Posted on 09/18/2024 9:44:20 PM PDT by ransomnote
According to Mercouris, illusions and fantasies about the war continue to circulate about it. And there are other fantasies connected to it, primarily held by people in Europe.One of the major misconceptions about the military side of the conflict is the discussion about a war conducted between two equivalent armies. That is not the case, it might have been true in some periods of the autumn and late summer of 2022, and maybe something people could believe in 2023. But it's not the case now.
Events proceed at a steadily accelerating pace - they point to a Ukrainian military collapse - perhaps in the next couple of months.
1:47
Financial side of the conflict.
Financial aid from various large Western donor countries (US, Germany, France Britain) is dwindling. The US Administration has been testing the idea in Congress of another big donation to Ukraine. The response was strongly negative from all sides this time.In Germany, the Finance Minister wants to reduce financial aid to Ukraine. Both Britain and France are in the middle of a financial crisis. In France there's also a political crisis following parliamentary elections. Committee of the French Parliament has authorized the initiation of impeachment proceedings against President Macron. Probably the first time an impeachment of the French President has been attempted since General De Gaulle, in the late 1950's.
Financial support from the West is slackening. Financial support from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank is also falling away. The IMF only continued funding Ukraine by changing its own rules. Changes to its happened in manner contrary to IMF rules for making such changes. Breaking IMF rules would be a more accurate way to describe it.
The IMF and the World bank have provided significant Finacial Aid to Ukraine and Mercouris thinks they are now increasingly nervous and embarrassed by the fact that they are heavily overly-invested and exposed in Ukraine, if things go wrong. They are becoming worried that if things go very wrong in Ukraine in the next two months, they will be facing difficult questions from participating countries like China, India and other countries in the global south.
The IMF is apparently making significant demands on Ukraine right now (taxes increased, spending reduced) and its even makng overtures to the Russians, saying it wants to be involved again in monitoring of the RUssian economy. Russians are expected to refuse this.
6:07As country to country Western aid to Ukraine dwindles, the West is increasingly talking about a major, massive loan to Ukraine. 50 Billion Dollars or (?) (ransomnote, not sure of his other comment about Euros here). He's not certain of the proposed amount. This loan is supposedly to be repaid by the interest on Russian assets mostly in Europe, which has been frozen.
This has always been a controversial issue - can the interest legally be used in this way? It's possible. There's been concern about legal action will be taken by Russia if this is attempted. Courts in Europe are expected to support such use of interest on Russian assets in Europe, but it's unknown how courts in Hong Kong, Singapore, and other international jurisdictions would agree with that.
Concern about Bond lenders (those who buy the bonds when a loan in the international market is made), governments or G7 float a loan on the int market, bonds would be released, the bonds would be sold, the proceeds by the lenders who bought these bonds would become the moaney that would make up the loan funds sent to Ukraine.
The G7 wanted to attract buyers for these bonds, which might be controversial (given source of funding to repay them), so the G7 got the EU states collectively to provide guarantees - if there was any problem with the payment from the interest of the frozen Russian assets, the European Union itself would pay the interest on the bonds. Over last few weeks this plan, with many legal concerns, is now in serious trouble.
This morning, an (misleading but factually correct) article in the Financial Times, "EU Plans to Raise up to 40 Billion in Loans For Ukraine, Without U.S."
https://www.ft.com/content/0684416f-58c6-4c76-ae54-140d34e30f67 (paywall)
The article is referring to 40 Billion in EUROS. The title doesn't make clear that this latest proposal (40 Billion EUROS in loans to Ukraine) is intended as an alternative to the prior plan to loan 50 Billion DOLLARS to be repaid by interest on frozen Russian assets guaranteed by the European Union. The article doesn't explain that potential legal problems with the first idea (interest on Russian assets) inspired the alternative idea (40 Billion in EUROS). The figure in the article Financial Times headline, 40 Billin EUROS, is misleading as well. It's more likely to be around 20 Billion EUROS, assuming this loan is agreed to.
The article title is followed by a 'clarifying' subtitle, which Mercouris feels actually furthers attempts to mislead, "Brussels Drafts Alternative Funding Solution..." The full subtitle, "Brussels Drafts Alternative Funding Solution to Circumvent a Hungary Veto on Extending Russian Assets Freeze." Textual innacuracy increases - attempt is put all the blame on Victor ORban, he's always made the villain. Orban objects to the indefinite freezing of the Russian assets. Up to now, Russian assets have been frozen 6 months. The EU wants to freeze them indefinitely, and schedule a review every 6 months. The vote must be unanimous - Mercouris says that there's no way the EU will ever agree collectively - so this Russian asset freeze would in practice be permanent. 14:00
That isn't the real problem; the problem is the legality of using the interest from these frozen Russian assets. Hungary is not the only country taking issue with this freeze; Slovakia and privately a number of other countries also have concerns.
The Financial Times article itself then becomes more clear/factual -"The EU is preparing to loan up to 40 Billion EUROS in new loans to Ukraine regardless of U.S. participation, after a G7 plan to use frozen Russian assets to aid Ukraine faltered. The unilateral push comes from concern in Brussels that Hungary will prevent the block from delivering safeguards that the U.S. needs for it to participate in the frozen asset scheme, according to three people involved in the talks." It says Orban is set to delay the asset scheme until after the U.S. election.
So the alternative plan was not really proposed because of Hungary's objection to rules which would make the freezing of Russian assets permanent. 16:03 Other EU states are not willing to move forward with the idea of the EU states guaranteeing the bonds because they are worried about the legality of the whole scheme.
Now there's a frantic search for another solution. Brussels only has a few weeks to come up with an alternative - some powers to do so expire at the end of the year. 16:50 (Mercouris reads more of the article here). The proposed amount not really 40 Billin EUROS - the amount is actually unspecified. Later it's between 20 Billion and 40 Billion EUROS.
The real issue is a refusal for EU states to provide guarantees and the legal problems re interest on Russia's frozen assets. The loan is likely to be closer to 20 Billion EUROS.
The problem with the original scheme is not whether the U.S. wants to participate; the US would never have to repay the loan if it's based on interest on Russian assets, guaranteed by EU.
The proposal suggests that the current rolling 6 month freeze on Russian assets be lengthened to 36 months. Also an option, extending sanctions by 5 years - Mercouris has heard the real proposal is to make it permanent, and indefinite.
EU commission still supports the 50 Billion/Russian Assets scheme as Plan A, and EU officials say they need an alternative in case Orban's veto of the decision does push the deadline past the date of the US election. (ransomnote: Mercouris reads more of the details in the Financial Times article which I don't cover).
The 50 Billion/Russian assets plan would have the US and EU each shouldering 20 Billion (floated bonds) and remaining countries covering 10 Billion. The original plans looks increasingly shakey- Financial Times says it's 'faltering'. The likely resulting sum of 20 Billion EUROS would not be enough to cover Ukraine's deficit in 2025 which is est. to be approx. 40 Billion EUROS.
23:04 Ukrainians are starting to get trickles of money from the interest on Russia's frozen assets - Mercouris notes that is legally dubious. Russia will be litigating. It was a bad idea the EU never should have tried. They were pushed into it by Janet Yellen. Money will come - the EU is not going to allow Ukraine to fail over the next few weeks.
Mercouris notes Conor Gallagher's website NakedCapitalism.com (Mercouris says it's one of the best websites out there on financial geopolitical matters, a lot of unique information, Mercouris advises people follow it) Mercouris advises readers to read the original article(s) on the Naked Capitalism website, and not republished versions (often published without permission). Mercouris recommends Gallagher's article:
"The EU Retreats Further into a World of Self-Delusion"
September 15, 2024 by Conor Gallagher
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2024/09/the-eu-retreats-further-into-a-world-of-self-delusion.html27:48
Gallaghers artical remarks on Draghi's plan to rebuild the EU economically and points out that Draghi is missing the elephant in the room - the ongoing war and its impact on the energy sector. [ransomnote: Interesting discussion, I think it's worth reading Gallagher's article, but I won't detail it here, aside to note that it's a lively article detailing energy challenges facing the EU, and a rule of thumb mentioned: European companies face electricity prices 2- 3 times those faced in America for electricity, natural gas prices are 4 - 5 times more than Americans pay for natural gas.On the subject of the hardship's now faced by the EU since 2022 when Germany and the EU decided to switch off supplies of Russian gas, Ghallagher quotes Putin:
But as Russian President Vladimir Putin recently put it for the hundredth time at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok:
It is very strange, and I cannot get my head around it. They up and blew up the gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea. They blew up both Nord Stream 1 pipelines and one Nord Stream 2 pipeline. The second one is fully functional, though. What stops the German government from pressing the button, coming to terms with us and turning it on? How much is it? 25 billion cubic metres through one pipeline?…It was the Poles who shut down the Yamal-Western Europe pipeline. Now Ukraine is closing [transit through Ukraine], and the Nord Stream 2 route along the Baltic Sea bed is not turned on. Well, if they don’t want to, they don’t have to. It will be a loss for them. For us, there will be a certain reduction in revenues, but it’s no big deal. 38:00
Gallagher also talks about runaway military spending and other sources of problems now faced by those in Europe.
Mercouris introduces another article, this one by Simon Jenkins, columnist in The Guardian. Mercouris says Jenkins is the one permitted dissident on the topic of the war in Ukraine, and while is cautious not to stray too far from the official line, Jenkins sometimes says things the British have not heard or read anywhere else.
Jenkins says Zelensky is still an inspirational leader, and Putin is unstable and isolated. Mercouris notes that Jenkins' assertion that Putin is isolated is surprising and asks, "isolated in what way?" before pointing out that it's now just weeks ahead of the major BRICS summit, which Putin's going to chair. Mercouris says Simon Jenkins 'has to say that' (not stray too far from the official line) 42:48 Attendees of the BRICS conference include India, China and Brazil, among others. Mercouris says Jenkins makes very strong, good points about the folly of missile strikes within Russia."Keir Starmer’s missile bravado could jeopardise Nato’s careful balancing act in Ukraine" September 16, 2024 by Simon Jenkins.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/sep/16/keir-starmer-nato-ukraine-british-long-range-missiles-russia
"Now he wants to use British missiles to attack military targets deep into Russian territory. Germany has refused similar requests. The US, whose intelligence is needed for targeting, also says Ukraine cannot use its missiles to strike Russia"
As an example of the times Jenkins sometimes says important things, that those in Britain never read or hear elsewhere, Mercouris read's more of Jenkins' article:"Nato at the moment is trapped. The economic war on Russia has been a disaster. It has sorely hurt western trade, sending energy and agricultural supply prices soaring. Sanctions have merely validated Putin’s claim that the war is the west against the east. They have freed him to strengthen Russia’s autocratic alliances around the world, and they have hugely increased its trade with Asia. By isolating Putin from contact with the west, sanctions have also kept him away from the negotiating back-channels and unofficial contacts that can be crucial in such crises."Mercouris believes Jenkins, is right about NATO and the EU; more so the EU as it represents the economic dimension in this conflict. Mercouris says that he and others keep saying the same things about the actions the EU is taking, but have not been heeded (it's like "talking into the wind"), because the EU is not pulling back, but instead keeps lending even more money to the Ukraine despite what Mercouris suspects are insurrmountable legal problems, even as the Ukraine is about to crash. 45:20
Mercouris says, "It's not enough that the EU has cut themselves off from their major energy supplier, and antagonized that energy supplier, probably forever. It's not enough that they've sent most of Europe's weapons to Ukraine, or at least a large proportion of them, where they have been lost. It's not enough that they are facing a military and geopolitical disaster on their eastern border. It's not enough that they've given already over 100 Billion Euros of funding to Ukraine, which they will never see repaid, they have to add on top of all of that 20 to 40 Billion Euros more. I am speechless with incredulity about this. There is a pig-headedness or bloody-mindedness to all of this that defies, for me, rational understanding."
(ransomnote, the last report I saw said the U.S. has given 189 Billion to Ukraine)
Mercouris notes that Simon Jenkins continues to call Putin unstable, and articles describe Putin as ultimately as irrational. Mercouris wonders (paraphrasing) How does the conduct of the EU leadership in the face of this crisis compare then? Western leaders want it their own way - they may say Putin is unbalanced, irrational, capable of any enormity, appaling things, has no regard for human life. On the other hand when we want to do something reckless like launching missiles into Russia, attacking Russia itself, suddenly western leadership and media portray Putin as rational, predictable, far too calculating and logical to do something reckless like nuclear war or war between Russia and the west, so Western leaders then reason Putin is bluffing. They want Putin rational when it suits them, and irrational when it suits them - they never worry that Putin cannot be both at the same time. 49:00
Mercouris says, European policy is, exactly as Simon Jenkin says, in a trap. It's bizarre that rather than look for ways out of the trap, the EU seems to want to get further in. There are prior instances of this happening in history, but Mercouris has never seen it to the same extent in his lifetime.
Battlefront developments.
There are rumors that Russia is planning to reactivate the Zaporozhnya front. The Ukrainians say there are 130,000 Russian forces commanded by General Tiplinski, one of Russia's best commanders, who is also commander of Russia's airborn forces. They are edging along the west bank of the Dnipo river. The Russians may be planning another offensive in this area. Others say it's the Ukrainians who are planning an offensive in this area and therefore the Russian moves are pre-emptive. Mercouris says the Ukrainian military has been "smashed to pieces everywhere along the front lines" and probably wouldn't want to attack again in the same territory, and go up against Tiplinski, where the Ukrainian military was massively defeated last year.Zelensky is said to have told the head of his military, Syrskyi that he must hold the front line while Zelensky heads to New York for the General Assembly session, where he intends to present his 'so-called' victory plan to western leaders. At present, Zelensky's plan is only 90% complete. 53:00 His general, Syrskyi, has responded by stripping all the front lines everywhere else to re-inforce those two places, where Russian breakthrough is considered most dangerous (Pokrovsk, Sumy & Kursk).
54:00 There are reports that Ukraine is moving troops from Kherson and Zaporozhnya to reinforce those two regions (Pokrovsk, Kursk/Sumy). This would look like an opportunity for Russia if true. Ukraine seems to be betting that the Russians won't cross the Dnipo river in the next two months.
Further westwards, Mercouris gives details on fighting in this region starting at 58:00 Russians control coal mine South Donbas #3, Russians are now in position to shell the last main road in use by the Ukrainians (to resupply troops in Vuhledar) in DONBAS, the Ukrainians are starting to partially evacuate Vuhledar. Mercouris says they should leave now - escape routes will soon become impossible. Escape routes will be muddy soon when rains begin in a few weeks. Russians pushing west to Konstantinovka (and other villages I can't spell). Vulhledar is facing the end game - it is lost. 1:04:00
Further North - Ukrainian troops are trapped in a coal mine/slag heap west of Ukrainsk. The Russians have surrounded them -there have been various attempts to break through, there are lots of films showing Ukrainians experiencing heavy losses trying to break through to free the troops trapped in the mine. Mercouris considers this another pointless effort by the Ukrainians - throwing away more troops trying to get their troops out of the mine, who are already lost. The humane and rational thing to do would be to allow these troops to surrender to the Russians. Surrendering would be to give up Ukrainsk. Once those troops surrender, then negotiate their release with the Russians through the various prisoner exchanges which regularly take place. Mercouris doesn't expect the Ukrainians to allow the trapped men to surrender. 1:06:00
(ransomnote: More discussion of Russian advances, naming villages here, but I don't understand the names or region so I will skip them)
According to TASS there's a logistical crisis for Ukraine in Pokrovsk because 3 bridges around Pokrovsk were destroyed, they were key strategic highways. Pokrovsk is cut off from supplies. The bridges were destroyed by arial bombs. This will impact additional villages.
Large areas of Toretsk (15% -20% of the metropolitan area) are under Russian control. Toretsk is being heavily bombed. 1:11:38 Mercouris believes a few more captured positions around Toretsk by the Russians will make defending against them all but impossible, and that the battle for Toretsk is likely closer to the end than some people realize.
(ransomnote: more advances in various villages discussed here)
The Russians are now right in the center of Chasiv Yar. Ukrainian flank defenses appear to be collapsing. (more details re geography and villages where Russians are advancing). IN general - on a map it looks like the Russians are forming an pincer. (more Russian advances, towns etc. All discussions are about Russian advances taking control piece at a time of Donbas, and Mercouris' statement that once these regions fall, the Ukrainians will lose them forever, and never come back to this region). 1:19:36
1:20:26
Kursk
Group of Forces North (Ukrainian) say that they've advanced 2 kilometers and are in control of another village, they say they remain on the offensive. Mercouris notes he never knows what is meant because the reports are vague. It looks like the Russians are advancing from the sides to create a pincer and link up to cut off the enclave at their most vulnerable point - the one major roadway which connects Sumy and Sudza which crosses the border, and was the road the Ukrainians advanced on when they began their operation.Mercouris's closing comments - American scholar Gordon Hahn wrote an excellent article, "The NATO Ukraine Defeat in Kursk" (September 14, 2024), which is on Hart's blogsite.
https://gordonhahn.com/2024/09/14/the-nato-ukraine-defeat-in-kursk-and-beyond/Hahn gives an overview of the entire Kursk Operation. Here's is an excerpt of the start of Hahn's article:
Contrary to the view of Beltway pundits regarding the sunny side or various alleged successes of Ukraine’s Kursk incursion (https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/kursk-offensive-and-future-russia-ukraine-war-%C2%A0-212669), the Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelenskiy’s newest simulacra attack – substituting a fake reality for the real one – has led to yet another predictable catastrophe in the real world of war and politics. Zelenskiy’s gambit had no military logic behind it. Its essence was made up of a propagandistic/PR component and perhaps a terrorist element. It was a reckless, desperate last roll of the dice to overturn the playing board which never had a hope of succeeding. Not one of the goals stated by Ukrainian officials was achieved, nor was the unstated, potential goal of seizng the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant achieved. What was ‘achieved’ was a decimation of some of Ukraine’s best remaining men and materiel`.
PING
The reason why the iron curtain fell was because NATO outspent Communist Russia... And the economic situation in Russia isn’t improving... It’s deteriorating... So this whole article appears to be based on nonsense.
NATO would rather have Ukraine fight against and weaken Russia with Ukrainian troops, than with NATO troops... So the money is there for the Ukrainians, and it always will be there for them.
I’ll read it later. Right now I’m watching clips of the Toropets ammo facility burn. 2.5+ on the Richter scale!
Who cares how many Ukrainians die? There are plenty more where they came from.
I'm glad to learn that the thousands of Russian civilians in nearby towns and villages were evacuated, thus minimizing the danger to innocents. Supposedly, 30 kilotons in conventional explosives have gone up in smoke. The facility, itself, has been destroyed beyond repair. This is a serious blow to the Russian war-machine.
Who but a Russian Putin operative, agent, or at least sympathizer would lament this?
Regards,
In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled US/EU $50B Rus Asset Ukr Loan Plan Fails; Ukr Officers Flee Vuhledar; Rus Encircles Ukr Troops Kursk (My notes on 1 hr 30 min video), alexander_busek wrote: Right now I’m watching clips of the Toropets ammo facility burn. 2.5+ on the Richter scale! I'm glad to learn that the thousands of Russian civilians in nearby towns and villages were evacuated, thus minimizing the danger to innocents. Supposedly, 30 kilotons in conventional explosives have gone up in smoke. The facility, itself, has been destroyed beyond repair. This is a serious blow to the Russian war-machine.
Who but a Russian Putin operative, agent, or at least sympathizer would lament this?
Regards,
I don't care if ammo dumps burn. People like me who know that the Ukraine is losing the war anyway may at least wonder 'why bother?' I guess, Ukrainian ego? "Yes, we lost the war, but we DID blow up that ammo dump." Is it very important PR because Zelensky is going to New York to present his 'plan for victory' and he needs this photo op of a burning ammo dump?
Maybe for the soldiers, it's all the sacrifices of lives and limbs made, so many attempts thwarted, so that it feels cathartic to at least get to watch the flames?
In the article I posted as the OP, Mercouris points out that the Ukrainian soldiers trapped in a coal mine, surrounded by Russians, should be allowed to surrender - it's the humane, intelligent thing to do. They can then be traded back to Ukraine in the routine prisoner exchanges they have. Mercouris doesn't think the Ukraine will allow it - once again, people like me wonder 'why bother' refusing to let those men surrender? Why waste lives? Ukrainian pride/ego? The need for public relations? Is that what's wasting lives and limbs?
Zelensky told Syrskyi that he has to hold the line (Donbas) for Zelensky's meeting in New York - so Syrskyi pulled troops from all over to reinforce those two places in Donbas. How that must feel for the soldiers left stripped of support, again. These are all public relations moves, not military strategy. What a waste of lives and human effort.
Prayers up, may the trapped soldiers be allowed to surrender!
I shudder to think of the sacrifices being made ahead of that meeting in New York Zelensky is going to attend. What if they say 'no' to more money, after more Ukrainian lives (e.g., coal mine trap, Kursk, Donbas) are forfeited to make a good impression while asking for money?
I approve this Vranyo message.
So 130,000 Russians with the best commanders are in the Zaporizhzhia and Kherson oblasts, which are still internationally accepted (even by China and Hungary) as Ukrainian land.
So regardless of what Retard Russia argues, this does present a legitimate target for our Storm Shadows.
Ukraine can keep twatting Retard Russia’s munitions stores with home grown drones while they turn the Kadyrov rearguard and the remnants of Russia’s more competent invasion force into fertilizer.
Let’s see Putin’s Vranyo machine spin that loss as the eleven time zone gangster state’s concept of conducting a self defense exercise.
A purely military installation has been destroyed - and you are quibbling, "expressing concern," casting aspersions, as well as distracting and diverting attention to unrelated matters.
Ukraine has won a major victory today. Let us hope that many more days like this follow!
Regards,
The West has been busy during this time importing the seeds of our destruction. Way to go leaders, you didn’t think that these immigrants who have Zero loyalty to any Western nation would not want their pound of flesh if the opportunity arose?
Get lost. We don’t need help from Russia and the likes of you. Russia is hardly a beacon of liberty.
“The US Administration has been testing the idea in Congress of another big donation to Ukraine. The response was strongly negative from all sides this time.”
“this time” is the key. Wait for the lame duck Congress in December. A lame duck session after the election is when the real dirty work is done.
You should care - ammunition destroyed hits the logistics for Muscowy, which have been bad since Feb 2022
ransomnote People like me who know that the Ukraine is losing the war -- as I've said from I think around August 2022, Ukraine "won" the war in the sense of being still independent of the Kremlin. That is still the case. Do you really think that that is going to change anytime soon?
“Ukraine has won a major victory today. Let us hope that many more days like this follow!”
indeed, it is wonderful news. It means they are doing this without our long-range missiles. Since they are so successful without them, we don’t have to risk war with Russia now.
Twisted logic!
When Russia has been pushed back / has retreated to its pre-2014 borders, then we can talk about reducing aid.
Regards,
Yet another delusional Canadian take on American foreign policy.
 | alexander_busek Since May 2, 2005 |
| |||||
Randian Libertarian
 | Cronos Since May 1, 2001 |
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.