I'm gonna take another go at why the US press and the chattering classes are so uncritical of Putin. Right now, the US is going through a strongman infatuation stage. We are impressed with supreme confidence and the surface of confidence mesmerizes us. (BTW, one of the reasons for the surge of Harris/Walz is they are doing a very good job of projecting confidence.) We cannot place an equal focus on the weakness behind the confidence. In fact, Putin controls everything so that nobody from the outside can ever lay an eyeball on the weaknesses of the Russian military.
In contrast, democratic leaders look weak. They have to rally their nations, not command them. They have to argue for their positions, not hand them down as from heaven. Whenever Zelensky fires a top subordinate, be it his general in chief, foreign secretary, head of the Air Force, he looks weak. It's a confession that his policies haven't worked so far. Have you noticed that Putin will stay with the same personnel forever to signal that his policies are perfect?
Putin, Trump, and their ilk are lifelong practitioners of the maxim, “Fake it till you make it."
Cannot say you are wrong. But in the end with the unsealed indictment, always follow the money. Russian money is everywhere and the indictment is only the top of the iceberg
Putin has had massive shakeups throughout the war. Granted a lot of it has been shifting people around from one role to another, but he’s done as much - if not more - firing/shifting than Zelensky.
In difficult times when the world order is in flux, anyone who can simplify the situation and claim to have an answer to even a vaguely defined situation will find a following. Your point on projected confidence is excellent. Projected confidence can reduce stress and anxiety.
He has killed off only one person who was supporting his war on Ukraine— Yevgeny Prigozhin. All the rest were members of the enemies classes—political opponents, journalists, etc. In other words, say nice things about Putin and your life will be long.
I think things are more opaque inside Russian than you assume; everyone is, by definition, an enemy after you have had them killed. All of the “corruption” accusations against longtime regime insiders can be, to my mind, anyway, viewed as political “defenestrations”.
So, you're in favor of word creep. Defenestrate has a very specific meaning, and you want to broaden it so it no longer communicates clearly. Although, Putin has literally defenestrated a few of his enemies, I'm willing to broaden the meaning to anyone who was KILLED because they made a government uncomfortable.
To extend the word to mere loss of office, creates terminal confusion and ruins another useful word. I obviously feel quite strongly about this. Indeed, it gives me one less reason to read your comments, because I don't know when I'll have to guess what you mean by them.
Defenestrate means to throw someone out a window. It was first done in Prague when some city councilors threw their opponents out the window to their deaths.
Information warfare is the only kind of warfare Russia has historically been competent at, starting at least with Potemkin villages, but probably a lot earlier. But it's really the fault of several generations of Western historians that the Russian/Soviet carefully constructed official narratives about almost singlehandedly defeating Napoleon and Hitler were allowed to take root in the West and create the impression of Russian military juggernaut that Russia now skillfully employs in its information warfare. So many people will point to Stalingrad and Kursk as places where Hitler was defeated, and very few realize that actually Germany lost more soldiers in its "easy victory" capturing Paris than in its "epochal defeat" at Kursk (well, to be fair, the difference in KIA+MIA count is only 12, and that's well within the margin of error).
You could not be more correct about the Russian talent for information warfare. But I'm going to make a request— please supply a link for the casualty figures for the Kursk battle and the invasion of France.
However, the story of the Potemkin villages was a lie immortalized after Potemkin's death by his enemy who happened to write his first biography. (Another classic example of the Russian talent for disinformation.)
The true story is this: Potemkin conquered Ukraine for Catherine and then invited her to tour her new territory, along with many of the nobility of Russia. Potemkin built a barge that was well stocked with food and beverages and they all floated downstream from Kiev to Kherson.
As you are well aware, Ukraine is far more fertile than the rest of Russia. The nobleman on the barge could not believe the prosperity of the peasants they saw on the bank— all looking healthy and having plenty of animals. Thus, his enemies started the rumor that he had phonied up these villages. Potemkin was much hated and envied during his lifetime because he was clearly brilliant and competent and had the total trust and favor of Catherine.
Wikipedia is a good source as they use widely accepted figures and cite reputable sources like Karl-Heinz Frieser. For France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_France says "German casualties are hard to determine but commonly accepted figures are: 27,074 killed, 111,034 wounded and 18,384 missing" (and three sources are cited). That's 45,458 KIA+MIA.
For Kursk, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Citadel says "45,444 killed or missing and 119,843 wounded (per German military medical data)" with the OKH casualty reports as a source. That's 14 KIA+MIA fewer than in France.
Alternatively, you can go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kursk for a more detailed breakdown: "Karl-Heinz Frieser, who reviewed the German archive record, calculated that during Citadel 54,182 casualties were suffered. Of these, 9,036 were killed, 1,960 were reported missing and 43,159 were wounded. The 9th Army suffered 23,345 casualties, while Army Group South suffered 30,837 casualties.[16] Throughout the Soviet offensives, 111,114 casualties were suffered. In facing Operation Kutuzov, 14,215 men were killed, 11,300 were reported missing (presumed killed or captured) and 60,549 were wounded.[364] During Polkovodets Rumyantsev, 25,068 casualties were incurred, including 8,933 killed and missing. Total casualties for the three battles were approximately 170,000, with 46,500 killed or missing (per German military medical data).[356]" I don't know where they got their final 46,500 number, as all the numbers cited before that add up to the same 45,444 cited in the Operation Citadel link. Citations are heavy on Frieser, but he may have just used OKH data. In that case it's probably an undercount, as OKH would not include Luftwaffe casualties. It is plausible that Luftwaffe could have lost about 1000 men (they lost very roughly 1000 planes, many of which had two or more crew members, but many of them were neither killed nor captured). That might explain 46,500 figure, and in that case German casualties at Kursk may have been slightly higher than in France. Well, as I already said, the difference is really within the margin of error.
The fall of France was clearly a strategic victory for Germany (I do not hesitate to use the word "strategic" here as the course of war was indeed materially altered, and Paris ain't Pokrovsk - who nobody had even heard of until a couple months ago). And it is ridiculous to call a battle with the same number of German casualties a strategic defeat just because Germany gave up some territory of little strategic values while inflicting several times higher casualties on the Soviets (furthermore, German human and material losses were replaceable during the battle while the Soviet ones weren't, i.e. the German armed forces were stronger after the battle and the Soviet ones were temporarily weaker, even if in possession of more land).
Great post Phillips. Do you think NATO will have a punishing response to Iran sending short-range missiles to Russia or will it be the “deeply concerned” platitudes only. Somebody on X said that if it happens then Taurus should be used to take out the Kerch bridge. That would be great but good luck trying to convince meek Scholz.
Saw it somewhere on Twitter (X) from a news source and checking it now, it was from November 2022 and clearly it has not happened. My sincere apologies for jumping the gun.
There’s a bigger picture than solely the Tenet Media allegations. It’s one that falls more inside the scope of Russian intelligence agencies’ traditional approach to information warfare or InfoWars, if you like. Hmm, now where have I heard that before? Anyhow, the FBI affidavit ((https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1366261/dl)) alleges that Putin's eminence grise, Sergei Kiriyenko headed this whole Doppelganger project using outfits with names like The Social Design Agency (SDA). It later discusses a document obtained from the SDA:
“One document revealed a list of more than 2,800 people on various social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook and Telegram, spanning 81 countries, that SDA identified as influencers, including television and radio hosts, politicians, bloggers, journalists, businessmen, professors, think-tank analysts, veterans, professors, and comedians. When referring to politicians, the list often mentioned which U.S. state and/or political party they represent and the position they hold in Congress.” [Case 2:24-mj-01395 Document 4 Filed 09/04/24. Page 28 of 277. Paragraph 66]
Two thousand eight hundred targets. This is how systematic Russian active measures work. By targeting large numbers of lesser influencers, seeds are sown. They do not have to be MAGA, it is preferable if they are not. Most of the seeds never sprout but, with time, some do flourish and a seemingly organic talking point takes hold. It’s noticed and magnified by more popular influencers and then works its way into the mainstream media where it is repeated unthinkingly by journalists, by you, by me, by everyone. In the 1980s, the KGB infamously used this tactic to spread the lie that the USA had created AIDS as a bioweapon. They planted the story in Indian and African newspapers and it spread slowly across the globe until it became impossible to debunk. It doesn’t have to be an outright lie, it can be the careful selection of unfounded rumours or the mere amplification of a pre-existing narrative.
You can likely see it happening this year in Ukraine too. Where did this ‘strategic collapse’ notion come from? Or the story eight months ago that Russia’s industrial capacity and population meant victory was inevitable? Or the widespread panicking a couple of months later that NATO’s summer exercise could trigger a nuclear conflict? It’s impossible to identify where these first sprang up and that’s the beauty of having so many influencers to manipulate. It’s information warfare at its best.
The affidavit is a great speaking indictment. And it’s worth checking out the attached exhibits, in particular Exhibit 6A p.148 - Center S. Comprehensive support for informational and political influence & Exhibit 8A p.215 - The Good Old USA Project.
All so true! But what is the facilitator if such seedlings and plantings?? Money. The second is a promise or prospect of gaining influence and notoriety. Look at the weak minded and otherwise invisible who have latched on to this? MTG? Tim Pool a high school dropout? These are the people who are most vulnerable to such influence. Bob Menéndez also fits this bill taking money from Egypt.
Sadly it does not have to be money. In fact, it rarely is, which is why Tenet Media and its clowns are such an outlier. Instead the Russians look for targets whose worldview can be manipulated with gentle nudges. Even the smartest can fall for it.
If you or anyone else wants to know more, can I suggest Thomas Rid's book 'Active Measures'? He's a leading expert in this field and the book is a history of active measures as a deliberate disinformation tactic going all the way back to the Bolsheviks. It's fascinating and, if nothing else, teaches its readers to question stories that are too good to be true.
Why oh why do we (I’m a US citizen living in US) continue to emphasize all the strategic defense systems we’re providing? Not enough and all they do is stop some of the Russians missiles etc from hitting Ukraine. As Phillips says, way too much like “thoughts and prayers”. To defend itself, Ukraine needs to hit the places in Russia where those missiles are coming from.
Below is an excellent account of the fecklessness of the West. Neither the U.S. nor Europe are on track to provide adequate munitions until 2028, if they even meet the target at all.
We're not even trying. The plan is for Ukraine to wear down and give up. Heart breaking.
The author is not forlorn. He believes UKR can persevere and increase offensive actions in Russia through their effective domestic drone innovations. My summary is poor.
Anne Applebaum remarked recently that her greatest fear is that a wave of Ukrainian refugees is coming this winter. Russia's attacks on energy may make cities uninhabitable.
Biden has led a tragic policy. I suppose I single him out only because I set lower expectations for the Europeans.
"I’ll tell you what I think going to happen. While the smart DC people are having kittens about ATACMS legal launch ranges, and the Europeans are calculating how to maximize profits from shell production two or three years from now, the Ukrainians are going to make more and better drones, faster, and their skill at striking targets in Russia is going to improve. They are going to degrade Russian air defenses, and the volume and destructiveness strikes against Russian energy infrastructure are going to increase. I see no way anyone can stop this from happening, and that particularly includes the Russians."
Why of why do, a US citizen living in the US, feel it necessary for your Government to send billions of your dollars to extend a war that cannot be won by the side you're supporting?
I believe that indications are that the Ukrainians can and with proper support will prevail against Russia’s aggression. Further, they should. “Why?” is multifaceted and too long an answer for me to write here but if you’ll read this newsletter for a while, you’ll get it.
I have been reading this newsletter for 2 years now and haven't got it I'm afraid. The plain fact is that the Russians have withstood the sanctions better than our Western experts expected and that their military, whilst not perfect, is resilient and working on an effective doctrine that has seen it destroy Ukraine's first army, then the one constructed of the Wests Soviet-based stocks, and latterly the one from the West's stockpiles. There simply aren't the munitions in the West to defeat them now. I've asked the Professor repeatedly to explain what munitions might be necessary AND what estimates he has of their physical existence and rate of production - but he refuses to do so. If you've been reading for a while perhaps you could help me find any notion of a 'theory of victory' he has stated and lets see how well the AFU are doing in achieving it.
I'm actually a proud Englishman with a lovely young family who lives in Hove in Sussex. It's because I love my country and especially my kids that I'm so disgusted by chickenhawk Neocon yanks wanting to drag us into unnecessary wars with our European cousins. When that war could go nuclear then anyone who is encouraging playing with red-lines needs to be told they're being reckless - and sometimes told rudely.
I've got a few Russian friends and would love to visit their historic homeland one day, but nowhere's beer is like ours, gin is the prince of all spirits and I'm certain I'd never get a decent cup of tea there so I'll stay here if it's alright with you.
I'm going to say something critical of Zelensky and it's only because I'm a trained historian and truth is paramount for me. How can Zelensky claim that the Kursk invasion was designed to prevent an attack on Sumy when the feeble Russian response to the Kursk invasion revealed that they were hardly building up an invasion force? The Kursk invasion did not make Sumy any safer from aerial attack and was not necessary to protect it from ground attack. Kursk was simply a region that could be invaded without facing strong resistance.
Kathleen! His job as wartime leader is sometimes marketing, not truth-telling :-). (Relatedly, I understand talk of a buffer zone plays interestingly in Russia and by extension in many countries friendly with the monsters in the Kremlin.)
There is also some military truth, of course - weren’t the Russians shelling the Sumy region, often indiscriminately as they do everywhere? And in any case, the time to advance is when the enemy is weak, not after they have already gathered their invasion force.
Well, it was time for Germany to attack Poland before it had already gathered their invasion force.
I'm saying there is not a shred of credible evidence that the Russians were planning to invade Ukraine with Suny as their goal. I think putting out absurd claims which amount to lies weakens rather than strengthen a democratic government.
Why do you disbelieve him when he says that they invaded Kursk as a preemptive attack to prevent a corresponding attack by the Russians on Sumi oblast? After all quite a few OSINT analysts were warning of such a likelihood. Plus Putin had been talking of the need to seize more Ukrainian territory to create a buffer zone to prevent Ukrainian attacks on Russian civilians - oh the irony.
You really think that every word spoken by Churchill or FDR was the Gospel Truth?
In peacetime you are absolutely right, but maybe you could take into account the importance of deception in warfare throughout history. Propaganda too. Wartime leaders have to use these tools.
This was found in a speech given by Zelensky to the Ukrainian people to explain the current strategy in the war. Therefore, the statement that they invaded Russia to protect Sumy is either idiotic or a lie. You don't lie to your own people. If you want to mislead the enemy, you leak disinformation to them. Back in the day, it was a misplaced diplomatic pouch. I don't know how they do it these days.
Weren't Churchill's speeches in the same vein? He incorporated disinformation and propaganda where necessary. Ukraine has a war to win first and foremost.
His job as wartime leader is sometimes marketing, not truth-telling :-).
Really effective war time leaders like Roosevelt, Churchill, and Lincoln effectively market truth to their own people. I don't know of a single lie Lincoln told in the course of the war, but he sure did know how to keep his mouth shut.
Along the lines of what G Man says, I don’t think he’s lying (and good marketing is also not lying). I don’t really understand why you think he is, so I guess we can disagree.
For clarity, I mean he’s not lying, simply emphasizing certain points disproportionately because the single message is more impactful and across so many audiences. (By the way, in my view in today’s age, any message which will be reported on is for all audiences - the forum in which it was delivered doesn’t matter like it used to.)
You might want to read the clarification that I posted just above your comment. When politicians make statements that are incorrect or idiotic, it almost always comes back to bite them.
If someone knocks frantically on your door with loaded gun in his hand and says let me in because there's a burglar hiding in your closet, and I must defend you from this burglar. Then you both look around and there's no burglar in any closet in the house.
Zelensky claimed that he invaded Kursk to protect Sumy from attack. The Ukrainians went across the border and found only poorly trained and disorganized forces. There was no invasion army being assembled. Thus, it is ridiculous for Zelensky to claim that he invaded Kursk to protect Sumy, because there was no invading army, just like there was no burglar.
There are plenty of great reasons for Ukraine to invade Kursk, but defending Sumy was not one of them.
Donald Trump’s running mate, J.D. Vance, who has spouted anti-Ukraine and pro-Russian talking points for months, is connected to Moscow’s RT and has been for some time. His connection is financial and may explain the anti-Ukraine narrative spouted by him, by radical Republicans, and by Trump.
In 2021, J.D. Vance, tech tycoon Peter Thiel, and ultra-conservative Vivek Ramaswamy invested in an online video platform called Rumble specializing in alternative, right-wing content that includes RT content, even after it was kicked off the air in 2022 by the U.S. and European Union following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Rumble live-streams RT and its questionable content.
One of the points you threw out in passing that was new to me (and I think the media) is worth repeating and emphasizing: a tactical benefit of Kursk is not pulling troops out of the Donbas, where they are being used up at a scarcely credible rate: the benefit is diverting potential reinforcements.
Elements from units deployed in the Donbas (and the Kharkiv offensive too) have indeed been spotted in Kursk, but we've once again fallen for Putin's BS. Tom Cooper (https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com) is keeping a list. It's very long. Here are a few of the more notorious (ahem, notable) ones:
- 810th NIB: nominally 6.000 troops+; 5 battalions are present (1st, 3rd, 5th, 382nd, unk. and Tiger; two battalions already decimated; 1,800-2,000 troops?)
- 155th NIB: nominally 6,000 troops+; 2 battalions are present (1,500 troops?), 1 battalion still in the Kharkiv area
- 24th Spetsnaz Brigade: nominally brigade HQ (1 battalion+) and 3 battalions; probably brigade HQ and 1 battalion are present, plus battalion each from the 2nd and 10th Spetsnaz
- 11th VDV Brigade: nominally 6-7 battalions; probably brigade HQ and 1-2 battalions (possibly: one battalion from the 83rd VDV Brigade);
It's significant how heavily degraded all these units are. They have taken such heavy casualties in the last two-and-a-half years that they can no longer be described as elite units.
Thanks Phillips again for your article which so accurately describes the Russian influence on the MAGA wing of US Politics.
I used to listen to some of these influencers and always thought they were a fairly accurate when discussing US politics but when they started spouting Russian propaganda with respect to Ukraine they showed their true colours.
On US support for Ukraine, the time for “The US will support Ukraine for as long at it takes” is long since past it’s sell by date.
I recall on the Mriya Report Twitter Space asking both Generals Breedlove and Hodges about this…
They both said the same thing.
“As long as it take, to do what?”
For Ukraine to Win?
Or for Ukraine to Not Lose?
Also we rightly panned Mike Johnston for holding up the Ukraine Support Bill, but since it was approved in April 2024, this Biden administration has continued to drip feed military equipment.
The latest support package - $ 250 milllion - really?
It’s pathetic isn’t it? They make the announcement like it’s $250 million in addition to the $61 billion promised back in April. The WH is so smug about it. NATO, in general, is so underperforming in helping its ally. S Korea provides more artillery shells than the entire EU. (as per ‘The Counteroffensive by Tim Mak’ Sept 7/24)
Thanks Phillips. I very much appreciate your thoughtful assessments. My main sources on Ukraine have been NYT and Economist and as you say they seem pretty reactionary-anything russia does is consequential and Ukraine's situation always precarious-they say. Your analysis is always a calming and reassuring influence.
Phillips, you are right with every single word. What is even more depressing is that none of this is really new. The Russians have been involved in spreading lies and trying to undermine our democratic societies around the world for decades. And what is even more depressing is that so many people in the West, who live in an open society, are so easily deceived and become active, useful idiots, spreading lies with all consequences even further!
The Western governments really should wake up from their Sleeping Beauty Sleep and activate laws that hinder hostile nations dictatorships from exploiting that severe weakness. Well-informed opinion-making is the basis of every democracy. Masses of our societies are just plain ignorant, and each one of them bears 100% responsibility for this state of mind himself. And all of them are endangering our democratic processes and our freedoms. We have to stop this decisively. People who think you have just to speak with Putin and Trump fans, cultist, fascists and racists are wrong, they live in an isolated bubble and are not approachable anymore.
I’ve long wondered - why do western governments seem to just accept Russian hybrid warfare, especially since 2022? Yes, much of the response will not be visible to ordinary citizens, but I would think more of it would. And I rarely hear of politicians educating their citizens about the threat, which is an important component of the long term defense.
Where have you been for the last eight years? There's almost nothing that hasn't been blamed on the Russians - Brexit, Trump, power outages, cyber-leaks, internet outages, power failures, Wikileaks revelations, German and French election interference, pensioners collapsing in English market towns - they even blew up their own gas pipeline apparently. All of this had been accompanied by hours and hours and hours of very serious people telling us very seriously about how they've done this.
I don’t really understand your comment. There’s a massive difference between media coverage of a specific event for a day and discussion of threat to national security / sovereignty, implications for defense spending and policy, educating / warning the public to help counteract the threat, etc.
I would say you need the education component. the Russian government publicly discusses the need to train more people in information operations. What do you think they do with that capability if not try to pull the wool over your and others’ eyes Adrian? Which countries do you think would be highest on their target list if not the US, UK, Germany, and France?
It’s hard to read the NY Times, Washington Post, etc. They “buy” Russian propaganda and refuse to denounce Trump. They ignore Trump’s Russian ties and his increasing insanity. After all of these years, shouldn’t The New York Times know better? Haven’t they seen enough? The rest of us need to keep calling our Senators and House members and affirm our support for Ukraine.
It seems Russia is becoming more and more dependent on the price of gold (due to robbing their fund for the war), and a sudden drop would be catastrophic.
Many thanks for another excellent post showing just how effective Russia has been in its information war in the US.
This success also extends to Europe and particularly to Germany. The AfD which has just won widely reported electoral success in two regional elections in Eastern Germany is also reputedly a recipient of Russian money. More interesting still is the case of Scholz. There was a well documented thread on X (@Rail_splitter1) this past week, describing Scholz's formative years as Vice-Chairman of the Young Socialists (Jusos) in the 1980. The Chairman of the Jusos as the time was non other than Gerhard Schröder, who needs no introduction to this community During what has come to be known as the Euromissile crisis of 1983, Scholz is on record as denouncing US imperialism and blaming NATO for the crisis. He met frequently at this time, both in West and East Germany, with GDR youth groups and even Egon Krenz the GDR leader and was described by the Stasi as a fellow traveler, helping the GDR spread its message in the Federal Republic.
Schröder of course was appointed by Putin to the board of Gazprom after he left office, although he he has since been forced to resign. There are no allegations about Scholz being directly or indirectly in Russia's pay but, be that as it may, his past sympathies must leave considerable doubt about the real reasons for his present political stance and notably his steadfast refusal to send Taurus missiles to Ukraine. Deep down, and despite large quantities of German military and financial aide to Ukraine, is he still not basically anti-American, anti NATO and pro-Russian?
More generally, as Merkel's favorable attitude towards Nordstream 2 illustrates only too well, there is still a deeply ingrained sympathy and sense of shared interest among German political and cultural leaders towards Russia, a trend that Putin (who was a KGB colonel in Dresden in the final years before reunification) has had no difficulty exploiting ...and undoubtedly continues to exploit.
I'm gonna take another go at why the US press and the chattering classes are so uncritical of Putin. Right now, the US is going through a strongman infatuation stage. We are impressed with supreme confidence and the surface of confidence mesmerizes us. (BTW, one of the reasons for the surge of Harris/Walz is they are doing a very good job of projecting confidence.) We cannot place an equal focus on the weakness behind the confidence. In fact, Putin controls everything so that nobody from the outside can ever lay an eyeball on the weaknesses of the Russian military.
In contrast, democratic leaders look weak. They have to rally their nations, not command them. They have to argue for their positions, not hand them down as from heaven. Whenever Zelensky fires a top subordinate, be it his general in chief, foreign secretary, head of the Air Force, he looks weak. It's a confession that his policies haven't worked so far. Have you noticed that Putin will stay with the same personnel forever to signal that his policies are perfect?
Putin, Trump, and their ilk are lifelong practitioners of the maxim, “Fake it till you make it."
Cannot say you are wrong. But in the end with the unsealed indictment, always follow the money. Russian money is everywhere and the indictment is only the top of the iceberg
Putin has had massive shakeups throughout the war. Granted a lot of it has been shifting people around from one role to another, but he’s done as much - if not more - firing/shifting than Zelensky.
In difficult times when the world order is in flux, anyone who can simplify the situation and claim to have an answer to even a vaguely defined situation will find a following. Your point on projected confidence is excellent. Projected confidence can reduce stress and anxiety.
Interesting take on the present situation, however I will note that being fired by Putin often results in high altitude defenestration.
He has killed off only one person who was supporting his war on Ukraine— Yevgeny Prigozhin. All the rest were members of the enemies classes—political opponents, journalists, etc. In other words, say nice things about Putin and your life will be long.
I think things are more opaque inside Russian than you assume; everyone is, by definition, an enemy after you have had them killed. All of the “corruption” accusations against longtime regime insiders can be, to my mind, anyway, viewed as political “defenestrations”.
So, you're in favor of word creep. Defenestrate has a very specific meaning, and you want to broaden it so it no longer communicates clearly. Although, Putin has literally defenestrated a few of his enemies, I'm willing to broaden the meaning to anyone who was KILLED because they made a government uncomfortable.
To extend the word to mere loss of office, creates terminal confusion and ruins another useful word. I obviously feel quite strongly about this. Indeed, it gives me one less reason to read your comments, because I don't know when I'll have to guess what you mean by them.
deforested, maybe.
fores, noun (Latin)
entrance, gate, folding doors, double doors, opening
Defenestrate means to throw someone out a window. It was first done in Prague when some city councilors threw their opponents out the window to their deaths.
Latin fenestra means “window.”
Information warfare is the only kind of warfare Russia has historically been competent at, starting at least with Potemkin villages, but probably a lot earlier. But it's really the fault of several generations of Western historians that the Russian/Soviet carefully constructed official narratives about almost singlehandedly defeating Napoleon and Hitler were allowed to take root in the West and create the impression of Russian military juggernaut that Russia now skillfully employs in its information warfare. So many people will point to Stalingrad and Kursk as places where Hitler was defeated, and very few realize that actually Germany lost more soldiers in its "easy victory" capturing Paris than in its "epochal defeat" at Kursk (well, to be fair, the difference in KIA+MIA count is only 12, and that's well within the margin of error).
You could not be more correct about the Russian talent for information warfare. But I'm going to make a request— please supply a link for the casualty figures for the Kursk battle and the invasion of France.
However, the story of the Potemkin villages was a lie immortalized after Potemkin's death by his enemy who happened to write his first biography. (Another classic example of the Russian talent for disinformation.)
The true story is this: Potemkin conquered Ukraine for Catherine and then invited her to tour her new territory, along with many of the nobility of Russia. Potemkin built a barge that was well stocked with food and beverages and they all floated downstream from Kiev to Kherson.
As you are well aware, Ukraine is far more fertile than the rest of Russia. The nobleman on the barge could not believe the prosperity of the peasants they saw on the bank— all looking healthy and having plenty of animals. Thus, his enemies started the rumor that he had phonied up these villages. Potemkin was much hated and envied during his lifetime because he was clearly brilliant and competent and had the total trust and favor of Catherine.
For an excellent biography of Potemkin, see:
https://archive.org/details/potemkin00simo
Wikipedia is a good source as they use widely accepted figures and cite reputable sources like Karl-Heinz Frieser. For France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_France says "German casualties are hard to determine but commonly accepted figures are: 27,074 killed, 111,034 wounded and 18,384 missing" (and three sources are cited). That's 45,458 KIA+MIA.
For Kursk, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Citadel says "45,444 killed or missing and 119,843 wounded (per German military medical data)" with the OKH casualty reports as a source. That's 14 KIA+MIA fewer than in France.
Alternatively, you can go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kursk for a more detailed breakdown: "Karl-Heinz Frieser, who reviewed the German archive record, calculated that during Citadel 54,182 casualties were suffered. Of these, 9,036 were killed, 1,960 were reported missing and 43,159 were wounded. The 9th Army suffered 23,345 casualties, while Army Group South suffered 30,837 casualties.[16] Throughout the Soviet offensives, 111,114 casualties were suffered. In facing Operation Kutuzov, 14,215 men were killed, 11,300 were reported missing (presumed killed or captured) and 60,549 were wounded.[364] During Polkovodets Rumyantsev, 25,068 casualties were incurred, including 8,933 killed and missing. Total casualties for the three battles were approximately 170,000, with 46,500 killed or missing (per German military medical data).[356]" I don't know where they got their final 46,500 number, as all the numbers cited before that add up to the same 45,444 cited in the Operation Citadel link. Citations are heavy on Frieser, but he may have just used OKH data. In that case it's probably an undercount, as OKH would not include Luftwaffe casualties. It is plausible that Luftwaffe could have lost about 1000 men (they lost very roughly 1000 planes, many of which had two or more crew members, but many of them were neither killed nor captured). That might explain 46,500 figure, and in that case German casualties at Kursk may have been slightly higher than in France. Well, as I already said, the difference is really within the margin of error.
The fall of France was clearly a strategic victory for Germany (I do not hesitate to use the word "strategic" here as the course of war was indeed materially altered, and Paris ain't Pokrovsk - who nobody had even heard of until a couple months ago). And it is ridiculous to call a battle with the same number of German casualties a strategic defeat just because Germany gave up some territory of little strategic values while inflicting several times higher casualties on the Soviets (furthermore, German human and material losses were replaceable during the battle while the Soviet ones weren't, i.e. the German armed forces were stronger after the battle and the Soviet ones were temporarily weaker, even if in possession of more land).
Thanks!
Great post Phillips. Do you think NATO will have a punishing response to Iran sending short-range missiles to Russia or will it be the “deeply concerned” platitudes only. Somebody on X said that if it happens then Taurus should be used to take out the Kerch bridge. That would be great but good luck trying to convince meek Scholz.
The person who tweeted on X to bomb the Kerch bridge with Taurus missiles was Gabrielius Landsbergis, the Minister of Foreign Affairs for Lithuania.
I wish someone would finally take out that Bridge.
Just so I could play that “Kerch Bridge on Fire, Your Defence Is Terrified!”
Please accept my apologies as what I ran across was from nearly 2 years ago prior to Oct 7 and it seems this has not happened.
I have deleted the comment
Really? Excellent, if true. Do you recall your source for that?
Saw it somewhere on Twitter (X) from a news source and checking it now, it was from November 2022 and clearly it has not happened. My sincere apologies for jumping the gun.
Doh. Ah well, with luck it will happen.
There’s a bigger picture than solely the Tenet Media allegations. It’s one that falls more inside the scope of Russian intelligence agencies’ traditional approach to information warfare or InfoWars, if you like. Hmm, now where have I heard that before? Anyhow, the FBI affidavit ((https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1366261/dl)) alleges that Putin's eminence grise, Sergei Kiriyenko headed this whole Doppelganger project using outfits with names like The Social Design Agency (SDA). It later discusses a document obtained from the SDA:
“One document revealed a list of more than 2,800 people on various social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook and Telegram, spanning 81 countries, that SDA identified as influencers, including television and radio hosts, politicians, bloggers, journalists, businessmen, professors, think-tank analysts, veterans, professors, and comedians. When referring to politicians, the list often mentioned which U.S. state and/or political party they represent and the position they hold in Congress.” [Case 2:24-mj-01395 Document 4 Filed 09/04/24. Page 28 of 277. Paragraph 66]
Two thousand eight hundred targets. This is how systematic Russian active measures work. By targeting large numbers of lesser influencers, seeds are sown. They do not have to be MAGA, it is preferable if they are not. Most of the seeds never sprout but, with time, some do flourish and a seemingly organic talking point takes hold. It’s noticed and magnified by more popular influencers and then works its way into the mainstream media where it is repeated unthinkingly by journalists, by you, by me, by everyone. In the 1980s, the KGB infamously used this tactic to spread the lie that the USA had created AIDS as a bioweapon. They planted the story in Indian and African newspapers and it spread slowly across the globe until it became impossible to debunk. It doesn’t have to be an outright lie, it can be the careful selection of unfounded rumours or the mere amplification of a pre-existing narrative.
You can likely see it happening this year in Ukraine too. Where did this ‘strategic collapse’ notion come from? Or the story eight months ago that Russia’s industrial capacity and population meant victory was inevitable? Or the widespread panicking a couple of months later that NATO’s summer exercise could trigger a nuclear conflict? It’s impossible to identify where these first sprang up and that’s the beauty of having so many influencers to manipulate. It’s information warfare at its best.
The affidavit is a great speaking indictment. And it’s worth checking out the attached exhibits, in particular Exhibit 6A p.148 - Center S. Comprehensive support for informational and political influence & Exhibit 8A p.215 - The Good Old USA Project.
All so true! But what is the facilitator if such seedlings and plantings?? Money. The second is a promise or prospect of gaining influence and notoriety. Look at the weak minded and otherwise invisible who have latched on to this? MTG? Tim Pool a high school dropout? These are the people who are most vulnerable to such influence. Bob Menéndez also fits this bill taking money from Egypt.
Sadly it does not have to be money. In fact, it rarely is, which is why Tenet Media and its clowns are such an outlier. Instead the Russians look for targets whose worldview can be manipulated with gentle nudges. Even the smartest can fall for it.
If you or anyone else wants to know more, can I suggest Thomas Rid's book 'Active Measures'? He's a leading expert in this field and the book is a history of active measures as a deliberate disinformation tactic going all the way back to the Bolsheviks. It's fascinating and, if nothing else, teaches its readers to question stories that are too good to be true.
Great reference! Thanks!
Why oh why do we (I’m a US citizen living in US) continue to emphasize all the strategic defense systems we’re providing? Not enough and all they do is stop some of the Russians missiles etc from hitting Ukraine. As Phillips says, way too much like “thoughts and prayers”. To defend itself, Ukraine needs to hit the places in Russia where those missiles are coming from.
Below is an excellent account of the fecklessness of the West. Neither the U.S. nor Europe are on track to provide adequate munitions until 2028, if they even meet the target at all.
We're not even trying. The plan is for Ukraine to wear down and give up. Heart breaking.
The author is not forlorn. He believes UKR can persevere and increase offensive actions in Russia through their effective domestic drone innovations. My summary is poor.
Anne Applebaum remarked recently that her greatest fear is that a wave of Ukrainian refugees is coming this winter. Russia's attacks on energy may make cities uninhabitable.
Biden has led a tragic policy. I suppose I single him out only because I set lower expectations for the Europeans.
https://stefankorshak.substack.com/p/september-1-day-921-russian-punch
I'll quote Stephan Korshak from above:
"I’ll tell you what I think going to happen. While the smart DC people are having kittens about ATACMS legal launch ranges, and the Europeans are calculating how to maximize profits from shell production two or three years from now, the Ukrainians are going to make more and better drones, faster, and their skill at striking targets in Russia is going to improve. They are going to degrade Russian air defenses, and the volume and destructiveness strikes against Russian energy infrastructure are going to increase. I see no way anyone can stop this from happening, and that particularly includes the Russians."
Why of why do, a US citizen living in the US, feel it necessary for your Government to send billions of your dollars to extend a war that cannot be won by the side you're supporting?
I hope the murderer and war criminal Putin pays you well.
How much do you get from Putin to write your pro Russia comments.
A great deal less than the Professor gets from the MIC for his pro-(someoneelses) War ones.
Because it can be won and is.
… anyway, back to the real comments.
I'm assuming you mean your echo chamber.
I believe that indications are that the Ukrainians can and with proper support will prevail against Russia’s aggression. Further, they should. “Why?” is multifaceted and too long an answer for me to write here but if you’ll read this newsletter for a while, you’ll get it.
I have been reading this newsletter for 2 years now and haven't got it I'm afraid. The plain fact is that the Russians have withstood the sanctions better than our Western experts expected and that their military, whilst not perfect, is resilient and working on an effective doctrine that has seen it destroy Ukraine's first army, then the one constructed of the Wests Soviet-based stocks, and latterly the one from the West's stockpiles. There simply aren't the munitions in the West to defeat them now. I've asked the Professor repeatedly to explain what munitions might be necessary AND what estimates he has of their physical existence and rate of production - but he refuses to do so. If you've been reading for a while perhaps you could help me find any notion of a 'theory of victory' he has stated and lets see how well the AFU are doing in achieving it.
“CIA boss says west should not be intimidated by Russia’s nuclear threats”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/sep/07/cia-west-russia-nuclear-threats-putin?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
I'm assuming he's got a nice bunker. Won't make any difference for him in the long run though - or (very much more importantly) my kids.
If you want to be on the winning side, the obvious strategy is to move yourself and your family to Russia.
I'm actually a proud Englishman with a lovely young family who lives in Hove in Sussex. It's because I love my country and especially my kids that I'm so disgusted by chickenhawk Neocon yanks wanting to drag us into unnecessary wars with our European cousins. When that war could go nuclear then anyone who is encouraging playing with red-lines needs to be told they're being reckless - and sometimes told rudely.
I've got a few Russian friends and would love to visit their historic homeland one day, but nowhere's beer is like ours, gin is the prince of all spirits and I'm certain I'd never get a decent cup of tea there so I'll stay here if it's alright with you.
I'm going to say something critical of Zelensky and it's only because I'm a trained historian and truth is paramount for me. How can Zelensky claim that the Kursk invasion was designed to prevent an attack on Sumy when the feeble Russian response to the Kursk invasion revealed that they were hardly building up an invasion force? The Kursk invasion did not make Sumy any safer from aerial attack and was not necessary to protect it from ground attack. Kursk was simply a region that could be invaded without facing strong resistance.
Kathleen! His job as wartime leader is sometimes marketing, not truth-telling :-). (Relatedly, I understand talk of a buffer zone plays interestingly in Russia and by extension in many countries friendly with the monsters in the Kremlin.)
There is also some military truth, of course - weren’t the Russians shelling the Sumy region, often indiscriminately as they do everywhere? And in any case, the time to advance is when the enemy is weak, not after they have already gathered their invasion force.
Well, it was time for Germany to attack Poland before it had already gathered their invasion force.
I'm saying there is not a shred of credible evidence that the Russians were planning to invade Ukraine with Suny as their goal. I think putting out absurd claims which amount to lies weakens rather than strengthen a democratic government.
Why do you disbelieve him when he says that they invaded Kursk as a preemptive attack to prevent a corresponding attack by the Russians on Sumi oblast? After all quite a few OSINT analysts were warning of such a likelihood. Plus Putin had been talking of the need to seize more Ukrainian territory to create a buffer zone to prevent Ukrainian attacks on Russian civilians - oh the irony.
You really think that every word spoken by Churchill or FDR was the Gospel Truth?
In peacetime you are absolutely right, but maybe you could take into account the importance of deception in warfare throughout history. Propaganda too. Wartime leaders have to use these tools.
This was found in a speech given by Zelensky to the Ukrainian people to explain the current strategy in the war. Therefore, the statement that they invaded Russia to protect Sumy is either idiotic or a lie. You don't lie to your own people. If you want to mislead the enemy, you leak disinformation to them. Back in the day, it was a misplaced diplomatic pouch. I don't know how they do it these days.
Weren't Churchill's speeches in the same vein? He incorporated disinformation and propaganda where necessary. Ukraine has a war to win first and foremost.
His job as wartime leader is sometimes marketing, not truth-telling :-).
Really effective war time leaders like Roosevelt, Churchill, and Lincoln effectively market truth to their own people. I don't know of a single lie Lincoln told in the course of the war, but he sure did know how to keep his mouth shut.
Along the lines of what G Man says, I don’t think he’s lying (and good marketing is also not lying). I don’t really understand why you think he is, so I guess we can disagree.
For clarity, I mean he’s not lying, simply emphasizing certain points disproportionately because the single message is more impactful and across so many audiences. (By the way, in my view in today’s age, any message which will be reported on is for all audiences - the forum in which it was delivered doesn’t matter like it used to.)
You might want to read the clarification that I posted just above your comment. When politicians make statements that are incorrect or idiotic, it almost always comes back to bite them.
If someone knocks frantically on your door with loaded gun in his hand and says let me in because there's a burglar hiding in your closet, and I must defend you from this burglar. Then you both look around and there's no burglar in any closet in the house.
Zelensky claimed that he invaded Kursk to protect Sumy from attack. The Ukrainians went across the border and found only poorly trained and disorganized forces. There was no invasion army being assembled. Thus, it is ridiculous for Zelensky to claim that he invaded Kursk to protect Sumy, because there was no invading army, just like there was no burglar.
There are plenty of great reasons for Ukraine to invade Kursk, but defending Sumy was not one of them.
I was thinking that too.
https://dianefrancis.substack.com/p/comrade-jd-vance
Donald Trump’s running mate, J.D. Vance, who has spouted anti-Ukraine and pro-Russian talking points for months, is connected to Moscow’s RT and has been for some time. His connection is financial and may explain the anti-Ukraine narrative spouted by him, by radical Republicans, and by Trump.
In 2021, J.D. Vance, tech tycoon Peter Thiel, and ultra-conservative Vivek Ramaswamy invested in an online video platform called Rumble specializing in alternative, right-wing content that includes RT content, even after it was kicked off the air in 2022 by the U.S. and European Union following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Rumble live-streams RT and its questionable content.
All too true.
One of the points you threw out in passing that was new to me (and I think the media) is worth repeating and emphasizing: a tactical benefit of Kursk is not pulling troops out of the Donbas, where they are being used up at a scarcely credible rate: the benefit is diverting potential reinforcements.
Elements from units deployed in the Donbas (and the Kharkiv offensive too) have indeed been spotted in Kursk, but we've once again fallen for Putin's BS. Tom Cooper (https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com) is keeping a list. It's very long. Here are a few of the more notorious (ahem, notable) ones:
- 810th NIB: nominally 6.000 troops+; 5 battalions are present (1st, 3rd, 5th, 382nd, unk. and Tiger; two battalions already decimated; 1,800-2,000 troops?)
- 155th NIB: nominally 6,000 troops+; 2 battalions are present (1,500 troops?), 1 battalion still in the Kharkiv area
- 24th Spetsnaz Brigade: nominally brigade HQ (1 battalion+) and 3 battalions; probably brigade HQ and 1 battalion are present, plus battalion each from the 2nd and 10th Spetsnaz
- 11th VDV Brigade: nominally 6-7 battalions; probably brigade HQ and 1-2 battalions (possibly: one battalion from the 83rd VDV Brigade);
- 56th VDV Regiment: nominally 6-7 battalions; probably 2-3 battalions;
- 217th VDV Regiment: nominally 6-7 battalions; probably 1-2 battalions
(Source: https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/ukraine-war-30-august-2024)
It's significant how heavily degraded all these units are. They have taken such heavy casualties in the last two-and-a-half years that they can no longer be described as elite units.
Thanks Phillips again for your article which so accurately describes the Russian influence on the MAGA wing of US Politics.
I used to listen to some of these influencers and always thought they were a fairly accurate when discussing US politics but when they started spouting Russian propaganda with respect to Ukraine they showed their true colours.
On US support for Ukraine, the time for “The US will support Ukraine for as long at it takes” is long since past it’s sell by date.
I recall on the Mriya Report Twitter Space asking both Generals Breedlove and Hodges about this…
They both said the same thing.
“As long as it take, to do what?”
For Ukraine to Win?
Or for Ukraine to Not Lose?
Also we rightly panned Mike Johnston for holding up the Ukraine Support Bill, but since it was approved in April 2024, this Biden administration has continued to drip feed military equipment.
The latest support package - $ 250 milllion - really?
It’s pathetic isn’t it? They make the announcement like it’s $250 million in addition to the $61 billion promised back in April. The WH is so smug about it. NATO, in general, is so underperforming in helping its ally. S Korea provides more artillery shells than the entire EU. (as per ‘The Counteroffensive by Tim Mak’ Sept 7/24)
Thanks Phillips. I very much appreciate your thoughtful assessments. My main sources on Ukraine have been NYT and Economist and as you say they seem pretty reactionary-anything russia does is consequential and Ukraine's situation always precarious-they say. Your analysis is always a calming and reassuring influence.
Phillips, you are right with every single word. What is even more depressing is that none of this is really new. The Russians have been involved in spreading lies and trying to undermine our democratic societies around the world for decades. And what is even more depressing is that so many people in the West, who live in an open society, are so easily deceived and become active, useful idiots, spreading lies with all consequences even further!
The Western governments really should wake up from their Sleeping Beauty Sleep and activate laws that hinder hostile nations dictatorships from exploiting that severe weakness. Well-informed opinion-making is the basis of every democracy. Masses of our societies are just plain ignorant, and each one of them bears 100% responsibility for this state of mind himself. And all of them are endangering our democratic processes and our freedoms. We have to stop this decisively. People who think you have just to speak with Putin and Trump fans, cultist, fascists and racists are wrong, they live in an isolated bubble and are not approachable anymore.
I’ve long wondered - why do western governments seem to just accept Russian hybrid warfare, especially since 2022? Yes, much of the response will not be visible to ordinary citizens, but I would think more of it would. And I rarely hear of politicians educating their citizens about the threat, which is an important component of the long term defense.
Where have you been for the last eight years? There's almost nothing that hasn't been blamed on the Russians - Brexit, Trump, power outages, cyber-leaks, internet outages, power failures, Wikileaks revelations, German and French election interference, pensioners collapsing in English market towns - they even blew up their own gas pipeline apparently. All of this had been accompanied by hours and hours and hours of very serious people telling us very seriously about how they've done this.
I don’t really understand your comment. There’s a massive difference between media coverage of a specific event for a day and discussion of threat to national security / sovereignty, implications for defense spending and policy, educating / warning the public to help counteract the threat, etc.
I would say you need the education component. the Russian government publicly discusses the need to train more people in information operations. What do you think they do with that capability if not try to pull the wool over your and others’ eyes Adrian? Which countries do you think would be highest on their target list if not the US, UK, Germany, and France?
It’s hard to read the NY Times, Washington Post, etc. They “buy” Russian propaganda and refuse to denounce Trump. They ignore Trump’s Russian ties and his increasing insanity. After all of these years, shouldn’t The New York Times know better? Haven’t they seen enough? The rest of us need to keep calling our Senators and House members and affirm our support for Ukraine.
They’re gullible rubes. They think objectivity means you lied to me a thousand time, but I’m going to assume you’re telling the truth this time.
Have you seen this article on how Russia is depleting it's wealth fund? https://x.com/ulyssecolonna/status/1832504896894963969
It seems Russia is becoming more and more dependent on the price of gold (due to robbing their fund for the war), and a sudden drop would be catastrophic.
Many thanks for another excellent post showing just how effective Russia has been in its information war in the US.
This success also extends to Europe and particularly to Germany. The AfD which has just won widely reported electoral success in two regional elections in Eastern Germany is also reputedly a recipient of Russian money. More interesting still is the case of Scholz. There was a well documented thread on X (@Rail_splitter1) this past week, describing Scholz's formative years as Vice-Chairman of the Young Socialists (Jusos) in the 1980. The Chairman of the Jusos as the time was non other than Gerhard Schröder, who needs no introduction to this community During what has come to be known as the Euromissile crisis of 1983, Scholz is on record as denouncing US imperialism and blaming NATO for the crisis. He met frequently at this time, both in West and East Germany, with GDR youth groups and even Egon Krenz the GDR leader and was described by the Stasi as a fellow traveler, helping the GDR spread its message in the Federal Republic.
Schröder of course was appointed by Putin to the board of Gazprom after he left office, although he he has since been forced to resign. There are no allegations about Scholz being directly or indirectly in Russia's pay but, be that as it may, his past sympathies must leave considerable doubt about the real reasons for his present political stance and notably his steadfast refusal to send Taurus missiles to Ukraine. Deep down, and despite large quantities of German military and financial aide to Ukraine, is he still not basically anti-American, anti NATO and pro-Russian?
More generally, as Merkel's favorable attitude towards Nordstream 2 illustrates only too well, there is still a deeply ingrained sympathy and sense of shared interest among German political and cultural leaders towards Russia, a trend that Putin (who was a KGB colonel in Dresden in the final years before reunification) has had no difficulty exploiting ...and undoubtedly continues to exploit.