Recruitment and far right: “I Love the Third Brigade”

Recruitment and far right: “I Love the Third Brigade”

The United States is putting pressure on Zelensky to lower the age of conscription again, but for the moment the Ukrainian president is rejecting this possibility. This is what Ukrainian media such as Ukrainska Pravda reported this week, referring to the mobilization of men between 18 and 25 years old, a very small population group in which the country’s future cannot afford to lose. Even before the law on mobilization was approved, which is very unpopular despite not being as harsh as foreign allies demanded, prominent figures and self-proclaimed friends of Ukraine such as US Senator Lindsey Graham have publicly encouraged Ukraine to recruit those over 18 years old despite the demographic risk that this implies for the country they claim to defend. These suggestions seem to have become a demand that is confirmed even by people who belong to the state apparatus. “If this information has come to light, it may confirm that American politicians from both parties are putting pressure on President Zelensky on the question of why there is no mobilisation for those aged 18-25 in Ukraine,” said Serhiy Leshchenko, one of Andriy Yermak’s advisers and a figure who has gone from representing the third sector, civil society in Maidan Ukraine to all kinds of well-paid positions in government or in the few state-owned companies that Kiev has not yet privatised. The past ten years show a double standard between those who have been privileged and those who have been impoverished and marginalised thanks to the European and liberal reforms of the peacetime years. However, Ukraine’s refusal to recruit its most vulnerable population group strictly responds to the future needs of the state, which, if it hopes to rebuild itself, must maintain minimum levels of youth population.

Read More »

Zelensky Ukraine victory speech: Listen for the quiet parts

Source

Zelensky Ukraine victory speech: Listen for the quiet parts

Zelensky is going to give his “victory” speech on October 16 to Ukraine’s parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, but much of the speech will be secret. The secret part is about giving up territory to Russia.

The Rada has just passed new legislation that allows NATO officers to command Ukrainian units. So far, the Russians have been mostly quiet, probably because they do not believe NATO will supply field commanders for Ukraine’s military. But if it happens, and that is a big if, the Russians will see it as NATO sending combat troops and react accordingly.

Some speculate that Zelensky will hint at a desire to get some sort of ceasefire and establish a buffer zone patrolled by a kind of coalition of NATO-willing. This is being billed as a Zelensky “concession” to the reality of Russia occupying Ukrainian territory.

There also are rumors that Ukraine may try to attack Transnistria, the breakaway area of Moldova that includes a few thousand Russian troops – some of them on an agreed peace-keeping mission and others protecting a huge ammunition dump left over from the Soviet period.

The Russians also have been attacking dry cargo ships in the port of Odessa that are unloading weapons and military supplies from Turkey.  

Moldova also has an important election on October 20. An attack on Transnistria could backfire and topple the current pro-NATO. pro-EU Moldovan government.

Following in the footsteps of Nikita Khrushchev? FYI, “Khrushchev Lied!”😉

Related:

Read More »

The Postwar Vision That Sees Gaza Sliced Into Concentration Camps

The Postwar Vision That Sees Gaza Sliced Into Security Zones

A plan that is gaining currency in the government and military envisions creating geographical “islands” or “bubbles” where Palestinians who are unconnected to Hamas can live in temporary shelter while the Israeli military mops up remaining insurgents. 

Other members of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party are backing another, security-focused plan that seeks to slice up Gaza with two corridors running across its width and a fortified perimeter that would allow Israel’s military to mount raids when it deems them necessary. 

The ideas come from informal groups of retired army and intelligence officers, think tanks, academics and politicians, as well as internal discussions inside the military. While Israel’s political leadership has said almost nothing about how the Gaza Strip will look and be governed after the heaviest fighting ends, these groups have been working on detailed plans that offer a glimpse of how Israel is thinking about what it calls the Day After. 

The plans—whether or not they get adopted in full—reveal hard realities about the aftermath that rarely get voiced. Among them, that Palestinian civilians could be confined indefinitely to smaller areas of the Gaza Strip while fighting continues outside, and that Israel’s army could be forced to remain deeply involved in the enclave for years until Hamas is marginalized.

According to people familiar with the effort, it aims to work with local Palestinians who are unaffiliated with Hamas to set up isolated zones in northern Gaza. Palestinians in areas where Israel believes Hamas no longer holds sway would distribute aid and take on civic duties. Eventually, a coalition of U.S. and Arab states would manage the process, these people said. 

Ziv, who oversaw Israel’s exit from Gaza in 2005, proposes that Palestinians who are ready to denounce Hamas could register to live in fenced-off geographic islands located next to their neighborhoods and guarded by the Israeli military. This would entitle them to reconstruction of their homes. 

The process would be gradual, and in the longer term, Ziv envisages bringing the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority back to Gaza as a political solution, with the whole process taking roughly five years as the military fights Hamas insurgents. Under his plan, Hamas could be part of Gaza’s administration, if it frees all the hostages held there and disarms, becoming purely a political movement.

Northern Gaza, under the plan, would remain without reconstruction, and Palestinians there wouldn’t be allowed back to their homes until Hamas’s miles-long tunnel network was destroyed. Like the bubbles plan, it promotes the notion of de-escalation zones where aid can be delivered by the Israeli military or by international forces, but stops short of articulating an idea for governance. 

Another plan published by the Washington-based Wilson Center* also advocates a coalition-style approach to the conflict but refrains from calling for Israel to consider the adoption of a Palestinian state. It says the U.S. should establish an international police force to manage security in Gaza and over time hand the job to a yet-to-be-defined Palestinian administration. 

Robert Silverman**, a former U.S. diplomat in Iraq who is a co-author, said his team discussed the plan with Israeli officials for months, even changing parts of the proposal to make it more agreeable to Israel’s war objectives and political dynamics, but it stalled with the prime minister’s office.

“He believes we finish the war first and then plan the postwar,” Silverman said of Netanyahu. “All the people who have done this before say that’s a huge mistake.”

Another document, drafted by Israeli academics, that has made its way to the prime minister’s desk draws on historical precedents in rebuilding the war zones in Germany and Japan after World War II, and more recently in Iraq and Afghanistan. It considers how to tackle Hamas’s Islamist doctrine by learning from the defeat of ideologies such as Nazism and that of Islamic State. 

Related:

Strategic Hamlet Program

The Strategic Hamlet Program (SHP; Vietnamese: Ấp Chiến lược) was a plan by the government of South Vietnam in conjunction with the US government and ARPA during the Vietnam War to combat the communist insurgency by pacifying the countryside and reducing the influence of the communists among the rural population through the creation of concentration camps.

The Strategic Hamlet Program was unsuccessful, failing to stop the insurgency or gain support for the government from rural Vietnamese, it alienated many and helped contribute to the growth in influence of the Viet Cong. After President Ngo Dinh Diem was overthrown in a coup in November 1963, the program was cancelled. Peasants moved back into their old homes or sought refuge from the war in the cities. The failure of the Strategic Hamlet and other counterinsurgency and pacification programs were causes that led the United States to decide to intervene in South Vietnam with air strikes and ground troops.

The *Wilson Center plan isn’t much better. 👇🏻

Related:

Read More »

‘Barbaric attack using Western arms’ – Moscow decries Ukrainian shelling of Donetsk (18+)

The shelling of the Russian city of Donetsk, which has claimed the lives of at least 25 civilians and wounded 20 others, is “a barbaric terrorist act” carried out by Ukraine with the support of the West, Russia’s Foreign Ministry has said.

‘Barbaric attack using Western arms’ – Moscow decries Ukrainian shelling of Donetsk

Related (18+):

Ukraine War Massacre: 28 Killed At Market In Donetsk/Patrick Lancaster

Read More »

The Russian Art of War: How the West Led Ukraine to Defeat

We are very happy to bring you this excerpt from Colonel Jacques Baud’s latest book, The Russian Art of War: How the West Led Ukraine to Defeat (L’art de la guerre russe: Comment l’occident conduire l’ukraine a la echec). This is a detailed study of the two-year old conflict in which the West has brutally used the Ukrainians to pursue an old pipedream: the conquest of Russia.

The Russian Art of War: How the West Led Ukraine to Defeat

Ex-Pentagon Analyst: West Nixed Ukraine-Russia Peace Deal, Now Seeking Way Out

Source.

Davyd Arakhamia, leader of the Servant of the People faction in the Ukrainian parliament has spilled some beans about the March 2022 Russo-Ukrainian talks, hinting that it was then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson who brought the negotiations to naught.

Ex-Pentagon Analyst: West Nixed Ukraine-Russia Peace Deal, Now Seeking Way Out

Related:

Ukrainian Official Confirms Russia Was Ready to End War in March 2022 If Kyiv Agreed to Neutrality