, thus far.
“Extending Russia” – https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3063.html
“Overextending and Unbalancing Russia” – https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB10014.html
“WHICH PATH TO PERSIA?” – https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/06_iran_strategy.pdf
You are well aware that remo is a signature, Pat. Not a pseudonym: a signature. Not anonymous, as I gave you my full identity. http://www.rogermorris.nz
You didn’t publish that comment at that time, is all. Who knows why.
I think AO answered both our posts best: …..loose ties leading to endless speculation.
In the meantime, the war is being resolved on the battlefield. And that resolution will not be speculative.
Even the pro-war trolls agree, Putin doesn’t want peace.
A O says:
“Conclusion – Putin’s peace overture is about resetting relationships and buying time”
….we see the US trying to reset the playing field, calling for endless ceasefires
….But how often to we see USA flying out for talks when they are winning…..
Nick J says:
You are correct AO. Two separate US delegations don’t go to Moscow unless they are begging for peace….
So, why is Putin determined to continue the war?
Why did Putin start the war in the first place?
Three men, one echo chamber, zero Ukrainians in the room.
The professors who blame everyone except Putin
These stooges provide Putin’s Academic Alibi: they Excuse His appalling Aggression…
Link to my patreon: / professortimwilson
YouTube podcast
The Three Mirrors of Moscow: Mearsheimer, Sachs and Diesen
Professor Tim Wilson
252K subscribers
48k views Sep 6, 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ur4PNfhbNAc
@9:58 minutes:
… Their deepest error is moral as well as analytical. Mearsheimer, Sachs and Diesen treat the violence of great powers as natural, then lecture smaller nations about the danger of resisting.
@10:23 minutes:
… Western governments made grave mistakes. Those mistakes did not abolish Ukraine’s sovereignty. They did not compel Putin to invade. They do not transform conquest into self-defense.
Understanding Russia is necessary.
Excusing Russia is not….
These three men repeatedly confuse the two, then congratulate one another on their courage in having done so.
Much like European politicians twist Russian words from which they then extrapolate all sorts of outcomes from, then so too do you do the same to myself. ‘Strawberry’ shyt.
“Why did Putin start the war in the first place?” – why ask this question when you either dismiss the reasons given or otherwise ignore these reasons.
Here’s the full video to the Professor Tim Wilson piece and subsequent comments about it. It is titled “Jeffrey Sachs & John Mearsheimer: Spheres of Security to Prevent World War III”.
In short, Sachs is very concerned about the possibility of World War III and nuclear war. Here he proposes a possible solution to it. Mearsheimer uses his ‘real world understanding’ to explain why his solution is unlikely to happen. They cover many past events and possible events along the way. Glenn Diesen is the host.
“Jeffrey Sachs & John Mearsheimer: Spheres of Security to Prevent World War III” – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ntkc7AWujEU
A O says:
“….Here’s the full video to the Professor Tim Wilson piece and subsequent comments about it. It is titled “Jeffrey Sachs & John Mearsheimer: Spheres of Security to Prevent World War III”.
Invading your neighbours is a strange way to prevent World War III.
Using the same logic, Hitler was invading Poland to prevent World War II
And this is one of the strengths of the Sachs & Mearsheimer discussion. Their discussion is not limited to just Russia. How do we prevent world war and beyond – this is what they are debating. Commenting on them rather than the subject matter they discuss, well, no wonder we are at war. We in the West, be it our political class or political followers – we all show no capacity to listen!
This is all music to the ears of the billionaire class who control politics, war, conflict, its the money tree that keeps on giving.
Prominent 20th century German Jewish political intellectual, Hannah Arendt during a television interview in 1964, said this;
“The problem, was not what our enemies did, but what our friends did… Even some of their leaders I would let off, but the intellectuals who I blame most for Nazism, they were trapped by their own ideas.”
Hannah Arendt
Sachs & Mearsheimer are ‘trapped’ by their own ideas.
By selectively citing the undoubted atrocities that the US commits around the world, they become locked into a circular confirmation bias that the US is the only aggressive imperialist power in the world.
A O says:
“And this is one of the strengths of the Sachs & Mearsheimer discussion….”
Two ivory tower intelectuals, of identical views, sitting in glorious isolation in a room together, free from any distracting challenging viewpoint, selectively picking out facts and citations, to support their confirmation bias, while ignoring others that don’t, is not a strength, it is not even a ‘discussion’. It is an echo chamber of two.
They need to stop pissing in each other’s pocket and get out to talk to some actual Ukrainians.
The trouble with Sachs & Mearsheimer, is that they start from the position that there is only one imperialist power in the world, this is patently absurd.
Imperialism is an economic system.
Every country with a developed capitalist economy tends towards imperialism
Even little New Zealand.
In the late 19th early 20th Century New Zealand became known as the ‘Prussia of the South Seas’ for our aggression against our Pacific Island neighbours to forcibley monopolise the then lucrative copra trade.
Especially notorious New Zealand’s brutal colonial occupation of Samoa.
A New Zealand government corporation, the New Zealand ‘Reparation Estates’ backed by the NZ navy and army forcibly took control over major copra plantations in Samoa after taking over the Kaiser’s German colonial occupation of Samoa during World War 1.
Centered around Apia, producing and exporting massive shipments of copra and cocoa the ‘Reparation Estates’ employed Samoans under conditions that were described by Samoans of the time as more repressive than that of the former German imperialist occupiers.
Labour disputes and heavy handed New Zealand rule led to the rise of a formal Samoan independence movement, the MAU.
The “Beach Road massacre” or Black Saturday (‘Aso Pogisa’ in Samoan), the New Zealand colonial adminstration turned machine guns on a non-violent Samoan independence protest march on the Apia Waterfront.
On the morning of December 28, a festive, peaceful parade was marching down Apia’s main Beach Road to welcome home two Mau leaders following their release from forcible exile and detention in Wellington. New Zealand Colonial Police armed with .303 rifles and a Lewis machine gun opened fire directly into the unarmed crowd. The gunfire killed 11 Samoans on the spot, many others later died from their wounds. Many other atrocities followed, fortunately the NZ army military operations were hampered by New Zealand seafarers who refused to man ships transporting NZ troops to Samoa.
On June 4, 2002, New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark issued a formal apology to Samoa, for the atrocities committed under New Zealand’s colonial occupation of Samoa.
The apology was delivered in Apia during celebrations marking the 40th anniversary of Samoa’s independence from New Zealand colonial rule.
The lessons to learn from this, are;
Every occupying and invading imperialist power commits atrocities to achieve their aims.
Every colonised and invaded people never stop resisting the invader.
Every colonised and invaded people eventually achieve their liberation from imperialism and occupation.
(Unfortunately imperialists and pointy headed intellectual lickspittles and apologists for imperialism, never seem to learn these lessons).
,
I
There’s only one superpower in this world. The entire world revolves around this country, this includes China and Russia. Its currency underpins the global economy and it spends more on its military-intel machine than the next six countries combined.
This is the very same superpower than managed to upend the neighbor of the country you believe to be a superpower, a neighbor rich in Russian heritage at that, a neighbor that soon turned against that heritage and more, thus becoming troublesome to Russia. This speaks to how powerful Russia is when it can’t even keep its neighbor, again, steeped in Russian heritage, under its fold. This speaks to the true tail of this calamity, right there.
Now, given the scale of the US military, the influence welded by the USA, its political meddling and warring ways since the collapse of the USSR, no wonder Sachs & Mearsheimer talk abut US aggression, perhaps more than you would like. Now, by all means, contrast this record with Russia’s, don’t forget the meddling part as well, on top of the many wars Russia has started or involved itself in since the collapse of the USSR. If you are bothered about their imbalance, then stack the two records against each other – show us all how Russia acts the same as the USA. Show us all why they are biased!
Otherwise, back to the premise of the discussion, two chaps concerned with war, especially nuclear war, looking for ways to avoid these outcomes, these are the types of discussions we all should be having, especially among the political class. Today’s political world puts their bias towards Russia in the way of avoiding or resolving conflict. It would be good if you could stop mirroring their behavior.
The world needs peace, discussion is the way to achieve this, the powerful and their political acolytes, have other things in mind. Its an effin tragedy.
No. The theory Putin wants world war – that he ‘began’ it and is working hand-in-glove with angloZionist BLACKROCK, to screw his own country; I think is junk and paranoid and contrived and unworthy. IIO meme. Britprop. https://rumble.com/v7fr4pm-russias-strategic-victory-zelenskyy-launches-his-second-40-day-plan-16k-dro.html?e9s=src_v1_eh_cs
On the election victory of the Far Right AFD party in the German state, hyper imperialist US President Donald Trump wrote on his Truth Social messaging service, “MGGA” Make Germany Great Again.
The world hasn’t forgotten the last time Germany Was Great Again.
Like the nasty little anonymous far right trolls that comment here, The AFD supports Russian imperialism.
While Donald Trump was celebraing the AFD win, Putin fan boys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner were gushing over meeting with the Russian dictator as “incredible memories” to recall “at the top” in their retirement..
Imperialism is first and foremost an economic system of exploitation and extraction sometimes with soft power sometimes with hard power.
Irish Journalist Caolan Robertson questioned Witkoff about whether Witkof’s Russian investments, made him a neutral negotiator. But was brushed off.
Trust the Irish to get it right. Ireland is one of the few countries that support both Ukraine and Palestine struggle for self determination and independence from occupation.
A Ukraineian reporter asked Witkoff and Kushner what it was like sitting with a war criminal.
Witkoff replied saying that Putin had treated him personally very well.
Another reporter asked Witkof and Kushner if Russia really wanted peace. Asking didn’t Russia’s escalation and intensification of the war show that Russian had no interest in peace. The reporter asked if the US would put more pressure on the Kremlin to stop the war.
Kusner replied, It is like a business deal, you have to have opportunities for both sides It has to be “Win Win”.
On the question of wheterh the US would be putting more pressure on Russia to end the war theanswer was No
YouTube
I watched Trump’s team completely unravel in Ukraine
Caolan Robertson
406K subscribers
411K views
Sep 10, 2026
I think you are seriously wrong about Russian casualties, and the problem with repeating the standard Western narrative is that eventually the facts have a rather inconvenient habit of catching up with it.
Even the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) reported that: “The Russia-Ukraine casualty rate has likely risen to nearly 8:1 in the first half of 2026, up from between 2:1 and 3:1 for much of the war.”
That is quite a change of direction, isn’t it? CSIS’s earlier estimates had Russia suffering casualties at roughly 2–2.5 times Ukraine’s. By its own June 2026 assessment, the estimated ratio had swung dramatically the other way—towards approximately 8:1 in Russia’s favour.
Then there’s the rather awkward subject of Ukrainian mobilisation. There is now an enormous amount of video evidence showing Ukrainian men being stopped, detained and forcibly taken into the mobilisation system. You can dismiss the videos if you like, but pretending they don’t exist doesn’t make them disappear. I visited Russia myself and certainly didn’t see anything remotely comparable happening there.
So, Ben, here’s my question for you: when this war is finally over, the battlefield dust has settled, and we have access to the evidence rather than today’s competing propaganda narratives—and if it turns out that Ukraine really did suffer the defeat and catastrophic manpower losses that some of us have been warning about—what story will you be telling then?
Will today’s narrative simply be quietly rewritten, with everyone pretending they always knew how it would turn out?
Because that’s the real test, Ben: not what you believe today, but whether you’re prepared to look back honestly tomorrow and admit when you got it wrong.
If the evidence ultimately proves that the narrative you’ve been repeating was wrong, will you actually acknowledge it—or will you simply move the goalposts, find a new explanation, and carry on telling the same story?
History has a nasty habit of exposing confident predictions. Let’s see who is prepared to face the evidence when it does.
How about that.
We have a new pro-war Kremlin troll.
Shaun says:
“… So, Ben, here’s my question for you: when this war is finally over, the battlefield dust has settled, and we have access to the evidence rather than today’s competing propaganda narratives—and if it turns out that Ukraine really did suffer the defeat and catastrophic manpower losses that some of us have been warning about—what story will you be telling then?….
….History has a nasty habit of exposing confident predictions. Let’s see who is prepared to face the evidence when it does.”
We don’t need to wait, we can already see who is prepared to face the evidence.
The newly minted pseudononymous Shaun, and the other sour old Krelin trolls who post here, who hide their identities.
Don’t have the balls to face the evidence of Russia’s imperialist aggression under their own names now.
And when this war finally does end, the cowardly pro-war creeps who support Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, will disappear back into the anonymous swamp they the crawled out of, never to be heard from again.
History also has a way of establishing casualties. Given that Russia has consistently been on the attack, those casualty figures are not particularly unbelievable. This is now static warfare along the lines of World War I, without the massive artillery bombardments that might have produced casualties amongst the defenders. Not to mention Russian troops are ill trained. So yeah the Russians are losing.
Guerilla Surgeon says:
“….Given that Russia has consistently been on the attack, those casualty figures are not particularly unbelievable
… So yeah the Russians are losing.”
Attacking is generally far more costly in lives than defending.
Why Attacking Costs More Lives
AI Overview
…The 3-to-1 Rule:
Military theory states that an attacking force usually needs a 3-to-1 numerical advantage over a defender to successfully take a fortified position.
Exposure: Attackers must leave cover and move across open ground or obstacles, exposing themselves directly to enemy fire.
Prepared Defenses: Defenders benefit from entrenched positions, pre-sighted artillery zones, obstacles like minefields, and cover.
Exceptions to the Rule: Poor Defense or Low Morale. A defending force that is poorly supplied, surrounded, or lacks the will to fight can suffer catastrophic casualties when overrun.
Counter-Attacks and Slaughter Pens: If a defender launches a poorly planned counter-offensive against an entrenched enemy, the defender temporarily takes on the costly role of the attacker.
Well said.
“Conclusion – Putin’s peace overture is about resetting relationships and buying time”
Much like many other times, I feel like Ben is writing in reverse. After all, we see the US trying to reset the playing field, calling for endless ceasefires – buying time against Iran. And here they are flying out not once but twice – US representatives to Moscow for whatever, whatever, whatever – no one really knows. But how often to we see USA flying out for talks when they are winning…..
You are correct AO. Two separate US delegations don’t go to Moscow unless they are begging for peace or raising the threat level (because their proxies Ukraine are losing).
Here we go. The useful idiots are at it again.
A O says:
“…. But how often to we see USA flying out for talks when they are winning…..”
Nick J says:
“….(because their proxies Ukraine are losing).
AO and Nick J are like two trained circus seals who bark on command “Ukraine are losing” while clapping their flippers every time their Kremlin handler snaps his fingers. Amusing at first, but after 4 years of Russia’s SMO and still no sign of the promised Russian victory.
The American and the Russian imperialists have been meeting so many times because they have been trying to cut a deal to carve up Ukraine between them. The Kremlin gets the grain, the Whitehouse gets the rare earths.
Unfortunately for Trump and Putin their scheme to carve up Ukraine between them has not been realised because the US negotiators can’t get Ukraine to agree to end their resistance to Russian aggression or surrender Ukrainian territory to Russia that the Russians are demanding but haven’t been able to take by force.
Donald Trump doesn’t give a shit about Ukraine.
Trump and Putin met in Siberia last year to agree on a joint US Russian venture to extract Russian oil a deal which would help fuel Russia’s war machine.
The Real Story of the Trump-Putin Summit Is a US Oil Deal Hiding in Plain Sight
While no progress was made towards a Russia-Ukraine ceasefire, the Kremlin opened the door to a deal that could pour billions into its own war coffers
Zarina Zabrisky
18 August 2025
https://bylinetimes.com/2025/08/18/trump-putin-summit-us-oil-exxonmobil-deal-hiding-in-plain-sight/
Ukraine is not losing, because Russia is not winning. The Russian imperialists are stuck in a quaqmire of their own making that they can’t extricate themselves from.
The Russians cannot win because the Ukrainians will never stop resisting them.
The Russians know this, which is why they keep threatening to use nuclear weapons and now threaten to widen the war to Europe. Neither of those two things will help Russia win.
Witkoff and Kushner have visited Moscow 6 times and only visited Ukraine once for the first time last week.
The Americans are starting to realise that they can’t make any deal with Russia over the heads of Ukraine that goes against the wishes of the Ukrainian people.
Down with imperialism.
Down with colonialism.
Their time has passed.
Viva Palestina, Slava Ukraine.
Sacrilege. Palestine and Ukraine do not mix. Only a person with opposing views to myself would ever think they did. From The Grayzone, Sept 2022 – “Zelensky and NATO plan to transform post-war Ukraine into ‘a big Israel’” – https://thegrayzone.com/2022/09/17/zelensky-nato-ukraine-big-israel/
Otherwise I will say to the cows come home that I want this war to end – for the sake of Ukraine. They are being used and abused by the only imperial-superpower-force in the world, the USA and its collective West allies, so all those wishing for this war to continue on aids and abets the continued destruction of Ukraine. Don’t say you haven’t been told. Do not ever say you were not informed!
Now, on to the speculation, the so-called real story. Interestingly enough, I came across an interesting version of the ‘big picture’ myself, just a day or two ago. As I see it, it centres around the reaffirmation of US global hegemony through restricting the supply of energy and food that will negatively impact the BRICS nations leading to a slowdown, specifically, of the Chinese economy, which is the real end goal of these wars against Russia and Iran. Of course the entire world will suffer too, but to use a familiar hegemonic saying – that’s just collateral damage.
The world has seen the slowdown in Middle Eastern oil supply. Some of the world knows of the slowdown of Russian energy supplies also. But the constricted supply of Russian fertilizer and Russian/Ukrainian grain supplies, especially to the global South, this is another layer of destruction about to hit the world. Long story short, its a different take on today’s fragile world – Ryan Perkins – “The Harvest Trap: China’s Industrial Squeeze and India’s Impossible Choice” – https://ceinewsletter.substack.com/p/the-harvest-trap-chinas-industrial
I’m pretty sure that the troops raised by conscription won’t be particularly happy or well-trained. Lots of people trying to get out of the country, lots of desertions, lots of drunk soldiers. Isn’t the Russian system still roughly based on the old Soviet one? Lots of conscripts and a few professionals. I think they’re now separating the professionals from the conscripts, which will bugger conscript units even more. Apparently they have pretty much run out of tanks as well. I think they would be wise to go on the defensive except I suspect the defences will be picked off by drones eventually. As one German general is alleged to have said to Hitler something like “Make peace you fools make peace.”
BEN MORGAN – Tri-lateral peace negotiations – Is Putin serious?
By
Ben Morgan
11 September 2026
The answer is ‘No’. Putin is not serious about ending this war.
Putn will continure this war no matter what.
Continuing the war is an existential issue for the Putin regime.
Endless growth, and expansion are existential to imperialism.
Without endless growth and expansion imperialist powers almost always descend into economic and poltical collapse.
Even as the war turns against him, Putin is no more likely to abandon Russia’s war to conquer Ukraine, than Hitler was to abandon Germany’s war to conquer Europe.
There are two possible ends to the war in Ukraine.
1/ Russia is defeated on the battlefield, which happened to Hitler’s Third Reich.
2/ If the war drags on without end, the Putin regime is overthrown at the hands of the Russian people, as happened to the Kaiser Wilhelm’s Second Reich at the hands of the German people. The so called ‘stab in the back’
(Reich is the German word for Empire, in German imperial, and fascist lore, the Holy Roman Empire was the First Reich).
The Second World War was mostly fought as a mobile war of shifting battle lines.
The First World War was fought mostly as a static war of attrition with neither side making progress, or minimal progress at great loss of life. Barbed wire and machine guns made crossing no-mans land extremely costly for either side. No Man’s land in WW1 was at most only one mile deep. In Ukraine UAVs have made No Man’s land 25 miles deep.
Many commentators have compared the war in Ukraine not to the Second World War, but to the First World War, which is why I pick the end of the war in Ukraine will come from an internal revolt within the Russian army and people, grown weary of an endless war of attrition, rather than a defeat on the battlefield.
P.S.
Personally I don’t think Ukraine has the resources and the military forces to defeat the Russian Federation on the battlefield.
Conversely I don’t think the Russian Federation has the resources to defeat the combined forces of Europe. If Putin decides to widen the war to Europe, no doubt it would be devastating and extreme for all sides, but it would end in the defeat of the Russian Federation, within a year.
Drone kill zones favour defenders
Who has the upper hand in Ukraine’s evolving drone war?
Kyiv Independent
446K subscribers
91k views Sep 3, 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8QBHCqbic0
In this interview, the Kyiv Independent’s Francis Farrell speaks with “Schweiger,” a Ukrainian drone operator from the Signum UAV Battalion of Ukraine’s 59th Separate Assault Brigade – one of the country’s pioneering FPV drone units. He recounts carrying out the first-ever kamikaze strike with an FPV (first-person view) drone in 2022 and explains how the technology has evolved and expanded since then.
The conversation also explores the shift from radio-controlled to fiber-optic drones, the limitations of each technology, Russia’s Rubicon drone unit, and how Ukrainian and Russian drone capabilities compare today.
Transcript:
@25:57 minutes:
…. Meanwhile, drone density and the overall lethality of the kill zone just keep climbing. And it seems to me that this shift ultimately plays into the defender’s hands. You have been to our positions. Every day is the exact same story. They just keep pushing and dying, pushing and dying. Someone sneaks through or hunkers down in a hole for for two or three days, pops out and gets spotted and eliminated. Enemy destroyed….
@27:05 minutes:
So, what do you think the next big shift is going to be this year?
@27:10 minutes:
…. Drones, pure and simple. Not just aerial drones, but ground drones, too. They’re making a huge impact. Commanders have different perspectives on this. Some still insist, and I get the sentiment, it’s about honor and respect, you simply can’t fight without infantry.
After all, free Ukraine starts where the infantry stands. But on the flip side, other commanders are saying, well, no, the war is moving in a direction where there might simply be a kill zone….
… It’s heading toward a situation where it will just be pilots on one side, pilots on the other side, and a buffer zone. In some cases, it’s already the case. Mechanized assaults in certain sectors [tanks] are completely impossible. They are absolutely doomed…
[Tanks were orignally invented to cross no-man’s land of barbed wire under machine gun fire. Using tanks for their original purpose is no longer possible]
@28:26 minutes:
Just a couple of weeks ago, we saw Ukrainian drone crews defeat NATO forces and their armored columns again during war games.
What does NATO need to learn from Ukraine?
Western and NATO countries are always asking us for key lessons, but we can still see how far behind they really are….
… A really close friend of mine came back from such a trip and said that some of these countries are honestly doomed….
…Their war doctrine is completely different. They can’t update it because everything gets bogged down in paperwork and in the end they have an obsolete view of warfare that just doesn’t work on the ground anymore.