There’s an election today, but it seems to early say anything. So here’s a bit of a Ukraine update. There’s been a lot of talk and speculation about US - Russian contacts, Ukraine being urged to express openness to negotiations, and so forth. It’s hard to say what any of this actually means. Is it flummery to keep Europeans more or less on board with the war on Russia, i.e., blame Russia for a lack of negotiations? Is the US hoping against hope that Ukraine/NATO can achieve a PR victory on the battlefield that could somehow be parlayed into a ceasefire?
Rather than get bogged down in speculation that can’t be resolved at this point, I’ll offer two points of information that mark fairly hard data points.
First, the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) appears to have fully secured the Donetsk Airport. This is a big deal, because this airport was the scene of two significant battles following the DPR secession from Ukraine. Ukraine later constructed massive fortifications near the airport, part of the fortifications that have been used to shell Donetsk city pretty indiscriminately, causing heavy civilian casualties.
You can read more about the battles over the airport here: Second Battle of Donetsk Airport.
By the way, for those who imagine that Russia is a country under the iron grip of a dictator who brooks no criticism, this video clip offers a glimpse of the reality. I’m in no position to comment broadly on free speech in Russia, but it appears from this clip to be comparable to what we enjoy. This difference is that our MSM largely self censors, and we’re left to seek information on tech patrolled outlets:
One of the stories that’s being talked up lately is that the West is supplying Ukraine with “air defenses”, now that Ukraine has basically run out of its pretty capable Russian S-300 systems. Brian Berletic assesses those stories in a 15 minute (or so) Youtube. Here is the summary blurb beneath the video, by way of a preview:
Ukraine's deteriorating air defenses are a much larger problem than the Western media is admitting.
- Ukraine boasts of receiving NASAM systems from the US;
- NASAMS have inferior spects compared to Ukraine’s dwindling supply of S-300s;
- Western analysts admit that if the West cannot resupply/replace Ukrainian air defense systems, Russia will be able to establish air superiority over the country;
- Western analysts also admit that the West is incapable of resupplying or replacing Ukraine’s air defense systems.
And here’s a tweet containing the video, which is quite informative:
And here’s some miscellaneous stuff:
Kim Dotcom offers provocative food for thought:
What’s the root cause of the US proxy war in Ukraine? Most people don’t have a clue. Let me explain.
It all started after the 2007-2008 financial crisis that originated in the US. The reliability of the US Govt as a partner in global financial affairs was destroyed.In 2009 Russia hosted the first BRICS summit to establish a better international financial system with China, India, Brazil, South Africa and later with future BRICS+ partners. In short a new “multipolar order”. BRICS is challenging the US Dollar reserve currency status.
That started a new Cold War with Russia and China. US National Debt is now at $31 trillion, total US Debt is at $92 trillion and total US unfunded liabilities are at $172 trillion and all of that without any US Govt surplus to pay for any of it. Only more Debt and money printing.
The US Govt knows that without the reserve currency status it is bankrupt. Without money printing on the backs of other nations it’s simply Game Over for the US. But not just for the US. The EU and most western democracies followed the US model of endless Debt and money printing.
I believe that’s the model that got Bernanke his Nobel.
That’s why they stand with the US and support the escalating actions that seem totally illogical to most people. Why is the EU sacrificing prosperity for a US proxy war in Ukraine? Because if the US is collapsing they collapse too. Their alliance is glued by the fear of failure.
BRICS+ was on track to launch its new global financial system by 2030. Ukraine is the tool for conflict with Russia and Taiwan is the tool for conflict with China. Eventually the US and NATO will be at war with Russia and China. They simply don’t seem to have another choice.
WEF’s famous Agenda 2030.
It’s either war with Russia and China to stop BRICS+ or the financial collapse of the US, EU and the entire Debt and money printing circus. It was never about the people of Ukraine. Ukraine is a sideshow. The main event is yet to come. The two options are poverty or nuclear war.
Bonus—Covid v. mRNA:
Looks like I was correct about the election. The country is finished.
2 points:
https://edwardslavsquat.substack.com/ is a superb stack by an American journalist who lives in Moscow. There is little geopolitical focus, and he is more a Russian nationalist who believes that Putin is too soft - but it is an eye opening encounter with daily life in Russia, Russian bureaucracy re the covid scam and the faction within Russia that is aligned with Western liberalism.
On Kim Dot Com's points - an excellent observation that the cold war of Russia vs the West started in '09 (and consequently why the US supported Maidan). Recognising now that Germany, who essentially run the EU, are a vassal state of the US (essentially since '45, various US bases, the Marshall plan etc) and that NATO is the arm that the US uses to enforce that servitude - it sheds more light on Trump's comments in '15 and throughout his reign that he'd consider withdrawing from NATO, and how badly that triggered the establishment.
On the down side, Trump got completely rolled narrative wise when it came to Russia. Russiagate, Impeachment 1.0. My chief complaint with Trump is his lack of narrative control - his instinctive style and honesty make him attractive to normies, but for those of us in the weeds, he didn't do enough - not releasing the russiagate docs, not explaining to the american people that it's Mitch McConnel who he's fighting against, not calling a spade a spade when it came to Fauci. I would have been a willing ear had he gone to bat against NATO, but he didn't.
I suspect that's why intellectual MAGA (characters like Will chamberlain and Hans Mahnke) prefer De Santis - he at least potentially may fulfill those requirements.
Additionally, with Trump, he specifically noted that he'd secured the oil supply when the RINO's were mad at him for abandoning the Kurds - he also mentioned multiple times that he prefers the USD and hates bitcoin.
My read is that Trump wants the old America back - the one that gave him the opportunity to become a billionaire. And that America was the sole hegemon.
I'm not convinced that Trump is the right character to lead us into a multipolar world. Do you think he'd happily play second fiddle to BRICS?