In a previous article, titled “Ukraine is collapsing” the feud between president Zelensky and commander-in-chief Zaluzhny was discussed. Back then, in January 2023, the writing was on the wall. A little over a year ago, early February 2024, Zelensky made his move, fired Zaluzhny, and replaced him with general Syrsky. It was a complete counter-coup, as Zelensky fired not just Zaluzhny, but 14 other generals as well. Nikolay Mitrokhin, of Germany’s Bremen University, wrote in an interview that “Apparently, it was coordinated with the new commander-in-chief, Syrskyi, who named the people he would want to work with as a team.” Giving some of the background, he added: “It’s very much in Zelenskyy’s style with his decision to ‘fire ’em all’, not only those who failed their work, but even those who belong to the wrong generation or team.”
For the background on the reasons behind the feud between Zelensky and Zaluzhny, see my previous article. The short version is this: “Zelensky sees Zaluzhny as a rival who might overthrow his presidency, and Zaluzhny sees Zelensky as a lightweight who has no idea of military tactics and needs, and who is sending thousands of valuable troops to certain death just for PR reasons, seriously endangering the security of Ukraine,” where you have “Zelensky, beholden to NATO and the US, versus Zaluzhny, who thinks less politically, and more with his troops and military goals in mind.”
Jean-Marc Rickli, head of global and emerging risks at the Geneva Centre for Security Policy, offers the following insight in an article by The Hill:
“On the one hand, you have the narrative from Zelensky, which is full of hopes and that we’re doing the job, in order to secure Western support. And on the other hand, you have the more realistic narrative that it’s not going according to plans, and that right now Ukraine is suffering and unless a technological breakthrough occurs, the situation of Ukraine won’t change anytime soon. You had a conflict of two narratives that sent two conflicting messages to Western allies.”
If you need further proof how the main war is not the ‘hot war’, on the ground, but instead a more subtle and hidden information war, a true ‘war for our minds’, this is it. What message do the powers that be want us to know? Which narrative is being pushed, even at the cost of factual truth and the warning such truths should bring us? As CNN wrote, “Writing after Ukraine’s counteroffensive was mostly rebuffed by heavily fortified Russian defenses, Zaluzhny warned that without a great technological leap forward “there will most likely be no deep and beautiful breakthrough,” but instead an equilibrium of devastating losses and destruction. His remarks drew immediate criticism from Zelensky’s office, which said such commentary about the war only benefitted Russia.”
Another main point of discord was that of mobilization. Zaluzhny, aware of the enormous losses on Ukrainian side, and of the constant build-up of Russian forces, had asked for a mobilization of half a million men. Zelensky flat-out refused that, afraid of the political repercussions, the danger of a popular uprising and the impact on the narrative of success he was trying to build up. Zaluzhny bitterly remarked about “the inability of state institutions in Ukraine to improve the manpower levels of our armed forces without the use of unpopular measures.” This difference in care for political capital and popular support did not translate into popularity. When the Kyiv Institute of Sociology polled the level of support for both men, they found that Zaluzhny had 88% of all Ukrainians who supported him, against a much less glamorous 62% for Zelensky.
Among Ukrainian troops, the mood about this top level shuffle goes from neutral to very negative. “I have the impression Syrskyi is an adequate person. But I’m sorry that [outgoing army head] Zaluzhnyi was dismissed. I do not think it will get easier at the front. Syrskyi is close to the authorities, but he needs to be independent,” said a soldier (anonymously). A frontline commander was harsher (also anonymously): “You do not dismiss the Commander-in-Chief in the middle of a war. Nothing good will come of it. It is playing into the hands of the Russians.” Another soldier was simply angry about the news that Syrsky was his new commander-in-chief: “This man sent me to die as if I were meat!” He went on to explain why he and those other soldiers only spoke on condition of anonymity: “servicemen who complain about their superiors or corruption end up dispatched to the most dangerous front-line spots to be killed.”
So who is Colonel General Oleksandr Syrskyi?
Reuters sums up his training and background: “Syrskyi was born in July 1965 in Russia's Vladimir region, which was then part of the Soviet Union. He has lived in Ukraine since the 1980s. Like many people of his age in Ukraine's armed forces, he studied in Moscow - at the Higher Military Command School - among peers who have since become Russian commanders, graduating in 1986 and serving for five years in the Soviet Artillery Corps. Some military analysts believe his battlefield tactics reflect his hierarchical Soviet training.”
His fame in the war against Russia comes from 2 major ‘achievements’: Syrsky led the defense of the capital of Kiev against the Russian invasion in the first weeks of the Special Military Operation, for which he received the honor of ‘Hero of Ukraine’, the highest national decoration possible in Ukraine, in April 2022. (On a side note: Zelensky awarded his former army chief general Valeriy Zaluzhnyi the same decoration of ‘Hero of Ukraine’ the day after his dismissal from his post of army chief...) In July and August, he planned and executed the massive counteroffensive that retook large swats of Ukraine around Karkhov, all the way to Kupyansk, Izyum and Lyman.
Problem is, as you know from following this war more closely, and by reading my earlier reports (for example this article ‘On the military strategies in Ukraine’), neither was the result of his leadership. Russia had given up the gains around Kiev by end of March 2022 as a token of goodwill in the context of the peace negotiations that were well underway between Ukraine and Russia, before they got torpedoed by the West. The counteroffensive that retook most of Karkhov Oblast was as successful as it was because the Russians simply retreated, understanding that their frontline was severely undermanned. Syrksy did recognize the opportunity, and managed to stage his attack in complete secrecy, taking the Russians by surprise in that part of the front.
He is also the man behind the Bakhmut operation, where he stubbornly kept reinforcing the city, against the onslaught of the Wagner soldiers. The reason was that Zelensky insisted Bakhmut be defended at all cost, purely for PR reasons.
The Atlantic noted: “According to documents included in the recent Discord leak, U.S. intelligence officials have been warning Kyiv for months to withdraw from Bakhmut. Far better, the skeptics’ argument goes, for the Ukrainians to pull out of the cities and take up new, more easily defended positions in the countryside, leaving the Russians—who seem willing to devote enormous quantities of soldiers and equipment to the fight—only small gains of little military value. Some observers even claim that, in holding on to Bakhmut, the Ukrainians might be jeopardizing their expected counteroffensive, in part by using so many munitions to defend the city.”
Interestingly, in February 2022 The Hill reported: “Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Ukraine will continue to defend Bakhmut, an eastern city in Donetsk province that has seen months of brutal Russian attacks, but “not at any price.”” But a month later, AP reported this: “Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy vowed Monday not to retreat from Bakhmut as Russian forces encroached on the devastated eastern city they have sought to capture for six months at the cost of thousands of lives.” As Wagner encroached upon the city, Zelensky dug in not just his troops, but his own resolve and demand to defend the city. Syrsky was the man for the job.
Slavnyangrad, a pro-Russian Telegram channel, had this to say:
”Bloomberg: Zelensky could turn into a disgraced leader due to the “disgusting fight” with Zaluzhny
The Western press did not appreciate the replacement of the popular commander-in-chief in Ukraine with the “Bakhmut butcher” and in unison predicted problems with the Ukrainian president’s ratings and public trust (as if they did not exist before). While a new Maidan is slowly brewing in Kiev, Bloomberg writes about how the “disgusting struggle” with Zaluzhny “exposed the split” in Ukraine.
“His public conflict occurred at the most inopportune moment. Ukraine finds itself on the battlefield three to one, while the United States, its financial backbone, refuses aid. He wants to avoid the need to negotiate unpleasant peace terms, even though pressure for this purpose is growing,” the publication quotes one Western diplomat as saying.
The Politico newspaper previously openly reported to Western audiences that the new Commander-in-Chief Syrsky in the Armed Forces of Ukraine is called the "Butcher" and General "200" for the successful disposal of his troops. According to the publication, unlike Zaluzhny, Syrsky will obediently send Ukrainian troops to their death in the Avdeevka meat grinder on Zelensky’s orders.”
200 is code for KIA.
WaPo reported on Zelensky praising Syrsky, showing the reasons for his appointment to the top spot in the Ukrainian army: “He has successful defensive experience, particularly in the Kyiv defense operation,” the president said. “He also has successful offensive experience, particularly in the Kharkiv liberation operation. … 2024 can become successful for Ukraine only through effective changes in the basis of our defense, which is the Armed Forces of Ukraine.”
WaPo continues, and explains how Syrsky is seen by many soldiers as a ‘butcher’, precisely because of his decision to keep troops in Bakhmut for far too long under fire, only retreating when there was barely anything left (and even then in a chaotic and costly rout, when Wagner had complete fire control over their one remaining escape route). ““I only know what I’ve heard from my subordinates,” said a high-ranking military official who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to do so publicly. “One hundred percent of them don’t respect him because they don’t think he counts soldiers’ lives.”” But Zelensky does not count the lives of soldiers, either, but only the impact of actions on the international media and for his own narratives. Which is why Syrsky got the main job.
“But Ukrainian military personnel in the field said they are especially wary of Syrsky exactly because he is considered closer and more loyal to Zelensky and the chief of his administration, Andriy Yermak.
“In a couple of months there will probably some attempts to conduct assault actions or something like that. Because Syrsky will follow Zelensky. And Zelensky wants big victories,” said a major currently fighting in eastern Ukraine.” This is particularly prescient, as our next part will show.
Ever since this change of command at the top of the Ukrainian leadership, things in the field have changed markedly as well. Before we can show the change, this is the state before Syrsky took over command. The Russians had focused on defense, with Bakhmut as the main exception. After Bakhmut fell on May 20, 2023, things stayed relative quiet, until the Ukrainian counter-offensive started on June 4th.
The much vaunted Ukrainian had counter-offensive fizzled quickly when it shattered on a rock-solid Russian defensive line, making only very local and very limited gains, counted in only a few miles, and only in 1 place by a mere 20 miles (Robotyne). Some say that too many top level units and a lot of much needed and scarce ammunition were wasted in Bakhmut, preventing the Ukrainian counter-offensive from having as much ‘punch’ as it could have had. By the end of 2023, it was as good as dead, stopped in it's tracks.
In October 2023, the Russians decided to start moving again. Not a clear ‘offensive’, but a series of small scale attacks, ranging from ‘probing reconnaissance’ to full scale attempts to regain limited objectives, such as a certain tree line and the entrenched positions it gave cover for, or a section of a settlement. This happened haphazardly across the whole front, effectively tying up Ukrainian reserves everywhere, and requiring a constant use of ammunition, reserves and vehicles to be spent all over. At the same time, the battle for Avdeevka began. Avdeevka is a town just to the north of the main city of Donetsk, capital of the Oblast with the same name. Ukrainian soldiers have held the city for 10 years, and turned it into a true fortress. From there, Ukrainian troops had relentlessly shelled civilian areas since the frontline became more or less fixed in 2014.
Even Reuters reported https://www.reuters.com/world/eight-killed-after-ukraine-shells-russian-controlled-city-donetsk-mayor-2024-01-21/ on some of those instances, such as on Jan 21 2024: “Twenty-seven people were killed and 25 injured when Ukrainian forces shelled the Russian-controlled city of Donetsk in eastern Ukraine, Denis Pushilin, the Russian-appointed head of the Donetsk region, said on Sunday.
According to Alexei Kulemzin, the city's Russian-installed mayor, Ukrainian forces bombarded a busy area where shops and a market are located. Pushilin said the city was shelled by Ukrainian artillery.”
Caption by Reuters: People remove debris at a food market following, what local Russian-installed authorities say, was a Ukrainian military strike in the course of Russia-Ukraine conflict in Donetsk, Russian-controlled Ukraine, January 21, 2024. REUTERS/Alexander Ermochenko
Caption by Reuters: A man mourns his wife, who was killed while working at a food market following, what local Russian-installed authorities say, was a Ukrainian military strike in the course of Russia-Ukraine conflict in Donetsk, Russian-controlled Ukraine, January 21, 2024. REUTERS/Alexander Ermochenko
That was in January 2024, when Ukraine still held major parts of Avdeevka. The stories of such shelling go back a lot longer. CNN reported in January 2015 : “At least seven civilians died after shells slammed into a transit stop Thursday in the volatile eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk.” And in 2014, Human Rights Watch reports titled “Ukraine: Unguided Rockets Killing Civilians” that “Unguided Grad rockets launched apparently by Ukrainian government forces and pro-government militias have killed at least 16 civilians and wounded many more in insurgent-controlled areas of Donetsk and its suburbs in at least four attacks between July 12 and 21, 2014, Human Rights Watch said today.” This, too, has been reported here several times before on my Substack (here and here).
Back to the military situation. Russia stepped up their small attacks, making gains of half a mile, a mile, here and there. Constantly harassing the Ukrainian positions. All this seemed to mask several key attacks, that took the southern industrial zone by December 4 2023, and the advance to the northern outskirts by January 20, 2024.
Situation early December, notice the push in the north of the city.
Allocation of a lot of units to defend this key position. If Avdeevka falls, it weakens the rest of the whole front through a domino effect, by exposing the flanks of all the neighboring positions, which, if captured, in turn expose the flanks of the next neighboring positions, etc.
Notice the northern and southern push towards the city. The most important move is the one in the south. To the left of it is the old air defense position, an old cold war era position, that had been very heavily fortified by Ukraine since 2014, getting very close to operational encirclement, while also bypassing a lot of the main defense lines towards the city, disrupting communication and support lines towards the eastern part of the city.
To get this close into the city, they pulled of a crazy stunt: using an old sewer tunnel, they advanced almost a mile, straight into the city, behind the main defensive lines prepared by the Ukrainians and managed to create a defensive position, and link up with their own lines, to create a long protruding position, into the city itself.
This map shows the advances on the 20th. Getting past the lines with a small unit of about 150 soldiers, through the sewer, they established a bridgehead, and attacked the rear of the defensive positions, while other troops attacked those same positions frontally. Attacked from both sides, the Ukrainian positions got very quickly overrun, giving the Russians a strong foothold at the outskirts of the city itself
This is a map of the next day:
A Russian in the sewer underneath Avdeevka.
Not that the point that our own media is absurdly biased, feeding actual disinformation, still needs to be proven, but this example from Forbes was too incredible not to share. A Forbes article by David Axe, who ‘writes about ships, planes, tanks, drones, missiles and satellites’, published on January 30, headlined: “Russian Troops Crawled Through A Sewer To Attack Avdeevka. Ukrainian Drones Were Waiting For Them.”
This is how he described the battle: “First the Russians tried directly assaulting the Ukrainian garrison in Avdeevka, starting in October. When that failed in November, they tried bypassing and cutting off the city from the south and north.
When that failed this month, they resumed direct attacks on the eastern city, just northwest of Donetsk. Meanwhile, the Russians have tried infiltrating the city from the south in order to slip paste, and cut off, a key Ukrainian strongpoint—a Cold War air-defense bunker that the Ukrainians have turned into a veritable fortress.
The infiltration also ended in failure, as a small group of Russian infantry emerged from a sewer, smeared in feces, and promptly got hunted down by Ukrainian drones. The sewer attack, targeting the Tsarska Okhota section of Avdeevka, is the latest debacle in a battle replete with them.”
And two weeks later, Avdeevka had fallen, and Ukrainian troops were in a panicked, chaotic rout...
From Slavyangrad: “These are shots of the very [sewer] pipe through which stormtroopers from the "Veteran" brigade of the Volunteer Corps penetrated into the "Tsar's Hunt" [the southern area of Avdeevka]. The object was discovered a year ago by intelligence officers, all this time the details of the operation and its preparation were kept secret. The work of cutting passages in the pipe was accompanied by active artillery and mortar shelling, thereby drowning out the noise from the work being carried out. The first attempt was unsuccessful. The reason was that there was not enough oxygen and additional ventilation holes had to be made. Then the flood flooded the pipe with water. And only now “Veterans” were able to carry out this daring operation. The fighters went behind enemy lines and cut off most of the fortifications near Avdeevka, while capturing a group of Ukrainian Armed Forces fighters.”
With small, incremental and very strategic advances, The Russians then secured the north, moved towards the railroad line and the last main access road (the purple road), and cut off the remaining defenders in the city. The only road in and out left, was a dirt road (the blue road), but that led through open terrain, within firing range from Russian positions (the red arrows below it). Once the Russians reached the main road (the red X), it was game over for the defenders of Avdeevka.
The encircled troops, estimated at around 7000, frantically tried to escape, leaving wounded comrades behind, as well as stockpiles of weapons, ammo and those soldiers who could not be reached to warn. At this point, elite units from Azov (their 3rd Assault Brigade) were called in, to counterattack the Russians at the edge of the ‘pincer’, to avoid the pincer from closing, and to distract the Russian troops there from firing on the retreating Ukrainian troops behind the countering Azov fighters. Again, a costly attempt to save soldiers who could have been ordered to retreat weeks earlier.
And some more western propaganda clown show, this time from the Institute for the Study of War. Yes, Russia clearly demonstrated their inability to conduct a successful operational envelopment or encirclement. “Operational envelopment” means that it does not have to be closed, which is precisely what the Russians DID achieve! A modern army need not achieve full encirclement, either. As Russia proved with some of the previous successful attacks, such as Bakhmut and Soledar, it is better to leave a small opening, to give the almost encircled soldiers the illusion of escape. This way they won’t dig in and dearly sell their hides, as happened in Mariupol. Instead, they will try to break free, and risk running that gauntlet...
Almost immediately, the blame game began, and an easy black sheep was found. As discussed on Ukrainian TV: “Military expert Dmitry Snegirev said that the failure of the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ukrainian Defense Ministry led to the defeat of the Ukrainians in Avdeevka. He believes that the department under the leadership of Budanov was unable to reveal the plan of the Russian special forces, which had been prepared for several months.”
In the US, White House press secretary Kirby wasted no time to use the fall of Avdeevka to try to put pressure on Congress to pass the Ukraine Aid bill: “The cost of Congressional inaction is stark. And it lies on the shoulders of Ukrainian soldiers. Congress must pass the Ukraine aid bill without further delay. If the House of Representatives does not do anything soon, what is happening now in Avdeevka could also happen anywhere, anywhere on the front line. So I repeat: Congress must act now!”
After the fall of Avdeevka, Russian troops continued their slow pace nibbling away. Some commentators remarked that this was a lost chance, to drive deep into the now exposed Ukrainian flank, where there were miles of open land without adequate defensive positions in the hinterland behind Avdeevka.
But the gap in the Ukrainian defensive line was real enough. This is where the change of leadership starts to show. Quickly, Syrsky sent some of his most elite units in the breach: if they could not hold the Russians long enough to plug the gap and erect proper defensive lines, this Russian thrust into the middle of their lines could unravel all their defenses. This included the 47th Mechanized Brigade, the only Ukrainian unit that has the American Abrams tanks.
The result, however, was the destruction of several of the American supplied Abrams tanks.
Another problem the Ukrainian faced, was the air superiority the Russians had enjoyed for the last year or so. Raining down modified cold war era ‘dumb bombs’, outfitted with a rather cheap ‘upgrade kit’ to turn them into guided glide bombs (compare to the very expensive Western guided bombs), they had a major impact along the front, not in the least in Avdeevka, where the heavy bombs erased even strong, concrete defensive positions. In his cold, calculated style, Syrsky ordered precious air defense units to be moved closer to the front. They had been saved and kept around important areas inland (Kiev, for example), in order to protect those sensitive inland areas, while also protecting the air defense batteries themselves, including the US made patriot systems.
The result was immediate. Within a span of 11 days, Ukraine shot down 11 Russian planes, including a special radar plane of which Russia only has a limited number. One such plane, a IL-22 airborne command post in the Azov Sea region, was rather far from the frontlines.
This slate of downed planes slowed the Russian air force down a little, but the Russians responded by actively hunting down these air defense units. In a single attack by 3 Iskander-M OTRK missiles, 9 trained operators of the Patriot system (a very valuable and slowly acquired skill set!), together with 2 launchers, were destroyed. As the Russian Ministry of Defense reported: “In the last week alone, as a result of the effective work of reconnaissance and strike systems, three American Patriot complexes, a Vampire multiple launch rocket system combat vehicle, more than 10 foreign-made artillery systems and warehouses of fuel, lubricants and ammunition were destroyed.”
These were mobile Patriot systems, something a source claimed only American troops are trained on. Even Newsweek reported that “US Troops 'May Have Been Killed' in Strike on Patriots in Ukraine”. The article reported that “a spokesperson for the Pentagon told Newsweek, "I can confirm no U.S. injuries because we have no US service members in the fight."” That is of course the only possible public answer, as actual US troops on the ground, partaking in combat operations (manning and maintaining an active air defense system falls under that) against the Russian army, would be a very significant escalation and problem.
Either way, a Ukrainian insider source (RezidentUA) claimed: “Our sources in the General Staff reported that the Ukrainian Armed Forces lost three mobile air defense groups in the last two weeks, which were hunting enemy aircraft. At the moment, the General Staff is trying to understand how the enemy identified the routes and managed to accurately hit 3 out of 5 mobile air defense groups, which included 3 Patriot launchers and a multifunctional radar."
To counter the constant Russian small scale attacks, the Ukrainian army has changed its tactics. Instead of more direct counter-attacks, they now developed a counter-encirclement strategy, seeking out the weak spot in the Russian attempts to move around strong Ukrainian defensive positions.
All this betrays a more active, and more adaptive, mindset from the strategy makers. Syrsky, in this case. Where Zaluzhny was more conservative, and did not want to put troops at risk, Syrsky has less such scruples, and tackles the military need first, thinking of the cost later. This allows him to gain immediate victories, even if at times only PR victories, gaining him points with the political leadership under Zelensky.
One other mayor development is the attempt by Ukraine to open a new front with Russia, this time on Russian soil. In the north, the Belgorod region, a combined and multi-pronged attack on the Russian border was planned and executed. The last time, only light troop carrying vehicles and infantry were used, this time artillery, helicopters and tanks are thrown in the mix, in a much larger scale invasion. Despite the efforts, this was stopped cold in its track. The only result: a photo-op were a handful of soldiers ran a kilometer across the border to an evacuated school building, torn down the Russian flag, and replaced it with a Ukrainian flag, then to hastily retreat again...
If the town of Belgorod, or any other smaller town, had been captured, this would have been a major PR victory for the Ukrainians: Putin cannot defend the homeland! Ukraine successfully invades Russia! All this, timed perfectly the week before the presidential elections in Russia... Clearly aimed to disrupt those elections, in an attempt to show to Russians how Putin is weak, unable to defend the Motherland of Russia, in an attack triggered by his own delusions of grandeur! This is what Scott Ritter wrote, accusing openly the CIA of having been behind this attack: “The CIA’s secret war using Russian fascists to fight Russia”.
“In the days leading to the Russian presidential election that concluded on Sunday, a network of three Russian paramilitary organizations working under the auspices of the Main Directorate of Intelligence of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense, or GUR, launched a series of attacks on the territory of the Russian Federation.
The purpose of the attacks was clear — to disrupt the three-day Russian presidential election by creating an atmosphere of weakness and impotence around President Vladimir Putin designed to undermine his authority, legitimacy and appeal at the voting booth.”
The units involved in this attack, the Russian Volunteer Corps (RDK), the Freedom of Russian Legion (LSR), and the Siberia Battalion, are all under control of the GUR, the Ukrainian intelligence organization. Ritter explains how the CIA is extensively involved with the work of the GUR, and given the widespread use of American weaponry, from rifles to Humvees and Bradley fighting vehicles, and tactics such as helicopter insertions, very similar to typical clandestine CIA ops. Combined with the very clearly politically motivated timing, aimed at disruption of the Russian elections, it has all the hallmarks of the CIA.
That the CIA had been involved in Ukraine from 2014 on, building 12 (!!) secret bases in Ukraine, involved in the color revolution that ousted Yanukovich, has been admitted and reported by, among others, the WaPo, in an article titled “Ukrainian spies with deep ties to CIA wage shadow war against Russia”. WaPo wrote, among other revelations: “Ukraine’s affinity for lethal operations [read: assassination of political targets] has complicated its collaboration with the CIA, raising concerns about agency complicity and creating unease among some officials in Kyiv and Washington.”
Other news outlets understood what this meant:
The New York Times had written: “Toward the end of 2021, according to a senior European official, Mr. Putin was weighing whether to launch his full-scale invasion when he met with the head of one of Russia’s main spy services, who told him that the C.I.A., together with Britain’s MI6, were controlling Ukraine and turning it into a beachhead for operations against Moscow.”
As WSWS wrote: “The Times report demonstrates that this Russian intelligence assessment was absolutely true. For more than a decade, dating back to 2014, the CIA was building up, training and arming Ukrainian intelligence and paramilitary forces that were engaging in assassinations and other provocations against pro-Russian forces in eastern Ukraine, against Russian forces in Crimea and across the border into Russia itself. [...] Ukrainian paramilitary forces that were armed, funded and led by the United States and NATO were systematically assassinating forces supporting closer relations with Russia.”
Why is the NYT reporting these admissions? Mixed with other claims that are clearly misleading?
“By reporting the virtual control of the Ukrainian regime by the US military-intelligence apparatus, the Times is seeking to pressure the Republicans to support the war funding. It is arguing that this money is not going to a foreign government, in a foreign war, thousands of miles from US borders, but to a subcontractor of American imperialism, waging an American war in which US personnel are deeply and directly engaged.”
That seems the gist of it all, as I and others have been reporting on for 2 years now. The NYT tries to show how the CIA was an unwilling and distant supported, and that Ukraine is acting on it’s own, against the CIA’s warnings and cautions. “Before the war, the Ukrainians proved themselves to the Americans by collecting intercepts that helped prove Russia’s involvement in the 2014 downing of a commercial jetliner, Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. The Ukrainians also helped the Americans go after the Russian operatives who meddled in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.” Yeah, right. Both are CIA directed missions, one aimed at undermining and isolating Russia, the other at undermining and isolating Trump and his supporters, by connecting them to the same bogey-man they were creating: Russia. It’s an interesting exercise, to read this NYT article, and try to spot the twists and half-truths, the hidden agenda, behind the seemingly open reporting.
Back to the current Ukrainian battlefield in the Belgorod region.
Members of the Russian Volunteer Corps on 24 May 2023. (Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 4.0) [Notice the high end Western rifles, Belgian made SCAR rifles.]
Ritter continued: “In the lead up to Russia’s initiation of the Special Military Operation (SMO) against Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022, the C.I.A. expanded its relationship with the GUR to include specialized training provided by members of the Ground Division of the C.I.A.’s Special Activities Group, responsible for covert paramilitary operations.”
The operation failed, as Russia was more than prepared. With over a half a million new soldiers, part from a partial draft, part from a huge influx of volunteers, it was able to man the whole frontline, preventing any penetration by enemy forces. The attempt to disrupt the Russian elections failed, and Putin was overwhelmingly re-elected for another 6 year term.
Taking about those elections, the leader of the French Patriots party, Florian Philippot, didn’t mince any words when he excoriated Zelensky:
It is clear that the recent Russian successes, and the pressure exerted in the wake of the fall of Adveevka, rapidly are exposing a huge weakness within Ukraine. Even the French president, Macron, was calling for French troops on the ground in Ukraine. “Macron warns Europe's security 'at stake' after uproar over Ukraine ground troops comment” headlined France24, reporting how the French president was “warning that a Russian victory against Kyiv "would reduce Europe's credibility to zero".” Elina Valtonen, Finland's Foreign Minister, as well as the Polish Foreign Minister, also stated that NATO countries should think about deploying troops to Ukraine. This past weekend Polish president Tusk and Macron were called in to meet with the German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who seems to be calling them to order about such rhetoric.
The situation in Ukraine is at the edge of a sword, and can shift dramatically anytime. Whether that will be tomorrow, next month, or after the summer, is to be seen: Russia, at least, seems not bothered at all, and simply continues to calmly, methodologically, take the next step. Small scale, focused on minimizing troop losses above all else. They know the outcome, and they can wait for it.
To end, David Sacks wrote the following text, worth republishing in full:
“The war in Ukraine is based on lies—lies about how it started, how it continues, and how it will end.
We are told that Ukraine is winning, when in fact it is losing. We are told that war makes NATO stronger, when in fact it weakens it. We are told that Ukraine's biggest problem is a lack of funds from the US Congress, when in fact the West cannot produce enough ammunition - a problem that will take years to solve. We are told that Russia is suffering heavy losses, when in fact Ukraine is running out of soldiers - another problem that cannot be solved with money.
We are told that peace is with us, when in fact the world majority considers US policy to be the height of stupidity. We are told that there is no possibility of peace, when in fact we have rejected many opportunities for a negotiated settlement. We are told that if Ukraine continues to fight, it will improve its negotiating position, when in fact the terms will only become much worse than those that were already available and rejected.
However, lies will manage to prolong the war. Congress will allocate more funds. Ukraine is mobilizing more young men and women to put them into the meat grinder. Ultimately, a crisis will erupt in Kyiv and the Zelensky government will be overthrown.
And then, when the war is finally lost, when the whole country lies in smoldering ruins on the funeral pyre that they themselves built, the liars will say: “Well, we tried.” Having prevented any alternative, having exposed anyone who spoke the truth as puppets of the enemy, the liars will say: “We did everything we could. <…> Then, having shifted the blame and patted themselves on the back, they will blithely move on to the next war, just as they moved to Ukraine after their disasters in Afghanistan and Iraq.”
Depressing, but true. We cannot forget that it is not Ukraine that is fighting this war. WE are. Or, more precise, our unelected elites. Among all the reporting, the absolute bravery and tenacity of the Ukrainian soldiers stands out, and should be honored. Let’s keep pressuring our own political leaders to end this crime as soon as possible, to save as many of those brave men as possible.