Patrick Lawrence: Why Are the Russians Retreating in Ukraine? | Scheerpost

[Scott]

It's a long story. Legion responds to almost everything with a one or 2 word question. Great guy though.

Ah I see. You'll find that I rarely respond with such short posts, but once in a while, I think it makes sense.

 

[Scott]

Seems to be pretty clear that Ukraine is a very divided country.

Agreed.

Both sides need to let it go.

Could you elaborate on what you mean by that?

 

[goat]

Ah I see. You'll find that I rarely respond with such short posts, but once in a while, I think it makes sense.

The facts support that Russia is strategically retreating from Ukraine to save Russian soldier lives.

 

[Scott]

The facts support that Russia is strategically retreating from Ukraine to save Russian soldier lives.

Agreed. I also strongly suspect that Patrick Lawrence's educated guess that Russia is taking one step back to later take 2 steps forward is right.

 

[goat]

Agreed. I also strongly suspect that Patrick Lawrence's educated guess that Russia is taking one step back to later take 2 steps forward is right.

The Ukraine war is based on the survival of the petrodollar. Establishment economists are openly admitting the dollar will drop by 2/3. Like Rome and the British before us, the US empire has spread itself too thin.

 

[Scott]

Agreed. I also strongly suspect that Patrick Lawrence's educated guess that Russia is taking one step back to later take 2 steps forward is right.

The Ukraine war is based on the survival of the petrodollar. Establishment economists are openly admitting the dollar will drop by 2/3. Like Rome and the British before us, the US empire has spread itself too thin.

Agreed. Patrick Lawrence just published another article yesterday that really gets into the waning of the western nations and the waxing of the non western ones, think you might find it interesting:

Patrick Lawrence: Zhou Enlai’s Posthumous Triumph: Consortium News


I'll quote some of the introduction for those who might not want to click on the link:

**
November 28, 2022

The big news over the Thanksgiving weekend — big such that you could hardly find it in the mainstream press — is that top officials from China will travel to Riyadh in early December to meet counterparts not only from the Saudi kingdom but also from other Arab nations. There appears a strong possibility that Xi Jinping will attend.

The Chinese president is already scheduled to summit in the kingdom next month with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and, almost certainly, MbS’ father, the aging but on-the-ball King Salman bin Abdulaziz. I do not know why Beijing and the Arabs are coy as to Xi’s presence at the larger summit, but one way or the other this will be his first visit to Saudi Arabia since 2016 and could hardly come at a more significant moment.

Making the December docket yet more interesting, TRTWorld, the Turkish broadcaster, reported the day after Thanksgiving that this is to be understood as the “inaugural Chinese–Arab summit.” This starts to sound like the start of something very big indeed.

Riyadh’s rather bitter drift away from its oil-for-security alliance with the U.S., worn thin after nine decades, is by now a matter of public record. The interesting thing here is that Xi’s talks with MbS and presumably his Pop are to focus on none other than trade, as in oil and security.
**

 

[Jarod]

Just read the article from Patrick Lawrence with the same name as the title of this thread on Scheerpost today, found it quite interesting, thought some here might as well. Hopefully room for some constructive discussion on it. Here's the introduction to the article:

**
November 12, 2022

The most opaque war in my lifetime and probably yours, the war we can hardly see because the reporting is so bad, just took an unexpected turn. There must be someone somewhere who anticipated the retreat of Russian forces from Kherson, the key Ukrainian city along the southern end of the Dnieper River, but I haven’t run across such a person. Russia’s move certainly came as an abrupt surprise to me.

How shall we understand this development? What comes now? As we attempt answers, it is important neither to underestimate nor overestimate the significance of Russia’s withdrawal from the only provincial capital it has held since its intervention began last February.

The New York Times ran a piece covering this development last Thursday. It is worth reading for some of the detail the reporter included; it also has a map of the Kherson region and a useful photograph of the Dnieper River that shows Kherson City on the west bank and the east bank opposite, to which Russian troops have retreated.
**

I thought I'd include a little from the center of the article that highlights a theory that I'd been holding but hadn't seen voiced before, namely that this is a -temporary- tactical retreat:

**
All signs of what was to come. Now to signs of what is to come.

One, there is Surovikin’s concern about protecting the combat readiness of the troops now regrouped on the Dnieper’s east bank. Two, there is the vast call-up of Russian reserves announced last summer: I read some 80,000 of the 300,000 reservists to be mustered out are already in place in Ukraine. Three, there is Moscow’s claim—respect it or not, it is a “fact on the ground”—that Kherson region is Russian territory now and Kherson is the provincial capital.

I add one and one and one and get this: It is very likely Surovikin, who is putting his own plans and people in place like some new-broom corporate CEO, has taken one step back prior to taking two forward. I don’t think anyone too far from the Russian high command can say when, but the signs just enumerated indicate that a major new offensive is in the offing at some point in the new year.
**


Finally, Patrick goes into how even the U.S., vis a vis Joint Chiefs chairman Mark Milley, has started to talk of possible diplomatic solutions. I for one certainly hope that this war ends with a diplomatic solution, the sooner, the better.

I have seen this theory for a while, and it may be true... But you are not the only one who has considered this for quite a while, Ukraine and the Western Allies are prepared for it as a possibility and are set up to defend in a way Russia has not anticipated. IT is also possible that it is a face saving move by Moscow to concede it before peace negotiations so it does not look like Russia "gave it away" during peace talks but rather lost it in the fog of war.

 

[Eagle_Eye]

Just read the article from Patrick Lawrence with the same name as the title of this thread on Scheerpost today, found it quite interesting, thought some here might as well. Hopefully room for some constructive discussion on it. Here's the introduction to the article:

**
November 12, 2022

The most opaque war in my lifetime and probably yours, the war we can hardly see because the reporting is so bad, just took an unexpected turn. There must be someone somewhere who anticipated the retreat of Russian forces from Kherson, the key Ukrainian city along the southern end of the Dnieper River, but I haven’t run across such a person. Russia’s move certainly came as an abrupt surprise to me.

How shall we understand this development? What comes now? As we attempt answers, it is important neither to underestimate nor overestimate the significance of Russia’s withdrawal from the only provincial capital it has held since its intervention began last February.

The New York Times ran a piece covering this development last Thursday. It is worth reading for some of the detail the reporter included; it also has a map of the Kherson region and a useful photograph of the Dnieper River that shows Kherson City on the west bank and the east bank opposite, to which Russian troops have retreated.
**

I thought I'd include a little from the center of the article that highlights a theory that I'd been holding but hadn't seen voiced before, namely that this is a -temporary- tactical retreat:

**
All signs of what was to come. Now to signs of what is to come.

One, there is Surovikin’s concern about protecting the combat readiness of the troops now regrouped on the Dnieper’s east bank. Two, there is the vast call-up of Russian reserves announced last summer: I read some 80,000 of the 300,000 reservists to be mustered out are already in place in Ukraine. Three, there is Moscow’s claim—respect it or not, it is a “fact on the ground”—that Kherson region is Russian territory now and Kherson is the provincial capital.

I add one and one and one and get this: It is very likely Surovikin, who is putting his own plans and people in place like some new-broom corporate CEO, has taken one step back prior to taking two forward. I don’t think anyone too far from the Russian high command can say when, but the signs just enumerated indicate that a major new offensive is in the offing at some point in the new year.
**


Finally, Patrick goes into how even the U.S., vis a vis Joint Chiefs chairman Mark Milley, has started to talk of possible diplomatic solutions. I for one certainly hope that this war ends with a diplomatic solution, the sooner, the better.

Putin has known for at least a couple of months the war is lost. He has succeeded in showing the entire world that Russia is not the Juggernaut it once was. All he is doing now is using young Russians as cannon fodder to appease his ego.

 

[Jarod]

Putin has known for at least a couple of months the war is lost. He has succeeded in showing the entire world that Russia is not the Juggernaut it once was. All he is doing now is using young Russians as cannon fodder to appease his ego.

I think he is laying the groundwork for a "face saving" peace negotiation.

 

[Eagle_Eye]

I think he is laying the groundwork for a "face saving" peace negotiation.

We can only hope.

 

[Bigdog]

I think we can agree that invasions usually involve a hell of a lot more deaths than the deaths that occurred due to Russia taking over Crimea. There's also the fact that Crimea had sought more independence from Ukraine mere days after the dissolution of the U.S.S.R.. Even Wikipedia admits as much:

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine#Independence



Do you have any evidence to back up your assertion?



I certainly prefer facts over alleged experts, but I've also found that it's not nearly as easy to ascertain what the facts are as one might assume at first glance.

Thank you for the reply, Phoenyx.

There has been a Cold (sometimes heated) civil war in Ukraine since it became independent. Putin took advantage of this.

The Euromaidan triggered Putin to invade Ukraine in Feb. 2014, and large parts of the Donbas became pro Russian and anti gov't in March 2014. Not troops, but I have no doubt that Putin secretly provided supplies and weapons to the insurrectionists.

The ethnic Russians are not innocent as Baud implies. If you launch an insurrection against your gov't, you can expect there to be repercussions.

Has the UN officially recognized Russia's annexation of Crimea as legal?

Only evidence that Putin is a ruthless Socialist Authoritarian who will kill anyone to maintain power. It's a character judgement.

 

[goat]

Agreed. Patrick Lawrence just published another article yesterday that really gets into the waning of the western nations and the waxing of the non western ones, think you might find it interesting:

Patrick Lawrence: Zhou Enlai’s Posthumous Triumph: Consortium News


I'll quote some of the introduction for those who might not want to click on the link:

**
November 28, 2022

The big news over the Thanksgiving weekend — big such that you could hardly find it in the mainstream press — is that top officials from China will travel to Riyadh in early December to meet counterparts not only from the Saudi kingdom but also from other Arab nations. There appears a strong possibility that Xi Jinping will attend.

The Chinese president is already scheduled to summit in the kingdom next month with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and, almost certainly, MbS’ father, the aging but on-the-ball King Salman bin Abdulaziz. I do not know why Beijing and the Arabs are coy as to Xi’s presence at the larger summit, but one way or the other this will be his first visit to Saudi Arabia since 2016 and could hardly come at a more significant moment.

Making the December docket yet more interesting, TRTWorld, the Turkish broadcaster, reported the day after Thanksgiving that this is to be understood as the “inaugural Chinese–Arab summit.” This starts to sound like the start of something very big indeed.

Riyadh’s rather bitter drift away from its oil-for-security alliance with the U.S., worn thin after nine decades, is by now a matter of public record. The interesting thing here is that Xi’s talks with MbS and presumably his Pop are to focus on none other than trade, as in oil and security.
**

Thanks. That's the article I couldn't find.

 

[ExpressLane]

I have doubts about Putin's health problems. I read about them a year ago saying he had cancer. A sick man is not likely to start a war. What does he get from it?

Putin wants his place in History. Look at Putin from 5 years ago and look at him now his face is much puffier. I would wager he is using a fair amount of Glucocorticoids. They use those to treat some cancers and Parkinson's and other diseases.

 

[Scott]

I have seen this theory for a while, and it may be true... But you are not the only one who has considered this for quite a while, Ukraine and the Western Allies are prepared for it as a possibility and are set up to defend in a way Russia has not anticipated. IT is also possible that it is a face saving move by Moscow to concede it before peace negotiations so it does not look like Russia "gave it away" during peace talks but rather lost it in the fog of war.

Well, I think we can agree that if Russia is prepared to relinquish its claim on Kherson City, there was no point in putting a lot of effort into holding on to it. I do believe that Russia might well give it up in peace negotiations if Ukraine would agree to establish new borders wherein they would agree that land Russia currently holds is officially Russian. Conversely, if Ukraine refuses to negotiate up until the time that tanks and such can start to move again after the winter, I suspect that Russia might well retake Kherson city and a lot more besides. I guess we'll find out what happens.

 

[Scott]

Putin has known for at least a couple of months the war is lost.

You're making 2 assertions in that one sentence, neither of which I agree with.

1- That Russia has lost the war.
2- That Putin knows it.

Let's start with your first assertion. Do you have any evidence that Russia has lost the war?

 

[Scott]

A bit off- it's been independent since 1990/1991, depending on one's definition of independence:
**
As part of the so-called parade of sovereignties, on 16 July 1990, the newly elected Supreme Soviet of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic adopted the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine;[136] after a putsch of some Communist leaders in Moscow failed to depose Gorbachov, outright independence was proclaimed on 24 August 1991[137] and approved by 92% of the Ukrainian electorate in a referendum on 1 December.[138] Ukraine's new President, Leonid Kravchuk, went on to sign the Belavezha Accords and made Ukraine a founding member of the much looser Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS),[139] though Ukraine never became a full member of the latter as it did not ratify the agreement founding CIS.[140] These documents sealed the fate of the Soviet Union, which formally voted itself out of existence on 26 December.[141]
**

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine#Independence

Thank you for the reply, Phoenyx.

There has been a Cold (sometimes heated) civil war in Ukraine since it became independent. Putin took advantage of this.

I suppose one could look at it that way, though I think we can agree that things really heated up from Euromaidan onwards. Also, that before Euromaidan, the main struggle was in Crimea. Donbass may have had its difference with Kyiv, but Donbass had been part of the Ukrainian S.S.R. a fair amount longer than Crimea and had less ethnic Russians as well, so there was less of a drive to distance itself from Ukraine following Ukraine's independence.

The Euromaidan triggered Putin to invade Ukraine in Feb. 2014, and large parts of the Donbas became pro Russian and anti gov't in March 2014. Not troops, but I have no doubt that Putin secretly provided supplies and weapons to the insurrectionists.

I'm curious, who do you think was behind most of the violence during Euromaidan? As to Putin invading Ukraine in February 2014, I think we can agree that its limited military actions at the time pale in comparison to its military actions at present. It was such a small operation that Putin initially denied he was even involved:

**
On 27 February, Russian troops[43] captured strategic sites across Crimea,[44][45] followed by the installation of the pro-Russian Aksyonov government in Crimea, the Crimean status referendum and the declaration of Crimea's independence on 16 March 2014.[46][47] Although Russia initially claimed their military was not involved in the events,[48] Putin later admitted that troops were deployed to "stand behind Crimea's self-defence forces".[49] Russia formally incorporated Crimea on 18 March 2014.[50][49]
**

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation

I believe that only a few individuals died during these events. Compare this to the 14,000 Ukrainians killed in the War in Donbass following Euromaidan:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War#Total_deaths

Have you considered the possibility that by annexing Crimea, Russia spared Crimea from such carnage?

You go on to claim that you have "no doubt that Putin secretly provided supplies and weapons to the insurrectionists." Yet Swiss Intelligence Officer Jacques Baud, who was actively searching for evidence of Russia doing just that found none:

**
In 2014, I am at NATO, responsible for the fight against the proliferation of small arms, and we are trying to detect Russian arms deliveries to the rebels in order to see if Moscow is involved. The information that we receive then comes practically all from the Polish intelligence services and does not “match” with the information from the OSCE: in spite of rather crude allegations, we do not observe any delivery of arms and materials Russian military.
**

Source:
Former NATO Military Analyst Blows the Whistle on West’s Ukraine Invasion Narrative | Scheerpost

He even goes on to explain his belief on how they had armed themselves:
**
The rebels are armed thanks to the defections of Russian-speaking Ukrainian units which cross over to the rebel side. As the Ukrainian failures progressed, the entire tank, artillery or anti-aircraft battalions swelled the ranks of the autonomists. This is what drives the Ukrainians to commit to the Minsk Accords.
**

The ethnic Russians are not innocent as Baud implies. If you launch an insurrection against your gov't, you can expect there to be repercussions.

Agreed, but that goes both ways. What do you think Euromaidan was, if not an insurrection against the Ukrainian government? In that particular case, the insurectionist forces were successful, and there have certainly been consequences- the civil war that followed, claiming 14,000 lives, and now Russia's military operation, which I believe has now claimed even more than that. I think we can agree that insurrections aren't always a bad thing- the trick is to look at the motivations of those behind them. From what I have seen, those behind the rebellions in eastern Ukraine had a lot better reasons than those behind Euromaidan.

Has the UN officially recognized Russia's annexation of Crimea as legal?

No, but I'm sure that Russia would disagree as to the legality of the annexation. Ultimately, I think that Frank Herbert said it best when it comes to laws: "Law always chooses sides on the basis of enforcement power. Morality and legal niceties have little to do with it when the real question is: Who has the clout?". Personally, I'm more interested in what Crimeans want. On that count, I think that Canadian American journalist Eva Bartlett, who travelled to Crimea a few years after it Russia annexed it, did a great job of explaining their feelings on the matter:

Return to Russia: Crimeans tell the real story of the 2014 referendum and their lives since | mintpressnews.com

Only evidence that Putin is a ruthless Socialist Authoritarian who will kill anyone to maintain power.

Do you have evidence for -that- assertion? My own take of Putin is that he thinks he is doing the right thing. I don't agree with he should have conscripted Russians into the war, but I -can- see the logic in deciding to help defend the Donbass republics and trying to stop them from their continued attacks on said republics. I also understand the reasoning behind his wish to create a land bridge between Russia and Crimea. Ukraine made the reasoning for this particularly apparent after it bombed the Crimean bridge.

 

[Eagle_Eye]

You're making 2 assertions in that one sentence, neither of which I agree with.

1- That Russia has lost the war.
2- That Putin knows it.

Let's start with your first assertion. Do you have any evidence that Russia has lost the war?

Gee I suppose not being able to hold areas already taken coupled with the massive loss in equipment, personnel and finally having to send slightly trained conscripts to replace battle hardened losses is a pretty good indication!

Ever been in the military sport?

As to Putin his health appears to be rapidly declining a good indication of the stress he is experiencing after reading his action reports.

 

[LurchAddams]

Yep, the NATO narrative is false. Russia is a mega nuke country that can obliterate any countries that try to invade mother Russia. No one has bombed Moscow or any part of Russia because they know this.

Putin wants Sevastopol to be internationally recognized as part of Russia. IMO, That is his ultimate goal.

Notice that no one ever mentions Obama handing the Ukrainian Crimea to Pootie on a silver platter. No one talks about Crimea.

Such fiction. Why would Obama put sanctions on Russia if he wanted to "hand it to them"?

C'mon man.

 

[LurchAddams]

yeah, when he forced Putin to invade a peaceful neighbor, it was a crime. Poor Putin had no choice.

goat is such a creepy jackass.

 

[Scott]

You're making 2 assertions in that one sentence, neither of which I agree with.

1- That Russia has lost the war.
2- That Putin knows it.

Let's start with your first assertion. Do you have any evidence that Russia has lost the war?

Gee I suppose not being able to hold areas already taken coupled with the massive loss in equipment, personnel and finally having to send slightly trained conscripts to replace battle hardened losses is a pretty good indication!

I did a little research to see just the estimates on how many Russian soldiers have died. The difference between what the mainstream media parrots and what an independent investigation conducted jointly by the BBC Russian Service and independent Russian news outlet MediaZona is staggering. See for yourself:

More than 100,000 Russian military casualties in Ukraine, top U.S. general says | reuters.com

Death Toll for Russian Soldiers in Ukraine at Least 9,300 – BBC | themoscowtimes.com

Ever been in the military sport?

No, though I had a former brother in law who was. Have you?

As to Putin his health appears to be rapidly declining a good indication of the stress he is experiencing after reading his action reports.

Even if true, Putin exiting the stage will not necessarily bring an end to the war. In fact, there's evidence that it will actually accelerate it:

Putin will be replaced – but by someone even more extreme, warns former UK spy chief | Business Insider