Tomasz

 What Russia has reached over three months diplomatic and military pressure on West ?

Recommended Posts

 What Russia has reached over three months diplomatic and military pressure on West ?

The United States has warned of Russia's impending invasion of Ukraine and has even set a February 16 date for the offensive. And although later Washington itself doubted this date, almost 40 countries began to evacuate diplomats and citizens from Ukraine, OSCE mission observers and Western military instructors are leaving. Airlines are considering the possibility of suspending flights to Ukrainian cities. The authorities of Ukraine itself consider these measures unjustified and urge people not to panic. Moscow does not rule out that the Ukrainian or a third party is preparing to arrange a provocation in the Donbass in order to drag Russia into the war. Three months after the start of diplomatic and military pressure on the West in order to obtain security guarantees, Russia found itself in a very unsafe situation.

Wednesday, February 16

Almost three months have passed since Vladimir Putin on November 18 instructed the Foreign Ministry to seek from the United States and NATO "the provision of Russia with serious long-term security guarantees." Then the Russian president announced the need to keep the West in a “state of tension” “for as long as possible”, clearly referring to the accumulation of Russian military forces and equipment near the border of Ukraine, which greatly disturbed the United States and its European allies.

The Russian side, apparently, even overfulfilled the task of maintaining tension. US President Joe Biden on Friday evening warned allies that Russia was ready to invade Ukraine and, according to US media, even named the date of the alleged attack as Wednesday, February 16.

His National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, at a special media briefing at the White House, did not name a specific day, but made it clear that it was a time period until February 20. “This (Russia's invasion of Ukraine . - Kommersant ) can begin during the Olympic Games,” he said. Jake Sullivan recalled that the US authorities began to evacuate diplomats and their families from Kiev, and appealed to all other Americans in Ukraine with an appeal to "leave immediately."

“Any American in Ukraine should leave as soon as possible, and in any case within the next 24-48 hours,” he said. According to him, there may not be another opportunity to leave the country, and US citizens should not expect that the military will be able to evacuate them later. “If Russia invades Ukraine, then the attack will most likely begin with aerial bombardments and missile strikes, which, obviously, can lead to the death of civilians regardless of their nationality. With a subsequent ground invasion, huge forces could be involved, ”continued the adviser to the US president.

According to him, the connection necessary for organizing the departure can be interrupted suddenly, and commercial flights are stopped. “Once hostilities begin, no one can expect to leave by air, rail or road,” he warned.

Jake Sullivan emphasized that he does not claim that a Russian invasion is imminent, but noted that the US authorities consider it their duty to warn citizens of the danger. To numerous questions from journalists about the evidence of an allegedly impending Russian attack, the adviser answered vaguely: the US conclusions are based on the amount of forces and equipment pulled together by Russia to the borders of Ukraine, and "intelligence information received."

However, on Sunday, speaking on CNN, Mr. Sullivan was clearly not so sure about the information he made public on Friday. “We cannot accurately predict the day (of the invasion . - “Kommersant” ), but we say that we are in a period when an invasion, a major military operation, can be launched by Russia in Ukraine on any day. This includes next week, until the end of the Olympics. Of course, this can happen after the Olympics. Or, this is still possible, Russia may choose the path of diplomacy,” said the national security adviser.

Be that as it may, but on Saturday the US State Department announced the desire of "several thousand Americans" to leave Ukraine. Following the United States, almost 40 European, Middle Eastern and Asian states began to evacuate embassy staff and citizens. It also became known that the United States and Great Britain withdrew their representatives from the OSCE monitoring mission monitoring the situation on the demarcation line in Donbass. It is noteworthy that the United States, Great Britain and Canada intend to take out of Ukraine military instructors who had previously arrived there to train Ukrainian military personnel.

Over the weekend, information also appeared about a possible suspension of air traffic over Ukraine. According to Ukrainian media, this could happen as early as Monday due to the refusal of Western insurance companies to service civilian aircraft in Ukrainian airspace. The Dutch airline KLM has already suspended flights to Ukraine and through its airspace. The German Lufthansa does not exclude the same step.

"The Anglo-Saxons Need War"

The Ukrainian authorities, meanwhile, still do not consider all these measures to be justified, as follows from a statement by President Volodymyr Zelensky, who called on those who are not indifferent to provide Kiev with “additional information about the 100% invasion of the Russian Federation in Ukraine starting from the 16th (February - “Kommersant” ) ". Prime Minister of Ukraine Denys Shmygal, in a video message, called on the citizens of the country to maintain self-control. “We live in a world of rapid information dissemination, when panic is a gift for the enemy. It is panic that destroys states better than tanks and machine guns,” he said, adding that disinformation and panic are already negatively affecting the hryvnia exchange rate and the state of the country’s economy.

Meanwhile, on Saturday it became known that Russia also decided to significantly reduce the staff of its embassy in Kiev and consulates general in Lvov, Odessa and Kharkov. From the explanation of the representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, it follows that Moscow took such a step, seeing that Washington and London had begun to evacuate diplomats. “Given the significant influence that they have on Kiev, and in general their role in managing processes in Ukraine - what is the mere pumping of "square" weapons and instructors - we conclude that our American and British colleagues, apparently, know about some military actions being prepared in Ukraine that can significantly complicate the situation in the security sphere,” she said. According to her, in this situation, fearing possible provocations of "the Kiev regime or third countries",

At the same time, Maria Zakharova sharply criticized the US and UK decision to withdraw their observers from the OSCE monitoring mission. According to her, these steps cannot but cause serious concern in Russia. “The mission is being deliberately dragged into the militaristic psychosis fomented by Washington and is being used as a tool for a possible provocation,” said Maria Zakharova. And she added: “The hysteria of the White House is more revealing than ever. The Anglo-Saxons need a war. At any price. Provocations, disinformation and threats are a favorite method of solving one's own problems.

On Saturday, the current situation was discussed by telephone, first by the heads of the foreign ministries of Russia and the United States, Sergei Lavrov and Anthony Blinken, then by Defense Ministers Sergei Shoigu and Lloyd Austin, and, finally, by Presidents Vladimir Putin and Joe Biden. Yuri Ushakov, an aide to the Russian president, said the conversation between the two leaders "came at a time of unprecedented hysteria by U.S. officials about an allegedly imminent Russian invasion of Ukraine." According to him, referring to the likelihood of such a "catastrophic scenario", the American side requested an urgent telephone contact of the presidents, although initially they were supposed to phone on Monday.

At the same time, Yuri Ushakov generally described the conversation as "quite balanced and business-like." According to him, Joe Biden said that he was "an adherent of the diplomatic path", and in this regard, "set out a number of considerations that, in his opinion, take into account many of the Russian concerns." “The President of Russia reacted in the spirit that the Russian side, of course, will carefully analyze the considerations expressed by Biden, and we will undoubtedly take them into account,” Vladimir Putin’s assistant continued. “But, unfortunately, and this was said, these considerations do not affect the central , key elements of Russian initiatives”.

According to Yuri Ushakov, the President of the Russian Federation also "highlighted the destructive line of the Ukrainian authorities to sabotage the Minsk agreements, which has been going on for the past eight years," and "noted that Western states are not exerting due pressure so that Kiev fulfills its obligations." obligations."

The White House, in turn, reported that Joe Biden "made it clear that if Russia undertakes a further invasion of Ukraine, the United States, along with allies and partners, will respond decisively" and make Russia pay a "high price" for this. The US president also warned that a Russian invasion of Ukraine would "cause massive loss of life" and "weaken the position" of Moscow. “President Biden has made it clear to President Putin that while the United States remains ready to engage in diplomacy … we are equally prepared for other scenarios,” the White House said.

What have you achieved

If, as follows from all of the above, Moscow has succeeded in creating tension in the West, then the task of securing security guarantees is becoming increasingly difficult. Recall that in mid-December, Russia handed over draft treaties to the United States and NATO, which describe in detail what exactly it is seeking from them. Among other things, these are: the rejection of NATO expansion (primarily at the expense of Ukraine), guarantees that strike systems threatening Russia will not be deployed in Europe, and the withdrawal of forces and infrastructure of the North Atlantic Alliance to the positions of 1997. The written text was accompanied by an oral ultimatum: do not fulfill these requirements, a military-technical answer will follow.

At the same time, it is unlikely that the people involved in decision-making in Moscow really expected that their demands would be satisfied exactly in the form in which they were put forward. Whatever Russian officials say publicly, they are well aware that no US president can announce the abolition of NATO's "open door policy", even in relation to a single country, in this particular case, Ukraine.

However, if we consider the task of Russia - to obtain legally binding guarantees of Ukraine's non-entry into NATO - not directly, but in a broader context, then it can be achieved in another way - through the implementation of the Minsk agreements on the settlement of the conflict in Donbass.

The fact is that the return of Donbass to Ukraine in strict accordance with the Minsk agreements, as Moscow wants, would close the way for Kiev to NATO for a long time. The road map for resolving the conflict (the document is at the disposal of Kommersant), submitted by the unrecognized DPR and LPR to the Trilateral Contact Group back in 2020, proposes to give these regions a special status until 2050. But the self-proclaimed republics insist that this period can be extended by referenda, which should be held no earlier than 2045 and no later than 2049.

The Minsk agreements and the proposals of Donetsk and Lugansk based on them (Kyiv has not yet given any answer to the road map) suggest, if we compress a multi-page text into one phrase, to create a state within a state on the territory of Ukraine. In addition to the fact that such a construction means the emergence of alternative centers of power and decision-making to Kiev, it has a significant potential for conflict: one can confidently predict that friction between the center and these regions will arise on any issues.

An additional effect of the implementation of the Minsk agreements may be that, following the example of the Donbass, some other regions of the country may want autonomy, especially those where other ethnic groups live compactly. For a state with a weak central government, such as Ukraine, this threatens chaos. Apparently, Secretary of the Security Council of the country Alexei Danilov spoke about him in an interview with the Associated Press, urging the West not to put pressure on Kiev on the implementation of the Minsk agreements.

However, there are still no signs that the Ukrainian side intends to fulfill the agreements, which last week turned exactly seven years old. After Russian diplomatic and military pressure, the negotiations in the Normandy format were revived, and the first meeting after a long break even gave reason for optimism.

However, the last round of negotiations of the Normandy Four failed, and this plays into the hands of Kiev, whose tactic is not to renounce agreements and negotiations on their implementation, but in the end not to implement them. President Zelensky and his team are thinking more about self-preservation and the upcoming elections - parliamentary in 2023 and presidential in 2024. They understand that any compromise on Donbass can blow up the internal political situation and lead to a change of power. The fear of the Maidan clearly outweighs the desire to end the war.

This irritates Moscow, which explicitly requires the West to put more pressure on Ukraine. Judging by the statements of Western politicians, including French President Emmanuel Macron, there is this pressure, but Volodymyr Zelensky has not yet yielded.

More obvious positive achievements include the willingness of the United States to discuss with Russia "the deployment and use of armed forces in Ukraine." This is exactly how this topic is indicated in the written response of the American side to the Russian demands. The United States, as follows from this document, offers Russia to start negotiations on "measures of mutual transparency" and "mutual obligations" that provide for the refusal to deploy land-based offensive missile systems and regular armed forces on the territory of Ukraine with a combat mission. Earlier, Moscow expressed concern that strike systems and bases of the United States and other NATO countries could be deployed on the territory of Ukraine.

From the point of view of Russia's interests, the beginning of an expert discussion in the United States and Europe that perhaps NATO really should not be expanded (or at least impose a moratorium on the admission of new members) can be considered positive, and Europe needs a different security architecture to replace the one that was rebuilt after the end of the Cold War. Columns and interviews on these topics over the past three months have appeared in many authoritative Western publications, which actually did not exist before.

Another achievement: the readiness expressed by the United States (including in writing) to discuss arms control, military restraint and the prevention of dangerous incidents with Russia. Many of the measures cited as appropriate in Washington's response have been promoted by Moscow itself over the years, without success.

The most striking example is the proposal made public by Russia back in 2019 to impose a moratorium on the deployment in Europe of previously banned intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles. Until recently, the US and its NATO allies publicly called it "unacceptable and untrustworthy." However, Washington's response to Moscow's demands explicitly states that the Americans agree to negotiate on this issue. Moreover, the letter clarifies that the US is ready to discuss a transparency mechanism with Russia to confirm the absence of Tomahawk cruise missiles at Aegis Ashore installation sites in Romania and Poland, provided that Russia provides mutual terms of transparency regarding the two US-selected ground-based missile bases at its territory. Earlier, the proposal to introduce similar verification measures was made by the Russian side,

Side effects

But the Russian diplomatic and military pressure of the past three months has many negative effects. And unlike the pluses that exist so far only on paper, many of them are already very practical.

Thus, the supply of weapons from Western countries to Ukraine has sharply intensified. Military transport aircraft from the United States and other NATO countries one by one land at Kiev's Boryspil airport, delivering ammunition, weapons and trainers (see infographic on this page). On Saturday evening, Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksiy Reznikov tweeted that the United States alone had delivered 1,300 tons of military aid to Ukraine.

From the point of view of Russia's interests, this is, of course, an extremely undesirable trend. According to Yuri Ushakov, during a Saturday conversation with Joe Biden, Vladimir Putin “drawed attention to the dangers of militarizing Ukraine, pumping it with modern weapons, which Western countries are purposefully doing, thereby encouraging possible provocations by Ukrainian security forces both in relation to Donbass and in relation to Crimea ".

Meanwhile, in recent months there has been an active build-up of forces and armaments on the "eastern flank" of NATO. Part of the military is transferred to the region directly from the United States. About 3,000 more US troops are expected to arrive in Poland early this week. It is reported that these contingents are designed to strengthen the defense capability of the Eastern European NATO member countries and will not be involved in a possible armed conflict in Ukraine.

Another negative effect for Russia was the growth of anti-Russian sentiment in Ukraine. Thus, in the course of a December poll by the Kiev International Institute of Sociology, 59.2% of respondents would vote for Ukraine's entry into NATO, and 49.2% considered the possibility of Russia's invasion of Ukraine very likely. At the same time, 57.8% of respondents said that the Ukrainian authorities should actively oppose Russia. These figures are up from a similar survey conducted in February last year.

Against the backdrop of constant statements about the growing "Russian threat", one should expect a further deterioration in attitudes towards Russia in many Western countries. Fresh global polls by Kommersant could not be found, but, for example, in the course of a January study by Pew Research Center in the United States, 49% of respondents said they consider Russia a rival, 41% an enemy, and only 7% a partner. And in a February poll of citizens of seven EU countries commissioned by the ECFR, 73% of Poles and 64% of Romanians said they considered it “very likely” or “very likely” that “Russia will invade Ukraine this year.” At the same time, residents of most countries participating in the survey said that their governments should be more actively involved in protecting Ukraine from “Russian aggression.”

Other negative consequences of Moscow's November initiative include: the rallying of NATO against the background of the "Russian threat", the rapprochement between NATO and the European Union, and the growing number of supporters of NATO membership in Finland and Sweden. Alarmist rhetoric about the upcoming "Russian invasion" and threats of tough sanctions have a negative impact on the quotes of Russian companies, as well as the ruble exchange rate.

Thus, it can be stated that over the past three months, diplomatic and forceful pressure on the West has brought Russia along with positive and many extremely undesirable results. Yuri Ushakov said that Moscow would "bring to the attention of partners and the public in the near future" its response to the US and NATO's reaction to Russia's demands.

Here, of course, a joke arises that "the main thing is not to February 16." But it's probably not the time for jokes.

Elena Chernenko, Vladimir Solovyov https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/5216150

image.gif

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

My comment:

I believe the Russian strategy now is based on the assumption that for Ukraine any form of Minsk is preferable to war. So at the end of the day it will agree to a version of the Russian interpretation, the Kremlin hopes.

For the US, the strategy is probably to get a better version of Minsk by pushing the narrative about Ukraine ready to fight and also threatening harsh sanctions even for a token invasion in the form of moving troops into LDNR. Trying to impress Putin with costs. But the American apocalyptic messaging is weird and a part of the DC is clearly happy to let Ukrainians fight and die just to get Putin bogged down in a horrendous war and feel the brunt of nuclear sanctions. So I am not sure.

Also not sure about Ukraine. Zelensky’s government doesn’t seem to have full trust in America’s strategic genius. The strategy Biden and Zelensky started implementing a year ago went astray when Putin amassed the troops. Not sure Zelensky understands what Biden really wants.  Kyiv isn’t very good at making decision that are in its best interest. It shoots from the hip most of the time.

It seems Russia will not invade now or in the next two weeks (except maybe a token invasion into separatist-held areas) but tighten the screws on Ukraine instead by slowly increasing pressure until they give in.

The one scenario Ukraine wasn't prepared for was severe Western pressure.  With the airports closed that scenario is becoming a reality.  Putin won't have to bluff if the Ukrainian elite can't fly out.

Edited by Tomasz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reads like old copies of Pravda.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Putin can kiss Americas Ass

Hope he chokes on Javelin and Sidewinders if he invades the Ukraine and now he can kiss his Nordstream 2 goodbye. Gazprom ??? will be a company with no customers if he invades. What is this?? Sleepy Joe let Calcasieu Pass open while it is under construction?? FERC and Sleepy Joe tossed the Ukraine and Germany a freebie 

U.S. Exporting Every Molecule of LNG Possible

Bloomberg
 
February 12, 2022

 

By Sergio Chapa, Feb 12, 2022 (Bloomberg) –Tankers are docked or loading at all seven U.S. liquefied natural gas export terminals for the first time, marking a small piece of industry history and setting up record flows to the plants amid high prices and tensions in Europe. 

The Greek-flagged tanker Yiannis is docked at Venture Global LNG’s Calcasieu Pass plant in Louisiana, which remains under construction but has been given permission by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to send out cargoes during the export terminal’s startup process. The Saturday afternoon arrival of LNGships Manhattan at Kinder Morgan’s Elba Island LNG plant in Georgia, marked loadings at the other six U.S. LNG export terminals.  

Although the tankers will only remain docked at the same time for less than a day, demand from their loadings helped set a record 13.3 billion cubic feet of natural gas flows to U.S. LNG export terminals on Saturday. Once Calcasieu Pass LNG is in full service, the seven U.S. LNG export terminals will be able to draw as much as 13.9 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day, solidifying America’s lead over Qatar and Australia as the world’s top supplier of the superchilled power plant fuel, figures from U.S. Energy Information Administration show. 

Out of the roughly five dozen U.S. LNG cargoes on the water, more than two-thirds are headed to Europe where low winter inventories and tensions between Russia and Ukraine have sent natural gas prices on the continent soaring to more six times the U.S. benchmark Henry Hub. 

© 2022 Bloomberg L.P.

Edited by notsonice
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Tomasz said:

My comment:

I believe the Russian strategy now is based on the assumption that for Ukraine any form of Minsk is preferable to war. So at the end of the day it will agree to a version of the Russian interpretation, the Kremlin hopes.

For the US, the strategy is probably to get a better version of Minsk by pushing the narrative about Ukraine ready to fight and also threatening harsh sanctions even for a token invasion in the form of moving troops into LDNR. Trying to impress Putin with costs. But the American apocalyptic messaging is weird and a part of the DC is clearly happy to let Ukrainians fight and die just to get Putin bogged down in a horrendous war and feel the brunt of nuclear sanctions. So I am not sure.

Also not sure about Ukraine. Zelensky’s government doesn’t seem to have full trust in America’s strategic genius. The strategy Biden and Zelensky started implementing a year ago went astray when Putin amassed the troops. Not sure Zelensky understands what Biden really wants.  Kyiv isn’t very good at making decision that are in its best interest. It shoots from the hip most of the time.

It seems Russia will not invade now or in the next two weeks (except maybe a token invasion into separatist-held areas) but tighten the screws on Ukraine instead by slowly increasing pressure until they give in.

The one scenario Ukraine wasn't prepared for was severe Western pressure.  With the airports closed that scenario is becoming a reality.  Putin won't have to bluff if the Ukrainian elite can't fly out.

I don’t know but I suspect that if there is conflict all US Allie’s would be expected to quit trading with Russia. Including China. It would turn into a pick your system day in world history. Choose rule of law vrs. Authoritarian systems. If China chose to trade with Russia it would be major disruption. China would quickly run out of customers. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/13/2022 at 6:36 PM, Tomasz said:

The Anglo-Saxons need a war.

Presumably this includes the African Anglo-Saxons, Asian Anglo-Saxons, Hispanic Anglo-Saxons, and Native American Anglo-Saxons that inhabit North America.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/13/2022 at 6:36 PM, Tomasz said:

...instructed the Foreign Ministry to seek from the United States and NATO "the provision of Russia with serious long-term security guarantees."

In short, the US is expected to provide guarantees to Russia that subordinate the security interests of other sovereign states, particularly those that are NATO members and whose borders are shared with Russia. The United States cannot and will not make any assurance to any third country without their consultation and consent. If those countries have had experiences with Soviet/Russian rule that have motivated them to join NATO to keep it from happening again, it is patently obvious that Russia's 'security interests' are in direct conflict with the interests of these other countries.

  • Like 2
  • Great Response! 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/13/2022 at 6:36 PM, Tomasz said:

President Zelensky and his team are thinking more about self-preservation and the upcoming elections

Not only Zelensky. Putin has a few election problems in Russia, including a desire by a majority of Russians for him to retire and get out of the way.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/13/2022 at 6:36 PM, Tomasz said:

The United States, as follows from this document, offers Russia to start negotiations on "measures of mutual transparency" and "mutual obligations" that provide for the refusal to deploy land-based offensive missile systems and regular armed forces on the territory of Ukraine with a combat mission. Earlier, Moscow expressed concern that strike systems and bases of the United States and other NATO countries could be deployed on the territory of Ukraine.

Such 'refusals' would be entirely dependent on the force posture of the Russian military. Russia would have to agree to position their own assets far enough away that there would be no point in having strike capability within the borders of these countries.

Given ships, submarines, and aircraft can traverse these distances in minutes or hours, this is pretty silly. If Russia is maintaining a naval base in the Black Sea, threats are situated right on the Ukrainian coast.

The 'techno-military' coming from the US would most likely take the form of 'stand-off' weapons if hostilities begin - the US has pledged to keep troops out of the Ukraine. This does not constrain US military responses.

The armor build-up in Russia and Belarus is absurd. A war over the Ukraine is going to be an air war, with a heavy dose of radar countermeasures, possibly lasers, and missile defenses. Massive troop movements into the Ukraine would create a scene not all that different from the end of the Gulf War in Kuwait - a 'Highway of Death'.

Furthermore, it isn't clear what exactly those troops would do. Is the objective to remove the existing government in Kiev? What would it be replaced with? 

A hot war would destroy Russia as it is today, leading to a collapse similar to the dissolution of the Soviet Union. It isn't exactly clear how this would play out. Some of the fractioning would be along religious lines and some of it simply involving distance. It's distinctly possible that the Pacific coastal areas would break off.

There is a difference between Russia's 'security interests' and Putin's 'security interests'. No one in the West has any interest in absorbing any Russian territory. Therefore, the military presence of NATO in the Ukraine is to limit Russian threats outside its borders. This is a constraint on Putin's power, which is already excessive, and most likely unsustainable.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/13/2022 at 6:36 PM, Tomasz said:

dangerous incidents with Russia

Including, for example, the murder of ex-Russian citizens by Russian agents in western countries.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/13/2022 at 6:36 PM, Tomasz said:

one should expect a further deterioration in attitudes towards Russia in many Western countries.

I'm not sure it could get any worse. What was it that the US public found acceptable in the last dozen years that is unacceptable now?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Meredith Poor said:

Not only Zelensky. Putin has a few election problems in Russia, including a desire by a majority of Russians for him to retire and get out of the way.

Except that only approved candidates are allowed to run. Approved by Putin. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Either there will be no Western troops in Ukraine, or there will be no Ukraine.

We have not seen the war yet  and even now the Western instructors were escaping on the first plane available.

American diplomats even burned all documents and computers in a panic mode.

The oligarchs, on the other hand, needed at least 20 planes to escape

To sum up:

Ukraine will never be in NATO / EU

The West has shown that it will not defend Ukraine militarily

Any weapons for the Ukrainians will not fundamentally change the final outcome of the war

The sanctions will not stop Putin from realising vital Russian interests

But at  a result of the Maidan, the greatest success of American policy after World War II took place, i.e. the close Russian-Chinese alliance to which Iran and Turkey propose aspirations

But if there will be serious russian invasion on Ukraine it will look just that like always did in the past

If so, Ukraine is surrounded now on 3 sides. The common border with Belarus and Russia is 3.000 kilometers long and indefensible.

Everyone interested knows that one day in the event of big  Sino-American war, the Baltic states and Ukraine are lost at first day of war.

They can wait calmly - the Chinese will test you in Taiwan, the Russians in Eastern Europe and the Iranians in the Middle East.

One day, like in the "Godfather" the day of resolving "family matters" will come.

 

pobrane.jpg

Edited by Tomasz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For now, you have guarantees that every sensible foreign investor will avoid Ukraine from a distance in the coming years. They cannot afford such military expenses in the long run.

GDP in real numbers is around 93% of GDP in 2014.

Even in the pre-covid 2019 year, FDI was practically 0.

I will also remind you that in the years 2014-2020 we had an epoke of low raw material prices. From 2021, the announced new great resource boom began, and it is the geopolitics in the region and the Russian opportunities that have a fundamental effect on it.

The demographic situation is much more tragic than in Russia - there are already 10-15 people working in Ukraine for 10 pensioners.

The West has just shown that Ukraine will not be armed to defend in any case, and it is not known whether any sanctions will stop Putin if it decides that China's advantage over America is already large enough that the right moment has come.

Russia currently relies on a growing hegemon and grows with it.

After the informal annexation of Belarus, Ukraine is de facto surrounded on three sides and has almost 3,000 km of frontier to defend.

With their gdp and 1/3 of the population welcoming the invaders with bread and salt, if Russia decides that the time has come to resolve family matters, then China moves to Taiwan Russia to Ukraine and the Baltic states and Iran to Israel and the chances of defending the US military hegemony on at least so many fronts away from home to me they are slim

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

A hot war would destroy Russia as it is today, leading to a collapse similar to the dissolution of the Soviet Union. It isn't exactly clear how this would play out. Some of the fractioning would be along religious lines and some of it simply involving distance. It's distinctly possible that the Pacific coastal areas would break off.

Kadyrov is already testing Putin. I don't see any response to this yet, if Putin lets his pets run rampant things will get messy quickly.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/01/russia-federal-authorities-must-ensure-the-release-of-zarema-musaeva-and-stop-intimidation-against-ramzan-kadyrovs-critics/

The pit-bulls are already getting their own ideas, Putin's Russia is super stable, uh-huh...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

Not only Zelensky. Putin has a few election problems in Russia, including a desire by a majority of Russians for him to retire and get out of the way.

Fact is President Putin never had an issue get elected. Even the rewritten Constitution got accepted by a large margin. Western Countries undervalued Putin since 20 years.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russian media reporting "thwarted terror attack" in Donbas:

https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-696579

Here is a Twitter video of it:

https://twitter.com/michaelh992/status/1493590163024400389?s=21

Fortunately, the park was empty, except for 3 troops and six different professional cameramen who happened to document the exact moment the dog happened to find the dynamite in the garbage can, and these independent journalists were able to film it being dismantled from every angle.

The nation of Russia is very fortunate to have such professional filming of this very rare event, thus proving beyond a doubt that it was not Russia staging a false flag event, like that one time Russian troops were caught trying to bomb an apartment building with Russian explosives, which led up to the Chechen war and got Putin elected in the first place.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Except that only approved candidates are allowed to run. Approved by Putin. 

how is the US any different?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/14/2022 at 5:37 AM, nsdp said:

Reads like old copies of Pravda.

You never did read old copies of Pravda.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tomasz said:

For now, you have guarantees that every sensible foreign investor will avoid Ukraine from a distance in the coming years. They cannot afford such military expenses in the long run.

GDP in real numbers is around 93% of GDP in 2014.

Even in the pre-covid 2019 year, FDI was practically 0.

I will also remind you that in the years 2014-2020 we had an epoke of low raw material prices. From 2021, the announced new great resource boom began, and it is the geopolitics in the region and the Russian opportunities that have a fundamental effect on it.

The demographic situation is much more tragic than in Russia - there are already 10-15 people working in Ukraine for 10 pensioners.

The West has just shown that Ukraine will not be armed to defend in any case, and it is not known whether any sanctions will stop Putin if it decides that China's advantage over America is already large enough that the right moment has come.

Russia currently relies on a growing hegemon and grows with it.

After the informal annexation of Belarus, Ukraine is de facto surrounded on three sides and has almost 3,000 km of frontier to defend.

With their gdp and 1/3 of the population welcoming the invaders with bread and salt, if Russia decides that the time has come to resolve family matters, then China moves to Taiwan Russia to Ukraine and the Baltic states and Iran to Israel and the chances of defending the US military hegemony on at least so many fronts away from home to me they are slim

Is bread-and-salt a Polish tradition also?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/15/2022 at 9:08 PM, frankfurter said:

how is the US any different?

We have 2 parties to elect from (more if you count the greenies, liberterians, and other fringies)       Russia and China have only One party.

Don't you and your countrymen have another virus to concoct and unleash on the world instead of pestering us here?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/15/2022 at 10:45 PM, Andrei Moutchkine said:

You never did read old copies of Pravda.

Yes we did before we wiped our asses in the latrine in 1971.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, nsdp said:

Yes we did before we wiped our asses in the latrine in 1971.

This is not good for your ass, because of the leaded inks. Explains a lot about you being so embittered now. Does the ass cancer hurt?

Edited by Andrei Moutchkine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/15/2022 at 8:28 PM, ronwagn said:

Except that only approved candidates are allowed to run. Approved by Putin. 

All the major political parties had a candidate running for President. Navalny neither has a registered party, nor was eligible to run on the account of being a convicted felon on probation, if you mean him.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.