After the local elections, where the locals overwhelmingly in favor of joining Russia and not being killed (either by Russia for not voting, or by Ukraine as traitors for putting up with Russian control), we have this
RUSSIA TO FORMALLY ANNEX FOUR UKRAINE OCCUPIED REGIONS FRIDAY: KREMLIN
Other headlines today
KREMLIN CALLS INCIDENTS ON NORD STREAM PIPELINES ‘VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION’ WHICH NEEDS INVESTIGATION
[London Metals Exchange] TO CONSULT ON POSSIBLE BAN OF RUSSIAN METAL
GERMAN ANNUAL INFLATION RATE AT 10.0% IN SEPTEMBER - BUSINESS INSIDER, CITING GOVT SOURCES
Accurate forecast though me thinks Putin’s initial plan was to annex the whole of Ukraine. He never imagine the resolve of Zelensky and the Ukrainian population to keep their country independent. The special operation had to be redefined to Putin’s chagrin.
I suspect he never imagined the skill and accomplishment of the Ukrainian PR effort, and the attachment to those efforts. They have been exceptional in gathering allies.
But without the resolve to stay during the early days of the conflict, Zelensky would almost certainly not have been able to muster the same level of support that has carried them through to today. Same goes for their military and civilian populations in their resolve to maintain their independence from Russia.
“it is our solemn duty, as outlined in the Constitution, to fully fund the Ukrainian government at all times," said Senator Chuck Schumer. “We humbly accept this sacred responsibility to send billions to Ukraine, who will send it to Raytheon, who will send it to super PACs, who will help us get elected. It’s the right thing to do.”
what is far more interesting than the technicalities of the referenda is what the decision to annex these regions says about Russian intentions. Once these regions become formally annexed, they will be viewed by the Russian state as sovereign Russian territory, subject to protection with the full range of Russian capabilities, including (in the most dire and unlikely scenario) nuclear weapons…Those fixating on the “legality” of the referenda (as if such a thing exists) and Medvedev’s supposed nuclear blackmail are missing this point. Russia is telling us where it currently draws the line for its absolute minimum peace conditions
So far in this war, Ukraine has achieved two big successes retaking territory: first in the spring, around Kiev, and now the late summer recapture of Kharkov Oblast. In both cases, the Russians had preemptively hollowed out the sector. We have yet to see a successful Ukrainian offensive against the Russian Army in a defensive posture.
Let’s be frank about this. Russia did not blow up its own pipelines, and it is ludicrous to suggest that they did. The importance of the pipeline to Russia lay in the fact that it could be switched on and off, providing a mechanism for leverage and negotiation vis a vis Germany. In the classic carrot and stick formulation, one cannot move the donkey if the carrot is blown up.
Cui bono? Who benefits? Well, considering Poland celebrated the opening of a new pipeline to Norway only a few days ago, and a certain former Polish MP cryptically thanked the United States on Twitter, it is fair to make a few guesses.
Let us briefly meditate on the actual implications of Nordstream’s demise.
Germany loses what little autonomy and flexibility it had, making it even more dependent on the United States.
Russia loses a point of leverage over Europe, reducing the inducements to negotiation.
Poland and Ukraine become even more critical transit hubs for gas.
Russia clearly perceives this as a bridge burning move of sabotage by NATO, designed to back them into a corner. The Russian government has decried it as an act of “international terrorism” and argued that the explosions occurred in areas “controlled by NATO” - the concatenation of these statements is that they blame NATO for an act of terrorism, without explicitly saying that. This precipitated another meeting of the Russian National Security Council.