“Putin’s leadership continues to erode Russia’s economic and military security. His actions do nothing to enhance the welfare of Russian citizens. Under Putin, Russia is best described as an increasingly disorganised irrational fiefdom.”
Russia’s war with Ukraine continues to reveal interesting tensions that highlight that there are major problems with the governance of Russia.
There is an important paradox here in that President Vladimir Putin has become one of Ukraine’s most powerful weapons. Putin continues to act irrationally and irresponsibility with his actions working against the long-term interests of the Russian people.
This article is the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the UK Defence Journal. If you would like to submit your own article on this topic or any other, please see our submission guidelines.
Over the last two decades Putin’s actions have eroded Russia’s statehood. Russia should no longer be recognised as a nation state, but as Putin’s fiefdom. One of the problems facing the Russian people is that Putin is not subject to Russian law – he works above and outside the law. This is a clear sign that Russia is no longer a nation state.
There are many signs of Putin’s lawlessness. The best perhaps is Russia’s admission that it paid 85bn roubles to support the Wagner group or Yevgeny Prigozhin’s mercenaries. Such a payment could only have been authorised by Putin and yet mercenaries are illegal under Russian law. Putin should have been held to account by the Russian legal system for supporting an illegal organisation with public funds. Such actions are normal for a fiefdom but would not be tolerated in a properly functioning nation state.
Russia is a country with an opaque governance and legal system, and it is one in which Putin can do anything he wants to protect his position. His actions do nothing to enhance Russia’s position. In fact, the opposite is the case as Putin’s leadership continues to erode Russia’s economic and military security. His actions do nothing to enhance the welfare of Russian citizens.
Under Putin, Russia is best described as an increasingly disorganised irrational fiefdom. There are many indications of Russia’s disorganised irrationality. The decision to raise the maximum age at which men can be conscripted from 27 to 30 is an excellent example. This is an ‘own goal’ for Putin and highlights his increasing despair and irrationality. All this must be placed in the context of Russia’s Presidential elections that will be held in 2024. Of course, Putin will wield his election engineers to ensure that most Russians continue to vote for Putin as boss of his fiefdom.
One of the major problems with a fiefdom is that there are no checks and balances on the boss man. The outcome is irrationality. In a war it is important to try to get inside the mind of the opposition. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has worked out how to read Putin, but Putin continues to fail in his attempt to read Zelenskyy and his supporters. Ukraine can nudge Putin into making decisions that work against the interests of Putin’s fiefdom. Zelenskyy has identified that Putin has ‘flashpoints’ or sensitivities that if disrupted result in Putin making irrational decisions.
Putin’s flashpoints include any Ukrainian attack on the Kerch or Crimean Bridge or any damage to Crimea or Moscow. A Putin flashpoint is evidenced by any immediate act of revenge by Putin in response to a Ukrainian military initiative. Revenge is not something that leads to positive outcomes; acts of revenge are not strategic interventions, but irrational acts. Putin’s acts of revenge are own goals. In a properly functioning nation state checks and balances exist that are intended to safeguard the interests of citizens against leaders who consider themselves to be above the law. There are no such checks and balances on Putin’s flashpoints.
There have been two recent examples of Putin’s irrationality driven by acts of revenge. On the one hand, there has been his revenge in response to Ukraine’s attack on the Kerch bridge. This has included attacks on Odesa including targeting its historic centre. Putin’s decision to authorise military activities against a UNESCO World Heritage site is against the interests of all humanity and yet comes with no military outcomes for Russia. This act includes the part destruction of Odesa’s cathedral which is an excellent example of Putin barbarism.
On the other hand, Putin has decided not to continue participating in the grain deal that was protecting the interests of some of the most vulnerable people on this planet. Moreover, Putin is destroying grain-related infrastructure as revenge in response to damage to an inanimate structure – a bridge.
Putin is weaponizing food and for what end as the outcome works against Russia and Putin’s own interests. Putin’s decision to attack grain store located in Ukrainian ports on the River Danube, and Odessa’s grain terminals, should be considered as a crime against humanity as the outcome will be malnutrition, starvation and death experienced by citizens living across the Global South.
There is too much of a tendency to define Russia’s war with Ukraine as one that reflects a tension between Russia and the West. This is a misreading of the situation as Putin’s recent actions regarding international food security highlight that this is a battle between Russia and any country involved in flows of grain from Ukraine. All nations of the world should combine to call out Putin and Russia and to support Ukraine in its time of need.
I can only agree, as must every right thinking person.
If the numerous videos available of disgruntled Russian servicemen appealing for their back pay to be paid to their families, and for promised equipment to be delivered, are to be believed then the rot is permeating much of the war effort. If there is to be a coup or revolution then presumably it must come from the rank and file of the Army, as in 1917.
I attended a lecture given by the late Paddy Ashdown, at least 15 years ago, when he described Russia then as a kleptocracy. A very prescient comment.
I would not disagree with the Professor’s analysis. But the real problem is Biden’s weakness and lack of leadership. Putin knows he can commit war crimes and these “acts of revenge” with impunity because Biden refuses to allow UkR to attack legitimate targets inside Russia itself – on the spurious grounds that it would be “escalatory”
I give credit to Biden’s Administration for $billions in military support, ordnance and equipment. But Russia has just called up 300,000 conscripts and eventually to win this war, NATO boots on the ground are going to be necessary, as Sanders said on BBC R4 a couple of months ago.
Not sure NATO needs to put “boots on the ground” and we could avoid it if we weren’t handicapping the Ukrainians with the restrictions you mention in your first paragraph. We’ve taught them the ‘Western way’ of fighting but without the air cover and without the ability to strike at tactical/strategic sites within Russia. If ‘we’ were fighting I’m sure we’d be happy to drop TLAM’s etc on the wrong side of the invisible line on a map.
I think we can be fairly sure that the SF of many NATO countries are already operating in Ukraine and across the border. And I don’t think the Pentagon are telling Biden much these days in case it upsets him
Really ? I’m pretty sure there won’t be any NATO military of any sort anywhere near or across the border. Its a bit of a step up in involvement and the Ukrainians seem to be doing alright in that regard anyway.
Its one thing for a naval vessel to ‘accidentally’ be in another country’s territorial waters but for any troops that aren’t Ukrainian to ‘accidentally’ wander across the border is a bit harder to justify. “Yeah we were looking for our way back to Hereford and we took a left instead of a right…silly me….” ain’t gonna cut it mate.
They get taught how to orienteer and read maps at Hereford and how to use a compass at Poole. Plus they get really good training in evasion and how to set booby traps to get tracker dogs. They get taught to speak fluent Russian with a Moscow accent. And so ultimately its all deniable by HM Government…..
I have no idea why you obsess with NATO forces and in particular UK forces being in Russia, I can speculate of course but none of it reflects well on you.
While I can’t counter your claims of our special forces being able to speak fluent Russian with a Moscow accent, what I can say is its a good job that we’re talking about a conflict involving Russia instead of ya know, Syria, Libya, Mali etc etc or are they all fluent in Arabic and French too with the necessary accents. It might have changed since I occasionally worked with them but colour me dubious.
I have to say that I never worked with anyone from the Regiment, but I did meet some of them at 1 RSME Brompton. The RE had a nice workshop facility at Wainscott that repaired/rebuilt desert vehicles for use in Afghan during the war and these chaps were explaining what they wanted. Stronger ballistic glass, different weapon mounts, mesh screens, extra spare wheels, some ceramic armour, external fuel and water tanks from memory.
What impressed me at the time was that if the engineers at Wainscott didn’t have what was specified, a couple of the guys with sandy berets disappeared for a few days and then turned up in a MAN truck with the necessary.
They kept to themselves in a tight group, but always reponded to a cheery “good morning” and absolutely EVERYONE in green saluted them, even the RE Brigadier!
Only a small department within the CRW wing mate. Moscow accent lol love it, that’s for MI5 stooges to do. Others in the Regiment support them, cheers.
I know of whom you speak. 😆😉
👍
CRW hasn’t existed for 20 years..
CRW, RRW, and ops wing, all exist thanks for your concern.
Apologies for the typo, should read RWW, that’s renamed and reformed in 2007, not the CRW as you alluded to. Thank you.
that’s a strange response
Intriguing photo? Is that taken at Lake Drive?
What naval vessel was the wrong side of the border. I think you’ll find pre war that HMS Duncan was in Ukrainian territorial waters close to Crimea. Therefore not in the wrong side of any border or territorial disputes. The fact Russia illegally occupied and annexed Crimea doesn’t mean at any time should the region be recognised as part of Russia.
I don’t think NATO needs to put boots on the ground nor do I think Biden is particularly weak on the issue. He is doing what is reasonable and acceptable to support Ukraine without escalating matters. In that he is doing far more than some very vocal Republicans would. It is very reminiscent of FDR supporting the U.K and her allies in the face of a reluctant Congress and a rabid isolationist movement.
As for the gist of this article I agree with Professor Bryson’s assessment of Russia and its irrational dictator.
IMHO I think that the nearer we get to Autumn the more it will quietly dawn on the Russian military and the Elite oligarchy, that they are destroying their own country in a war with no reasonable outcome. I don’t think they will launch a mutiny but there is maybe an opportunity to crystallise that vision.
There are 2 things that are certain about this war. One is that Russia massively overestimated its ability to defeat Ukraine, and secondly woefully underestimated the reaction of NATO.
Short term they cannot beat the Ukraine nor is there any likelihood that will change anytime soon unless they use NBC and risk an all out conflict with NATO (and crossing China’s Red lines).
Long term they have actually managed to do what no one has done in decades, galvanised the western nations into increased defence expenditure, cooperation and expansion.
I don’t usually use these words but they have completely F¥€{ed up on an epic scale, not once but twice and the second time is a long term road to hell.
I do think that maybe the time is fast approaching for NATO to take some sensible escalators moves but that are measured, reasonable but non offensive in nature. I would suggest 3 steps, all done without warning to maximise the psychological effect of them.
Firstly I would publicly inform Ukraine to cease and desist from any offensive actions outside Ukraine’s pre 2014 borders, and confine their activities to defensive or strictly within those boundaries. Or all NATO aid will cease.
Secondly I would reiterate that Ukraine is a sovereign Nation state which has been attacked, is not engaging in offensive actions against Russia but seeking to restore its territory. And that as per previously done NATO is extending and enforcing a complete no fly zone over all Ukrainian territory within its pre 2014 borders on both sides. That may sound a bit odd but losing close air support over the front line over the front line will effect Russia far more than Ukraine.
Then take no offensive moves but establish total Air superiority over that territory.
One big caveat I would exclude Crimea from that. It’s just something that would be too much for Russian pride to stomach.
Thirdly sit back and wait for the Penny to drop on the Russian military hierarchy as to just what they are risking if Putin is allowed to keep on being in power.
Do we dare risk hitting a NATO aircraft by firing anything at Ukraine ?
Also very quietly let the Russians know that peace is attainable if they want to be sensible about it. But reducing their population by 1 would really help put everyone in a conciliatory mood.
Then move on to the Big question “What does Peace look like ?”.
To my mind, a great post.
Thanks for that Mate, thinking about I’d probably modify the 2nd part at bit. Impose a no fly zone to all of the Ukraine to the west of the Dnipro river only. But I would get NATO to recognise the terms of the Budapest memorandum and move sufficient NATO mobile SAM system into Ukraine to effectively stop the vast majority of Russian Air, Missile or Drone attacks.
That would enable Ukraine to move all its own units forwards to give effective cover for their front line and offensive.
By limiting the area NATO covers to the West of the Dnipro it provides a buffer zone to avoid direct contact with Russian forces.
But it effectively nullifies any dreams Putin has of making any further progress and a massive reality check for the Russian Army.
Absolute crap. See my reply above
@ ABC Rodney
Well I have to say that I think both these posts are crap. No fly zones in any conflict anywhere now are impossible, thanks to the demonstrable effectiveness of MANPADS and modern air defence systems. And neither side has been able to use Wild Weasel tactics because both sides have lost aicraft trying it. Drones are now the future tech to control the battlespace.
And to threaten Ukraine with consequences unless they stop attacking legitimate targets inside Russia is complete bollocks. You are telling Russia to carry on bombing hospitals, residential blocks, kintergartens, blood transfusion centres, public bomb shelters regardless because we have just stopped UkR from any sort of retailation. Slava Ukraini for taking the war to the agressor
What are you proposing next, that UkR should stop its counteroffensive and withdraw in case it upsets the war criminal Putin? Whose side are you on? Like it or not NATO is already heavily involved and collectively we have spent at least $100billion dollars in support. Are you proposing to write that much off?
Fortunately you are not in a position to dictate to UkR how to defend themselves against the Russian invasion. Doubtless you would have also spoken against sending the RAF to bomb Germany flat after the Blitz in WW2. You need to understand how military power is applied to defeat the enemy and not recommend appeasement
Firstly I am not suggesting appeasement in any form whatsoever ever, just the contrary. Secondly you need to think about what goals we are trying to achieve and how to do so with the fewest casualties.
We are not at war with Russia, if you don’t believe me then just look outside your window and if you see houses with windows that is good indicator that we aren’t.
We are not in the business of destabilising Russia nor threatening its sovereignty. Russia is historically paranoid about the West and NATO in particular, so why stoke that up further. Much as I like the idea, we would probably regret it in the long run, who follows Putin ?
We are supporting Ukraines sovereignty as detailed in the Budapest memorandum. The aim of that is to ensure Russia get back to its pre 2014 borders or has to come to reasonable negotiated peace agreement. No more and no less.
Putin is like most dictatorial megalomaniacs in that he thrives in an environment of fear and mistrust. Hence accusations of Neo Nazi Ukrainians, Western SF involvement and a secret ambition of NATO to attack Mother Russia.
So my suggestions are designed to ensure 3 things happen.
I don’t know if you just scan read or what but you really don’t seem to grasp the fundamental difference of what I am suggesting compared to previous no fly zones.
Those were all carried out over the territory of hostile countries armed with MANPADS & SAM systems this is over Ukrainian occupied territory so zero threat. And I wouldn’t put our aircraft close to the Frontline anyway.
Do the above and I would suspect that given their abilities, tenacity and sufficient Western support, Ukraine should be able to retake all of their occupied territory in the North and East. Crimea would be a different kettle of fish.
To summarise I am not suggesting appeasement, but exactly the opposite, I’m suggesting that we pro actively intervene and actually defend the Ukrainian homeland from air attack.
And meanwhile free up Ukraines AD forces and support them to kick the $**T out of the Russians.
Somewhere along the line Mr Putin would probably depart either his country or this earth.
I don’t think Biden is weak on the issue I think he’s deliberately drawing this out. Every few months NATO agree to send one system or another that 6 months previously was considered a provocative escalation.
It may be the case that NATO is doing this, boiling frog style, to avoid provoking a greater Russian response and, given that most of Biden’s team is the Obama 2.0 administration, the same group who were particularly gun ho for a President that won the Nobel peace prize – they’re trying to wear the Russians down. They don’t want a swift outcome through an enforced no fly zone they want to break the Russian military on the Ukrainian rock.
They will keep supplying and gradually upgrading the Ukrainian arsenal to ensure Russia does not succeed and is not decisively defeated. I estimate the plan is to draw in so much resource over an extended period that the Russian military and economy are thoroughly ground down and will not be in a position to pose a threat for two or more decades. But further than that, I’m guessing the outcome will be a North Korean stalemate that creates a permanent headache for Russia on its South Western front which sucks in resources and permanently divides attention. I expect to see a lot of Western investment akin to South Korea to create a significant, self-sustaining economic and military power on Russia’s door step.
Not only does this cement Western dominance in the region it so thoroughly exhausts Russia that they cannot provide substantial support to China in the East making the Taiwan situation all that more difficult for the communists.
In short, more casualties in Ukraine to prevent war and more casualties in Taiwan.
Interesting perspective, and I think you are giving Biden and his advisors far more credit for Strategic thinking ability than most folks think they have. Just not for the same reasons as yours.
I do think it makes massive sense for the US to spin this out a while, but disagree with your analysis. Your putting to much emphasis on Russias ability to support China, it just can’t do that anymore.
If they wanted to just wear Russia down then they have pretty effectively done that already. As it stands at present Russia seems to have given up hope of any further advances by digging in and mass mining. Russia is bleeding away and cannot replace its loses in men or materiel. I actually can’t think they would add anything much to a Sino attack on Taiwan except rust and junk.
I suspect that Bidens reluctance is more to do with him not wanting to destabilise Russia or diminishing it too far. That would be counter productive.
Russia is a vast land mass with a shrinking population and enormous natural resources especially in Siberia. At present China is renaming Siberian towns, rivers etc with the old Chinese ones. And there are literally armies of Chines workers up in Siberia.
I wonder why ?
If Russia ceases to be a viable threat to Western Europe then the European countries will just retract back into the Defence cutting mentality that left us relying on Uncle Sam.
Putin has got his uses, his mistake in the Ukraine has essentially re motivated European Defence spending and that continuing a few more years is far more important to the US than diminishing Russias military.
It makes far more sense to spin it out and Europes increased defence ability will then be enough to allow the US to do what Obama wanted all along. But can’t whilst tying up forces in Europe.
The Pivot to the Western Pacific.
Do the Math ! If European NATO countries continue on the present uplift we will have our own effective AD systems, sufficient equipment to take on anything Russia can throw at us. Add up the armed forces of Europe and we have more ships, aircraft and troops than Russia has or can ever have or support.
Very thought provoking.😉
Regarding the last part, leaving a stalemate creates a festering wound in Europę that necessitates on going investment.
I dont rate Biden at all but his team are sneaky neo-cons who have been looking for conflict with Russia for years. Remember Hillary Clinton wanted to establish a no fly zone on Syria, while Russia was conducting air missions. Same people planning policy there.
I’m not informed enough about remaining Russian matériel, i understand they’ve kept a highly capable rump back but I don’t know if that’s true or ever was.
I personally think NATO could have established a no fly zone in West Ukraine from day one and called it a safe zone for refugees, but they didn’t. Russia wasn’t interested in the West, they see it as old Poland. They “only” want historic Russia territory so that would likely have been accepted by them. I think the neo-cons have been angling for something like this for over a decade. They missed the opportunity in Syria, they haven’t this time. They want to bleed Russia dry, and they partly deserve it, so they can focus on China. Both nations are busted flushes demographically so if the US can contain China long enough it will likely tear itself apart before they can act on Taiwan. China is at the peak of its power now. If they don’t act soon, they won’t be able to. If China feels isolated today then they won’t act and the US can protect Taiwan without firing a shot and see off hegemonic competitors in one go. Any way, this is my reasoning and why I proposed what I did.
Interesting times.
Hi Nath, Would I be correct in thinking that you come from one our Ex Colony’s ? I find your reasoning to be fine but we differ on the interpretation of the reasons for Biden Foot dragging and the outcomes. But both are positives.
I don’t think it will end up in a long term stalemate, I suspect that Putin will be ousted if it goes much into next year. Russia today is a different beast to what is was in the past. They have a middle class who have higher expectations than their parents and that means they want Holidays, nice western goods and not watching their sons getting drafted for a bloodbath.
If you wouldn’t mind could you explain the term Neo Con ? In
UK Conservative equates to Right or Right of Centre and my understanding of Democrats is that they are Left or Left of Centre. So Neo Cons in a Democrat Government doesn’t make much sense to me.
Oh and as for Biden I don’t rate him or Trump either. Where are the Truman’s and Eisenhowers ?
to my mind, a ridiculous and ill informed post. Cheers, Chairborne Warror
300,000 newly conscripted, poorly trained and rubbish equipped fresh troops won’t win the war for Russia. They will maintain the war and keep feeding the meat grinder but won’t win the war. That’s the tragedy of Russia’s mode of war fighting. Massed artillery and huge infantry and tank/ armoured vehicle losses. The Russian military are devoid of any plan, tactical use of combined arms and seem to think firing 10,000 artillery rounds at a generalised area of land then advancing is a sound strategy. They must be burning through the Soviet era ammunition stockpiles very quickly whilst achieving bog all effect on the frontline. Sooner or later they are going to run out of ammo. Probably before Ukraine does as the Ukrainian army are counter battery firing to identified targets.
Bidens inability to think for himself has left him easily led into another Vietnam scenario. Drag on the war with targeting restrictions, ignore the great cost to humanity and national economies, the arms industries profits go through the roof. Its a nigh on carbon copy scenario. It has to be asked, who calls the shots in the US when a weak president leaves a leadership vacuum?
So how does Russia continue to hold a seat on the UN Security Council? It has proven itself to be a terrorist state in all but name!
It looks increasingly like the UN is not fit for purpose.
Because it is one of the five founding permanent members and by permanent I mean precisely that. It’s enshrined in the UN Charter and there is nowt that can be done about it as it has an absolute veto.
As for not fit for purpose, its original reason for existing was to avoid any future major conflicts between the great powers.
So as we are all still alive and the planet isn’t an irradiated rock in space I’d say it has succeeded 100%.
Admittedly it is flawed, imperfect and sometimes a total pain in the arse, but given the obvious survival of humanity it is 100% fit for purpose.🤔
Really? I would say that it is MAD that has kept us away from major conflicts! That has nothing to do with the UN. As to Russia we have a country committing countless war crimes trying to bomb a country back too the Stone Age and now threatening world wide starvation with their withdrawal from the UN grain deal! If the UN cannot between themselves deal with Russia and change the charter I would say it’s not fit for purpose!
I don’t like it anymore than you do but no one can boot Russia out of the UN, no country has ever been removed. Its completely impossible to do so because that is the way it was set up in the original charter.
I quote :-
A Member of the United Nations which has persistently violated the Principles contained in the present Charter may be expelled from the Organization by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council.”
Russia and China are both permanent members of the Security Council and either can veto any resolution on the spot.
Thats it Dead, Finito, sunk ☹️
So the only way such a recommendation from the SC could be put to a vote of the General assembly is if Russia and China either abstained or voted for it.
Now if you know any way to get Russia to do either of those then can you please let the Foreign & Commonwealth Office know ?
Wellcome to the World of Catch 22 !
I’m not sure that it is correct to characterize Putin’s actions as irrational. He has made clear that he regards the breakup of the USSR as a geo political disaster. The loss of Belarus and Ukraine in particular were tolerable only as long as their governments remained close to Moscow. With the revolution in Kyiv and the. increasingly pro Western leadership, Putin felt the need and justification
for counter action. He moved cautiously at first, supporting ethnic Russian separatists in the Donbas whilst denying any official Moscow involvement. Then, in a move hugely popular at home, he seized Crimea without casualties, restoring to Russia a territory dominated by ethnic Russians.
The attack on Ukraine proper was expected to be similarly successful- a quick occupation of major cities and a regime change in Kyiv. Nothing irrational in any of this.
But the gamble failed and the essential characteristic of Putins rule was exposed: incompetence. Strategic incompetence in the overall operational plan; tactical incompetence on the front line; organisational incompetence in supply and repair functions.
In essence, Putin has failed: claiming( largely incorrectly) that NATO represented a growing threat to Russian security, his botched invasion has done more to strengthen NATO than any haranguing by Trump. And a Ukraine that might have been persuaded back to a more pro Moscow attitude will now be utterly hostile.
Putins latest actions are starting to seem irrational, but that is because he cannot yet acknowledge that his great plan has failed. Until he does, we will continue to see vicious attacks with little military purpose.
I agree with most of what you say. Putin is just another tin-pot dictator, doubtless with large sums stashed away in offshore Cayman Islands accounts that he has embezzled from ordinary Russians. The problems is, Putin/Medvedev are rattling the nuclear threats
Having said that, my view is that whilst Biden allows Putin to bomb hospitals, kintergartens, public shelters, blood transfusion centres, residential blocks etc with impunity, UkR is not allowed to target the launch sites using American or French ordnance. The Russians only respect strength and regrettably, they think Biden is showing cowardice.
Putin, Shoigu, Gerasomov and the other Russian war criminals are now spending most of their time cowering in their Siberian bunkers due to UkR drone retaliation, whilst bravely ordering yet more attacks on civilians. As the British Government has said, they must not be allowed to get away with it
I think that if Russia were not a nuclear power, Western forces would have been in action already. The nuclear threat is probably a bluff: the Russians must know how accurate and effective Western weapons would be in a nuclear exchange. But it is right to err on the side of caution. Additionally, use of Western supplied conventional weapons against Russian targets would just feed the paranoid narrative that Putin spins to his domestic audience.
The big problem is how this now pointless ” special military operation” is brought to an end. As with the USA in Vietnam or NATO in Afghanistan, it can take years to acknowledge that you can’t win. The operation will probably drag on until after the 2024 Russian presidential elections- Putin won’t want to admit failure before then.
Putin has to continue the war because if he loses in UkR he also loses power. He’s just called up 300,000 conscripts and he’s not going to stop now, he has to be defeated.
While UkR has bravely defended itself, because Russia has much bigger armed forces, greater resources and can continue until Trump wins the next election, untimately they will get to keep the UkR lands that they have occupied. Trump will sell UkR down the river for sure, even if he has to do it from a prison cell
Hmmm…when Mad Vlad starts to refer to himself as Caesar, gonna take that as a sign it may be time to start construction of the bomb shelter. 🤔😉
I’m not going to dig any shelter. The UK would be utterly destroyed in a nuclear exchange with Russia. There would be zero point surviving the initial exchange in a shelter to emerge on an island that is an irradiated wasteland.
When the balloon goes up I will be waiting outside with a huge drink of whisky and a curse to Putin and his fascist Russian state.
Well written article. Russia stopped being a state and has been a dictatorship for the last 15+ years. Putin is not removable via democratic processes. Anyone who mounts a serious democratic bid against him is either chucked in jail on trumped up false charges or gets to have a novichok cup of tea or a mystery sudden flying lesson from a 5th floor window.
The Russians might think they are voting in a democracy but when there is no choice on the ballet paper other than pro Putin candidates that’s not a democracy.
Excellent piece that takes Putin apart in a clear and logical manner.
The world needs to grow some balls and stand up to this pathetic specimen.
His short man syndrome is petulantly lashing out at innocents from one side of the globe to the other.
Unite and say we the world will protect our food supplies, not the US, not the UK, not nato, but the world.
Letting one little bully hold the world to ransom is pathetic weakness and just invites and creates future problems of similar nature.
Very good article.
Putin has lost. His ‘special operation’ is a great failure. His army has no initiative beyond killing civilians in their beds. The west has to maintain and expand its support. Planning for Russia after Putin must now be priority.
Just saw a Reuters post that Russia’s central bank has just raised interest rates by 3.5% to 12%.
Ongoing isn’t hyphenated
I suggest some of those who comment here stop listening to the ‘narrative’ and explore information from further afield. Try Simplicious blog, The Duran, Col McGregor/Col Scott Ritter or the Hindustan Times reporting on YT. Many hope that Putin is failing, but as a veteran of Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq, and what I have seen in Syria and Libya (and our support for the mass destruction of Yemen), Putin seems to be doing just fine.