Ukraine civil war: op-ed from the Saker

It is way too early to give up on Putin or to dismiss the Novorussian resistance

the Vineyard of the Saker,

9 July, 2014

Apparently, my post today expressing my disgust with the way outside forces were arrogantly deciding the future of 7 million citizens of the Donbass was interpreted as an admission on my part that I have given up on Putin (even though I had clearly written "Let's even add to this, for conversation's sake, that Putin has decided to yield to the terms of these AngloZionist and that the Kremlin has also come to terms, "). Some even interpreted it as an indirect admission on my part that the Novorussian forces are doomed. Nothing could be further from the truth.

First, how do we establish the likely course of action of a leader? Well, unless we manage to establish some kind of telepathic connection I would suggest that we should avoid any kind of guesses about intentions or motives.  I would suggest that the best way to try to predict one a leader will do is to do two things: a) we can try to form an image of his personality and character and b) we can look at what he did in the past and project that as a likely thing he will do in the future.  With these criteria I personally see absolutely no reason to suspect the man of being anything but a sincere patriot, a man of exceptional courage and willpower and a man who spent all this time in the Kremlin trying to free Russian from AngloZionist colonization while opposing the US hegemony elsewhere.  I note that all those accusing Putin of betrayal or cowardice do not offer a single argument to make their case which is solely based on suspicions that Putin is, in fact, not what people think he is.  Clearly, 80%+ of Russians disagree, and I wonder what it is they know which other's don't.  But nevermind Putin right now, what I really want to discuss is the Novorussian resistance.

Guys, please do not let the fall of Slaviansk and the cities around it lead you to believe that this is the first in a long string of defeats which will end with a full invasion of Novorussia by the Ukies.  I think that by now we know enough about exactly why Strelkov decided to withdraw.  Basically, he knew that Slaviansk was untenable, he wanted to preserve his forces and equipment, and he wanted to get some order and unity of command in Donetsk and, to a lesser degree, Lugansk, where all sorts of behind the scenes negotiations involving Akhmetov were taking place.  I don't want to go in this right now, but I want to make a simply point.  Taking Slaviansk is nothing compared to the complexities involved in an operation to take Donetsk or Lugansk.  Please remember that the Ukies had a HUGE advantage in all of the following categories:

• Armor (MBT, APC, IFV)
• Artillery
• Attack aircraft
• Attack helicopters
• Supplies
• Ammunition
• Mobility
• Intelligence and Reconnaissance

All of these are negated during offensive urban combat operations. Let's rapidly take them one by one

• Numbers - Strelkov will hire or mobilize many more soliders
• Armor (MBT, APC, IFV) - are vulnerable and of limited use in cities
• Artillery - is hard to direct and causes huge damage which looks very bad
• Attack aircraft - have a hard time finding their targets
• Attack helicopters - can be shot down from all sides
• Supplies - cities are usually well supplied with critical supplies
• Ammunition - is easier to move around due to sorter distances
• Mobility - is done mostly on foot and is restricted
• Intelligence and Reconnaissance - is very hard to do, it is easy to hide in a city

Num

I am not saying that this is a done deal and that all well be great from now on.  But I am saying that if it took the entire Ukie military, supported by death squads paid for by oligarchs so long to take Slaviansk even though they used literally every weapon in their possession (including MLRS, cluster bombs and chemical munitions!) it is most unlikely that they will succeed in taking Donetsk or Slaviansk anytime soon.  Or ever.

So even if (that is a hypothetical, ok, I am not saying it will happen) Putin decides to betray Novorussia like Milosevic betrayed the Bosnian Serbs, that does not at all mean that the Ukies will be able to take control of Novorussia.  And remember that time is very much on the Novorussia side now, because the economy of Banderastan is in free fall and sooner rather than later a social explosion will happen in Kiev and the rest of Banderastan.  Finally, even if (that is a hypothetical, ok, I am not saying it will happen) the Ukie forces somehow manage, against all expectation, to invade all of Novorussia, what will they have gained?  A large territory which will not provide them with anything of value (see here for the reason why the Donbass cut off from Russia is useless) except a large and desperate population, filled with hatred for the invader, which will maintain a constant and most painful and costly partisan war against the Nazi occupier supported by a never ending flow of Russian volunteers sneaking across the border to help the resistance.

In conclusion, and no matter how bad things look now, do not let yourself be deceived by those who believe that this war will end soon.  No, unless the Ukies come to their senses and get the hell out of Novorussia (something which Uncle Sam will never permit them to do, of course), this will be a LONG war and A LOT will change before it ends.  And it will end with the defeat of the Nazi regime in Kiev.  I have no doubt about that at all.  But yes, it will take time because, as I wrote earlier today, this Nazi regime has the full support of the US and EU who "will fight Russia to the last Ukrainian solider".

So this is not an appeal for optimism.  Just for realism.

The Saker

CrossTalk: Ukraine, End of Beginning (+ commentary)

Vineyard of the Saker,

9 July, 2014

Commentary:First, I have to admit that I could not bring myself to watch this show to the end. Listening to Mary Dejevsky spew her arrogant certitudes about the Ukraine gave me a stomach ache and I had to stop. What I do want to draw your attention to, however, is the idea which seems to have been somehow accepted by by Mary Dejevsky and Ray McGovern: that the EU and the US would never accept anything short of a united Ukraine, albeit maybe a federated one, and that Russia had accepted this reality.

This is an interesting logic here.

What is the reality we are talking about here? The only "reality" is the one of the phenomenal imperial hubris and stubbornness of the US and EU leaders. Let's even add to this, for conversation's sake, that Putin has decided to yield to the terms of these AngloZionist and that the Kremlin has also come to terms, if you wish, that a unitary Ukraine is the only possible outcome.

So what?

Does that really mean that the will of the 7 million people of the eastern Ukraine counts for nothing at all and that they will just have to accept that? Is there not another "real reality" which is that the people of the Donbass do not want to live under the rule of a Nazi regime composed of bloodthirsty freaks who do not even bother to hide their genocidal hatred for them?! How crazy is that?

Why is it that only Mark Sleboda brought up the opinion of these people?

Are we really living in a world whose only message to those who want to live in peace on their own land and in their own culture is "fuck you! you will henceforth live under Nazi rule and don't you dare resist!"?

Nevermind that the right of self-determination is enshrined in all the most sacred documents of international law. Nevermind that the West is supposedly fiercely anti-Nazi. And nevermind that nobody is denying that the junta in Kiev came to power in an illegal armed insurrection. Somebody naive would have expected the entire international community, lead by the "democratic West" and the "Leader of the Free World and Indispensable Nation" aka the US, to absolutely condemn the Nazi regime in Kiev and given its fullest support to the freedom loving people of Novorussia. But no. Not at all. The exact opposite happened.

What is at work he is the centuries old European racism who has always considered that it had the God given right to dispose of our planet in any way it wants and that the will of the rest of mankind is simply irrelevant (just remember the Treaty of Tordesillas). From the Crusades to today's Nazi occupation of the Ukraine, deception and terror have always been the two pillars of Western "foreign policy". As for negotiations and lofty principles, they are only what I would call "ancillary tools" which can be used if and when needed to speed things up, or to provide enough time to prepare for a resumption of deception and terror.

What is pretty darn clear is that the kind of future the West wants to "offer" the people of Novorussia is the same one which was offered the Native Americans or the Palestinians: "shut up and stay quiet until you all die".

I have been told many times that I should not wear my heart on my sleeve and that showing emotions is inappropriate on a blog. If so, then I have to apologize because I think that not showing emotions in these circumstances is a sure sign of zombification. And my emotions are a dense mix of horror, disgust, despair, hope, determination, rage, sadness, contempt, amazement, fear, faith and a huge desire to scream at the top of my lungs to denounce the infinite hypocrisy of a society which does not even pretend to stand for the values it supposedly holds for sacred. How could I not feel all these emotions when I see that what is calmly discussed is basically the imposition of a regime of terror and constant persecution on millions of completely innocent people?

And then I also really wonder about folks like Mary Dejevsky: do they really believe that the people of the Donbass will ever accept this "reality"? Don't they realize that the imposition of such a regime on Novorussia will mean one of two options to the local people: resistance or emigration.

But maybe that was the plan all along: to ethnically cleanse Novorussia from its population and turn it into a Lebensraum for west Ukrainian Nazis?

I am disgusted beyond words with the world I live in and I will never accept it, and I will always resist it. Because I have emotions.

The Saker