Threat and Bluff
While western media are full of stories of Ukraine’s “great victory” in Kharkiv, of “thousands” of Russians fleeing from Putin's “partial mobilization,” Russian and the USA threatening each other with nuclear war and nuclear resistance, continuing economic war and the rest of it, here is a quiet revelation of the west’s anti-Russian propaganda machinery:
Exposed: Covert Pro-Western Info Op
How Anti Russian Propaganda Is Done
The Battlefields
Meantime, Mercouris (Mercouris 09.24.2022) says that all is relatively quiet on the Ukraine battlefields, with Russia’s Wagner group continuing to make inroads towards Bakhmut City (which, at least until recently, was said to be the lynchpin of the Ukrainian Army’s defense line in Donbass - OBB), but they need to take a suburb on the way before actually moving into the City itself (a modification of Mercouris’ account yesterday, by the way, which suggested more of an advance had been achieved than that). Ukraine has tried to take Lyman, which Russia so far has successfully defended, and the fighting here (which has been going on for two weeks) seems to be the last ebb of the Ukrainian counteroffensive which it launched at the beginning of September.
Referenda
Yesterday was the first day of the referendums in the four occupied areas and these seem to be progressing in a relatively orderly way. Russian sources suggest that a quarter of the voters have turned up on the first day. The referendum will continue to September 27. The referenda will doubtless, in Russian announcements, turn out to be valid and that there has been an overwhelming vote for union with Russia. This means that when the vote comes through, then the four regions will apply to the State Duma for admission to the Russian Federation. The Duma will pass the law and Putin will sign it so that the regions will formally become part of Russia.
Partial Mobilization
Parallel to the referenda, the partial mobilization continues across Russia - the call up of 300,000 reservists. There have been problems in some places but overall the process is taking place in a relatively orderly way. There has been discussion as to how long it will take before these reservists start to appear on the battlefields. Many of these reservists will be used to beef up Russia military units stationed on the mainland, so that acting army personnel can be released for service in Ukraine. Training of some of these reservists will last two to three weeks and after that period they will be joining their military units. This turns very much on the question of how recent any given reservist has left the military and how much time he has served. We will not see a big Russian offensive until after the Ukrainian offensive has completely runs its course.
Shoigu’s estimates of killed and wounded Ukrainians (61,000 dead; 39,000 wounded) and his claim of Russian casualties put at 6,000 dead, this latter figure appears to include the Chechnyan fighters (who are part of the Russian armed forces but some of whom contribute to a separate section that does not report to the Russian MOD), and should otherwise include only those who fall under the remit of the Russian MOD. But there is scope for greater clarity on this. The figure of 6,000 does seem rather too low. (My apologies: I find this section of Mercouris’ talk rather confused).
Western powers do not appear to have any strategy for dealing with the latest developments (partial mobilization and referenda). A western attempt at the UN to rally world opinion against Russia utterly failed (despite western media desperation to convey the opposite impression). There seems to be global frustration with the West’s obsession with Ukraine.
Nuclear Threats
There has been concerted western attention to what the west says is Putin’s threat to use nuclear weapons. But if you look at Russian conduct in Ukraine - and this has been discussed many times by Mercouris and elsewhere (whose doubts about Russian threats to use nuclear weapons I find somewhat ingenuous, although any such Russian threats have usually been shrouded in ambiguity - OBB) - one finds that its conduct has been marked by an “extraordinary degree” of constraint. Only very recently has Russia seriously targeted civilian infrastructure. No attempt has been made to take out the headquarters buildings of Ukrainian political and defense forces. Nor has Russia tmade any systematic attempt to take down the internet in Ukraine.
Would Russia move from such restraint to the extreme position of using nuclear weapons? (See my Friday article on this). Mercouris claims that Russia has consistently ruled that out. All such speculation has come from western commentators. Such western commentary appears to be orchestrated to present Putin as a psychopathic individual (or, I would add, a desperate failure - OBB).
Putin himself refers to statements made by high ranking representatives who have made threats of the use of nuclear weapons against Russia. He refers to modern Russian weapons that the western powers do not have (I think this must be a reference to Russian hypersonic missiles, and these only have significance in the nuclear context - OBB) and indicates that Russia might use them if it deems necessary.
Mercouris himself is uncertain that any such western threats have indeed been issued but he has noticed a recent Washington Post article that deals with Biden admin messages to Putin that warn of the grave consequences that would follow Russian use of a nuclear weapon in Ukraine. Such messages are deliberately vague, says the WP, and intended to achieve “strategic ambiguity.” The Russians might construe such “warnings” as actual threats by the USA to use nuclear weapons in some form but without saying so directly. This would explain Putin’s claim of western “nuclear blackmail.”
Mercouris points to the absence of such threats (Cuba was formally about the location of weapons, not the use of them - OBB) in previous crises between the two great powers, notably in Vietnam, even though their use was discussed in Washington.
Taiwan
Biden is increasing the rhetoric of aggression in his language about US intention to defend Taiwan, and provoking China in ways that the Chinese must be making China feel extremely angry.
Biden has trashed Washington’s own single China policy and has made war with China much more likely. In the last 50 days Washington has done more than in the previous 50 years to assure China that US policy is relentlessly imperialistic. Biden’s comments on Sept 18 - that the US would defend Taiwan against any Chinese attack - make the possibility that China might consider itself obliged to take action against Taiwan much more likely.
Such a foreign policy is reckless, indicating that the US is looking for some kind of extreme escalation (what I call World War Three - OBB), and certainly Russia and China are likely to read US rhetoric in that vein. Laughably, the US at the same time asks China for assistance in containing Russia!
This is the most dangerous administration the US has produced since World War Two (why stop there? - OBB). No previous US president has behaved with such astonishing recklessness (and for what? - OBB)
Russia and China appear to have agreed to try not to be provoked by the US, because time is on their side, but that doesn’t make the US administration any less dangerous (and off the rails), and there is always the chance of a provocation-too-far that will lead us to the abyss.