Good synopsis Marat, personally, I wouldn't let any one other than an experienced Russian that understands Kiev run things . How it worked in Simferopol after the vote is a good example of putting the right guy{s} and gal[s] in office. Of course, Ukraine is a much larger scale. I'd even consider hiring some honest Belarusians to help and gain some experience in the new Gov. , as you touched on.
Its a shame Hungary is in Nato , Orban would be a good neighbor for sure - even a potential partner in some of the Western lands that are already inhabited by his people.. Long way to go tho. Спасибо
Since the ZIO/GLOBO/HOMO BORG asset management groups have already bought gajillion dollars worth of Ukie assets, taking all of Ukraine decimates the economies in the "allies' " economies, as all the allies are tied into the fatmerican Dollar.
Living in Canada, I have said as much about our economy hijacked in favour of U$A objectives.
Also, that the fact many of the Waffen SS getting rescued post WW2 and received tribute in 2023 by our non-democratic govmnt, would be a serious existential lesson to us cultureless Canuckistanis.
The worship of Mammon has become the Canuck Culture.
No matter what happens Odessa and Mykolayev must be annexed. Strategically this is an obvious necessity. These will cut-off what remains of the Ukraine from the Black Sea and provide a safe land corridor to Transnistria. A landlocked Ukraine will be an even more unbearable burden to the EU and the West. Additionally, an extremely strict disarmament and strict neutrality status (No NATO membership) must be included in the constitution of the fully and unconditionally capitulated Ukraine. These would be the terms dictated by the winning party, i.e. Russia and they will be absolutely non-negotiable with either the West or any other party.
A very interesting peek behind the curtains of Russian politics regarding the possible long term goals of Russia in Ukraine.
IMO it would be a mistake for the Kremlin to base its strategic goals on “management metrics”, as is the position of this bureaucrat guy who has supervised the civilian management of the L&DPRs.
It would also be a huge mistake for Russia to rely on any kind of agreement with “the West”, by now it must be clear to all Rest of the World politicians that “the West” is “not-agreement-capable”, meaning they only “cheat, lie, and steal”.
Third, stopping at the Dnieper would leave still a very large and populated NATO-krania and a broad front in a potential future war, especially if Odessa remains NATO-land. The future Russian controlled buffer statelets should include not only the East bank of the Dnieper but also the complete Black Sea coast and most if not all of the Dnieper West Bank, including Dnipro, Krivoi Rog and maybe even Kiev itself.
Very difficult times ahead and so such serious planning and consideration is vital to achieve harmony. Odessa maybe a step too far for Russia militarily and future governance.
At least we can be sure that the powers that be in the kremlin are working diligently on this matter unlike their counterparts in the west who cannot plan for the next hour or day.
To grr's point: I agree a land corridor would be a strategic advantage. I am also concerned about the fragile sliver of Transnistria. I am in no way qualified to advise on geopolitics. However, opinions are relatively cheap, and here is mine: controlling all of Ukraine would give Russia the most realistic prospect for protecting the Russian citizens in Transnistria and Kaliningrad. In this case, perhaps this becomes a generational siege, with the longer part being raw materials starvation.
By referencing Kaliningrad are you suggesting no land corridor? If so, that would be a bad idea. Odessa must be connected physically to the Russian land mass for security reasons.
Hmm. Very insightful. Clearly Marat has knowledge of the two primary competing viewpoints in Russian politics about the future of Ukraine as well as the main players. At least those of us who are interested observers from various and diverse parts of the world have a definable point of reference and can avoid being dragged back and forth by the wild speculation of amateurs or plain misrepresentation by others, many of whom have ulterior motives.
One thing for certain, the USSA/NATO cannot be at the bargaining table. All they ever do is lie, cheat, murder and steal.
Good synopsis Marat, personally, I wouldn't let any one other than an experienced Russian that understands Kiev run things . How it worked in Simferopol after the vote is a good example of putting the right guy{s} and gal[s] in office. Of course, Ukraine is a much larger scale. I'd even consider hiring some honest Belarusians to help and gain some experience in the new Gov. , as you touched on.
Its a shame Hungary is in Nato , Orban would be a good neighbor for sure - even a potential partner in some of the Western lands that are already inhabited by his people.. Long way to go tho. Спасибо
That is, Russia is run by outsiders. For them, it is not a country, but a business project. And have them tried stealing less? https://nikolay-zaikov.livejournal.com/521493.html
Since the ZIO/GLOBO/HOMO BORG asset management groups have already bought gajillion dollars worth of Ukie assets, taking all of Ukraine decimates the economies in the "allies' " economies, as all the allies are tied into the fatmerican Dollar.
Living in Canada, I have said as much about our economy hijacked in favour of U$A objectives.
Also, that the fact many of the Waffen SS getting rescued post WW2 and received tribute in 2023 by our non-democratic govmnt, would be a serious existential lesson to us cultureless Canuckistanis.
The worship of Mammon has become the Canuck Culture.
What role, if any, will Vladimir Medinsky play in all of this?
No matter what happens Odessa and Mykolayev must be annexed. Strategically this is an obvious necessity. These will cut-off what remains of the Ukraine from the Black Sea and provide a safe land corridor to Transnistria. A landlocked Ukraine will be an even more unbearable burden to the EU and the West. Additionally, an extremely strict disarmament and strict neutrality status (No NATO membership) must be included in the constitution of the fully and unconditionally capitulated Ukraine. These would be the terms dictated by the winning party, i.e. Russia and they will be absolutely non-negotiable with either the West or any other party.
A very interesting peek behind the curtains of Russian politics regarding the possible long term goals of Russia in Ukraine.
IMO it would be a mistake for the Kremlin to base its strategic goals on “management metrics”, as is the position of this bureaucrat guy who has supervised the civilian management of the L&DPRs.
It would also be a huge mistake for Russia to rely on any kind of agreement with “the West”, by now it must be clear to all Rest of the World politicians that “the West” is “not-agreement-capable”, meaning they only “cheat, lie, and steal”.
Third, stopping at the Dnieper would leave still a very large and populated NATO-krania and a broad front in a potential future war, especially if Odessa remains NATO-land. The future Russian controlled buffer statelets should include not only the East bank of the Dnieper but also the complete Black Sea coast and most if not all of the Dnieper West Bank, including Dnipro, Krivoi Rog and maybe even Kiev itself.
Very difficult times ahead and so such serious planning and consideration is vital to achieve harmony. Odessa maybe a step too far for Russia militarily and future governance.
At least we can be sure that the powers that be in the kremlin are working diligently on this matter unlike their counterparts in the west who cannot plan for the next hour or day.
To grr's point: I agree a land corridor would be a strategic advantage. I am also concerned about the fragile sliver of Transnistria. I am in no way qualified to advise on geopolitics. However, opinions are relatively cheap, and here is mine: controlling all of Ukraine would give Russia the most realistic prospect for protecting the Russian citizens in Transnistria and Kaliningrad. In this case, perhaps this becomes a generational siege, with the longer part being raw materials starvation.
To bring a sense of closure to the SMO, I believe Odesa must be brought home to Russia. Maybe Odesa could be a new Kaliningrad on the Black Sea.
By referencing Kaliningrad are you suggesting no land corridor? If so, that would be a bad idea. Odessa must be connected physically to the Russian land mass for security reasons.
Hmm. Very insightful. Clearly Marat has knowledge of the two primary competing viewpoints in Russian politics about the future of Ukraine as well as the main players. At least those of us who are interested observers from various and diverse parts of the world have a definable point of reference and can avoid being dragged back and forth by the wild speculation of amateurs or plain misrepresentation by others, many of whom have ulterior motives.
After Odessa joined motherland back, nobody will care about the rest of Poland. I mean, Ukraine