I really enjoy your analysis Mark - and your drawing together facts and opinion from expert sources. It’s led me to follow a number of other commentators on various issues and deepened my understanding of the situation in Ukraine, among other things. Thank you for your insights!
Wow...starting from the specific context of Nord Stream, this piece goes on to be the most-accessible, single-source exposition I've seen in a long time of exactly where we are now and how we got here. Fantastic! Have put it on blast (as the kids say) to all of my thinking acquaintances and others who aren't too far gone on Russia.
Luongo's point on Putin's approach to Minsk is spot on. The hubristic assumption at Foggy Bottom on Putin's teetering vulnerability to opposition from Russia's "thinking elite" is WAY off the mark at this point. Now-prominent lawyers and business people whom I've known since studying and practicing in Moscow between '93 and '98 and who were strongly anti-Putin for making Russia a pariah-state impediment to their pro-Western business and cultural interests have all changed their tune once Maidan and post-Minsk made it all clear. Why suck up to demonstrably "non-agreement capable" forces who are coming for your and your culture's very existence? The "very smart people" that State is relying on really seem to have Putin's back for reasons of State's own creation.
I tend to think that Putin had little faith in the Minsk accords and appreciated the time to build up resources, as discussed in the extracts above. FWIW Francois Hollande has backed up Angela Merkel's statement about the primary aim of buying time for 404:
Lots of good discussion points in your summary, Mark. I think Tom's piece is a mixed bag, with some great insights but also some overcomplications. He's entirely correct about how Putin and the Russians see this struggle and how the West underestimated him and them. He's also correct about the 5-Eyes sabotage of Nordstream. Where I agree with him less is over his idea that Davos dominates the neocons. Firstly, this makes it seem like they are two separate groups. Is that really so? I believe there is a lot of crossover with some of the actors having feet in both camps. As to who is dominating who, well, I think that the neocons like Nudelman have far more influence over events in Ukraine than people like Schwab. I also disagree that Merkel deliberately let NS2 go ahead knowing that, like Minsk, it would never see the light of day. German industry needs cheap fuel and I believe they went for the cheapest and best option. What is amazing is not just how the UK/US blew up the pipeline - a deliberate act of war - but how the Germans just shrugged their shoulders and let it pass.
Right. I'm not clear on the relationship between the Neocons and WEF Globalists either. That there is overlap seems beyond dispute--but I doubt that the Neocons are actually being "used" and directed. It seems to me to be more of a confluence of interests.
Another point that I disagree with Tom about is this statement from his article: "I would be more worried that Putin makes a big move in the coming weeks in Ukraine. That he again, “Goes First,” and pre-empts what the West has planned by attacking." On the contrary, I think that Putin has nothing to lose and should unleash the dogs of war. The West will do what it wants anyway. The longer this drags on, the greater the neocon psychosis will be - the kind of madness that turns their glance towards the nuclear button. They are that crazy.
I think that was simply badly stated. I think what he meant is something like: Those in the West like Armstrong who "worry" that Putin will overreact to these provocations and do something crazy should actually be more worried that Putin will, as usual, do something extremely rational, which means pre-empting Western schemes by taking the initiative and resetting the terms of engagement. In fact, with the failure of both the sanctions and military proxy wars, the various provocations show that the Neocons are simply improvising and trying to catch up with Putin. As in the period from 2015 - 2022 Putin is waiting to put all his ducks in a row before acting. He will not be "embarrassed" into acting precipitately, knowing that time is, increasingly, on his side, as the dynamics of the international order continue to line up with Russia, and Western cohesion continues to unravel.
That, Mark, is exactly what I meant. Putin again "goes first" and disrupts whatever plans the neocons think they have.
I get the pushback about there not being much air between Davos and the Neocons.... but let me clear things up for you.
The Neocons are NOT globalists like the Eurocrats are. They aren't transnationalists.
They are dispensationalists who believe in America First at any cost. Davos hates the US.
Both camps like this war but for different reasons. Map their incentives and their ideologies and you can easily see where I've arrived at one (neocons) being the useful idiots of the other (davos).
"Both camps like this war but for different reasons." Absolutely, and I can see how that can give the impression that they are equal partners in this fiendish endeavour.
I get that difference, but I do also wonder there is a distinction to be made regarding the American First-ism of the Neocons. It's certainly not a type of MAGA, nor is it a true American Identity nationalism. America is where they happen to be and where they can leverage America's great national resources to wield power. Around the world.. It seems to me that this is not America First-ism in the traditional sense. They seem to neither understand nor even really like Americans in the usual sense of the term--the lengths to which they go in gaslighting the American public is a useful indication of the mentality. They know that Americans don't really share their preoccupations. I mean--Galicia? Refighting historic grievances in Eastern Europe? It's a dedication to wielding power at the core of Neocon thinking.
I would say that Davos' hatred for Russia and dependence on US military muscle is the tie that binds. Davos helps to deliver a unified European response in cooperation with the Anglo-American military drive. This is useful to the Neocons.
Yes Mark. Agreed on all counts. They both want Russia taken down for imperial reasons, but the core of their ideologies is fundamentally different. It's what makes them so easy to see as allies but also hard to see as adversaries... better to think of them in terms of whose in control of the US ship of state.
You are probably right, Mark. And it takes nothing away from Tom's great points. Another point is that the neocons are insane if they think that taking out Putin will turn things their way. The Duran guys have done some great stuff on Putin's likely successor, Medvedev. This guy is not only as tough as Putin but he is far more hawkish.
Mark, thanks for the links. The article written by this expert from the Hudson Institute is really fascinating and quite informative. Back in the 1990s, Russia was perilously close to the portrayed crumbling state. The author could only change the dates in his copy-paste, to spare mental efforts. Although in 2022, his analysis and forecast look too biased due to wishful thinking. The most interesting question for me is why they published such strategic recommendations in the open (and why now?).
I don't think the article written by the Hudson Institute is merely wishful thinking. It seems to be delusional with respect to how much control the US and the west have in the world. Misplaced arrogance.
Vlad (no relation?), I think it's because they believe their own propaganda. That Russia is a nation of dumb mujiks who had the gall to inherit a major slice of the world's natural resources. Oh, and that they are failing and flailing in Ukraine.
After what has come out about Syria, Libya, Egypt and the Islamist’s involvement with US backing, I would not be surprised if the Russian view is correct.
I think it was Tom Luongo or maybe Gonzalo Lira who were positing the Neocon involvement in Chechnya. There was also a video (cannot remember where) that shows on a map all the mini colour revolutuions or insurgencies thrown at Putin in the 2000s and 2010s - it may have been a Reece Reports vid. Seeing them mapped out in geographical context to Russia adds credence to the theory that neocons have been prodding the bear for decades.
Neocons have a major revenge motive and a desire to use their power in the USA to achieve global power and domination while massively increasing their wealth at the expense of ordinary Americans. Any pretense to democracy is just that, pretense. These neocons are a vicious lot of humans who do not share the principals upon which this nation was built, they worship money and power.
Everyone in the world seems to understand the folly and utterly disastrous nature of the Ukraine gambit except those who felt-I use the term “felt” because I don’t believe that they ever “thought” through or about anything related to this whole enterprise-that it was a good idea and a sound course of action. Now we are in a situation that offers no good exit strategy and pushes things to an even more perilous level, with the potential for a World War.
In the midst of all of this geopolitical turmoil, I find idea that Joe Biden as President is somehow involved in the process as laughable. The guy can’t even read a teleprompter with any guarantee of accuracy, so he certainly is totally incapable of dealing with the intricate details and nuances of international relations. Without knowing who is truly “in charge” of the country, I’m at a loss to determine how exactly we extricate ourselves from this
nightmare.
Putin has got to be laughing his ass off and telling himself, “Are these people really this stupid?”. Unfortunately, it appears that they really are…….
The blessed irony of the propaganda - Putin has parkinsons, Putin has meglamania brought on by chemotherapy, Putin has cancer and intends to bring the world with him when he goes (I've seen all these headlines) when held up against visuals of Joe Biden shaking hands with invisible people.
The Hudson Institute article is troubling. I wonder if other international groups have similar discussions regarding the United States and make plans for how they would have to account for our nuclear stockpile once they dismantle our government. Whether our leaders choose to accept it or not, we are not a shining city on a hill when it comes to the international community. I think we are more like the bully on the block and everyone else is tired of our aggressions.
I work indirectly with these kinds of people. They live in a total bubble and still believe that the "international community" is the UK and US. Their delusions are deadly - to them and maybe us.
Is it safe to assume when you and those you referenced in these articles quote Biden we’re not meant to believe that Joe Biden actually did or said or met with the person in the quote?
In actuality “Biden” is just a place holder for whomever is pulling the strings, writing the dialog, holding the meetings, etc. we’re all being played for fools.
Someday maybe the archives will be opened and those then living will know who the puppeteers were. But then it will be too late and no one will care.
"The interesting question is why are Germans not responding to Biden*'s aggression against them? They are suffering cold and de-industrialization, and they know who is responsible." I know. It's beyond belief.
I really enjoy your analysis Mark - and your drawing together facts and opinion from expert sources. It’s led me to follow a number of other commentators on various issues and deepened my understanding of the situation in Ukraine, among other things. Thank you for your insights!
You're welcome!
Wow...starting from the specific context of Nord Stream, this piece goes on to be the most-accessible, single-source exposition I've seen in a long time of exactly where we are now and how we got here. Fantastic! Have put it on blast (as the kids say) to all of my thinking acquaintances and others who aren't too far gone on Russia.
Luongo's point on Putin's approach to Minsk is spot on. The hubristic assumption at Foggy Bottom on Putin's teetering vulnerability to opposition from Russia's "thinking elite" is WAY off the mark at this point. Now-prominent lawyers and business people whom I've known since studying and practicing in Moscow between '93 and '98 and who were strongly anti-Putin for making Russia a pariah-state impediment to their pro-Western business and cultural interests have all changed their tune once Maidan and post-Minsk made it all clear. Why suck up to demonstrably "non-agreement capable" forces who are coming for your and your culture's very existence? The "very smart people" that State is relying on really seem to have Putin's back for reasons of State's own creation.
I tend to think that Putin had little faith in the Minsk accords and appreciated the time to build up resources, as discussed in the extracts above. FWIW Francois Hollande has backed up Angela Merkel's statement about the primary aim of buying time for 404:
https://www.voltairenet.org/article218584.html
Let us pray that the last sentence of that article does not come true. I have a twenty year old son.
My son just finished 4 years of military service. Got out just in time!
Lots of good discussion points in your summary, Mark. I think Tom's piece is a mixed bag, with some great insights but also some overcomplications. He's entirely correct about how Putin and the Russians see this struggle and how the West underestimated him and them. He's also correct about the 5-Eyes sabotage of Nordstream. Where I agree with him less is over his idea that Davos dominates the neocons. Firstly, this makes it seem like they are two separate groups. Is that really so? I believe there is a lot of crossover with some of the actors having feet in both camps. As to who is dominating who, well, I think that the neocons like Nudelman have far more influence over events in Ukraine than people like Schwab. I also disagree that Merkel deliberately let NS2 go ahead knowing that, like Minsk, it would never see the light of day. German industry needs cheap fuel and I believe they went for the cheapest and best option. What is amazing is not just how the UK/US blew up the pipeline - a deliberate act of war - but how the Germans just shrugged their shoulders and let it pass.
Right. I'm not clear on the relationship between the Neocons and WEF Globalists either. That there is overlap seems beyond dispute--but I doubt that the Neocons are actually being "used" and directed. It seems to me to be more of a confluence of interests.
Two parts to this....global domination and....revenge.
Another point that I disagree with Tom about is this statement from his article: "I would be more worried that Putin makes a big move in the coming weeks in Ukraine. That he again, “Goes First,” and pre-empts what the West has planned by attacking." On the contrary, I think that Putin has nothing to lose and should unleash the dogs of war. The West will do what it wants anyway. The longer this drags on, the greater the neocon psychosis will be - the kind of madness that turns their glance towards the nuclear button. They are that crazy.
I think that was simply badly stated. I think what he meant is something like: Those in the West like Armstrong who "worry" that Putin will overreact to these provocations and do something crazy should actually be more worried that Putin will, as usual, do something extremely rational, which means pre-empting Western schemes by taking the initiative and resetting the terms of engagement. In fact, with the failure of both the sanctions and military proxy wars, the various provocations show that the Neocons are simply improvising and trying to catch up with Putin. As in the period from 2015 - 2022 Putin is waiting to put all his ducks in a row before acting. He will not be "embarrassed" into acting precipitately, knowing that time is, increasingly, on his side, as the dynamics of the international order continue to line up with Russia, and Western cohesion continues to unravel.
That, Mark, is exactly what I meant. Putin again "goes first" and disrupts whatever plans the neocons think they have.
I get the pushback about there not being much air between Davos and the Neocons.... but let me clear things up for you.
The Neocons are NOT globalists like the Eurocrats are. They aren't transnationalists.
They are dispensationalists who believe in America First at any cost. Davos hates the US.
Both camps like this war but for different reasons. Map their incentives and their ideologies and you can easily see where I've arrived at one (neocons) being the useful idiots of the other (davos).
"Both camps like this war but for different reasons." Absolutely, and I can see how that can give the impression that they are equal partners in this fiendish endeavour.
I get that difference, but I do also wonder there is a distinction to be made regarding the American First-ism of the Neocons. It's certainly not a type of MAGA, nor is it a true American Identity nationalism. America is where they happen to be and where they can leverage America's great national resources to wield power. Around the world.. It seems to me that this is not America First-ism in the traditional sense. They seem to neither understand nor even really like Americans in the usual sense of the term--the lengths to which they go in gaslighting the American public is a useful indication of the mentality. They know that Americans don't really share their preoccupations. I mean--Galicia? Refighting historic grievances in Eastern Europe? It's a dedication to wielding power at the core of Neocon thinking.
I would say that Davos' hatred for Russia and dependence on US military muscle is the tie that binds. Davos helps to deliver a unified European response in cooperation with the Anglo-American military drive. This is useful to the Neocons.
Yes Mark. Agreed on all counts. They both want Russia taken down for imperial reasons, but the core of their ideologies is fundamentally different. It's what makes them so easy to see as allies but also hard to see as adversaries... better to think of them in terms of whose in control of the US ship of state.
Agreed.
You are probably right, Mark. And it takes nothing away from Tom's great points. Another point is that the neocons are insane if they think that taking out Putin will turn things their way. The Duran guys have done some great stuff on Putin's likely successor, Medvedev. This guy is not only as tough as Putin but he is far more hawkish.
Mark, thanks for the links. The article written by this expert from the Hudson Institute is really fascinating and quite informative. Back in the 1990s, Russia was perilously close to the portrayed crumbling state. The author could only change the dates in his copy-paste, to spare mental efforts. Although in 2022, his analysis and forecast look too biased due to wishful thinking. The most interesting question for me is why they published such strategic recommendations in the open (and why now?).
I don't think the article written by the Hudson Institute is merely wishful thinking. It seems to be delusional with respect to how much control the US and the west have in the world. Misplaced arrogance.
Agreed. They really haven't been paying attention recently.
Vlad (no relation?), I think it's because they believe their own propaganda. That Russia is a nation of dumb mujiks who had the gall to inherit a major slice of the world's natural resources. Oh, and that they are failing and flailing in Ukraine.
Yes, it's me, but please don't tell anybody.
I believe that no one is free from propaganda effects. Those who produce it are especially vulnerable, even more so when they think otherwise.
And being a large country, we do have some quantity of dumb mujiks. The US doesn't hold monopoly on fools. It's OK until they attain higher positions.
I've seen that stated in just about so many words, especially be UK strategists.
No-one does smirking superiority like we Brits, Mark. You damned colonialists have a lot to learn from us, old chap! :)
I had not heard the Russian claim the US had any involvement in the Chechen War.
Zbigniew Brzezinski name comes up. Small world. As does McCains.
https://www.russiamatters.org/node/20317
After what has come out about Syria, Libya, Egypt and the Islamist’s involvement with US backing, I would not be surprised if the Russian view is correct.
I think it was Tom Luongo or maybe Gonzalo Lira who were positing the Neocon involvement in Chechnya. There was also a video (cannot remember where) that shows on a map all the mini colour revolutuions or insurgencies thrown at Putin in the 2000s and 2010s - it may have been a Reece Reports vid. Seeing them mapped out in geographical context to Russia adds credence to the theory that neocons have been prodding the bear for decades.
Neocons have a major revenge motive and a desire to use their power in the USA to achieve global power and domination while massively increasing their wealth at the expense of ordinary Americans. Any pretense to democracy is just that, pretense. These neocons are a vicious lot of humans who do not share the principals upon which this nation was built, they worship money and power.
Everyone in the world seems to understand the folly and utterly disastrous nature of the Ukraine gambit except those who felt-I use the term “felt” because I don’t believe that they ever “thought” through or about anything related to this whole enterprise-that it was a good idea and a sound course of action. Now we are in a situation that offers no good exit strategy and pushes things to an even more perilous level, with the potential for a World War.
In the midst of all of this geopolitical turmoil, I find idea that Joe Biden as President is somehow involved in the process as laughable. The guy can’t even read a teleprompter with any guarantee of accuracy, so he certainly is totally incapable of dealing with the intricate details and nuances of international relations. Without knowing who is truly “in charge” of the country, I’m at a loss to determine how exactly we extricate ourselves from this
nightmare.
Putin has got to be laughing his ass off and telling himself, “Are these people really this stupid?”. Unfortunately, it appears that they really are…….
The blessed irony of the propaganda - Putin has parkinsons, Putin has meglamania brought on by chemotherapy, Putin has cancer and intends to bring the world with him when he goes (I've seen all these headlines) when held up against visuals of Joe Biden shaking hands with invisible people.
And all the other Dem geriatrics. Oh, and not forgetting that George Kennan of modern times, Fetterman.
The Hudson Institute article is troubling. I wonder if other international groups have similar discussions regarding the United States and make plans for how they would have to account for our nuclear stockpile once they dismantle our government. Whether our leaders choose to accept it or not, we are not a shining city on a hill when it comes to the international community. I think we are more like the bully on the block and everyone else is tired of our aggressions.
The Hudson article is...breathtakingly...troubling.
And the author was previously at Heritage. And ex US Army. And has uk connections.
An over-educated mediocrity and quintessential globalist drone.
I work indirectly with these kinds of people. They live in a total bubble and still believe that the "international community" is the UK and US. Their delusions are deadly - to them and maybe us.
Is it safe to assume when you and those you referenced in these articles quote Biden we’re not meant to believe that Joe Biden actually did or said or met with the person in the quote?
In actuality “Biden” is just a place holder for whomever is pulling the strings, writing the dialog, holding the meetings, etc. we’re all being played for fools.
Someday maybe the archives will be opened and those then living will know who the puppeteers were. But then it will be too late and no one will care.
Just like JFK.
More than likely.
For the female heads of state, I think it was more like face to hair.
"The interesting question is why are Germans not responding to Biden*'s aggression against them? They are suffering cold and de-industrialization, and they know who is responsible." I know. It's beyond belief.
Well said Sir, well said.