I wrote a long response precisely because your post was long, so i figured it deserves an appropriate response with a similar amount of effort put into it. I apologize if i overlooked or misunderstood parts of what you originally said.
The point i was making is that in my opinion NATO’s article 5 is a bluff and one that needs to be called because at the moment it just emboldens small insignificant nations like Lithuania to act very recklessly because they think they are immune from consequences.
In a confrontation with a near-peer power that can inflict significant losses and destruction on their home soil, and where due to the location of the conflict not being in their favor victory is not assured, i believe there are few NATO members who would be willing to actually intervene on behalf of a peripheral member like Lithuania.
The Baltic states add little to the overall security of the alliance, they barely have an army, and their location is more a liability than anything else. They talk a big game but especially the western Europeans and the Americans are extremely politically sensitive to taking real losses and being seen to actually experience defeats in battle.
I also don’t think that even intervention by the UK, which also has a pitiful army that is weaker than Poland’s and could realistically only try to use its navy in the Baltic, would result in use of nuclear weapons. It would be one thing if Russia was pushing into Germany, but to start a nuclear war over Lithuania? No.
It would be a bold gambit, and as i said i am convinced that this is not Russia’s way of doing things, not under Putin who is extremely cautious and reluctant to escalate unless he literally has no other choice, but it would be a way to fulfill Russia’s goal of removing the NATO threat once and for all by showing the alliance to be unreliable and a paper tiger.
Or maybe i’m wrong and this would lead to nuclear WW3, in which case i sure am glad i am in no position to be making decisions like this 😂
I think this is a bit unrealistic and alarmist to be honest. Also, what even is a “NATO-Russia” conflict? NATO is not one unified entity, as much as it pretends or wants to be. Even if the US did decide to actually go to war with Russia, a lot of NATO could decide to sit it out out of self-preservation. Turkey first and foremost, but even France, Germany, Italy, Spain would likely not be very enthusiastic and would prefer to sit on the sidelines and offer material support if they haven’t by then exhausted it all on Ukraine.
But even the US i frankly don’t see entering into a war in Europe with Russia, it’s just not something that the Pentagon wants to do, they realize it would be a disaster, and so do large parts of the political establishment. So what you’re left with are essentially Poland, Britain and the Baltic states, and maybe Romania if their government is weak enough to be pushed into such a blunder by Washington (who are more than happy to push others into a war that they won’t enter themselves).
But with the economic crisis that is building up right now in the west there will be very little appetite for war anywhere else, and in fact even Britain will abandon ship at the earliest opportunity once the full extent of the economic catastrophe begins to set in. By mid-winter Europe will be in severe trouble. The only ones fanatical enough to still want to pick a fight with Russia are Poland and the Baltics and they would simply be crushed, IF Russia decides to devote a good chunk of their forces and not just the little expeditionary force they have in Ukraine right now.
The good news is that i don’t see even this scenario playing out. The economic crisis will bring the West to its knees well before Russia takes all of Ukraine. At the current pace, even with occasional breakthroughs like the one in the Lugansk pocket that has just happened, i don’t foresee the Donbass being fully cleared before mid autumn, and Kharkov and Odessa, IF the Russians decide they still want to continue and take them, not before next year. Russia is taking this very slowly to keep casualties extremely low and to maximize not just Ukraine’s casualties but the depletion of the weapons stocks of the West.
My suspicion is that they expect the Western support for Ukraine to collapse some time this winter, and only then can they either enforce the peace terms that they want, or if rejected to really start collapsing Ukraine and pushing deep toward Kiev and toppling the regime there. Until then i think Ukraine will keep fighting and the regime will remain somewhat stable, because money and weapons/ammunition are still being pumped in from the west, not enough to not lose but just enough to lose slowly and not collapse all at once. That is my prediction unless something changes dramatically.
The business with Kaliningrad is interesting, and i have said before that i think Russia could and should just go in with essentially an armed guard for their trains and ignore the embargo, and if Lithuania attacks them they will have a casus belli to go in and de-nazify them. I think they could do this without too much international condemnation apart from the West because it is Lithuania that broke the treaties, and i don’t think NATO would protect Lithuania, though Poland and the UK might try to intervene and it would end badly for them. However that is not Russia’s style. I think they will take non-invasive action, maybe a counter-blockade or something.
A spectre is haunting Europe — the spectre of Operation Z. All the powers of the decrepit West have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre: POTUS and PM Bozo, Macron and Scholz, Ukrainian Nazis and unelected Eurocrats.
Where is the party in opposition that has not been decried as Putin’s Puppet by its opponents in power? Where is the opposition that has not hurled back the branding reproach of Russian Bot, against the more advanced opposition parties, as well as against its reactionary adversaries?
Nothing the US says means anything, they will literally say one thing today and another tomorrow depending on who they are speaking to. Also it literally doesn’t matter because they will change their position on a whim if and when it suits them.
The only constant remains the fact that they are an empire in terminal decline that is growing increasingly desperate and will do anything it thinks it can get away with to try and cling to primacy.
Definitely not a marxist but definitely anti-imperialist. His videos are excellent, top notch. His pro-Thai monarchy views are of course somewhat dubious from the viewpoint of a communist, and so are his takes on Myanmar, but at least he’s consistent. He doesn’t care about what kind of regime it is, socialist, capitalist, monarchist or junta, so long as it is independent of Washington.
Considering that China is 100% on Russia’s side and that most of the Global South continues to do business as usual with them, considering that Russia is self-sufficient in food and energy, that inflation is not being experienced in those essential daily necessities but only in imported goods while the west is having the biggest problems in precisely those essential areas, considering that the value of the Ruble has come back to pre Operation Z levels, that much of Europe has no choice but to continue to buy essential Russian exports like gas (which they will have to do more and more in Rubles), and that almost a dozen countries have now signed up in one form or another to Russia and China’s alternative to the SWIFT payment transfer system… Well i’d say things are looking good and will only get better for Russia the longer this goes on.
Time is on Russia’s side, the sanctions frontloaded all the damage hoping to cause an immediate collapse, shock and awe style, which did not work and now Russia is starting to fill the gaps left by western companies in their market with either domestic or Chinese/Indian production. This will have the effect of making Russia stronger, more self-reliant and more resillient just as the 2014 sanctions did. While at the same time things in the west will only get worse, a massive economic crisis is already showing signs of emerging, in economies severely weakened by two years of pandemic mismanagement that have now committed economic suicide by cutting themselves off from one of the largest suppliers of food, raw materials and energy, not to mention destroying international trust in the Dollar hegemony and Western financial system with their foolish decision to rob Russia’s Central Bank.
Of course, there is wisdom in what you say as well, we should not rush to conclusions, only time will tell what the ultimate result will be, and that will depend in large part by the decisions Russia takes. What the west does from now on is of little importance, but if Russia continues to listen to its more liberal economists that could risk undermining its successes so far. Now is the time for Russia to make bold, radical moves. They have a window of opportunity now that the population is in a nationalistic mood, and would support a daring experiment in adopting a new economic paradigm while many oligarchs have largely been neutered by the western sanctions which took away their foreign wealth and thereby crippled their political power in Russia, getting rid of a thorn in Putin’s side.
Mediocre article. Poor analysis. Places way too much importance on what westerners think. What matters is the material reality. Economic and military facts on the ground. Economically Russia and China are winning. The west is going into a death spiral of inflation and recession. Militarily the outcome of the war is a foregone conclusion unless NATO directly intervenes, which they are too scared to do. Finland and Sweden, even if they do join NATO, a crumbling organization whose ever widening cracks have only temporarily been papered over with propaganda driven hysteria which does nothing to change the objectively diverging interests of Europe and the US, are of little importance.
Also, the idea that Putin would not have been perceived as the aggressor if only he waited for Kiev to make the first move and launch their planned all out assault on Donbass is incredibly naive. That scenario is exactly what the US had been setting up for and priming westerners to believe would represent a “Russian invasion of Ukraine” if and when Russia would be forced to intervene to save Donetsk and Lugansk. That is why they blasted “Russia is about to invade Ukraine” propaganda all over the media in the preceding months because they knew Ukraine was preparing to make a move that would force a reaction.
There is nothing that Russia could have done short of completely abandoning ethnic Russians in Ukraine to genocide and ethnic cleansing to not be seen as the aggressor. Furthermore, the proposal to allow an all out slaughter of ethnic Russians to begin in Donbass before intervening just to maybe score a minor propaganda win with westerners is deeply cynical, utterly morally revolting. Militarily it is also an incredibly stupid thing to do to allow the enemy to strike first and force the battle to occur at the time and place of their choosing.
The talk about Finland and Sweden joining NATO is essentially a matter of formality, for many practical purposes these countries were already deeply integrated into the Atlanticist framework, as part of the EU and both having extensive military cooperation with NATO countries. They are also much smaller countries than Ukraine population wise, and not nearly as much of a strategic threat to Russia’s national security. It is far easier to defend against a NATO strike from that direction. They are a consolation prize. The loss of their pet project in Ukraine is a big deal for the US and EU, they are furious about it as seen by their extreme, self-harming reactions.
Yeah, surprised that anyone would think this is the Sagrada, imo the Sagrada is unmistakeable and instantly recognizable seeing as it is the ugliest cathedral ever built…