Once the economic and financial sanctions against Russia failed the only possible outcome in Ukraine was for Russia to win and win big. Despite this clear path to the accomplishment of all Russia’s goals, the protection of the Russian-speaking majority in Ukraine’s Donbass region, the demilitarisation and denazification of Ukraine Russia was willing, a month into its military campaign, to settle for one fourth of its military goals, that Ukraine would never join NATO. This has been confirmed by a lead Ukrainian negotiator at the negotiations held in March 2002 in Istanbul.
The Ukrainian authorities ought to have jumped at the chance to settle things there and then. Further discussions were agreed to take place to iron out any remaining issues, also including meetings between Putin and Zelensky on the most thorny issues regarding Crimea and the two breakaway Russian republics. It was all there for the taking. Russia even withdrew its forces from around Kiev as a goodwill gesture when optimism of a settlement was in sight through the Istanbul negotiations. It wasn’t to be however. Statements from multiple sources, people of substance in a position to know, said that the western powers convinced the Ukrainian regime to fight on instead.
This was the crucial moment when a Ukrainian regime appeared ready to come to a rational decision to save lives and territory from the Russians, lives and territory that were sure to be lost if the Russian economy survived the onslaught of western sanctions. But instead of pushing forward toward a peaceful solution Zelensky and his people decided to bet on western financing and advanced weaponry supply from the West. The promises must have been many and offered with certain convincing guarantees regarding an ultimate Russian defeat. Who knows what subtle or unsubtle arm-twisting went on behind these scenes in the determination of the western powers to achieve their own goals through the use of Ukraine against Russia?
As we see now this entire plan by the western powers to land an immense blow upon Russia, one that they thought would bring down Putin and the entire panoply of Russia’s form of governance, has failed to an extent never conceived possible by those powers. It is surely the case that western leaders were all convinced by their own rhetoric on Russia, that Russia was nothing but a ‘gas station masquerading as a country’, that it was weak, with a disorganised and incapable military and had a financial system that could be subverted and brought to its knees along with entire foundation of Russia’s economy. It is undoubtedly the case that leaders across the West had convinced themselves of these things and that anyone contradicting them was ignored and shunned as delusional.
So it was that the leaders of western nations agreed on a course of action, just as they had done in respect of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria. Few if any lessons from those military adventures appear to have been learned. All appears to have been “Gung ho!” and “Yessir, can do!” with any naysayers laughed out of the room. Once again hubris raised its sorry head allowing group thought to replace logic, rationality and in-depth analysis. Reality was far less important than ambition. If only we could do this or that and with the might of our supposed power we CAN do all these things. We can smash the Russians using Ukraine and we must convince this tool Zelensky of this fact.
This is pretty much how it must have gone. Each committee consulting well-heeled advisers, many of them lobbyists for or paid consultants of so-called “defence” corporations, would have been left in no doubt. This was all doable and there was nothing to stop them. Combining the frontal assault on Russia’s banking system and sources of gross domestic product, commanding all western companies to leave Russia and bringing all nations worldwide into the fold against Russia would do the trick. It couldn’t fail. All the graphs, presentations, war game analyses and adviser input said so. This would be a ‘slam dunk’. All systems were go. This is ‘in the bag’.
What are all these people doing now? Are they still advising those who hold the levers of power in the West? They surely are because since 9/11 and even before, the dearth of those interested in true diplomacy, bridge building through dialogue and negotiations to create win-win solutions, was extreme. Even the Trump presidency, ostensibly one that sought good relations with Russia, brought in arch-hawks and neocons such as John Bolton and Mike Pompeo in extremely high positions totally negating any policy of renewed détente with Russia. Then Biden arrived in the Oval Office, always a political thug but now seemingly a doddering version of your favourite uncle. Biden, given the Ukraine portfolio under Obama had a very sharp knife to grind in relation to Russia.
Biden and virtually the entire Democratic party had swallowed whole the entire Russiagate narrative promoted by Hillary Clinton to explain her losing to the outsider Trump. “Russia did it” was the cry and was Biden going to speak or act against this trope so consistently, indeed endlessly repeated? Naturally he was not. Therefore the concept that Putin and Russia was responsible for every negative circumstance under the sun continued under Biden and every additional foundation to this false premise was pursued. As 2021 wore on and the rhetoric against Russia issuing from both the political and media spheres across the West only intensified there was only one way things were headed in regard to Ukraine.
Trying to avoid this destination, with appeals to the western powers to engage in talks leading to ‘a new security architecture for Europe’ that would include Russia and simultaneously an appeal to NATO to recognise Russia’s interests, Russia sought a way out. Even when all roads were blocked to Russia and the Russian military was used in an attempt to bring the Ukrainian regime to the negotiating table Russia still sought any way possible to avoid the inevitable bloodshed on both sides of continued military conflict. Even when the Ukrainian regime took the chance offered by the West to beat Russia militarily, Russia attempted in a very gradual form of military combat in an incremental pursuit of its goals, to avoid the deaths that a full scale military commitment would bring.
Through two years of Russia making incremental gains using tactics of defensive attrition no full scale strategy of all-out war was initiated. It appears that the Russian leadership and high command always had on their minds that the regime in Kiev would recognise the futility of fighting on and come back to the negotiating table. All such hopes began to be abandoned only in the last six months or so. Until then it appears that the Russians could not bring themselves to believe that the Ukrainians would be so incredibly foolhardy to believe that western promises of financing and weapon/ammunition supply could bring them anything remotely like the victory they repeatedly claimed would be theirs. Now, in these days of February and March 2024 we can see Russian patience finally and totally running out.
Early in the conflict Putin said, to the astonishment of many in the West, that Russia hadn’t really started yet. Now we see exactly what he meant. Russia has finally ‘taken the gloves off’ and is hitting targets all across Ukraine as never before. Fuel depots, energy infrastructure, decision-making centres, Ukrainian intelligence and security hubs, and much else besides are being hit hard on a continuing, nightly basis. The Russian military is moving forward taking positions from the Ukrainian army causing it large losses. Losses are estimated to be around three times greater than a year ago when even then they were very high. Russia is bringing all its military resources to bear now. We can see now, as we were never quite able to see before, though it has always in truth been evident, that ever since Russia survived the sanctions war, Ukraine never really stood any chance.
No comments:
Post a Comment