May 28th combat SITREP update by "Juan"

• Residential areas of Slavyansk shelled by mortars and artillery starting at 11:00 local time.
• School #13 in Slavyansk was hit by a 12.2 cm mortar shell. School is also used as a kindergarten. 9 civilians injured including a 4 year old boy. Unknown if the casualties were at the school or in other areas under bombardment.
• Very strong fighting commenced approximately 15:30 local time in the area of Donetsk Airport but not at airport. Airport terminal is heavily damaged from fighting Monday. Fighting is ongoing as of 17:00 local time.
• Artillery bombardment in town of Rubezhnoye in Lugansk Oblast. Casualties unknown. Reliable sources say there are no Lugansk Self Defense forces in or near the town. 
•  ZU-23-2 antiaircraft gun system seen in public video in possession of Donbas Army.

May 28th combat SITREP by "Juan"

• Heavy bombardment at night and early morning in Rubezhnoye in Lugansk Oblast. Civilian casualties unknown.

• More scattered fighting and probes around Slavyansk last night and this morning.
• Donetsk residents are actively assisting the Fed units in building barricades on city streets and setting up fighting positions.
• Reports of more fighting in the Donetsk Airport area last night and dawn this morning.
• Terminal at Donetsk Airport heavily damaged in the fighting Monday.
• Probes in scattered areas around Lugansk City. No reports of results or casualties, civilian or military.
• Situation in Mariupol is unknown.
• Email yesterday 23:07 local time from Donetsk Oblast, simple and terse: 'We are at war. Pray for us.' No word since as of 09:12 local time.

My apologies to all those who commented today

Guys, there are good times, bad times and terrible times.  I just had a major problem happen in my home (a teenager acting up in the worst way and at the worst time) and when I came back to my computer I managed to press the wrong button and delete the last 50 comments posted (across all posts, I think).  I was really upset and I screwed-up.

I tried to find an "undo" command, but blogger does not seem to offer it.  So I have to offer you my heartfelt apologies for shooting your comments today.  I am sorry and I will try to never let that happen again.

If you have the time and patience to repost them, I will gladly do that.  If you email me with a summary of your comment, I can go through my inbox and try to find your deleted comment.  Other than that there is nothing I can offer.

This is the perfect time to call me a moron and an idiot.  I would have no right to object :-(

Sorry, 

The Saker

Does Russia really need the Ukrainian military-industrial complex?

I really like the Asia Times, but the article I saw in it today left me wondering how it could have gotten past the editors. The article in question is Ukraine: A military-industrial complex to die for by Gregory J Moore. While I most definitely encourage you to read the article in its entirety, its thesis is simple: the Ukrainian military-industrial complex is, if not vital, then at least crucial for Russia. Moore gives several examples which I want to quote here:

1) Antonov is not a Russian aircraft manufacturer, its Ukrainian
2) The Ukraine builds many aircraft and helicopter engines
3) The Ukraine builds missiles, rockets and the SS18
4) The Ukraine accounts for 30% of the USSR's shipbuilding industry
5) The Ukraine builds APCs and tanks including the T-84
6) The Ukraine builds air-to-air, surface-to-air and cruise missiles
 
And all this is true.  So what is the problem here?

The problem is that all the examples Moore gives are Soviet-era systems.  Even the T-84 is nothing but an upgraded T-80.  The Ukraine, just like Russia, has inherited a lot of top-quality Soviet technologies.  These technologies were, in fact, so good, that both the Ukraine and Russia could literally "coast" for almost 20 years on that technological basis without really developing any truly new systems.  A good example of that is the SS-18 missile which is still one of the most powerful ones on the planet.  But it's design is really late 1950s early 1960s technology and it runs on liquid fuel.  And yet the Russian Ministry of Defense recently wanted to purchase more of these missile.  Why?  Money: the Ukrainians were willing to sell them cheap.  Now the deal appears dead, much to the delight of the Russian military which did not want that missile to begin with, but which had been told that it was the cheaper solution to a more expensive but also more modern purely Russian alternative.

And here is the key issue here: Russia does not need the Ukrainian MIC, Russia could produce all it needs indigenously, but that would be more expensive.  So why spend more when you can spend less and use the difference in developing other sectors?

When the Soviet Union broke apart Russia lost not only the Ukraine but another 13 republics many of which had Soviet MIC resources and many have wondered whether Russia could go by without them.  The test of that proposition is simple: can Russia produce completely new weapon systems or not?  And the clear answer is yes - Russia can and Russia has.

Take, for example, the new Russian submarines (Borei-class or Yasen-class), new combat aircraft (Su-34 of PAKFA), new tanks (Armata), new ICBMs (SS-27) or SLBMs (SS-N-32).  Now, of course, since the weapons-design cycle is very long, all these systems have their origins in Soviet designs, and some might even have part purchased from the Ukraine (or other ex-Soviet states).  But the fact that Russia assembled, tested and deployed these systems proves that Russia has the technological know-how to control all the technologies used in them.  This is especially true of very complex systems like submarines or advanced combat aircraft.  For the general military, the goal is to have the Russian armed forces equipped with new military systems for 70% of all its equipment by 2020.  That is ambitious but doable.

At least two top Russian weapons experts (Dmitri Rogozin and Igor Korotchenko) have addressed the issue of the importance of the Ukrainian MIC and, on one occasion, even Putin himself.  All three were categorical: a possible "loss" of the Ukrainian MIC for Russia is not a problem for Russia at all, but the perfect opportunity to allocate the funds needed to develop indigenous and much more modern capabilities in Russia.  This is exactly the same situation as with the western credit card companies: the US sanctions provided Russia with a much needed pretext and opportunity to develop a Russian credit card system which, as it has been announced in Shanghai, will be compatible with the Chinese one.

Speaking of China: China is the *perfect* partner for Russia in nearly all economic terms, especially in the military-industrial cooperation.  And, unlike the Ukrainian technologies, the Chinese technologies are far more modern, if probably more expensive.

Putin and Medvedev have already set as a strategic goal for Russia to become fully independent from foreign suppliers for all its strategic needs. Dumping the Ukrainian MIC is just a logical step towards this goal. It is an opportunity for Russia, not a problem.

Moore concludes by saying that "The value and importance of Ukraine's military industrial complex to Russia is an important reason Moscow will not let go of eastern and southern Ukraine, and consequently it may be that sanctions alone will not be enough to make Putin back down."  I completely disagree.  Not only does Russia not "want" the Ukraine or even the Donbass, it is going out of its way to avoid having to "own" it (following a hypothetical intervention).  The very last thing Russia needs is to have to support a huge population working on 20-year old technologies which nobody wants and which Russia does not really need.  By the way, and for the very same reasons, neither does the EU or US need to Ukrainain MIC: they have their own which is much more modern and which they control.

I will say it again and again and again.  Russia does not need the Ukraine, not its lands, not its MIC, not its coal and not its people.  What was true in 1991 is not true any more in 2014.  Furthermore, the Ukrainian oligarchs have truly destroyed the whole country and laid waste to its MIC: did you know that the top 50 Ukrainian oligarchs own 50% of the Ukraine's GDP?  It is mind boggling, really.  Or why do you think that the Ukrainians are still using (old) Mi-24s used in Africa by the UN instead of their own helicopters?  Because that is all that they have left, literally!  Recently, when the Russians took control of Crimea they found out that even the most prestigious youth camp (Artek) was in a state of total abandonment. The oligarchs neglected even that jewel.

For years Russia had tried to make some kind of deal with the Ukrainians to develop a very interesting advanced transport aircraft: the AN-70.  But the Ukrainian politicians were making such ridiculous demands that the Russians eventually walked away in disgust (they ended up making a deep upgrade the IL-76 and they are now developing a wide-body long range transport aircraft with China which will probably have civilian and military variants).  So even if Yanukovich was still in power, how could Russia trust such completely unreliable partners?

The sad reality is that the Russians cannot trust the Ukrainians with anything. Not even paying their bills, nevermind participating in strategic military-industrial projects.  For that Russia now has China.  Let the EU "enjoy" its new found partnership with the Ukraine.  Good luck to them!

The Saker

Clarifications about certain issues mentioned in today's SITREP

As is often the case, my previous SITREP has touched superficially on a number of issues which have raised some eyebrows and, since I have the time, I feel that it might be a good thing to clarify my position on some of them.

A "limited" Russian military option

First, this is clearly a possibility whose main quality is that is falls short of a full-scale ground operation.  However, those who advocate for this option often do not really understand what it entails.  Let me give you an example by using a grand favorite of Americans: a no-fly zone.

The standard US/NATO practice if to precede the imposition of a no-fly zone by a almost total suppression of enemy air defenses.  US/NATO generals always do that because they want to make it look like this is a clean, victim-less operation since, after all, nobody gives a damn about who many "bad guys" die as long as "our boys" come home.  The problem with that is that a total suppression of enemy air defenses rarely works.  This is particularly true of the Ukraine which holds large stocks of Soviet air defense systems which remain very capable even when old are.  I remind you that the super-dooper mega-secret "invisible" and "we own the night" US F-117 stealth fighter bomber was shot down by an export version of the 1960s Soviet 125 Neva/Pechora (SA-3 GOA in the NATO classification) air defense system.  The US also lost another two F-117 to the Iraqi Air Defenses (I know that for a fact, but that is officially denied).  The Ukraine inherited some very powerful systems like the S-300, S-300V, several versions of the Buk, the Tunguska and the Igla MANPADs.  They are not as new as the Russian systems, but they are still way more capable then anything Yugoslavia had.  Furthermore, we also know from the war in Georgia that Ukie air defense systems have been modernized by the Ukrainians themselves and, in some cases, with Israeli help.  So while the Ukrainian military is more or less a joke, the Ukrainian air defense capabilities are not to be dismissed too easily.  In other words, it is one thing to impose an no-fly zone over Libya and a very different thing to try that with the Donbass.

Also, this scenario simply assumes that the Ukies will take a Russian attack sitting like ducks and without taking action.  This is naive.  There are a lot of very capable senior officers in the Ukrainian military and they know that just sitting and waiting is no option.  Does anybody know what they might or might not do if the Russians attack?  I sure don't.

Limited and "no fly zone" types of operations have this way of getting out of control which makes them all very risky.

Finally, while there are people dying every day in the Donbass, there will be many more people dying if Russia intervenes.

Wars are messy and ugly and they typically refuse to proceed according to the plans of those who start them.  This is why Russia is doing the right thing by avoiding such a war for as long as it is possible.

Objections to my mentioning the "sads"

This time again I got not only comments but even emails objecting to my reference to the "sads".  My recent post of the Conchita Wurst photo with a bearded man from the Donbass has also irked some readers.  Mostly what I am told is this:"stop your anti-sads rethoric or your readers will be upset" (of course, were I use "sad" they use "gay").  My reply is simple:

I never wrote a single word on this blog with the intent to become popular or not to ruffle any feathers.  If fact, I don't give a damn about catering to the modern sociological and cultural trends of the day.  I simply write the truth as I see it and in this case it is very simple: what modern society calls "sexual diversity" I consider as psycho-sexual pathologies, personality disorders.  Second, I object to the instrumentalization of sexual pathologies for political purposes: sex belongs in the bedroom and it should stay there.  And third, I consider that the so-called "West" suffers, among other ailments, of an acute case of psychological, moral and spiritual "AIDS": an acquired deficiency in its ability to distinguish between what is wholesome, healthy, natural and contributing to the growth of the individual and what has the opposite effect.  In Russia there is a comprehensive rejection of this "western societal model" which I fully approve of and I have no intention of catering to the micro-agenda of those single-topic folks who would have me join the passive herd of bystanders who dare not call things by their name.  This is why I refuse to use the term "gay" which I consider a ridiculous misnomer.  Solzhenitsyn used to speak of a "decline in courage" and I personally see everywhere and in everything.  If I was also afraid of offending somebody for simply speaking the truth, I would not be able to look at myself in the mirror.  People should come here to get my honest opinion, not to get my support for whatever lifestyles they fancy.  The more pressure I will get to shut up or accept the modern dogmas of political correctness, the more I will push back and denounce that kind of pressure for what it is: an attempt to silence the opposition.

The Eurosceptics: Right-wing racists or anti-system progressives?

Let me begin by saying that the only country in Europe whose politics I follow really carefully is France.  I do not know what the Eurosceptics are like in other countries.  With this caveat in mind, is the French National Front anti-Muslim and racist?  The answer is, I believe, yes and no.

Yes, there is most definitively an anti-immigrant core in the FN.  This group is represented by Marine LePen who, logically, is also rather Right-wing in her politics.  But you have to look beyond that and understand the following:

First, immigration in Europe is, objectively, a real and very serious problem.  Denying that makes no sense at all.  Second, this problem has been created the capitalist classes who saw in it a way to not only get cheap labor, but also to break the resistance of the European workers and to deconstruct the social state.  In other words, from the point of view of the worker in France or German the immigrants and his capitalist bosses are very much part of the same threat to his lifestyle.  Add to this toxic brew the Euro-bureaucrats who took it all one big step further and opened the EU to the huge and poor people of Central Europe.  For the German or French worker what used to be a problem of Arabs and Africans has now turned into a problem of Poles and Romanians, especially Gypsies.  In fact, a lot of the French Arabs from northern Africa now vote with the FN against immigration because they now see their very hard earned benefits melt away under the influx of Romanian and Moldovan immigrants.  Likewise, it used to be that Islam was seen as a threat, now it is Muslims who are on the front lines of the fight against thefts and muggings which take place in London or Paris.

So, yes, the first-step of the rejection of the system often goes through an anti-immigrant phase.  And some remain stuck there.  But the next step is a realization that immigrants and local workers are both equally the victims of the capitalists.  This is what Alain Soral's movement Equality and Reconciliation stands for.  This movement is probably 40% Arab or African by now and yet while E&R does not make the political endorsement of any one party, Alain Soral (himself both ex-Communist and ex-National Front) clearly states that the FN is the only non-system party in France.  And since E&R is clearly pro-Muslim I think that it is likely that most anti-Muslim voters of the FN could easily turn their position to a pro-Islamic one if they are explained what really happened to Europe and how both local workers and immigrant Muslims have been used and artificially pitied against each other by the plutocrats.

Does the French model hold true for the rest of Europe?  I don't know.  But I have no doubt that very voter for the FN is at least a potential member of E&R at which point he/she will automatically drop his/her anti-immigrant and anti-Islamic stance.  Does that mean that there are no racists or bigots inside the FN?  No, of course not.  But even if their rejection of the "system" is initially polluted by racist or secularist bigotry, these elements rapidly disappear as soon as they are explained how misguided these views are and that immigrants and Islam are not a risk for Europe, but a fantastic and possibly life-saving opportunity against the real threat: the plutocracy, globalism, turbo-capitalism and imperialism. 

To those who still would not accept that I have a simple peace of advice: study Soral and see what E&R does day in and day out.  They are the "proof" of my thesis: the real enemy of the patriots in Europe is not the immigrant, it is the globalist.  In his book 1984 Orwell has Winston saying "if there is hope it lies with the proles".  So to paraphrase him I will say this: "if there is hope for Europe it lies with the extremes" (whether Left or Right).

Kind regards,

The Saker

"Flash" SITREP update from "Juan"

Tanks are on the move west of Slavyansk, destination unknown, at least a Rota (Company, ergo 16 tanks if at full strength, which is doubtful. Normally any serving tank Rota will be at 75% max at any given time as tanks are under repair, and normally 60%. Under combat conditions it is 50% or less.) with accompanying support units such as BTR's and BMP's plus infantry. Unit unknown.

Unconfirmed information states that one platoon of tanks (Platoon is 4 tanks) lost their way and managed to drive in to a swamp. Two were so deep in water and mud the diesels hydraulicked.

At roughly 18:20 local time a bombardment was made on a residential district in Slavyansk lasting for 20 minutes. One building of flats took 3 direct hits. Casualties are unknown. 

Video of arty hitting civilian house in residential area:

Ukraine SITREP May 27th, 14:54 UTC/Zulu: assault on Donetsk and a look from above

First, a "SITREP from the front lines" by "Juan"

• Donetsk Airport freight terminal is burned and partly destroyed. Kiev is believed to be in control of the airport at this time. Damage to the terminal building is unknown.
• The attempt to seize Donetsk Airport was reinforced by Vostok Brigade. Casualties were heavy in the brigade but numbers unknown.
• The Vostok Brigade wounded being transported to hospital in a truck were fired upon. The driver was killed, then an RPG round was fired at the truck. All the wounded in the truck were killed, either by the RPG or head shots after the assault. Confirmed by vid and photos of the dead, all that could be seen had head wounds. A second video not being published absolutely confirms that all the dead from the trucks carrying wounded had head wounds.
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1ZvgJG7eNk&feature=youtu.be
• Numerous bombardments last evening and this morning of civilian areas of Slavyansk, Donetsk, Mariupol and Lugansk City and suburbs, civilian casualties are heavy with more than 70 reported dead and wounded.
• Major movements of Kiev forces as of 05 local time this morning have not commenced. More information on this later.
• As of 11:30 local time scattered probing attacks are reported around Slavyansk.
• As of 10:05 local time the situation in Mariupol is unknown.
• No major attacks by the Nats today, just numerous small probes.
• Evacuation is being attempted in Slavyansk for civilians but it is not possible, the city is cut off and surrounded to an extent. Don't know if this is true or if it is a charade to mask the evacuation of at least the children. Reality is Slavyansk has to large a population to evacuate, 120,000.
• Scattered artillery and mortar attacks continue in the vicinity of Slavyansk and the outskirts of Donetsk, almost all at random civilian residential areas. Some casualties but number is unknown.
• No information on the situation in either Lugansk Oblast or Mariupol in Donetsk Oblast.

-------
The Saker comments:

This is clearly a major escalation of the war.  For the first time for example Su-25 ground attack aircraft have been filmed using unguided rockets to attack the positions of what I will call from now on the Novorossia Armed Forces (NAF).  I have also seen some very bad footage of what appears to be a MiG-29.  The attack on the Donetsk airport involved a long column of transport and attack helicopters.  NAF sources also claim that their checkpoints have been attacked by Ukie helicopters.  All in all, this the first (comparatively) large scale military operation of this war, at least to my knowledge.  Though there are some contradictions in the figures presented by various sources, there seems to be a general agreement that "many tens" of people were killed, possibly up to one hundred, including about 50% civilians.

I have just heard the interview of two representatives of the Novorossia resistance who claim that the number of men wanting to sign up for combat has risen sharply.  Alas, there was not footage provided to support this claim and since I don't know how trustworthy the information given by these officials is I can only mention here "as is" with the usual caveats.

(Pseudo) "Election" of Poroshenko as seen in Moscow

There seems to be a consensus in Moscow that Poroshenko is a political chameleon who can change his opinion as fast as this animal can change his color: first he was a member of Kuchma's United Social Democratic Party, then he helped create the Party of Regions, then he joined Yushchenko's Our Ukraine Party.  He also was a member of the Azarov government under President Yanukovich whom he then betrayed by financing the Maidan movement and joining the Udar Party.  So Poroshenko is the ultimate political prostitute and in Moscow this is definitely a cause for optimism because a prostitute is pragmatic and can be bought.  Does that shock you?  Consider the alternatives and you will rapidly come to the same conclusion as Moscow.

The bad news is that for the time being Poroshenko is clearly on the USA's payroll and that both his rhetoric and his declared policies are pretty much indistinguishable from the one of Iatseniuk, Turchinov, Avakov & Co.  As a result the Kremlin's reaction to Poroshenko's announcement that he wanted to travel to Moscow to meet Putin has been to declared that at this point in time no such visit was being considered.

Russia's policy towards the Ukraine

The approach chosen by the Kremlin to deal with the Ukrainian mess is now becoming pretty clear.

1. Declare that while Moscow has huge reservations about the so-called "elections" it will be willing to negotiate and work with whoever is in power in Kiev.
2. Declare that cessation of combat operations in the Donbass as a pre-condition for any such negotiations.
3. Agree to try to find a deal on gas sales provided the Ukies pay their outstanding bill.
4. Basically take note but otherwise ignore any statements made by Poroshenko and judge him by his actions and not his words.

Translated from "Diplomatese" into plain English this means putting the financial and political squeeze on Poroshenko until he decides that his current attempts at rapidly solving the problems of the Donbass by force will fail.

This is a tough and unpalatable policy because it implies that Russia will stand by and watch the neo-Nazi forces killing combatants and civilians across the Donbass.  In this context it is very important to keep in mind another no less disturbing fact: the current level of resistance in the Donbass is still far below what it could be and nowhere near the kind of levels of resistance which took place in South Ossetia, Abkhazia or Crimea.  Just take a look at the map of the Donbass and circle the cities where combats are taking place.  You will see Slaviansk, Kramatorsk, Kransyi Liman, Antartsit and maybe one or two more.  So what about all the rest?

What about Donetsk.  We have all seen the combat footage coming out of Donetsk so let me ask you - how many combatants did you see on that footage?  Ten, maybe thirty soldiers?  More?  Fifty?  One hundred?  Did you know that Donetsk has a population just under one million people and that the Donetsk Metropolitan area has two million?  Any military analyst will tell you that you can easily put 10% of any given population under arms, and 20% with some effort.  In other words, the city of Donetsk should be able to generate anywhere between 100'000 and 200'000 men and the Donetsk Metropolitan area anywhere between 200'000 and 400'000 men.  While no reliable figures are available at this point, I personally doubt that the entire NAF has much more than maybe 10'000 to 15'000 men in arms (maybe "Juan" can correct me here).  In other words, what is clear is that the current level of resistance in the Donbass is at best about 10% of what it could be.

That is most emphatically not something the Kremlin can ignore.

Of course, some wannabe strategists would want Moscow do to what the USA did with Iraq and simply *assume* that Russian forces will be greeted as liberators by a majority of the population of the Donbass and in this case I happen to think that it might even be true, but that is not a good enough reason to move forces in.  Sadly, but what is taking place now is what I would call a massive "awareness campaign" for the people of Novorossiia: the obscene alliance of Jewish oligarchs and Galician neo-Nazis is showing its true face and with every shell dropped on the Donbass the prospect of a unitary Ukraine are becoming more and more remote.

One anonymous commentator recently posted this most insightful comment on this blog.  He/she wrote: Call me cynic, but invasion is when Russia enters in Ukraine after 3 days of shooting. Liberation is when Russia enters in Ukraine after 3 months of bloody mess.  This is absolutely true.

Painful as this may be to admit, the current problem is not that Russia is not ready to intervene in the Donbass, but that the Donbass is not ready to make such an intervention justifiable.

Other factors which affect the Russian stance: changes in the EU

There is no doubt at all that the results of the recent European elections have been received with elation in the Kremlin.  I have carefully listened to the reaction to these election results by many commentators in Russia and it is absolutely clear that they have a very different view of what happened than their western counterparts.  Where western analysts speaks of a triumph of xenophobic and Right-Wing parties, Russian analysts speak of a victory for anti-EU, anti-NATO and, ultimately, anti-US forces.  Furthermore, what is labeled as "Right Wing" in the West is perceived as "conservative" or even "traditionalist" in Russia.  One commentator said that the victory of the "Conchita Wurst" freak at the Eurovision Song Contest was the straw that broke the camel's back and that it had a direct impact on the European rejection of a morally degenerate and politically subservient Europe.  I am not sure that the Wurst freak by itself has such a role, but the constant barrage of sicko gender propaganda, combined with a frontal assault on European traditional values probably did.

I wish I had the time to write a detailed analysis of these elections here.  I will say that I follow French politics very closely and that I fully agree with the Russian point of view.  The National Front is not just a "right wing" movement (although in some aspects it is).  It is first and foremost an anti-system movement and party which is deeply affected by the kind of values Alain Soral promotes: the "Left of Labor and the Right of Values".  True, the top leadership of the National Front is still stuck in old "Right of Labor" ideas, but most members are clearly "popular" in their politics, some even very close to Socialist ideas.  In fact, I would argue that the entire Right-Left paradigm simply does not apply to Europe any more.  Look at all the so-called "Left" parties in France, Germany or the UK.  They are all really nasty, hardcore, capitalist and reactionary parties.  I prefer to use pro-system and anti-system categories.  By 'system' I mean the following characteristics:

1) free-market, capitalist, globalist, pro-corporate economic policies
2) promotion of supra-national entities like the EU and NATO
3) total political subservience to the AngloZionist empire
4) support for and constant use of the "Ziomedia" to achieve its goals
5) systematic destruction of traditional European values
6) support for a police state internally
7) support for use of military force externally

These are the policies which the establishment or  "system" parties in Europe have promoted for decades and these are the policies which have been rejected in the latest European elections.  Now look at Russia's stance on the very same issues:

1)  Officially, Russia is a social/socialist state (Putin's words in his address to the Federal Assembly).  In reality there are still many signs of very strong capitalism in Russia, but they are being regulated and contained.  Most of the population is probably far more socialist than the current regime, but compared to the EU/US Russia is definitely a social state.
2) Russia is clearly opposed to the EU and NATO.
3) Russia, at least under Putin, has tried really hard to free itself from the AngloZionist Empire.
4) The Russian media has largely been "de-Zionistized".  There are some exceptions like the notorious Ekho Mosvky (Echo of Moscow, also called "Ekho Matsy" or "Echo of the Matzo") and the Dozhd (Rain) TV channel, but they have very little or no traction with the general public.
5) Russia clearly support traditional values, especially Christian and Islamic ones.
6) Russia's policies on civil rights are a mixed bag.  Unfortunately, the Kremlin does support Internet censorship, so-called "anti-Piracy" laws, surveillance of Internet Service Providers, etc.  The Russian Duma has also passed some terrible laws banning the free discussion of WWII.  The good news is that these laws seem to be applied with clear lack of determination and that they are probably more a reaction  to the rise of neo-Nazis in the Ukraine than a true attempt at internal political censorship.
7) Russia clearly opposes the use of force in international affairs unless the UNSC gives it's approval, Russians are attacked or when a vital national strategic interest is threatened.

In other words, the folks in the Kremlin and the French National Front would largely agree with each other and the fact is that historically these two forces get along very well.

Russia is clearly counting on the fact that before the end of the year it might see a much more friendly Europe than it has so far.

Other factors which affect the Russian stance: crypto-alliance with China

Though I wish I could I cannot go into an analysis of the recent Russian-Chinese agreements (others have done so very well - see here, here, here or here).  I will just say this:

While, for a number of reasons, the word "alliance" has never been used by Russia or Chinese officials - they prefer to speak of "partnership" - the fact is that what Russia and China have committed to is exactly that: a strategic alliance.

Two huge countries do not commit to a 30 year long full spectrum joint development program without committing to an de-facto alliance.  No country decides to commit to a 400 billion dollar deal without committing to a de-facto alliance.  This alliance will make it possible for Russia to create a single energy distribution network, meaning that gas could be sent from any place in Russia to any client state.  As for China they have basically decided that their energy needs for the next 30 years or more will entirely depend on Russia.  So whether the word "alliance" is used or not, we are dealing with a clear strategic and vital pact, the decision to operate in symbiosis if you want.  From now on, China will depend on Russia and Russia will depend on China.  Put differently, the survival of the other partner will become an existential priority for both countries.  I call that a crypto-alliance.

Furthermore, while both sides went to extraordinary lengths to declare that this alliance or, excuse me, "partnership" was not targeted against any third party, and most definitely not against the USA, it of course is.  Russia and China are now committed to create a dollar-free economic zone, not only for energy but for all goods and services.  And whom do you think the Russian and Chinese military strategists see as their biggest potential enemy?  Bulgaria?  Nepal?  Of course not, it is pretty darn obvious that they both see the US as the number one enemy or, as the Russians used to say, their "main adversary".

So this is a tectonic shift.  Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping have basically committed their countries to a strategic alliance which will define the future of our planet more than any other factor.  Already now the combined power of Russia and China far supersedes the power of the AngloZionist Empire, thrown in the BRICS, the SCO, the CSTO and the EEC and will will clearly see the beginning of a consolidation of the Eurasian landmass against the AngloZionist Empire.  Here, again, the Russians feel that time is on their sides and that with each passing day they are becoming stronger while the Western plutocracy is becoming weaker.

A look from above

So let us look at the big picture.  If we "take-off" from Slaviansk or Donetsk and look at what is taking place on a global, planetary, scale we shall immediately see that the Ukraine is only the latest visible flashpoint of a much bigger struggle: the decolonization of the entire Eurasian landmass.  While the US and its EU puppets have their gaze fixed on such "developments" as the (pseudo-) "election" of a non-entity like Poroshenko to the (largely symbolical) position of President of (the completely broke) "Banderastan", the Chinese and the Russians are busy looking decades down the road with the shared objective to bring down the AngloZionist Empire.  In this context, the Ukraine will not be neglected, of course, but each policy decision towards the developments there will be carefully evaluated in the context of this global, over-reaching, strategy.

The Saker.

SITREP from the front lines by "Juan"

This is the latest "SITREP from the front lines" sent by "Juan" to whom I am immensely grateful for sharing this information with us.

The Saker

------- 

A lot has happened since I wrote the last items for the Saker. The situation in the south and east of Ukraine is quite fluid and changes by the hour.

Early on 24 May 2014 strong movements of Nats units began, converging on the city of Slavyansk and it's outlying towns and villages.

One armor battalion of the Nats Army moved at speed to the east from their lager some distance away from Slavyansk. This was an 'all arms' movement, the tank companies consisting of upgraded main battle tanks and including at least one Oplot upgraded T80 known as T84,the usual variants of BMP tracked light armored vehicles and BTR troop carriers, many soft skin vehicles (trucks, fuel bowsers, support vehicles amongst others) and the usual large numbers of troop filled trucks. Accompanying this unit was a battery of Msta self propelled howitzers of 15.2 cm main gun size, the howitzer being in a rotating and lightly armored turret built on an older main battle tank chassis. Also in the train was at least one battery of Grad missile launchers.

This unit stopped on the outskirts of Slavyansk on 24 May and stood down for most of 25 May.

Numerous other Nats units, some armored and some not, also moved on 24 May to positions close to Slavyansk and the outlying areas. Most of these units appear to be national guard/right sector units.

Morale:

For the Nats national guard/right sector units, morale appears to be the same, most quite motivated, a few not. However, they have yet to prove they can stand and fight. This mode, 'stand and fight', is the essence of combat and always has been. If the Nats right sector units will not stand and fight then they are useless in any campaign and will only pursue their penchant for terror aimed at unarmed civilians with the resultant anger on the part of the civilians.

Many of the right sector units are composed mainly of young men, many veterans of the brawling in Kiev during the maidan debacle but few with military experience. It is quite one thing to stand against highly trained but unarmed police and Berkut units (unarmed meaning no weapons beyond short truncheons and shields) and rather a different experience to fight armed units who have every intention of killing you.

The consist of a combat unit is of the utmost importance when going in to combat. As I explained earlier the Nats army does not have a professional NCO corp nor does it have the tradition of such a corp and as such there are few if any combat experienced sarjanti to train and guide these totally inexperienced and poorly trained young men as they enter in to the world of War. Mentioning this failure on the part of the Nats Army and right sector units does not violate my policy of not giving them ideas to improve their units and tactics. It takes years to form, train and deploy such a cadre and in this instance they do not have the time nor the will to do so.

I have seen extant videos of these young men joyfully riding around on various vehicles, laughing and smiling. I have also seen these same young men in videos as they rolled in to a set piece ambush, I've seen the look of surprise turn to horror to realization they are going to die in seconds. And die they did, shot down by the people who intended to kill them in the beaten zone.

It remains to be seen how these losses, and there has been more than a few of these incidents, will affect the overall morale of right sector units. The losses to right sector have been quite large. The losses are kept secret as much as possible, however the total losses in KIA are approaching 900, possibly more, in the last 3 weeks alone. Wounded are reported to be half of that. Many of the wounded and dead are reported to be evacuated to Kharkov in a clandestine manner and treated at close facilities. We'll leave it at that, although anyone willing to dig a little can find what and where this event happens and how. I will say this about losses, though. It is an established fact that for most units in a combat situation, either actually fighting or in lagers preparing to fight, that 10% or so of your losses are self inflicted one way or another. Accidents do happen, especially when you have a bunch of young men running around with all kinds of dangerous little items that go 'bump' in the night so to speak. Relatively inexperienced drivers piloting large and cumbersome vehicles do hit things, misjudge curves and embankments and roll the vehicle, weapons not treated with the utmost respect do have a nasty habit of discharging at an inopportune moment. Thus 'non combat' casualties are generated with surprising regularity and the dead are just as dead as if they were killed in combat. As an aside, I have always beaten in to my men, either those I was training or those I was serving with, rank didn't matter, that there is no such thing as an 'unloaded weapon'. Period.

Nats Regular Army units are still to an extent an unknown entity as far as morale goes. The entire army knew of the right sector attack on the Ukraine Army unit of 22 May. Since that time there have been more reports, some confirmed, of Ukraine Army units going over to the Federalist side. There have also been two reports, one patently confirmed, of Ukraine Army units that planned to either stand down or switch sides and were promptly slaughtered by right sector, the confirmed one involving 28 soldiers killed.

The tank battalion looked good and looked motivated when they were in transit. However, they have not seen combat yet. The Feds have no tanks and no air assets so any combat with tanks on the Fed side will mean someone has to do something unkind to the tanks on the ground, up close and personal. This takes experience and courage. Can the Feds do it? Yes. Will the Nats get their act together on how to use armor? That is unknown and only time will tell and I'm certainly not going to give them the slightest idea how.

Before I go in to the Federalist side morale, I first want to put to rest a phrase often heard in both media reports and civilian conversations. Late me state this once and only once. There is no such thing as a 'bullet proof vest'. Period. The phrases used by the military are 'ballistic armor', 'body armor' and an older phrase of 'flak vest'. This vest and accompanying accouterments do offer some protection against rounds and shrapnel but are in no way 'bullet proof', they are 'bullet resistant'. The material works by dissipating the kenetic energy of an impacting object by spreading the force of the impact through the fabric around the impact sight. Some vests are far better than others depending on the development level of the manufacturer and the standards of the manufacturing contract. I know of none that will stop a modern high energy round fired from a modern rifle at less than 75 meters. Anyone who has information on the latest and greatest of these vests, feel free to correct me. These vests will normally not stop a pointed weapon, read bayonet, when used directly at the vest. However, many years ago when I was in advanced training my grizzled old Sarjant, who had fought on both the East and West Fronts during The War, made it very clear to me what would happen if he ever saw me use the bayonet when I had rounds left in my automat. I have never forgotten his graphic description, told in clinical detail, the gentlest part involving how many teeth one needs to chew a piece of bread (two are needed, according to him the rest are redundant).

75 meters you say with raised eyebrows? Yes. Look around you. Go out in the woods and look, see how far you have visuals. Go in to a town or city and look. How far can you see when huddled against a building or an alley or in a doorway? Most modern combat is at ranges of less than 50 meters unless you are on the wide open steppes or plains or desert. In built up areas this goes down to even less in house to house fighting, read up close and personal. Now, how to get around this problem will not be revealed in this writing and you know why.

Federalists.

Morale is generally quite high. They have been reinforced of late with some experienced volunteers, most notably yesterday in Donetsk City seen publicly when the Vostok Battalion arrived to the cheers and tears of the populace. I have also heard various accents in Russian, most notably the soft, almost Southern Drawl of the Chechnyans.

The Feds will fight and seem to be quite well trained, witness the losses they have inflicted on the right sector units and the very few Nats units that have attacked them at close range.

The problem for the Feds is the Nats have stand off arty up to and including the aforementioned Msta 152 cm howitzers and they have tanks, real tanks, on the edge of the combat areas now. As an aside, a 'tank' is not every vehicle with either tracks or wheels that has a turret and a weapon in said turret. A 'tank' refers to a 'Main Battle Tank', a heavily armored and armed vehicle with tracks and a rotating turret with a good sized piece of artillery in said turret. The Feds have no tanks to my knowledge but, reality being reality, I would not tell you if they did and I knew. They do have a very few BTR and BMP units, lightly armored and armed either fighting vehicles or troop transports.

I have seen quite modern anti tank weapons in possession of the Fed troops plus the usual RPG systems of various models. They also have surface to air hand held missiles to discourage the Mi24 attacks, which they have, and these weapons are also useful against the Sukhoi ground attack aircraft Kiev is known to possess and which have been used once on Saturday.

However, the Fed morale again seems to by very high. They will fight as they have often already. How will they stand against an all out attack by the Nats forces? That is a question I can not answer. Is Kiev willing to destroy towns and cities to achieve their ends with the resultant very high civilian casualties? I think so. Today and tomorrow may well tell the tale. What are the Fed armed forces numbers? Even if I had that number, which I don't, I would certainly not devulge it. Better to keep your enemy guessing, in other words Operational Security. Always try to keep your enemy as ill informed about you as possible. Let him wonder and worry and be afraid of the dark.

All this being said, I have no doubts the Feds will fight to the last man. They really have no choice if it comes to an all out assault by the Nats. They either fight and defeat the Nats or fight and die standing rather than kneeling in subservance to a government that is both illegal and detested.

Will Russia intervene in the event of a blood bath? That is an unknown but I personally do not think they will.

Fighting going on at Donetsk airport since shortly after 03 today. This morning, reports are a full Rota (company, ergo 200 men if at full strength) of Kiev 'Army' are in the terminal. 4 choppers and 2 aircraft are in the area and there has been bombing. The main terminal is on fire hard in one wing.

A fly on the wall says there is a 'high value target' with the Rota of Nats troops there, to wit, an American in command. That would possibly explain their 'stand and fight' deal. Either that or there was a landing scheduled of Nats troops at airport to attack Donetsk from within. Airport is on the north west edge of Donetsk City with major roads to it and around it.

Two attempts have been made to 'get someone out', once by chopper that landed and immediately took off under fire with two others in support, no one got to the bird. An hour later 4 ambulances went at high speed to the main terminal but evactuated no one and did not leave. Possibly the ambulances contained reinforcements for one side or the other or their task was to get the target out and were not successful.

The Chechens and Ramzan Kadyrov - reply to a reader

After my recent post about Chechnia and the hope it gives me, one reader posted a particularly interesting comment which, I believe, deserves a full answer.  One thing which particularly motivated me to write this more detailed reply rather that a shot comment-reply was that what this reader wrote almost exactly mirrored my own thoughts just a few years ago.  So in replying to this reader I have the opportunity to explain why I changed my opinion about Ramzan Kadyrov and the Chechen people today.  So let's take the comments of this reader one by one:

1. “Image of Chechnia and Chechens is radically changing in Russia”. In reality, Chechens are being considered what they are – thugs from the mountains, using knives and guns without hesitation after slightest provocation, for example in a restaurant, against usually barehanded adversaries. What is worse, it’s well known that they will get away with it even with blood on their hands. Officials will be bribed or intimidated, so no one will be prosecuted. Even if the case gets to a court – well, persons involved will just go back to Caucasus, where local police will never try to catch them. These guys go through the downtown Moscow in dozens of cars, shooting live ammunition into the air and surrounding vehicles, and again, with impunity. So – there is no change in attitude towards Chechens: they are feared and hated. And since they are really a very small minority the only thing keeping them from being harassed and killed one by one is support from the police, judicial and special services. Sad but true. Google phrases below, if interested. Click images section or youtube if you don’t know Russian: Кавказский автопробег.
Стреляющая свадьба.

There is much truth to what you write.  However, what is important here is this: what is Ramzan Kadyrov's stance on the actions of these Chechens?  The reply is that he calls such behavior a disgrace for Chechens and that he demands that Chechen behave more courteously and more respectfully than any other ethnic group.  He not only says so, he takes action which one famous case illustrates very well.  There is this volunteer group in many regions of Russia called "Stop Kham" (stop the rude person") which confronts rude drivers and which glues a big sticker on the front window of cars parked illegally (you can find their videos on YouTube, some with English captions; they are quite fun to watch).  One day they confronted a rich and arrogant woman who, as it turned out, was the wife of a senior Chechen official.  She got really angry and called up some "body guards aka thugs" and a big fight ensued.  When Kadyrov learned about that he immediately dismissed the official.  So yes, there is a lot of Chechen thuggery and banditry, but that is not behavior Islam approves (often the Chechens acting this way are drunk) and Kadyrov tries as hard as can be to crack down on such behavior.

2. Media calls Kadyrov hero? That’s because he was awarded with the Golden star (highest Russian decoration) and title of Hero of Russian Federation, move, that caused sheer outrage and disgust in the Russian military. He is also called academic, which is also true. When Kadyrov is called a hero in media, there is /sarc tag in 100% cases. The tag you are probably missing.

Did you watch the latest Вести Недели с Дмитрием Киселевым (Weekly News with Dimitri Kiselev)?  He clearly means it when he says that Kadyrov is a hero and, as I am sure you know, Kiselev is arguable the most powerful and influential person in the Russian media right now.  As for the Russian military being disgusted with Kadyrov getting the medal of "Hero of Russia" this makes sense: he used to be a Chechen warlord who switched sides after all.  But look what he did after that?  His father was murdered and he inherited a horrible situation in Chechnia and yet he achieved what was in theory impossible: there are no more terrorist gangs to guerrilla warloards in Chechnia.  And look at the key role Chechen security forces have played in their elimination, including the recent one of Doku Umarov.  Does that not deserve the title of Hero of Russia?  I think that is completely does and any Russian with such achievements would have obtained it.

3. Kadyrov is really playing very important role. He (actually, his father) was chosen to become a rat wolf of a kind. A creature trained to eradicate its fellow rats, i.e. warlords, that failed to strike deal with the Kremlin first. Was that necessary to bring up such creature? The answer is likely “yes”. It was cost-effective solution. But that doesn’t change Kadyrov from what he is, nor it helps to improve attitude towards him. Nothing will help here, i think.

You are making one huge assumption here: that in essence folks like Maskhadov, Dudaev, Umarov, Basaev, Iandarbiev, Raduev, Zakaev or Baraev are of the same nature as Kadyrov.  That they are all rats.  I totally disagree.  The former were thugs and liars, they made a mockery of Islam and they used Wahabi Islam as a cover for their banditry and mobster activities.  They were in for the money first and foremost, for power second and for hatred third. These guys were truly vicious rats, the scum of the earth, and they have to be eliminated one by one.  I believe that Kadyrov is truly religious and that his goal is categorically different: he is trying to built up a peaceful and prosperous Chechnia and for that he puts his life on the line each day.  Can I prove it?  No.  Can you?  No.  Neither of us are mind-readers.  So it is your deeply held and sincere conviction versus mine.  All I can say is that I used to think exactly like you do.  Two things made me re-consider: discussions with Chechens and listening to Kadyrov in interviews.

4. After elimination of most rivaling warlords Chechnya is living quite well, thanks to the money they got from the federal state budget. Money, that doesn’t go to other regions, that is. They build great mosques and skyscrapers (skyscrapers, for god’s sake, in a rural area!) at expense of regions of Russia proper. It’s well known, and causes a lot of tensions too.

Is Kadyrov wealthy?  Yes.  Does a lot of money come from the Federal Center.  Yes.  So what?  Kadyrov is no richer than any other regional leader and pouring money into Chechnia was an absolute necessity to prevent the return to another civil war fueled by criminal gangs.  Does Chechnia need great mosques and skyscrapers?  First, it is not for us to judge what they want to do in their own country as long as they don't act against Russia.  But second yes, I do believe that Chechnia badly needed big mosques and skyscrapers!  Why?  To restore the badly hurt pride and self-confidence of the people and to give them a sense of hope for the future.  In New York they figured that neighborhoods with broken windows and painted tags foster crime.  So they decided to fix that and it worked.  Same thing for Grozny: these construction are a powerful, visible, signal of what Chechnia wants to become and that is essentially for a city which has almost been leveled to the ground.

One last thing: it would be naive in the extreme to compare Kadyrov to Buddha, Gandhi or Saint Seraphim of Sarov.  The main cannot simply press a button and transmute himself into a Sergei Lavrov kind of refined intellectual.  Besides, while a person like Lavrov is needed in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, he would not make a good leader in Chechnia.  I think that Kadyrov should be compared to another Hero of Russia: General Shamanov who also did a fantastic job in Chechnia, who is equally hated by western "human rights" professionals and who is himself not averse to take some, shall we say, semi-legal actions.  These are tough guys, hard has iron, both personally very courageous and both merciless to their enemies.  These are folks you do not want to mess with and you definitely want them on your side.  But are they both also intensely patriotic and intensely committed to their ideals?  I believe so.  Of course, just like with Kadyrov, we don't really know what Shamanov really thinks or what he believes in.  But I think that this is a fair comparison: Kadyrov and Shamanov.  Neither of them will ever become a refined intellectual and both will always remain dangerous predators in their heart.  That is exactly the kind of persons Russia needs in the Caucasus today: to keep any wannabe Georgian, Dagestani or Ukrainian enemies of Russia frightened and deter them from taking any hostile action.  At least this is my personal conclusion.

Kind regards and many thanks,

The Saker

The "other West" - one more example

Alexander Solzhenitsyn liked to say that "one teaspoon of sea water gives you the taste of the ocean".  Today I would like to post here the text of a letter to the Russian embassy in Germany by a private person which is exactly that: the letter of (only) one person.  However, the feelings which it conveys are, I believe, shared by a lot of people in the "West".  It would well be that this letter is like Solzhenitsyn's teaspoon and that it gives us the taste of an ocean of people which the imperial propaganda machine is trying to hide from us.

Here is how this person explained to me the motive behind the writing of this letter:

Earlier this month I wrote an e-mail to the Russian Embassy in Germany. I thought I'd share it. It isn't much, but I felt I need to send out some peaceful "signals". Our leaders are completely controlled by the US agenda. They do not take the calls for deescalation and peace serious, and many in Germany speak out for that. I find it incredibly sad how our country is a hostage of the US. No idea how we can ever get out of that strangle hold.

Does it make sense to write such personal letters?

I strongly believe that it does.  First, it will be read by somebody in the Russian diplomatic corps and that somebody is most definitely in need of moral support in these times of rabid russophobia.  Second, Russian diplomats understand that for one person who put pen to paper there will be one hundred who did not, but who feel likewise.  But third, and that is most important, this person freed himself from the burden of passive collaboration, of being a silent accomplice of what is being done in his name.  That kind of soul-cleansing immensely profits the person who performs it.  Most of us do not have the power to really affect the outcome of what takes place around us, nevermind changing the course of history, but we do have the power to refuse to let the "system" (for lack of a better word) survive through us.  That individual refusal to support the system is what brought down the Soviet Union and which, I strongly believe, will bring down the AngloZionist Empire.

The Saker
-------
Translation of the original letter (written in German):

Dear Sirs and Madams,

In consideration of the ever increasing tensions between Germany and Russia, I would like to apologize for the behavior of our government. Right from the start I was assailed by a very bad feeling due to occurrences in the Ukraine. I am a German and also a US citizen and feel great shame for the foreign policies of both Nations. To me, just like to many Russian people, it is unfathomable that Germany and the United States would openly support Fascists in the Ukraine and that our political leaders can not be dissuaded from doing so. There are more and more attempts at making Russia seem like the guilty party on the world's stage, which is another thing troubling me. One is forced to conclude that certain influential circles in „the West“ intend to provoke an armed conflict with Russia, a cause for great concern. It is my hope that things will not go that far, since Germany would certainly be at the center of events. Hopefully people in Russia are aware that the majority of Germans do not want a war with Russia and that many people here are increasingly disillusioned with the policies of our Government, NATO and of the United States. The outrage is growing. The words and deeds of our Chancellor drive home the fact of the US's predominance also in Germany. Surely you can imagine that it is painful for me to say such things, since I was born in the United States and therefore have ties to the country and the people. Peace and understanding between peoples have greater personal meaning than blind patriotism and nationalism though. And it is clear to see that Germany needs strong and positive ties with Russia. Whether the US leaders will realize that is doubtful. I can only question the rationality of some American officials. In the past days I have voiced my opinion on some social networks, including the page of the German Secretary of State. Unfortunately I was blocked there, as many others who voiced their criticism. Apparently political leaders here in Germany, have abandoned the public's opinions, the same can be said of the media here. It has turned out to be the worst propaganda in a long time and is reminiscent of the days before World War II. Hopefully the tensions will decrease, instead of rising further. And I hope that President Putin will continue to act in a level-headed manner. I can not help but call Merkel's and Obama's behavior insane.

I would appreciate if you could forward this mail to the correct recipients. Thank you in advance.

Kind regards,

XXX

Russia, Chechnia and the Ukraine - the *choice* to keep hoping for the impossible

As you probably know, the two Russian journalists who worked for the LifeNews, Oleg Sidyakin and Marat Saichenko, were finally freed and brought back home via Grozny in Chechnia.  You might even have heard that the President of Chechnia, Ramzan Kadyrov, played a special role in their liberation.  I think that the importance of this event might be under-estimated by many observers and I want to briefly comment on that.

It all really began in Crimea where, before the operation of the Russian Polite Armed Men in Green (PAMG), when there were some very serious tensions between the various parties including the Muslim Tatars.  At that time, Ramzan Kadyrov for the first time made a statement from faraway Grozny saying that he will not tolerate any "abuses against the Chechen" minority in Crimea.  Since there are not all that many Chechens in Crimea and since soon thereafter PAMG solved the problem anyway, this statement was rapidly forgotten.  But think again, besides being a statement in support of the Chechens in Crimea, who was that statement directed against?  Clearly, the threatened party was not the pro-Russian one, but the pro-Ukrainian forces, including those Tatars (mainly linked to Turkey) who had been manipulated by the USA to take action against the pro-Russian population of Crimea.  It is now clear that what happened in this instance is that Kadyrov did openly say that which Putin could not (for obvious political reasons).  In the end, it was Putin who eventually engaged his PAMG, but it was Kadyrov who had made the threat.

This time again, Kadyrov got involved by issuing an amazing statement which most commentators overlooked.  Here is what he said about the two kidnapped reporters:

The Ukraine's leadership continues to use Fascist methods. We demand the immediate release of Sidyakin and Saychenko. If the folks in Kiev don't come back to their senses and do not let these journalists go back home, we will not stand by in silence and watch as mock them, for them to their knees and keep them with bags on their heads. We have the forces and the capabilities to influence those who are holding these journalists in captivity. I therefore advise them to free these journalists or otherwise we will have resort to some tough actions.

I don't know about you, but when I read that I went "wow!".  There is a Chechen President (who is also and-ex warlord) who is clearly giving the Ukies an ultimatum which they better not ignore.  They didn't.

During 4 days of secret negotiations a group of Chechen negotiators sent by Kadyrov flew to Kiev in his personal jet and had some very frank conversations with the right people in Kiev.  The Chechens probably used the typical mix of threats and bribes to prevail and, as a direct result of this operation, the two reporters were freed.

What is very interesting, is that there is mounting evidence that Putin was involved all along even though he never said a word about it.  First, it is well know that Putin is personally very close to Kadyrov and that a strong friendship binds these two men who have immense respect for each other.  But now we can also make sense of a comment made by Putin who declared that the kidnapped journalists were kept in a "zindan" (a prison hole in the ground), something which he apparently learned through Kadyrov's people in Kiev.  Finally, one has to know Kadrov's quasi obsession in stressing at every step that he is always acting exclusively with the full support of the Kremlin to completely exclude the possibility of a unilateral action on Kadyrov's side.

This time again, Kadyrov said that which Putin could not say.

It was also interesting for me to hear the testimony of the two reporters who told that they understood that something dramatic had changed in their condition when they heard a voice pick up the phone and say "salaam aleikum".  Soon thereafter their handcuffs were taken off and they were told "take off the hood off your heads, you are safe now, you are under the protection of the President of Chechnia".

Why do I consider this so important?

Because the image of Chechnia and the Chechens is radically changing in Russia.  The media openly calls Kadyrov a hero and Russian citizens rejoice when they hear the Islamic "salaam aleikum" because they know that they are now safe.  This is huge!  What a change from only 10 years ago.

Kadyrov in reality plays a role which is a much bigger one than "just" the President of Chechnia (and a hugely successful one at that!).  He is clearly Putin's "ally number 1", especially in security matters, and the two men clearly work closely together as a kind of "tag team".  This kind of special role does a lot to restore the pride of the Chechen people and it also does a lot to change the terrible image many Russians had of Chechens as a result of the horrors of the time when Chechnia was ruled by psychopathic Wahabis.  Instead of being "terrorist barbarians" the Chechens are now increasingly seen as tough and reliable allies of Russia and of the Russian President.

As for the Chechens, they are still feared, but this time outside Russia.  During the 08.08.08 war the Georgians ran as fast as they could as soon as they heard that the Chechen battalion had arrived.  Nowadays, the Ukraine is full of rumors that Chechens have arrived to support the Donetsk and Lugansk republics.  To my knowlege this has not happened (yet?) and apparently there is some confusion between a "Vostok battalion" (Eastern battalion) in the Ukraine and the Chechen "Vostok battalion" which saw action in 08.08.08.  The former is composed of local volunteers from the Donbass while the latter is now formally part of the 291st Motor-Rifle regiment of the 42nd Guard Motor-Rifle Division of the Russian armed forces.  But I would not put it past Kadyrov to send in Chechen special forces as "volunteers" into the Donbass if things get really ugly there. Of course,  the key thing would be to get Putin's go ahead for such a move.

I find that absolutely remarkable.  By 2000 Chechnia was in ruins, a huge amount of Chechens had been killed, Grozny was was completely destroyed and plans were made to abandon the city and build a new capital elsewhere.  Almost all western experts were unanimous in their conclusion that the guerrilla war and terrorism operations would never stop and that Chechnia would become a "constantly bleeding wound in the soft underbelly of Russia" or some equally stupid cliche.  Now, 14 years later, Grozny is a superb city, traditional Islam has completely replaced Wahabism, Chechen terrorists and warlords have all been eliminated one by one, Chechnia has a very low crime rate, French actor Gerard Depardieu has an apartment in downtown Grozny, Russians increasingly see Chechens as their toughest and most dependable allies and the enemies of Russia literally tremble in fear at the possibility that "the Chechens might come".  Who could have ever imagined that?!

Will that be enough to heal the wounds of the past?

I don't know for sure, but I fervently hope so.  For one thing I will always blame the regime of Eltsin and his Jewish oligarchs more than Dudaev and his Chechen followers for the first Chechen war.  True, what the Chechens did during and after that war was simply beyond barbaric and I fully supported the 2nd Chechen war in which Russia simply did what had to be done (and did so brilliantly).  So I believe that both sides share the guilt and the pain of what happened.  Still, Russia is so much bigger and more powerful that the Chechens who had no chance as soon as the Russian people supported the military action (which was not the case in the first Chechen war) and I believe that Akhmad Kadyrov had the wisdom to see that this war would end up in the quasi-total elimination of the Chechen people and that it had to be stopped.  I think that Putin also understood this and that he believed that such an outcome would also be a disaster for Russia.  So these two men did the unthinkable and stopped a war which was about to turn into a total war until one side would wipe out the other.  It is as easy for me to write these terrible words as it is for you to read them.  But think about it, we are truly talking about an unspeakable horror which almost happened.  And the murder of Akhmad Kadyrov could have made this outcome inevitable had it not been for his son Ramzan who replaced his father and did an absolutely brilliant job to make his dream come true: Chechnia today is both Islamic and free.  It has a huge degree of autonomy, but it also is the most faithful and strongest ally of the Russian President.  I would even say that Chechnia is the single most important factor of stability in the entire Caucasus region.

I am under no illusion about the possibility of a "Ukrainian Kadyrov" appearing on the world scene anytime soon.  But if such a miracle could happen in Chechnia, I want to at least hope that it is possible in a future Ukraine, one freed from oligarchs and Nazis as much as Chechnia is now Wahabi-free.

Hope dies last and this is a hope I simply want to keep in my heart, no matter how naive it might seem to the "realists" out there.  I don't want to believe that a "Banderastan" can survive in what is a Christian holy land for which literally millions of people died to keep in Orthodox and free.  Right now the picture out of the Ukraine is a terrible one.  But Chechnia in 2000 was even worse.  So I will keep hoping.

The Saker