Friday 30 June 2023

Arming Ukraine is a cynical and dangerous NATO ploy, RT reporter tells UNSC

 

The Western “proxy conflict” is costing Ukrainian and Russian lives and may lead to decades of instability, UN delegations heard

Arming Ukraine is a cynical and dangerous NATO ploy, RT reporter tells UNSC

Western nations are pushing Ukrainian soldiers into suicide missions against Russian forces after providing them with outdated and often inoperative weapons, RT correspondent Chay Bowes has told the UN Security Council.

The Irish journalist was among the speakers invited to address to the Council on Thursday, sharing his views on Western lethal aid to Ukraine and the related proliferation risks. The gathering was attended by ambassadors including Russian Permanent Representative Vasily Nebenzya and his UK counterpart Barbara Woodward.

Bowes told the delegations that NATO nations have been helping Kiev to build up its military since 2014, training thousands of troops each year. He described the current hostilities as “a proxy conflict, where Ukraine supplies manpower… to support a de-facto NATO operation to prevent a Russian military victory”. A defeated Ukraine would undermine the US-led military bloc itself, he predicted, which explains the escalation of arms supplies from the West.

Many of the weapons provided to Kiev, especially by smaller nations, are often in a poor state of repair, Bowes said, citing multiple reports from the Western media and officials. Some are “outright lethal” to the Ukrainians using them. The sub-par weapons are being “dumped” as part of schemes by the larger powers, primarily the US, to replace and upgrade their own stocks.

 

Meanwhile on the frontline, Kiev’s troops have paid a heavy price for “strategically insignificant” territorial gains during this month’s counteroffensive, he said. Ukrainian action essentially amounts to a “suicidal full-frontal attacks on in-depth prepared defenses”, and allowing them to occur is “deeply cynical” and “sinister”, the reporter argued.

“No modern NATO military strategist or senior officer would suggest these maneuvers are anything but an inhumane ticket to tragedy, when commanding their own troops,” Bowes claimed. “Yet when it comes to Ukrainian young men mounting these assaults being decimated – they are silent.”

Continued hostilities are also taking a toll on civilians in Russia, some of which Bowes said he had met personally in places including Belgorod Region.

“I’ve seen [Russian] villages burning, I’ve heard artillery strikes, and I have to tell you that weapons being supplied by NATO and their allies to Ukraine are being wilfully targeted against civilian populations on a daily basis… all miraculously invisible to the Western media,” he told the UNSC.

Historical precedents, such as the Troubles in Northern Ireland or the terrorist attack on the 2015 Bataclan Theater in Paris, show that even a small number of weapons can cause much suffering by civilians, Bowes warned. The arming of Ukraine may lead to decades of instability in the region and cause spillover effects in far-away nations, he added.

https://www.rt.com/news/578955-unsc-ukraine-arms-proliferation/

Foreign Policy Matters

 


by  

In an extra special way, foreign policy matters crucially to champions of individual liberty. Not that it doesn’t matter to other people too – just not in all the same ways. Anyone who understands the importance of keeping government power strictly limited in domestic matters (if such power must exist at all) will also grasp the paramount importance of constraining government power abroad. They’re cut from the same cloth.

This is obvious to libertarians, but not necessarily to others. When Randolph Bourne wrote that “war is the health of the state,” he expected his readers to understand that this is a bad thing because the state is dangerous. But do most people know that? For neoconservatives and humanitarian interventionists, war being the health of the state is a feature, not a bug.

I think it was Richard Cobden, the 19th-century British free trader, peace activist, anti-imperialist, and member of Parliament, who demanded, “No foreign politics.” He meant that the government should be too busy dismantling power at home to engage in deadly balance-of-power intrigue abroad. In America a century later, Felix Morley, the anti-interventionist and pro-market newspaper editor, said in opposing the advocates of war and central bureaucracy that politics will stop at the water’s edge only when policy stops at the water’s edge, which he favored.

War naturally repulses individuals because – obviously – it kills and disables people, most atrociously, noncombatants. It’s so obviously repulsive that many soldiers have to be turned into killers during training. Another count against war is that it encourages a self-destructive, indiscriminate, and collective hatred of foreigners and even local individuals who are invidiously identified with the designated “enemy.” (Russian athletes and even long-dead Russian composers are targets of hostility these days.)

But those who understand that full individual liberty is a necessity – and not a mere luxury – include another count in the indictment against war. It inevitably fosters the general growth of government power, which then infects all aspects of life and society. That doesn’t happen all at once, but it sets in motion a deadly process that menaces everything in its path unless it is stopped. Few things approach war fever in this regard. (A pandemic and a major economic crisis can have similar effects.)

War is a great way to instill the “governmental habit”: it powerfully encourages people to think that the state is indispensable for all sorts of problems – including the control of “disinformation.” F. A. Hayek wrote The Road to Serdom in 1944 because World War II had people thinking that if central planning worked in wartime, it ought to work in peacetime too. (The phrase governmental habit is from economic historian Jonathan R. T. Hughes. Hughes wasn’t writing about foreign policy; in that regard, see Robert Higgs’s Crisis and Leviathan.)

Just think about this century. Without the wars of the last 20 years, it would have been tougher for the government to have gotten away with its frightening surveillance powers, which have no doubt spread to matters other than terrorism. People will say it was a response to the horrific 9-11 attacks, but those must be seen out of context. While the attacks were atrocities, they did not come out of the blue. The U.S. government was hardly minding its own business before 2001. Rather, it had been fighting proxy, covert, and even overt wars in the Middle East killing thousands of people far from home.

Surveillance is not the only consequence of a belligerent foreign policy. Let’s not forget the huge monetary price tag, which has to be handled through taxation and, less visibly, borrowing, followed by inflationary monetization, an implicit form of taxation. Other burdens on people’s freedom include economic regulation, trade barriers through sanctions and tariffs, the militarization of local police departments, and the corruption of the news media. It’s said that the first casualty of war is truth. (Noninterventionist Sen. Hiram Johnson said that in 1917.) War and government lying go hand in hand.

An especially insidious thing about foreign policy is that critics can be silenced by the war party’s invoking of state secrets. The classified document is the ace up the sleeve. This doesn’t happen in domestic policy. But it happens all the time in foreign policy – which is why we should be grateful to Daniel Ellsberg (who died the other day, sad to say), Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, Julian Assange, and other whistle-blowers. Naturally, the government treats them brutally.

War is also useful to politicians in taking people’s minds off other government-caused problems. Shakespeare showed that he understood this when, in Henry IV, Part II, he had the king tell his son, “Be it thy course to busy giddy minds with foreign quarrels, that action, hence borne out, may waste the memory of the former days.”

Foreign intervention, covert war, and open war are poison to a society that aspires to be free. That’s another reason to say no to interventionism.


Sheldon Richman is the executive editor of The Libertarian Institute and a contributing editor at Antiwar.com. He is the former senior editor at the Cato Institute and Institute for Humane Studies, former editor of The Freeman, published by the Foundation for Economic Education, and former vice president at the Future of Freedom Foundation. His latest book is What Social Animals Owe to Each Other.

https://original.antiwar.com/srichman/2023/06/28/foreign-policy-matters/

Colonel Douglas Macgregor - The US Government Lied About The Ukraine War

 

In this exclusive interview, we sit down with retired Colonel Douglas Macgregor to discuss the controversial truth behind the US government's involvement in the Ukraine War. A decorated military strategist and trusted expert, Colonel Macgregor shares his insights on the hidden agendas, political motives, and shocking revelations that have been kept from the public. Join us as we dive deep into this explosive topic, uncovering the lies and deceit that have shaped the narrative of the Ukraine War.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VF1qDjLCHNY

Russia owes West no explanation about Wagner mutiny – Lavrov

 

Moscow has been extremely transparent about recent events in the country, the foreign minister has said

Russia owes West no explanation about Wagner mutiny – Lavrov

Russia has no obligation to reassure the West that the political situation in the country is stable in the aftermath of Wagner private military group uprising last week, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Thursday.

Speaking to reporters, Lavrov reiterated that we are not obligated to explain anything to anyone, to give any assurances.” He stated that Russia “acts transparently,” adding that both President Vladimir Putin and other senior officials have commented on the Wagner mutiny. 

“If anyone in the West has any doubts, well, that’s your problem,” the minister said.

Lavrov went on to say that Russia has always emerged stronger from the challenges it has had to overcome, while describing the mutiny as “nothing more than trouble.”

“The same thing will happen now. Moreover, we feel that this process has already begun.” 

He also said Moscow has “serious doubts about the sanity of many Western leaders.” While publicly admitting that their citizens are suffering due to the Ukraine conflict, these leaders press on with their policies in the name of helping Kiev prevail over Moscow, the foreign minister explained. “Does this sound sane? Does this reflect national interests?”

Lavrov noted that amid the Wagner mutiny, many Western leaders claimed that the veneer of Russia’s statehood was crumbling. This reaction, combined with statements that arming Ukraine had paid off, basically amounted to a confession that the West is “waging war” against Russia, he said.

https://www.rt.com/russia/578965-russia-owes-west-no-explanation-wagner/

A Matryoshka of Psyops: And Why General Armageddon Is Not Going Anywhere

 The main problem faced by Russia is not the Hegemon and NATO: it’s domestic, Pepe Escobar writes.

The secret of a perfect psyop is that no one really understands it.

A perfect psyop accomplishes two tasks: it renders the enemy dazed and confused while achieving a set of very important goals.

It goes without saying that sooner rather than later we should see the real goals emerging out of the strategic play in Russia I described as The Longest Day.

The Longest Day may or may not have been a larger than life psyop.

To clear the fog, let’s start with a roundup of the usual “winner” suspects.

First one is undoubtedly Belarus. Due to the priceless mediation of Old Man Luka, Minsk is now gifted with the most experienced army in the world: the Wagner musicians, masters of conventional (Libya, Ukraine) and non-conventional (Syria, Central African Republic) war.

That is already inflicting the Fear of Hell in NATO, which is suddenly facing in its eastern flank a super pro army, very well equipped, and de facto uncontrollable, and on top of it hosted by a nation now equipped with nuclear weapons.

Simultaneously, Russia props up dissuasion on its western front. Like clockwork that is leading NATOstan to invest in ballooning military budgets (with funds it doesn’t have). That process happens to be a key plank of Russian strategy since at least March 2018.

And as an extra bonus Russia creates a 24/7 threat to the whole of Kiev’s northern front.

Not bad for a “mutiny”.

The Dance of the Oligarchs

Way more complex is Russia’s internal dynamics. Putin’s current and subsequent difficult decisions may entail loss of popularity coupled with loss of internal stability -depending on the manner Kremlin-defined strategic victories are presented to Russian public opinion.

Whatever 24/7 NATOstan mainstream media spin may come up with, the Kremlin’s official explanation for June 24 boils down to a Prighozin demonstration: he was just trying to shake things up.

It’s way more complicated than that. There were strategic gains, of course, and Prighozin seems to have followed a very risky script that in the end favors Moscow. But it’s still too early to tell.

A key sub-plot is how the Dance of the Oligarchs will proceed. Independent Russian media was already expecting some – treasonous – players, including state functionaries, to buy their one-way ticket when the going got tough (or to say they were “ill”, or refuse to answer important calls). The Duma – fed by Bortnikov’s FSB – is already working on a hefty list.

The Russian system – and Russian society as well – see people like these as supremely toxic: in fact much more dangerous than the demshiza (a term that mixes “democracy” and “schizophrenia”, applied to globalist neoliberals).

On the military front, it gets even more complicated. Putin has charged Defense Minister Shoigu to compile the list of Generals to be promoted after The Longest Day. To put it mildly, for quite a few people, from many different persuasions, Shoigu has become a toxic element in Russian politics.

Wagner – rebranded, and under new management – will continue to serve Russia’s interests via Minsk, including in Africa.

Old Man Luka, wily as ever, has already firmly stated there won’t be any provocations against NATO via Wagner. Wagner recruiting bureaus will not be opened in Belarus. Belarussians may join Wagner directly. As it stands, most of Wagner fighters are still in Lugansk.

For all practical purposes, from now on the Russian government won’t have anything to do, militarily and financially, with Wagner.

Additionally, there are no heavy weapons to be confiscated. Already on Monday, June 26, Wagner had moved their heavy weapons to Belarus. What remains – and had not been moved during The Longest Day – was returned to the Ministry of Defense (MoD).

The Dance of the Generals

A clear winner in the whole process is Russian public opinion: they made that graphically clear in Rostov. Everyone was supporting Putin, Russian soldiers, Wagner and Prighozin – at the same time. The overall objective was to improve the Russian army to win the war. It’s as straightforward as that.

The purge inside the MoD will be tough. Under the pretext of repression or “rebellion”, operetta Generals” (as defined by Putin himself) that did not train their soldiers properly, did not organize the mobilization properly, or were incompetent in battle, will definitely be axed.

The problem is that they’re all part of Gerasimov’s circle. To put it diplomatically, he needs to answer a lot of serious questions.

And that’s what brings us to the “General Armageddon has been arrested” monster fake news gleefully parroted by the whole of the NATOstan info universe.

General Surovikin did receive Prighozin in Rostov – but he was never an accomplice to the “rebellion”. Vice-Minister of Defense Yevkurov was also at the HQ in Rostov, and received Prighozin alongside Surovikin. Yevkurov may have played the role of strategically-placed observer.

The Prighozin rebellion soap opera de facto started back in February – and nothing was done to stop it. Regardless whether one shares the official narrative – or not.

What this implies is that the Russian state saw it coming. Does that make The Longest Day the Mother of All Maskirovskas?

Once again: it’s complicated. Unlike the collective West, Russia does not practice or enforce cancel culture. Wagner was protected via martial law. Any insult against a “musician” fighting neo-nazi Banderistan would be met by as much as a 15-year jail term. Each Wagner fighter is officially a Hero of Russia – something Putin himself always stressed.

On the maskirovka front, there’s no question the simmering tensions in Russian military circles before The Longest Day were manipulated, fog of war-style, to disorient the enemy. It worked like a charm. On the fateful June 24 itself, Surovikin was running a war, and not spending the day drinking brandy with Prighozin.

The NATOstan axis is really clutching at straws. It took just a Surovikin-related rumor to send them into rapture – proving once again how deeply they fear General Armageddon.

A key vector is how Surovikin is regarded by public opinion compared to the surviving “operetta Generals”.

He built the now legendary three-layered defense which is already burying the “counter-offensive”. He introduced the wildly successful Shahed-136 Iranian drones in the battlefield. And he organized the meat grinder devastation in Bakhmut/Artemyovsk – which has already entered the military annals.

Way back in the Autumn of 2022, it was General Armageddon who told Putin that Russian forces were not ready for a large-scale offensive.

So whatever the 5th columnists fabricate, General Armadeggon is not going anywhere – except to win a war. And Russia is not “leaving” Africa. On the contrary: a rebranded Wagner is there to stay, and remains on speed dial in several latitudes.

The trend, short term, seems to point to a – convoluted – draining of the Russian military swamp. The Longest Day seems to have galvanized Russians of all stripes into identifying who the real enemy is – and how to defeat it, whatever it takes.

“Nothing happens by chance”

Historian Andrei Fursov, reviving Roosevelt, observed that “in politics, nothing happens by chance. If it happens, you bet it was foreseen.”

Well, maskirovska rides again.

Yet the main problem faced by Russia is not the Hegemon and NATO: it’s domestic.

Based on conversations with Russian analysts, and their impressions from very sharp people who lived in Russia, Ukraine and in the West, it would be possible to identify basically four main groups trying to impose their idea of Russia.

  1. The “Back to the USSR” gang. Includes, of course, some former KGB. Have some kind of support from the general population. A lot of educated specialists (old school pros, mostly pension age). This project suggests a revolution – a 1917 on steroids. But where is Lenin?
  2. The “Back to the Tsar” people. That would imply Russia as the “Third Rome” and a prominent role for the Orthodox Church. Hefty funds behind it. A big question mark is how much popular support, especially in “deep” Russia, they really have. This group has nothing to do with the Vatican – which is sold to The Great Reset.
  3. The Plunderers – as in robbing Russia blind in favor of the Hegemon. Congregates 5th columnists, and all manner of “totalitarian neoliberals” worshipping the “values” of the collective West. The remaining ones will soon get a knock on the door by the FSB. Their money is already blocked.
  4. The Eurasianists. This is the most feasible project – in close collaboration with China, and aiming towards a multipolar world. There’s no place for Russian oligarchs here. Yet the degree of collaboration with China is still highly debatable. The real burning question: how to really integrate, in practice, the Belt and Road Initiative with the Greater Eurasia Partnership?

This is just a sketch – open for discussion. The first three projects may hardly work – for a series of complex reasons. And the fourth still has not gathered enough steam in Russia.

What is certain is that all of them are fighting each other. May the current draining of the military swamp also serve to clear the political skies.

https://strategic-culture.org/news/2023/06/30/a-matryoshka-of-psyops-and-why-general-armageddon-is-not-going-anywhere/

Ukraine’s ‘failure’ a big problem for Biden – Seymour Hersh

 

Kiev faces “looming disaster” in the conflict with Moscow, according to investigative reporter Seymour Hersh

Ukraine’s ‘failure’ a big problem for Biden – Seymour Hersh

Ukraine’s foundering counteroffensive will mark a major embarrassment for the White House, Pulitzer-winning journalist Seymour Hersh has argued, suggesting President Joe Biden’s hardline support for Kiev could cost him the next election.

Writing in his latest Substack article on Thursday, Hersh outlined the progress of Ukraine’s offensive operations, claiming it would need a “miracle” to reverse Russian gains after Moscow took “total control” of the Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye regions.

While a short-lived rebellion by Russia’s Wagner Group last weekend offered a brief distraction from “Ukraine’s failing counter-offensive,” Hersh went on to argue that Kiev is heading for “disaster.” He said this could be politically damaging for Biden, who will seek to sell Ukraine as a foreign policy success as he campaigns for re-election in 2024.

“It may be prudent for Joe Biden to talk straight about the war, and its various problems for America – and to explain why the estimated more than $150 billion that his administration has put up thus far turned out to be a very bad investment,” the journalist added.

Pointing to battlefield statistics and other information provided by US intelligence sources, Hersh claimed that Kiev had reclaimed only 44 square miles of territory since launching its counteroffensive in early June, “much of it open land.” He said at the current pace, Kiev would need 117 years to completely repel Russian forces, attributing the figure to an unnamed official.

Ukraine’s defense minister, Aleksey Reznikov, has acknowledged the slow progress of the counteroffensive, but told the Financial Times this week that the operations so far were merely a “preview,” saying Kiev had yet to deploy the bulk of its Western-trained reserves.

While Ukraine and its Western backers insist victory is still on the table, Hersh said Biden’s “overall foreign policy may be at risk” should Kiev fail to deliver results on the battlefield. The journalist urged Democrats to take the “looming disaster” in Ukraine as a “wake-up call” as they enter the 2024 race, noting the president’s waning approval numbers. 

The Russian Defense Ministry, meanwhile, said that the repeated pushes by Kiev’s troops have failed to breach the Russian defenses and gain any significant ground. Moreover, multiple German-made Leopard 2 heavy tanks and US-made Bradley combat vehicles were either destroyed or abandoned on the battlefield. Videos shared by Russian and Ukrainian sources this month show Ukrainian soldiers bogged down and retreating due to minefields and artillery fire. 

https://www.rt.com/news/578950-biden-ukraine-failure-hersh/

Regular Russian Army fast becoming world’s most powerful military in ground combat

   Uncategorized   10 Minutes

Over the past several days, we have heard a great deal about the outstanding achievements of the Wagner Private Military Company on the field of battle. Their victory in the months-long bloody fighting to take Bakhmut/Artyomovsk and Soledar brought them respect throughout Russia which has even outlasted the disgrace that Wagner boss Yevgeny Prigozhin brought on their heads by his reckless armed mutiny over the past weekend.

Indeed, in his address yesterday to military commanders who had stood in the path of Wagner’s march on Moscow and forced Prigozhin to negotiate a settlement, President Vladimir Putin acknowledged that the Wagner Group had shown greater effectiveness on the field of battle than the Ministry of Defense’s own regular troops.

That remark struck me as something rather peculiar to say to officers who had just saved the Kremlin from the prospect of a disastrous bloodbath at the gates of Moscow.  Perhaps it was said to soften the shock of Putin’s next statement, when he detailed the amount of money that the Russian government had paid to Wagner in the year May 2022 to May 2023, namely one billion euros in ruble equivalent, for both maintenance of the force and for incentive rewards which came to 20% of the total.

However, as I reflect upon it, I conclude that Putin’s intended audience was not in the room but overseas, in the intelligence agencies in London and Washington, to give them and the leaders they report to the false hope that the Russian military will now be weakened by the disbandment of the Wagner Group.

I say this because official Russia is very circumspect in describing what is happening and what is likely to happen on the field of battle in Ukraine. Yes, they announce the horrific casualties being borne by the Ukrainian army and the destruction of Western tanks, artillery and armored personnel carriers in the first two weeks of the Ukrainian counter-offensive. But they remind themselves that the Ukrainian reserves have been held back till now and may be unleashed at any time, with unpredictable results. On the Russian side, there is absolutely no crowing “Mission Accomplished” in the typically American fashion of George W. Bush at a premature moment in the Iraqi war.

And yet, if you look closely at the daily reports of the Russian military on battlefield operations, you have to recalibrate our understanding of who is who, where the strengths of Wagner end and the strengths of the Russian regular Army begin.

The Wagner Group made their mark in the battle for Bakhmut, which was largely a war of street fighting and that is always bloody. Despite the artillery advantage of the Russian forces, taking building after building and street after street was costly in lives. It is easy to imagine that Russian losses were not less than Ukrainian losses.  For the Russians that was politically acceptable only because most of the Wagner troops engaged in the fighting were liberated prisoners whose lives were expendable, as seen from Moscow. Then for other special missions there were the Chechens of the Akhmat special forces, who did wonders to liberate Mariupol.

However, battlefield operations in Ukraine are now proceeding in a very different manner, that of traditional war of attrition in which artillery strength is determinant.  From the very beginning of the Special Military Operation, Russian soldiers were the operators of the tanks, drones and other heavy equipment while a lot of the infantry fighting was being done by the Donetsk and Lugansk militias, These were hardened fighters defending their own land. But, as seen from Moscow, they also were more easily expendable than, say, reservists or even contract soldiers from Moscow, or Kazan or Vladivostok. During 2022, the regular Russian army was at a disadvantage to the Ukrainian side in terms of real time reconnaissance of enemy positions for purposes of targeting. The Ukrainians were receiving such data from the American planes and satellites.  Moreover, the Russians were not very skilled in tank maneuvers and repeatedly fell into Ukrainian traps or were destroyed by anti-tank weapons provided by the West.

In 2023, we see that the situation has reversed itself. The Russian Army has learned to work with drones very effectively. Whatever shortages in drones they may have had at the outset of the war have been compensated by vastly expanded production from the military industrial complex and also from what might be called ‘handicraft’ production both by start-up companies on the home front or by improvised assembly by troops themselves close to the battle lines.

We have seen on Western television many reports of Russian drone attacks on Ukrainian cities and critical infrastructure. Initially such drones were largely imported, from Iran and other sources.  Today they surely are mostly Russian produced. 

But these attacks on cities are only a side-show in this war compared to the reconnaissance and kamikaze drones that the Russian Army is now deploying on the battlefield. The Russian soldiers have perfected the coordination of both types of drones to achieve proven success in destroying both the latest NATO heavy equipment and the older Soviet vintage equipment that Kiev is moving to the front in its so-called counter-offensive.

Today’s Russian news portals provide reports and video images of the destruction of an American supplied Bradley armored personnel carrier by a Russian T-80 tank at a distance of 9.5 kilometers using drones in tandem to locate the hidden target, provide coordinates for precise cannon fire and record the explosion of the target vehicle. This, of course, is an entirely new method of tank warfare that requires computer savvy personnel and highly sophisticated communications.

In his Evening with Vladimir Solovyov show on a succession of Sundays, the host has put up on the screen videos taken during his meetings with officers and rank in file soldiers at the front lines in Donbas. Most recently one show was devoted entirely to the soldiers operating the drones and to their colleagues manning the artillery and tanks.

In addition to drones, the Russian Army is now using attack helicopters, primarily the so-called Alligators, to destroy Ukrainian heavy equipment on the battlefield. The risks of ground fire or missiles attacking the helicopters have been mitigated by a variety of new electronic warfare devices that appear to be very effective in practice. And electronic warfare is being used by the Russians to disorient and otherwise neutralize Ukrainian drones.

At the same time, the Russian military is very quietly telling us that it is now deploying stealth bombers into the war zone. Initial flights have demonstrated their ability to operate over Ukrainian controlled territory without being detected. If this practice is now generalized, the Russians will finally enjoy the air superiority that has been the feature of US and NATO operations in war over the past thirty years or more.

The most sensational results of the new Russian ways of warfare make it into Western tabloids and television broadcasts because the destruction of Bradleys and Leopards is news-worthy in the supplier countries. These advanced systems are being targeted in a priority fashion by Russian soldiers and airmen because of the high rewards that the Ministry has posted. As part of the process of documenting ‘kills,’ the incidents of destruction are video recorded and put on social media by the Russians.  What is missing in our coverage is any overview of what this means for our evaluation of the military potential of the Russian army.

Neutralizing the Ukrainian tanks, armored personnel carriers and artillery pieces means removal of the most talented, trained and experienced Ukrainian soldiers and officers. It exposes the infantry to ever more horrific losses as the counter-offensive proceeds at the demand of the paymasters in Washington, Brussels and London.

                                                                      *****

Now let us consider the implications of the foregoing for the end game of this war.

So far in the counter-offensive that began on 4 June, the Ukrainian side has lost nearly 20% of the Bradleys supplied by the USA and about the same percentage of Leopards supplied by the European NATO member states. The latest information from the USA on the next tranche of military assistance to Kiev indicates a one-for-one replacement of the heavy equipment being lost on the battlefield.  Note:  one-for-one!  The Ukrainian forces will not gain any advantage over the losing hand they now seem to have.  The conclusion that I draw from this is that regardless of what Washington declares about the long-term future of the war, it has already written off the Ukrainian army’s chances of succeeding in its mission of liberating its territory from Russian occupation.

As for personnel, two weeks into the counter-offensive the Russian military command reported to Putin that the Ukrainians had lost 13,000 soldiers and officers. By daily accounts since then, we have been told that 500 or more Ukrainian fighters have been killed daily on the several fronts where they have been making concentrated attacks. A report today in Forbes confirms that the Russian mine fields and other defenses which stand in the way of the attacking Ukrainians have led to disastrous personnel losses.

In fact, the United States may have written off the Ukrainian army’s existence entirely. Rumors abound that during Polish President Duda’s last visit to Kiev he and Zelensky laid down plans for Polish troops to enter Western Ukraine in July-August to back-stop the Ukrainian military. If there is any substance to this, it confirms the suspicion that there will no longer be a Ukrainian army worthy of the name by that time due to deaths and injuries, but possibly also to another consequence of the very high casualty rate that many Ukrainian units are now experiencing:  in the disabled Ukrainian units soldiers may finally turn on their officers in desperation. Up to now, Ukrainian soldiers on the battlefield who have seen what awaits them and have made moves to surrender were being shot in the back by the Ukrainian National Guard.

The possibility that there are legs under the rumor of Polish plans to send troops into Western Ukraine is supported by other rumors concerning the whereabouts of Wagner Group forces that have left Russia for Belarus and are being redeployed near the borders with Poland and Western Ukraine.

For those who are alarmed at Polish entry into the war moving us closer to a general European-wide war and likely escalation to nuclear strikes, I offer the “consolation” that Poland’s possible engagement in Ukraine does not engage Article 5 obligations of the North Atlantic Alliance treaty.  It would be a Polish-Russian war, and possibly would be limited only to fields of battle in Ukraine. Full stop. And even if the battle improbably expanded to Polish territory, I do not envision Germany putting Hamburg in jeopardy for the sake of defending Wroclaw (Breslau) or Warsaw from the Polish leadership’s delusional adventure.

                                                                                *****

A  few days ago, the dean of the Realist School of International Relations in the United States, Professor John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago, posted on his substack.com site an article entitled “The Darkness Ahead: Where the Ukraine War is Headed.” This is obviously an essay in which he has invested a great deal of time and thought, since he remarks at the very end that he will be using it as the basis for public lectures he will be delivering in coming months.

This essay bears all the hallmarks of a professional political science document. It sets out a long series of scenarios that describe possible eventualities. It makes the argument that since both Ukrainian and Russian sides see their confrontation as existential, neither side will come to the negotiating table. For that reason the war will, in Mearsheimer’s view, end in a frozen conflict that may flare up again in the future. In the meantime, Russia’s relations with Europe and the Collective West will stagnate at their present state of rupture, and the European economies will continue to suffer the consequences of their sanctions on Moscow.

It is most curious that the good professor has not faced up to the “elephant in the room,” namely the possibility of Ukrainian military collapse and the conclusion of a peace on terms of capitulation to Russian demands. 

I have mentioned above the very unfavorable casualty rate of Ukrainian forces at present when facing the much stronger Russia and much more technologically capable Russian Army that has emerged from a year of fighting.  Mearsheimer himself describes the ongoing war of attrition as a war decided by artillery in which, per his admission, the Russians have a 10 to 1 advantage in terms of artillery tubes and shells.  He goes on to say that given the limitations of Western stocks and manufacturing capacity, there is no way to improve the Ukrainians’ odds in terms of artillery in the coming year.

Curiously, Mearsheimer chooses to set Russian losses of personnel at 1:2 whereas by his own logic it should be 1:5 if not 1:10.    He also remarks on the population advantage of Russia, which he now sets at 5:1, taking into consideration the flight of Ukrainians abroad, including the 4 million who have moved to Russia proper.

So, let’s draw the appropriate conclusion from the very facts that Professor Mearsheimer has given us: Ukraine is about to be militarily obliterated, and that suggests a capitulation, whatever Washington wants or hopes for.   Moreover, with the Wagner Group breathing down their necks from just across the border on the Belarus side, it would be utter madness for the Poles to proceed with their “rescue” of their Ukrainian friends, which more realistically could be called an occupation of defeated Ukraine.

Time will tell. But at this moment, time is very much favoring the Russian cause.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2023