It might even save his life. Receiving letters from abroad, would ensure that his jailers know he's not invisible and that people around the world would notice if he disappeared
That was my deleted post, sorry for the spam can’t edit.
But i agree 100%; I don’t see how Putin maintains power if he loses the support of the Australian NEET community. Don’t expect any big reaction in the west.
5 eyes will choke out any attempt to build outrage for Girkin in the west. That’s bc (1) girkin would run the war far better than any other option, so him dying in prison as an anti-Putin martyr is the best outcome for NATO, and (2) MH17 is why the Dutch are putting so many resources into Ukraine, they’ll see girkin dying in prison as karmic justice even tho it’s an extrajudicial execution.
If Putin is smart he’ll send Girkin back to the front line and pat tillman him in an offensive against Kursk. Then Putin can co-opt his legacy.
" Perhaps seeing how this Hezbollah thing turns out for Lebanon and Iran might be the eye-opening moment for ZAnon enthusiasts. Because the parallels with Russia should be immediately apparent. "
You're more correct the you know. Check out this comedy show. IMHO Iran has been under Zio control for decades. Just like Russia, China and so forth .
" Pezeshkian on Sept. 29 suggested that western nations had promised Iran that they would secure a ceasefire in Gaza if it opted for a “non-response” over the assassination of Haniyeh.
The Iranian president said Israel’s killing of Nasrallah showed that the alleged promise by the leaders of European countries and the US was “completely false.” He added, “Giving chances to these criminals [Israelis] only encourages them to commit more crimes.”
Prominent former lawmaker Ali Motahari argued that Iran had been “tricked by America” into not avenging Haniyeh, which he insisted is what led to Nasrallah’s death. "
" Days after reports claimed an Iranian informant provided Israel with crucial intelligence that led to the assassination of Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah, former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has revealed the head of Israel’s national intelligence agency Mossad, operational in Iran to counter Israeli espionage, was himself an Israeli national.
In an interview with CNN-Turk, Ahmadinejad also said Iran’s secret services had created a special unit to combat Mossad operating in Iran, and that 20 other agents were also involved.
The alleged double agents were providing Israel with sensitive information on the Iranian nuclear program, according to his comments in the interview.
“The boss of the Iranian anti-Mossad intelligence agency was a Mossad agent,” he said. "-
It’s an overworked euphemism but the more I read (your posts) & RT “news” the more I’m reminded of Orwell 1984. There is a glorious and spectacular deception at play here, where the blood of patriots is fertilising the breadbasket of the world, all for the future benefit of the Fabulous Liars Club.
John Helmer Reporting from Moscow Indicates that Putin Is Preparing Russia’s Surrender
Political, if not actual survival would seem to be an issue:
The Russian military, or at least significant parts of it, are concerned that concessions will play as a defeat and have adverse effects on Russia. Fleet commander, Admiral Sergei Avakyant, removed from command by Putin, and Deputy Chairman Medvedev of the Russian National Security Council view concessions as unacceptable. Helmer speculates whether the military will remove Putin. If so, I would imagine his replacement would be a more hardlined person.
What follows is from Helmer’s report:
“Medinsky’s version of the end-of-war terms is flatly opposed by the General Staff. In the Security Council the General Staff’s case is argued by Deputy Chairman Medvedev. Medinsky’s appearance at the Security Council last week is a sign, Moscow sources believe, of the intensification of the debate between the Army and the President.
In an unusual disclosure of military command thinking, the former Pacific Fleet commander, Admiral Sergei Avakyants, has written earlier this month that “despite its external logic and attractiveness”, the Medinsky terms for ending the Special Military Operation “lead to a catastrophe that threatens to become the last and most tragic in the history of the Russian people. In Russia, it is dangerous for the current government to lose wars, especially when for a long time this government held parades and convinced the people of the invincibility of their native army. Defeat will cause disappointment and loss of faith, but not in the army, rather in the political leadership.”
Avakyants was warning Putin publicly. In private, Putin had ordered Avakyants’s dismissal in April. No Russian military blogger has reported the circumstances of the clash between Avakyants and the Kremlin.
I used to read Helmer, but got spook vibes from him. This could be an attempt to undermine Putin.
Putin has been built up for years as the reincarnation of Hitler by the West so one can hardly imagine the West being magnanimous (ICC indictment and all)..
This response is so pathetic and predictable, it's like Nikola Mikovic said, if Estonia invades Russia, Zakharova will appeal to the international community to uphold international law :))))
That might change after the Commander of the Estonian Defense Forces spoke last week about Tallinn’s plans to close off the Gulf of Finland. Here are his exact words as reported by publicly financed ERR:
“Maritime defense is an area where cooperation between Finland and Estonia is set to increase, and we may be able to make more concrete plans on how, if necessary, we can completely block adversary activities in the Baltic Sea, literally speaking. Militarily, this is achievable, we are ready for it, and we are moving in that direction. If there is a threat and it is necessary, we are ready to do it to protect ourselves.”
That prompted the Russian Foreign Ministry to respond as follows according to Sputnik:
“If Finland and Estonia plan to impose a complete blockade of the Gulf of Finland for Russian shipping, Russia will regard such actions as an obvious violation of international maritime laws. Its norms do not contain provisions that allow, even based on some 'threat,' to introduce measures to restrict shipping, much less unilateral measures of a discriminatory nature aimed at a specific state…but we proceed from the fact that in this matter they will strictly adhere to the norms of international law.” https://korybko.substack.com/p/dont-forget-about-how-natos-northeastern
Russia agrees to accept payment in Pakistani tangerines amid payment difficulties
TASS reports that Russian chickpeas and lentils will be exchanged for tangerines and rice from Pakistan.
The decision to move to an exchange was made because the parties “are experiencing certain difficulties in making mutual payments,” explained Pakistan’s Deputy Minister of Commerce Nasir Hamid.
Under the agreement, the Russian company will supply 15,000 tons of chickpeas and 10,000 tons of lentils in exchange for 15,000 tons of tangerines and 10,000 tons of potatoes.
" The appeal by Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan for the lifting of US CAATSA sanctions in a recent TV interview highlighted the difficulties of US-Turkish relations and the implicit but clear admission that Washington and Ankara are looking for a formula that would under certain conditions allow even the return of Turkey to the F-35 program. "
It's difficult to blame the Turks for abandoning Russian S 400 anti aircraft systems. Seeing how Russia gets hit by every type of drone Ukraine throws at it, I'm surprised that other countries that bought this system don't ask for their money back
By Allowing Regions to Form Militias, Moscow Increases Likelihood of Future Civil War
Paul Goble
Executive Summary:
The Russian cabinet is in support of a Duma proposal to allow the governors of oblasts, krais, and republics to form their own militias to deal with natural disasters and military interventions, such as the Ukrainian advancement into Kursk oblast.
Moscow is confident it can control these new units, but the recent Prigozhin revolt and actions of Ramzan Kadyrov’s Chechen forces cast doubts.
With the eventuality of a transition of power or weakened regime, these regional forces would increase the probability and violence of a civil war.
In September, the Kremlin announced its support for a proposal before the State Duma, allowing the heads of all federal subjects—the governors of oblasts, krais, and republics—to create their own regional military units. These regional militias will deal with extraordinary circumstances, including both natural disasters, such as flooding and fires, and foreign interventions, such as the Ukrainian advancement into Kursk oblast (Kommersant.ru, September 16). On September 16, the Russian cabinet approved amendments to laws governing military units as proposed by Andrey Kartapolov, an army lieutenant general who is a member of the ruling United Russia party and heads the State Duma’s defense committee. Moscow thus dramatically increased the number of actors allowed to form militias, which previously had only included those regions adjoining Ukraine and large corporations in the Russian far north (The Barents Observer, February 9, 2023; Charter97, September 1).
This government-backed measure, which will almost certainly be signed into law by the State Duma, is intended to allow regions to combat extraordinary circumstances both in the event of military conflict and during peacetime. This will also address the serious problem that many regions in Russia remain dangerously unprotected against any military challenge (Theins.ru, June 30, 2023). Simultaneously, it has the potential to give regions and republics armed forces that could be deployed in the event Russia descends into a civil war. Presumably, Moscow believes that it will be able to maintain central control over these militias through centrally organized recruitment, arming, and training. The Prigozhin revolt last year and the increasingly independent stance of Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov, who already has his own forces, strongly suggest that units created within a region under a regional leader are more likely to be loyal to their immediate commanders than to Moscow (Kavkazr.com, May 1, 2023).
Some in the regions and republics have already spoken out about the need for such regional defense forces, given Moscow’s inability to help them overcome natural disasters, defend against terrorist attacks, or even meet basic demands regarding regional needs (Window on Eurasia, June 30, 2023, April 6). Such talk is likely to increase, especially in non-ethnically Russian regions. This is all the more so if the new regional militias are primarily comprised of veterans of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine, as many currently expect, and have the support of the right-wing “Russian Community” organization, which is openly hostile to non-ethnically Russian groups. This organization has been working hand in glove with Russian officials to suppress non-ethnic-Russians in the North Caucasus and is now reportedly actively involved in recruiting Ukrainian war veterans in the Russian North for new regional forces (VK.com, July 2; Window on Eurasia, August 30; The Barents Observer, September 26). Unsurprisingly, the Russian Community’s involvement in this endeavor has already prompted one Circassian leader to call for non-ethnic Russians to form their own “community” organizations (Facebook.com, September 29). It is probable that leaders will suggest that these non-ethnically Russian groups play a key role in the formation of regional militias in their respective non-ethnically Russian republics.
The creation of these militias carries both short- and long-term consequences. In the short term, Moscow’s creation of multiple military hierarchies rather than maintaining a single military structure may make a coup attempt against Putin more likely. The point is often made that Russia lacks a tradition of military coups in large part because tsars, commissars, and presidents have insisted on having a single military loyal to themselves rather than creating multiple “armies,” who might be tempted to fight among themselves or challenge the country’s leader. Putin is violating that tradition, however, and thus putting himself at risk, according to some observers (Window on Eurasia, January 11). For instance, the Kremlin leader’s permissive attitude toward the Wagner Group led directly to Prigozhin’s armed revolt. The establishment of regional militias could open the way for similar and perhaps more successful actions, especially if some of them were to cooperate, a possibility made likely by the fact that regional identities are often far broader than the territories into which Moscow has carved the country. (On that oft-neglected aspect of Russian politics, see Window on Eurasia, August 27, 2022, April 12, September 11).
The speed of Prigozhin’s initial advance through Russia highlighted these risks to the Putin regime. It may help explain Moscow’s backing for regional militias, but the rapidity with which the Kremlin recovered and suppressed the Wagner leader underscores the likelihood that, for the time being, the appearance of regional military forces will not lead to a successful coup. The long-term consequences in the event of political instability, however, are far more pressing. If Moscow is weakened and regional leaders seek to carve out more power for themselves, they almost certainly would view the new regional militias as an important resource, one that the Russian government has now given them the power to form. In that event, these forces would likely be involved not only in challenging Moscow but also in fighting with each other, especially with those of a different ethnicity.
It is widely assumed that if the Russian Federation does fall apart after Putin leaves the scene, the process will resemble 1991, which was remarkably peaceful due to the fact that Moscow alone had significant military resources and the Russian Federation had agreed to the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The approaching end of the Russian Federation will be fundamentally different, not only because many in Moscow will not accept such a possibility, but also because regions and republics will now have their own military resources.
At the Sixth Forum of Free Peoples of Post-Russia in April 2023, this author argued that “the approaching end of the Russian Federation is more likely to resemble 1918 than 1991,” not only with regard to the amount of violence but also concerning what the arrangements will be when the dust settles after a civil war (Region.expert, April 26, 2023). The decision of the Putin regime to form regional militias guarantees there will be more violence in that event, but could also mean that the disintegration of the Russian Federation will be far more complete at the end of this historical cycle.
‼️🇷🇺🇮🇱 On the 2nd of October 2024, Vladimir Putin issued a Presidential statement congratulating all ‘Russian Jews’ with the beginning of their holiday - Rosh Hashanah.
Zelenskyy’s Victory Plan Attempts to Redefine Victory and Defeat
Vladimir Socor
Executive Summary:
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy presented a “victory plan” to the Joe Biden administration and two US presidential candidates. The plan envisages arming Ukraine adequately for negotiating “peace through strength” with Moscow as well as strengthening economic sanctions on Russia.
The military situation, damaged energy systems at the onset of winter, and seeming fatigue on the part of some Western partners are causing Kyiv to accept negotiating with Russia. Kyiv has apparently dropped its earlier conditions, namely the withdrawal or eviction of Russian forces from Ukrainian territories, Russian reparations for war damages, and prosecution of war crimes.
Zelenskyy envisages a three-month timetable for the delivery of Western military aid that would turn the tide of war in Ukraine’s favor and commence negotiations with Russia in the framework of a world peace summit.
Inadequate Western military support is compelling Ukraine to accept negotiating with Russia from a posture of weakness. While the battlefield situation seems sustainable for the time being, despite local reverses, Russia’s relentless air strikes on Ukrainian energy supply systems at the onset of winter add an element of urgency to domestic political challenges. In Washington and other capitals, meanwhile, proposals are multiplying for negotiations to “end the war” whereby Russia would retain the Ukrainian territories it has seized. Some of Ukraine’s Western partners hope to see Russia join a peace summit before the end of this year.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has responded by launching his own plan for a negotiated outcome, dubbed the Victory Plan. It is designed, in part, to preempt outright defeatist proposals from being tabled by other parties. Zelenskyy presented this plan to US President Joe Biden, presidential candidates Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump, and the G7+ leaders during his recent visit to the United States (Ukrinform, September 28).
The basic document is due to be released during the coming weeks or months, although some parts will even then be kept confidential, according to Presidential Office chief Andrii Yermak (Ukrinform, September 30). Some major elements of the plan can, nevertheless, be pieced together from fragmentary public statements made by Zelenskyy and his top aides.
The plan’s declared goal is to enlist Western military support for “compelling Russia” to negotiate an end to the war that would amount to a “just and sustainable peace” for Ukraine. This logic formally mirrors that of the Biden administration from 2022 to date, namely, providing Ukraine with limited levels of military support that would merely improve Kyiv’s position in eventual negotiations with Russia. The administration’s logic is a defeatist one inasmuch as it presupposes negotiations based on frontlines cutting across Ukraine, in effect predetermining the country’s partition.
What is publicly known of Kyiv’s plan marks a substantial retreat from previous positions. From September 2022 to date, Ukraine ruled out negotiations with Russia in general and with the Kremlin in particular for as long as Russia occupied Ukrainian territories (see EDM, October 5, 2022). Those were, in effect, Ukrainian preconditions to negotiating with Russia. A negotiated outcome, in Kyiv’s view, had to entail Russian reparations for war damages and prosecution of war crimes committed during Russia’s aggression. Kyiv’s recent public statements no longer explicitly mention those preconditions and outcomes. Ukraine’s Western partners had supported reparations and prosecution for some time but are currently soft-pedaling those items.
Kyiv aims to have its victory plan accepted by Western partners and its implementation launched “this autumn”—a timeframe reflecting Kyiv’s sense of military urgency and need to encourage the nation to endure harsh winter conditions. During and following their US visit, Zelenskyy, Yermak, and a few of their aides have hinted at the following elements within the victory plan:
Arming Ukraine with advanced weaponry prioritizing long-range missiles, electronic warfare equipment, air defense systems, and artillery shells. Allowing Ukraine to strike military targets deep inside Russia with Western-supplied weapons at their maximum range. Helping Ukraine to fully equip all the available combat brigades.
Using Russian frozen assets in the West to support Ukraine’s defense against Russia’s aggression. Finalizing a political decision in that regard and agreeing on an implementation mechanism.
A clear promise, ahead of any negotiations, to invite Ukraine to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) “after the end of the war.”
Some form of Western security guarantees as an interim solution, stronger than the bilateral security agreements recently signed by NATO member states with Ukraine and pending Ukraine’s eventual accession to NATO.
Calling a second “world peace summit,” this time with Russia’s participation, in November this year, following up on the first such summit that Switzerland hosted in June this year without Russia’s participation (President.gov.ua, September 24, 29, October 1, 2; RBK-Ukraine, September 30).
Kyiv professes hope that the October meeting of the US-led Ramstein Group at the level of heads of state and government would arm Ukraine properly for regaining some territories ahead of any negotiations with Russia. This would presuppose a major policy change in Washington. The existing policy does not lead to negotiating “peace through strength” as Kyiv sees it.
Meanwhile, the Biden administration and the German government are the leading opponents of inviting Ukraine to join NATO. The White House adopted this position publicly in May 2021, before Russia’s all-out invasion of Ukraine. Expecting this administration or Berlin to reverse their position any time soon on Kyiv’s victory plan timeframe appears unrealistic. Kyiv’s victory plan indirectly concedes this by seeking Western interim security guarantees outside NATO. By the same token it implies that the bilateral security agreements fall short of providing reliable security guarantees (see EDM, August 6, 7, and 14 [1], [2]).
Zelenskyy’s plan aspires to levels of US and European military support that would turn the tide of the war in Ukraine’s favor, even if not regaining the Russian-occupied territories in their entirety.
A war outcome that would leave Ukrainian territories under Russian occupation, the country devastated economically and demographically, the rump Ukraine stranded outside NATO, and Western partners instead of Russia funding Ukraine’s reconstruction, would add up to Russia’s victory. Kyiv’s declared goal, however, is a “just and sustainable peace.” This formulation allows Kyiv and its Western partners some leeway for redefining the notions of victory or defeat according to political necessity.
The die is now cast for the disintegration of the Russian Federation regrettably. This is the coda for the process unleashed since August 1991 and the failure of the Yanaev putsch against Gorbachev/Yeltsin.
‼️🚨🇷🇺 Russian Donbass veteran & military blogger for Wagner ‘The Thirteenth’ (300k followers on Telegram) has been arrested by Russian authorities a day after he started posting about ‘Jews’ ✡️
Russians soldiers have begun ‘noticing’ & naming them.
"The number of people prepared to seriously risk their lives storming well-fortified Ukrainian positions is not unlimited. That is why, over the past two and a half years, Moscow has reportedly forced thousands of migrant workers and foreign students to join the Russian army to fight against Ukraine. The problem for the Kremlin, however, is that it can no longer count on a large pool of migrants to fight on the Russian side." https://www.persuasion.community/p/putins-manpower-shortage
I am seeing more and more of these pieces of news, this one from Quora, that only reinforce the Rurik take on the special needs op
Russian Soldier Surrenders in Zaporizhzhia After Realizing Commanders' Brutality
In the Zaporizhzhia direction, a Russian soldier made the crucial decision to surrender after finding a leaflet with instructions. Amir Salipovich Mukhambetaliev, from the 70th Motor Rifle Regiment, traveled over 1,000 kilometers from Astrakhan, only to witness firsthand how Russian commanders were ruthlessly sacrificing their units in battle.
Thank you, Rurik, for all the tireless work toward opening people's eyes, you surely helped me see more clearly
You should write a letter to Strelkov and post it here. Let him know there are hikki NEETs in Australia wishing him well. This will improve his mood.
How many of us Aussies subscribe to Rurik ya reckon?
One here.
It might even save his life. Receiving letters from abroad, would ensure that his jailers know he's not invisible and that people around the world would notice if he disappeared
That was my deleted post, sorry for the spam can’t edit.
But i agree 100%; I don’t see how Putin maintains power if he loses the support of the Australian NEET community. Don’t expect any big reaction in the west.
5 eyes will choke out any attempt to build outrage for Girkin in the west. That’s bc (1) girkin would run the war far better than any other option, so him dying in prison as an anti-Putin martyr is the best outcome for NATO, and (2) MH17 is why the Dutch are putting so many resources into Ukraine, they’ll see girkin dying in prison as karmic justice even tho it’s an extrajudicial execution.
If Putin is smart he’ll send Girkin back to the front line and pat tillman him in an offensive against Kursk. Then Putin can co-opt his legacy.
smart
" Perhaps seeing how this Hezbollah thing turns out for Lebanon and Iran might be the eye-opening moment for ZAnon enthusiasts. Because the parallels with Russia should be immediately apparent. "
You're more correct the you know. Check out this comedy show. IMHO Iran has been under Zio control for decades. Just like Russia, China and so forth .
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
" Pezeshkian on Sept. 29 suggested that western nations had promised Iran that they would secure a ceasefire in Gaza if it opted for a “non-response” over the assassination of Haniyeh.
The Iranian president said Israel’s killing of Nasrallah showed that the alleged promise by the leaders of European countries and the US was “completely false.” He added, “Giving chances to these criminals [Israelis] only encourages them to commit more crimes.”
Prominent former lawmaker Ali Motahari argued that Iran had been “tricked by America” into not avenging Haniyeh, which he insisted is what led to Nasrallah’s death. "
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
" Days after reports claimed an Iranian informant provided Israel with crucial intelligence that led to the assassination of Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah, former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has revealed the head of Israel’s national intelligence agency Mossad, operational in Iran to counter Israeli espionage, was himself an Israeli national.
In an interview with CNN-Turk, Ahmadinejad also said Iran’s secret services had created a special unit to combat Mossad operating in Iran, and that 20 other agents were also involved.
The alleged double agents were providing Israel with sensitive information on the Iranian nuclear program, according to his comments in the interview.
“The boss of the Iranian anti-Mossad intelligence agency was a Mossad agent,” he said. "-
It’s an overworked euphemism but the more I read (your posts) & RT “news” the more I’m reminded of Orwell 1984. There is a glorious and spectacular deception at play here, where the blood of patriots is fertilising the breadbasket of the world, all for the future benefit of the Fabulous Liars Club.
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2024/10/01/john-helmer-reporting-from-moscow-indicates-that-putin-is-preparing-russias-surrender/
John Helmer Reporting from Moscow Indicates that Putin Is Preparing Russia’s Surrender
Political, if not actual survival would seem to be an issue:
The Russian military, or at least significant parts of it, are concerned that concessions will play as a defeat and have adverse effects on Russia. Fleet commander, Admiral Sergei Avakyant, removed from command by Putin, and Deputy Chairman Medvedev of the Russian National Security Council view concessions as unacceptable. Helmer speculates whether the military will remove Putin. If so, I would imagine his replacement would be a more hardlined person.
What follows is from Helmer’s report:
“Medinsky’s version of the end-of-war terms is flatly opposed by the General Staff. In the Security Council the General Staff’s case is argued by Deputy Chairman Medvedev. Medinsky’s appearance at the Security Council last week is a sign, Moscow sources believe, of the intensification of the debate between the Army and the President.
In an unusual disclosure of military command thinking, the former Pacific Fleet commander, Admiral Sergei Avakyants, has written earlier this month that “despite its external logic and attractiveness”, the Medinsky terms for ending the Special Military Operation “lead to a catastrophe that threatens to become the last and most tragic in the history of the Russian people. In Russia, it is dangerous for the current government to lose wars, especially when for a long time this government held parades and convinced the people of the invincibility of their native army. Defeat will cause disappointment and loss of faith, but not in the army, rather in the political leadership.”
Avakyants was warning Putin publicly. In private, Putin had ordered Avakyants’s dismissal in April. No Russian military blogger has reported the circumstances of the clash between Avakyants and the Kremlin.
I used to read Helmer, but got spook vibes from him. This could be an attempt to undermine Putin.
Putin has been built up for years as the reincarnation of Hitler by the West so one can hardly imagine the West being magnanimous (ICC indictment and all)..
This response is so pathetic and predictable, it's like Nikola Mikovic said, if Estonia invades Russia, Zakharova will appeal to the international community to uphold international law :))))
That might change after the Commander of the Estonian Defense Forces spoke last week about Tallinn’s plans to close off the Gulf of Finland. Here are his exact words as reported by publicly financed ERR:
“Maritime defense is an area where cooperation between Finland and Estonia is set to increase, and we may be able to make more concrete plans on how, if necessary, we can completely block adversary activities in the Baltic Sea, literally speaking. Militarily, this is achievable, we are ready for it, and we are moving in that direction. If there is a threat and it is necessary, we are ready to do it to protect ourselves.”
That prompted the Russian Foreign Ministry to respond as follows according to Sputnik:
“If Finland and Estonia plan to impose a complete blockade of the Gulf of Finland for Russian shipping, Russia will regard such actions as an obvious violation of international maritime laws. Its norms do not contain provisions that allow, even based on some 'threat,' to introduce measures to restrict shipping, much less unilateral measures of a discriminatory nature aimed at a specific state…but we proceed from the fact that in this matter they will strictly adhere to the norms of international law.” https://korybko.substack.com/p/dont-forget-about-how-natos-northeastern
I am sure this is just all another 5d Putin chess move
Attritional warfare, baby, Sun-Tzu page 54 at his finest and whatnot :)))
Still winning, Brics-style?
PS01 △
@PStyle0ne1
Russia agrees to accept payment in Pakistani tangerines amid payment difficulties
TASS reports that Russian chickpeas and lentils will be exchanged for tangerines and rice from Pakistan.
The decision to move to an exchange was made because the parties “are experiencing certain difficulties in making mutual payments,” explained Pakistan’s Deputy Minister of Commerce Nasir Hamid.
Under the agreement, the Russian company will supply 15,000 tons of chickpeas and 10,000 tons of lentils in exchange for 15,000 tons of tangerines and 10,000 tons of potatoes.
Turkey friend to Russia . Turkey not lie. SMH
- Turkey excludes $2.5 bln Russian S-400 missiles from new air defense system project -
https://nordicmonitor.com/2024/08/turkey-excludes-2-5-billion-russian-s-400-missiles-from-new-air-defense-system-project/
- Turkey Nears Deal to Decommission S-400 Air Defences and Return to F-35 Fighter Program - Reports -
https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/turkey-decommission-s400-f35-reports
- Reports suggest Turkey to warehouse Russian S-400 missiles in order to obtain F-35 jets from US -
https://www.intellinews.com/reports-suggest-turkey-to-warehouse-russian-s-400-missiles-in-order-to-obtain-f-35-jets-from-us-340655/
" The appeal by Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan for the lifting of US CAATSA sanctions in a recent TV interview highlighted the difficulties of US-Turkish relations and the implicit but clear admission that Washington and Ankara are looking for a formula that would under certain conditions allow even the return of Turkey to the F-35 program. "
https://www.ekathimerini.com/politics/foreign-policy/1249788/fidan-indirectly-confirms-s-400-talks/
It's difficult to blame the Turks for abandoning Russian S 400 anti aircraft systems. Seeing how Russia gets hit by every type of drone Ukraine throws at it, I'm surprised that other countries that bought this system don't ask for their money back
Putin's best friend strikes again :))))
BREAKING — Turkey ratifies a free trade agreement with Ukraine.
Erdogan signed the deal into law just now https://x.com/ragipsoylu/status/1842211730811760910
Is Russia still winning?
By Allowing Regions to Form Militias, Moscow Increases Likelihood of Future Civil War
Paul Goble
Executive Summary:
The Russian cabinet is in support of a Duma proposal to allow the governors of oblasts, krais, and republics to form their own militias to deal with natural disasters and military interventions, such as the Ukrainian advancement into Kursk oblast.
Moscow is confident it can control these new units, but the recent Prigozhin revolt and actions of Ramzan Kadyrov’s Chechen forces cast doubts.
With the eventuality of a transition of power or weakened regime, these regional forces would increase the probability and violence of a civil war.
In September, the Kremlin announced its support for a proposal before the State Duma, allowing the heads of all federal subjects—the governors of oblasts, krais, and republics—to create their own regional military units. These regional militias will deal with extraordinary circumstances, including both natural disasters, such as flooding and fires, and foreign interventions, such as the Ukrainian advancement into Kursk oblast (Kommersant.ru, September 16). On September 16, the Russian cabinet approved amendments to laws governing military units as proposed by Andrey Kartapolov, an army lieutenant general who is a member of the ruling United Russia party and heads the State Duma’s defense committee. Moscow thus dramatically increased the number of actors allowed to form militias, which previously had only included those regions adjoining Ukraine and large corporations in the Russian far north (The Barents Observer, February 9, 2023; Charter97, September 1).
This government-backed measure, which will almost certainly be signed into law by the State Duma, is intended to allow regions to combat extraordinary circumstances both in the event of military conflict and during peacetime. This will also address the serious problem that many regions in Russia remain dangerously unprotected against any military challenge (Theins.ru, June 30, 2023). Simultaneously, it has the potential to give regions and republics armed forces that could be deployed in the event Russia descends into a civil war. Presumably, Moscow believes that it will be able to maintain central control over these militias through centrally organized recruitment, arming, and training. The Prigozhin revolt last year and the increasingly independent stance of Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov, who already has his own forces, strongly suggest that units created within a region under a regional leader are more likely to be loyal to their immediate commanders than to Moscow (Kavkazr.com, May 1, 2023).
Some in the regions and republics have already spoken out about the need for such regional defense forces, given Moscow’s inability to help them overcome natural disasters, defend against terrorist attacks, or even meet basic demands regarding regional needs (Window on Eurasia, June 30, 2023, April 6). Such talk is likely to increase, especially in non-ethnically Russian regions. This is all the more so if the new regional militias are primarily comprised of veterans of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine, as many currently expect, and have the support of the right-wing “Russian Community” organization, which is openly hostile to non-ethnically Russian groups. This organization has been working hand in glove with Russian officials to suppress non-ethnic-Russians in the North Caucasus and is now reportedly actively involved in recruiting Ukrainian war veterans in the Russian North for new regional forces (VK.com, July 2; Window on Eurasia, August 30; The Barents Observer, September 26). Unsurprisingly, the Russian Community’s involvement in this endeavor has already prompted one Circassian leader to call for non-ethnic Russians to form their own “community” organizations (Facebook.com, September 29). It is probable that leaders will suggest that these non-ethnically Russian groups play a key role in the formation of regional militias in their respective non-ethnically Russian republics.
The creation of these militias carries both short- and long-term consequences. In the short term, Moscow’s creation of multiple military hierarchies rather than maintaining a single military structure may make a coup attempt against Putin more likely. The point is often made that Russia lacks a tradition of military coups in large part because tsars, commissars, and presidents have insisted on having a single military loyal to themselves rather than creating multiple “armies,” who might be tempted to fight among themselves or challenge the country’s leader. Putin is violating that tradition, however, and thus putting himself at risk, according to some observers (Window on Eurasia, January 11). For instance, the Kremlin leader’s permissive attitude toward the Wagner Group led directly to Prigozhin’s armed revolt. The establishment of regional militias could open the way for similar and perhaps more successful actions, especially if some of them were to cooperate, a possibility made likely by the fact that regional identities are often far broader than the territories into which Moscow has carved the country. (On that oft-neglected aspect of Russian politics, see Window on Eurasia, August 27, 2022, April 12, September 11).
The speed of Prigozhin’s initial advance through Russia highlighted these risks to the Putin regime. It may help explain Moscow’s backing for regional militias, but the rapidity with which the Kremlin recovered and suppressed the Wagner leader underscores the likelihood that, for the time being, the appearance of regional military forces will not lead to a successful coup. The long-term consequences in the event of political instability, however, are far more pressing. If Moscow is weakened and regional leaders seek to carve out more power for themselves, they almost certainly would view the new regional militias as an important resource, one that the Russian government has now given them the power to form. In that event, these forces would likely be involved not only in challenging Moscow but also in fighting with each other, especially with those of a different ethnicity.
It is widely assumed that if the Russian Federation does fall apart after Putin leaves the scene, the process will resemble 1991, which was remarkably peaceful due to the fact that Moscow alone had significant military resources and the Russian Federation had agreed to the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The approaching end of the Russian Federation will be fundamentally different, not only because many in Moscow will not accept such a possibility, but also because regions and republics will now have their own military resources.
At the Sixth Forum of Free Peoples of Post-Russia in April 2023, this author argued that “the approaching end of the Russian Federation is more likely to resemble 1918 than 1991,” not only with regard to the amount of violence but also concerning what the arrangements will be when the dust settles after a civil war (Region.expert, April 26, 2023). The decision of the Putin regime to form regional militias guarantees there will be more violence in that event, but could also mean that the disintegration of the Russian Federation will be far more complete at the end of this historical cycle.
‼️🇷🇺🇮🇱 On the 2nd of October 2024, Vladimir Putin issued a Presidential statement congratulating all ‘Russian Jews’ with the beginning of their holiday - Rosh Hashanah.
Zelenskyy’s Victory Plan Attempts to Redefine Victory and Defeat
Vladimir Socor
Executive Summary:
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy presented a “victory plan” to the Joe Biden administration and two US presidential candidates. The plan envisages arming Ukraine adequately for negotiating “peace through strength” with Moscow as well as strengthening economic sanctions on Russia.
The military situation, damaged energy systems at the onset of winter, and seeming fatigue on the part of some Western partners are causing Kyiv to accept negotiating with Russia. Kyiv has apparently dropped its earlier conditions, namely the withdrawal or eviction of Russian forces from Ukrainian territories, Russian reparations for war damages, and prosecution of war crimes.
Zelenskyy envisages a three-month timetable for the delivery of Western military aid that would turn the tide of war in Ukraine’s favor and commence negotiations with Russia in the framework of a world peace summit.
Inadequate Western military support is compelling Ukraine to accept negotiating with Russia from a posture of weakness. While the battlefield situation seems sustainable for the time being, despite local reverses, Russia’s relentless air strikes on Ukrainian energy supply systems at the onset of winter add an element of urgency to domestic political challenges. In Washington and other capitals, meanwhile, proposals are multiplying for negotiations to “end the war” whereby Russia would retain the Ukrainian territories it has seized. Some of Ukraine’s Western partners hope to see Russia join a peace summit before the end of this year.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has responded by launching his own plan for a negotiated outcome, dubbed the Victory Plan. It is designed, in part, to preempt outright defeatist proposals from being tabled by other parties. Zelenskyy presented this plan to US President Joe Biden, presidential candidates Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump, and the G7+ leaders during his recent visit to the United States (Ukrinform, September 28).
The basic document is due to be released during the coming weeks or months, although some parts will even then be kept confidential, according to Presidential Office chief Andrii Yermak (Ukrinform, September 30). Some major elements of the plan can, nevertheless, be pieced together from fragmentary public statements made by Zelenskyy and his top aides.
The plan’s declared goal is to enlist Western military support for “compelling Russia” to negotiate an end to the war that would amount to a “just and sustainable peace” for Ukraine. This logic formally mirrors that of the Biden administration from 2022 to date, namely, providing Ukraine with limited levels of military support that would merely improve Kyiv’s position in eventual negotiations with Russia. The administration’s logic is a defeatist one inasmuch as it presupposes negotiations based on frontlines cutting across Ukraine, in effect predetermining the country’s partition.
What is publicly known of Kyiv’s plan marks a substantial retreat from previous positions. From September 2022 to date, Ukraine ruled out negotiations with Russia in general and with the Kremlin in particular for as long as Russia occupied Ukrainian territories (see EDM, October 5, 2022). Those were, in effect, Ukrainian preconditions to negotiating with Russia. A negotiated outcome, in Kyiv’s view, had to entail Russian reparations for war damages and prosecution of war crimes committed during Russia’s aggression. Kyiv’s recent public statements no longer explicitly mention those preconditions and outcomes. Ukraine’s Western partners had supported reparations and prosecution for some time but are currently soft-pedaling those items.
Kyiv aims to have its victory plan accepted by Western partners and its implementation launched “this autumn”—a timeframe reflecting Kyiv’s sense of military urgency and need to encourage the nation to endure harsh winter conditions. During and following their US visit, Zelenskyy, Yermak, and a few of their aides have hinted at the following elements within the victory plan:
Arming Ukraine with advanced weaponry prioritizing long-range missiles, electronic warfare equipment, air defense systems, and artillery shells. Allowing Ukraine to strike military targets deep inside Russia with Western-supplied weapons at their maximum range. Helping Ukraine to fully equip all the available combat brigades.
Using Russian frozen assets in the West to support Ukraine’s defense against Russia’s aggression. Finalizing a political decision in that regard and agreeing on an implementation mechanism.
A clear promise, ahead of any negotiations, to invite Ukraine to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) “after the end of the war.”
Some form of Western security guarantees as an interim solution, stronger than the bilateral security agreements recently signed by NATO member states with Ukraine and pending Ukraine’s eventual accession to NATO.
Calling a second “world peace summit,” this time with Russia’s participation, in November this year, following up on the first such summit that Switzerland hosted in June this year without Russia’s participation (President.gov.ua, September 24, 29, October 1, 2; RBK-Ukraine, September 30).
Kyiv professes hope that the October meeting of the US-led Ramstein Group at the level of heads of state and government would arm Ukraine properly for regaining some territories ahead of any negotiations with Russia. This would presuppose a major policy change in Washington. The existing policy does not lead to negotiating “peace through strength” as Kyiv sees it.
Meanwhile, the Biden administration and the German government are the leading opponents of inviting Ukraine to join NATO. The White House adopted this position publicly in May 2021, before Russia’s all-out invasion of Ukraine. Expecting this administration or Berlin to reverse their position any time soon on Kyiv’s victory plan timeframe appears unrealistic. Kyiv’s victory plan indirectly concedes this by seeking Western interim security guarantees outside NATO. By the same token it implies that the bilateral security agreements fall short of providing reliable security guarantees (see EDM, August 6, 7, and 14 [1], [2]).
Zelenskyy’s plan aspires to levels of US and European military support that would turn the tide of the war in Ukraine’s favor, even if not regaining the Russian-occupied territories in their entirety.
A war outcome that would leave Ukrainian territories under Russian occupation, the country devastated economically and demographically, the rump Ukraine stranded outside NATO, and Western partners instead of Russia funding Ukraine’s reconstruction, would add up to Russia’s victory. Kyiv’s declared goal, however, is a “just and sustainable peace.” This formulation allows Kyiv and its Western partners some leeway for redefining the notions of victory or defeat according to political necessity.
The die is now cast for the disintegration of the Russian Federation regrettably. This is the coda for the process unleashed since August 1991 and the failure of the Yanaev putsch against Gorbachev/Yeltsin.
Trust-the-plan-er seeing the light?
Orthodox Canonist
@OCanonist
·
2 h
‼️🚨🇷🇺 Russian Donbass veteran & military blogger for Wagner ‘The Thirteenth’ (300k followers on Telegram) has been arrested by Russian authorities a day after he started posting about ‘Jews’ ✡️
Russians soldiers have begun ‘noticing’ & naming them.
Why are they being arrested?
Russia is winning, bay-bee!!!
"The number of people prepared to seriously risk their lives storming well-fortified Ukrainian positions is not unlimited. That is why, over the past two and a half years, Moscow has reportedly forced thousands of migrant workers and foreign students to join the Russian army to fight against Ukraine. The problem for the Kremlin, however, is that it can no longer count on a large pool of migrants to fight on the Russian side." https://www.persuasion.community/p/putins-manpower-shortage
I am seeing more and more of these pieces of news, this one from Quora, that only reinforce the Rurik take on the special needs op
Russian Soldier Surrenders in Zaporizhzhia After Realizing Commanders' Brutality
In the Zaporizhzhia direction, a Russian soldier made the crucial decision to surrender after finding a leaflet with instructions. Amir Salipovich Mukhambetaliev, from the 70th Motor Rifle Regiment, traveled over 1,000 kilometers from Astrakhan, only to witness firsthand how Russian commanders were ruthlessly sacrificing their units in battle.