You are conditioned to believe that killing more people is a better solution than negotiating a compromise. This is despite the fact that it is self-evidently a psychopathic notion. Let me give you a homespun analogy.
I have this week been dealing with an incident where somebody feels their share of a limited income should be increased, due to the amount of work they have put in. Others felt the person was underestimating the amount of work they had also put in. It became quite a difficult discussion. Happily in the end a compromise has been reached that everyone can live with. At no stage did anybody turn to me and say “we should kill them, that will solve it”. (And to anticipate the trolls, no I do not get any income myself from it).
There may be differences of opinion within a village on whether a wind turbine should be built next to it. The matter will be resolved, one way or another. Nobody suggests the answer is to smash anybody into bloody pulp on the ground with bombs and automatic weapons fire.
Yet when the question is whether that village ought to be in Ukraine or in Russia, inflicting horrible, painful death on those who disagree is seen not only as legitimate, but as heroic and noble. Boasts are continually being made by both sides about how many of the “enemy” have been killed, as though they were orcs rather than human beings with their own hopes and dreams, no different to those they are fighting.
I do not wish to understimate the differences between being in Ukraine and being in Russia. But they pale compared to the difference between hundreds of thousands of people being alive, or hundreds of thousands of people being dead. The problem is much more comprehensible when you accept that there are a significant minority of people within Ukraine’s official borders who really do want their district to be in Russia, and in some limited number of eastern localities they are a majority. That is not a Russian invention.
Diplomatic solutions to territorial solutions always end with a certain amount of population movement to areas where people can be with “their” side in perceived greater safety and comfort. The second world war shifted territorial boundaries and moved populations to an incredible degree. Western Ukraine was historically Polish. Western and much of northern Poland was historically German.
The simplistic narrative that the Donbass is Russian is just untrue. Pre 2014 the urban populations in the Donbass were very largely Russian. Urban populations are more visible and easier mobilised. But a substantial minority were Ukrainian, almost all rural. While only a small percentaage of those Donbass Russians come from families settled there pre 1946.
The Crimea is even more difficult. The population was historically majority Tartar – Crimea was within living memory a Muslim land – and the Krim Tatars were deported brutally by Stalin. This is not ancient history. Much of the deportation did not happen until the 1950’s. I cannot understand those who join me in wanting the Chagos Islanders to get their country back, but do not take the same view of the rights of the Krim Tatars.
(The same people tend to dismiss the human rights abuses against the Uighurs. Muslim Central Asia is a serious blind spot for many on the left).
Thankfully, diplomatic channels to Russia through Turkey remain open in the Ukraine war, as witness the recent prisoner exchanges. I am happy to see the British mercenaries back home safe in the UK, not least because now we won’t need to hear any more lies about how they were not mercenaries but new Ukrainians who had permanently settled in Ukraine.
Western powers should have used the limited but real advances made by the Ukrainian military in the last fortnight to reach out to Putin at a point where he might have been persuaded to accept a deal based on the ceasefire lines as they existed in 2021. Instead, they have ramped up the Russophobia another notch and persuaded themselves that the total destruction of the Russian army can be achieved and Putin brought down by a colour revolution.
The grim response from Russia, with mass mobilisation, is all too predictable. I am afraid that the notion that opposition to the draft will see Putin ousted is totally unrealistic. It underestimates the power of nationalist propaganda within Russia, and misreads the national psychology.
It really doesn’t help when the Ukrainians paint swastikas on tanks.
Do you believe that the Russians are propagandised into supporting this war but westerners are not? Here is an interesting experiment you can repeat. Go to google and do a google image search on “Swastikas on Ukrainian tanks”. I get this, and I suspect you will get something very similar:
Google Image Search “Swastikas on Ukrainian Tanks”
The large majority of those images link to articles claiming that the “Z” symbol used by the Russian forces is a (previously unnoticed) Nazi symbol.
The one thing google does not give you is any swastikas on Ukrainian tanks, which is what you asked for.
Now go to yandex.ru and enter an identical image search for “Swastikas on Ukrainian tanks”. This is what I get:
Yandex Image Search “Swastikas on Ukrainian Tanks”
That is a rather strikingly different set of images, is it not?
Now which one looks more like what I asked for?
Crucially, the first two images top left on the yandex search link to the German NTV station report that captured the swastika on the Ukrainian tank which Max Blumenthal had tweeted about. That is what I was searching for, to check on Max’s facts. Google hides this; I have no doubt whatsoever that this is deliberate.
It is also worth noting that while the Google results totally exclude any material about Nazi symbols used by Ukrainian troops in the current conflict, the yandex.ru search does include images from pro-Ukrainian sites that claim to debunk these images, rightly or wrongly.
In other words, while the google search results are highly censored to exclude the Russian viewpoint, the yandex results include pro-Ukrainian viewpoints and appear to be much more what you would expect on a random, uncensored internet search on the subject.
As I said at the start, if you are in the west you are being conditioned to support the war, to at least as great an extent as people are being conditioned to support it in Russia. That little experiment with google is the tip of an iceberg of suppression: on twitter, on facebook, by paypal defunding, and by all of western TV, radio and newspapers.
On any matter relating to any aspect of the Ukraine war, you are seeing one side of a story. Russians are seeing only another side. The space for truth is very limited, as the world crashes into full dystopia.
I might add that the chilling effect is so great that I personally have serious qualms about publishing this article, in case its querying of aspects of the western narrative lead to cancellation of social media and paypal accounts.
Many of my regular readers are annoyed when I point out that Russia is far too weak a country to be a military superpower that can challenge NATO. It has an economy the size of that of Spain or Italy, and a military crippled by corruption. It has an economy that is not only small but woefully undeveloped and reliant on raw commodity export, be it energy, cereal or mineral.
To historians, the most significant thing about Putin may be his failure to develop manufacturing industry at a time when China raced into world manufacturing domination.
What limited military power Russia does command was used very effectively in Syria, where I credit Putin for ending the momentum of Wahabbist jihadi violence, promoted by the USA and Saudi Arabia, that had so traumatised the world for the first two decades of the twenty first century. But those who extrapolated that into a general ability for Russia to counterbalance the USA were very wrong.
For my entire lifetime, the western military industrial complex and its national and NATO functionaries have exaggerated systematically the “Russian threat” in order to justify their own bloated budgets. I have explained this throughout the Ukraine crisis and again and again I have said that Russia does not have the ability to conquer Ukraine – it is therefore utterly ludicrous for NATO propagandists to claim we have to squander fortunes to defend against Russia sweeping through all of western Europe.
What I have always found bitterly amusing is western left-wingers who do the NATO propagandists’ work for them by exaggerating Russian power.
The logical fallacy of western politicians cheering Ukrainian advances around Kharkiv, and in the same time saying that still trillions more need to be spent on defence against Russian invasion by the USA, Germany, France, UK and others, would be obvious to a five year old. Yet peculiarly I don’t believe I have ever seen or heard the fallacy queried in the media.
Putin’s reaction appears to be escalation. The conscription is a huge statement internally which probably does make major military reverse not politically survivable, even for Putin. The proposed referenda in occupied districts also make any backtracking very problematic.
No reasonable person can believe that a time of war and military administration can be adequate conditions for a referendum vote. The situation now is even more extreme than when the Crimea “referendum” was held in 2014. No doubt we would see similarly risible 97% referenda results now. In real life, in a genuinely free vote you would not get 97% on a referendum for free ice cream. Yulia Timoshenko won about 18% of the vote in Crimea in the Ukrainian presidential election of 2010, on a stridently Ukrainian nationalist and pro-western platform.
While I knew the Russian military to be far weaker than we were being told, what is more surprising is the spectacular failures of Russian intelligence services, which were traditionally very good.
The spectacular failure to predict the Ukrainian counterattack around Kharkiv is worth considering. Given the scope and range of modern surveillance techniques available, from satellite, drone and aircraft imagery through computer hacking and communications intercept, that Russia did not pick up the build-up of Ukrainian forces for the north-eastern attack is, in this day and age, very strange.
It follows the massive Russian intelligence failure at the outset of this invasion, where both the strength and morale of Ukrainian forces around Kiev were massively underestimated, as was the attitude to invasion of the Ukrainian people. Vast sums given to the FSB to bribe key Ukrainian politicians and officials proved to be wasted (and the Kremlin believes to a sgnificant extent the funds were purloined by corrupt FSB personnel).
So what is the solution? Borders are not immutable. The borders of sovereign Ukraine only lasted 21 years before Russia annexed Crimea. A Ukrainian victory that retakes Crimea from Russia would involve a long war and a death toll rising into the millions.
There really are – and remember I worked over twenty years in British Foreign Office, six of them in the senior management structure – people in NATO, and in all western governments, who have no problem with the notion of hundreds of thousands of dead people, particularly as they are nearly all Eastern Europeans or Central Asians. They are not even particularly perturbed by the risk the conflict could turn nuclear. They are delighted that the Russian armed forces are being degraded and vast sums pumped into western military budgets. That is worth any number of dead Ukrainians to them.
I do not believe the USA, UK nor NATO has any political will for peace. This is a disaster. The question is whether the economic pain their populations will feel this winter will force the western politicians to consider the negotiating table. This war can only end with at least de facto international recognition of Russian control of Crimea, and with some kind of special status for the Donbass. The alternative is a war so destructive as to bring disaster across the entire world economy, with the possibility of nuclear escalation.
China remains remarkably unassertive on the world stage as it increases its economic dominance. If there were ever a time for China to assert international leadership it is now. There are no signs of such initiative at present.
How many thousands of people is it right to kill for control of Izium? How many millions of people worldwide should plunge into dire need for the same cause?
There is a solution that leaves a free and now much more united Ukraine with the vast majority of the territory it has enjoyed in its very short current existence, and lets go some populations who determinedly do wish to be Russian. People need the courage to say so.
————————————————-
Forgive me for pointing out that my ability to provide this coverage is entirely dependent on your kind voluntary subscriptions which keep this blog going. This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.
In a proxy war, peace is not in the brief. Sacrificing foreigners is there. Sacrificing your own people is there. Profit is there. Oh, no here it is: “Signs of failure: peace”
Another experiment to test British establishment propaganda: Imagine Russia led a military alliance premised on hostility to the United States, an alliance that included every Latin American country and Caribbean island. All those countries had nuclear missiles that could reach the United States in 6 minutes. The closest, Mexico, had a government imposed by a Russian coup and a military flooded with genocidal anti-US ideologues. For almost a decade that government had discriminated against Anglos within Mexico’s borders, while its fascist military attacked and murdered Anglos living near the US border. Mexico City rejected all diplomatic appeals to stop, even though its latest president had been elected specifically to end the murder and mayhem.
The experiment would be to ask British media and its consumers if they would consider the United States to be beyond the pale of civilised nations if it invaded Mexico in those circumstances.
If the answer is no, then why do they consider Russia to be in 2022?
Spot on, well said.
Great reply
I think it’s more plausible to imagine how England would react if, 10 years after the UK broke up, an Anglophobic Welsh government banned English-language books and broadcasts and started shelling towns like Wrexham and Oswestry. It seems to me inconceivable that HMG would not send in troops.
That analogy isn’t really accurate, though; it’s more as if the UK broke up, Wales became a separate country, anglophile rebels in Denbighshire declared independence, and the UK attacked Denbighshire to “protect English speakers”, opening with a right-hook feint to Bristol and Gloucestershire.
Island of Ireland analogy. NI is still a problem. Donbas should have this weird status like NI after Brexit!
Google ain’t even the worst. I began this year as a settled user of Duck Duck Go. This ended when they blocked access to basically reliable but Russophilic sites such as Southfront. After a few weeks on Bing (same issue), I eventually alighted on Google (for better or worse).
Check out Presearch. It is still uncensored as far as I can tell.
Vivian, I always use Startpage; you can access Southfront on there.
This may be a location issue. DDG in Canada is not blocking Southfront at least as of 2022-02-23 12:36 UTC.
I tried Craig’s search terms in DDG and got something very similar to his Google results. Using the same terms in Yandex gives very different results. Now, to figure out how to do an image search.
Try Qwant, a French based search engine. I used to use Startpage until I read this: https://restoreprivacy.com/startpage-system1-privacy-one-group/. That restoreprivacy site is worth checking out with regular reviews of various privacy focused web resources. Also, remember that many of the alternative search engines scrape Bing or Google if they themselves don’t have the required reach.
I just typed “Southfront” into DDG, and it was the first result. I imagine that as a small search engine DDG could be easily bullied, but they have a very vocal founder who is taking on the might of Google – and hiding a lot of search traffic from the CIA.
So I am not sure they are blocking this site – representatives of US/UK/NATO might regard quietly approaching them as not worth the possible public blowback.
In February/March I looked for one which didn’t have a blue and yellow flag prominent on its front page. In the end I settled for Brave which, if it has taken a side in the latest war, doesn’t display its allegiance on its front page. So far I haven’t noticed evidence of censorship.
I first read about the attempted bribery of Ukrainians a few days ago and was sceptical about the site. Seeing Craig’s reference I did some searching. Among several sites I came across the Guardian article written before the invasion. It seems the western intelligence services had correctly assessed the Russian intentions and methods.
It also seems it is not just the CIA that tries to organise coups.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/13/russias-fsb-agency-engineering-coups-ukrainian-cities
Guardian, huh
How the UK Security Services neutralised the country’s leading liberal newspaper
https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2019-09-11-how-the-uk-security-services-neutralised-the-countrys-leading-liberal-newspaper/
@ portside.
Lest face it – it wasn’t a difficult task. The Guardian was always a ‘Liberal’ paper, and mostly well in tune with the establishment. There were a few exceptions to this in the past, but definitely none now.
That article purports to explain stuff without explaining it. It sets out the history that everyone knows, and then claims “There you are – that’s how The Guardian was subverted!”
I want to know exactly how Rusbridger and The Guardian were cowed; I’m afraid I’m not convinced that a piece of theatre in The Guardian’s basement, with angle-grinders and Dremels, is a sufficient explanation of The Guardian’s complete capitulation to government demands.
Nor does Johnson’s appointment to the committee explain much. I also doubt it’s a coincidence that Rusbridger’s resignation as editor-in-chief, and his replacement by some fashion editor from Oz, occurred shortly after the laptop-smashing party.
I’m sure there is much more to be revealed about The Snowden/Guardian/Dremel story.
Anything that has ‘the UK believes’ should raise red flags, that and ‘an MOD spokesman’ or ‘Ben Wallace’
No specific evidence has been put forward to justify the two-step plan, but it is nevertheless considered by the UK to be a central invasion scenario, aimed at “regime change” in Ukraine… Because that is what we done in 2014 alongside our partners
The problem is not really Russia or even Ukraine, the problem is solely USA, UK and NATO, with the EU just being a bunch of useful idiots, a lapdog to western powers.
Russia and Ukraine have been on the point of negotiated agreements several times, but every time it has been undermined and halted by the western powers. Until the USA, UK and NATO stand up and explicitly say we will supported any negotiated peace settlement made by Russia and Ukraine the war will continue – that is the plan.
China has been providing humanitarian help within Ukraine, as opposed to weapons, but as they are next on the USA, UK, NATO death list, I fail to see what they can really do without getting dragged into the quagmire.
Maybe, if Russia, and China, stopped ALL trade with the western powers until they sit down and act like grown ups it might have an impact. But, the western leaders are actual psychopaths who are not impacted by their decisions – so there’s the problem.
I agree, with the reservation that the USA is primarily to blame, with UK and the rest of NATO (+Australia) in their wake. Resistance in the UK brings oblivion. The USA is under control of Russophobes.
Mr. Murray, re. the recent prisoner exchanges.
Today Anatoliy Sharij published a video (you mentioned once you understand Russian) giving his views and lots of data on this event.
https://youtu.be/cO6NMjQwTJU
He says many Azov men were released, including the most odious personalities, marked by open support for Nazism and undeniable war crimes. Anatoly says that the diplomatic channels to Russia through Turkey worked in such a way that now these people will be under Erdoğan’s personal supervision until the end of the war.
We here in Russia hoped to see them tried, there were talks about future tribunal. I’d like to know your opinion, what are the chances of a trial now? Is it possible they will be brought to the tribunal after the war ends?
Tatyana,
The exchange of prisoners is an age-old solution as to what you do with people who have been captured in conflict.
How would it help any Russian captives if Ukrainian prisoners were put on trial? I think it would endanger them.
Both sides have an honour-bound duty to their fighters to do what is best for them. Realpolitik is a bitch…_
I’m in no way object our soldiers return home. I’m also happy the foreign mercenaries returned to where they belong – or, I’m afraid we could here of the death sentence was implemented and I really do not want any death sentences.
My question was about tribunal and Mr. Murray’s opinion on its possibility. He knows laws and he may have some better inderstanding of how the things are going in Turkey.
Hope he may answer.
Tatyana,
tribunals are the privilege of outright victors, not the participants. They could happen when this conflict ends, but I doubt it. They will probably be negotiated in to the long grass with any peace agreement.
I’m no military strategist, but it seems highly likely that the next phase will be determined by what Ukraine does with its recent victories, or what Russia does next.
Ukraine and their supporters will be praying for a mild winter in western europe. I can’t see heat and energy shortages keeping the public on side here, especially when combined with financial hardship and rising prices.
How do you assess the mood in Russia? Oligarchs might be a bit miffed losing their yachts, and the middle classes will be equally miffed not getting the latest Gucci items, but I’m more interested in how the rural and working class populations are reacting…_
Thanks for asking, DiggerUK
Ordinary people are scared, feel doomed. we have to make decisions and we are not ready for it. Mobilisation. We need to abandon our homes and our small businesses to go to war.
I see Ukraine and the West had long been preparing for this conflict. Russia had not.
I mean, there’s no ‘proper’ quantity of hatred towards Ukraine or the West here. Some find themselves at a loss. Some are going to fight. Most of us think about how to survive these difficult times.
If you expect a wave of desire to take guns and shoot – no, nothing like that. More it looks like ‘well, we have no choice but to do what is the right thing to do”.
All of this right on the background of … not stability or doing well, but nothing like a disaster. We maybe noticed some rise in food prices. I’m a housewife and am currently busy stocking up foods for winter, well some 10-15% rise in food prices. Nothing looking like shortages or 90x in Russia. I’m done with pickling cucumbers, paprika, tomatoes, freezing berries, buying sunflower oil, sugar, rice (there was a flood in my region this spring and we are major rice producer for the country, so I discovered wonderful Basmati and Jasmine sorts of rice).
Silver bullion is cheap now. Bought a kilo, thinking of buying more as a material for my future work: it is 45 roubles per gramm, pretty cheap. I bought another non-residential premises to make a new fine jewellery workshop. Busy with repairs. There’s a pipe leaking water in it, so I know for sure there’s no rise in labour or materials cost, so far. Utility bills show no rise.
Looks like we will be fine.
In the olden days, prisoners were returned “on parole” – they gave their word that they wouldn’t again take up arms against their captors.
I’ve never been a fighter; but the handling of prisoners must be a real problem on a battlefield. A large part of an army’s problems is keeping it supplied; if providing food or medical treatment for prisoners conflicts with military goals, it’s a no-brainer; we wouldn’t have prisoners if it weren’t for our military goals. I think we civilians perhaps have inflated expectations of rules on the handling of prisoners, such as the Geneva and Hague Conventions.
I imagine that for the most part, soldiers with real combat experience don’t expect those rules to protect them much. I know that even Army cadets are taught that “interrogation” skates the boundaries of beating someone up. I mean, that’s schoolboys, interrogating their schoolmates.
Tatyana
The release of Azov fighters makes no sense indeed. Russia had their chance putting them on trial, instead they released them! The swap ratio was off too something like 250 ukrainians vs 55 russians.
Of course they will soon be back on the battlefield…
Everyone talks about disadvantageous ratio, few know there were 2,500 people who surrended in Azovsteel plant. So, we still keep about 2300 of them. Perhaps, they released those who were on public screen, keeping someone truly important?
I also have wild fantasies that the Mossad might want to visit Turkey? Well, just to have a look at them?
Kept someone truly important? Considering they released high ranking Azovs’ like Prokopenko and Volyn I doubt that.
Now you don’t know what is real and what is fake.
I believe that Ukraine is now a theater with a clown in the presidential chair. They are playing a big dramatic performance, strictly in the Western European cultural code. Unshaven Ze in a khaki T-shirt, women crawling across European squares in bloody shorts, and these “brave defenders” who do not forget to shoot their actions in 4K – everything looks so fake.
Like the mourning of the nation for the monarch under the supervision of the police so that everyone mourns properly.
“The logical fallacy of western politicians cheering Ukrainian advances around Kharkiv, and in the same time saying that still trillions more need to be spent on defence against Russian invasion by the USA, Germany, France, UK and others, would be obvious to a five year old.”
Well, this is embarrassing. Could someone explain the fallacy to me? Isn’t it the case that the billions of dollars that the West has already poured into Ukraine is the reason Ukraine have been able to get the upper hand against Russia? With Russia now announcing that it will use nuclear weapons to hold onto annexed territory, what is the logical fallacy in the West thinking it needs to spend even more to counter such behaviour?
Also, why does Craig repeatedly dwell on Russia’s military insignificance when it has enough nuclear warheads to destroy the whole planet (and is currently threatening to use them)?
N:
“[…] why does Craig repeatedly dwell on Russia’s military insignificance when it has enough nuclear warheads to destroy the whole planet […]”
Presumably to give lie to the claim that Russia is about to overrun the whole of Europe. Thought that was obvious enough.
Glenn, if Putin only needs to bark out demands while waving his nukes around and Europe submits – sorry, negotiates – then it’s not much of a lie, is it?
The supposed threat isn’t to nuke Europe (we’re all supposed to believe in MAD, recall), but to actually invade it. “If we don’t stop them in Ukraine, we’ll be next! We’ll be next!” is the official line.
Glenn, Judged by past behaviour, “If you don’t stop Putin, he will just keep doing this shit” seems pretty spot on, wouldn’t you say?
And look at the timing. Putin basically says Donbass is now Russian, and he will use nukes to defend “Russia”, and lo and behold Craig comes out with an article calling for compromise (aka giving Putin what he wants).
On the one hand, portraying Russia as militarily weak, while on the other highlighting the peril we face in crossing Russia. Doesn’t quite add up.
But what do I know? I still haven’t spotted the logical fallacy that’s obvious to a five-year-old.
By “doing this shit”, do you mean responding to many years of provocation and broken promises, while being encircled by NATO members who line up weapons on the Russian border?
Can you imagine America putting up with a hostile, nuclear armed neighbour for a single day, let alone be surrounded by them?
Please don’t knee-jerk to the ‘whataboutary’ charge. That is just a reflex action to utter hipocrisy being pointed out, taken as a magic word to make that hipocrisy invalid or disappear.
America nearly started a nuclear war when Cuba received Russian missiles. Yet Russia is supposed to be OK while surrounded by American missiles.
Seems to me a five year old could see a problem with that.
Glenn,
“By “doing this shit”, do you mean responding to many years of provocation …”
No, I just meant slaughtering hundreds of thousands of innocent people simply because it gives him a hard-on”
Ukraine doesn’t have the upper hand on Russia.
“Ukraine doesn’t have the upper hand on Russia.”
You must have missed recent news
Taking back a few square kilometres of Ukraine which were, through an error of intelligence, very lightly defended (as Craig points out), is in no way having the upper hand.
Bayard, no need for mobilisation then.
Winning a battle is not winning the war.
The Ukrainian counter attack was successful because Russia did not have enough troops in that area.
Thus Russia needs more troops and so it mobilises its reserves.
The Germans retook a lot of ground in the Battle of the Bulge. They didn’t get the upper hand and it didn’t stop them losing the war.
Bayard, you’re tying yourself in knots. If they didn’t have enough troops “in that area”, they simply needed to transfer from another area.
Again, if Russia is doing so well in Ukraine, as you and Putin have been repeating ad nauseum, why the need for mobilisation?
Neil
If Russia want, they could put Kiev in the crosshair right now. Of course they have the upper hand, I might ask you, you guys have said Russia is about to lose ever since february. Today Ukraine is about to lose part of thier land in the referendum. If Russia is so weak as you claim, how is that possible?
Jack,
“Today Ukraine is about to lose part of thier land in the referendum”
Is that the best you’ve got? Talk about scraping the barrel!
Neil
Yes that is the best I got, is that response the best you got? If not, could you now respond to that question of mine?
“If they didn’t have enough troops “in that area”, they simply needed to transfer from another area.”
Strategy really isn’t your thing, is it? If they simply transferred some troops from another area, then that area would be short on troops and vulnerable to a counter attack,. The logical place to get more troops from is the reserve, which is precisely what is happening.
I should think Russia needs to mobilise up to 300,000 as part of the defence presumed to be needed when Kherson, Zaporozhye, Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts hold their independence referendums and those who vote in them, vote for independence and then union with the Russian Federation.
BTW, I’m curious to know how many National Guard reservists and other Army reservists were mobilised and sent to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan over the past 20 years.
Russia holds about 16% of Ukraine, Ukraine holds about 0% of Russia.. Perhaps if you think for yourself rather than repeating our mainstream wartime propaganda outlets blindly you can figure out which side has the upper hand. As to the mobilisation, the front line is about 100km long which requires bodies, estimates put the Russian force at 200,000.. The Kherson retreat looks more to have been a logistics problem than an Intel one and I’m no military genius but i would imagine Russia are more focused on the coastline to cut Ukraine off from the black sea rather than a largely strategically useless piece of land (albeit one of there own supply lines).
Dean,
“Russia holds about 16% of Ukraine, Ukraine holds about 0% of Russia…”
The fact that you think that statistic paints Russia in some kind of positive light says a lot about your world view.
> i would imagine Russia are more focused on the coastline to cut Ukraine off from the black sea
That does indeed seem to be the Russian priority; it makes some sense.
The coastline is (a) important to Ukraine economically; (b) a land route to Moldova, where there is a Russian enclave to the West of Ukraine; and (c) important for Russia’s defence of Northern Crimea. Russia needs a land-bridge to Crimea, because the Kerch Bridge seems *awfully* vulnerable to missile attack. Of course, Russia has a sea bridge, via Sevastopol; but the Russian navy is also evidently vulnerable.
Time and time again Craig you seem to think Russia is as you saw it in the Yeltsin years. Even the CIA ‘Factbook” rates Russia as being 6th in the world for global purchasing power
https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/real-gdp-purchasing-power-parity/country-comparison
While I would not disagree at all that the two parties desperately need to negotiate a peace deal and that Russia could not (and would not want to) invade the rest of Europe, there is strong factual evidence to suggest that Russia has a sufficient manufacturing base to continue this war despite the billions NATO and other Western countries have invested in Ukraine’s army and their ongoing role in providing intelligence and ‘guidance’ to Ukraine’s army. The West is in reality at war with Russia, and has really been so since the WW2 with its ongoing financing and support of the OUNB and now the Azov Battalion and others. The 10,000 dead Russian-speaking Donbass civilians killed by Kiev’s shelling since 2014 clearly indicates though that, for those civilians’ safety, Ukraine cannot continue to try and ‘govern’ those areas with the savagery it has exhibited since 2014 with the full connivance of all the Western states.
yes, this video in the last hour makes a number of good points about the Russian military.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfz4WeN8cEs
Patrick Armstrong had a bid of a rant and a lot of links to current Russian infrastructure.
PROJECTION AND DEFLECTION: RUSSIA’S INFRASTRUCTURE
Civilian deaths in Donbass.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1293409/civilian-deaths-related-to-russia-ukraine-conflict/
The other c.10,000 were combatants.
“Even the CIA Factbook” – err, don’t you think the CIA is in the top rank of those with an institutional interest in exaggerating Russian strength?
PPP-based arguments amount to saying you can live very cheaply in Novosibirsk on a diet of lard and vodka.
PPP-based arguments amount to saying you can live very cheaply in Novosibirsk on a diet of lard and vodka.
Generally speaking you are completely wrong.
I used to live in Switzerland. A meal at a cheapish restaurant used to cost over 20 francs (=20 euros). A kilo of Gala apples at Migros (a cheap supermarket chain) or Co-op cost about 3.60. An espresso coffee at a café cost over 3 euros.
I now live in Portugal. A meal at an equivalent restaurant (better-than-average for Portugal) costs about 10 euros. A kilo of apples at Intermarché or Continente (not the cheapest supermarket chains) costs about 1.80. An espresso coffee at a café costs under 1 euro. Many other prices for everyday stuff are about half of what I used to pay in Switzerland. Big one-off items like quality washing machines cost about the same as Switzerland but they don’t affect the day-to-day cost of living. My standard of living here is much higher than it was in Switzerland, on a lower budget. I can’t speak for Novosibirsk, but while PPP comparisons cannot be exact, they are usually a better guide to living standards than interbank exchange rates.
There must be a reason economist and statistician introduced PPP.
In Hull you just get lard while in Novosibirsk lard and Vodka.
PPP is trying to correct GDP and make it more realistic.
We are all obsessed with GDP +1 or -1 % and does not tell us anything important about society and hardly anything about economy.
BTW, by PPP, India was a bigger economy than the UK a couple of years ago, and now by GDP.
Humans need Food Energy and Shelter – and Russia can provide! And you prefer brands!
(A few days ago there was a story about a Russian plane travelling to EU with Exemptions. Well, the plane was apparently transporting nuclear fuel)
Russia’s trade balance is about 20 billion PLUS while UK is about 30 billion MINUS. I did not see that in GDP but I believe it is part of GDP.
And finally, if Russia borrowed/created 1 Trillion or 2, like we did over the last 10-20 years, I am sure their GDP would be higher than Spain or the UK.
Sorry Craig – you are looking for a middle view. On this and many others, there is no middle view. There is not similar lying on both sides.
All the lying is anti-Russia – the Ukrainian Nazis really are the bad guys – they do kill civilians and have done for 8 years.
The Nato/UK/US leaders that support them are not one side in a 2 bad guy dispute. They are the out and out bad guys plain evil in wanting to fight to the very last Ukrainian (not far away now).
You might as well say that Russia gate was partly true, that the British Labour party did have some anti-Semitism amongst its leaders, Israel has half a point about Palestine, Salmond was a bit guilty, 25 intelligence workers were sincere when they said Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation or that there really are half a million Ujghur prisoners in Xinjiang*.
All that gets you is to keep you FB account a bit longer, but it is not a rational place to be.
* The failure of every accusation about Ujghurs to last more than 3 months before being replaced with a completely different but less testable claim should have told you all you need to know about the Ujghur campaign.
Thank you, Michael. I was disappointed to see that Craig has drunk the Uighur Separatists Koolaid.
Anyone interested in a non-MSM non-Deep State view of Xinjiang would benefit from reading a series of articles on the topic by journalists at the Grayzone https://thegrayzone.com/?s=uighur
Great post.
I’ve tried to temper my view but on being challenged on the referenda, it came out that I will cheer when the Donbass regions become part of Russia. That they will now be protected properly. There is a time to consider the grey areas and a time to stand up for the truth and the oppressed.
“I do not believe the USA, UK nor NATO has any political will for peace”.
Odd how Putin/Russia doesn’t get a mention there ..
Do you think that this war is “Putin’s unprovoked war on Ukraine” then? Surely the very phrase should be ringing alarm bells for you. There is a piece by some detestable Republican called Sen Richard Black in which he says “the war was started by Russia, but planned in Washington” and I will hazard a guess that it is one of the few truthful things to pass his lips.
Interestingly there is a lot of evidence that WWI was started by Germany, but planned in Paris.
“There is a solution …..”
But Craig, your solution involves giving Putin what he has used violence to obtain. That would only encourage him, as his past behaviour proves beyond a doubt.
If I come to your home, rape and murder members of your family, and then demand that you turn over part of your property to me or else, of course your submitting to my demands – no, let’s use your preferred word: “compromising” – would avoid further violence. But seriously?
Of course it would be different if I had a gang of a thousand thugs with me, but if it was just me, and I was defeatable, and you had a gun in your hand, would you really be seeking compromise?
I think you’d try to defend your home and your family.
And though you may disagree with their decision, Ukrainians too have the right to decide to fight to defend their home and their people. If on the other hand they want to compromise with the invaders, no one is stopping them.
They have made their decision. The choice for the West is, do we help them or just leave them to their fate?
The West decided to help. You may hate many aspects of the West, and given your personal history, it’s not surprising that your quite justified horror of often atrocious behaviour by Western actors amplifies that hatred, but in this particular instance, the West has done the right thing.
If you want to persuade me otherwise, you need better arguments than in your article above. I don’t think you have them because you’re basing your view on an anti-Western prejudice rather than events in front of you.
Why do you suppose that the west has zero interest in “doing the right thing” when it comes to invasions and occupations by our official friends? How is it just fine when the Yanks, the Israelis, Saudis or us ourselves who does the invading?
Trying to pretend this is some noble point of principle is sheer dishonesty, whether or not you care to admit it.
Glenn, Bayard, I’m happy to admit the West has done horrible things. But whataboutery doesn’t mean that in this case it’s not doing the right thing.
It’s not whataboutery to point out that your assumptions about the encouragement or discouragement of warlike nations have no basis in fact.
> How is it just fine when the Yanks, the Israelis, Saudis or us ourselves who does the invading?
I suspect that is the whataboutery that Neil was referring to.
There we go again – another apologist for American imperialism, who has been taught to screech “whataboutary! whataboutary!” whenever gross hipocrisy is pointed out.
A more honest person would say, “Hey! We were talking about your appalling behaviour, not ours!”
Ah yes, finally moral greats are at the wheel in the West. Biden, Schultz, Trudeau, Truss, universally recognised now and in times to be as a golden circle who did the right thing.
Glenn, I was talking about Putin’s invading Ukraine. If your response is, “How is it just fine when the Yanks, the Israelis, Saudis or us ourselves who does the invading?” that’s pretty much the dictionary definition of whataboutery
So come on, back to the subject. Do you think the deaths, maiming and destruction of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian and Russian soldiers and civilians, and the horror that Putin’s invasion has unleashed on the world, do you think it’s justified? A simple yes or no will suffice.
“But Craig, your solution involves giving Putin what he has used violence to obtain. That would only encourage him, as his past behaviour proves beyond a doubt.”
It can also be said that not giving the USA what they have used violence to obtain has not discouraged them, as their past behaviour proves beyond a doubt. Losing in Vietnam didn’t stop them invading Afghanistan and Iraq. Losing WWI didn’t stop the Germans launching WWII. We are not dealing with a child, as you seem to think.
glenn_nl and Bayard
Here Neil catches you by diverting the focus to “the violence used by Putin”, and omitting 8 years of Putin’s attempts to settle everything peacefully through the Minsk agreements (btw, that was time when the regions wanted autonomy WITHIN Ukraine).
Not only are you falling into this trap, but you are using “look at others” which is not an argument, but a logic fallacy.
Thus, the discussion becomes unproductive and gets sidetracked. Though, it is good for Google algorytms to promote the blog upper in the search result, but I guess Mr. Murray’s website is shadowbanned, so that’s really no smallest use to answer. Just ignore.
Tatyana, for one thing, your portrayal of Putin as some kind of earnest seeker of peace is laughable. But even if it were true, imagine me saying, “I tried to reason with my wife for years before finally giving up and murdering her.” Seriously, you think my past behaviour would excuse the violence?
However, the search for a peaceful solution is true and there is well-documented evidence and international witnesses.
Well, if you want to play with the analogy, then I have a much more accurate description for you –
After a divorce, your child remains with your ex-wife. Your ex remarries and with the stepfather, they beat your child, justifying the beatings by saying that he is of the wrong blood and therefore deserves it.
You are looking for a solution in court, but unfortunately it lasts so long and so unproductively that after another wound on the body of your child, you don’t find another way to protect him than to use violence against your ex and her new husband, and to take the child to your home.
You may regret that you had to use violence, but you will see no other way out. But even more you will regret that the court you applied to, is so inefficient.
You would be very happy to solve everything in a civilized way, saving your child from additional suffering. And yes, your ex, she wasn’t always like this.
Thank you for the opportunity to make my opinion public.
Tatyana, the analogy isn’t quite right, though, because you don’t use violence against your ex and her husband, you use violence against completely innocent bystanders, and not one or two, but millions.
Imagine the other way around. You physically and mentaly abuse your wife for years and at the and she retaliates or kills you.
Not that long ago in UK this happened and she got couple of months or couple of years in jail.
“But Craig, your solution involves giving Putin what he has used violence to obtain. That would only encourage him, as his past behaviour proves beyond a doubt.”
Neil.
Actually, believe it or not Putin has saved many lives, and here’s how.
Several days prior to the Russian forces commencing their SMO, the Ukrainian forces began a huge military build up on the border with Donetsk, it was a precursor to a large scale invasion into the Dontesk, which of course would’ve saw many, many civilians murdered as the Ukrainian forces had already been shelling civilian areas, such as schools, residential areas and hospitals for the last eight years.
However, the Russians preempted this on Feb 24th by making their move first, and in the process, it saved many lives.
Deluded. The Russian build up on Ukraine’s borders started months before the invasion. It was planned well in advance.
Since 2016 the number of casualties in the region has been rapidly declining.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1293409/civilian-deaths-related-to-russia-ukraine-conflict/
Pears Morgaine
Statista.com.
The German market research group, that Media Bias FactCheck.com thinks is very truthful, forgive me if I take its statistics with a huge pinch of salt.
Regardless of whether Russia built up troops or not, on the Donbas border, they prevented the Ukrainian forces from murdering more civilians in the DPR.
Another ad hominem. The figures come from the OHCHR Ukraine Report (scroll down to page 8):
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Countries/UA/29thReportUkraine_EN.pdf
“they prevented the Ukrainian forces from murdering more civilians in the DPR.”
So they could kill some themselves?
https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2022/09/ukraine-civilian-casualty-update-5-september-2022
Neil.
Consider all that and attempt to tell me that the Ukraine is in the right.
> The Ukraine than passed laws banning the use of the Russian Language
…and I stopped reading when I encountered that lie. They banned teaching in Russian in government-funded schools. They didn’t ban use of the language.
It is like saying we in England don’t want Scottish accent and their words in school or forbidding any American words or vice versa
Well, excuse me; that’s called “moving the goalposts”.
I said they passed no such laws. Are you defending the claim they passed laws banning the use of the Russian language, or not?
A few points:
What do you call a country where nearly one in 10 adults have medical debts and a broken bone can boot you into bankruptcy? A country where a city of more than 160,000 residents recently had no safe drinking water for weeks? A country where life expectancy has dropped for the second year in a row and poor people sell their blood plasma in order to make ends meet? A country where the maternal mortality rate of black women in the capital is nearly twice as high as for women in Syria?
You call it one of the richest countries in the world!
The UN recently demoted the US to 41st, down from 32nd, in a global ranking based on its sustainable development goals. This index is focused on the quality of life of ordinary people rather than the creation of wealth. And, on this measure, the US comes just behind Cuba and just above Bulgaria. The US is “becoming a ‘developing country’,” one MIT economist said last week, based on this index. An example: in Chicago, a lack of funding at the city, state, and federal levels means that toxically high levels of lead in the water supply will not be dealt with.
On an A to F grading scale, the American Society of Civil Engineers gave the U.S.’ infrastructure condition a dreadful D+ and described investment in it’s improvement as “woefully inadequate.”
Here’s a breakdown of ASCE’s rating:
“We do not have reliable information about what is happening in Xinjiang. Reports of malign events are cobbled together by anti-Chinese ex-patriots in the US who have not been home in decades, are negatively motivated, and are very much influenced and financed by the CIA. “
I think you are basically quite right, but I would add that the reason we don’t have reliable information about Xinjiang is that our media aren’t publishing it. Xinjiang is not some “closed area”; this is not 1980. In the last 10 years (except for Covid restrictions), anybody can get a visa to visit China and then take a train to Ürümqi and just wander around and talk to people. You don’t have to go in a group, or with a guide. A lot of tourists go to Xinjiang, it has several interesting historical sites on the old Silk Road.
@Roger
Yes – good point. The propaganda system works.
I have an analogy for you. Imagine Tony Blair on the eve of Scottish devolution had, instead of deciding to gift a huge swathe of Scottish water to England opted to gift Cornwall to Scotland… What would England do if Scotland ever grew the backbone to go for full independence? Would the say ‘oh, its fine, that Scottish warcriminal gave them it so it clearly belongs to them.’? I doubt they would.. The exact same analogy applies to Crimea. It has never been Ukrainian, and as far as I can tell, it was only given to them in 1954 (by a Georgian) administratively with the sole purpose of cheating the UN seat allocation numbers (regardless of what the Russian propagandists claim about brotherly celebrations). The Donbass is less straight forward since it was Ukrainian, however, Russia did buy everything east of the Dinper in the 1600s (granted it was from Poland hence the less straight forward bit), but it was Russian pre soviet Union regardless and as a result, its full of Russians. The carving up of soviet territories was something that the Russians had no say on and is far more complex than the ‘unprovoked war’ that we are continually being propagised with. This isn’t even touching on the continual NATO provacations against Russia so whilst wars don’t have good guys and bad guys, we are clearly the bad guys in this one.
Another often overlooked fact in this war is that Ukraine has the second highest known reserves of oil in Europe (after Norway), and that they are located almost exclusively in the Donbas and luhansk regions and in Crimea. This to me would seem to be a far more likely reason than democracy for NATO and the United States of America to be involved, and also why Ukraine were so unwilling to implement Minsk2.
Where you have shit, you have flies; where you have oil, you have Americans.
It is such a great relief to me to read this article as it puts into words and order much of what I have instinctively felt about the war in Ukraine but am hesitant to voice to many of my otherwise peace loving friends. What you, Craig, say here chimes very much with what I believe my father, (a military man who fought in Alamein and was later in intelligence in the Balkans and Italy) would have said about the whole business. I wish you could have met each other!
If only the UK gov (and others) would have the wisdom to listen to people like you who have actual experiential insight into these areas of concern, and that they would urgently prioritise diplomacy.
“I have this week been dealing with an incident where somebody feels their share of a limited income should be increased, due to the amount of work they have put in. Others felt the person was underestimating the amount of work they had also put in. It became quite a difficult discussion. Happily in the end a compromise has been reached that everyone can live with. At no stage did anybody turn to me and say “we should kill them, that will solve it”.”
Since the repression of anger can have real negative psychological consequences (https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/living-emotional-intensity/202201/5-symptoms-repressed-anger), perhaps one death would have been an acceptable compromise to release the tension. (Since some of my previous comments – “Racist trees”, “Today’s football results”, etc. – have caused either confusion or triggered the censor’s pen, I find it necessary to state that (sigh) I am not really advocating that someone should have been killed, but at least the need to make this clarification illustrates the effect that the menta…(sorry, sorry, what am I saying?) “woke”, are having on society).
“Yet when the question is whether that village ought to be in Ukraine or in Russia, inflicting horrible, painful death on those who disagree is seen not only as legitimate, but as heroic and noble.”
The “Ukraine situation” is only superficially nationalist. As the RAND study “Extending Russia – Competing from Advantageous Ground” (https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3063.html) and its shorter ‘research brief’ “Overextending and Unbalancing Russia” (https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB10014.html), both dated 2019 and which first seem to have been reviewed by Manlio Dinucci on 25/5/19 (https://www.globalresearch.ca/rand-corp-how-destroy-russia/5678456), make clear, the Ukranians are merely “nationalist pawns” in a larger game: the de facto destruction of Russia.
Nationalism is, of course, by definition reactionary, being the key category of capitalist political ideology (the most genocidal aspect of what is now termed “identity politics”) and infinitely amenable to being used, like its stable-mate, religion, to divert attention from class relations. It is also worth noting that those (non-Marxist/Communist) “Leftists” and republicans who have commented on the “stupidity”, “gullibility”, “infantile disorder”, etc. of those bowing and scraping to the monarchy are guilty of exactly the same general (but different specific) type of ideological blindness in their continued support of Capitalism – not so “radical” after all.
“I might add that the chilling effect is so great that I personally have serious qualms about publishing this article, in case its querying of aspects of the western narrative lead to cancellation of social media and paypal accounts.”
This might be a good time to research a transition to more robust sites for publishing/finance: the Prism-Break site (https://prism-break.org/en/) is a good first stop to avoid those compromised by weak security.
“Many of my regular readers are annoyed when I point out that Russia is far too weak a country to be a military superpower that can challenge NATO.”
This is patently false. Whatever the real state of its conventional armed forces, Russia remains the premier nuclear power (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/nuclear-weapons-by-country), the sole reason that NATO has not (yet) rolled into Russia itself (as Patton wanted, making the circumstances of his fatal car accident in December 1945 the first post-WW2 conspiracy theory).
On the subject of conventional forces, degradation is occurring on both sides. For example, the Pentagon has not ordered any Stinger missiles for 18 years (https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/increasing-stinger-missile-production-will-take-time-raytheon-ceo-says), some of their electronic components are now obsolete and no longer produced, the missile will therefore have to be substantially re-designed, and Raytheon estimate that it will be 2 years before more are available. The same is true of the Javelins and other US and UK high-tech weapons, but not so much of the “smart” 155mm artillery shell ($110,000 each to you, sir), production of which has been ramped up.
While I accurately predicted the 2016 EU Referendum and US presidential results months in advance (multiple witnesses!) and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, I believe that there are now too many uncertainties to predict anything. In other words, the situation is now really dangerous in a way that it has not been since the Cuban missile crisis.
Stinger first entered service in 1981 it was planned to be phased out and replaced from 2023. EADS in Germany and ROKETSAN in Turkey manufacture the Stinger under license, ROKETSAN has also developed it’s own MANPAD. About 70,000 stingers were produced for use by 29 countries; I’m guessing there are still plenty about. Javelin is a much newer system (35,000 made) so I doubt either it or NLAW or Starstreak suffer the same problems with obsolete components.
In the meantime Russia seems to having problems with its artillery.
https://defence-blog.com/russian-soldiers-burn-out-their-guns/
Yes barrels can be replaced, but damage of that nature will require attention at a heavy maintenance depot.
As far as tank barrels are concerned, in the 1980s the Russians disclosed 82,000 tanks (in one of the Cold War rituals like mutual over-flights – now cancelled by both sides – designed to “reduce tension”). They aren’t going to run out!
Well said, Fred
Russia completely blundered, they had no idea the west would bend over backwards for Ukraine, which of course no sane person realized would happen. Now we in the west have to suffer the risk of deliberate power outages in the winter; we have a skyrocketing inflation; we have rate hikes which cause even more damage and even the prospect of a World war III. For what!? To win a war in Ukraine there could be no winners in? How can there be no-one talking about peace in the West? How psychopathic have the West become? I feel awful everyday reading how ignorant the news/politicians/journalists are about this topic – or I am the one that have become crazy myself?
Arms, money, political support, boycott and on: if it was not for the West prolonging the war, Ukraine would sign a peace deal with Russia a long time ago. But instead the West told Ukraine to quit the path towards a peaceful solution:
“Boris Johnson Pressured Zelenskyy to Ditch Peace Talks With Russia: Ukrainian Paper”
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2022/05/06/boris-johnson-pressured-zelenskyy-ditch-peace-talks-russia-ukrainian-paper
“EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Borell: “This war must be won on the battlefield”
https://thefrontierpost.com/borrell-this-war-must-be-won-on-the-battlefield/
….which of course sent the message to Russia to prepare for even more fighting. Obviously Russia has responded in kind and have similarly shut down the peace talks option.
We see the result now. Ukraine is about to lose part of Donbas (the referendums), which will likely become part of Russia. If the West/Ukraine would have settled the conflict with talks months back, this risk would not have occurred. It is like no-one in the West has any analytic mind left, only hatred and lust on killing more Russians.
And as Craig proves, the propaganda is immense. Westerners have no idea about the assault on Donbas PRIOR to the Russian invasion. They have no idea about the neo-nazi troops, they have no idea about warcrimes by ukrainian forces. Westerners are probably more indoctrinated than Russians, which of course the westerners laugh at.
And trying to educate people around you about these matters makes you “brainwashed” spreading “Russian propaganda”.
Cruel, cruel world…
Jack,
“If the West/Ukraine would have settled the conflict with talks months back, this risk would not have occured.”
I think you missed the bit where Putin ordered his troops across the border.
Not sure you understood my point: There was actual talks for peace after the invasion. Western world blocked that peaceful development.
there were also peace talks before the invasion, and a year before the invasion, and two years before, and three years before, and 4 years before, and 5 years before, and 6 years before, and 7 years before, and Neil just now woke up
?. Those talks were not important. Shit hit the fan 2022
Neil.
In April, it looked as though a peace deal might have been thrashed out between Ukraine and Russia, but after Boris Johnson flew out meet Zelensky in Kiev and told him to snub a peace deal, that it wasn’t what Ukraine’s Western backers wanted. Anthony Blinken, the US Secretary for State also flew out to Kiev and dropped a few words in Zelensky’s ear.
Zelensky has been well compensated for selling out his country.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/diplomacy-watch-did-boris-johnson-help-stop-peace-deal-ukraine/5792502
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/4/pandora-papers-ukraine-leader-seeks-to-justify-offshore-accounts
And you missed the 2014-2022 events.
Thanks for this article, it covers quite a few things that I had also suspected – particularly with regard to Russia’s military capabilities. Crimea? Agree with you, Crimea can’t be ‘given’ back to Ukraine as it was only passed to Ukraine in the 50s for administrative purposes and it is now under control of Russia. However, I don’t think returning Crimea to the Tartars is feasible considering their mass deportation along with the seeding of Crimea by Stalin with ethnic Russians. I have no problem with the idea but it’s as problematic as handing the USA back to the first nations people, or Australia back to the Aborigines – it isn’t possible. The Chagos Islanders – give them their land back. The Malvinas? Give it to the Argentinians – whether or not you agree with the competing historical claims it’s just off their shores. Same as the North Sea give us back our 6,000 square miles.
The bit I have a problem with is your focus on propaganda. We all know we are being fed one side of the story. The Russians? We all know they are being fed one side of the story – but do they? I think they probably do. However, the painting of Nazi symbols on Ukrainian tanks may be true but it also could just be propaganda. It is also irrelevant. I have no idea where the individual pictures you see from Yandex come from they could be posed for by anyone. It is difficult to cross check these things if full propaganda misinformation is being used by our governments. So, I would be wary. I know about Azov from long ago – the Canary covered this long before there was a war. But there is a war and this is where I have to differ from your take. The West will never accept any annexed area of Ukraine after this and in a way they can’t. Both sides are liars and cheats and have their own vested interests to protect so they aren’t going to start being Gentleman Jim now “Oh, very well then… you can have it.”
It is important though to remember that the borders of Ukraine before February were accepted by Russia themselves. What was going on in the Donbass was actually outside of the Russians’ remit. Yes, perhaps the international community should have intervened in their usual ineffectual way, but they didn’t. If you follow the notion that we should all accept that Russia should be allowed to have these areas for themselves after an act of aggression, then you are also suggesting that it is right for Israel to keep the occupied areas of Palestine. I’m not sure that either of these is a good solution. Russia started this war. Only Russia. It wouldn’t matter if the Devil himself sat on the throne of Ukraine, Russia invaded a country of which it had previously recognised and accepted the political borders. Putin is wrong.
As for President Xi, I feel he is playing this very well. He watches from the sidelines manufacturing every gadget the West requires to make the masses feel good, at the same time as forging links with Russia for energy at very low prices. Why should he take a lead? This is not the moment and as the Chinese often used to say, China is patient.
But the bigger questions for me are these:
What if Ukraine had let Russia roll over them? What would be the outcome for the ordinary Ukrainian in the street? Kyiv would still be standing. Most of Ukraine would still be intact. Thousands of lives would have been saved. People would still go to work, socialise, eat at cafés and make love to each other. It’s the same here. What if Russia took over the United Kingdom? Buildings would remain the same, people would still go to work, socialise, eat at cafés and make love to each other. Yes, there would be different things we aren’t allowed to say. Down with Putin might not be allowed, but shouting ‘down with the monarchy’ might be allowed – and issues like fat-shaming might become less important. Generally, though, nothing much else would change. But is that what we want? Does Scotland want to take control of its own destiny or put up with England’s vision for us? England’s vision doesn’t hurt us much, in the scheme of things it’s fairly benign, but I’m not comfortable with it. I don’t want it. Perhaps that is what it’s like in the Ukraine. I don’t know.
Another question is:
How did we get to the position where one mad cretin can threaten the world with a nuclear conflict? Whether it is Putin or a Trump, a dictator or a freely elected cretin, both systems have produced at varying times nutters that we allow to make key existential decisions over our lives – are we, the people of the world, insane?
And finally:
What happened to the United Nations? There is the weak link in this sad affair. Absolutely no use when a bully behaves like a bully. If ever an organisation needed to be reconstructed, it’s this one. Where is the representation of ordinary people – not the class of politicians – ordinary people in the United Nations? There is no voice for the people of the world in the organisation that is meant to protect us. In fact, there is no means for ordinary people to influence world affairs at any level. A vote every four years? It’s not really influence, is it?
Wynn
Hello Jack, I agree with almost everything you say here. I’ll just address each point.
I am aware of the West’s part in the coup of 2014 but that is not really relevant to the situation today. As it happens, I put that problem partly on the doorstep of the EU. If you recall the pressure that led eventually to the coup was due to the lack of guarantees to Russia about EU goods in competition with Russian goods. The subsequent change of direction from EU by Yanuchovich to sign the deal with Moscow led to the West-supported coup. I accept it might be a reason for disgruntlement, but it is not the root of this war. You could say the war is a complex of the situation in the Donbas and the failure of the West to keep to the agreements made about NATO spreading east. However, all of that is immaterial to today. Bombs are bombs. There is a great tendency these days to give up on personal responsibility, but I don’t accept that – the reason for this war is because one man decided to launch a military attack. That’s actually all there is to it.
It’s a mess, but the real issue for me is that ordinary people have no power to do anything about anything.
Wynn
“Petro Poroshenko : Minsk agreements “meant nothing” and claimed credit for giving Kiev enough time to militarize”
https://thepressunited.com/updates/minsk-deal-was-used-to-buy-time-ukraines-poroshenko/
So if Ukraine say that peaceful agreements meant nothing, what signal do that send to Donbas population and to Russia?
Jack I agree again with you. I think this is a misunderstanding of perspective – and I am willing to accept that this is my fault for my poor way of expressing myself.
We are all duped by the media and the framing of war. As we argue about who owns what, e.g. the stuff about the Malvinas – you and I own nothing of it. I gain nothing out of the UK ‘owning’ the Malvinas. I gain nothing knowing that Gibraltar is ours and a place to park enormous amounts of money to evade tax. Similarly, this war is not about territory or defence – it’s about money and influence. This is about assertion of markets or what used to be called ‘spheres of influence’. We are duped into thinking about it in terms of them and us, but it’s not – it’s actually them and them.
3. Neo-nazis and fascists are more powerful than you think. They are very committed to their cause of getting rid of “untermenschen” (you do not want to be on opposite side) and they get passive support from many. Most of Brits and Americans never experienced it but heard it on TV. Only holocaust is mentioned but not others.
That is why I have problem with a name Scottish NATIONAL party instead of Scotish INDEPENDENCE party. I like British NATIONAL party. Sounds very inclusive. O fu*ck, UKIP comes to mind. Pass.
> He said Russia would RESPOND if threatened with nukes from the west.
He didn’t mention nukes from the west; he said he would respond if Russian territory is threatened by the west. In the same speech, he announced that the Donbas (including the parts he doesn’t control) would be annexed (i.e. become Russian territory) following a lightning-fast fake referendum.
Look, I think the guy’s a bullshitter of the first order. Both he and Lavrov have been making lightly-veiled threats of nukes, if they don’t get their way. I can hear a threat clearly enough, even if it doesn’t involve a detailed explanation of under what exact circumstances I’m going to be attacked with baseball bats.
Incidentally, those threats have failed, on their own terms: they say that if you draw your revolver (threaten) then you’d better shoot.
“The Malvinas? Give it to the Argentinians – whether or not you agree with the competing historical claims it’s just off their shores.”
It’s actually over 400km from their shores – further than London is from Paris (not to mention that the bit of Argentina that the Falklands are “only” 400+ km from, only became part of Argentina in 1880, long after the Falkland islands were settled). And what do you suggest doing with the Falkand Islanders, whose ancestry in the Falkland Islands goes back further than the ancestry of most Argentinians in Argentina? Throw them into the sea?
And while we are about it, why not give the Channel Islands “back” to France, or Gibraltar to Spain?
Absolutely! I have no idea about the provenance of the Channel Islands but if you think that France should have them ‘back’ as you say, then fair enough. As for Gibraltar definitely Spain should have it back.
Facts:
In 1704, Anglo-Dutch forces captured Gibraltar from Spain during the War of the Spanish Succession. The territory was ceded to Great Britain in perpetuity under the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713. (Not by Spain)
The Channel Islands belonged to Normandy before 1066, so when William invaded England, and won, he brought the Channel Islands with him, so to speak, along with the rest of Normandy.
So if you were considering the righting of violent historical wrongs, it would be more a case of the Channel Islands giving England back to the Anglo Saxons!
(Who should return it to the Danes, who should then give it back to the Celts…etc!)
“further than London is from Paris”
– thats not very far. You could walk it in a couple of days (apart from the requirement to swim the Channel).
“You could walk it in a couple of days (apart from the requirement to swim the Channel).”
No you couldn’t. Google maps reckons it takes 57 hours at the quickest, and that includes doing a huge chunk on the ferry. 52.5 of those hours are walking, which means that, even if you walked 14 hrs a day, it would take you almost four days.
Now London to Middlesborough is about 400km, which Google Maps reckons will take you 81 hrs, which at 14 hours walking a day, would be five and three quarter days, Still, the last bit, over the North York Moors, should provide you with some good scenery.
Hello Roger. I’m sorry. I don’t want to get involved in a “we own it” argument. But just to reassure you I do not want to throw anyone into the sea. I wouldn’t throw anyone into the sea. I hope that reassures you. Sometimes you have to accept the realities of a situation for example Taiwan is going to become part of China – it will happen; Ireland will be unified – it will happen; the Chagos Islanders will get their homeland back – it will happen. Here are some facts:
Falkalnd Islands:
Population 3,398.
Distance from London 7,948 miles Distance from Buenos Aires 1,201 miles Distance from Río Gallegos (Argentina) 414 miles – only 50 miles more than the distance from Thurso to Carlisle – a six-hour drive.
From Wikipedia:
The United Kingdom and Argentina both assert sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. The UK bases its position on its continuous administration of the islands since 1833 and the islanders’ “right to self-determination as set out in the UN Charter”. Argentina claims that, when it achieved independence in 1816, it acquired the Falklands from Spain.The incident of 1833 is particularly contentious; Argentina considers it proof of “Britain’s usurpation” whereas the UK discounts it as a mere reassertion of its claim.
From the United Nations:
Special Committee on Decolonization Approves 18 Draft Resolutions, as It Concludes 2021 Substantive Session
The Special Committee on Decolonization concluded its 2021 substantive session today, approving 18 draft resolutions, including one requesting that the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom resume negotiations as soon as possible to reach a peaceful resolution of their sovereignty dispute over the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)*.
In the ensuing debate, delegates, many from the Latin American and Caribbean region, supported Argentina’s claim of sovereignty and urged Buenos Aires and London to begin negotiations as soon as possible on the basis of the relevant United Nations resolutions. Several cautioned against unilateral actions, expressing concern about the United Kingdom’s military presence in the Falklands (Malvinas), and by extension, the South Atlantic.
If the Latinos don’t think it’s right for the UK to be the administrative power, then it’s time to rethink our position.
Re:
‘not least because now we won’t need to hear any more lies about how they were not mercenaries but new Ukrainians who had permanently settled in Ukraine.’
The truth about the freed Britons:
The average wage in Ukraine is around $3000 a year – probably less for grunts. Minimum wage job in UK – circa £15k per year.
(References easily available online)
It is worth remembering that for the support and sacrifice of many Russian soldiers during WWII, the Nazi flag might well be adorning the offices and buildings across Britain right now. We should also remember that in the extermination camps, particularly Sobibor, it was the brutality of the Ukrainian Guards, who operated the gas chambers and torture billets on behalf of the SS, that was most feared.
I do not endorse war or any military action in respect of territorial dispute or for mineral economic gains. In that regard, the UK & USA’S invasion of Iraq was unquestionably a war crime – as was the subsequent action in Syria – yet our own was criminal, the former PM Blair has never been referred to The Hague but was Knighted last Christmas by the late monarch. Such hypocrisy and double standards that no amount of propaganda can ever erase.
“Such hypocrisy and double standards that no amount of propaganda can ever erase.”
Exactly. Until we put Kissinger, Kennedy, Johnstone, Nixon, Thatcher, Clinton, Blair, and all the rest of them in the dock (of history, at the very least) we have no right to put Pol Pot, Mao Tse-tung, Putin or anyone else in the same place. Western war crimes are passed over as being part of the ‘fight for democracy’ while being no such thing – only a base struggle for supremacy everyone else’s war crimes are stains on the human race. The truth is that they are all stains on the human race, but partial condemnation means that the whole project is dubious.
And of course, in 2014 and before 2022 the MSM were happy to share notice of Nazi swastikas apparently observed as dispayed by Ukrainian military (see NBC report below as seen by German film crew) along with empathy for those that may be offended by those concerned! This is actually the first full written item I get from a Google search and its dated 2014!
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/german-tv-shows-nazi-symbols-helmets-ukraine-soldiers-n198961
Exactly, here is small sample of how Western media reported on Ukraine prior to the invasion:
“Western media before invasion” – https://i.imgur.com/wF5qIIV.jpg
That image ** should be given to any cocky anti-russian westerner claiming there are no propaganda in the West.
Thanks for the link – most people have forgotten.
The perfectly-synchronised 180° turn by the Western media reminds me of the passage in ‘1984’ where the speaker changes the identity of the enemy state in mid-speech to reflect a change in the political alliance, and nobody notices.
Impressive that the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC, and every other well-known media outlet made the change at the same time. Clearly our government institutions are more efficient than Orwell’s Ministry of Truth.
We all have to listen to what Mr. Murray has to say because of his moderate position and his previous experience but may I just add my personal view, insignificant as it may be?
There is no appetite for peace because this war has been a set trap for Russia and consequently Putin had no choice but to behave they way he did as this was part of the plan. Having managed to destroy the USSR and install a puppet to carry out western pillage of Russia with the aim of once and for all destroying it as a counterbalance, the West soon realised that the job was incomplete. Putin has been consistent since 2005 regarding his views of how the West treated Russia and ignored its security needs.
This pre-planned war has so far not gone according to plan, on both sides I may add, strangely because the West has miscalculated Russian resilience. Mr Murray repeatedly claims that Russia is underdeveloped, and this may be so on the consumer and trade side but not in heavy industries. It is also self-sufficient in everything else, which few of the western countries are.
The current war is a another war on control of energy resources, much as the Iraq war was a war for oil, this war is one for gas with an expectation that sanctions would end the war quickly. But this has badly backfired.
I also think that the only way to end this war is by negotiations.
SA, I like your views, and it saves me time posting comments and missing reading other great comments.
Pigeon English
Thank you for your kind words. I also know from your comments that we agree on most things. This is why this is such a good forum: you get many considered views and you come to know some people. Best wishes.
This is one of Craig’s best articles, in which his undoubted experience of Western political policy is of real value.
However, I question his dismissal of the 2014 Crimea referendum. Even BBC correspondents in Crimea at the time of the referendum reported that the final result (95.5%, by the way, not 97%) was consistent with exit polls. It’s true that some groups boycotted the referendum, but the turnout was nevertheless extremely high (about 80% – estimated by a BBC reporter in Crimea) so it would have made no difference to the final result even if they had not. Don’t take my word for it, google for: crimea referendum on site bbc.co.uk .
Back then, the BBC still had some vestiges of objectivity!
In this episde Jimmy Dore talks about Rand corporation rapport from 2019 for the US Army: “Extending Russia” – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVjPh-8JMJQ
USA did what rapport suggested and is working so far. Rapport even mentions that actions will cost us.
After the Ukrainian forces shelling, and killing the people of the Donbas for at least eight years, I’m sure the people of the DPR and the LPR, will be glad to join the Russian Federation and who could blame them.
This is an interesting ethnic map of Ukraine.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/14i/ukrelection2.jpg
Here is a funny dialogue from social networks I translated for you. Describes what people think.
– imagine that the result of the referendum is the majority don’t want to join Russia, so Russia says: “Well, if you don’t want it, so be it”, and leaves.
– ha ha, no less funny if the result shows that people want to join Russia. And Ukraine says: “Well, if you want it, so be it”, and leaves.
– friends, now imagine that the result is 50/50. Russia says: “Well, let it be so”, and leaves. Ukraine says: “Well, let it be so”, and leaves. And the residents of Donbass and Luhansk: “What was that?”
Tatyana.
Yes, it’s funny, I’ll be surprised if the result in the Donbas with the referendums in mind isn’t in the high 90’s for a yes, to join the RF.
frankly, I think that such referendums are held after preliminary polls, when the polls show a certain result. If the polls were unfavorable, why make a referendum then?
Tatyana.
I hope the folk of the Zaporozhye region vote to join the RF, if not the ZNPP might fall into the hands of the Ukrainian forces, and the largest nuclear power station in Europe could end up being used to stage a terrible disaster.
Tatyana,
You seem to think it’s possible to hold a legitimate referendum, in a territory that is under foreign occupation, with active conflict going on, many of the population living in basements, and many others having fled the territory (or having been kidnapped and deported to Russia).
That is, you don’t need to hold preliminary polls, if you’re going to stage a fixed referendum. Perhaps that’s why nobody has announced the results of these preliminary polls.
“– imagine that the result of the referendum is the majority don’t want to join Russia,”
Would the Western media continue to say that it was a sham referendum, that the conditions were less than ideal, that people were intimidated, that the result should be discarded and another referendum held when things are more stable? It’s funny how the validity or otherwise of any election or referendum seems to depend entirely on the result.
> Would the Western media continue to say that it was a sham referendum
Don’t get your point at all. How would a “sham referendum” result in an anti-Russian outcome, if the voting process is controlled by Russia, and Ukraine has no control in that territory? Is Ukraine proposing their own referendum, which they will fix to their own advantage? How would they set up the fake polling stations, when neither their army nor their police have any say in Crimea?
I should’ve added that the West has already lost the economic war, and that the UK and the US, have decided the only way to redress this point, apart from using Europe as a battlefield, and to sell its wares at highly inflated prices, is to antagonise Russia and China. The UK and the US already have their war with Russia, now they are hoping that they can have their war with China, in the form of China engaging with Tawain, its every arms manufacturers dream.
https://consortiumnews.com/2022/09/21/defensive-west-smears-samarkand-summit/
Russia after 2014 offered a better deal than that proposed here. It offered a comprehensive settlement in late 2021. It offered the deal proposed here as recently as March. The Ukrainian government and Russian government both indicated then that a deal was possible. The Ukrainian government then changed its position, Russia says on the instructions of the US delivered by Boris Johnson. The problem, it appears, has not been intransigence by the Russians.
I would like to know the source of the assertions here about the Russian military and the conduct of operations in Ukraine, also the assessment of the Russian economy (one small indication that it may be awry – Russia has used way more munitions than Ukraine/NATO, yet it is not Russia running out, but the US & NATO, which do not have the industrial capacity to replenish their stocks any time soon).
Diplomacy is certainly always an option but the sad fact is that the collective west, driven by its visceral hatred and envy of Russia and atavistic desire to smash it to bits is just not interested. Putin and by implication Lavrov can be criticised for putting too much faith in diplomacy when the other side just doesn’t want to tango. There have been several occasions when the collective west has eschewed the idea of a diplomatic solution from the Minsk Accords onwards. Putin if anything has been too soft and too patient in dealing with its Chicago School ‘always seize an opportunity to attack, never cede an inch and stick it up them’ mentality.
A mixed bag really. As for russian military strength, Craig Murray is wrong. He makes the typical human mistake of extrapolating from past experience to the present situation. It would not have been difficult for him to realize that the massing of Ukrainian troops was well known. Even I knew that weeks before the actual Ukrainian counterattack. And I also knew that the now recaptured territories were hardly occupied by units of the Russian army. At the time of the conquest, this had not been necessary because of the sympathetic population, and afterwards the scarce contingents were needed elsewhere.
The absurd referenda are needed according to Russian law in order to be able to deploy all parts of the Russian army without hindrance. Russians abide by their own rules. If Russia had followed the Western model and destroyed the Ukrainian power center and large parts of the civilian Ukrainian infrastructure in the first days – which would have been easily possible with all the guided weapons, including exclusive hypersonic versions – the situation would look different today. Putin, however, has the approach of the Swabian housewife, he is always as frugal as possible and probably could not imagine that the West would intervene so massively, but rather hoped for early negotiations.
That was, if it was, a miscalculation and now he is forced to escalate. Giving in now would be an ignominious defeat and his end. Now the Western leadership can decide – does it want to go all the way and risk a veritable third world war in which there will only be losers? Or does it come to its senses, accepting that a nato base on Russia’s doorstep will never be accepted, not by any other Russian president?
It is the West that has rejected any offer of negotiation and is now slamming the very last door with atrocity propaganda and ridiculous allegations – such as that the Russians are shelling a nuclear power plant that they themselves control.
In the end, it no longer matters to whom any sympathies are directed. Death is the great equalizer and we are not very far from a nuclear catastrophe.
Is the ordinary Ukranian worried about the other invasion, that of capital into their country? It’s hard to know what is true, however, going back, in 2014 Ukraine needed a loan. There were 2 offers. The World Bank (IMF) offered $15 billion but with conditions, 1. to lift the ban on private sector land ownership; 2. cut pensions and fuel subsidies. Russia offered $15 billion too but without the austerity and privatization requirements. President Yanukovych chose Russia’s offer, so the US instigated the coup. The coup government accepted the IMF loan and conditions; austerity and privatization. Is that right? I’d be worried about future labour and pension rights if it was.
So far multinational consortia with US capital have already bought one-third of Ukraine’s farmland.
https://www.oaklandinstitute.org/blog/who-owns-agricultural-land-ukraine#:~:text=The%20United%20Farmers%20Holding%20Company,through%20Continental%20Farmers%20Group%20PLC
On another note, Russia is forming its own gold standard to establish fairness over the disingenuous pricing from the London Bullion Market. This would be considerable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdT0BvPafws
I didn’t quite appreciate the comparison with China.
“To historians, the most significant thing about Putin may be his failure to develop manufacturing industry at a time when China raced into world manufacturing domination.
China remains remarkably unassertive on the world stage as it increases its economic dominance. If there were ever a time for China to assert international leadership it is now.”
There’s a failure to understand that the current Chinese policy has a very, very long history, going back roughly 1200 years or more. Manufacture and export, but let foreign ships come to China, not Chinese ships go abroad (in general). What was done with early porcelain in the 8th century, China is still doing today. Experts in the history of porcelain traditionally talk about the distinction between Imperial and Export porcelain. we now know that it is more complicated than that, but it is true that China manufactured for export, based on models brought back to copy, at an early date.
Although they have some activity in Africa and the Belt and Road initiative, they’ll never do like the Americans and intervene all round the world. Xinjiang, like Tibet, is different, as a traditional Chinese colony, and they look unlikely to let it go.
Russian industrialisation is different, more recent, and lately you’d have to get rid of the oligarchs to renew it. Not easy for Putin.