US/NATO War on Russia

[Lauren Johnson]

I am asked to comment on the cease-fire propositions from Putin, which apparently were publicized by Poroshenko's press-service in its own interpretation.


"First stop active offensive operations of the armed forces, armed militia groups from the south-east of Ukraine in direction of Donetsk and Luhansk.


Second remove the armed units of the Ukrainian security forces to a distance that precludes the possibility of their firing artillery and using multiple rocket launchers against civilian areas.


Third provide full and objective implementation of international enforcement of the parties compliance with the conditions of cease-fire and monitoring of the situation in the created safety zone.


Fourth exclude the use of military aircraft against civilians and settlements in the conflict zone.


Fifth organize exchange of the prisoners based on the formula "all for all" without any preconditions.


Sixth open humanitarian corridors for the movement of refugees and the delivery of humanitarian supplies to the cities and other settlements of Donbass - Donetsk and Luhansk regions.


Seventh facilitate sending to the affected Donbass region of repair crews to restore social and life-supporting infrastructure, to assist them in preparing for the winter."


http://www.ntv.ru/novosti/1206701/#ixzz3CGFhhjpK (in Russian) - link (n.b. translation of the points taken from here).

PS. Actually, there's nothing surprising in them and they fit quite well into the political line that is carried out after the replacement of the military and political leadership of the DPR and the LPR and the departure of Strelkov, the main proponent of the war to a victorious conclusion. Of course, with a living Strelkov on the position of the minister of defense of the DPR, who speaks of the campaign on Kiev, there's no speaking of any armistice.

Well, and so the line on creating Novorossia in the form of "Larger Transnistria" is persistently carried out since August. In this scenario there such a constant as a Ukraine that's still under the junta in some or other borders and with which there will be negotiations.

The proposed plan, under the theory that Poroshenko will accept it, implies creating Novorossia based on the DPR and the LPR and freezing the conflict. This also means that Kharkov, Zaporozhye, and Dnepropetrovsk will remain with the junta.


Of course, given such a result, the exit of Novorossia from Ukraine will be set de-facto, but many were not fighting for this but for the possibility to fight back the fascists and to go to Dnieper and punish the culprits.

The injection of these initiatives before the NATO summit where the new steps of the USA and their satellites against the Russian Federation may reflect a dominating line: the reluctance to burn all bridges with the West. A significant part of the political elite of the Russian Federation and of its major capital, whose interests are expressed by Putin, in spite of all the hurrah-patriotic rhetoric for the masses, perfectly understand the huge risks of escalating tensions in the relationship with the USA, which already unambiguously threaten with the deployment of military bases right near the borders of the Russian Federation, which includes Ukraine. In this regard, the long-standing threat of the NATO bases near the borders of the Belgorod region may suddenly become reality. This is in addition to tightening the regime of sanctions.

After losing all of Ukraine in February of 2014, the Kremlin managed to recoup in Crimea and partially in Donbass. The sounded proposals and the general policy direction reflect the desire to wrap up the conflict and end this gamewith a draw, satisfying oneself with Crimea and Donbass (plus another 1-2 regions if the course of events will be lucky). At this time there is no serious long-term policy with respect to fighting for the whole Ukraine, the "united pro-Russian Ukraine" is a media propaganda phantom, which is completely divorced from the real state of the Ukrainian society and the real instruments of the Russian influence on it. Some use it for the routine support of the changing line of the political leadership, some sincerely believe that this is still possible, but by now these are simply pipe dreams. The same applies to the attempts to reinvigorate the long since rancid topic of federalization, which peacefully died back in March-April. In essence, Ukraine is in a state of disintegration since March. Taking Crimea into account, it already lost 3 regions, because, even with a strong desire of the Kremlin, it is effectively impossible to ram Novorossia into some sort of "united Ukrainian state" because this goes against the interests of the overwhelming majority of the residents of Novorossia. This includes those who shed their blood for it. An attempt to forcefully push this scenario is unlikely from my point of view. The consequences of this will be comparable to the consequences of completely refusing to support Novorossia.


Thus, the policy of the Kremlin, which is manipulating the situation by turning the valve of the "military surplus store", remains one-legged: on the one side the republics are not allowed to perish, but on the other side this aid is quite measured and directed to achieving certain limiting results from the positions of achieving which it is supposed to negotiate with the junta and its masters.

The problem is that the USA are absolutely not interested in this. And it is precisely their opinion that will be crucial to how the war in Donbass will develop and where the future borders will be drawn. The USA, as it is not hard to see, are not concerned with the negotiating movements of Kiev and Moscow too much. They are eagerly building a coalition for yet another conflict, feeding the fascist regime in Kiev simultaneously.
For Moscow it would be indeed more convenient to reach some kind of an agreement with Kiev and to wrap up the open phase of the war, achieving a minor tactical victory which makes the defeat in the struggle against the USA for the whole Ukraine less bitter. As I wrote in the Summer, it was impossible to completely dump Donbass, because this was likely to cause significant consequences in the internal politics.

But here everything runs into the lack of the negotiating capacity of the opponents. It is impossible to make piece on some conditions if they may call from the State Department and correct the course in the necessary direction. Because there were no major negotiations of the Russian Federation and the USA, I wouldn't count on signing the armistice with these or other conditions. The "Khasavyurt", which is expected by many, will happen after the Washington and Moscow will reach some sort of an agreement. The projection of these agreements will become the foundation for the negotiations of the fascist junta and the leadership of Novorossia. In this regard, at this stage it is exactly the position of the USA and of the junta that impede the agreement on the fate of Novorossia. To some extent this is even better, because from the one side Novorossia will be able to capture even more territory for future state-building. The institutionalizing conflict of the USA and the Russian Federation will force to activate the involvement of the Russian Federation into the situation in Donbass to achieve the result. This will strengthen the positions of those circles who initially stood for splitting Ukraine not by the borders of the DPR and the LPR but by the Dnieper, i.e., those who proposed a project of liquidating "united Ukraine" and creating a pro-Russian Novorossia instead of the chimera of "united pro-Russian Ukraine".

The arguments from the category of this being simply an injection in order to demonstrate the lack of negotiating capacity of the junta are only suitable for internal consumption because, as the information war around Ukraine shows that no matter what Russia would do, the Ukrainian and pro-American media declare it to be guilty of everything. This applies even more to the struggle for the European public opinion. As it is not hard to see, despite all the efforts of the diplomacy and the official propaganda, the involvement of the EU in the war in Ukraine on the side of the fascist junta didn't go anywhere. The "European military surplus store" successfully opened a long time ago. However, the trading volumes aren't as high as the junta would have it.

PS. Regarding the points themselves, the first point clearly outweighs all other points because it gives the junta time to regroup and to resume military action. The junta will be soon pushed out of the positions that it uses to shell Donetsk and Lugansk in any case, which will be accompanied with large losses for it.

In general and as a whole this is just diplomatic rhetoric for now, which reflects certain aspirations of the political elites of the Russian Federation in the Ukrainian question, which are not at all guaranteed to come true in the light of the peculiarities of the position of the USA and its Kiev puppets. We will soon see how will it be. The talks in Minsk and the coming NATO summit will determine the direction of the development of the conflict. Either it will be gradual drifting towards the talks on "Larger Transnistria" or further escalation with the involvement of the "workers of Euro-Atlantic military surplus store" on the one side and the continuation of the "seasonal discounts and bonuses" in the "Russian military surplus store" on the other side.


The main thing here is to understand that there cannot be an agreement between Donetsk and Kiev without an agreement between Moscow and Washington. The confrontation of the fascist junta and the army of Novorossia is just one dimension of the conflict in Donbass. The main nerve passes through the line of competition of the major imperialist states for control over Ukraine. And while they won't agree on a split or somebody won't capitulate, the war will continue, because both the junta and Novorossia have the political freedom to determine the future of territories that once constituted "united Ukraine".

http://cassad-eng.livejournal.com/85133.html