This is understood in the Kremlin, so they chose the strategy of “boa constrictor”, the slow strangulation of the entire economy, so that Ukraine becomes too heavy a burden for the West.
If earlier it cost $2-3 billion to serve a “social case” in Ukraine, now it is already $5-7 billion, and in 2023, with the economy not working, $8-10 billion is predicted if the Office of the President refuses to lower the hryvnia and raise tariffs.
Now Zaluzhny [Chief of the General Staff] is asking for at least 300 tanks, which cost at least $600-$900 million (of Soviet era), 600 normal infantry fighting vehicles is about $500 million, and 500 good howitzers is 1 billion, not counting ammo, that is, about $2.5 – $3 billion. According to him, this is necessary for a new offensive.
At the same time, it should be taken into account that the loss of Ukraine in a positional war is about 4-8 tanks per week, not counting other light vehicles. [category saving ukrainians from themselves]
High gas prices in the EU will remain for 20 years, as long-term contracts with the US are concluded for this period
This was stated by the outgoing general director of the Austrian energy concern Energie AG Werner Steinecker.
According to Steinecker, gas in Europe will no longer be as cheap as it used to be, even if the current global processes are regulated.
The EU buys liquefied natural gas from the US on a take-or-pay basis. Contracts are concluded for 20 years, so the countries of Europe will have to pay any price.
A new round of Wunderwaffen deliveries to Ukraine is taking place. It is unlikely to change the strategic or even operational picture of the war.
The U.S. and its ‘allies’ are engaged in a boil-the-frog operation in which they steadily increase the lethality and complexity of arms and other support they deliver to Ukraine. At some point in time this process will cross Russian red lines. That’s when it will become really interesting …
The newest gimmick to be deployed is the Patriot air defense system likely soon to be followed by main battle tanks:
The U.S. is poised to approve sending a Patriot missile battery to Ukraine, finally agreeing to an urgent request from Ukrainian leaders desperate for more robust weapons to shoot down incoming Russian missiles, U.S. officials said Tuesday.The approval is likely to come later this week and could be announced as early as Thursday, said three officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the decision is not final and has not been made public. Two of the officials said the Patriot will come from Pentagon stocks and be moved from another country overseas.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy pressed Western leaders as recently as Monday to provide more advanced weapons to help his country in its war with Russia. The Patriot would be the most advanced surface-to-air missile system the West has provided to Ukraine to help repel Russian aerial attacks.
During a video conference on Monday, Zelenskyy told host Germany and other leaders of the Group of Seven industrial powers that his country needed long-range missiles, modern tanks, artillery, missile batteries and other high-tech air defense systems to counter Russian attacks that have knocked out electricity and water supplies for millions of Ukrainians.
He acknowledged that, “Unfortunately, Russia still has an advantage in artillery and missiles.”
Well, yes, the artillery advantage the Russian army has in the current battle for Bakhmut is nine to one or even higher:
“For every artillery piece we have, they have nine,” said one soldier.
NATO no longer has the equipment and ammunition reserves to change that.
As for the Patriot, the “Phased Array Tracking Radar to Intercept on Target”: Training for them takes quite some time and unless Ukrainians have already been secretly trained on them for several months they will have to be deployed with NATO soldiers or ‘former’ soldiers to have any effect:
Asked about training, Brig. Gen. Patrick Ryder, the Pentagon press secretary, said that in general the U.S. takes those needs into consideration when providing complicated weapons systems to Ukraine, such as the High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, known as HIMARS. Currently U.S. forces are training Ukrainian troops on a number of systems, including the HIMARS, in other European countries, such as Germany.
…
The entire system, which includes a phased array radar, a control station, computers and generators, typically requires about 90 soldiers to operate and maintain, however only three soldiers are needed to actually fire it, according to the Army.
The HIMARS missiles, the previous Wunderwaffen, are now routinely shot down by Russian missile and air defense systems:
The anti-aircraft defence forces shot down two drones in the areas of Zhytlovka and Kremennaya (Lugansk People’s Republic).In addition, two HIMARS MLRS rounds were intercepted near Perovomaysk (Lugansk People’s Republic) and a HARM rocket near Makarovka (Kherson region).
The Patriot battery to be deployed to Ukraine is likely one of those that the U.S. currently has in Poland. A German Patriot unit will be deployed to replace it.
The phased array radar that Patriot systems use are good but they are also a weakness. They are visible from satellites with Synthetic Aperture Radar. As researchers have found some years ago:
Amid a busy few weeks of nuclear-related news, an Israeli researcher made a very surprising OSINT discovery that flew somewhat under the radar. As explained in a Medium article, Israeli GIS analyst Harel Dan noticed that when he accidentally adjusted the noise levels of the imagery produced from the SENTINEL-1 satellite constellation, a bunch of colored Xs suddenly appeared all over the globe.
SENTINEL-1’s C-band Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) operates at a centre frequency of 5.405 GHz, which conveniently sits within the range of the military frequency used for land, airborne, and naval radar systems (5.250-5.850 GHz)—including the AN/MPQ-53/65 phased array radars that form the backbone of a Patriot battery’s command and control system. Therefore, Harel correctly hypothesized that some of the Xs that appeared in the SENTINEL-1 images could be triggered by interference from Patriot radar systems.
Using this logic, he was able to use the Xs to pinpoint the locations of Patriot batteries in several Middle Eastern countries, including Qatar, Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia.
Process the SAR data, look for ‘noise’ crosses, program the coordinates into a number of suicide drones of Iranian design and send them off. This should take no more than an hour. The Russian Reconnaissance Strike Complex is designed to do that:
The Reconnaissance Strike Complex (разведивательно-ударный комплех-RYK) was designed for the coordinated employment of high-precision, long- range weapons linked to real-time intelligence data and precise targeting provided to a fused intelligence and fire-direction center. The RYK functioned at operational depths using surface-to-surface missile systems and aircraft-delivered “smart” munitions. The Reconnaissance Fire Complex (разведивательно-огновой комплех ROK) was the tactical equivalent.
…
The Reconnaissance Fire System (ROS) is designed to detect, engage and destroy enemy targets in near-real time within the range of tactical units (maneuver battalion and brigade with supporting artillery). On occasion, an artillery brigade or helicopter gunship brigade (a tactical/operational formation) could conduct ROS missions. However, Army Corps and Army Group units normally conduct RYS missions-engaging, detecting and destroying operational targets in near-real time using longer-range reconnaissance and strike systems (especially SSM and aviation systems).
Will the Patriot radar move during the Russian reaction time interval between reconnaissance and strike? I have my doubts.
Wikipedia says that a Patriot battery costs about $1 billion. The radar is the thing that makes these so expensive. Each of its missile costs about $3 million. The suicide drones are maybe $10,000 each. Now do the math …
The most modern missiles Patriot system use have a maximum reach of some 60 kilometer (37 miles). One battery can thus cover a bubble with a 120 kilometer diameter. It may be good for Kiev or Odessa but is nothing that will solve the general military problem Ukraine has.
The Russian forces are superior in technology, personnel and fire power. There is no chance, and never has been, for Ukraine to win that match. No Wunderwaffen, British marines with sea drones or U.S. Patriot systems, will change those basic facts.
I read the news that the United States plans to deliver the Patriot air defense system to its troops in Ukraine in a week.
The emergence of this system will not fundamentally affect the course of hostilities, because it is just a dull analogue of the C300, which has shown itself no longer on the battlefield, but in the catalogs of “super-expensive” weapons for “voluntary-compulsory sponsors of the US military-industrial complex” such as Japan, Canada, Australia, South Korea, the Persian Gulf monarchies and others.
But nevertheless, one conclusion can still be drawn from this news, obviously, the S300 and Buk air defense systems [formerly produced by the Soviet Union] of the NATO troops in Ukraine have already ended, the Russian Aerospace Forces have destroyed almost everything.
There is no alternative for the NATO countries, they have only the Patriot air defense system physically left for serious military operations, there is simply nothing else on the world arms market, with the exception of the Chinese and Iranian analogues of the C300, which are inaccessible to the “evil empire”.
The U.S. government just released its November Treasury Statement with a shocker that the Debt-Service Interest Expense surged 50% in the first two months. This is a great deal of money when it equals nearly the same value for World Transparent Silver Holdings.
So, how much did the U.S. Interest Expense increase in the first two months of fiscal 2023? Let’s look at the following charts from the November Treasury Statements.
The U.S. government paid a total “Net Interest” Expense of $60 billion for October-November 2021.
Now, look at what was paid for October-November 2023:
The U.S. Treasury forked out an additional $30 billion for a total of $90 billion (just for October & November) to service the U.S. Debt, now at $31.3 trillion. Amazingly, this is a 50% increase year-over-year. Folks, $30 billion is a lot of money and represents nearly the same value as World Transparent Silver Holdings: Read More
by Sergey Markov, director of the Institute for Political Studies, in Moscow, author of the Markov Logic telegram channel, talks about the American plan for the Russian-Ukrainian conflict.
Now in Ukraine everything is going according to the American plan. This plan involves the creation of a strong anti-Russia out of Ukraine, with the help of which it would be possible to fetter Russia, which then would make it possible to deprive Russia of the status of a great power. Moreover, that would help to make it possible to change the political regime in Russia itself to a pro-American one.
The ideal model that the Americans are striving for, which is being voiced publicly, is the Korean model, that is, the cessation of hostilities. After that, Russia turns into an analogue of North Korea, and Ukraine – into an analogue of South Korea, a prosperous state.
The task is to make relations between Russia and Ukraine exactly the same as between India and Pakistan, that is, these are countries that were part of a single Indian civilization, but then were divided along religious lines and became eternal enemies. Ukraine is separated from Russia now according to some linguistic principles, which are artificially created.
This plan included an intensive manipulation of consciousness in an anti-Russian spirit and the creation of a sufficiently strong Ukrainian army. After that, hostilities in the Donbass were supposed to result in that the main part of Ukraine became total anti-Russian. According to this plan, intense fighting should show that it is bad to be for Russia. This was perfectly demonstrated by the history of Mariupol. And Mariupol is one of the most pro-Russian cities in Ukraine.
The Ukrainian army suffers huge losses while implementing this plan, but these losses were predicted. After all, the more funerals come from the front to Ukrainian families, the more total and endless will be the hatred for Russia. Therefore, when Ukrainian generals holding British or American passports and receiving salaries in dollars and euros give the order to fill Russian positions with the corpses of Ukrainian soldiers, this simultaneously and dramatically increases the effectiveness of military operations, and also has a colossal political effect.
In order to make anti-Russia out of Russian Ukraine, from 2014 until 2022, it took the most brutal dictatorship that was installed by Kiev. After huge losses, attacks on infrastructure facilities, the population itself is already becoming anti-Russian, and no dictatorship is needed here.
Anti-Russia will always fight with Russia, will fight, blowing up the metro in Moscow and St. Petersburg, blowing up planes, it will fight like terrorists fight, regardless of any victims.
Only one thing can break this plan – a military victory for Russia. It must be understood that this is a war of attrition, a long one, and such a war is beneficial to the United States, because Ukraine is only formally opposed to Russia. In reality, Russia is opposed by the huge economies of the United States, the European Union and their highly developed allies. Their combined potential is significantly greater than Russia’s.
The American plan also works great in terms of regime change in Russia. After all, a necessary condition for this is a split in the elites, and such a split already exists. The elites are shocked and frustrated, they have lost their way of life.
But one question arises – why are the Americans doing so well in Ukraine? The main reason why they did not succeed in Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria lies in the fact that there they were opposed by fanatics who were ready to make any sacrifice. In Russia, they are opposed by ultra-pragmatists (Putin people) who only pretend to fight.
This does not mean at all that in order to defeat the Americans in Ukraine, Russia must use nuclear weapons. Russia has such restrictions – for example, not to be the first to use nuclear weapons. But at the same time, fanaticism and the will to win are needed, and not the desire to beg for negotiations.
It is possible to agree with the Americans on only one thing – only on the terms of surrender by Ukraine. From my point of view, Russia will still win. It will win because the majority of the people of the Russian Federation do not want negotiations with the Americans on the terms of Ukraine’s surrender.
Russian television is talking up a storm about Xi’s visit to Saudi Arabia and the enormously significant agreement to denominate Chinese purchases of oil in Yuan. In this regard, Russian commentators are running well ahead of the more cautious description of ‘agreements under discussion’ and ‘partial payments in Yuan’ that we find in yesterday’s Global Times, an English language semi-official Chinese newspaper.
However, there is every reason to believe that the Russians know more than the Chinese or Saudis are willing to say publicly. After all, there are now news leaks to the effect that the Chinese have for months been sending many planeloads of military gear to Russia each week in support of its Ukraine campaign, in violation of their supposed neutrality on the issue. That by itself is subject to a news blackout that Washington, for obvious reasons, does not violate. To do so would accelerate the economic decoupling with China in a way that would leave all U.S. retail shelves bare in a very few months. Replacement of the Chinese global factory in supply chains is still several years away.
Let us recall that China is the world’s biggest petroleum importer and trade in their currency instead of the dollar is the landmark event that dooms the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency. Creation of the Petroyuan will, in a very few years, end the U.S. Treasury’s free ride on the global bond market. Interest rates in the States on government bonds will rise from their present phony levels to match those of others in the industrialized world, with the consequence that U.S. taxpayers will see the advent of ‘pay as you go’ financing of America’s wars abroad. With some luck, if we make it through the present fraught confrontation with Russia over Ukraine, Peace on Earth may become a year-long theme song and not just a tune for one or two days at the end of each year.
And whom do we have to thank for this oncoming development that is plain as the wart on Uncle Sam’s face? It is Vladimir Putin and his David stand versus the US-NATO Goliath now proceeding on the territory of Ukraine.
It is patently obvious that the change of direction in the Middle East against the United States and towards the rising world power, China, as well as towards its close ally Russia, was prompted precisely by the U.S. sanctions on Russia, by the freezing of 350 billion dollars of Russian assets on deposit in the West. These exceptional and unprecedented punishments could just as easily be applied to Riyadh at any time for a multitude of reasons. And, unlike Russia, the Saudis could not possibly resist an economic and financial assault from the West.
So, I say, thank you, thank you again to Vladimir Vladimirovich for setting the world well on its way to peaceful multipolarity and balance of powers.
While we react with fear to the resurgence of fascist, Nazi or Japanese imperial groups, we fail to see that it was not these ideologies that provoked World War, but the alliance of rulers ready for the worst. The same configuration is about to be repeated with other groups. In a few months, if we do not react now, a Third World War may be possible.
The Second World War can serve as a lesson to us. It did not appear in a serene sky. It was not a battle of the Good guys against the Bad guys. It was just triggered by an unforeseen gathering of forces capable of destroying everything.
After the economic crisis of 1929, the whole world was convinced, and rightly so, that the capitalism of that time was over. The Soviet Union alone offered an alternative, Bolshevism. Soon the United States came up with a second alternative, the structural reforms of the New Deal, and then Italy promoted a third alternative, fascism. The great Anglo-Saxon capitalists chose to support a new regime, close to fascism, Nazism. They thought that Germany would attack the USSR, thus preserving their interests threatened by both Bolshevik collectivisations and US economic reforms. However, nothing worked out as planned, since Italy, Germany and Japan formed the Axis with their own logic and the war was not started against the Soviets, but against the great fortunes that prepared it.
In the collective imagination, we do not hold responsible the great Anglo-Saxon capitalists who supported Nazism at its beginning. On the contrary, we remember the British and American people as having participated in the victory.
From this experience we must learn that the most skilful plans can escape their promoters. Peace was threatened by the alliance of three very different regimes, Fascism, Nazism and Hakkō ichiu. None of the international relations scholars and other geopoliticians of the time foresaw this union. All of them, without exception, were wrong.
What these three ideologies had in common was that they wanted to change the world order without regard to the human consequences of their actions. This does not mean that their opponents were democratic and peaceful, far from it, but only that they refrained from exterminating entire peoples.
Let’s not mistake the adversary. We must be very vigilant, not to a particular type of political regime, but to the fact that states governed by men capable of the worst ever unite. The current danger is neither fascism, nor Nazism, nor Hakkō ichiu, three ideologies marked by their time and which do not correspond to anything today. What we must protect ourselves from, above all, is a global alliance between ideologies capable of the worst.
This is exactly what is about to happen: the current leaders of the US State Department, the government in Kiev and the next government in Tel Aviv have no limits. The union of the “Straussians”, the Ukrainian “integral” nationalists and the Israeli “revisionist Zionists” can, without any qualms, plunge the world into a Third World War. Fortunately, the CIA does not share their ideas, the government in Kiev is constrained by Russian military intervention, and the Israeli Prime Minister’s coalition has not yet formed its government.
Professor Leo Strauss (1899-1973). Although he wrote extensively on natural law and Jewish philosophy, he left nothing about his political conceptions, which he reserved for certain of his students. Numerous testimonies have made his “oral” thought known to us.
THE U.S. “STRAUSSIANS”
This small group of about a hundred people controls the foreign policy of the United States, including the Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, his deputy, Victoria Nuland, and the National Security Advisor, Jacob Sullivan.
It is in line with the thinking of the Jewish philosopher Leo Strauss [1] for whom democracies showed their weaknesses during the 1930s. The only way to ensure that the next anti-Semitic regime does not massacre them is for the Jews to set up their own dictatorship; to be on the side of the hammer and not of the nail.
The “Straussians” have already shown what they are capable of by organizing the 9/11 attacks and by launching various wars to destroy the “wider Middle East”.
It is amazing that, despite the controversies that tore the US ruling class apart during the Bush Jr. administration, most of today’s politicians are unaware of who the Straussians are.
The poet Dmytro Dontsov (1883-1973). He created a mythology that inspired millions of Ukrainians to fight the Russians. A secret agent of the Second and Third German Reichs, he participated in the supervision of the extermination of Jews and Gypsies in Europe as administrator of the Reinhard Heydrich Institute, before being whitewashed by the Anglo-Saxon secret services.
THE UKRAINIAN “INTEGRAL NATIONALISTS”
This is a group comprising hundreds of thousands of people, perhaps millions. It originated in the First World War, but solidified during the interwar period, the Second World War and the Cold War [2].
They identify with the poet and criminal against humanity Dmytro Dontsov. They see themselves as Vikings ready to fight the last battle against evil, that is, according to them, against Russian civilization.
The term “integral nationalist” should not be misleading. Dontsov chose it in reference to the thought of the Frenchman Charles Maurras. Dontsov was never a patriot, nor a nationalist in the classical sense. He never defended either the Ukrainian people or the Ukrainian land. On the contrary.
The Ukrainian “integral nationalists” have, since 1919, shown what they are capable of. They have murdered more than 4 million of their fellow citizens, including 1.6 million Jews. Since 2014, they have waged a civil war that has cost the lives of about 20,000 of their fellow citizens. They also, in 1921, amputated their land from Galicia and Volhynia to pay in advance the Polish army against the USSR.
They made an alliance with the Straussians, in 2000, during a big congress in Washington, where the Straussian Paul Wolfowitz was the guest of honor.
It is very dangerous to claim, as NATO does, that the “integral nationalists” are marginal in Ukraine. Certainly, in the spirit of this organization, it is only a question of discrediting Russia’s discourse and mobilizing for Ukraine. But these people are now murdering, without trial, those of their fellow citizens who find themselves in Russian culture.
It is particularly dangerous to participate in the delirium of the “integral nationalists” as the Bundestag has just done by adopting a resolution on the “Holodomor”, i.e. the “genocide by hunger”. The famine of 1932-33 was by no means caused by the Soviets in general, nor by Joseph Stalin in particular. It affected many other regions of the USSR than Ukraine. It is a climatic catastrophe. Moreover, in Ukraine itself, it did not affect the cities, but only the countryside because the Soviets decided to manage this shortage by feeding the workers rather than the peasants. To give credence to the myth of a planned genocide is to encourage anti-Russian hatred as the Nazis once encouraged anti-Jewish hatred.
Vladimir Jabotinsky (1880-1940), founder of the Jewish Legion, then of the Irgun. He called for Israel to extend over the entire British Mandate territory, i.e. over the current State of Israel, the Palestinian Territories and the Kingdom of Jordan.
ISRAELI “REVISIONIST ZIONISTS”
The “revisionist Zionists” represent about 2 million Israelis. They have managed to form a parliamentary majority by uniting several political parties behind Benjamin Netanyahu.
They claim to be inspired by the Ukrainian Vladimir Jabotinsky, the man who claimed that Palestine is “a land without a people, for a people without a land”. In other words, Palestinian Arabs do not exist. They have no rights and must be expelled from their homes.
In September 1921, Jabotinsky formed a secret alliance with the Ukrainian “integral nationalist” anti-Semites, the first link in the developing Axis. This union aroused the indignation of the entire Jewish diaspora and Jabotinsky was expelled from the World Zionist Organization. In October 1937, Jabotinsky formed a new alliance with the anti-Semites of Marshal Rydz-Smigly, number 2 in Poland behind Józef Piłsudski. He was again rejected by the Jewish diaspora.
At the very beginning of World War II, Jabotinsky chose Bension Netanyahu, Benjamin’s father, as his private secretary.
It is appalling that, 75 years after the establishment of the State of Israel, most people continue to lump together different, and often opposing, views solely on the basis of the religion of those who profess them.
Revisionist Zionism” is the opposite of the Zionism of Nahum Goldman and the World Jewish Congress. It has no concern for the Jewish people and has therefore not hesitated to form alliances with anti-Semitic armed forces.
The “revisionist Zionists”, including Menahem Beguin and Ariel Sharon, have shown what they are capable of with the Nakba; the forced expulsion of the majority of the Arab population of Palestine in 1948. It is this crime, whose memory haunts both Arabs and Israelis, that makes peace in Palestine impossible to this day.
Benjamin Netanyahu formed an alliance with the Straussians in 2003 at a large closed-door congress in Jerusalem [3]. Since the election of Volodymyr Zelensky, of whom he has become a personal friend, Netanyahu has also renewed Jabotinsky’s alliance with the “integral nationalists”.
THE AXIS IS CONSTITUTED.
The common ideology of the new Axis
Just as Italian Fascism, German Nazism, and Japanese Hakkō ichiu had little to do with each other, so did the Straussians, the “integral nationalists,” and the “revisionist Zionists” think differently and pursue distinct goals. Only the Nazis were so anti-Semitic as to seek to kill an entire people. The fascists despised the Jews, but did not seek to exterminate them. The Japanese never engaged in this hatred and even protected the Jews in their own country and in the territories they occupied. In the same way, today if the “integral nationalists” are obsessively against Russian culture and wish to kill all Russians, men, women and children, the Straussians despise them without wishing to exterminate them, and the “revisionist Zionists” pursue other objectives.
Each of these three isolated groups represents a danger to specific populations, but all three together threaten all of humanity. They share a cult of violence and power. They have shown that they can engage in wars of extermination. All three consider that their time has come. However, not only do they have to overcome their internal oppositions, but their axis is still uncertain. For example, the Straussians have just warned the “revisionist Zionists” about the possible expansion of Jewish settlements in the Palestinian territories.
Europe is destined to become an economic backwater. It has ‘lost’ Russia — and soon China. And is finding it has lost its standing in the world, too,
Something odd is afoot in Europe. Britain recently has been ‘regime washed’, with a strongly pro-EU Finance Minister (Hunt) paving the passage to an election-free premiership by ‘globalist’ Rishi Sunak. Why so? Well, to impose swingeing cuts to public services, to normalise immigration running at 500,000 per annum and to raise taxes to the highest levels since the 1940s. And to open channels about a new relationship deal with Brussels.
A British Tory Party is content to do that? Slash social support and hike taxes into an already existent worldwide recession? On the face of it, it doesn’t seem to make sense. Shades of Greece 2008? Greek austerity for Britain — are we missing something? Is this setting the scene for the Remainer Establishment to point to an economy in crisis (blamed on Brexit failure), and to say there is no alternative (TINA) but a return to the EU in some form, (British ‘cap in hand’, and with head bowed)?
Simply put, forces behind the scenes seem to want the UK to resume its former role as US plenipotentiary inside Brussels — pushing the US primacy agenda (as Europe sinks into self-doubt).
Likewise odd — and significant – was that on 15 September, former German Chancellor Schroeder entered unannounced into Scholtz’s office where only the Chancellor, and Vice-Chancellor, Robert Habeck, were present. Schroeder slapped down a long-term gas supply proposal by Gazprom on the desk, directly under Scholtz’s eyes.
The Chancellor and his predecessor held each other’s gaze for a minute – without a word passing. Then Schroeder reached out, took back the unread document, turned his back and exited the office. Nothing was said.
On 26 September (11 days later), the Nordstream pipeline was sabotaged. Surprise (yes, or no)?
Many unanswered questions. The upshot: No gas for Germany. One Nordstream train (2B) however, survived the sabotage and remains pressurised and functional. Yet still no gas arrives in Germany (other than high price liquified gas). There are presently no EU sanctions on gas from Russia. Landing the Nordstream gas requires only a Regulatory go-ahead.
So then: Europe is to have austerity, loss of competitiveness, price and tax hikes? Yes — yet Scholtz did not even glance at the gas offer.
The Green Party of Habeck and Baerbock (and the EU Commission) is in close alignment with those in the Biden team insisting to maintain US hegemony, at all costs. This Euro-coalition is explicitly and viscerally malefic towards Russia; and in contrast, is as viscerally indulgent towards Ukraine.
The big picture? German Foreign Minister Baerbock in a speech in New York on 2 August 2022 sketched out a vision of a world dominated by the US and Germany. In 1989, George Bush famously had offered Germany a “partnership in leadership”, Baerbock claimed. “Now the moment has come when we have to create it: A joint partnership in leadership”. A German bid for explicit EU primacy, snaring US support. (The Anglos will not like that!)
Ensuring no backsliding on Russia sanctions and continuing EU financial support for the Ukraine war is a clear ‘Red Line’ for precisely those in the Biden team likely to be attentive to Baerbock’s Atlanticist bid — and who understand that Ukraine is the spider at the centre of a web. The Greens explicitly are playing this.
Why? Because Ukraine is still the global ‘pivot’: Geopolitics; geo-economics; commodity and energy supply chains — all revolve around where this Ukraine pivot finally settles. A Russian success in Ukraine would bring a new political bloc and monetary system into being, through its allies in the BRICS+, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the Eurasian Economic Union.
Is this European austerity binge then just about the German Green Party nailing down EU Russophobia? Or are Washington and its Atlanticist allies now prepping for something more? Prepping for China to get the ‘Russia treatment’ from Europe?
Earlier this week at Mansion House, PM Sunak changed gear. He ‘hat-tipped’ to Washington with the promise to stand by Ukraine ‘as long as it takes’, yet his primary foreign policy focus was firmly on China. The old ‘golden’ era of Sino-British relations ‘is over’: “The authoritarian regime [of China] poses a systemic challenge to our values and interests”, he said — citing the suppression of anti-zero-COVID protests and the arrest and beating of a BBC journalist on Sunday.
Over in the EU — belatedly panicking over unfolding widespread de-industrialisation — President Macron has been signalling that the EU might take a more hard-line China stance, though only were the US were to back-down on the subsidies in the Inflation Reduction Act, which entice EU companies to up-anchor, and sail off to America.
Yet, Macron’s ‘play’ is likely to meet a dead end, or at best, a cosmetic gesture — for the Act has already been legislated in the US. And the Brussels political class unsurprisingly already is waving the white flag: Europe has lost Russian energy and now stands to lose China’s tech, finance and market. It’s a ‘triple whammy’ — when taken together with European de-industrialisation.
There you have it — austerity is always the first tool in the US toolbox for exerting political pressure on US proxies: Washington is prepping the EU ruling élites to sever from China as fundamentally Europe has already done from Russia. Europe’s largest economies already are taking a harder line on Beijing. Washington will squeeze the UK and EU ‘til the pips squeak to get full compliance on a China cut-off.
The protests in China over Covid regulations could not have arrived at a more serendipitous time from the US’ ‘China hawks’ perspective: Washington whipped the EU into full propaganda mode on Iranian ‘demonstrations’ — and now the China protests offer the opportunity for Washington to go full court on China demonisation:
The ‘line’ used against Russia (Putin makes mistake after mistake; the system bumbles; the Russian economy is precariously perched on a knife edge and popular disaffection is soaring) – will be ‘cut and pasted’ to Xi and China.
Only, the inevitable EU moral lecturing will antagonise China even further: Hopes to keep a trade foothold in China will vanish, and effectively it will be China ‘washing its hands’ of Europe, rather than vice versa. European leaders have this blind spot — quite some Chinese may deplore the Covid lockdown practice, yet still will remain deeply Chinese and nationalist in sentiment. They will hate EU lecturing: ‘European values speak only for themselves — we have our own’.
Obviously, Europe has dug itself into a deep hole. Its adversaries grow bitter at EU moralising. But what exactly is going on?
Well, firstly, the EU is hugely over-invested in its Ukraine narrative. It seems incapable of reading the direction of travel that events in the war zone are taking. Or, if it does read it correctly (of which there is little sign), it appears incapable of being able to affect a course correction.
Recall that the war at the outset was never seen by Washington as likely ‘being decisive’. The military aspect was viewed as an adjunct — a pressure multiplier — to the political crisis in Moscow that sanctions were expected to unleash. The early concept was that financial war represented the front line — and the military conflict, the secondary front of attack.
It was only with the unexpected shock of sanctions not achieving‘shock and awe’ in Moscow that priority switched from the financial to the military arena. The reason the ‘military’ was not firstly seen as ‘front-line’ was because Russia clearly had the potential for escalatory dominance (a factor which is now so evident).
So, here we are: The West has been humiliated in the financial war, and unless something changes (ie. dramatic escalation by the US) – it will lose militarily too — with the distinct possibility that Ukraine at some point, simply implodes as a state.
The actual situation on the battlefield today is almost completely at odds with the narrative. Yet, so heavily has the EU invested in its Ukraine narrative that it just doubles-down, rather than draw back, to re-assess the true situation.
And so doing — by doubling-down narratively, (standing by Ukraine ‘for as long as it takes’) — the strategic content to the ‘Ukraine’ pivot rotates 180 degrees: Rump ‘Ukraine’ will not be ‘Russia’s Afghan quagmire’. Rather, its’ rump is morphing into Europe’s long-term financial and military ‘quagmire’.
‘As long as it takes’ gives the conflict an indeterminate horizon — yet leaves Russia in control of the timetable. And ‘as long as it takes’ implies ever more exposure to NATO blind spots. The rest-of-world intelligence services will have observed NATO’s air defence and military-industrial lacunae. The pivot will show who is the true ‘paper tiger’.
‘As long as it takes’ — has the EU thought this through?
If Brussels imagines too, that such dogged adherence to narrative will impress the rest-of-the-world and bind these other states closer to the EU ‘ideal’, they will be wrong. Already there is a wide hostility to the notion that Europe’s ‘values’ or squabbles have any wider pertinence, beyond Europe’s borders. ‘Others’ will see the inflexibility as some bizarre compulsion by Europe to self-suicide – at the very moment that the end of ‘everything bubble’ already threatens a major downturn.
Why would Europe double-down on its ‘Ukraine’ project, at the expense of losing its standing abroad?
Perhaps, because the EU political class fears even more losing its domestic narrative. It needs to distract from that — it is a tactic called ‘survival’.
The EU, as with NATO, was always a US political project for the subjugation of Europe. It still is that.
Yet, the meta-EU narrative — for internal EU purposes — posits something diametrically different: that Europe is a strategic player; a political power in its own right; a market colossus, a monopsony with the power to impose its will over whomsoever trades with it.
Simply put, the EU narrative is that it has meaningful political agency. But Washington has just demonstrated it has none. It has trashed that narrative. So, Europe is destined to become an economic backwater. It has ‘lost’ Russia — and soon China. And is finding it has lost its standing in the world, too.
Again, the actual situation on the geo-political ‘battlefield’ is almost completely at odds with the EU narrative of itself as a geo-strategic player.
Its ‘friend’, the Biden Administration, is gone — whilst powerful enemies elsewhere accumulate. The EU political class never had a good grasp of its limitations — it was ‘heresy’ even to suggest there were limitations to EU power. Consequently, the EU has hugely overinvested in this narrative of its agency too.
Hanging EU flags from every official building will not cast a fig leaf over the nakedness, nor hide the disconnect between the Brussels ‘bubble’ and its deprecated European proletariat. French politicians now openly ask what can save Europe from complete vassalage. Good question. What does one do when a hyper-inflated power narrative bursts, at the same time as a financialised one?
