30 Comments
User's avatar
Mark Wauck's avatar

Today Larry Johnson writes about the pickup in the Donbass offensive, and in doing so says something that explains why people like Schryver would have thought the war should have been over sooner:

https://sonar21.com/russias-donbass-offensive-picking-up-steam/

If this was a boxing match and there was a competent referee, this war would be called over — Technical Knock Out (TKO). The carnage Russia is inflicting on Ukraine is growing with each passing day. A year ago, the Russian Ministry of Defense reported an average of 700 Ukrainian casualties a day. Now, that number exceeds 2,000 a day — killed and wounded. The problem confronting Ukrainian commanders is the lack of trained reserves that could be plugged into failing battle lines. Ukraine has no viable system or plan in place to recruit and train 30,000 new soldiers every month. The reality is that Ukraine is throwing an untrained, unprepared cadre of men and women — many who were “press-ganged” into service — into combat, where they face well-trained and equipped Russian forces.

What Schryver--and quite a few others--didn't take into account was 1) the utter depravity of the Anglo-Zionist willingness to destroy Ukraine for their own goals, and 2) the utter depravity of Ukraine's rulers in going along with the national suicide of Ukraine.

Expand full comment
Mike richards's avatar

Well said - and utter depravity is the kindest way to put it. Although with the nazi aspect, banning churches, press-gangs etc, Ukraine has lost sight of land… fodder for those believing in karma

Expand full comment
St's avatar
Sep 2Edited

I'm not as critical of Putin as Helmer is on this war. It's a careful balancing act. Maintain economy. Force Ukraine into compliance w/o taking the useless Banderites into the fold. Keep allies allies by not acting like Israel. Not starting WW3. At the end of the day Putin is a capitalist not a communist, as such Oligarchs will have outsized influence too. Worst job in the world...

Putin biggest issue IMHO is lax immigration policy. The most existential challenge facing Russia is not NATO, the Ukraine, the threat of nuclear holocaust or sanctions. Rather, it is illegal immigration that has increased dramatically over the past two decades. This is evident from every single poll. The central Asians' that shot up Crocus and are beating up people in Russian cities. they are not mild mannered Russian sufi Muslims but basically Taliban. Cheap and illegal labor will be the death of Russia like Europe.

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

"The central Asians' that shot up Crocus and are beating up people in Russian cities."

I don't doubt that Russians are concerned about immigration to Russia. If you can shed specific light on that, I'd appreciate it. However, ...

I don't think that "the central Asians' that shot up Crocus" are simply typical of immigrants to Russia. There is strong evidence that ISIS-K is a CIA/MI6 creation.

Re Central Asians "beating up people in Russian cities" I'd also appreciate further information. The only reports along those lines have involved violence in Dagestan, which isn't a Russian area--the Caucasus region has a centuries long history of such conflict. But I don't monitor Russian internal news with great specificity.

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

That's a pretty mixed bag of references. MEMRI is Neocon and interested in portraying a weak Russia. Valdai Club is generally liberal and proves my point (in a way) re Helmer--it, like Helmer and his Russian right nationalist sources, has criticized Putin for not being "aggressive" enough against Ukraine to portray him as a failure. They're entitled to their views, but in light of the global situation I view them as misguided. It's doubtful that Valdai retains its ties to the Russian government. Korybko I have reservations about, and have for a long time. For the rest, there's no way of knowing how representative--or real--a single tweet is, which you present to support "Central Asians beating up people in Russian cities." Nor whether the rumor re Palestinian refugees is true or not.

At least I now know not to take you seriously.

Expand full comment
St's avatar

Fine. Go for yourself and see. Ride the green line out past the tourist inner circle. Count how many pale faces you see in the wagon with each stop further away from the center. Go to Krasnodar and see who wanders the city in groups of eight or more looking for trouble. Just don't go out after dark.

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

You're making my point. Krasnodar is in the North Caucasus and the Muslim population of the Muslim regions of the Caucasus would might form an underclass there. If you can demonstrate that the criminal class of Krasnodar is made up of Central Asian immigrants rather than natives of the Caucasus region, please do so. To suggest that that's representative of life generally in "Russian cities" is not persuasive. That said, Wiki says the population of Krasnodar Krai is 87% Russian and only 1.3% Muslim. Exactly why should I trust your representations regarding how many "pale faces" would be visible?

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

See my longer comment. I doubt we're in fundamental disagreement.

I will add that so far Putin has performed the "balancing act" in admirable fashion. Helmer fails to appreciate virtually any of the complexities that you point to. Schryver, IMO, has a better understanding of that.

Regarding Banderites. I don't predict but put forward for consideration. I would not be surprised if Putin opts to reincorporate Ukraine into the Russian Federation to thwart for good the Western ambition to seize Ukraine's resources. That consideration, IMO, could overbalance the admitted difficulties, and could explain the extremely methodical approach Putin is taking. The slowness could be a sign of preparation for that much bigger task ahead.

Expand full comment
ebear's avatar

"Helmer believes the Russian military was largely cognizant of the AFU buildup in Sumy, and desired to act preemptively, but that their hands were tied by Putin's shortsightedness and reluctance to act boldly and decisively against both Ukraine and its NATO allies."

Hard to see how they could miss the buildup, but I draw a different conclusion, having no opinion of Putin to colour my assessment. I think it was a trap. I can't prove it of course, but it's a strategy that Russia/CCCP has used in the past which is straight out of Sun Tzu: appear weak where you are strong. Draw the enemy in, then surround him.

Notice they didn't have to pull anyone from down south to counter it. Notice how quickly they evacuated the population. Notice that the attackers are now trapped and can't retreat or be resupplied. To free them you'd have to mount another assault, which would end the same way.

An attack on the assembly point in Sumy would have gotten some of them, the rest would have scattered and any damaged equipment could be recovered later. By drawing them into a cauldron you get them all, including mercenary prisoners which scores political points. Also notice the recent prisoner swap where Russia got some of the guys from Kursk back. Normally you'd want the one's who've been captive the longest, not recently captured. Perhaps a small consolation for allowing them to be overrun in an operation they no doubt weren't aware of.

It was a significant force, and it was entirely lost. Well played I would say. Of course no one is going to admit this, and Putin appears suitably outraged and now has an excuse to up the ante, which gets the hawks off his back while at the same time building public support for a more forceful approach, which we're starting to see now.

Again, just my opinion, but it does seem to have worked out rather well for Russia.

Expand full comment
Kieran Telo's avatar

Absolutely spot-on in my (nobody's) opinion. The only measure by which the Kursk incursion was a success was in terms of western rah-rah propaganda. The Russian govt quite rightly does not give two figs for that, or any of the other opinions proferred by the blow-with-the-wind Anglo-Zionist rabble.

Don't interrupt your enemy when he is making a blunder.

If Helmer is correct that Putin is vacillatory and passive it hardly makes sense to also characterise Helmer as "mouthing off bravely" (I paraphrase). What does he have to fear? Nothing at all. Because nobody of any importance takes him seriously. In JH's defence he has said some accurate things about the Western view of Russia and has used the Skripal affair as a highly productive example. But ultimately Helmer seems to have a hard-on for the Tsarist style of governing, and is disappointed that VVP eschews this.

Those of us with a continued interest in staying alive are very grateful that VVP is not the blowhard dictator that the West frames him as.

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

You're not alone in that view. One thing that you point out here--among several--that also made an impression on me was that very quick prisoner swap. One wonders whether the Russians had grabbed some NATO prisoners and used one or two to get the border guards back.

Expand full comment
Antipodes's avatar

And this is why i read both you and Will's posts.

Sensible, sane commentary on world events.

Thanks

Expand full comment
aDoozy's avatar

Thanks for broadening my information and analyst sources, Mark.

I have just signed up to receive notice of Mr. Schryver's Substack posts

Expand full comment
ellie's avatar

I very much appreciated your remarks about Helmer’s recent appearance on the Durand. I was unfamiliar with him, but his “creds” seemed impressive & Mercouris appeared to be a fan. Yet I found his views on the progress of the war from a military perspective very disconcerting because they conflicted so strongly with those of Andrei Martyanov & of Dimitri Orloff whom I respect. Your post helps put things in better perspective for me. Thank you.

Expand full comment
Tamsin's avatar

I'm not convinced this war will be decided on the battlefield, because the people who have been financing it might decide to make other arrangements for its resolution.

Off-topic but not really, it looks like the financiers have no plans to separate the US from Israeli goals, ever.

https://www.wsj.com/tech/silicon-valleys-hot-talent-pipeline-is-an-israeli-army-unit-e8368b4d?st=310qeb7c9usvqx3&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

No, not really.

Expand full comment
Eoin Clancy's avatar

I agree 100% with you on Helmer, his website can be informative on economic issues but anything geopolitical, he's out of his depth.

Expand full comment
Bash's avatar

Who is Schryver anyway? Just some guy. Helmer at least has been living in Russia and is a known figure there for the last 35 years with real contacts to the Russian leadership class. Not saying he is right or wrong but who is Schryver? As far as I know, he's nobody

Expand full comment
aDoozy's avatar

Is this a competition among journalists about who has the most glowing resume...according to your criteria, Bash?

If you choose to follow the writings of Helmer, that is your choice.

There is no need to dress down a journalist/analyst that you are not familiar with. If you don't like a writer, move along and go back to your pool of informers.

However, I recommend that you give a man a fair shake when he is recommended by Mark Wauck. You must respect Mark's writings if you are here, reading and commenting--correct?

Expand full comment
Bash's avatar

I wouldn't comment if I didn't respect, and I certainly wouldn't waste my time reading his posts.

I used to follow schrivers writings and was a sub to his stack, and followed him on twitter / X. So I know who he is, and have read a lot of his work, and he seems to have Mark's respect. But, personally, I don't follow him anymore

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

Who is Schryver? He's just some guy who happens to have a track record of being right about the war on Russia and about geopolitical matters more generally. Helmer has a miserable record with regard to analyzing what Putin is up to. If Helmer has contacts in the Russian leadership class--whom he never names--who are his contacts in Putin's circle? After all, Putin is the person who has exercised leadership in Russia--with enormous and measurable success--for over 20 years. Who are you?

Expand full comment
Bash's avatar

I am nobody, and don't claim to be anybody. Why are you attacking me? And Schryver has been plenty wrong, I stopped reading his substack a while ago.

You don't need to like Helmer but he at least does his talking from Moscow which as you said is not a subtle criticism of Putin.

Putin is has made and is making his share of mistakes - by his own admission.

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

"You don't need to like Helmer"

I never said I dislike Helmer. In point of fact, I stated that I have used him as a resource in certain areas--but that he represents a misguided tendency in Russian politics and that his sources are NOT among the leadership, as you asserted without foundation. The leadership in Russia is Putin's circle, as his track record in Russian politics amply illustrates.

"Schryver has been plenty wrong"

Examples? I specifically stated "Schryver ... happens to have a track record of being right about the war on Russia and about geopolitical matters more generally."

Expand full comment
Bash's avatar

Helmer has claimed his sources are within leadership. So, he was my source. Maybe they arent, but then he is being pretty brave mouthing off in Moscow with no political support if that's the case

As for Schryver, he was on a similar train as the likes of Ritter and Macgregor who said the war would be over last year, and everything that went with those sorts of claims. Everyone has been wrong in that sense, but at least Doug and Scott have both acknowledged it

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

I don't recall ever having said that the war would be over last year. I have always maintained that keeping casualties as low as feasible has been a priority for Putin. I have certainly repeated the views of those, like Macgregor, who are advocates of "big arrow" offensive bloodbaths to end the war, but I have also criticized those views. That view, by the way, is very similar to the views of Helmer's sources, who accuse Putin of timidly avoiding the necessary military solution in facing down the West. But I have never regarded those Western commentators as fundamentally misguided in their political views regarding the war's trajectory--they, like Putin, see the bigger picture of a global conflict that will not be won in Ukraine alone and for which Russia will need to husband resources. Helmer is fundamentally and dangerously misguided in that regard, focused on Ukraine and not nearly enough on China and the Middle East (although I have referenced Helmer on financial matters in that last regard).

Expand full comment
St's avatar
Sep 2Edited

Hes wrong a lot and a Russian exceptionalist despite never having set foot in Russia or Ukraine unlike Helmer or Escobar who's inconvenient sources he dismisses outright. Every Russian blunder is transformed into 5D genius with his convincing prose. He's been saying for a couple years Russia would take out US ISR. Said Germany would flip. As far as war over last year here's one instance.

https://x.com/imetatronink/status/1649516072406777859

"I can appreciate the logic, but in my opinion, the Russians are not going to stretch this out in the manner suggested. I think major combat will be over before the end of this year, and I don't foresee an insurgency forming in the aftermath.

4:50 PM · Apr 21, 2023

·

2,824

Views"

Most of his predictions are open still - like "In for a pound" or how US would fare vs various enemies. It's just what people want to hear that wish a US retreat from it's global management project and invest at home instead. Sounds good but verdict still out.

Expand full comment
Bash's avatar

I never characterised your views in that way. Schryver makes very strong claims and so my remarks are limited to him only. Helmer certainly limits the scope of his analysis but you can always say that when missiles are raining on your cities worrying about BRICS or Israel is secondary. And this is where Kursk is really significant, because the impact can be very dramatic once we see the full effects

Expand full comment