Home » The Putin Doctrine

Comments

The Putin Doctrine — 86 Comments

  1. So…Putin wants Russia to be treated like it is a major power. Like we treat China.

    Have we been treating Russia like a major power whose interests and sphere of influence should be acknowledged? Or have we more or less been doing whatever we want and expecting Russia to lump it?

    Not that our behavior excuses Putin’s invasion but if the question is “How did we get to this point?’ I don’t think the answer is “Everything was fine and then this CRAZY guy did this CRAZY thing for NO REASON whatsoever.”

    Mike

  2. Mike. Question is whether the putative reason is something out of the ordinary in international relations.
    NATO is only a threat–and Putin isn’t so dumb as to not know this–to plans to invade the West. So, as NATO expands, it shuts off his plans to invade the west. We get to do that. Might annoy him, but that’s on him. The alternative would be what?
    I’ve spoken before about the Russian history and likely DNA about being invaded. But Putin is a smart guy and can read the tea leaves. Nobody’s in a position to, or even to contemplate, invading Russia. Although, contemplating how things are going in Ukraine, maybe his tea leaf reading isn’t up to par.
    Have we economically damaged Russia? Competing in the energy market isn’t a casus belli, liberals’ heavy breathing notwithstanding.
    We have so many intelligence agencies ignoring Chinese spies that they may have time to go after Russian spies, but that’s not the way to bet, either, what with all those annoyed parents. But there’s no version of HUAC casting shade on all things Russian.
    Sure, Putin can be annoyed but whether it’s something we did wrong, so to speak, or something we did to protect ourselves and the west but annoys him anyway is an issue.

  3. So…Putin wants Russia to be treated like it is a major power. Like we treat China.

    China has a domestic product 5x that of Russia. It’s going to be treated more deferentially than Russia as a matter of course.

    The problem at the moment is that Russia is attempting to conquer and subjugate a neighboring state just because it can. Only the most disruptive and deviant states of the last century do this.

    and renegotiating the geographic settlement that ended the Cold War.

    The ‘geographic settlement’ was that the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact dissolved. There are no countries in Europe, the Near East, or Central Asia hankering to join anything resembling the Soviet Union or the Warsaw Pact, bar, perhaps, White Russia. Thus coercing the Ukraine, a country which Putin maintains has no proper existence and has been stolen by Nazis.

  4. The Biden regime has the answer to Putin and high gas prices. They are going to give every American (including illegals, I assume) 100 bucks a month to buy gas. That’ll show Putin.

    Does anyone still not understand why Russia did this after Biden took over ?

  5. Does anyone still not understand why Russia did this after Biden took over?

    I’d like to think about the possibility that Biden intended to give Ukraine to Putin . . . and that’s why he offered Zelensky an exit.

    Also, “10% for the big guy”. Was that Joe? Wasn’t Joe getting 50%? Could “the big guy” have been the sitting president?

    I know I’m going off for conspiracy thinking, but after what we have seen I think we have to consider it.

  6. So…Putin wants Russia to be treated like it is a major power. Like we treat China.

    Have we been treating Russia like a major power whose interests and sphere of influence should be acknowledged? Or have we more or less been doing whatever we want and expecting Russia to lump it?

    Russia is a lessor power compared to China, but it is also invading Ukraine, which is what China wants to do with Taiwan. We are not treating them all that differently when it comes to sphere of influence. China is upset that the Quad exists, China is pressuring neighboring countries and trying to expand its control over ocean that doesn’t belong to them. The same basic dynamic exists.

    If Russia wants to be treated more as a peer it needs to become one.

    And Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has shown lots of weakness, hence less reason to consider them a peer. They have lots of old Soviet junk, a poor quality military, although they still have a good weapons design system for a third world country.

  7. So far, most of what Zelensky has offered has been hyperbolic rhetoric. Speaking to Israel, he alludes to the Holocaust. Speaking to Western Europe, he alludes to the Nazis and Stalin. Speaking to an adoring U.S. Congress, he speaks of Martin Luther King Jr.

    Stent states, “The current crisis between Russia and Ukraine is a reckoning that has been 30 years in the making. It is about much more than Ukraine and its possible NATO membership.”

    That is an implicit admission by her that Putin is concerned about “Ukraine and its possible NATO membership”.

    “It is about the future of the European order crafted after the Soviet Union’s collapse…”

    Here I somewhat agree but unsurprisingly, not with the rationale she advances; “Russia is trying to defeat the freedom of all people in Europe; of all the people in the world.”

    Firstly, Russia hasn’t the capability “to defeat the freedom of all people in Europe”, much less “all the people in the world”.

    So that’s a ludicrous assertion.

    Secondly, there is a group that does want to eliminate the freedom of all people in the world and that would be those aligned with the stated goals of the Great Reset. Which is confirmed by their own words, easily found on the internet.

    I suspect that Putin has taken the measure* of the West’s current political leadership and decided that they are committed to creating a world government under their control. One in which the Russian people would be as subservient, as those in the West. And I think he sees the Left’s ‘cultural’ takeover of the West, as an anathema.

    Putin is not just a brutal dictator. He’s also a nationalist and a traditionalist.

    *Putin did familiarize himself with the WEF at Davos.

    “…[T]he Russian president’s behavior is being driven by an interlocking set of foreign policy principles that suggest Moscow will be disruptive in the years to come. Call it “the Putin doctrine”.”

    I somewhat agree though for different reasons than, “The doctrine holds that only a few states should have this kind of authority, along with complete sovereignty, and that others must bow to their wishes. It entails defending incumbent authoritarian regimes and undermining democracies.”

    So far Putin hasn’t demanded that the Baltic States or Poland for instance “must bow to his wishes”. Which he might, if not for NATO.

    He has demanded that the Ukraine bow to his wishes, as expressed in the conditions Putin states as necessary to end the invasion; the Ukraine accepting a permanent status as a neutral buffer State, which would permanently bar it from NATO membership. Ukraine’s agreement with the Donbas region’s independence and formal recognition of the Crimea’s incorporation into Russia. And the demilitarization of Western Ukraine.

    If sincere, those conditions do not indicate a desire to keep expanding. Putin’s future actions would either reinforce or contradict that supposition.

    As for the Putin doctrine having a goal of “undermining democracies”… there’s no need for that goal, as the West’s political leadership has already revealed that undermining democracy is its goal as well. The Biden administration, the Trudeau administration, the U.K., as well as Macron and Merkel’s administration and its successor… plus Italy, and the Swiss have all acted to substantively undermine democracy in their nations. We can throw in Australia and New Zealand as well. Hungary and Poland are holdouts with Hungary now being ‘punished’ by the EU.

    I do think Putin is prepared to do whatever he can to prevent Russia from falling under the sway of the West’s leadership and I think that includes whatever degree of brutality is required to accomplish that goal.

  8. He’s also a nationalist and a traditionalist.

    If he were an actual nationalist, he’d have some irredentist claims to border bits held by Kazakhstan, Estonia, and the Ukraine as of 2013, and would otherwise be satisfied with Russia’s ample territory. He’s pretty haphazard with the traditionalist business, what with his series of mistresses and ba*tard children. The best you could say is that he’s not impressed with the woke.

  9. They are going to give every American (including illegals, I assume) 100 bucks a month to buy gas.

    Again, put people on your patronage and manufacture pr fodder. That’s about 2/3 of what the Democrats do. The other third is Alinskyite harassment of everyone else in every conceivable venue at all conceivable times with every rusty tool in the box (funded by the sorosphere).

  10. MBunge,

    Welcome to the club, membership of which is determined by expressing views considered unacceptable by some and ‘proof’ of being an “apologist and enabler”. Wear your badge with pride, it’s the American way.

    Richard Aubrey,

    “NATO is only a threat–and Putin isn’t so dumb as to not know this–to plans to invade the West.”

    That was once a certainty. Now, perhaps not so much. The WEF Global Elite and their political operatives (Trudeau, Freeland, Macron, Buttigieg, etc.) control NATO and may one day see a “brief, victorious war” as a ‘regrettable’ necessity. Certainly moral considerations would not be a factor in their thinking.

    Don,

    “Russia is a lessor power compared to China”

    Economically and in conventional military forces agreed. Russia’s nuclear arsenal is their ‘trump card’. Their ability to access Russia’s vast natural resources set Russia above second world nations but do not in and of themselves grant first world status.

  11. Geoffrey, does that badge give you permission to wear a big red rubber nose, an orange wig, floppy shoes, and face paint?

    Buttigedge in control of NATO? LOL

    Macron is the PM of France IIRC. Did you know Geoffrey that France is not, … wait for it ……., not part of NATO? LOL Geoffrey.

    Amything else you wish to wear with pride?

    Pride goes before the fall. Does obstinacy lead the pridefull to pratfalls?

  12. Geoffrey Britain:

    MBunge has been commenting here for a long time and often disagrees with others on several topics. Since the Ukraine war began, MBunge has been pretty consistently expressing views that are different from the majority here on that topic as well. This isn’t something new. Different views are welcomed here, and there’s a lot of back and forth among commenters in general. So why the sudden “welcome to the club” from you?

    Furthermore, your own “membership” isn’t merely “determined by expressing views considered unacceptable.” This is not a religious group whose orthodoxy you have offended. You have been expressing views that many and perhaps even most people here consider poorly thought out and poorly evidenced, which is why they are not “accepted” by most.

  13. Art Deco,

    So a nation’s nationalists always agree on their nation’s proper boundaries? Do all traditionalists share the same morality?

    What degree of loyalty to nationalist and traditional standards must one embody to qualify for that appelation?

    Yes dependency is a major tool and goal of the democrats.

  14. neo,

    On this issue, we will have to agree to disagree. Time will tell which of us has poorly thought out their views on this subject. If subsequent events prove me wrong, I assure you that I will freely admit to it.

  15. This war is more likely to reduce the power of Russia, not increase it.
    China is likely the real winner hear. Apparently the great KGB Putin has asked China for help. So who is really the great power and who is the down and falling vassal?

  16. om,

    I would never stoop to swiping your costume.

    I didn’t say that Buttigieg was in control of NATO. But I can see where you could get that impression, sorry for the lack of clarity. I said that he’s a political operative aligned with the WEF. WEF influences NATO through its alliances with the West’s political leadership.

    Pride does go before the fall. A willingness to admit to error is protection against prideful obstinacy.

  17. Geoffrey Britain:

    What subsequent event could prove you right?

    No one here is saying that Putin will inevitably succeed. We are talking about his hopes, dreams, desires, plans, goals. You seem to think they are very very limited. I think they are far more expansive. I would be proven right if – within our lifetime – he succeeds. But that’s not required for me to be “right” in terms of his long-term “goals.” In addition, he might pause in his pursuit of these things, waiting for just the right time. Then you would think that your position has been vindicated, but it would not necessarily be vindicated at all – he just might be going slowly. He’s not all that old, and if he’s healthy, he’s got time (or his hand-picked successor would have time).

    Or he might be effectively thwarted. I sincerely hope Putin is roundly defeated and taken out of business. In that case, his ultimate goals will remain unknown, unless we find his secret diary.

    It was something like eight years between Putin’s activity in Crimea and his war against Ukraine itself. He was waiting for the right time. Things could speed up in the future, depending on the Ukraine outcome, or they could slow down. If he runs out of money, he might really have to slow down, but that tells us nothing about what he’d like to do.

    Hitler went slowly at first in terms of his international ambitions, but when he started waging war he went pretty quickly. Many people thought at first that he was a joke, or modest in his ambitions (just wanting the Sudetenland, etc.), but they were wrong. If he hadn’t been as successful as he initially was, people probably would not have realized the scope of what he wanted to do. He was ultimately defeated, but not without widespread suffering. But even when he was defeated, most people didn’t know – and to this very day most people still don’t know – about the scope of what he intended but did not accomplish. It was extraordinarily evil and encompassed a great deal of the world.

    Putin is not Hitler, of course. I am bringing Hitler up not to say their goals are the same or that they are the same, but merely as an illustration of how many mistakes people can make about a tyrant’s goals.

  18. Geoffrey, you own the badge and those duds lately. And about France and NATO? Turkey, Poland, Hungary, Romania, all under the WEF thumb?

    Otay

    It is your story.

    Bless your heart.

  19. neo:

    Yes I was mistaken about France and NATO, but won’t try to Geoffrey that, but will say that France has chosen to go its own way from time to time. That Fremch behavior undermines Geoffrey’s spiel that NATO is just the military arm of the WEF / Davos.

    My other point is that there are significant differences among NATO members and the agenda of WEF / Davos.

  20. So a nation’s nationalists always agree on their nation’s proper boundaries? Do all traditionalists share the same morality?

    Were he an actual nationalist, rebuilding the Soviet Union would not be on his agenda. Yes, all occidental traditionalists respect the order of family life.

    You’re welcome.

  21. NOTE to NEO: your link at “these concepts and plans” does not pull up an article by Stent, but this post at Foreign Affairs:
    https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ukraine/2022-03-21/how-make-peace-putin

    It’s interesting and I am going to comment on it, but it’s not the source of your excerpt.

    This appears to be that source, or at least it’s one that matches the excerpt:
    https://thecsspoint.com/the-putin-doctrine-by-angela-stent/

    Bonus link: an interview with Stent on March 7. Nothing she says is particularly new or different from at least one faction’s consensus, but it’s very simply laid out, almost as a FAQ, and thus good for sharing with people who want to hear from the experts.
    One notable excerpt – how CW 2.0 is not the same as CW 1.

    https://octavian.substack.com/p/a-dangerous-mind-angela-stent-on?s=r
    “There are limits to how we can affect his calculus. If he’s determined to do keep going, I don’t think anything’s going to stop him.”

    OR: We’re now clearly in a new cold war with Russia. How will it differ from the last one?

    Stent: We definitely are in a new cold war. The question is, will the American people make the kinds of commitments to defending Europe they did in the first Cold War? We know that Putin’s ambitions extend beyond Ukraine, possibly to Central and Eastern Europe. Will the United States and the Europeans step up and spend more on defense? We’ve had the surprising announcement from Germany that it’s going to do so. But will the United States go back into Europe with the numbers of troops it stationed there during the first Cold War?

    Whether or not it does, this will be a different cold war. In the first Cold War, there were rules of the game. We had an American and a Soviet sphere of influence, and we didn’t interfere much with each other’s sphere. I don’t think that’s what Putin wants. He wants a new world disorder. He wants a disruptive, a Hobbesian world order. So I don’t think he’ll be willing to accept limits on Russia’s influence.

    This new cold war also won’t be global like the last one was. There won’t be the same ideological component. And we’re now in the age of cyber, which will make the conduct of this cold war different.

    The other major difference is that during the first Cold War, there was a consensus in the United States about democracy and the other values we believed in. We don’t have that anymore. We’re a deeply divided country where parts of the population really don’t believe that our democratic system is worth fighting for.

    * *
    Stent’s credentials as an expert, per Wikipedia:

    Angela E. Stent is a foreign policy expert specializing in US and European relations with Russia and Russian foreign policy. She is Professor of Government and Foreign Service at Georgetown University and director of its Center for Eurasian, Russian, and East European Studies.[2] She is also a non-resident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. She has served in the Office of Policy Planning in the US State Department and as National Intelligence Officer for Russia and Eurasia.[3]

  22. In re Stent – her post on January 27 was pretty good prophecy.

    (NOTE: I just noticed that it was originally published in Foreign Affairs, so maybe that’s how that other post got tagged by Neo’s link.)

    Putin has now taken this approach one step further. He is threatening a far more comprehensive invasion of Ukraine than the annexation of Crimea and the intervention in the Donbas that Russia carried out in 2014, an invasion that would undermine the current order and potentially reassert Russia’s preeminence in what he insists is its “rightful” place on the European continent and in world affairs. He sees this as a good time to act.

    She doesn’t say outright that he will invade (“Putin may still decide not to invade.”) but my feeling is that she would have been more surprised if he hadn’t than that he did.

    Anybody can claim after Feb 24 that they just knew Putin would invade, because he had. Considering it this seriously ahead of time, when just about everyone* was declaring “no way,” is definitely a star on her “expert” report card.

    Mic drop quote: “The Warsaw Pact was an alliance that had a unique track record: it invaded only its own members.”

    BTW, her bio is a good quick tour of Russia’s international profile.
    She is clearly a Democrat, but does not appear to be a radical leftist of the new generation. She is definitely not a right-wing conservative nut-job.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Stent

    My caveats:
    Stent:

    U.S. President Donald Trump was contemptuous of the NATO alliance and dismissive of some of the United States’ key European allies—notably then German Chancellor Angela Merkel—and spoke openly of pulling the United States out of the organization.

    Like most Democrats, she took Trump literally but not seriously.
    IMO (and I’m not alone), Trump was rattling the cages of the EU-branch and other NATO members to get them to step up their own defense, and a threat to take the US ball and go home was one of the sticks he used. It worked, to a certain extent.
    Would he have pulled out if they hadn’t at least started amending their ways?
    Who knows. That’s what made his threats effective.

    Stent:

    But if the present is any indication, it looks as if Putin’s post-West “order” would be a disordered Hobbesian world with few rules of the game. In pursuit of his new system, Putin’s modus operandi is to keep the West off balance, guessing about his true intentions, and then surprising it when he acts.

    That looks…kind of familiar. Maybe it really is easier to work with someone who has the same playbook you do.
    BTW, note that there are factions in the West simultaneously claiming that Putin started this war because the US and Europe didn’t play well with Russia in the past, and that Trump was much too chummy with Russia. SMH

    Stent:

    Given Putin’s ultimate goal, and given his belief that now is the time to force the West to respond to his ultimatums, can Russia be deterred from launching another military incursion into Ukraine? No one knows what Putin will ultimately decide. But his conviction that the West has ignored what he deems Russia’s legitimate interests for three decades continues to drive his actions. He is determined to reassert Russia’s right to limit the sovereign choices of its neighbors and its former Warsaw Pact allies and to force the West to accept these limits—be that by diplomacy or military force.

    That doesn’t mean the West is powerless. The United States should continue to pursue diplomacy with Russia and seek to craft a modus vivendi that is acceptable to both sides without compromising the sovereignty of its allies and partners. At the same time, it should keep coordinating with the Europeans to respond and impose costs on Russia. But it is clear that even if Europe avoids war, there is no going back to the situation as it was before Russia began massing its troops in March 2021.

    Well, that didn’t work our very well.

    The ultimate result of this crisis could be the third reorganization of Euro-Atlantic security since the late 1940s. The first came with the consolidation of the Yalta system into two rival blocs in Europe after World War II. [AF: Cold War 1.0] The second emerged from 1989 to 1991, with the collapse of the communist bloc and then the Soviet Union itself, followed by the West’s subsequent drive to create a Europe “whole and free.” Putin now directly challenges that order with his moves against Ukraine.

    As the United States and its allies await Russia’s next move and try to deter an invasion with diplomacy and the threat of heavy sanctions, they need to understand Putin’s motives and what they portend. The current crisis is ultimately about Russia redrawing the post–Cold War map and seeking to reassert its influence over half of Europe, based on the claim that it is guaranteeing its own security. It may be possible to avert a military conflict this time. But as long as Putin remains in power, so will his doctrine.

    *See my next comment.

  23. *Anyone have links to any other prophetic exceptions, other than the video Neo posted today of Alexander Nevzorov?

    The commenters on that video mentioned a Ukrainian, Oleksiy Arestovych [Alexey Arestovich], and Wikipedia had this to say, since it seems to be of some importance to know the credentials of our sources
    (note: he is also an erstwhile thespian, but Ukrainians seem to wear a lot of professional hats):

    Since February 24, 2022, Arestovych has been holding daily briefings on the current situation regarding the Russian invasion of Ukraine, as an Adviser to the Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine.[4][5]

    In 2022, after Russia invasion on Ukraine, Oleksiy became known with his 2019 prediction on the inevitable war with Russia.[6]

    Arestovych is a graduate of the Odessa Military Academy, he has a diploma of military translator. According to data that need further confirmation, from 1994 to 2005 he worked in the Chief Directorate of Intelligence of the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine and is a reserve major.[12][13][14]

    Since 2014, he has been preparing combat units under the People’s Reserve program,[15] organizer of a charity fund to provide psychological support to the military in the ATO zone (2014—2017).

    From September 2018 to September 2019, he served in the environmental protection zone near Kramatorsk in the 72nd Mechanized Brigade as a scout.[16] Prior to that, he claimed to have fought on a volunteer basis, making a total of 33 battles outside the front line.

    On October 28, 2020, Arestovych was appointed by Leonid Kravchuk Adviser on Information Policy[17][18][19] and official speaker of the Ukrainian delegation to the Trilateral Contact Group [TCG] on Ukraine at the Minsk talks on resolving the War in Donbas.[18][20][21]

    On December 1, 2020, the Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Andriy Yermak appointed Oleksiy Arestovych his freelance advisor on strategic communications in the field of national security and defense.[22][23] Leonid Kravchuk, the head of the TCG, noted that Arestovych’s candidacy was chosen because of his military experience and the presence of a vision and position on issues that are the subject of the TCG.[24]

    [6] is this footnote and I have looked at it the linked video.

    “Oleksiy Arestovych and his prediction of Russian aggression (2019) – EN subtitles”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xNHmHpERH8

    I didn’t know if it was a general “Putin might invade, probably will sometime” or a “he is gonna do it as soon as he sees an opening.”

    It was the latter, and very specific, and very direct about WHY Ukraine made overtures to NATO under President Zelenskyy.

    There are English subtitles (as on the Nevzorov video), so set the speed to double-time and read along. Most important part starts about 7:30.

  24. @ Neo > “most people still don’t know – about the scope of what he [Hitler] intended but did not accomplish. It was extraordinarily evil and encompassed a great deal of the world.”

    Evil doesn’t even begin to describe that plan.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalplan_Ost

    Master Plan for the East), abbreviated GPO, was the Nazi German government’s plan for the genocide[1] and ethnic cleansing on a vast scale, and colonization of Central and Eastern Europe by Germans. It was to be undertaken in territories occupied by Germany during World War II. The plan was attempted during the war, resulting indirectly and directly in the deaths of millions by shootings, starvation, disease, extermination through labor, and genocide. However, its full implementation was not considered practicable during major military operations, and never materialized due to Germany’s defeat.[2][3][4]

    I do wonder if FDR and Stalin had some knowledge of the Plan, and if that influenced their actions.
    It doesn’t appear so from the article, but there might have been some “leaks” to the West from one of the anti-Hitler groups that were colluding with the Allies. If so, they are still very deeply buried.

    Nearly all the wartime documentation on Generalplan Ost was deliberately destroyed shortly before Germany’s defeat in May 1945,[10][11] and the full proposal has never been found, though several documents refer to it or supplement it. Nonetheless, most of the plan’s essential elements have been reconstructed from related memos, abstracts and other documents.[12]

    A major document which enabled historians to accurately reconstruct the Generalplan Ost was a memorandum released on April 27, 1942, by Erhard Wetzel, director of the NSDAP Office of Racial Policy, entitled “Opinion and thoughts on the master plan for the East of the Reichsführer SS”.[13] Wetzel’s memorandum was a broad elaboration of the Generalplan Ost proposal.[14][12] It came to light only in 1957.[15]

    The extermination document for the Slavic people of Eastern Europe did survive the war and was quoted by Yale historian Timothy Snyder in 2010. It shows that ethnic Poles were the primary target of Generalplan OST.[16]

    [16]Snyder, Timothy (2012). Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin. Basic Books. Generalplan Ost. ISBN 978-0465002399.

  25. Om,
    You are getting as tiresome as the late, unlamented Zaphod.
    At least he had an occasional modicum of wit.

  26. On the Victor Davis Hanson thread, Mike K linked a post by Ruy Teixeira on a Substack account, and one of the other authors, Peter Juul, posted this article on March 23. I think he brings up a lot of important points, and makes some good arguments. Please note that the co-authors are self-avowed Democrat-liberal-progressives-but-not-rabid-leftists.

    https://theliberalpatriot.substack.com/p/what-would-a-ukrainian-victory-look?s=r
    “Why America should make its priorities clear as soon as possible”

    It contrasts highly in tone and substance with the Foreign Affairs article that Neo linked in error for Stent’s post.

    https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ukraine/2022-03-21/how-make-peace-putin
    “The West Must Move Quickly to End the War in Ukraine”

    I think they exemplify the split between the camps espousing “victory for Ukraine on its own terms” versus “give Putin some of what he wants and he will go away happy.”

    Slava Ukraini.

  27. Important to read, and watch for updates –

    https://redstate.com/streiff/2022/03/23/correlation-or-causation-the-ukraine-invasion-has-stalled-and-putins-defense-minister-and-chief-of-the-general-staff-have-vanished-n539796

    Regardless of your views of the state of play in the military campaign, it is really difficult to deny that ferment is taking place in the Kremlin. In the past couple of weeks, we’ve had solid but unconfirmed reports that Putin has relieved at least eight general officers of their commands; two senior FSB officers have been arrested, allegedly over the intelligence that supported the operational plan for the Ukraine invasion …; and the deputy director of Rosgvardiya, or Putin’s personal military force, has been arrested …. The latter two events were announced in Russian media.

    Now we have some additional data points. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, a Putin crony, has not been seen in person since March 11.

    Another face awaiting its own personal milk carton is that of Chief for the General Staff Valery Gerasimov. Like Shoigu, Gerasimov has not been seen in public since March 11, when he met with his Turkish counterpart.

    For the time being, Shoigu and Gerasimov dropping out of sight are mere data points. They could very well reappear in the future with reasonable explanations for their absences. However, if they have been removed from their posts, we are dealing with a different scenario. What we can’t know is the reason for the spate of dismissals, if they are all true. There is no doubt that there is some scapegoating going on. But if Putin has pushed the ejection button for the Defense Minister he appointed a decade ago, while the nation is embroiled in an increasingly wasteful war, I think we have to look beyond mere incompetence for an explanation.

    https://redstate.com/streiff/2022/03/24/russian-military-leaders-refusal-to-talk-to-us-leaders-creates-a-dangerous-lights-on-nobody-home-situation-n540120

    The refusal of the Russians to maintain liaison with the United States as this war perks along is bizarre and unprofessional. Russia has been carrying out strikes closer and closer to the Polish border. They are conducting troop maneuvers near the borders of Poland and Romania. It isn’t hard to see how a local incident could mushroom into something much more significant.

    What, we may ask, could be the reason. One reason posited in the article is that the Russian military may have been forbidden to take calls because Putin is in a snit. There is another and equally probable reason. The Russian counterparts to Austin and White Rage Boy are Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov. These men have not been seen in public since about March 11 …. So we could very well be in a situation where the top defense and military leadership is in a state of flux and on one wants to take it upon themselves to answer a call from Austin or Milley because a) it would confirm a change in leadership that Putin probably won’t be in the mood to see in the Western press and b) you might make the wrong decision by picking up that phone and end up in a gulag.

    No matter the reason, the lack of direct communications increases the risk of Russia’s war with Ukraine spreading, which is something that is not needed right now.

    https://redstate.com/streiff/2022/03/24/russias-defense-minister-surfaces-after-two-week-disappearance-and-the-mystery-deepens-n540622

    The absence was such an item of comment that it resulted in Putin’s Mini-Me, Dmitry Peskov, being asked questions about Shoigu’s whereabouts at Thursday’s propaganda dump.

    “The defence minister has a lot to deal with right now, as you can understand,” Dmitri Peskov, the Kremlin spokesman, said during a briefing, denying Shoigu was ill. “A special military operation is ongoing. Certainly, now isn’t exactly the right time for media activities. This is quite understandable.”

    To defuse the situation, the Kremlin ginned up a video conference that featured Shoigu.

    Which didn’t really help a lot.

    Many observers note that the video quality for Shoigu, who is in the upper left square on the screen, is poor. It gives the impression of the camera recording existing video on a monitor rather than a live person (there is a good reason for that, if you think about it). Shoigu doesn’t speak. He moves one arm briefly.

    And some others point out that this appearance by Shoigu looks identical to his last known appearance on television.

    You have to be the judge of what to make of this. Shoigu may very well be alive and surrounded by Russian hookers. Still, the way to dispel rumors of his disappearance was not a quickly cobbled-together video conference where he not only had a crap video connection but was muted.

    Apparently, there is no word yet on Gerasimov.

  28. The Distributist on youtube summed up the whole fiasco along the lines of this conflict is a proxy war between two empires fighting over influence of a client state. The only question is whether the Nato countries would have the willpower to resist the Russian actions. That this mess will create real wide spread starvation, since the Russians and Ukraine are exporters to Africa of grain.

    Every indication is the Nato powers did not prepare to organize a campaign to deter or counter the Russians. The whole, Poland to exchange planes after the invasion is a clear example that the basic ground work necessary to Nato’s side was not done. Further more, the shutting down of Oil and Gas production in US has only strengthened Russia. The inverted drive to make “peace” with Iran using Russian diplomats is another example.

    The only thing Nato has been good at has been the media war, and the corporate cancellation effort. All of which is too little and too late. Nato isn’t willing to fight foreign powers. They are far more focused on internal issues and violating their constitutions to maintain power.

  29. The Distributist on youtube summed up the whole fiasco along the lines of this conflict is a proxy war between two empires fighting over influence of a client state.

    Well, that’s a stupid way of summarizing it. The Ukraine hasn’t been a client state of the United States or anyone else, it has every right and reason to fight for its own interests, and the people who elected to wage war are the Russians.

  30. So then, why would Putin desire that Russia be treated as a major power?
    Why is it not enough that Russia develops to the maximum its own economy, technology, standard of living, etc?
    Why does Putin seek personal recognition as the leader of a major power?

    Sounds like a spoiled child in the midst of a temper tantrum because he was refused cookies before dinner.

    In 1925, Hitler wrote Mein Kampf, in which is his concept of Lebensraum (living space) presented; basically describing how a greater Germany needed to colonize much of Eastern Europe.
    Note that Hitler became Chancellor (legally) in 1933.
    Apparently nobody in the UK, France, etc., bothered reading his book.

    Just as Hitler had his plan all sorted out years before he could do anything about it, so did Putin. Unlike Hitler though, Putin didn’t broadcast his intentions years before he was able to act upon them.

    Check out the arguments advanced by Hitler in regards to his demand to take control of the Sudetenland. They are very similar to those Putin used in invading Crimea and later on Ukraine.

    History may not repeat but it sure rhymes.

  31. Check out the arguments advanced by Hitler in regards to his demand to take control of the Sudetenland. They are very similar to those Putin used in invading Crimea and later on Ukraine.

    Ironically, China could look at a degraded Russian army and use the same excuse to try to regain Manchuria, territory they still covet, to protect the native Chinese living there.

  32. China could look at a degraded Russian army and use the same excuse to try to regain Manchuria, territory they still covet, to protect the native Chinese living there.

    The central government in China has held Manchuria since 1949.

  33. @Don-that has been my thought all along too. Hard to imagine Biden, even in his hey day plagiarizing Neil Kinnock, would be “the big one, he never had veritas.

  34. Art Deco,

    Not all of it. In the mid 19th Century Russia imposed the Amur Annexation on China which took the NE chunk of Manchuria (Outer Manchuria) from the Qing Dynasty of China. Curiously enough one of the impetuses to the Russian drive to expand east in Asia which led to that annexation was the Crimean War. Eventually the Russians used their leverage in the Second Opium Wars to finalize their control over that portion of Manchuria (an area which currently includes Vladivostok).

    Don’t think the Chinese have forgotten. They consider the treaties which annexed Outer Manchuria as being unequal treaties forced on them, and that those treaties are part of the Century of Humiliation that weighs heavily on their thinking.

    That said, I was being a bit facetious in my comment. I don’t really think there is much of a chance they would actually try to invade and reclaim Outer Manchuria.

  35. The point is the larger powers are contesting over a smaller nation. The NATO powers didn’t do the ground work to deter the Russian power while expanding it’s influence. The Russians objected and started the invasion. The NATO powers responded with Media and cancellation. The Russian military hasn’t been deterred and the mess is going to hurt more and more people the longer this mess continues.

    Ukraine wants NATO to go to war with Russia to save itself. I understand that desire, but the NATO hasn’t organized itself or prepared for a conflict. NATO is needs oil and gas from Russia.

    The problem NATO and Ukraine has is the US pullout in Afghanistan. The way the US left Afghanistan sent a signal that the US is unwilling or is unable to manage a military campaign. And the rest of the US allies are left in a weaker position because the leadership demonstrated itself to be unserious last year.

  36. Well, that’s a stupid way of summarizing it. The Ukraine hasn’t been a client state of the United States or anyone else, it has every right and reason to fight for its own interests, and the people who elected to wage war are the Russians.

    There are quite a few people, including me, who believe that Ukraine has had many of the features of a client state of the US, or at least the CIA, for years. Aside from bioweapons labs, there is the Biden brag that he got Ukraine to cancel an investigation of his son in hours.

    I have no objection to Ukraine defending itself and Russia did invade with weak excuses. Still, they behaved much like a client state.

  37. There is a big difference between a biological research lab and a biological weapons lab. Facts vs propaganda.

  38. We aren’t at war with Xi land and it is not known what the Wuhan Institute of Virology was and is actually doing; research only or research that was applied to weapons. Good luck finding out what has been going on in the Ukrainian bio facilities while they are at war with Russia.

  39. Still, they behaved much like a client state.

    That Biden was able to buffalo them into firing that prosecutor shows they are penetrable. I’m afraid our own government is penetrable.

    They’re not in a military alliance. World Development Indicators does not report any overseas development assistance over the last 25 years. Their trading partners are numerous, with no country receiving more than 14% of their exports and none accounting for more than 15% of their imports (the U.S. accounts for 2% and 5.5% respectively). They do buy military equipment from abroad, the ratio of arms purchases to gross domestic product nominal did not exceed 0.003 in the last decade.

  40. The point is the larger powers are contesting over a smaller nation.

    No, the problem is that a larger power wants to conquer and liquidate a smaller country. NATO’s role in this is to make that more difficult for fear of the implications of a successful conquest.

  41. Don’t think the Chinese have forgotten. They consider the treaties which annexed Outer Manchuria as being unequal treaties forced on them, and that those treaties are part of the Century of Humiliation that weighs heavily on their thinking.

    About 92.5% of the population of Primorsky Krai is Great Russian. About 0.2% are Chinese and 1.0% are Korean. The aboriginal population is nearly extinct. If it weighs ‘heavily on their thinking’ that this piece of land is not theirs, it’s another indicator that China is Asshole.

  42. neo,

    Subsequent events: in 5-10 years, you (and the rest of us) awaken one day to discover that you’ve been canceled and have no access to any of your financial resources. Nor do you have legal recourse. And that anyone to whom you go to for help is subsequently canceled as well.

    Belatedly realizing that Putin’s defeat and ouster was an important step in the Left’s advancement to global governance.

    That’s not an assertion that Putin’s a good guy or justification for his invasion of the Ukraine.

    Just an assertion that the West’s current ideological leadership has far worse plans for us and, that Putin’s nationalism is currently an intransigent obstacle to the Left’s agenda of achieving global governance.

  43. “No, the problem is that a larger power wants to conquer and liquidate a smaller country. NATO’s role in this is to make that more difficult for fear of the implications of a successful conquest.”

    NATO’s role is to protect NATO countries, not act as a military branch of U.S. or western European foreign policy.

    And I don’t think I can sum up the enormous problem with the discussion around Ukraine better than to point out that people who had no idea there were “biological research labs” in Ukraine until a few weeks ago are now totally certain they are “biological research labs” and not “biological weapons labs” because…wait for it…THE GOVERNMENT TELLS THEM SO.

    This is the generation who grew up reading about Vietnam and lived through Afghanistan.

    Mike

  44. Art Deco,

    You’re missing the point. It matters what the Chinese think about the area and what their long-term plans/desires may be. From The Unlikely Prospect of Long-Term Sino-Russian Cooperation: Points of Divergence in the Emerging Security Environment.

    Outer Manchuria consists of territory in Northeast Asia that was formerly controlled by the Qing Dynasty and which now belongs to the Russian Federation. After losing the Opium Wars, the Qing Dynasty was forced to sign a series of treaties that gave away land to European powers. Russia acquired Outer Manchuria from China via the Treaty of Aigun in 1858 and the Treaty of Beijing in 1860. As a result, China lost territory and access to the Sea of Japan. Strategically significant centers such as the city of Vladivostok, the contemporary home port of the Russian Pacific Fleet and the largest Russian port on the Pacific Ocean are located within the territory referred to as Outer Manchuria, making this contested territory of vital importance to Russia. In China, these treaties are known today as the “Unequal Treaties,” which were drawn up in a time of China’s weakness when it was forced to make concessions to foreign powers. This term has come to be associated with the concept of China’s Century of Humiliation.

    Russia has a history of conflict with East Asians. From the Mongol invasions in the 13th century which destroyed numerous cities that include Moscow and Kiev, to 20th century defeat in the Russo-Japanese War; Russia’s relations with its Asian neighbors are complicated. Sino-Russian relations in the 20th century were marked by the diplomatic conflict known as the “Sino-Soviet Split” which culminated in the Sino-Soviet border conflict in 1969. Although military clashes ceased that year, the underlying territorial issues were not resolved until the 1991 Sino-Soviet Border Agreement. Article 6 of the 2001 Sino-Russian Treaty of Friendship states that the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation have no remaining territorial claims.

    Despite this treaty of friendship and cooperation, there are indications of potential divergence between China and Russia. When President Xi Jinping took office, he declared his “Chinese Dream” to be “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.” To achieve this goal, Dr. Graham Allison of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government believes China intends to restore the predominance it enjoyed in Asia before the West intruded by reestablishing control over the territories that the Communist Party considers to be “Greater China” and by recovering China’s historic sphere of influence along its borders and in its adjacent seas. Given Russia’s historical territorial acquisition of Outer Manchuria in the 19th century, it is understandable why Moscow remains concerned about China’s long-term strategic designs in the Russian Far East.

    Again, I don’t think it is actually likely that they’ll do anything about that today, but there are a lot of ethnic Chinese in Siberia. However, I will get nervous if they start issuing those people Chinese passports, which would mirror the trick Russia used to DeFacto claim, and then to justify, their pushing in Crimea and the Donbas to ‘protect’ their citizens.

  45. Bunge:

    A bit slow on the uptake again it seems, nobody except the Ukrainians know what was going on in those biological research facilities. That nobody includes me, and you, and Mike K.

    You understand the concepts fog of war, and propaganda? You understand that calling something a biological weapons lab is not a neutral assertion, Bunge?

  46. It matters what the Chinese think about the area and what their long-term plans/desires may be.

    Gee, thanks for the instruction. I don’t know what I’d do without your wisdom.

  47. NATO’s role is to protect NATO countries, not act as a military branch of U.S. or western European foreign policy.

    Those aren’t distinct functions. That aside, engineering a re-assessment of plans to conquer the Baltic states is protecting NATO countries.

  48. Bunge, you are indeed slow today. Which generation are you deriding, young man? I was in High School when the Vietnam War draft ended, lived througt it as a the son of an Army NCO in an area heavily populated with Army and Marine families. Do you know what the Commisary, or PX, or living in base housing means? I’m guessing you have no idea.

  49. Belatedly realizing that Putin’s defeat and ouster was an important step in the Left’s advancement to global governance.

    Geoffrey thinks V. Putin is preventing your bank from shutting your account unilaterially. Someone let Mrs. Michael Flynn know.

  50. Geoffrey Britain:

    No, those things would not prove me right or you right, or me wrong or you wrong. Your thought process there is opaque to me, and I haven’t got the time to try to clarify except to say that we’ve been disagreeing on Putin’s intent and goals.

  51. To borrow a phrase from the Vietnam conflict and the movie Platoon, America has “zips in the wire” (enemies inside our perimeter). The zips in this case are Antifa, BLM, and the illegitimate Biden regime. What has made all of the above intolerable is the passivity and/or corruption of our justice system.

    The Russia/Ukraine conflict is of interest only if there is a remote chance it could somehow relieve us of the above malignancies (radiation therapy?). Otherwise it’s not terribly relevant.

  52. It seems obvious…so obvious that saying it is kind of offensive or something…that the facts on the ground, Ukraine or Siberia, are only relevant as the biggest of big shots see them.
    Anybody else’s view is…irrelevant.
    What is actual, factual, or seems relevant to us is only going to affect the situation if the biggest of big shots see it the same way.
    As a number of people have pointed out–my most recent brush with the genre is Sowell, “Intellectuals and War”–the mid to late Thirties were characterized by, among other things, oceans of earnest explanations of why Hitler wasn’t, couldn’t, wouldn’t, wouldn’t make sense to, would be counterproductive to what he wants all the things he did. Very smart people were making very intelligent arguments.
    Seeing as the US lost 400k dead, maybe having that many more guys in uniform in 1939, along with maybe a tenth of the various resources–ships, planes, trucks, artillery, we lost eventually–coming out of New Deal-funded factories would have been a better argument.

  53. Art Deco,

    Apparently Putin doesn’t agree with your numbers.

    Ethnic Chinese in Russia officially numbered 39,483 according to the 2002 census.[6] However, this figure is contested, with the Overseas Community Affairs Council of Taiwan claiming 998,000 in 2004 and 2005, and Russian demographers generally accepting estimates in the 200,000–400,000 range as of 2004.[2]Larin 2008 Temporary migration and shuttle trade conducted by Chinese merchants are most prevalent in Russia’s Far Eastern Federal District, but most go back and forth across the border without settling down in Russia; the Chinese community in Moscow has a higher proportion of long-term residents. Their number in Russia has been shrinking since 2013

    ———————

    During the 1960s, when the Sino-Soviet split reached its peak and Beijing-Moscow negotiations about regularisation of the border rolled on fruitlessly, Chinese civilians made frequent incursions into territory and especially waters controlled by the USSR. However, both sides’ military forces refrained from the use of lethal force in asserting their border rights until a March 1969 incident in which both sides claim the other fired first. The fighting escalated into a Soviet attempt to drive the Chinese off Zhenbao Island, a then-disputed island under de facto Chinese control.[39] On the Chinese side, 51 People’s Liberation Army soldiers lost their lives; however, they retained control over the island. The Soviet government feared that the fighting marked a prelude to a large-scale Chinese incursion into the Russian Far East.[40]

    Additionally, the expanding Chinese presence in the area began to lead to yellow peril-style fears of Chinese irredentism by the Russians.[11] Russian newspapers began to publish speculation that between two and five million Chinese migrants actually resided in the Russian Far East, and predicted that half of the population of Russia would be Chinese by 2050.[33][41] Russians typically believe that Chinese come to Russia with the aim of permanent settlement, and even president Vladimir Putin was quoted as saying “If we do not take practical steps to advance the Far East soon, after a few decades, the Russian population will be speaking Chinese, Japanese, and Korean.”[42]

    Some Russians perceive hostile intent in the Chinese practise of using different names for local cities, such as H?ish?nw?i for Vladivostok, and a widespread folk belief states that the Chinese migrants remember the exact locations of their ancestors’ ginseng patches, and seek to reclaim them.[11][43] The identitarian concern against the Chinese influx is described as less prevalent in the east, where most of the Chinese shuttle trade is actually occurring, than in European Russia..

    source

    In relationship to the Ukraine War, the point of this is that Russia has constraints as it approaches China for aid against the sanctions and to bolster its war effort. Russia has to walk a tightrope between getting that aid and turning itself into a Chinese vassal state. Chinese dreams of a ‘Greater China’ conflict with Russian aims for a “Greater Russia’. Both Putin and the Chinese understand that and will both try to take advantage of the other, but there are lines neither will want to cross.

    Bear in mind it is not just the West vs Russia in this conflict, also on the backburner is the distrustful Sino-Russian relationship. That will influence how Russia tries to manage things.

  54. “Bunge, you are indeed slow today. Which generation are you deriding, young man?”

    Uh, that would be you. For example, other people did know about the “biological research labs” in Ukraine. Just ask the New York Times:

    “There are biological laboratories inside Ukraine, and since 2005, the United States has provided backing to a number of institutions to prevent the production of biological weapons.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/11/us/politics/us-bioweapons-ukraine-misinformation.html

    So, lots of folks knew these labs existed. They just didn’t tell you about them. And now the government that lied to you about Vietnam and lied to you about Afghanistan, including lying to you about the drone-strike murder of completely innocent civilians, and lied about the possibility COVID-19 came from a lab in Chine and didn’t tell you about these Ukrainian labs is telling you “Of course, these aren’t biological weapons labs.”

    And you, apparently, take their word for it.

    Slow learner, aren’t you?

    Mike

  55. Apparently Putin doesn’t agree with your numbers.

    I quoted the 2010 census figure. Thanks for the text wall from Wikipedia.

    Chinese dreams of a ‘Greater China’

    Your last intervention contended that China’s in a snit over a treaty they signed in 1860 transferring a piece of territory that was at that time nearly empty of people. We’re in interesting times if that counts as an issue to the current Chinese government.

  56. So, lots of folks knew these labs existed. They just didn’t tell you about them.

    Why would they have had occasion to tell ‘me’ about them?

  57. Art Deco,

    I’ll simplify the wall of text for you.

    When President Xi Jinping took office, he declared his “Chinese Dream” to be “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.” To achieve this goal, Dr. Graham Allison of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government believes China intends to restore the predominance it enjoyed in Asia before the West intruded by reestablishing control over the territories that the Communist Party considers to be “Greater China” and by recovering China’s historic sphere of influence along its borders and in its adjacent seas.

    Vladimir Putin was quoted as saying “If we do not take practical steps to advance the Far East soon, after a few decades, the Russian population will be speaking Chinese, Japanese, and Korean.”

    As an aside, one reason to support Ukraine’s territorial integrity is we really don’t want countries to be grabbing each other’s land. Nothing good comes from that.

  58. Putin also says that the Ukraine is not a real country and that it has been captured by Nazis. What gave you the idea that Russia falsifies its census figures?

  59. Uh… you’re the one citing Russian census figures, not me. My ‘wall of text’, which apparently overwhelmed you, was pointing out that most people think those figures are far too low.

    All I’m saying is that Putin, in considering his moves in Ukraine (and I think his Russian invasion is in trouble and he needs to climb down to extract Russia from it), has to take into effect what China, a country he doesn’t trust for historical reasons, will do to further their interests. It’s just part of the equation and it should not be overlooked.

  60. was pointing out that most people think those figures are far too low.

    No, it cites a Taiwanese agency and a nebulous ‘Russian’ source. The wiki footnote is to a Russian language site that for all you know could be a discography of Burt Bacharach.

  61. Bunge do you understand the difference between the words research and weapons?

    It seems that you don’t. Sad to be you, try a dictionary, young man.

    Skepticism, young man, especially in a wartime situation between Ukraine and Russia. You certainly have trouble with reading today.

    z

  62. ambisinistral:

    Putin may have a better grasp of Russian demographics. Then again, he may not. Dictators often have underlings who are afraid to tell them the truth, and only tell them what they want to hear.

    Or Putin may know the truth, but might be lying for public consumption.

  63. om:

    Re your comment at 6:54 PM – please say what you want to say without so much gratuitous bashing.

  64. Zara:

    Thanks for the link and the Google translation hint, it worked. This case was a valid reason to use Chrome, instead of Duck Duck Go, my default.

    Bunge, you might consider reading Zara’s link.

    Do we know which is true?Not yet.

    Do you trust anything from Vlad? Not my problem.

  65. I trust that what Vlad says will be calculated to be self-serving.
    I don’t know if he believes it.
    I don’t know if he knows better but hopes it will sell–one category to the Russian people, another to the Russian power structure, another to the West–maybe two categories there.
    I don’t know if there will be a sale or no sale.
    I don’t know if what he says is for the history books, post-whatever this is justification.
    And nobody knows what he’s going to do because, among other things, nobody knows what he thinks of sunk costs.
    For example, what does he think the army will do if, after having been sent into the meat grinder under, in some cases, false pretenses and then he backs off. A sigh of relief, of course, but then an appraisal that it wasn’t that important to him anyway but he still got thousands killed for nothing. He didn’t bother to prep the battle space in all the ways that will appear Monday morning, all the thousands of assessments based on military science or common sense that weren’t done. Maybe they were attempted but didn’t work. But he went ahead anyway. And the Russian troops didn’t find any Nazis, anyway.
    I have no idea what he’s going to conclude but the considerations in the preceding paragraph must occur to a canny KGB guy trained manipulate people.
    So he’ll either back off, on the presumption he can survive that. Or he’ll double down, on the presumption he can survive that.
    Man, I’m glad I went through that exercise.

  66. I also quoted Vladimir Putin who may have a better grasp of Russian demographics that you do.

    Since I’m not in charge of Russia’s census bureau, your remark is irrelevant.

  67. Neo,

    I would say it matters quite a bit what Putin thinks. I think that the Russians are in trouble in Ukraine, and he needs to find some sort of an exit strategy before it gets worse. The reason I brought up Sino-Russian relations is China is backing him now, but the two countries generally have fairly poor relations with each other. So, as he tries to mitigate the Ukrainian situation he needs to be looking East as well as West in his calculations. China will stab him in the back if it is their interests.

    Regardless, this has drifted father off course than I expected. I’ll end with a video by two young guys who lived in China. At the start of the Ukranian War they did a video of their earlier travels along the Chinese/Russian border. They talk about the border and give a brief history of relations between the two countries. It is an interesting perspective.

    What We Saw on the Russia/China Border – Why We Understand the Ukraine Invasion. (the last clause is a bit of hyperbole on their part)

  68. ambisinistral,

    It seems to me Taiwan and the South China Sea are more China’s immediate focus.

    China isn’t going to back stab Russia as long as it’s focus is there. Unless something remarkable happens, say if Russia collapses and it is easy pickings with no reason to continue backing Putin.

  69. Don,

    I agree that they’re not likely to do anything overt to their north. I’m just saying that Putin has to factor that possibility into his calculations, and if Putin starts looking wobbly they’ll press their advantage as hard as they think they can get away with.

  70. ambi. “He has to…..” If you say so. Problem is, what weight does he give it? If you really, really need something to be true, really really, you might end up believing it.

    Hitler–not sure how this happened–was talking to Mannerheim and saying things like, “If someone had told me the Bolsheviks could manufacture three thousand tanks a month, I should have said they were mad.”
    ed. note. Not sure the figure was 3k, but incomprehensibly above what Hitler thought–needed to think.

    Maybe Putin would think a veiled warning about blowing the Three Gorges Dam would suffice. But Xi, needing to believe, would think the defenses plus the extra strengthening built in by the dam-building division of Evergrande made him safe.

    Never forget the power of NEED to believe. And the worse the situation, the more power it has.

  71. @ Aubrey > “Never forget the power of NEED to believe. And the worse the situation, the more power it has.”

    Gonna put that on a t-shirt, or something.

  72. @ Geoffrey > “the West’s current ideological leadership has far worse plans for us and, that Putin’s nationalism is currently an intransigent obstacle to the Left’s agenda of achieving global governance.”

    Leaving aside ALL of the rest of the discussion, I think these points need some serious attention.
    In that order.

    Victor Davis Hanson, not quite so optimistic as in the post Neo featured earlier.
    https://amgreatness.com/2022/01/30/joe-biden-and-the-uses-of-nihilism/#comment-5715773473

    Biden’s assigned task in 2020 was to put a familiar “centrist” veneer on a radical agenda. Thereby, the hard Left, with the help of COVID-19 and Silicon Valley, could push that agenda past an unsuspecting public. Upon election, Biden would not revert to old Joe from Scranton deploring the leftist tool that he had become.

    The movers of the agenda are the hard Left of the Democratic Party, those who circle around Bernie Sanders, the Obamas, Elizabeth Warren, and “the squad.” The shock troops are Black Lives Matter, Antifa, the millions on the campus, and the internet mob. The more confusion, chaos, and anarchy that follows, the more of their agenda they hope to push through, if not by legislative vote, then by executive edict, court decision, or simply ignoring the law.

    The third catalyst of the woke chaos are the hyper-rich—the franchise owners of the Left. These are the huge donors who nourish the think tanks, the media, the PACs, and the legal teams—the Zuckerbergs, the Soroses, the Bezoses and the rest of the Silicon Valley plutocracy.

    Equally important are the hypocritical professional classes—the tech upper-echelon, the media cohorts, the corporate lawyers and CEOs, the various university professoriate and administrations, the celebrities, the professional athletes, and the bicoastal movers and shakers. On the one hand, they are assuming that Americans won’t actually vote for their neosocialist utopias, which can be enacted only by changing the rules or demography or both. And on the other hand, they are hedging that their money, influence, and power will insulate them and their own from the stampede at the border, the growing criminality in the cities, price hikes that batter the middle classes, and the tribalism and racialism they helped to greenlight.

    In normal times, such hard-left agendas have no resonance. But during a plague, lockdown, riots and arson, during murder and mayhem, chaos and anarchy?

    The unimaginable can become the possible.

    https://notthebee.com/article/last-night-biden-said-theres-going-to-be-a-new-world-order-out-there-and-weve-got-to-lead-it-but-the-fact-checkers-say-youre-a-conspiracy-nut-if-that-raises-any-red-flags

    Yes, he really said this at the Business Roundtable’s CEO quarterly meeting while discussing the U.S. response to Russian aggression in Ukraine:

    The elites are constantly using this term, and consistently using it to refer to globalized institutions like the U.N., WEF, and World Bank. Then these institutions say they want to drastically rule your lives by controlling what you buy, where you work, what you eat (yum, crickets!), where you will travel, what laws you have to follow, what penalties you will incur, and how you will be tried and sentenced.

    They come up with policies for “climate,” “public health,” “governance,” and “social credit,” then tell you that you’re absolutely bonkers if you think they are trying to do away with national charters such as the Constitution in order to create an entirely new global system where they are the new kings, earls, dukes, and barons that are supported by billions of compliant serfs.

    And if you publicly point out that they are undermining the sovereignty of states – especially those created by and for The People – and using things like Russia and the ‘Rona as excuses for their misdeeds, they call you a conspiracy theorist and Twitter runs a fact check on you!

    I never thought I’d post an Alex Jones video unironically, but since all the conspiracies are coming true, I thought you might enjoy this clip of his from 2003 – nearly 20 years ago – talking about the New World Order.

    Make sure to get out your tin hats so Google can’t read your thoughtcrimes!!

    Connecting dots on my coloring pages.
    https://www.thenewneo.com/2022/03/23/unknown-factor-the-russian-public-and-the-russian-military/#comment-2614782

  73. @MBunge

    So…Putin wants Russia to be treated like it is a major power. Like we treat China.

    Have we been treating Russia like a major power whose interests and sphere of influence should be acknowledged? Or have we more or less been doing whatever we want and expecting Russia to lump it?

    Except treating a major power- especially a HOSTILE major power- does not translate into giving it anything it wants or “respecting” its interests or sphere of influence.

    The US Navy has spent the best part of a century pruning the CCP’s pretensions to dominance of the South China Sea and its “Cow Tongue Map” Maritime Claims, to say nothing of its support for Taiwanese autonomy if not defacto independence. And of course let us not pretend the PRC and Putin’s Russia have been very respectful to our own “sphere” or “interests.”

    Not that our behavior excuses Putin’s invasion but if the question is “How did we get to this point?’ I don’t think the answer is “Everything was fine and then this CRAZY guy did this CRAZY thing for NO REASON whatsoever.”

    Which is a fair point, and even I won’t claim that Putin is utterly crazy or that he acted for no reason.

    He is, however, a brutal, tyrannical hypocrite who tends to be rather bad at playing nice (even with his own vassals or clients like Lukashenko in Minsk and Yanukovych during the time he ruled in Ukraine) and reacts to nation-states typically getting sick of him or otherwise trying to balance his power by getting out guns.

    That doesn’t make the West’s current “leadership” good, but it does underline that the idea that all would be A-Ok if only we “treated Russia as a Great Power” doesn’t really work.

    NATO’s role is to protect NATO countries, not act as a military branch of U.S. or western European foreign policy.

    Agreed, but protecting NATO countries is a key component of US and Western European foreign policy. Moreover, nations that seek entry into NATO because of that prospect (as well as the clearly-evident fact that nations in NATO tend to be much less subject to nasty sectarian civil war, Russian invasion, or combos of the above than those outside of NATO) is an important component of US and Western European intelligence.

    And I don’t think I can sum up the enormous problem with the discussion around Ukraine better than to point out that people who had no idea there were “biological research labs” in Ukraine until a few weeks ago are now totally certain they are “biological research labs” and not “biological weapons labs” because…wait for it…THE GOVERNMENT TELLS THEM SO.

    Very true. For my own part I knew about the Ukrainian Biolabs a fair ways ago and took a sizable chunk analyzing them in my first comment here.

    https://www.thenewneo.com/2022/03/09/roundup-38/#comments

    I concluded that they probably were not “Bioweapons Labs” (though still incredibly dangerous), and that the US Government/Medical Establishment was PROBABLY doing something shady and even corrupt with them, albeit probably on a minor level. Moreover, I knew they had been around for a long time (at least since 2006, thanks to a document preserved from a “The Sky Is Falling” site that seemed to have uncritically aped Kremlin propaganda but which still hosted a genuine document), and that Putin almost certainly had known about them since at least 2010 but had not made a point of them.
    And when I learned that the likes of Nuland were insistent at trying to deny deny deny, that would just backfire.

    Of course I could be wrong (I was about whether or not Putin would openly invade), but I didn’t listen to the MSM.

    This is the generation who grew up reading about Vietnam and lived through Afghanistan.

    As someone who read about Vietnam (but whose area of expertise is the World Wars, meaning I study a lot more about the First Indochina War and its bleedover from WWII than most Americans) and lived through the Afghanistan era, I am still enraged at the degree to which the hard-core anti-American left have hijacked the narratives of both and Iraq.

    Not to say that the US government cannot be dishonest or unethical (indeed, I concluded that it almost certainly was being so), but it probably means that the idea of a “Biological Cuban Missile Crisis” was hot air form the Kremlin looking for an excuse.

  74. AesopFan
    Thanks. I’m reminded of the early part of Men in Black…..”Why did you shoot Tiffany?”
    …. Those guys were working out or had a cold or something. But a White girl in ghetto this time of night with books on nuclear physics? Something was not right….

    We have many threats and yes Putin is a genuine bad dude, worse than Cornpop, even. But my intuitive guess is the new world order, Devo’s group, reset society for its own good people, need to be at the top of the list. Lots of bad actors, but most disconcerting are those, like the Blackrock CEO who wants to change our behavior. One of the elites just donated $275 million to Planned parenthood.

    The best protection is embracing truth and beauty, and the source of truth and beauty. It’s hard to cheat an honest man.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>