First allow me to share a confirmation of our thesis here at the blog that a secret peace deal with Kiev was already signed in April came from Putin’s mouth this time at the Africa Summit. No one reported on this for some reason even though it is a big deal:
We have found a fragment of Vladimir Putin’s speech at the Russia-Africa forum, deleted (https://t.me/sotaproject/63677) from the Kremlin channel (https://t.me/news_kremlin/2187), where he talks about the “voluntary withdrawal” of Russian troops from Kiev in 2022:
💬 In fact, the draft of this (peace - ed.) Treaty was agreed upon. But after the withdrawal of our troops from near Kyiv, and we were asked to do this in order to create conditions for the conclusion of a final treaty, the Kyiv authorities abandoned all previous agreements.
So there you have it. The SMO ended more than a year ago and Russia pulled out for political reasons. Now we await confirmation that the Kremlin wanted to rent out Donbass and Crimea and put Medvedchuk and his cronies in power in Ukraine 2.0. Which, so much for 5D plans to waste NATO weaponry or foil the globalists’ plans. If Moscow signed a peace deal and then pulled out only to get “tricked again!” by their esteemed Western partners, well, then the entire subsequent Not-War following the conclusion of the SMO in April was a complete and total fuck-up on a colossal scale brought about by Russian spooks trusting the guarantees of the American spook state.
No other conclusion can be made from the statement, “we were tricked, again”. Tricked by who, exactly? It is obvious that the Kremlin is in close communication with Langley, as I alleged in my previous article.
**
I try to focus on the overarching driving factors fueling the corruption, the sadism and the bloodletting occuring in the Slavlands on this blog. I mostly skip the back and forth of the battlefield, which I find to be totally irrelevant and intentionally distracting, even. Because of my holistic approach to blogging on this topic, I am able to come to conclusions that do not require me to hone in on one particular aspect of the situation and I criticize those who take a very narrow and myopic approach to covering the war (because no one else will, apparently). It is my contention that political realities have a far more decisive effect on military decisions and the outcomes of campaigns as compared to barrel diameters of various artillery pieces.
So, with all that out of the way, let us take a look at how the war situation for Russia looks like on all fronts.
The Battlefield
Since my last article even mentioning the battlefield, ZAnon has claimed that a massive Russian counter-counter offensive had been launched and over 100k men had been massed for a breakthrough. But in the end, the 100k men didn’t materialize, a few kilometers were taken and that was the end of that. Then, the UAF simply took those positions back the next week. Then they lost these positions again. And now, I don’t even know. I don’t even want to know, really because wars are not decided by these completely pointless and inconsequential actions anyways.
Analyzing these smaller battles is indeed a worthwhile pursuit though if the intention is to draw lessons about capabilities, strategy and so on from them.
Sadly, these battles are just being used to create propaganda for both sides. When the dust is settled, sober analysts and military scientists (actual professionals, not retards on Substack or Blogspot) will have to wade in and figure out what really occurred because the disinfo is simply too thick now. What should be blindingly obvious by now, at least, is that both sides are fairly evenly matched as evidenced by the stalemate all along the contact line. In fact, I have argued before that the UAF is better than their opponents because they’ve been on the attack since last summer and the defender is almost always weaker than the aggressor, usually. My logic is so basic, really.
Relatively weaker armies usually adopt defensive positions because they cannot launch large-scale offensives against their opponents.
- an excerpt from Colonel Rolo’s seminal treatise on war-blogging (circa 2023).
All in all, nothing has changed.
But it is worth pointing out that the UAF counter-offensive failed. The only question is: why?
The Zaporozhye Front
The UAF counter-offensive was baffling, to put it mildly. Now that it is over though, we can analyze what actually happened. As best as we can tell, the attack failed almost immediately after it started.
Tanks were sent into minefields for some reason, repeatedly.
There was no air-defense on the UAF side (just as the Teixeira leaks predicted)
The top general (Zaluzhny) was removed before the offensive.
The dam collapsed, throwing off the offensive.
The reserves were never committed.
The funny thing is that while the UAF claimed that they were just probing, they were actually seriously attacking and when they were supposed to be seriously attacking following the probes, they were actually just half-heartedly approaching and then retreating from the defensive lines.
In other words, the UAF had largely already given up after the first ten days - two weeks.
This, to me, indicates that serious politicking was going on behind the scenes on the NATO+Kiev side. It could be that the UAF was under the impression that the Russian higher-ups would fold and retreat almost immediately. They would have thought this because of what happened in the previous two counter-offensives and probably because Washington was egging them on, possibly providing false info.
Once the initial attempts failed, it seems to me that the UAF did its best to appear to be busy, but actually was holding back most of its strength. We didn’t see Challengers or Abrams committed to the attack, for example. The vast majority of the troops were not committed to the battle either. And now, the UAF has fallen back on long-range strikes aimed at depots and supplies in the Russian rear, which is a successful tactic that they have used before ahead of Kherson and Lugansk.
Also, the longer they wait, the more money the military and the politicians in Ukraine get. Washington, meanwhile, continues to drip-feed them supplies. This is, as we have talked about many times before, the optimal strategy to maximize casualties on both sides and drag out the war.
Ukraine took heavy casualties, and the Russian side did too. Because they were attacking, without air defense, I would assume that the Ukrainian side lost more.
The War Industry
For what it is worth, Russia continues to produce tanks and is steadily increasing its production of drones. As you might expect, there is nothing but more shum on this front as well, making calculations difficult. The numbers that the Russian MoD gives are fake of course, like all the others that they provide and because they lie as much as their esteemed Ukrainian partners, we cannot take them at their word about anything, sadly. Also, we know that there are all sorts of ways to fudge the numbers even more. For example, a lot of the new tanks are really just older models that have been given upgrades. Does a tank that got damaged and then repaired count as a new tank that was produced? Maybe. Probably, even. But that isn’t to say that Russia is incapable of producing weapons. They are producing weapons, but there are many problems and questions that arise when trying to tease out the implications of this.
Q: Is Russia’s war industry beating the collective 1 billion strong West+satrapies?
A: That seems very unlikely. Sure, most of Western Europe’s defense industry has been gutted, but the US, South Korea, Czech Republic, Poland, Sweden, parts of Latin America, North Africa, and so on are either capable of producing weapons and ammo or they still have existing stockpiles to tap into. I think it is very naive to believe that a globe-spanning super empire that starts wars everywhere with frightening regularity doesn’t have enough bullets or forgot how to make them.
But I don’t know the exact numbers. I recall that even Marko, who knew his stuff, wasn’t sure about the exact figures from within Russia or the West.
Negotiated Peace
I contend that the voices that you hear in the US warning that NATO is running out of weapons are simply the faction that generally want a de-escalation of tensions with Moscow because they fear pushing Russia too far and Putin’s government being toppled by one that isn’t run like a Western satrapy. In other words, they have an obvious incentive to bend the truth and to pretend that Russia has won the war if it serves them in their political objectives at home. They also seem to want to pivot towards starting a war with China instead and need Russia either neutral or on board for this next step, rumored to be planned for 2025. We talked about this here:
Soldier and Citizen Moral
It is hard to gauge morale because there is a wide spectrum of factors by which we can evaluate it. In terms of “support” I guess we can define it as “enthusiasm” for now. There is no way to sugar-coat this, so I will be blunt: support for the Not-War against the Anglo-Satanists has plummeted on the Russian internet amongst both the patriotic faction and the Liberal-leaning masses who never supported it in the first place. Internet use and forum culture is largely confined to people below 40 years of age, so the picture is very skewed, admittedly, but a vanishingly small amount of online Russians support Putin. You would be hard-pressed to find any pro-Putin blogs in Russian even.
That’s more of an English-language internet phenomenon.
YaPlakal, 2ch, LiveJournal and other such forum communities are pretty vocally anti-Putin and increasingly fed up with the 2-week special military operation. The main political divide among the masses is internet use. Those who get their news from the internet overwhelmingly tend to be anti-Putin either from the Liberal, Communist or Nationalist perspective. Those who watch TV generally support Putin, even if they don’t trust their own government, because they think that Putin is doing his best.
Now, I suspect that Putin continues to retain a high level of organic popular support among the old-timers in Russia. He is a familiar figure and presents himself well on TV. However, the other shoe has not fallen on this whole SMO disaster and when it does, his support will plummet, barring even the efforts of propagandists who will try to prop him up. I half-expect key Putin media loyalists to turn on him too. When they do, I will as well, but for different reasons.
Until then though, I continue to fully support President Putin, because it is expedient to do so.
As for the soldiers, well, the criteria for morale is different. Who cares whether they are enthusiastic or not when they have to follow orders regardless? For morale to matter when evaluating them, the standards for demoralization have to be much higher. We are talking about whether or not these people have reached a level of disenchantment at which they no longer follow orders, or, perhaps, follow the orders of someone else. The situation that people want to compare and contrast to is obviously the 1917 scenario, where soldiers began to abandon the front en masse and mutiny. So far, we saw that no one in the army stood up for Shoigu during the Wagner mutiny. They stood aside and that is why the military is being purged by Shoigu now.
But that is not the same as actively siding against the Kremlin or deserting.
If I had to guess, I’d say that if the soldiers had a leader more trustworthy than the ethnic criminal Prigozhin, they might have followed him. More likely though, the soldiers are wary of civil war and unmotivated in general. There is no ideology or religious narrative inciting them to rebel against the Kremlin or to fight in Donbass against the “Ukrops”. Also, the anti-Nationalism rhetoric of the Kremlin doesn’t really resonate with military men who, as a rule, are Nationalists to some extent.
Back to the point, I would say that the soldiers on both sides are mostly motivated by the impulse to not die, collect their paychecks, and are beset by the gnawing doubt that their respective higher-ups might be insincere, lying hypocrites who deliberately inflict suffering on them. Soldiers and Donbass militias continue to rely on support from the Russian people, who raise money for them because they lack basic gear and supplies. This also occurs on the other side. The MoD still punishes soldiers who publicly complain, as we have covered before because asking for help discredits Shoigu, apparently. Also, it hurts the bottom line.
The Schizophrenic Overarching Narrative
The narrative and agitprop coming out of the Kremlin is so absurd that it is impossible to take seriously. When Putin explains that, actually, Zelensky is bad because he is a Jew that tolerates Nazis in his ranks and that the Kremlin believes that Ukraine’s statehood is sacred and Russia is only trying to police Ukraine and rid it of the Nazis … this only causes people to scratch their heads in confusion, roll their eyes, or ignore what the old grandfather is saying entirely, and rightly so.
At best, this is typical schizophrenic sovok-speak and all Slavs have a grandparent in their family who speaks in riddles like this:
The reigning meta-political schizophrenia that dominates the Slavlands confuses its denizens drives us all mad. We cannot think proactively because so few of us understand our own past.
In Ukraine, the new war propaganda is much simpler:
they are fighting for their country against the “Rashist”, asiatic, Authoritarian invaders who want to genocide them.
the West will pay to make Ukraine like Germany after the war.
Russia will be forced to pay reparations to Ukraine as well.
Russia is an ugly, balding rapist who is trying to beat his estranged wife (Ukraine) who just wants to be free, democratic and happy (a slut).
It is a pretty straightforward narrative with powerful emotional undertones.
It is also very similar to the propaganda driving the proceeding “nationalist” movements in Catalan and Scotland. Catalonian, in particular, is a very consciously female identity which actively seeks to juxtapose itself against the Authoritarian, patriarchal Spanish identity.
And the protests in Belarus against Lukashenko were 85% or higher female-led. All the leaders of the opposition were females too. It was a trio of three very rough-looking, square-jawed women. The protestors flatly stated that they were rebelling against Luka’s patriarchy and his “demands” that they raise the birthrate. Emancipated women prefer mass-democide. And yet, this is portrayed as “nationalistic” when it is literally the opposite.
The results speak for themselves: there is a far higher level of support for the war in Ukraine because the Ukrainian women fully support actually genociding Russians there thanks to the emotional propaganda campaign targeted at them, which they then unleash on Taras.
In Russia, in contrast, the women are almost all anti-war.
Russian women are not pacifists by nature, the Russian media simply hasn’t raised their natural female bloodlust levels like what was done in Ukraine. You can even see this in the sporting world, where the Russian women are still trying to shake hands with their Ukrainian competitors and getting rejected.
It is good that the media hasn’t fomented hatred, don’t get me wrong. But this is because the elite told them to play it cool and not raise the temperature in the country any more than absolutely necessary.
This makes perfect sense if you understand that the goal of Moscow is to bow out of the conflict eventually.
Third Worldism
Get behind the paywall to continue reading. I feel like I’d get in trouble for the last three articles I wrote and I’d prefer to mitigate that. I’ll resume regular posting after this one.