in

Why Russia’s Ukrainian Campaign Is Failing

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.

Eric Zuesse

One can’t evaluate whether Putin’s campaign in Ukraine is succeeding without first knowing what its OBJECTIVES were.

In order to be able to understand what Putin’s (and, actually, virtually all of Russia’s) objectives were at the start of the current Ukrainian war (the war that started on 24 February 2022), the historical build-up to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (on that date) needs first to be not only known, but truthfully understood (since we are here discussing motivations, and those are shown ONLY by what people actually say and do — which is the actual history of the matter). Here that is:

On 15 December 2021, Reuters bannered “Russia hands proposals to U.S. on security guarantees”, which were demands (Putin’s “red lines” — the most prominent of which was for Ukraine never to become a member of America’s anti-Russian military alliance, NATO, because that would enable U.S. forces along Russia’s very border there to threaten on Russia’s border an invasion of Russia). On December 17th International Business Times headlined “EU threatens Russia sanctions as NATO backs Ukraine”, and reported that NATO and almost all of the EU rejected Russia’s demands. NATO’s chief emphasized Russia would have no say, whatsoever, on whether or not Ukraine becomes a NATO member. Russia’s RT News then headlined on December 20th, “Russia promises ‘military response’ to any further NATO expansion.” Then, on the 26th, it was a “‘life-and-death’ issue for Russia”. (Western ‘news’-media hid that major news, instead of published it.) Germany’s Die Welt even published on December 29th the EU’s V.P. and Foreign Policy chief arguing against Russia’s demands of limiting NATO, by saying “We are not in the post-war period. There are some European states that are not Nato allies. (He was saying that for peace in Europe, all of its nations must be in the anti-Russian alliance.) On 7 January 2022, AP headlined “US, NATO rule out halt to expansion, reject Russian demands”. This was only two days before scheduled ‘negotiations’ between Russia and U.S. were scheduled to start on January 10th, and with NATO on the 12th, regarding Russia’s “demands.” The ‘negotiations’ turned out to be very brief, because both America and NATO refused to so much as even just consider Russia’s demand that NATO not ever accept Ukraine as a member. On 10 January 2022, RT headlined “US tells Russia NATO won’t stop expanding”, and reported that “US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman has told reporters that Russia’s proposed limit on the expansion of NATO further into Eastern Europe is a ‘non-starter.’” Then, on February 24th, Sputnik News bannered “Putin Authorises Special Military Operation in Donbass”, and presented Putin’s speech explaining its purposes: preventing inclusion of Ukraine in NATO, protecting Donbass residents against any possible all-out invasion by Ukraine, and killing Ukraine’s nazi battalions, such as Azov. Putin said “Those who aspire to global dominance have publicly designated Russia as their enemy. They did so with impunity.” But no longer. On March 2nd. Mark Sleboda’s keen analysis described the coming consequences — the new world in which all of us are now living (regardless of which side wins this war).

However, the situation for Russia has unfortunately turned out to be even worse than that, as I argued in my April 11th article, “Putin Fell Into Biden’s Trap”:

By Russia’s invading Ukraine before Ukraine invaded its breakaway former Donbass region (which the U.S. and its NATO anti-Russian alliance had for years been training, arming, and preparing, Ukraine to do), Russia thereby became the international ‘villain’ in this war (simply by being the first of the two to invade, and, so, widely considered to be ‘the aggressor’ in it), and, thereby, scared so many people in the nearby neutralist countries, into wanting their own Government to join the anti-Russian alliance ‘for safety’s sake’ against a Russian invasion such as Russia had just done to Ukraine, even though (and few of these people probably even had thought much about this) by doing that, their own land will then become among the ones against which Russia’s missiles and nuclear weapons will become targeted against (and are not now being targeted against). It’s an invitation, in other words, to their own becoming direct targets in the U.S.-planned World War III, which the U.S. Government (ever since at least 2006) has been planning to ‘win’ — and no longer for the U.S., like Russia, to be using its nuclear weapons only in order to PREVENT a global nuclear war from ever breaking out.

The connection which that invasion of Ukraine had to The West’s united repudiation of Russia’s life-or-death national-security demands (which had been presented to Biden and to NATO on 15 December 2021) was being hidden from Western publics — not being reported to them and honestly explained to them — and, so, Western publics (or at least those of them that trust their own nation’s government and its master, America’s government) aren’t even considering Russia’s life-or-death concerns in this epoch-making series of events that we’re all experiencing. The publics are, instead, being treated as mere pawns to be deceived so that they’ll support what ‘our’ government and ‘our side’ in this emerging WW III are doing — which is for nuclear-armed Russia to have only two possible realistic options: either to allow us (the billionaires who control the governments in the U.S. and in its vassal nations) to control Russia; or, else, for Russia to ultimately become conquered by us (our billionaires) militarily (via America’s ‘winning’ a WW III, which nuclear war would virtually destroy the entire planet).

After Russia demanded NATO to shrink, The West started what seems likely to be an intensified expansion of NATO:

On April 2nd, RT headlined “Finland can join NATO without referendum – president”. On April 7th, Reuters bannered “Prospect of Finland, Sweden joining NATO discussed at Brussels meeting: State Dept. official”. On April 8th, CNN headlined “US readies for long-term European security ramp-up after Russia’s invasion”, and opened: “The top US military general this week endorsed creating permanent US bases in Eastern Europe as a response to Russia’s attack on Ukraine.” On April 9th, CNN bannered “Finland and Sweden could soon join NATO, prompted by Russian war in Ukraine”, and opened: “Finland and Sweden could soon join NATO, moves that would likely infuriate Moscow and that officials say would further underscore Russia’s strategic error in invading Ukraine.

Also on April 9th, Britain’s Telegraph bannered “Jens Stoltenberg: We need a beefed-up Nato to face down threats to European security”, and reported: “In an interview with The Telegraph, the 63-year-old says he is preparing for that ‘reinforcement to be turned into a fundamental ‘reset’ of the alliance, which was born out of the 1949 North Atlantic Treaty between the US, Canada and European nations. … He adds: ‘It is also of concern that we see that Russia and China are working more and more closely together. This is something that matters for our security.’” He was saying that for Russia and China to be “working more and more closely together” threatens NATO countries, but that for NATO countries to be in an actual military alliance against Russia is NOT a threat to Russians; and that, therefore, NATO must henceforth target not only Russia but also China, as the two primary nations to be ultimately conquered — though NATO has no aggressive intent, and is never an aggressor, not against Russia nor against any other country. The following day, Russia’s RT News headlined (much more honestly), “NATO to station permanent force in east – Stoltenberg”, and reported that, “‘We have now asked our military commanders to provide options for what we call a reset, a more longer-term adaptation of NATO,’ he said, adding that the decisions on the matter are expected at the bloc’s summit in Madrid, Spain in June. ‘This is part of the reset which we have to make, which is to move from tripwire deterrence to something which is more about deterrence by denial or [of] defense. This is already in process.’ Stoltenberg said last month that the bloc had 40,000 troops ‘under direct command,’ mostly in Eastern Europe. The group’s individual members are supplying Kiev with weapons, ranging from anti-tank and anti-aircraft missile systems to tanks and armored fighting vehicles.’” But, Stoltenberg has always said, “NATO is not a threat to Russia.” How much contempt, against the public, must such a person, who says such a thing, in such circumstances, and with such a long history backing it up — all of which has been to the exact contrary of that person’s statement — have? However much it is, that’s how much contempt of the public he has. The blatancy of his lying is shocking.

Further indication that Putin blundered badly to have preemptively invaded Ukraine, instead of waiting for Ukraine to invade Donbass first, became clear when The Times of London bannered, on April 11th, “Putin ‘purges’ 150 FSB agents in response to Russia’s botched war with Ukraine”, and reported that

A “Stalinist” mass purge of Russian secret intelligence is under way after more than 100 agents were removed from their jobs and the head of the department responsible for Ukraine was sent to prison.

In a sign of President Putin’s fury over the failures of the invasion, about 150 Federal Security Bureau (FSB) officers have been dismissed, including some who have been arrested.

All of those ousted were employees of the Fifth Service, a division set up in 1998, when Putin was director of the FSB to carry out operations in the countries of the former Soviet Union with the aim of keeping them within Russia’s orbit.

FSB officers carried out searches at more than 20 addresses around Moscow of colleagues suspected of being in contact with journalists

The service’s former chief, Sergei Beseda, 68, has been sent to Lefortovo prison in Moscow after he was placed under house arrest last month. The prison was used by the NKVD, the KGB’s predecessor, for interrogation and torture during Stalin’s Great Purge of the 1930s.

The FSB purge was reported by Christo Grozev, executive director of Bellingcat, the investigative organisation that unmasked the two Salisbury poisoners in 2018. He did not reveal the source of his information.

The officer had been dismissed for “reporting false information to the Kremlin about the real situation in Ukraine before the invasion”, he said.

“I can say that although a significant number of them have not been arrested they will no longer work for the FSB,” Grozev told Popular Politics, a YouTube channel about Russian current affairs.

However, doing that (removing those individuals from Russia’s intelligence service) will not undo the damage, which has already been done to the prospects for a peaceful future for Russians, after the current hot war in Ukraine. NATO — that self-described purely ‘defensive’ military alliance against whatever countries America’s billionaires collectively decide to become the next ones to be placed upon their regime’s chopping-block, to carve up, carve out, and consume — is now booming as never before, and its expansion seems now to have been greatly accelerated, instead of ended and reversed, as Putin (and virtually all Russians) had been demanding — and as the entire would ought to have been demanding ever since the Soviet Union ended in 1991.

Barack Obama said it best, on 28 May 2014, addressing America’s future military elite shortly after his successful February 2014 coup had grabbed control over Ukraine and turned it sharply and suddenly against Russia:

The United States is and remains the one indispensable nation. That has been true for the century passed and it will be true for the century to come. … Russia’s aggression toward former Soviet states unnerves capitals in Europe, while China’s economic rise and military reach worries its neighbors. From Brazil to India, rising middle classes compete with us, and governments seek a greater say in global forums. … It will be your generation’s task to respond to this new world.

All OTHER countries are “dispensable.” NATO has proven that U.S. view, many times: Only America’s billionaires matter. Even their own subjects — America’s ‘citizens’ — don’t (but are instead “dispensable,” in Obama’s lingo).

On 13 March 2021, I headined “Why It’s Especially Necessary to End NATO Now”, and wrote that:

The way that WW III would start is that Ukraine would become more heavily armed by the U.S. and then would invade both Donbass and Crimea, Russia would then attack Ukraine for doing that, and the U.S. would then launch a blitz-attack against Moscow from Ukraine, and, simultaneously, launch against all other command-and-control targets in Russia, so that before those have become hit, Russia would already have been decapitated.

The United States Government is fortunately not obliged to allow Ukraine into NATO and has many ways to prevent it from joining NATO. Some of these ways wouldn’t at all embarrass the U.S. Government, and the reason for this is that if any one NATO-member nation refuses to okay Ukraine as becoming a member, then Ukraine won’t become a member, and the scenario that has been described [“Ukraine would become more heavily armed by the U.S. and then would invade both Donbass and Crimea, Russia would then attack Ukraine for doing this, and the U.S. would then launch a blitz-attack against Moscow from Ukraine, and, simultaneously launch against all other command-and-control targets in Russia, so that before those have become hit, Russia would already have been decapitated.”] won’t then happen. The U.S. Government has enormous clout with each existing NATO member-nation, because NATO was created by the North Atlantic Treaty (also called the “Washington Treaty”) in Washington, DC, on 4 April 1949, at a conference that was chaired by U.S. diplomat Theodore Achiles, who subsequently retired to become a Director of the Atlantic Council, which also is in Washington, and which is the PR arm of NATO. The U.S. Government could easily get at least one NATO-member country to say no to Ukraine’s joining. However, if U.S. President Biden announces that the U.S. endorses NATO-membership for Ukraine, then that’s, in itself, virtually a U.S. declaration of war against Russia, and Russia might not wait for it to be made official before responding to it — blitz-invading the U.S. and its allies.

According to Achilles’s account of the creation of NATO:

The NATO spirit was born in that Working Group. Derick Hoyer-Millar, the British Minister, started it. One day he made a proposal which was obviously nonsense. Several of us told him so in no uncertain terms, and a much better formulation emerged from the discussion. Derick said, and I quote, “Those are my instructions. All right, I’ll tell the foreign office I made my pitch, was shot down and try to get them changed.” He did. From then on we all followed the same system. If our instructions were sound, and agreement could be reached, fine. If not, we worked out something we all, or most of us, considered sound, and whoever had the instructions undertook to get them changed. It always worked, although sometimes it took time. That spirit has continued to this day, I believe, although the size to which NATO has grown makes it far less easy. Two years later we began in London to put the “O” on the NAT by creating the organization. Some of the members of the delegations had been members of the Working Group, some had not. 

Was that the beginning of the end of the world? Perhaps Biden will decide whether it is, or not.

Apparently, Biden has, by now, decided (like all other U.S. governments ever since Harry S. Truman’s in 1945) to go all the way — to expand NATO, and for it to conquer ultimately not only Russia, but also China (and any other country that resists U.S. demands — all of the other “dispensable” nations).

Russia’s Ukraine campaign is failing because Putin invaded prematurely. He didn’t wait Biden out and hold his fire until after Biden’s Ukrainian stooge (Zelensky) had first launched his blitz-attack against Donbass. If Putin had been the second to strike, instead of the first, then the Finns etc. would be far less likely now be in the grip of the fear that so stupidly has turned them (and Swedes and perhaps others) against Russia, and NATO would be far less likely now to be racing forward to expand, as it currently is. That premature invasion has thus produced exactly the opposite of its intended and declared purpose. It could end the world, because of NATO’s voraciousness (which reflects mainly the U.S. regime’s voraciousness — plus its stooges’ psychopathy and stupidity tolerating that voraciousness).

In other words:  if what Putin did is going to expedite instead of prevent NATO’s expansion up to Russia’s very borders, then his war in Ukraine will not only not have won, but it will spectacularly have lost — it will have hurt (decreased) the safety of the Russian people, instead of increased it. And THIS is the reason WHY his having PREEMPTIVELY invaded Ukraine (on February 24th) appears now to have been a spectacularly wrong thing for him to have done. (Prior to February 24th, I had been expecting him to wait-out Biden. I was stunned that he did not, but I was hoping that his judgment on this crucial matter was better than mine. I now am concluding, very reluctantly and sadly, that I seem to have been right and he seems to have been wrong. I find my having been right about this matter to be very depressing, because it means a far likelier ultimate success of the neocons’ project, and maybe even of there ultimately being a WW III.)

The only possible way that I can envision out of this disaster now would be for Putin to publicly make an offer to all nations’ leaders: If you do not want America’s billionaires, who control the U.S. Government, to come to replace the U.N. as being the sole and exclusive final source and authority regarding what is international law, then Russia and its allies will guarantee that your nation will not be targets, ever, but instead will democratically become allies building together toward a new and more lasting global era of peace and of mutually beneficial economic development, and we will all, together, be committed to eliminating nuclear weapons in ALL nations; and, so, Russia is now inviting leaders from throughout the world to meet with us in Moscow at a global conference to begin the process to replace the current depressing trend toward global control by U.S. billionaires (the U.S. Government that they control). We will instead together build further upon the existing U.N. as being the sole authorized source of international law, in order for the world to come to achieve, for all nations, the U.N. as being the global democracy of nations, that America’s anti-fascist champion, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, had intended, for the U.N., that he had invented and named, to become — in order to COMPLETE the job that he had so nobly started, before America became itself a fascist nation, as it tragically did soon after his death (a democracy-in-name-only), when America’s billionaires took control of America’s government.

Putin now needs to step his performance up to a higher level, addressing the global public, no longer merely the Russian public. The battlers in this war are not Putin versus Zelensky, but Putin versus Biden, and, at the present moment, Biden is winning. Biden (like the recent U.S. Presidents before him) represents America’s billionaires, and Putin represents, and speaks only to, the Russian public. If Putin can’t become widely recognized to also represent the interests of the global public — to build together a future world in which there will no longer be any international empires — then Biden’s team will win, and the entire world will lose. That is how stark the current stakes have become, in today’s geopolitics. An all-encompassing U.S. global empire won’t be able to be achieved without a WW III, which must be prevented, no matter what. And that is a global imperative — not merely a Russian one.

The present article doesn’t concern “military matters,” but instead it’s about winning the world-war that has begun and whose ultimate outcome already is being determined now, in these early stages, more by public opinion (specifically in the lands that border or are near to Russia and that haven’t (yet) committed themselves to becoming vassals of the U.S. empire, countries such as Finland and Sweden — not to mention Ukraine itself), than by “military matters.” It’s this, far more encompassing, “war” that is at stake. And Putin is losing it (even if he is ‘winning’ the military aspect of it). And that is, tragically (for everyone except U.S.-and-allied billionaires), an indisputable fact.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s next book (soon to be published) will be AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change. It’s about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.

Report

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.

What do you think?

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
38 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Richard
Richard
April 14, 2022

This is rambling and overstated. The title is extremely misleading. Russia made a decision to launch a preemptive attack that caught Ukraine and its US masters off guard. This did not allow them to hide all the evidence of the biolabs and led to the entrapment of the main Ukraine force in the Donbass. Let’s see what happens as the war proceeds. I trust Putin and the Russian general staff over retrospectives by armchair field marshalls.

Bob Valdez
Bob Valdez
Reply to  Richard
April 14, 2022

Agreed. Eric needs to read Pepe Escobar and learn how to write about geopolitics.

Richard
Richard
April 14, 2022

Why didn’t you publish my comment?

АммА
АммА
April 14, 2022

Just two days ago Mr. Uesse wrote a similar piece of *die Kuhscheiße* on how Putin fell into Biden’s trap. Even though he was properly schooled in the comment section below that article, his overblown ego, and equally significant lack of any ability to analyze a military operation, forced this gentleman, with, only in America possible, pleonastic job title, to write another garment from the brain outlet about Russia’s failing campaign, all in the day when more than 1000 Ukronazis surrendered in the most sought after city of Mariupol. Mr. Uesse is working rally hard, offering whole bunch of most relevant… Read more »

Ultrafart the Brave
Ultrafart the Brave
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
April 14, 2022

“PS: I should also point out that this article is about avoiding a WW III, not about Donbass.” That statement is self-evidentially a fact. I’m inclined to defer to your article’s position re the geostrategic implications of Russia’s intervention in Ukraine, with a caveat – Putin’s actions constitute a “blunder” in the context of your assessment of the available options, but in Putin’s defence, Russia has it’s own priorities and has very likely acted on it’s own calculus of the world order. NATO isn’t the world, after all – those outside NATO outnumber NATO at least 6 to 1 –… Read more »

paul
paul
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
April 14, 2022

Surely Ukraine is a lot more important than Sweden and Finland? All these supposed “neutrals” are already de facto members of NATO anyway. This seems to be saying Russia should not act because people will say bad things about it. Reality Check – these regimes are utterly vile, implacable, hate filled enemies who will always demonise and vilify Russia anyway – while sanctioning children, denying Russians medical treatment, stealing their property, cancelling Dostoyevsky and Tchaikovsky, and targeting disabled Russian athletes, cats, dogs, and works of art. Russians need to develop a very thick skin, if they haven’t already, and learn… Read more »

Ultrafart the Brave
Ultrafart the Brave
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
April 15, 2022

You ignore the core of this article’s case: that if what Putin did is going to expedite instead of prevent NATO’s expansion up to Russia’s very borders, then his war in Ukraine will have not only not have won, but it will spectacularly have lost… … and that’s why, as stated, I defer to the thrust of your article with a conditional caveat. If Putin’s Russia has determined to its satisfaction that the US and the Globalists, together with their vassals in NATO, had already made the decision to push ahead with the endgame of destroying Russia as the prelude… Read more »

waine
waine
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
April 15, 2022

B/S

AммА
AммА
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
April 14, 2022

This is childish to the point of being pathetic… “this article doesn’t blame Putin except for having blundered”.. Heloooo? That’s the whole premise you knitted your article around, from the headline to the last paragraph. You’re contradicting yourself. “It blames Biden (& Co.) for evil..”.. No it doesn’t, it’s actually quite opposite, both of your last two articles praised them, for outsmarting Putin. The evil part, highlighted by various links of common knowledge, seems to be just a necessary tool in achieving that goal.  In addition, you’re one who wrote the article, so the ad-hominem argument will be always there,… Read more »

АммА
АммА
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
April 15, 2022

Sir, you’re a sad excuse for a historian, journalist and whatever else wannabe (on the side, history already has an investigative attribute within itself, so your work is signed with pleonasm, but I suppose it does give a typical XXL American hint). You’re constantly cherry picking parts of other people comments while missing, apparently intentionally, point that’s been made, calling other people liars while from all that’s left of that condemnation of Biden&Co (using  10 oz. gloves) is… outsmarting Putin, which is, at this point, not visible whatsoever. If you posses a crystal ball though, please accept my apologies. BTW, when… Read more »

waine
waine
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
April 15, 2022

there was no ” blunder ” Putin went in with his eyes wide open.

Robert Iver Bruce
Robert Iver Bruce
Reply to  АммА
April 14, 2022

War is politics by other means. Putin’s war was to shore up his southern flank, but because of his miscalculation, he is about to have to worry about his northern flank as well. All he had to do was to get Ukraine/ NATO to make the first move, but he blinked first. Bad move. He might shore up Ukraine, but what will he do about both Finland and Sweden? Invade them as well. WWIII is in the cards now!!!

Ultrafart the Brave
Ultrafart the Brave
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
April 15, 2022

I wouldn’t be so sure that your article is being “disliked” because its conclusions are not to people’s liking. In fact, I would expect that the article provides an embryonic framework for considering the strategic flux through Ukraine right now. I do, however, agree with the sentiment of some other commenters that Putin’s “blunder” is a somewhat speculative assessment, given we don’t necessarily understand the Russian decision matrix nor do we have clarity on exactly what the Western powers have been scheming behind closed doors (and they are very much closed to most of us, like it or not). We… Read more »

paul
paul
Reply to  Robert Iver Bruce
April 14, 2022

Please see my comment above. I’m ready to be convinced otherwise, but I really can’t see it. Putin “waited for NATO to act” in 2014, and the results were disastrous.

Helga Fellay
Helga Fellay
Reply to  Robert Iver Bruce
April 15, 2022

he didn’t blink first, he waited eight (8) agonizing years watching ethnic Russians being butchered by the Ukraine Nazi regime before taking action. He has no interest in Finland and Sweden until or unless they will attack him. WWIII is what the fascist West wants, and it decided to start it sacrificing Ukraine.

Steve Brown
Steve Brown
Reply to  АммА
April 14, 2022

great post

Truthful
Truthful
Reply to  АммА
April 14, 2022

Agreed!!!
I know absolutely nothing of military tactics but I’m sure those in charge in Russia did the right thing.
How can I assess that? Isn’t Russia winning this war?
This long article is maybe destined to démoralise. It can’t work because this dogmatic view doesn’t fit reality.
Russia is the vilain until the western debacle starts and then what?

Bob Valdez
Bob Valdez
Reply to  АммА
April 14, 2022

An even worse garbage response to a garbage article. You both should stick to playing computer games in Mommy’s basement, instead of trying to be ‘armchair generals’ and second guess Russia.

G2mil
April 14, 2022

I predict Russia will succeed. It has four times the population of Ukraine and ten times the GDP. Most of the Russian army is not in Ukraine, yet! At first it wanted only Donbass, but with all the resistance and rude responses to diplomacy, it will grind on and take all of eastern AND southern Ukraine to include Odessa. This will add several million more people to Russia, great farmland, one-third of Ukraine’s oil and gas fields, and the great orchards and resorts along the Black Sea. These areas were only half Russian, but after millions or Ukes flee, they… Read more »

Robert Iver Bruce
Robert Iver Bruce
April 14, 2022

An existential threat should be met head on, with quick desicive action. Eric is right. Putin allowed himself to be Tojoed, and has painted himself as the aggressor. He should be smarter than that, knowing how the West works. He should have had his troops in the breakaway republics for the Ukrainian onslaught, then painted the Ukies as the baddies, then smacked them down from the north This long drawn out war might neutralize Ukraine, but now you have two nations on your northern flank begging to come into NATO. Nice work Vlad, did Schwab give you the game plan?… Read more »

paul
paul
Reply to  Eric Zuesse
April 14, 2022

This reminds me of the western liberal criticism of Palestinians that they should have produced a Gandhi figure to lead a campaign of civil disobedience. Any Palestinian Gandhi would just be shot down like a dog or burned alive by rabid Zionist settlers. You cannot be reasonable and moderate with people who hate you and just want to kill you. If this was “a trap, and Putin fell into it,” I don’t see he had any other option. The costs of inaction are far greater.

Soph
Soph
April 14, 2022

I would call this article “very American.” Russia watched for 8 years as east Ukrainians were slaughtered. The west Ukrainians (with NATO help) intended to finish the “job.” Military intervention was inevitable and NATO planned it that way, Barbarossa in slow motion. Unfortunately for NATO it is part of a dying economic block. The main issue I have with this article is the use of western media, in Britain the press receives funding from the government (introduced by Covid regulations), they report what they are told. RT’s English site is too strange to discuss. Meanwhile in Britain there have been… Read more »

threepennies
threepennies
April 14, 2022

Funny assumption, that the 3rd WW could have been avoided, since in my opinion, the 1. WW never ended and the 2nd one was just a battle. Apart from that personal vue, the 3rd WW couldn’t be avoided, because the US will not sit idly, watching China pass. The US are accelerating – threatening small countries and larger ones, like Pakistan, they did it yesterday (Libya, Iraque, Afghanistan, Syriah, etc.) and they will do so – until Europe first and the US second – are failed states. I suppose, the Russians know much more than we all do and visibly… Read more »

Bob Valdez
Bob Valdez
April 14, 2022

This is sarcasm, or you have some serious western derangement syndrome.

Joe
Joe
April 14, 2022

More of the same. You are really desperate to be right. You have no idea what Putin’s end game is and what he is willing to force down. You assume that he will stop at Ukraine. How do you know that? He may not do what you would do. That is why he is Putin and you are Zuesse.

paul
paul
April 14, 2022

I don’t agree with this. If Putin had just waited and responded to a Ukie invasion of the Donbas, it wouldn’t have mattered – this would have been spun as a Russian invasion/ aggression anyway, just like Georgia in 2008.Russia has hamstrung itself far too often worrying about opinion abroad, particularly in hostile western countries. And the Ukie army would have caused a humanitarian/ refugee crisis in Donbas, with the population there exposed to the tender mercies of the Azov Nazis.

waine
waine
April 15, 2022

So Russia should have waited for the Ukies to invade the Donbas and the western propaganda machine would have told the truth about WHO STARTED THE CONFLICT, in a pigs ear. Russia did what was right by those in the Donbas who had been bombed for the 7/8 yrs since the coup, how many civilians should have been slaughtered before Russia acted, loosing a word war dosen’t equal winning the hot war, peoples lives in the Donbas are now being saved, thanks to Russia.

Tom
Tom
April 16, 2022

Eric Zuesse and Mark Sleboda are wrong this time. East Ukrainians in Donbass are shelled on a daily basis since 2014. Obama turned Ukraine into a failed state and international law gives Russia the right to put things back in order in Ukraine. How many times did America do exactly the same in Nicaraqua, Panama? What about Afghanistan, Iraq. Zuesse is parotting CNN about Putin fell into a Biden trap. Biden admin has been showing completely useless and inept. EU burocrats exactly the same. Putin is now ramping up the Uki war. Col. McGregor said it weeks ago. The Uki… Read more »

Biden blames Putin Price Hike. Pentagon ready to dump heavy artillery into Ukraine. Update 2

Ukraine wants to make money on the war to the detriment of itself