T. Belman. This is really weird and unexpected.
Yevgeny Prigozhin says it would be “ideal” to declare an end to the war. But he says Russia must keep fighting, even if it means humiliating defeat.
Wagner Group founder Yevgeny Prigozhin says Russia has already accomplished its goals in Ukraine—but must keep fighting even if it means humiliating defeat so that the country can ultimately rise again as a “war monster” that the international community will bow down to.
After recruiting thousands of prison inmates to help fight the war for Vladimir Putin and using his shadow army to emerge as a rival to Russia’s top military brass, the mercenary boss and Kremlin-linked businessman offered his thoughts on the state of the war in a lengthy article published Friday. In addition to predicting that Russia would ultimately come back stronger than ever, Prigozhin appeared to admit that Ukraine may win its territories back, acknowledged that the Kremlin’s plan had failed, and predicted a full-blown revolution in Russia.
“For the authorities and for society as a whole, it is necessary today to put a decisive end to the [special military operation.] The ideal scenario is to announce the end of the [special military operation], to inform everyone that Russia has achieved the results that it planned, and in a sense we have actually achieved them. We have ground down a huge number of fighters of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and we can report that the tasks of the [special military operation] have been completed,” he wrote.
He claimed that “in theory,” Russia had already put a decisive end to the war by wiping out a huge chunk of Ukraine’s male population, sending refugees fleeing, and seizing territory. Omitted, of course, was that the same could be said about Russia on the first two points.
And bizarrely, amidst all of his pontificating, Prigozhin appeared to admit that Ukrainian territories seized by Russia aren’t actually with Moscow “forever,” as the Kremlin has so often claimed.
Ukraine stands to lose if the war comes to a standstill, he said, because “those territories, that are today under the control of the Russian Federation, can stay at the disposal of the Russian Federation for years.”
Lest anyone think he’s suggesting Russia should call it quits, however, Prigozhin went on to cheer on a planned counteroffensive by Ukraine—saying “the sooner it starts, the better.”
But he admitted the result could prove catastrophic to Russia, saying it’s “not very likely” Moscow could launch a “colossal counteroffensive” of its own and take territory deeper into Ukraine.
He also acknowledged that “many of those who initially supported [the war], are now doubtful, or categorically opposed to what’s happening,” and confessed that Russia “could not achieve the results that society expected.”
If Ukraine’s counteroffensive manages to break through Russian defenses, he said, “an army that for years considered itself one of the best in the world” would be thoroughly demoralized.
In that case, he said, “global changes in Russian society” could lead to an all-out revolution as pro-war patriots seek revenge against bureaucrats and figures who were either critical of the war or reluctant to use harsher battlefield methods.
His solution, strangely, is for Russia to let itself sink to rock bottom by doubling down even further despite its myriad losses over the past year. According to him, that’s America’s worst nightmare, because “if Russia gets to the bottom, then it will push off from there… and float back up like a huge sea monster, demolishing everything in its path, including the plans of the United States.”
He appeared to shrug off further losses and even a “battering” of the Russian military, saying Russia would simply “lick its wounds” if defeated in a Ukrainian counteroffensive.
“Russia cannot accept any agreement, only a fair fight. And if we come out of this battle battered, there is nothing to worry about.”
His comments came the same day classified U.S. documents said Russian special forces had been decimated fighting the war against Ukraine. Separately, a joint investigation by the independent media outlet MediaZona and the BBC’s Russian service counted 20,451 Russian troops killed so far in the war. The true number is thought to be significantly higher, as that tally includes only those confirmed through open source data.
It is not Ukraine Russia fights against. It has always been NATO.
Can Russia win against NATO?
We are back to the original questions posed when Russia went for workers revolution in October 1917.
Address that Israpundit or all just shut up.
The Daily Beast seems to have missed most of the content of Prigozhin’s arguments when writing its summary, which Ted well described as sounding ‘weird’ as a result, but it is not an accurate summary of Prigozhin’s comments, which of course is not a novel occurrence for the Daily Beast.
Prigozhin’s article is very long, but well written with an occasional use of colorful metaphors, but this should not be mistaken as being anything less than a political statement challenging the Russians to remain isolated from the West, no matter what offers the West might make while trying to end the conflict.
Prigozhin makes his arguments upon the premise that Russia is a fortress of natural barriers which are immune to foreign invasions, and that the land corridor to Sevastapol currently held by Russia is enough to satisfy her needs. He calls on the Russian govt to forego any international agreement with the West, as any accommodation struck would only serve to weaken Russia to the advantage of the US and benefit of the Russian Deep State which is only concerned with their own comfort and wealth. He sees peace as the best path to weaken Russia militarily, while in continuing the war, win or lose, Russia will remain a strong and powerful nation able to inflict defeat upon her enemies. He notes that even in defeat, Russia would remain protected from foreign invasions due to its geographic barrier but a public demand for reforms would eliminate Russia’s pro-Western Deep State elements and Russia’s return to being a militarily dominant power could be restored as a consequence. He argues that the removal of these Deep State elements would make Russia stronger, as they only want to return to the pre-war state of normalization with the West where they could once again focus upon their own self interests which was the primary reason why Russia fell into a state of complacency and growing military decay over the past decades.
I find it hard to see this as being a direct challenge to Putin, though he never actually challenges Putin by name, but the subtle innuendo of referencing those who are in control, far from the battle while safe in their wealth and comfort leaves little guessword of whom he is indicating. Also, his reference to the military decay, a military which he himself is not part of, is suggested to be the result of the pro Western govt in power over the past years, which again can not be referencing anyone but Putin.
I see this is a rebuke and political challenge to Putin and his policy of moderation and cooperation with the West. Prigozhin has been expected to launch something of a political campaign following his significant role in the Bakmut campaign, and I believe this is it.
In any event, here is Prigozhin’s original article, which can be translated and understood quite easily:
https://telegra.ph/Tolko-chestnyj-boj-nikakogo-dogovornyaka-04-14
What Prigozhin really means:
1) in Russia the term “special military operation” is used to denote something that is not a war, in fact, I think it is illegal there now to use the term “war” for it;
2) Prigozhin argues that it is time to declare that the special military operation is over, its aims (taking over Donbass, etc.) are achieved, any kind of negotiations or prolonging the special military operation are harmful for Russia and beneficial for the West, therefore, the only solution lies in a “fair fight” (i.e., the actual war) which is the only situation which will permit Russia to win eventually, as history has shown time and again.
Davydov analyzes the current situation in Ukraine and Russia:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIhWcZduAG8
The “Daily Beast”, the last I checked, is Leftist and anti-Trump, for what it’s worth. Nevertheless, I have reason to believe the OP accurately reflects Prigozhin’s views. Davydov himself does not seem to doubt that these are his words, though he finds it difficult to see much logic in them. He also informs us that Prigozhin is a close PUTIN ally, in contrast to much of the Russian Army’s Deep State Western-educated elite.
My only first-hand information on all this, is that the disarray in and around the Kremlin is far, far worse than it was in the US at the height of the Vietnam War. That does not bode well for the Russian Federation — a place where “not boding well” seems to be the historical favorite pastime.