How Putin and Biden failed in Ukraine

Vladimir Putin has been pre-announced several times goals for Ukraine, and for its invasion of Ukraine, consistently contained two main points:

(1) permanently block Ukraine’s membership of the anti-Russian NATO military alliance; and (2) “denazifying” Ukraine.

On March 21, AP reported that “Zelenskyy said Kyiv would be ready to discuss the status of Crimea and the eastern Donbass region held by Russian-backed separatists after a ceasefire and steps to provide security guarantees.” The milestone was the very first time that Ukrainian President Zelensky has said there could be circumstances in which “the status of Crimea and the eastern Donbass region held by Russian-backed separatists” could even may be be negotiated by the Ukrainian government. All the leaders of the Ukrainian government, after US President Barack Obama carried out a violent coup in Ukraine who overthrew Ukraine democratically elected and neutralist President, and installed a U.S. controlled corporation fiercely anti-Russian government in Ukraine, in February 2014, declared that Ukraine never consider that the status of these two former regions of Ukraine is negotiable — that they are both part of Ukraine, independently what residents want (which, clearly and overwhelmingly, after this coup, was not ruled by this diet). (It’s definitely has been a blow — NOT a real revolution — who installed this.)

So: Zelensky was now claiming that “after a ceasefire and steps to provide security guarantees”, Zelensky would negotiate “the status of Crimea and the eastern region of Donbass held by Russian-backed separatists”. This was the first major shift in position by either side in the current conflict; and the fact that it was made by the Ukraine was indisputable proof that Russia was winning the war militarily, up to that point. (Afterwards, however, the war situation is much less clear; Ukraine could be winning it.)

Deeper and more continuous, dead end is (2) the denazification of Ukraine. In my March 21 report, “Why the question of which side is ‘Nazi’ blocks any peace agreement”was explained WHY this issue is so extremely unlikely to be agreed between Zelensky and Putin – and, therefore, why Russia will have to either accept defeat in this war or defeat Ukraine 100% militarily before it there is no capitulation of Ukraine in this conflict.

However, even if Russia defeats Ukraine in this war, Russia own national security situation (which is the ultimate reason that can justify the participation of ANY nation in any war) will be substantially reduced by war, for the following reasons:

On March 14, Chris Hedges very realistically summarized the war situation (present and future) as follows:

decision [byBiden)[byBiden)[parBiden)[byBiden)destroying the Russian economy, making the war in Ukraine a quagmire for Russia and overthrowing the regime of Vladimir Putin will open a Pandora’s box. Massive social engineering – look at Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya or Vietnam – has its own centrifugal force. It destroys those who play God.

The war in Ukraine silenced the last remnants of the left. Almost everyone has thoughtlessly embarked on the great crusade against the latest incarnation of evil, Vladimir Putin, who, like all our enemies, has become the new Hitler.

The United States will give $13.6 billion in military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine, with the Biden administration authorizing an additional $200 million in military aid. The 5,000-strong EU rapid deployment force, the recruitment of all of Eastern Europe, including Ukraine, into NATO, the reconfiguration of former Soviet bloc militaries to arms and NATO technologies have all been accelerated.

Germany, for the first time since the Second World War, is rearming massively. It has lifted its arms export ban. Its new military budget is double the amount of the old budget, with promises to increase the budget to more than 2% of GDP, which would take its army from seventh in the world to third, behind China and the United States. United.

NATO battlegroups are doubling in size in the Baltic states to over 6,000 troops. Battlegroups will be sent to Romania and Slovakia. Washington will double the number of American soldiers stationed in Poland to 9,000. Sweden and Finland are considering abandoning their neutral status to join NATO.

This is the recipe for a world war.

On April 2, Russian RT launched the banner “Finland can join NATO without a referendum – president”and reports:

The president of Finland, which borders Russia, has claimed that the broad support for NATO membership expressed in recent opinion polls could pave the way for joining the US-led military bloc without referendum. Finns’ attitude towards NATO membership took a turn after Moscow’s attack on Ukraine. …

Support for NATO membership hit a record high of 62% in Finland this month, according to a poll by Yle. A poll commissioned by Helsingin Sanomat and published this week shows that 61% of Finns want their country to join the bloc.

This indicates a complete reversal in public opinion after Moscow sent its forces to Ukraine – according to Yle, previous polls have shown Finns against NATO membership.

Putin’s goal of blocking Ukraine’s membership of Ukraine was part of his wider goal of shrink NATO (its membership) by reversing NATO’s inclusion of half of its member countries that have been added after 1991, when the Cold War ended on the side of the Soviet Union, but continued secretly on the American sideand so NATO has extended (same after the Assumed end of the cold war on the — also — American side) to include in NATO practically all European countries up to the western border of Russia. (This produces a Cuba-Missile-Crisis-in-reverse now, but one that will be much longer and longer.)

On April 3, NATO invited not only Finland but also Sweden (both officially neutral during the Cold War so far) to become members.

Consequence: the hasty invasion of Ukraine by Russia, wanted by Putin to shrink NATO, could instead lead to further expansion of NATO — even if Russia will win the war in Ukraine.

This is do not, however, to say that Putin made the wrong decision to invade Ukraine, but he did at the wrong time. Biden had forced him to invade so that Putin would prevent US nuclear missiles from eventually being planted in Ukraine just a 5 minute flight from Moscow and so (in post-2006 American strategic thinking) able to “winning” a US-planned World War III by lightning-fast invading Russia so quickly that it disabled all of Russia’s ability to retaliate.

So I expected Putin to invade Ukraine, but do not before Zelensky finally freed the 60,000 Ukrainian soldiers on the Ukraine-Donbass (border) contact line to rush into his former region of Donbass in order to slaughter his people (who had voted over 90% for the democratically elected and international neutralist Ukrainian president who obama had reversed) and take back his land — restore to Ukraine. If Putin had done this (expectedfor not having started this war), then even if many inhabitants of Donbass would have been killed and the war there would have been devastating, Russia would have been able to react immediately and send its troops in less than a week to conquer and destroy almost all those 60,000 invading Ukrainian soldiers (plus their civilian hostages or “human shields” in the Donbass), and the international “optics” of the situation would then have been much less bad for Russia than that resulting from the invasion of the Russia first – invaded “preventively”. Perhaps, in this situation, NATO own the future would be its shrinkage, instead of (as now seems to be not only possible but even probable) its accelerated expansion. (Also, Zelensky’s then international image would now be much worse, as he would have been the first to invade.)

Therefore, Putin invaded at the wrong time.

He was clearly frightened by what Biden and NATO were doing in this matter, by their support for Ukraine all the way, rushing arms into Ukraine – continuing the Ukrainian coup regime installed by Obama as an American vassal nation. On December 9, 2021, Reuters headlined “Russia maintains high tensions over Ukraine” and (in the form of a report without comment) said “Moscow has an interest in keeping tensions high”. On December 15, they got a hard-on “Russia submits proposals to the United States on security guarantees”who were demands (Putin’s “red lines”), do not ‘proposals’. December 17 IBT headband “EU threatens Russia with sanctions while NATO backs Ukraine”, and reported that NATO and almost all of the EU had rejected Russia’s demands. The NATO chief stressed that Russia would have no say in whether or not Ukraine joined NATO. RT headlining December 20 “Russia promises a ‘military response’ to any further NATO expansion.” Then, on the 26th, it was a “Question of ‘life or death’ for Russia”. (It was — and is — a “existential” question, as perceived by the Russian people, and was referred to as such by Putin.)

However, Biden himself also grossly miscalculated on this, for reasons well described by Alasdaire Macleod in his March 31 post. “On the way to a gold standard”. Biden’s response (and the leaders of all of America’s vassal nations) to impose the sanctions on Russia that have now been imposed will harm the entire global economy – not JUST Russia – and could very well be be very beneficial for Russia. economy; but, certainly, NOT the economies of nations that are cooperate with these penalties.

On the other hand, if the allegations that were published on CNN’s April 3 show “Bodies of ‘executed’ litter the street in Bucha as Ukraine accuses Russia of war crimes” prove to be true, Putin’s own reputation will be so negatively affected that he will personally lose this global conflict, even if Russia itself turns out to have won it. If this article is true, he might even end up being prosecuted as an international war criminal (like George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Joe Biden – and Ukraine leaders after the coup Yatsenyuk, Poroshenko and Zelensky — definitely should be, but never will to be).

Author’s note: first publication on The Duran

Comments are closed.