I believe Russia is under a lot of pressure from China. Witness the conditions China demanded to get the gas that formerly went to Europe. There were negotiations for two years to build a pipeline thru Mongolia but at the last minute talks were broken off as China had posed impossible conditions. That was in July and furthermore China has restricted the amount of business Chinese banks can do with Russia. Supposedly under US pressure. No, I think that some sort of compromise over Ukraine is possible and I don´t think Putin will want to get all of Ukraine. That is not how I read the Tucker interview. Goldilocks for Putin would be some Ukrainian strongman that talks Nationalist but follows the Russian lead. Some sort of Ukrainian Petain. Salushni would be perfect for this role.
I don't think Russia necessarily needs all of Ukraine.
But more broadly, it is the global south which is industrially developing, and hence in need of energy supplies. The west is economically in deep decline. I think it is safe to assume that Russia's fate in the long term is tied with the south/east. And the economic factor isn't the only one
I concur with this analysis like I feel Trump is gonna be a wild card like he's either gonna do a peace or double down on Ukraine. I think Russia wants either a DMZ on the border plus the 4 se oblasts or at maximum the whole of left bank Ukraine securing the border regions and recovering the old soviet MIC to integrate it to the ru economy.
I think this is an interesting point, German manufacturing has been curtailed a lot by lack of access to cheap Russian gas. Putin might think that it's better to supply gas away from Europe simply because it's going to be less vulnerable to the Americans whims
I do not believe in this "common north civilization identity" stuff. The reason that Russia, starting with Peter, started moving in the direction of identifying with Western Europe is that, at the time, the Western European powers were the most successful and hence were an obvious model to follow. It is however not the 18th century, or 19th, or 20th -- Europe in 2024 is at a 400-year historical nadir. Why would anybody want to identify with these people? The success stories of the modern period are China and, well, Russia itself
Replying to myself, aren't the obvious "polar identities" not North-South, but West-East? With the West being the Americas, with a population almost entirely composed of descendents of European settlers.
My thoughts with Trump is that he lacks the patience to engage in a long drawn out attritional campaign against the Russians. I don't think the Ukrainians can win militarily at this point anyway which means he'd be committing himself to a campaign which would require constant attention and effort, would be a visibly losing the whole time, all for some marginal outcome of weakening Russia. I don't think he's got some nixonian splitting of Russia from China in mind just because that sort of thing doesn't appeal to him, he's not big on realpolitik because he has very fixed ideas on How These Things Work. All this being said I think if he can get a negotiated settlement which fulfills 3 criteria he'll be happy, they are 1. It looks like he's gotten some concessions for the Russians he can sell as a win, 2. It's all wrapped up nice and quickly, and 3. It stops the issue from popping up again at any point in his term.
Yes that's the thing that worries me, that he would unwittingly step into a chain of rapid escalation with all the inherent risks that comes from it being between two nuclear powers. It puts us all into the uncomfortable position of hoping Putin is the more rational actor in all of this
Trump leads and here in the UK the BBC is sounding nervous......the real reason is that Trump doesn't follow THEIR script. He believes that the elected President should be in charge....when in reality MI6 and the CIA have been running foreign policy for years and, as a condition for getting their support in any election, everyone must continue to follow that script. This is what unites Ukraine and Gaza: it's about maintaining global supremacy (unipolarity) and the 'rules based order'. I hope that the liar Starmer will be a casualty...but he is a wolf in sheep's clothing and will bend in whatever way is necessary. Weep for Gaza. Palestinian blood is the meat in the sandwich. My tears for Ukraine are dry: it is gone. The blood of Zelenskyy will be the full stop. As soon as he reneged on his election promise I knew he'd fallen for the script of 'the west' and I have nothing but contempt for him because he is a fool and the deaths of half a million Ukrainians are largely down to him. He will be a hero in 'the west' and they will continue to call him 'Churchillian'. Make him a proper martyr....we don't want him, here....
Russia is pushing in the Donbass front this hard, so I assume that Putin is now hoping to acquire Ukraine's industrial and mercantile hubs. The four currently occupied oblasts are probably his minimal goals, but perhaps more. It might mean he's shifted his goals from regime change and then restructuring the Russian economy to cement his regime, to actual plunder of Ukraine's mineral and industrial resources; after all, this would give him an industrial zone he could rebuild and enhance Russia's position.
This means that Trump would need to either offer him an insanely sweet deal or work with China to pressure a ceasefire that he can sell as a success. With people like Graham in the party actively mentioning that said mineral resources, and U.S. arms manufacturers profiting through Ukraine, the domestic obstacles are nigh insurmountable even if he were being serious. Plus, this would only happen if the US elites *really* want Russia as an ally against China; why would the latter work with the US so they can possibly have 'lose' Russia. I don't think this adds up unless Russia got really desperate.
Humorous P.S. Is it time for an Odessagate saga in American Television to unfold?
That poor Ukrainian woman who 'of course we don't want to lose any territory' needn't worry if only she'd think straight and think about people instead of that virtual entity 'the State'. The Ukrainian people are not losing any territory. The Donbas Ukrainians still have their land, their property, even their government. And the Kiev Ukrainians the same.
So who is losing what when we talk about people?
Well the Ukrainian people are losing thousands of dead.
And the 'ukrainian State', which means a bunch of lying thieves and murderers in Kiev and Washington are losing their control over 10 mill Donbas people and that's just wonderful.
She is talking to Radio Free Europe, a famous nationalist news channel. Of course she will say what is politically correct
Also, keep in mind that she is also stating the very politically INcorrect desire to end the war no matter the Ukrainian territorial losses - she is brave to say that openly on TV.
The people in this video are under a lot of pressure, keep that in mind.
I believe Russia is under a lot of pressure from China. Witness the conditions China demanded to get the gas that formerly went to Europe. There were negotiations for two years to build a pipeline thru Mongolia but at the last minute talks were broken off as China had posed impossible conditions. That was in July and furthermore China has restricted the amount of business Chinese banks can do with Russia. Supposedly under US pressure. No, I think that some sort of compromise over Ukraine is possible and I don´t think Putin will want to get all of Ukraine. That is not how I read the Tucker interview. Goldilocks for Putin would be some Ukrainian strongman that talks Nationalist but follows the Russian lead. Some sort of Ukrainian Petain. Salushni would be perfect for this role.
I don't think Russia necessarily needs all of Ukraine.
But more broadly, it is the global south which is industrially developing, and hence in need of energy supplies. The west is economically in deep decline. I think it is safe to assume that Russia's fate in the long term is tied with the south/east. And the economic factor isn't the only one
I concur with this analysis like I feel Trump is gonna be a wild card like he's either gonna do a peace or double down on Ukraine. I think Russia wants either a DMZ on the border plus the 4 se oblasts or at maximum the whole of left bank Ukraine securing the border regions and recovering the old soviet MIC to integrate it to the ru economy.
I think this is an interesting point, German manufacturing has been curtailed a lot by lack of access to cheap Russian gas. Putin might think that it's better to supply gas away from Europe simply because it's going to be less vulnerable to the Americans whims
I do not believe in this "common north civilization identity" stuff. The reason that Russia, starting with Peter, started moving in the direction of identifying with Western Europe is that, at the time, the Western European powers were the most successful and hence were an obvious model to follow. It is however not the 18th century, or 19th, or 20th -- Europe in 2024 is at a 400-year historical nadir. Why would anybody want to identify with these people? The success stories of the modern period are China and, well, Russia itself
Replying to myself, aren't the obvious "polar identities" not North-South, but West-East? With the West being the Americas, with a population almost entirely composed of descendents of European settlers.
Just wanted to say congrats Peter, great clear eyed and informative stuff!
My thoughts with Trump is that he lacks the patience to engage in a long drawn out attritional campaign against the Russians. I don't think the Ukrainians can win militarily at this point anyway which means he'd be committing himself to a campaign which would require constant attention and effort, would be a visibly losing the whole time, all for some marginal outcome of weakening Russia. I don't think he's got some nixonian splitting of Russia from China in mind just because that sort of thing doesn't appeal to him, he's not big on realpolitik because he has very fixed ideas on How These Things Work. All this being said I think if he can get a negotiated settlement which fulfills 3 criteria he'll be happy, they are 1. It looks like he's gotten some concessions for the Russians he can sell as a win, 2. It's all wrapped up nice and quickly, and 3. It stops the issue from popping up again at any point in his term.
That's a good point.
But his unwillingness to engage in a drawn-own campaign doesn't exclude the possibility of short-term escalation if he doesn't get his way.
Yes that's the thing that worries me, that he would unwittingly step into a chain of rapid escalation with all the inherent risks that comes from it being between two nuclear powers. It puts us all into the uncomfortable position of hoping Putin is the more rational actor in all of this
100%, my thoughts exactly
Trump leads and here in the UK the BBC is sounding nervous......the real reason is that Trump doesn't follow THEIR script. He believes that the elected President should be in charge....when in reality MI6 and the CIA have been running foreign policy for years and, as a condition for getting their support in any election, everyone must continue to follow that script. This is what unites Ukraine and Gaza: it's about maintaining global supremacy (unipolarity) and the 'rules based order'. I hope that the liar Starmer will be a casualty...but he is a wolf in sheep's clothing and will bend in whatever way is necessary. Weep for Gaza. Palestinian blood is the meat in the sandwich. My tears for Ukraine are dry: it is gone. The blood of Zelenskyy will be the full stop. As soon as he reneged on his election promise I knew he'd fallen for the script of 'the west' and I have nothing but contempt for him because he is a fool and the deaths of half a million Ukrainians are largely down to him. He will be a hero in 'the west' and they will continue to call him 'Churchillian'. Make him a proper martyr....we don't want him, here....
Russia is pushing in the Donbass front this hard, so I assume that Putin is now hoping to acquire Ukraine's industrial and mercantile hubs. The four currently occupied oblasts are probably his minimal goals, but perhaps more. It might mean he's shifted his goals from regime change and then restructuring the Russian economy to cement his regime, to actual plunder of Ukraine's mineral and industrial resources; after all, this would give him an industrial zone he could rebuild and enhance Russia's position.
This means that Trump would need to either offer him an insanely sweet deal or work with China to pressure a ceasefire that he can sell as a success. With people like Graham in the party actively mentioning that said mineral resources, and U.S. arms manufacturers profiting through Ukraine, the domestic obstacles are nigh insurmountable even if he were being serious. Plus, this would only happen if the US elites *really* want Russia as an ally against China; why would the latter work with the US so they can possibly have 'lose' Russia. I don't think this adds up unless Russia got really desperate.
Humorous P.S. Is it time for an Odessagate saga in American Television to unfold?
Excellent. Thanks for the freebie.
i call on the international community to send humanitarian aid to the US in the form of reeducation camps we need it NOW
That poor Ukrainian woman who 'of course we don't want to lose any territory' needn't worry if only she'd think straight and think about people instead of that virtual entity 'the State'. The Ukrainian people are not losing any territory. The Donbas Ukrainians still have their land, their property, even their government. And the Kiev Ukrainians the same.
So who is losing what when we talk about people?
Well the Ukrainian people are losing thousands of dead.
And the 'ukrainian State', which means a bunch of lying thieves and murderers in Kiev and Washington are losing their control over 10 mill Donbas people and that's just wonderful.
If she could think straight she'd be happy.
They probably all would be if they could.
We should help them think straight.
Funny that no one does. Isn't it?
She is talking to Radio Free Europe, a famous nationalist news channel. Of course she will say what is politically correct
Also, keep in mind that she is also stating the very politically INcorrect desire to end the war no matter the Ukrainian territorial losses - she is brave to say that openly on TV.
The people in this video are under a lot of pressure, keep that in mind.
Yeah it seems she started with a disclaimer ("ofc I don't want ukr to lose territories") to avoid a visit from SBU