Just an "honest" mistake this time? Maybe

By now most of you would have heard about the artillery strike on the civilian outskirts of Mariupol.  The Nazis blamed the Novorussians, who denied it.  Turns out the locals saw it all and even filmed it.  Bottom line is this: this appears to be an "honest" mistakes, meaning that the Ukrainians were probably trying to hit the advancing Novorussians but that their salvo came in short (Ukie artillerists do not exactly have a reputation of being snipers...).  Here is a map sent to me this morning by a friend:

On the ground, it looked like this:

Ugly and scary, for sure.  And horrible for those who were hit, but what is forgotten in this story is that this is what Donetsk has been suffering every day and what Gorlovka is getting hit by daily, but in truly massive amounts.  And, unlike in Mariupol, Donetsk and Gorlovka are getting hit like that deliberately.

What the events in Mariupol do show, however, is that regardless of the expertise and caution taken by Novorussian artillery (it is considered very skilled as it always aims at precision strikes at Ukrainian positions in order to prevent the latter from hitting the Novorussian civilians), there are major risks in an operation to take a city like Mariupol.  If this time around it was probably just an "honest" mistake (to the degree that the word "honest" can be used for junta forces), the next time around it could be a deliberate SBU false flag.  For example, imagine this:

You are Poroshenko or Nalivaichenko and you asked the USA and the EU to declare the Novorussians "terrorists".  And then, for some reason, both the USA and the EU declined to do so (they did decline).  How would you go about proving them wrong?  The MH-17 and the recent civilian bus false flags failed, those pesky westerners still don't want to declare 7 million people as terrorists, so what would you do about it?

Exactly.

So the risk is real and huge.  So far, the Novorussians have played their hand very well, but their offensive on Mariupol has me nervous all for the same reasons as the first time around.  At least now they are moving in slowly and making darn sure that their lines of supply remain open and secure.  Still, this is a very dangerous situation and the events this morning show that even an "honest" Ukie mistake can be immediately turned into political ammunition to flame anti-Russian hysterics in the West.

The Saker

This is too good to wait for this evening

Remember the Colonel commanding the Ukie forces at the new terminal?  The one Motorola agreed to shake hands with.

Here he is again, with both Givi and Motorola :-)
But this time already as a prisoner!!
That should tell you what has been going on over the past 24 hours...
More (good) news later tonight

The Saker

PS: a huge THANK YOU to Colonel Cassad for his fantastic reporting and to Kazzura for his/hers amazingly fast subtitling!  You guys are the best of the best!!



Here the Ukie Colonel was a "negotiator" with the Novorussians:

And here is his already their prisoner:

Here is a Russian TV report which will probably be pulled down soon so download it if you want to keep it:

Zakharchenko offers to return their flag to the Ukrainians

I like Zakharchenko more and more.

First, there was this exchange with a Ukie officer near the :



Then Zakharchenko's men finally took the airport, and Zakharchenko invited Poroshenko to negotiate face to face at the airport.

And then there was this - Zakharchenko's offer to return to the Ukrainians the flag they died under at the last terminal they controlled at the airport:


The more I listen to Zakharchenko, the more I like him.

Frankly, I also have a good feeling about like Givi, Motorola, Mozgovoi, and Kononov too.  Not so sure about Khodakovskii and Kozitsyn. But all in all, these guys look tough and decent to me.

In the meantime the Ukies have announced three waves of mobilization, and it is pretty darn clear what they are preparing for: a massive onslaught against Novorussia using huge numbers to compensate for poor training, poor morale, poor tactical skills and poor leadership.  My guess (and hope) is that they will lose, but even if they do, it will be a bloodbath.

Faces and voices of the Novorussian resistance: Siberia and Kedr

Something very, very interesting has happened in Novorussia

Something fantastically interesting has happened in Novorussia: two senior Novorussian commanders, Igor Bezler and Alexei Mozgovoi have attempted to communicate with those Ukrainians who are on the other side.

Though I am not sure about the exact dates of the events (all I have is the dates of the posting on YouTube), this apparently began when Igor Bezler agreed to be interviewed by three TV crews at the same time: a Russian one, a Novorussian one, and a Ukrainian one.  The big news here was, of course, that a Ukrainian journalist was given access to the city of Gorlovka, currently surrounded by Ukrainian forces, and that she got to speak with the local people, including combatants and then that she was given access to Bezler himself.   Since all the journalists were more or less openly accusing each other of "filtering the truth" all parties agreed that the full recording, unedited, would be made available on YouTube.  Now please keep in mind that in Banderastan, Russian journalists are blacklisted, Russian TV stations banned, and that the people in the junta controlled Ukraine are told that the other side are terrorists and Russian soldiers.  Oh, and the Ukrainian media is the most disgusting, sold out, subservient, propagandistic you can imagine.  And then suddenly, at least one Ukrainian TV crew agrees to show the face of one of the most feared Novorussian commanders and he get's to speak his mind.

But the next event was even more amazing.  Alexei Mozgovoi agreed to a videoconference with not only Ukrainian journalists, but with actual field commanders of the Ukrainian military.  To see Mozgovoi and the Ukrainians speak directly to each other was absolutely amazing.  And here I have to apologize.  I will not ask our translators to translate and subtitle the full thing.  First, there were not one, but two such videoconferences.  Then, we are talking about three long videos, see for yourself:

Bezler interview: Published on Oct 21, 2014
http://youtu.be/uVN2wkuL88w (length: 2 hours 17 min)

First videoconference of Mozgovoi: Published on Oct 22, 2014
http://youtu.be/WYy5Y9MQozA (length: 1 hour 20 mins)

Second videoconference of Mozgovoi: Published Oct 28, 2014
http://youtu.be/tC7YGe0SmqQ (length:1 hour 51 mins)

I do hope that somebody somewhere will translate it all, but this is way too big a load for me to ask any of our volunteers.

Also, these are very complex videos.  There are discussions, some short moments of yelling and interrupting, there is cross-talk and there are even two songs.  This is complex, very emotional stuff, very hard to convey in a translated text.  Besides, who will have the time to sit through it all?

No, what I propose is to share with you the elements which struck me so much.

But first I need to clarify an important point: while the original idea apparently had been to have combatants talking to combatants, the Ukrainian side only had a few commanders and a few activists.  The Novorussian side was composed of actual soldiers.  Apparently, the Ukrainian side did not feel comfortable putting their foot-soldiers on the spot.

First and foremost, it was amazing to see how much both sides fully agreed upon.  Both sides agreed that this war was useless and only benefited the enemies of the Ukraine.  Both sides expressed contempt, disgust and even hatred for the politicians in power and the oligarchs who rule over Banderastan today.   Both sides also agree that Yanukovich was a scumbag and that the Maidan protests were absolutely legitimate but that the original protests had been hijacked by enemies of the Ukraine.  Both sides also agreed that this war had to be stopped.  Now, please keep in mind that Ukrainian Nazis were, of course, not invited.  These were mainly regular Ukrainian military speaking to Novorussian military and Ukrainian activists speaking to Mozgovoi.   There were also some real disagreements.

The Ukrainian position was this (paraphrase - not real quote): "the Maidan was legitimate and correct but you - the Novorussians - took up arms and you thereby created a crisis which the illegitimate junta used and which prevented us from defending our political goals.  We don't want our country to further break up and what you are doing is exactly that.  Also, we know that the Russian "Polite Armed Men in Green" are fighting on your side and many of you are not representing true Ukrainian interests, but Russian interests.  Stop fighting and join the political process to clean our country from the crazies".

To which Mozgovoi replied (paraphrase - not real quote): "we did not choose to fight, you came to our land and you are killing our people.  If you really want to clean Kiev from the Nazi scum, then don't stand between us and Kiev and let us pass - we will take care of them no problem.  You are taking orders from Nazis and oligarchs and you are doing nothing to stop them from killing our people.  If we were to lay down our arms, we would all be massacred.

One interesting thing was that when the Ukrainians accused the Novorussians of doing Russia's bidding, Mozgovoi replied that the Ukrainians were pawns of the CIA and, amazingly, the Ukrainians pretty much agreed that the CIA was running the show.  As for Mozgovoi, he did not deny that Russia was helping.

Both sides were expressing frustration that they could not unite their forces and jointly get rid of the oligarchs and Nazis.

During the Bezler interview, there was one amazing moment was when the Ukrainian crew asked Bezler if he spoke Ukrainian, to which he replied that 'yes'.  Unconvinced, the Ukrainian crew asked him if he could recite a poem by the famous poet Taras Shevchenko.  Then, to everybody's surprise, Bezler recited the poem "to the Poles" in which Sevchenko describes how happy the Cossaks were,

Until in the name of Christ
The ксьондзи (Latin Priests) came and set afire
To our quiet paradise. And spilled 
A huge sea of tears and blood,
And killed and crucified orphans 
In the Name of Christ
The heads of Cossacks then dropped
Like trampled grass,
The Ukraine cried, and moaned!
And the head after head
Fell to the ground. As if enraged,
A priest furious tongue
Screamed: «Te Deum! Hallelujah! .. "
And this is how my Polish friend and brother!
Evil priests and rich men
Separated us from each other
When we could have lived together happy

[nb: this is my own translation, I could not find this poem in English anywhere; as any Russian, I mostly understand Ukrainian, but I can easily misunderstand a word or expression so, caveat emptor, and don't take this translation to the bank!  The Saker]

It was quite amazing to see how well Bezler spoke Ukrainian and how he used this opportunity to remind his Ukrainian counterparts how already in the past they were used and manipulated by Russia and Orthodoxy -hating westerners, and he did so using verses of their own national hero!

In another rather surreal moment, a Novorussian solider took out a guitar and sang a song about the war.  The Ukrainians were clearly moved, although they were also disturbed by the fact that the song repeatedly said that these were "Russians fighting Russians".  This issue came up several again later in the conversation.  From the Novorussian point of view, the Ukrainians were also part of the "Russian cultural realm" (as opposed to state or nationality) albeit with a different accent and a different history.  The Ukrainians insisted that they were a different nationality, albeit one with strong ties to the "Russian cultural realm".

During both the Bezler and Mozgovoi interviews the issue of prisoners was raised.  Both sides reported that their men were mistreated and even tortured while in captivity.  Interestingly, during the Bezler interview there were two Ukrainian officials present, one human right activist and another who was representing the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense for the topic of POWs.  They both readily admitted that Bezler treated the Ukrainian prisoners not as prisoners at all, but as guests: they were free to walk around, they ate and slept with Bezler's men, they were treated with kindness and hospitality. In once instance he even fed them red caviar!  But the very same Bezler openly admitted that "we take no prisoners from the Nazi death squads" confirming  what I have said many times: the Russian kindness and generosity towards Ukrainian POWs only extends to regular army units - captured death squad members are immediately executed.

There are hundred of small moments and exchanges which I wish I could convey to you, but that would take too much space and time.  What I will say is that it was quite amazing to see enemies talking to each other in a very friendly manner.  I was also amazed at how readily the Ukrainians agreed that the Ukraine must rid herself from the Nazis and the oligarchs.  In various occasions people on both sides said "let's do that together!".  Others were more dubious.  Frankly, I am extremely impressed by the courage and decency of many of the Ukrainians in these interviews who, while standing their ground on the issue of the territorial integrity of the Ukraine, quite openly said how much they hated the Nazis and the oligarchs.  I sure hope that God will protect these men for their courage.

Both Bezler and Mozgovoi looked very, very good.  The latter especially surprised me by explicitly stating that his goal was regime change in Kiev and not just the separation of Novorussia which he clearly sees as a only temporary solution and as a necessary self-defense measure.  Clearly, both Bezler and Mozgovoi are first and foremost anti-Nazis and both of them see that there is not "Novorussian solution".  Mozgovoi explicitly stated that he think that both sides could live together if the Ukrainians got rid of their Nazis and oligarchs.

While I have always said that the only possible stable solution of the crisis is a de-nazification of the Ukraine and a conversion of the current Banderastan into a "mentally sane" Ukraine, I am not naive and I also see that this might take a decade or more.  However, seeing how Mozgovoi and his Ukrainian counterparts agreed on the need to de-nazify and de-oligarchise (is that English?) I see that there is hope because the bottom line is this: both sides have much more in common than what separates them!

Again, these were regular Ukrainians, not crazed Nazi death-squad members, I understand that.  And the two sides do disagree on fundamental issues.  I see that too.  But I also see that there is a basis, a minimum in common, to negotiate.  This does not have to be a war of extermination.

The Ukraine as we knew her is dead.  Now we have Crimea and Novorussia which are gone forever, and a rump-Ukraine I call "Banderastan" which is occupied by the US CIA, Ukie Nazis and oligarchs.  My hope is that the just as the Ukrainian civil war turned into a war for the self-determination and liberation of Novorussia, so will the war for self-determination and liberation of Novorussia turn into a war for the liberation of Banderastan from its US/Nazi/oligarchic occupiers.  If that happens and if a new Ukraine eventually emerges, then I have no doubt that the people of the Ukraine will agree that each region should have the right of self-determination ranging from cultural right to full separation.  Only then will we really find out which regions want to stay and which ones want to leave forever.

In the meantime, I am very positively impressed by the Novorussian field commanders.  Bezler and Mozgovoi of course, but also Givi, Motorola, Zakharchenko, Kononov  and the others are all strong figures capable of both fighting and talking.  Strelkov, alas, is still more or less in political no man's land and I am very concerned about his proximity with the blogger el-Murid who is clearly a "gateway" to the "hurray-patriots" and "Putin bashers" which are being used by the Empire to try to discredit Putin. Still, the political infighting amongst Novorussian leaders continues and there is still no clear leader.  Hopefully, the upcoming elections will help to solve this issue.

The Saker

What could the next Junta offensive against Novorussia look like?

Dear friends,

On July 1st of this year - just before an imminent Ukie attack - I made a short post entitled Novorussia - Hope for the best, prepare for the worst, and settle for anything in the middle in which I was trying to prepare my readers for the possible consequences of a massive Ukrainian assault.

Разбор полетов - "after action report"

Looking back, I would say that what actually took place was neither the best, nor the worst, option, but an "in the middle" kind of outcome: initially, the Ukies almost severed Donetsk from Luganks, but they never had the capability to really enter these cities and execute urban offensive operations.  The junta forces did penetrated deeply in Novorussian territory, but they were soon surrounded and the famous "cauldrons" began to form.  The biggest loss for the Novorussians was the loss of Slaviansk and Kramotorsk which Strelkov attempted to hold as long as possible apparently in the hope of a Russian military intervention, even though he always knew that Slaviansk was indefensible.  When it became clear that the Russians would not come, Strelkov did the right thing and pulled his forces out of Slaviansk and into Donetsk.

All in all, the Novorussian Armed Forces (NAF) proved to be a force far superior to the Junta Repression Forces (JRF) which suffered from the following problems:

• Criminally incompetent top commanders in Kiev and at the operational headquarters.
• Terrible logistics
• Poor morale
• Poor training
• Poor coordination
• A hostile local population

The strong points of the JRF were:

• An overwhelming advantage in firepower
• An overwhelming advantage in armor
• An overwhelming advantage in numbers
• A monopoly on heavy weapons
• A total control of the skies
• The individual courage and resilience of the soldiers of the regular and, especially, special army units

The Novorussians negated these advantages by never presenting a lucrative target, by their high mobility and by their extremely successful air-defenses.

The weak points of the NAF were:

• A acute lack of firepower
• A acute lack of armor
• A acute lack of men (especially specialists)
• The total absence of heavy weapons
• The absence of a true central command

The strong points of the NAF were:

• The extremely high morale of the all the fighting men and woman
• Very competent commanders and experienced officers
• Very strong tactical skills
• An excellent knowledge and use of the terrain
• Excellent intelligence (no doubt with Russian GRU help)
• Extremely effective air-defenses (which imposed a no-fly zone on the Ukies)
• Strong support from the local population
• A remarkable network of highly skilled technicians capable of repairing, cannibalizing and even rebuilding weapons with old, damaged and abandoned Ukie hardware

All in all the Novorussians did a superb job negating all the advantages of the Ukies while maximizing on their own strong points.  There were ups and down, but I would say that the bottom line of the July-September offensive was a crushing and humiliating defeat for the Ukies and a superb victory for the Novorussians.

What if the Junta attacks again?

Bu now - Sunday morning - there is a quasi-consensus that the Junta is about to launch yet another massive offensive.  Assuming that this is true - and I personally think this is very likely - what are we likely to see?  Furthermore, since the same causes tend to produce the same effects, the key question is this: what have the Ukies learned from their defeat this summer and what could they do differently this time around?

Alas, I don't have access to any first hand information about how the Junta has been preparing itself for the new assault.  Here is what I have found out through the Russian and Ukrainian media:

Junta-controlled military factories have been working night and day to produce a large number of tanks, APCs, IFVs and artillery pieces.  The Ukrainians have been training their SU-25 and Mi-24 pilots.  New volunteer units have been created and regular army units have been re-organized.  The Ukies have built defensive lines along key sectors of the front (such apparently "defensive" preparations are actually crucial for any offensive plans since a highly prepared defensive sector can be held by a numerically smaller forces while preventing an counter-attack or envelopment from the other side).  We have to assume that more men have been mobilized and trained and that the next Ukie assault will again pit a very large Ukrainian force against a much smaller Novorussian one.  But will that be enough for the Ukies to prevail?

I don't think so.

What the Ukies are preparing is rather obvious.  They will pick several key axes of attack along which they will unleash a massive artillery attack.  This fire preparation will serve to prepare for a push by Ukrainian armored units (this time around we can expect the Ukrainian infantry to properly defend their tanks and not the other way around).  The Ukrainians will not push deep into Donetsk or Lugansk, but rather they will try to, again, cut-off and surround Donetsk in a pincer attack and then negotiate some kind of quasi-surrender by the Novorussians.  At most, they will try to enter a few important suburbs.  I don't expect much action around Luganks - Donetsk is far more exposed.

Now, if I am correct and this is what happens, then please understand and remember this: the correct Novorussian response to this plan is to begin by retreating.  It makes no sense whatsoever for the Novorussians to sit and fight from positions which are densely covered by Ukrainian artillery strikes.  During the first Ukrainian attack I was dismayed to see how many people clearly did not understand the importance retreats in warfare.  The "hurray-patriots" in particular were adamant that the initial Novorussian retreat was a clear sign that, as always, "Putin had betrayed Novorussia" (when the NAF went on a long and brilliant counter-offensive, these "hurray-patriots" fell silent for a while until the moment when Moscow stopped the NAF from seizing Mariupol, at which point they resumed chanting their mantra).  The fact is that retreating against a superior forces is the logical thing to do, especially if you have had the time to prepare for a two, possibly, three echelon defense.  While I do not know that for a fact, this is what I expect the Novorussians have been doing during all the length of the ceasefire: preparing a well-concealed and layered defense.

My hope and expectation is that once the JRF attacks the NAF will, again, carefully retreat, pull the JFR in, and then being to gradually degrade the attacking force. I particular hope that the Russians have finally send some much needed guided anti-tank weapons through the voentorg.

Second, the lack of political unity in Novorussia is not as big a military problem as it is a political one.  Most Novorussian commanders are clearly very gifted and at least as competent as Strelkov.  Folks like Bezler, Kononov, Zakharchenko, Mozgovoi, Khodakovskii, Motorola, Givi and many others do not need to be told what to do to do the right thing in their area of responsibility.  The weaker Cossack units have now apparently been reassigned to the Russian-Novorussian border and only combat proven units are facing the Ukie side.

I don't think that the Ukie air force will be of much use, if anything the Novorussian air defense probably got even better.  Mostly, I fear their long range artillery and their sheer numbers.  But even if we look at the worst case scenario (successful Ukie attack cutting off Donetsk) I don't think that the the JRF will prevail.  There is still no doubt in my mind whatsoever that if Novorussia is really threatened then Russia will intervene, overtly if needed.  From what all sources are reporting, the voentorg is working at full capacity and weapons are flowing in in very large numbers including sophisticated ones.  I think that Putin's plan is to try to keep the Nazis out of Novorussia only by means of voentorg.  But should that not be enough, I am confident that Russia will overtly move in.  There is no way that Russia can accept the fall of Novorussia to the Nazis.

The good news is that the Ukies most definitely don't have what it takes for a long, sustained effort.  They will risk it all on one powerful push.  If that push fails, we will see a flurry of US/EU/OSCE "diplomacy" to save the Ukies and come right back to the negotiating table.  At that point the conflict with be "frozen" again (on the Ukie side literally) and the focus will be on keeping the regime in power or replacing it with something else.  After that, the next attack can only come in the Spring on 2015.

Finally, there is also a more optimistic possibility: the real reason behind the chorus of warnings about a Ukie attack might be the Russian way of telling them "we know what you are up to and we are ready".  In theory that should deter a Ukie attack.  Alas, we need to remember that a) there is no real power in Kiev - all the decisions are taking by the USA and b) the goal of the next attack might not be to win, but to draw Russia into an overt intervention.   I personally believe that this was the plan all along and I have been saying that for months: the real goal of the AngloZionists is to force a Russian military intervention in Novorussia while the real goal of the Kremlin is to stay out and keep Novorussia alive by means of voentorg on one hand, and chaos in Banderastan on the other.  So far the Kremlin has prevailed.  We will probably soon find out if that strategy will work again.

The Saker

Ukraine SITREP October 14th, 00:45 UTC/Zulu: Dark clouds over Novorussia

Things decidedly do not look good right now.  Poroshenko has replaced that clown Geletei with a bona fide war criminal Col. Gen. Stepan Poltorak, a far more dangerous and evil character who used to be the commander in chief of the junta's death squads (aka "national guard").

Stepan Poltarak

The fact that Poroshenko would appoint such an odious figure indicates that he is trying to appease the neo-Nazis who are demanding a full resumption of hostilities.  Interestingly, just like Geletei, Poltorak is not a military man but a person who made his career in the Ministry of Internal Affairs from where he was picked to head the notorious "national guard".

On the same day, Pavel Gubarev, the "people's governor" of Donetsk was the victim of an attack on his vehicle.  Even though he was not hit by bullets, he has suffered very serious head trauma as a result of the crash of his car.  He is now in a hospital in Russia in very serious condition.

Pavel Gubarev

The list of potential candidates who had an interest in murdering Gubarev is long.  First and foremost, I would list the Ukrainian oligarchs whose assets Gubarev had promised to seize then, of course, the junta and various Neo-Nazis.  Next, I cannot exclude the possibilityt that Gubarev could have been targeted by his own, Novorussian, political enemies and, finally, I would not exclude that the attack could have come from those circles in Russia who would see him as an obstacle for their plans for Novorussia.  Needless to say, the hurray-patriots will blame Putin.  Regardless of who ordered this murder, the fact that Gubarev is in very serious condition in a Russian hospital is very bad news as this is bound to have an extremely polarizing and distruptive effect on the ungoing feud between various Novorussian leaders.

click here for high res

Finally, there are numerous reports of Ukrainian attack all along the line of demarcation, including artillery strikes on Donetsk.  The front has no moved much, but we are fare away from the "days of silence" which had been announced (see map).

Novorussian intelligence sources are constantly reporting large concentrations of Ukie armor in various locations and the arrival of more troops.  At the same time, the work for the the creation of the buffer zone seems to be continuing.  I am getting the sickening feeling that just like the Georgians who worked with the Russian peacekeepers right until Saakashvili ordered his troops to attack, the Ukies will contine working on the demarcation line right up until the moment of they will attack.

Victoria Nuland

Past experience shows that each time a top level US official visits Kiev, something very bad happens.  Victoria Nuland (aka "f**k the EU") has just concluded a visit to Kiev which received only very little coverage.   The purpose of her trip was never clearly explained and after she left, no official results of the trip were announced.

Things look decidedly bleak and the fact that there will soon be elections in Banderastan and Novorussia will not make things better.

There is also a very real possibility that the US are considering dumping Poroshenko for another figure.  I have an article on this tomorrow in Russia Insider and I will re-post it here.  If that happens, we can expect an ever worse and more ruthless commander in chief for the Junta Repression Forces.

How bad could it get?

Superior morale and training: he will win

The military map shows that the Novorussian Armed Forces are in a fundamentally sound posture and that they should be able to prevent any deep Ukie incursion (unless,of course, the will decide to pull the JRF in to better incircle it).  I have it from an excellent source (about which I will tell you in a couple of week), that the morale of the Novorussians is sky high, though I cannot imagine that the infighting inside the Novorussian leadership will not have negative impact.  The fact that Russia has, for the time being, decided to turn off the "aid-spigot" must also be demoralzing and no amout of guarantess given by the Kremlin can change that.  Still, the NAF are far better trained, often better equipped (in qualitative terms only), their current posture is sound and Russia will, I am sure and my sources fully concur with this, re-open the "aid spigot" should the JRF attack again.  The Ukies have their usual advantage in numbers (men, armor, artillery).  I therefore have no reasons to believe that they will be more successful the next time around.

Russian Airmobile attack

One more thing in conclusion: you have probably heard that western sources announced that the Russians had withdrawn (some vague) "forces" from the border; you might even have heard that the Russians confirmed it.  This is all a big smokescreen.  The Empire says "we scared the Russians" and the Russians reply "see how peace-loving a good we are?!".  In reality Russian forces are mobile enough that they don't need to be close to the border to intervene in Novorussia.  If a Russian intervention ever happens (say if Donetsk really risks being overrun by the Ukies), then this will mostly involved very mobile forces (special, airmobile and airborne), supported by fixed and rotary wing aircraft, which will give plenty of time for heavier forces to move in, if and when needed (which will not be very often).  Check out the image above of Russian Airborne Forces training in the Caucasus: this is what a Russian intervention in Novorussia would like.  Not long columns of tanks.

The Saker

Ukraine SITREP October 11th, 13:05 UTC/Zulu: no Novorussian "sellout" after all

A few short items about the situation in the Ukraine.

First, here is the latest map of the combat situation: (for high res click here)

Second, Colonel Cassad is confirming that the Russians are finishing the pipeline which will bring Russian gas to some areas of Novorussia over the course of the upcoming winter.

Third, Cassad also confirms that while the voentorg (Russian covert military aid) is currently closed, the Novorussians command have received ironclad guarantees that in case of Ukie attack the voentorg would be fully reopened.  This agreement between Russia and Novorussia was finalized yesterday.

Lastly, as you have probably read elsewhere, the Novorussians and the Ukies, which have been negotiating under the watchful eyes of officially invited Russian General Staff officers, have agreed to a demarcation line although Kiev has immediately denied that.  What Kiev says really does not matter at all - they always spew nonsense - but it appears that the deal was made or is very close to being finalized.

Conclusion: all the panic about Russia "selling out" Novorussia now turns out to be utter nonsense.

The Saker

PS - important correction:

In my last SITREP I wrote:

The infighting of Novorussian political leaders and field commanders continues. At best, some of them simply ignore everybody else (Khodakovski or Cossack leaders) at worst, they openly fight each other (Bezler and Zakharchenko). In fact, Zakharchenko apparently resigned, then this resignation was pulled back.

This is incorrect. An anonymous reader correctly corrected (is this English?) me and wrote:

Saker, I am sorry but you appear to be misinformed: Bezler and Zakharchenko don't openly fight each other, or in fact anybody else. Whatever Bezler is doing, it's behind the scenes, and there is no reason to believe he is involved in the struggle to undermine Zakharchenko. The only field commander doing it seems to be Mozgovoi, with the full support and even encouragement from Strelkov.Strelkov and Mozgovoi are doing their best to undermine Zakharchenko, nobody else does. Strelkov seems to have fallen out with all the other senior Novorossian commanders, except for Mozgovoi.

Novorussian field commander Givi talks about the Donetsk airport situation

Dear friends,

Tonight I want to share two videos with you.  The first one is of a young but very talented Novorussian commander known has "Givi" who is one of the two commanders tasked with securing the Dontesk Airport (the other one being "Motorola").  In this video Givi explains what that problem is:




But, while I am at it, I wanted to share another short video showing Givi being interviewed at the moment when the Ukies fire a volley from their "Grad" MLRS.  The rockets land very close to Givi and yet while everybody runs for cover, Givi remains absolutely impassible.  His cool is most impressive and says a lot about the kind of man Givi is.

Enjoy,

The Saker

A very moving video

The following video has deeply moved me. In a way, it is emblematic of the entire conflict in the (now ex-) Ukraine. It shows the profound simplicity and humanity of one of those combatants whom the AngloZionists and the Nazis in Kiev call "terrorists" and the equally profound in-humanity of those Junta Repression Forces whom we can hear in the background using heavy artillery to indiscriminately murder Novorussian civilians (Novorussian Armed Forces are not harmed in any way by such random city shelling). See for yourself.

The Saker

What the battle for the Donetsk airport reveals about the Ukrainian and Novorussian forces

I hear contradictory reports about the situation of Donetsk airport ranging from "airport 90% in Novorussian hands" to "airport taken".  Whatever may be the case, I believe that there is a pretty good chance that the Novorussians are correct when they say that airport will be taken this week-end.  I took a quick look at the militarymaps.info site to get the latest report and this is what I saw:

There are combats taking place right now (5PM Moscow time) but most of the airport is in Novorussian hands.  Furthermore, the Ukies have been pushed back just barely enough to make it very hard, if not impossible, for them to resupply their buddies at the airport.  In fact, Novorussian soldiers interviewed in the Russian social media say that every time the Ukies try to send in a resupply convoy it gets destroyed.  The AngloZionists are also apparently preparing for the loss of the airport: they are currently discussing the imposition of more sanctions on Russia is the airport falls to the Novorussians.  Very stupid and yet oh so typical of these arrogant and clueless bureaucrats.

But the really interesting thing in all this is the Ukie behavior.  Try to make sense of that:

What the Donetsk airport reveals about the Ukrainian forces

For *months* now the Ukie forces at the airport have been resisting in very hard conditions, often completely surrounded and very rarely resupplied.  The Novorussians have offered them innumerable times to do what most other Junta forces did: leave through a corridor.  But the folks at the airport refused.  Sure, the (previously) ultra-modern Sergei Prokofiev Donetsk airport gave them a lot of very strong buildings and plenty of underground tunnels and facilities to hide, but their conditions there were not made much easier by that: they have been shelled, submitted to sniper fire, attacked by special commandos and basically starved and one can only imagine their morale considering that the chances for victory or even evacuation were close to zero.  And yet they resisted with a fierce determination.  According to one Novorussian source, over 1000 Ukies have already died in and around this airport.

Why?  Why did they resist that way?

Did that airport really have such a strategic meaning?

The answer is no, not in the least.  One silly notion was the the Ukies were holding on to the airport to prevent the Russians from using it to land their forces in Donetsk.  This is laughable for several reasons.  First, the Russians can land a fully mechanized airborne division anywhere, they don't need an airport for that.  Second, if the Russian military wanted to take that airport, it could do that in a few hours (more about that later).  But most importantly, why in the world would the Russian bother landing in a contested airport when they could land in Lugansk or even simply drive from the border?!  So no, the control of this airport does nothing to prevent a mythical Russian invasion.

Does the airport have some other strategic meaning?  Does it allow to control Donetsk maybe?

The answer again is, no, not at all.  In fact, if we look at what the Ukies have actually been doing from that airport we come to the most baffling "mystery" of it all: for months now the Ukies at the airport have submitted the city of Donetsk to completely random and indiscriminate fire.  The kid of fire which kills civilians and destroys buildings, but which will have exactly zero impact on the Novorussian Armed Forces (NAF).  And when I say zero I really mean zero.  Let me explain.

The Ukies do not have the reconnaissance/intelligence capabilities to track the movements of NAF units inside Donetsk.  Nor do they have correctors which could correct artillery fire.  Furthermore, while the Junta Repression Forces (JRF) forces to the northwest of the airport can, maybe, provider fire support to the Ukies in the airport, the artillery in the airport itself is useless because the NAF forces are too close for that kind of artillery to be of much use.  Besides, the JRF have a few (2?) tanks and mortars to do that.  So the only possible use for the Ukie forces at the airport is to try to terrorize the people of Donetsk.  This is simply mind-blowing, but it appears that 1000 or so Ukies were killed in months of heavy fighting for the sole purpose of killing civilians.  Yes, it does sound absolutely crazy, but that is because it is absolutely crazy.

Now, it is true that the Ukie "Minister of Defense", Valerii Geletei, is an incompetent clown.  A former cop turned state security official turned military (literally overnight), he is the guy who claims that Russia used nukes in Lugansk, the guy who "signed" his pledge of service with a closed pen and the guy who has just shown WW2 era ammo as proof of a Russian invasion.  He is hated and despised even by the Ukies.  I an see that guy giving the order to "keep killing civilians until all of you are dead", but why in the world are the Ukies at the airport following such an idiotic order?

Finally, consider that one of the few good aspects of an otherwise very controversial ceasefire was precisely to freeze the conflict more or less along the current line of contact and get any surrounded units out with no more blood spilled.  And several Ukies units used this chance to get out of some rather desperate looking situation.  The JRF even unilaterally withdrew from some contested villages.  Except for the crazies at the airport who, instead of getting the hell out of Dodge, decided to dig in, stay and keep on terrorizing civilians.

I might be mistaken here, and I would appreciate any insights into this from you, but the only explanation I have for the apparently insane behavior is that these Ukies have been terminally brainwashed.  They are like the SS in 1945 who screamed "Heil Hitler" while standing in front of a Soviet firing squad.  Just like the SS, these guys apparently believe that their "honor is called loyalty" and they are apparently willing to fight to their last breath for the opportunity to terrorize civilians.  Those Ukrainians who fought for Saur Mogila at least could tell themselves that they died in a battle for the control of the critically important southern edge of Novorussia.  But to die for the Donetsk airport is either to die for nothing, or to die for the capability to kill civilians.  Crazy and scary stuff.

What the Donetsk airport reveals about the Novorussian forces

There is another thing about this airport which strikes me as important.  For months the Novorussians could not take it. Granted, this was a tough objective to seize and one could even argue that the NAF was stretched thin by more important combats elsewhere - both arguments are true - but still that does not explain why they could not take that airport.

There is one fact which civilians are always unaware of and which even military people often fail to realize: all military forces are good when they are winning.  Let's me explain: when a battle starts and, say, side A gets the upper hand and begins beating or pursuing side B, the actual performance of side A is almost always good.  It is exceedingly rare for a military force to show incompetence, poor training or make mistakes while engaged in the pursuit of a retreating enemy.  This also means that you cannot judge the effectiveness of a force by seeing how it performed in a battle it won.  The key criterion to measure the combat effectiveness of a military force (from the foot solider up to the commander) is whether it can turn the tide, whether it can fight well while retreating, whether it can take a severe beating and then successfully mount a counter-attack.  That is something only a truly effective force can do.

I think of the Afghan insurgents who showed superb capabilities against the Soviet military (especially the Tadjiks in the north).  Everybody had assumed that as soon as the last Soviet solider would leave the insurgents would simply enter Kabul in a matter of hours.  It took them three years!

Urban offensive operations are one of the most difficult tasks any military force can be given and even a force which performs superbly in the countryside can completely fail in an urban environment, especially against a determined defender.

The NAF did turn the tide and from a situation where the JRF almost surrounded Donetsk and cut off Donetsk from Lugansk.  The NAF very skillfully used the fact that the JRF was "hugging the roads" to let them in, then surround them, then cut them off and then destroy them.  But this was defensive operation.  Furthermore, they got *a lot* of help from Russia including not only "voentorg", but also direct fire support from across the Russian border.  Then the Ukies ran.  Their retreat was a total disaster, a botched and chaotic retreat in which the JRF truly showed how poor of a military force it was.  But we must not mistake the military incompetence of the Ukies for a proof that the NAF is a very capable force on the offensive.  The fact is that we don't know how good the NAF would be in an offensive operation, especially against a determined defender.  The case of the Donetsk airport is rather unique and does not prove that the NAF could not do well, but it should at the very least give some pause and reasons to think to those who believe that if not for the ceasefire the NAF would have liberated Mariupol or the rest of Novorussia.  Furthermore, if we accept the argument often made by the Novorussians that they could not get the needed forces to the airport because they were stretched thin and needed these forces in other directions, then what does it tell us about what would happen of the NAF indeed did advance on several fronts as it appeared to be doing just before the ceasefire was signed?  Do those who today deplore that Mariupol was not take realize that all the best units of the NAF had already been allocated to this task and that they were all far away from the rest of Novorussia?  To those who are so upset about the ceasefire I have a basic question:

If all the best NAF forces were allocated to the battle for Mariupol, what NAF forces would have remained available in case of a Ukie attack from the north?  IF that had happened how "thin" would the NAF forces around Donetsk and Lugansk have been?

I know that I will not get an answer to those who have accepted as indisputable the thesis that the NAF could have taken Mariupol and freed the rest of Novorussia (nevermind those who believe that the NAF could have taken Kiev).  For them, the botched Ukie retreat from Novorussia is a clear proof that the Ukie military was finished and that total victory was at hand.  And nevermind the Donetsk airport.

History cannot be re-written and we shall never know for sure.  But as long as one can make a plausible argument that the ceasefire was signed just about at the perfect time for NAF - at the peak of its success - then there is no need to assume that all those who are not categorically opposed to that ceasefire are all traitors, agents of Surkov or any other kind of nasty nonsense which the hurray-patriots have been spewing on those who do not share their opinion.  In my opinion the battle for the Donetsk airport clearly shows that the NAF was already stretched thin and that it is far more skilled in rural defensive operations than in offensive urban ones..

The Saker

Of facts, opinion and (mis)-interpretations

This morning a reader brought to my attention a very interesting post by Vladimir Suchan entitled "The Minsk “Ceasefire” Protocol and Russian Diplomacy’s Masterful “Sabotage” which I recommend that you read in its entirety. Suchan quotes a short note of mine where I said the following:

“Knowing the degree to which Russian diplomats are normally maniacally fastidious and pedantic with words, I can only conclude that they have deliberately sabotaged this agreement and that it’s sole use what to deflate the bellicose mood of the NATO summit.”

What is missing is the preceding and following stance. The full section reads like this:

What is certain is that this documents is imprecise, nebulous, ambiguous and otherwise vague to such a degree that I would argue that it is basically impossible to implement. Knowing the degree to which Russian diplomats are normally maniacally fastidious and pedantic with words, I can only conclude that they have deliberately sabotaged this agreement and that it's sole use what to deflate the bellicose mood of the NATO summit. But as a basis for a real ceasefire it is useless, nevermind a real negotiation for a final status agreement or peace treaty.

Same difference?  Let's see.

POLITICAL SITUATION:

At this point, I am going to have to post a lengthy quote of Suchan's analysis, I apologize for that in advance, but it is crucial to follow his logical flow: (crucial parts bolded out be me - the Saker)

In other words, the implementation of Putin’s 7-point initiative was written so poorly and badly that Saker concluded not only that it must have been written by Russian diplomats, but that Russian diplomats must have composed the Minsk Protocol so terribly on purpose. For how could someone comparatively intelligent and reasonably well educated produce something so horrible and awful? One does not make something so bad by mistake. One has to be a master to be able to do that.  And why would Russian diplomats deliberately sabotage the document and made it so poor and thus making themselves appear as bad as the document they made? According to Saker, this was not because they had any intention to sabotage Novorossiya or its struggle, but because they wanted to sabotage “the bellicose mood” of NATO by appeasing NATO and its bellicosity with the sabotage of the ceasefire agreement.  And why exactly would NATO, receiving such awful provisions for Novorossiya, find its “bellicose mood deflated”? Because of being in awe of the horrible work of the Russian diplomats? Or just being stunned by it? Or because in some way this sabotage made their “bellicose mood” much happier and relaxed?  So does this mean that we have at last found the secret for deflating NATO and its aggressiveness–by sabotaging our own work, by promising to keep Novorossiya dissolved into several “special regions” for which the Nazis might at some point write their “Law” and run their “new elections”? Is it really by sabotaging genuine peace and actual principles that friends of Russia and Putin can appease, deflate and defeat NATO’s intelligence and plans, which were decades in making, as Avakov said the other night?  Does this mean that the worse their work Russian diplomats do, the more they “sabotage,” the more NATO will be deflated and the better and more effective Russian diplomacy is actually going to be?

Now let' take the key parts one by one:

"In other words": this is the crucial introductory opening - it indicates that what will follow is not what I actually said, but what Suchan thinks I said and what will be concluded from that is, unsurprisingly, not what I meant, but what Suchan thinks I meant. In plain English - a strawman.

"they wanted to sabotage “the bellicose mood” of NATO by appeasing NATO": actually that is not at all what I meant.  Notice the missing part of my quote now put together into one:

What is certain is that this documents is imprecise, nebulous, ambiguous and otherwise vague to such a degree that I would argue that it is basically impossible to implement. But as a basis for a real ceasefire it is useless, nevermind a real negotiation for a final status agreement or peace treaty.

Now let us not confuse goals and means.  In the sentence above I am looking at the means: to create a useless document impossible to implement.  That is the means.  The goal is not to "appease NATO" as such but to create enough friction inside NATO and the EU to prevent what was supposed to be a "historical summit" come up with anything useful.  As far as that goal is concerned, I would say that it has been fully achieved.  All that this so-called "historical summit" produced was hot air.  Some might say that NATO could not have come up with real actions, but if we recall the various predictions before this summit that is "Monday morning quarterbacking".  Expectations ranged from overtly anti-Russian ABM deployments, to massive assistance to the Junta, to actual troops deployments into the Ukraine, to a the adoption of a "special ally status" for the Ukraine to economic sanctions on Russia.  None of that happened.  Why?  We now know that a number of states blocked that or demanded a "delay" in implementation (which is a diplomat's way of taking something off the table).  So this part of the "plan" worked.

Now let's look at the two key words I used:

Useless: in other words, it could not be used as a basis to do or achieve anything,  it was designed to have no effect, to prevent any meaningful change in the circumstances on the ground.

Impossible to implement: again, that indicates that even if both parties wanted to do something with it, on the basis of it, they could not have done so.

What is the key feature of something useless and impossible to implement? That it collapses on it's own.  Neither the Novorussians or Russia could be blamed for its inevitable and almost immediate collapse.

So we have three characteristics spelled out now:

1) The plan was designed to create friction inside NATO.  That worked.
2) The plan was designed to prevent changes on the ground. That worked.
3) The plan was designed to rapidly collapse on its own. That worked.

To suggest, as Suchan does, that this plan could in any way form the basis for a final status agreement ("promising to keep Novorossiya dissolved into several “special regions” for which the Nazis might at some point write their “Law” and run their “new elections”?") is, at best, mistaken.

Here is the key point which is so often overlooked or misunderstood: the ceasefire agreement was not a strategic move, but a tactical one.  It was never designed to achieve anything more than a short term effect on one specific event: the NATO summit.

The real contradiction

Still, those who are upset by the Agreement have, I think, a very valid point.  They say that this agreement was not good for Novorussia.  I think that they right, but I also think that they very much overestimate its magnitude.  Let me explain what I mean.

MILITARY SITUATION

It is true that the Novorussian Armed Forces (NAF) were on the offensive and that the Junta Repression Forces (JRF) were in full retreat on all fronts.  And it is true that in Mariupol the panic was such that most Ukies were on the run.  I don't think that the NAF was about to retake Debaltsevo, but I will accept that Mariupol was within reach.  The strategy chosen to take Mariupol was to envelop it from the north and surround it.  Some (not in the NAF, but commentators who were clearly civilians) even spoke of going all the way along the coast to "open a land bridge to Crimea". Now let me ask this: does "creating a long but narrow advance along a barrier" remind you of something?  Did we not see something like that tried out pretty recently?

Sure did.

That is what the Ukies did earlier this Spring with the ill-conceived attempt to encircle Novorussia along the Russian border.  The NAF let them walk in, then they stopped them, then the cut their supply route, then the cut them into sectors and then the finished them off.  And they achieved all that with numerical inferiority on their side.  Now let's look at the situation around Mariupol.  Here are the latest figures for the NAF forces surrounding it:

About 6'000 soldiers, 28 tanks, 90 armored vehicles, 60 mortars, 60 artillery guns, 20 MLRS.  2'500 of these 6'000 soldiers are needed to occupy the towns around Mariupol and to keep the ONLY highway connecting the NAF forces to their rear bases in Novorussia.  

What does the JRF have inside Mariupol?  The same source provides the following figures: 3200 soldiers, 50 tanks, 150 armored vehicles, 120 mortars, 140 artillery guns, 70 MLRS.  True, the NAF has much better morale and tactical combat skills. And the population is massively on the NAF side. But consider this: just north of Mariupol the JRF also has 3000 soldiers, 100 tanks, 200 armored fighting vehicles, 150 mortars, 140 artillery guns, 100 MLRS.  So, in the operational vicinity of Mariupol the NAF is literally sandwiched in between no less then 6'200 soliders (vs 6'000 for the NAF), 150 tanks (vs 28 for the NAF), 350 armored vehicles (vs 90 for the NAF), 270 mortars (vs 60 for the NAF), 280 artillery guns (vs 60 for the NAF) and 170 multiple rocket launchers (vs 20 for the NAF).  There are three very important things to keep in mind here:

1) the NAF force around Mariupol is most definitely the best and most powerful one in the NAF.
2) the figures above do only include the JRF in the operational vicinity of Mariupol and do not include the other JRF available to the Junta from it's strategic depth.
3) there is only one highway connecting the NAF force around Mariupol to the rest of the NAF controlled Novorussia.  This is why the NAF has had to put 2'500 of 6'0000 of its soldiers in protection of the rest of the NAF force available to attack or blockade Mariupol.

Are you starting to see where I am going here?  If not, I will put in plainly even though I know that the amount of hate-mail is going to spike after I post this.

The attack on Mariupol was an extremely dangerous operation and those who believe that it would have been a first step towards smashing the JRF, going to Crimea or even to Kiev simply don't realize how weak the NAF really is.

[I believe that the Russian General Staff fully understood that and that one of the factors in favor of the otherwise "useless and impossible to implement" was that it made it possible to a) stop the advance of the NAF beyond Mariupol b) talk to the NAF leadership and make them realize the risks of this move and c) probably to provide enough time to get the hell out of there before it is too late.  I have no evidence for this and this is purely my guess.  Hence I will put this in brackets].

What evidence do I have for the (relative) weakness of the NAF?

• The Donetsk airport is still not taken
• There are several "cauldrons" deep inside NAF controlled territory which have still not been cleared up
• Not only has Debaltsevo not been re-taken, it is under huge pressure
• The NAF offensive towards Schiastie is, so far, going nowhere.
• There is a dangerous NAF offensive from Telmanovo which puts the NAF forces in the south at great risk

I know that some will say "yes, precisely, if not for that idiotic ceasefire all these problems would have been solved by now".  Except that these "problems" have not been solved for *weeks*, not days.

I will spell out again in clear what I am trying to demonstrate with all this:

1) The ceasefire did not have a significant impact on the military situation on the ground
2) The ceasefire might well have frozen a disaster in the making

I am sorry that it took such a long way to address a topic which, apparently, Suchan does not feel needs addressing at all (he does not say a single word about the military situation on the ground) and which I feel is crucial.

The impact of the Agreement on the military situation has been twofold: it gave the JRF time to regroup and to bring in reinforcements.  From that point of view it is a negative impact for the NAF and Novorussia.  Let me be clear here, I AGREE that this is bad for the NAF and Novorussia.  But I also think that the negative consequences of this indisputable drawback of this Agreement are dwarfed by the problems which the NAF is facing right now which have nothing to do with this Agreement.  In fact, I am not even sure that the negative consequences of this Agreement are worse than one would have happened if the NAF had pushed further or attempted to take Mariupol, which I think they were about to do, and successfully so, but at the cost of creating a cauldron for themselves in fact cutting off the best and most capable part of the NAF from the rest of the NAF forces in Novorussia at a time when the Ukies were threatening from at least three directions (Schastie, Debaltsevo, Volnovakha).

Now let me ask you this: let's suppose just for a second that I am correct and that the NAF forces in and around Mariupol would be "cauldroned-off" by a JRF counter-offensive along the Mariupol-Novoazovsk highway or an attack from Telmanovo towards Novoazovsk.  Can you imagine what would happen to the rest of Novorussia if at the same time the (very large) Ukie force north of Lugansk would have gone on the offensive or if Gorlovka would have been surrounded?

So, again, I will clearly spell-out my concern: the tactical offensive towards Mariupol (unless Mariupol is taken this would not be an operational one) potentially puts at risk the very survival of Novorussia.

Am I correct?  At this point I don't know for sure.  Maybe not.

But if we see a NAF withdrawal from Mariupol then this will be a sign that I might be.  Besides, according to Russian sources, Mariupol is not fully surrounded anyway and the Ukies are reinforcing their garrison there through corridors on the northeast of the city.  If that is true, the NAF will have to withdraw.

IN CONCLUSION

"Lasciate ogni speranza"

But here is the really nasty thing: IF the NAF withdraws from Mariupol the Putin-bashers will immediately blame the ceasefire agreement for this instead of realizing that this was the only way to avoid a strategic disaster.  I have concluded that no amount of facts or logic will in any way affect this group.  In their minds Putin has betrayed, period, Novorussia has been backstabbed and sold-out and the Kremlin is firmly controlled by Russian oligarchs.  Frankly, I have given up any hope of even marginally affecting their certitudes or to make them doubt.  Every time I try, I just get more hate mail or even full posts on other blogs explaining that I am either a complete idiot or a Putin groupie.  Fine, I will plead guilty to both charges and I will go on writing for those who prefer facts and logic over strawmen and ad hominems :-)

For the rest of you

I will admit that I am worried.  I have already spelled out what my main concern in my Q&A/FAQ+RFC, but I will repeat here that the main danger to Novorussia is:

"political infighting. I don't know if this is possible right now, but I would like to see the emergence of an undisputed Novorussian leader who would have the official and full support of Strelkov, Zakharchenko, Borodai, Mozgovoi, Kononov, Khodakovski, Tsarev, Bolotov, Gubarev and all the other political and military leaders. This has to be a truly Novorussian leader, not just a "Putin proconsul", a person capable of negotiating with Putin for the interests of the people of Novorussia. (...) Until that happens, I will always be worried for the future of the people of Novorussia"

I have always said that the interests of Russia and Novorussia are not the same.  For one thing, Putin was not elected to fix the Ukraine or, much less so, start a war with NATO.  My personal sympathies go to both the people of Russia and the People of Novorussia, whom I see as one and the same, really.  But the fact is that Novorussia is not part of Russia (yet?) and that the people of Novorussia have not elected Putin to represent or, even less so, defend them.  The Russian people have.  Putin clearly has his first priority the interests of Russia and the Russian people who have elected him, and this is how it should be.  To expect him to have a higher loyalty to the Novorussian people would be simply foolish.  But these self-evident facts do not mean that Putin does not care or wants to "sell out" Novorussia.  Guys, now please pay attention here, if Putin had wanted to "sell out" Novorussia he had the *perfect* opportunity to do so earlier this Spring.  And if anybody seriously believes that the immensely successful NAF offensive last month happened without Putin's full support - I have a bridge to sell to you!

Where do we go from here?

I don't know except for one thing: this will be a very long struggle.  Barring a successful JRF offensive in the next week or so, the frontlines will probably stabilize and freeze up.  The "military action" will be replaced by the "economic and social" action as the Junta-run Banderastan collapses on its face and serious turmoil begins.  

Do I think that the JRF is about to launch a counter-offensive?  Yes.  Or, should I say, I know I would if I was in their position.  Do I think that their counter-offensive will be successful? Probably not or, at least, not much.  The NAF forces around Mariupol can probably fight their way back to their rear, they might even preempt the need to do that and withdraw before any such counter-attack (that is what I would do in their place).  I think that the best the JRF can hope for are a few tactical successes, but I think that by and large the NAF forces will hold.  And if that is not the case, Russia will make sure that it does (as she did earlier this year).  This is not about Putin, this is much bigger than him, and the Russian people or "Russia" as a nation will not allow Novorussia to be run-over by Nazis.  They stopped that one this Spring and, if needed, they will do it again.  And after that, they will again seek a negotiated agreement.  As far as I know, not a single person in position of authority in Russia supports the idea of a "move to Kiev", not by Russian forces, not by NAF.  So two things will not happen: the Nazis will not overrun Novorussia and the (Novo)russians will not invade/liberate Banderastan.  That is something the Ukrainian people will have to do themselves.

The Saker

Personal note 1: Please forgive me if I don't reply to comments or answer emails today.  I am exhausted and, frankly, rather disgusted and discouraged by this feeling that I am banging my head against a brick wall.  If I do post today, it will not be on the "Putin backstabbing Novorussia" bullshit any more.  Besides, I need to make a post thanking the donors to this blog, so I will do that later today (a far more pleasant task then to deal with the ugly stupidity I mention in the next personal note).

Personal note 2: I strongly urge all those who want to post hostile, rude, condescending, hateful, vitriolic or otherwise nasty comments to hurry to do so now.  The first rule of the moderation policy on the new blog (I hope to have it ready very soon now) will be to immediately toss out any comment which is not 100% polite and courteous to me, the host of this blog, to any guest author or to any other person posting comments.  I have put up with so much crazy shit and outright nasty attitudes on this blog that on the next one this rule will be absolutely inflexible.  You will have full freedom to disagree with anything anybody writes here, but you will have to make it with absolute courtesy.  But until I move to the new blog, knock yourself out, insult me to your heart's content - that will only strengthen my resolve to toss any such comments to /dev/null on the new blog :-P