What's The Escalation Logic?

I don’t really have an answer for this question. It came to my mind because I’ve been reading and thinking about Simplicius the Thinker’s latest substack, which deals with a somewhat technical subject—the complications of mobilizing an army. It’s not as simple as just giving an order:

Rumors of a New Russian Mobilization, and Other Interesting Things

My assumption has always been that the military strategy behind America’s war on Russia has always been to goad Russia into launching an all out, conventional, tank led offensive against the deeply prepared Ukrainian defensive lines. Those Ukrainian defenses have been under construction, with massive US assistance both in planning and financially, for 8 years. A head on assault of that sort would undoubtedly have turned into a complete catastrophe for Russia.

In other words, we expected the Russians to act stupidly. They didn’t oblige. In fact, something like the reverse has occurred. The Russians have launched very little in the way of actual offensives. Instead, they’ve constructed defensive lines of their own and have lured the Ukrainians into suicidal assaults. In terms of offensive action, the Russian strategy has been a cautious, obliterate-everything-in-our-path-before-we-advance, approach that minimizes their casualties.

My speculation is that all the provocations, crossing of redlines, on the American side—recent reports by Seymour Hersh state that the US (he names Victoria Nuland as authorizing these acts) was behind both Kerch bridge attacks as well as the attack on the Kakhovka dam—are intended to goad Russia into that full frontal offensive that they’ve so far refused to launch. The idea is to instigate a blood bath that would include the Russians, instead of just the Ukrainians. That’s the best I can offer, but there may be another dynamic in play, as well.

We’ve all read about the massive reserves that Russia has built up, both in the Donbass as well, significantly, in Belarus. These reserves have largely remained uncommitted to the actual combat—they just keep training in place. The result is that the actual Russian forces in combat operations are still probably outnumbered by the Ukrainians in many areas. They probably do not constitute the heavy numerical superiority that has always been considered essential for going up against and entrenched and even relatively well armed foe. This is what Simplicius says. Further, says Simplicius, a key urban combat component—Wagner—has now been sent off to Belarus, where Russia already has large numbers of well equipped and well trained troops. How are we to explain Russia’s force deployments, which place Russia in the position of not really being able to launch a major offensive?

The explanation up till now has been that Russia prefers the strategy of waging a war of attrition. However, in addition to that, perhaps it’s possible that Russia is loath to commit the necessary forces for the big offensive at this time because they are leery of some sudden move by NATO—in Western Ukraine, in the Baltics—that would pose a threat if sufficient forces weren’t readily available to respond. For example, a Polish “peacekeeping” force in Western Ukraine might not be a direct threat to Russia, but it might serve to provide a very direct link between Poland and Romania—diversifying the logistical flow, making interdiction by Russia a bit tougher, but also raising the possibility of introducing more NATO forces deeper into Ukraine. I’m just speculating. I’m suggesting that Russia is hedging its bets, just in case, figuring that time is on it’s side so it’s better to be safe than sorry.

In the meantime, it appears that the policy of escalation continues. Here’s a headline from AFP:

Zelensky says 'war' coming to Russia after Moscow drone attack

Is this just desperation? More of the same tactic that Russia hasn’t fallen for?

The guys at The Duran suggest, in an uncharacteristically brief video, that that may be what’s going on. The idea they advance is that NATO has gone too far to just turn back. They’ve self destructed their own economies—except for the US—and now they can only look around for some way to double down on what went wrong. It’s an idea that’s at least worth considering, crazy as it may seem on its face.

German industrial economy collapse. EU economic collapse

[5:35]

AM: The EU depends heavily on exports. It's an export-driven economy, unlike the United States. Germany is the driver--it is the EU's export machine. German exports are finished goods--cars, machine tools, chemical products, all of those things. The German industrial economy is going down. The EU is losing its export positions because German goods are starting to become uncompetitive and, to say it straightforwardly, the EU is screwed. It's major cash provider, which is Germany, is going down and the industrial system is going down, and the EU's export position is eroding as well.

AC: Giving more money to Ukraine will solve the problem, of course.

AM: That's the answer to everything! I think in some ways we are actually going to see an intensification of this. Remember, the EU's part of the Neocon plan is to engineer regime change in Russia--either impose a friendly government on Moscow, a vassal government, or break up the country and gain control of Russian resources. Oil, gas, and all the rest. That was supposed to provide the EU with long-term energy security. So, given that was the plan, it's obviously not working. But I can imagine that--because they can't really change course--they're going to try to find some other means to actually make that plan work. So I think that what we will see is more support for Ukraine, and intensify the terms to pressure Russia. So even as the EU goes down it will escalate on what it's doing.

AC: Yeah, absolutely, push Poland into the conflict--that's going to be the the EU's move. [Laughs] They have no other option than trying to orchestrate regime change in Russia, because they need the resources. So that's the only option that they have left in order for the EU to survive. Yes, so that's what they're going to do. They're going to double and triple down on the conflict with Russia. Because if they can't orchestrate regime change in Russia, if they can't pillage Russia, break Russia apart, steal its natural resources on the cheap, then the EU is going to collapse. So that's where we are.

[8:57]