If you are reading or listening to Western media outlets, they are painting a dire picture for Russia’s military in Ukraine. Here’s a sampling of headlines over the past four weeks:
Here is a true gem from the Daily Mail published on 14 March:
- Putin’s forces may only be able to keep up the fight for another 14 days, defence sources say as increasingly-desperate invaders launch more devastating strikes on Kyiv this morning
Forbes weighed in on March 15 suggesting that Russia’s tank force was being decimated:
- The U.S. Department of Defense estimated that Russia was losing about 50 vehicles per day. On March 8 they put the Russian losses at “8% to 10% of military assets.” By Sunday they put the total vehicle losses at 184 tanks and over 380 other armored vehicles (a total of 564). Saying that this is more than 8% of Russian forces suggests they believe the grand total is much less than 10,000.
Not to be outdone in promoting hysteria, The Guardian insisted on March 22 that Russia was doing a Jackson Brown, i.e., Running on Empty:
- Russian forces have only three further days of fuel, food and ammunition left to conduct the war after a breakdown in their supply chains, Ukrainian military commanders have alleged. . . . The report from the Ukrainian armed forces general command was said to be consistent with evidence that the Russian advance had stalled, and that they had reverted to using “indiscriminate and attritional” artillery attacks on civilians.
At what point will the American people and Europe wake up and realize they have been fed a steady diet of bullshit about what is actually happening on the ground in Ukraine. I have made this point in earlier posts–why do we not see any western reporters on the frontlines with the Ukrainian forces reporting on these magnificent triumphs? Because it is a chimera–i.e., an imaginary monster compounded of incongruous parts.
The most recent victory declaration from Ukraine touts “victories” in pushing back the Russian horde from Kiev. This assumes that Russia’s objective over the last three weeks was to capture Kiev and hang Zelensky from a bridge.
Let me suggest an alternative explanation. Russia’s encirclement of Kiev over the past three weeks was intended to pin down a significant portion of what remains of Ukraine’s military forces so that Russia could carry out offensive operations in the east and the south. Mission accomplished.
Some of the Russian units that were deployed around Kiev are now moving east towards Kharkiv. Russian forces have destroyed the Ukrainian neo-Nazi entity that controlled Mariupol. Russia now controls Mariupol. Let me put this in simple strategic terms–Russia has eliminated any possibility of Ukraine being able to use the Black Sea for ship borne imports or exports. Ukraine is now cut off in the south.
Russia’s next focus will be on the Ukrainian forces that still exist in the Donbas and Kharkiv. Eliminating them is the likely next objetive.
One comment regarding Russian casualties. If Russia had suffered massive losses, the wounded and dead would be flooding back into Russia. There is no way that Russia could hide such losses, if real, from parents, siblings and spouses. Field hospitals just inside the western border of Russia would be filled to overflowing. And decimated units would be pulled from the fighting to refit and rebuild. NONE OF THAT IS HAPPENING.
Instead, Russia continues to maintain large reserves on its western border and the units that carried out the invasion remain intact. At the same time, Russia controls much of the air space in Ukraine and continues to hit Ukrainian bases and fuel depots in the extreme western portion of Ukraine.
The propaganda effort in the west has been very effective in persuading masses of Americans to believe Ukraine has a chance at beating Russia. But this belief is not tied to any facts from the battlefield.
I know some analysts and pundits believe that Russia’s use of sophisticated missiles that are precision weapons, is a sign of Russian desperation. But I see it differently. First, it gives the Russians a real battlefield to prove their capability. Second, the use of these missiles has exposed NATO’s inability to defend against them. Third, hitting logistic centers and fuel disrupts NATO efforts to help Ukraine restock, rearm and gather more troops. Fourth, these strikes keep the West worried about Western Ukraine while ignoring what will happen in the Cauldrons created in the east.
This is not the first time that the U.S. military has misread the intelligence about enemy plans. Remember TET? The Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese Army unleashed a massive, countrywide offensive in January 1968 that shocked U.S. military commanders and the American public. While U.S. and South Vietnamese military forces ultimately quashed the attack, it was done at a terrible cost and played an important role in building anti-war support in the United States.
We should know in the next few weeks if Russia is a spent force or if western media has been deceiving itself and the public it is supposed to serve. I have seen no evidence that Russia is struggling or bogged down. It is moving deliberately, decisively and forcefully. Just ask the survivors of the Azov battalion (if there are any).
Larry
Thanks for great synopsis. This certainly tracks with other informed people (Ritter, Martyanov, Saker, etc.). The propaganda and narrative control is stunning. Sadly there are only a handful of friends/ family with whom I could have a “rational” discussion about this.
Speaking of insanity have you seen the recent Gonzalo Lira YT? He makes a strong case that Nuland is the architect of this, certainly used by Anglo forces, in what amounts to another attempt to overpower Russia.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TzR—YDDIQ
I would also draw your attention to the history of struggle between “American” and “English” systems presented by Matthew Ehret in his book “The Clash of Two Americas”. Essentially the “American system” is founded on original principles of the revolution. International relations are based on a “win-win” arrangement for mutual development. Importantly the relations developed by Franklin, Lincoln, McKinley, JFK envision cooperation with Russia/China.
The “English system” has tried, often successful, to overthrow and control the US for 200 years. The last was JFK assassination ( w/ RFK & King in 68) which was also coordinated with the coup d’etat in Canada (Diffenbaker) the same year. This eliminated another visionary and cemented Anglo control over North America.
The Bolshevik “revolution”, WW2 were attempts to break Russia. The current effort has same objective!
Regards, Jeff
Gonzalo Lira is worthwhile viewing now under these wartime circumstances but he’s an open anti-Semite. He blames the neocon agenda on Nuland because she’s Jewish. Never mind there are plenty of neocons and neolibs who aren’t Jewish, and that the Ukraine debacle is bigger than one woman.
Joe Lauria is a much better source on Ukraine. The modern Russophobia enterprise really started with Zbigniew Brzezinski, under Carter.
https://consortiumnews.com/2022/03/27/can-russia-escape-the-us-trap/
A very valid point.
be careful of so casually calling someone an anti-Semite, for it carries significant weight. Present your case if you are confident.
I have followed Gonzalo for a long time and he has made references to many potential contributing factors in theorizing the root causes of behavior arising from the State Department, NGOs, and other influencers. Psychological, cultural, religious, familial, and other concerns are all multifactorial components – it cannot be distilled to only a handful of components.
Just saw this. I am not casually calling anyone anything.
As I said, and I guess I have to repeat it, Lira is worthwhile as an alternative info source NOW. In the present circumstances, where good info is so hard to get, I do listen to him.
Thank you Larry for your objective analysis of the war situation. When we live in a society where we celebrate gender fluidity, I really feel sorry for the adolosent kids who face maturity problems as they grow to be adults now the MSM is doing the same to us the adults telling us that we don’t know any better because they figured the whole universe and we should fall in line. They have succeeded in creating a society of uncritical thinkers. Thank you again for posting sanity and critical thinking to this world.
Reportedly, negotiations between Ukraine and Russia are ongoing. Whenever an agreement is reached, the terms will be most telling of all: IF Ukraine agrees to neutrality, agrees to forego a quest for NATO membership, agrees to Donbass autonomy, what will that tell us? IF the terms are such, how will the MSM spin it to make it seem like Russia lost? Could it be that’s why they’re trying to convince people Russia’s goal is to take over all of Ukraine?
Don’t worry they’ll find a way to present the west debacle in Ukraine as a victory for Europe that showed it’s solidarity with ‘freedom’ and it’s independence from Russia’s gas…
Then ukraine will disappear from the headlines and replaced by nice Taiwan oppressed and threatened by bad China communiste regime etc…
Soon Ukraine like Afghanistan will become a fading memory. No accountability, just move on…
NATO neutrality isn’t really a win for Russia. There was a lot of agreement pre-invasion that Ukraine would never get NATO membership despite the 2008 Bucharest statement, simply because it had so far to go in meeting the requirements and because of the internal opposition against Ukraine joining from Germany and France. Forcing Ukraine to forego NATO membership doesn’t dramatically change the status quo.
The independent regions aren’t really a conclusive success either. The independent states are war-torn and unstable. Post-war, their governments will probably struggle to provide basic social services and face legitimacy issues from those Ukrainians who see them as Russian puppets. They’ll probably face insurgency too. If those states join Russia, Moscow then has to foot the bill for rebuilding Donbas infrastructure and security services to maintain order – a pricey proposition.
I think there’s little doubt Russia is going to win this war. BUT, the question is, what strategic objectives will they gain? I’m no bigger fan of the MSM then you are, but pointing out that Russia might not gain all that much isn’t MSM spin, but something that’s coming from lots of think-tanks and independent assessments too.
What I hear around from Russian Army after those atrocities done by Ukrainian Nazis to POW is:
Work brothers, you know what needs to be done!
I would not want to be anywhere near Ukraine forces in near future.
And yes it seems focus shifted heavily to Donbass region. Very good analysis of situation and it looks like you are right in every element in your text. We on the west will be ashamed with war crime tribunal Russians will put on Crimea after this intervention finishes. I decided to stop watching any MSM and just follow few of good analysts (you are one of them), The Duran and Gonsalo Lira also.
Keep good work,
B
My 2c$
All war crimes should be punished equally. I hope there will also be a war crimes tribunal for Russia’s deliberate and horrific shelling of civilian areas and apartment buildings that has now been confirmed.
Our MSM managed to surprise me with the absurd claim that precision strikes on military targets is a sign of weakness. It is the exact opposite of weakness. Weakness would be blowing up your own assets to prevent it from being captured.
————-
If the final peace agreement is anything like the details that have been leaked, this would prove that Russia won on the ground. Losers do not get favorable terms like that.
Its true that the MSM is overhyping Russian losses to some degree and glossing over the fact that Russian military victory is still pretty certain.
HOWEVER
It seems like this article cherry picks a couple of the most extreme MSM predictions about the Russian military to try to conclude the Russian military is in tip-top shape and will win a decisive victory.
There are pretty reasonable and nuanced assessments, which this article ignores, showing real problems in the Russian military (logistics, shortage of precision guided munitions, inability to conclusively get air superiority, etc) raising legitimate questions about their capabilities and relatively significant losses.
I think Mr. Johnson needs to engage with the legitimate question, does a battlefield victory for Russia actually mean a strategic victory for them? Or will it be another Afghanistan 1989?
Ok. You spell out the Afghan scenario for us. Let’s see if you’re as smart as you think you are.
Absolutely; The Afghanistan scenario is just one in which the costs in terms of credibility, military losses, the damage sanctions inflict on their economy, the financial burden of sustaining the war, fighting an insurgency, and becoming an isolated pariah state, outweigh the strategic gains of their incursion.
Assuming Russia is taking the ceasefire negotiations seriously (still an uncertainty), their endgame seems to be a NATO-neutral Ukraine, recognition of Crimea as part of Russia, and recognition of independent regions.
Russia already had de-facto recognition of its annexation of Crimea as NATO and the US largely turned a blind eye and were unwilling to kick them out. Ukraine was not going to get NATO membership anytime soon despite the 2008 Bucharest summit declaration – Ukraine was too far from meeting the requirements and there was too much internal opposition from Germany and France. The only significant gain appears to be creation of two war-torn and unstable republics on Russia’s border, a financial and security liability for Russia, especially if they vote to be ruled by Moscow.
Meanwhile there’s the high likelihood of a prolonged, fierce, and well armed insurgency in the new Russian puppet republics and any other territory they try to occupy that will bleed Russian forces and finances even further.
The Ukrainian populace is cohesive and ready to fight down to the last grandma. Hatred of Russian invaders has only been worsened by Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of civilian areas and leveling of cities. The many who are displaced or have lost everything are angry and have little else to lose.
Ukrainians are already turning to asymmetric urban warfare tactics that are simple and low-cost (civilian drones outfitted with bombs, IEDs, daisy-chain attacks on Russian convoys, NLAW attacks from rooftops, molotov cocktails, etc) which would intensify, especially with resources focused on an area like Donbas. In the long-term, it will continually get more expensive for Russia to maintain order in puppet states or otherwise. Ukrainian insurgents could down an attack helicopter at the cost of a MANPADs while Russia would have to try to hunt them down out of the populace with entire troop companies.
Overall, Russia’s costs are mounting and will continue to climb facing a highly motivated and well equipped insurgency. Little in the way of strategic objectives seems to have been gained. A lot of assessments are saying with good reason that this looks an awful lot like another Afghanistan for Russia that will see them win every battle but lose the war.
Academics are so insufferable
How can people with this much iq and education be so ignorant?
Academics are blaming this entire war on shock therapy, and truly believe that the world will be all butterflies and rainbows if shock therapy worked in Russia and they became like Poland
They simply can’t accept that shock therapy didn’t work, because it was never intended to work it was intended to destroy the Russian economy.
They simply cannot accept that the deep state exists
Russia was always going to be a target for the deep state due to its size and potential to be a superpower