Whilst all hell is breaking out across the Middle East, hogging most of the headlines, Nato’s proxy war against Russia is coming to an ever stickier end. Project Ukraine, instigated primarily by the US and Britain, had as its aim regime-change in Moscow, to be followed by the weakening and balkanisation of the whole of Russia and the forcible opening of the country to outside market forces. Imperialism is driven to this insane behaviour because it is running out of territories to loot and cheap labour from which to milk surplus value. But the irreversible collapse of the proxy war against Russia is now slamming the door in the face of Nato barbarism. This is the end of the road for Project Ukraine. The Kiev junta is losing on the battlefield, its government is imploding politically and its fake president is becoming an embarrassment to his sponsors, who are scrambling around trying to find a replacement asap.
Project Ukraine hits the buffers
The fall of the heavily fortified and strategically important town of Ugledov, a town which Russian forces had been trying to capture since 2022, is another huge blow to the punch-drunk junta. Ugledov had been a key obstacle in the path of the resistance forces, the removal of which now opens up the path to the complete liberation of the whole of the Donbass. The fall of this fortress is a major blow to morale, the more so given the way it happened. The commander tasked with the town’s defence, realising that the operation was going wrong, begged his superiors to let him withdraw and regroup, but instead he was sacked from his post. The end result was the encirclement of some 2,000 troops, many of whom decided to call it a day and surrendered to the Russians. Ugledov had acquired the romantic status of an indomitable fortress, so this shabby ending, not with a bang but a whimper, was particularly galling.
Meanwhile the junta’s much-feted Kursk diversion is not going well, draining troops from already thinning front lines elsewhere and threatening the Ukrainian aggressors with the unpleasant prospect of encirclement in what the Russians graphically term ‘cauldrons’ – just in time for the autumn rains and mud. The Ukrainian incursion into Russia’s Kursk oblast is coming to an end. The brigade that led the ill-fated hop across the border, the 82nd, was mostly wiped out in the first push, and its place has been taken by a much inferior bunch of ill-trained territorials.
The real battlefield conditions facing these luckless grunts are even starting to be admitted to in the columns of newspapers regarded as normally pro-Kiev, as in this revealing vox pop piece snipped from Ukrainska Pravda:
“The Pokrovsk front didn’t just crumble overnight. Since 15 February 2024, when they withdrew from Avdiivka, Ukraine’s defence forces have been retreating towards Pokrovsk – sometimes faster, sometimes slower – almost every week. The first difficulties arose when the 3rd Separate Assault Brigade, which had been holding the line in the vicinity of Orlivka and Semenivka (not far from Avdiivka), was replaced by the 68th Separate Jaeger Brigade.
“Botched rotations have caused several occasions where the lines were open and allowed Russian units to break in. They may be the main cause for the Russian break through from Avdiivka towards the key supply point in Pokrovsk.
“Vitalii, a crew member who operates a large attack drone, tells ‘Ukrainska Pravda’ that he was deployed in the area in March, and that the Russian attacks started even before the 68th Brigade could take up its positions.
“Another major turning point that marked the undoing of the Pokrovsk front was the Russians’ sudden breakthrough in Ocheretyne, a relatively large, urbanised town on the railway with industrial facilities, and therefore a particularly useful defence position. Russian occupation forces entered the town in mid-April.
“‘Before the offensive, I received intelligence that the Russians were going to assault Ocheretyne, where we had no troops at the positions,’ the officer says. ‘I passed this information on to my commanders straight away, but the commander of the brigade stationed there responded: ‘We have forces there, they’re all there.’
“Next morning the Russians started to walk into [Ocheretyne], moving through what were officially minefields – but in fact there were no mines there. After we surrendered Novobakhmutivka, Ocheretyne and Soloviovo, the front started to collapse at the rate we’re seeing now.’
“’When the Russians captured Ocheretyne, there was no stable contact line as such,’ Vitalii the drone crew member adds. ‘No one knew where the front was. Soldiers in the villages of Sokil, Yevhenivka and Voskhod were walking around with guns in their hands, asking each other for passwords to figure out if they were dealing with one of us or the enemy’” (Ukrainska Pravda, cited in ‘Ukraine – recent front line reports point to systemic failures’, Moon of Alabama, 20 September 2024).
That last description of total chaos and demoralisation, writ large, pretty much sums up the true state of the Ukraine army.
Last days at the court of Zelensky
As above, so below. The cowardice, incompetence and disloyalty of the soldiers on the ground are but a pale reflection of the same vices exhibited by the junta itself. Every new military cockup sparks a new purge, but however many times Zelensky shuffles the deck, the problems only multiply. Back in May, in the run-up to what constitutionally was supposed to have been the 20 May deadline for the presidential election, Zelensky sacked his Kvartal television production company old pals and turned instead to be guided by his chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, who promptly placed his own buddies in the vacated posts. This attempt to stabilise Zelensky’s power base had the reverse effect: Yermak struck some as some kind of Rasputin figure who made policy on the hoof, whispering instructions in the presidential ear.
The decision to remove the then commander-in-chief Valery Zaluzhny made new enemies, but the abysmal failure of the much-hyped summer counter offensive required a scapegoat. Zaluzhny’s departure heralded another wave of spring cleaning, sweeping away inter alia the influential secretary of the National Security and Defence Council.
Now we are in the middle of another wave of government reshuffles, further destabilising an already febrile administration. The Strana news channel revealed that the president “is planning on dismissing Defense Minister Rustem Umerov and military intelligence chief Kirill Budanov.” Zelensky is desperate to pin the blame for the army’s dismal performance on someone else, and the defence minister and the head of military intelligence are obvious candidates. Umerov’s own predecessor, Aleksey Reznikov, was himself sacked following the Ukrainian military’s disastrous summer counter-offensive against Russian forces.
The supply of scapegoats is as finite as the supply of recruits to the meatgrinder, and Zelensky is getting through both like there is no tomorrow.
Nato is playing with fire
Eager to justify the confidence of his imperialist masters in his ability to serve them slavishly, British gauleiter Starmer has been a busy boy at the outset of his premiership. One moment he is strutting his stuff at the servile TUC, attacking the working class by putting the boot in to winter fuel payments for pensioners, the next he is out on the continental circuit, comparing notes on migrant bashing with the Italians and explaining to the Germans why his blather about mending ‘broken relationships’ with EU countries is not a prelude to quietly abandoning Brexit.
But where this fledging prime minister has been most active, and where he has been of particular service to the US imperialists, has been in his moronic echoing of ‘president’ Zelensky’s call for the collective West to stop pussyfooting around and give Kiev the green light to point long-range missiles directly into Russia. If this very dumb advice wins the day and is acted upon, the US, and Britain, should expect a fitting response.
Wheedling that it would be Ukrainians firing the missiles, not the Americans or British, will impress nobody. From the outset this has always been in essence a US war against Russia, fought out by US proxies in Ukraine. If Zelensky and Starmer get their way and Storm Shadow long-range missiles are fired at Russia, the polite fiction that pretends that Ukrainians are involved in a war of national liberation goes up in smoke. The missiles in question require a full complement of armed back-up personnel on site, without which the missiles cannot work, and by no stretch of imagination can this be viewed as anything other than a flagrant case of ‘boots on the ground’, a clear act of war.
At least some inkling of these dangerous realities is getting through to the collective West. Following a council of war between the US, Britain and the junta on a visit to Kiev, it was hoped that a joint statement would be signed on the spot, giving the okay to Kiev to launch missile attacks deep into Russian territory. But at the last minute there appear to have been doubts as to the sanity of this move. In the end, says The Times, “the decision was on such a knife edge that two statements for their joint press conference were prepared. One was drafted to announce the decision to authorise Ukraine’s use of the missiles, and the other, which was delivered, said they were still considering the request” (Aubrey Allegretti, ‘Private deal could let Ukraine fire missiles into Russia’, 20 September 2024).
At the time of writing this article (10 October) Zelensky is back in London again, still seeking solace (and more cash and military hardware) from his dear friend Starmer, who is more gung-ho than any other European leader about encouraging Kiev to conduct long-range missile strikes deep into the heart of Russia. If he continues on the same trajectory, he will be exposing the British population to whatever retaliatory measures Moscow deems fit in response to any threats made against the sovereignty of Russia and the lives of its citizens.
The UK and US hoped the recent UN general assembly would provide a suitable occasion to put pressure on other member states to sign up to a resolution that would authorise Kiev to fire long-range missiles at will into Russia. The hawkish US secretary Anthony Blinken spoke for the US and his sidekick David Lammy, the wet-behind-the-ears British foreign minister, spoke for the UK.
The object of the exercise, say diplomatic sources, was to show that Nato is ‘moving as one’ and to avoid the impression of Britain and the US ‘dominating decisions’. Ironically the impression actually given was rather that the US was finding it rather more difficult than in the past to dominate decisions, whilst other countries were sliding away from such perilous commitments. Muddying the waters further, there have been some indications that US president Joe Biden is himself not completely convinced, and that Anthony Blinken and national security advisor Jake Sullivan have been prodding Biden to force his hand.
Meanwhile back in Britain there was a queue of former foreign secretaries forming, ready to jog Lammy’s elbow if he showed any sign of ‘appeasing’ Vladimir Putin.
“Boris Johnson, the former prime minister, and five former Tory defence secretaries have urged Britain to go it alone and authorise the use of the Storm Shadow missiles if needed. Ben Wallace said that failure to move now would make Britain ‘appeasers’ of the Kremlin, while Gavin Williamson called it a ‘dereliction of duty’. Johnson added: ‘There is no conceivable case for delay’” (ibid.).
And lest anyone should suspect David Lammy of getting cold feet about flirting with World War 3, here is a report of what he told a fringe group at the Labour Party conference.
“The UK foreign secretary, David Lammy, has indicated that delicate negotiations with the White House to allow Ukraine to use Storm Shadow missiles inside Russia are ongoing, arguing it was a time for ‘nerve and guts’.
“The apparent encouragement to Joe Biden comes just over a week after Lammy and Keir Starmer visited the US president in the White House but failed to resolve the sticking point between two countries.
“Speaking at a fringe event at the Labour party conference in Liverpool, Lammy said the hardship and challenges of the war in Ukraine would get ‘deeper and harsher’, particularly heading into ‘the back end of 2025 into 2026’ and beyond.
“‘So this is a critical time for nerve and guts and patience and for fortitude on behalf of allies who stand with Ukraine,’ he said in comments that appeared directed at a hesitant White House, concerned about the risks of allowing Storm Shadow missiles to be used to attack Russia” (Dan Sabbagh, ‘Lammy urges “guts” in ongoing US talks over Ukraine using missiles in Russia’, The Guardian, 22 September 2024).
And if it proves difficult to secure even the grudging consent of US allies before the missiles are sent, then there is always plan B. Let The Times explain the bold plan.
“Ukraine may be given private dispensation by the UK and US to fire long-range Storm Shadow missiles into Russia without making it public until the first one is fired. Western diplomats are poised to sign off on the decision but could hold back from making an official announcement at the UN next week. ‘The Times’ understands there is wariness about publicising the move in advance to alert Russia.
“An agreement could therefore be struck in private to allow Ukraine to fire the British and French-made cruise missiles into Russia with the element of surprise, diplomatic sources said” (ibid.).
Such surprises can cut both ways. And when they do so, let none dare claim that no warning was given.
The ‘Victory Plan’
Smarting from criticism that his endless demand for more dollars and more weapons is not backed up by a clear political strategy, the pretend ‘president’ Zelensky has come up with what he has dubbed his ‘victory plan’, fuelled by a wish and a prayer. He planned to take this wish list to the UN General Assembly, hoping to convince delegates that something can be salvaged from the Ukrainian catastrophe. In particular, he photocopied enough copies to give to Biden, to vice president Kamala Harris and (covering his options) to Donald Trump, who has made however no secret of his irritation with the whole project (‘Zelinsky’s victory charade’, Moon of Alabama, 21 September 2024).
The victory plan was dribbled out in bits, with the big reveal saved for the General Assembly in September. As well as the most poisonous demand (for Kiev to be allowed to pursue long-range missile strikes into Russia), there is the demand for membership of the EU and Nato, for boundless dollars to cover reconstruction bills, for a permanent supply chain to ensure the influx of advanced hi-tech weaponry, and more of the same wishful thinking. Yet it seems that Zelensky on some level believes in his own hype, commenting that “This plan is based on decisions which would need to be adopted within the period from October to December… Then the plan will work, we think.” Listen to Jimmy Panetta, a Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee in Congress, chasing his own tail. “The problem is, to get to that point where we have any sort of peace negotiations, Russia must feel like they’re going to lose, and we are not there yet”. But that is exactly Kiev’s problem: Russia is winning, knows it is winning and has not the remotest interest in Zelensky’s half-baked ‘victory’ posing. Panetta lamely concludes “I hope part of this victory plan is how we can shape battlefield conditions to reach that point.” However, “reshaping battlefield conditions” just means pumping in more weaponry and more conscripts, a strategy which has failed spectacularly to date.
Getting away from Panetta’s wishful thinking, what immediately exposes the victory plan as delusional is a glance at the current balance of forces on the ground.
Predictably, Zelensky’s latest trip to the UN in New York to attend the general assembly, turned out to be one more humiliating knock back for the joke president, with his begging bowl mostly filled with IOUs, still nobody prepared to give him the green light to send missiles deep into Russia and no enthusiasm for his phony ‘victory’ parade. Meanwhile, whilst Zelensky was striking heroic poses and touting his ludicrous victory plan in the UN corridors (basically a stunt to drag Nato into open war), other diplomatic moves were gathering pace.
“Despite harsh criticism for his earlier mediation efforts, Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán seems undeterred — and is again busy rounding up world countries to push for his peacemaking plan for Ukraine.
“On the sidelines of last week’s UN General Assembly, the Hungarian leader quietly worked the room, asking China and Brazil to join him in organising a peace summit that would bring Moscow and Kyiv to the negotiating table” (Aleksandar Brezar, ‘Hungary’s Orbán rallies China and Brazil in renewed Ukraine peacemaking push’, Euro News, 30 September 2024).
Hungary assumed the EU presidency in June, giving Orban the opportunity to seize the role of ambassador and negotiator, beginning with whistle stop tours of Kiev, Moscow and Beijing, then liaising with China and Brazil over future peace summitry. Brussels freaked out at this, protesting that Orban’s initiative could only be done in Budapest’s name. Such a dog in the manger response can only demonstrate to the majority world that the collective West is more worried about losing its monopoly on global diplomacy than actually giving a damn about peace. Particularly galling for EU leaders is the prospect of being in the same room with Russia’s Vladimir Putin to discuss Ukraine on his terms. And when the press got to hear the Swiss ambassador to Ukraine was talking in positive terms about the China-Brazil ‘peace initiative’, the pressure on the ambassador to recant was intense, forcing him to come out with a gabbled retraction. “Thank you for the question, actually, because I’m really glad to be able to explain our position. So first of all, and I think there was a kind of a misunderstanding, actually. So first of all, Switzerland did not join or did not subscribe the final communique of this meeting that was held by China and Brazil last week in New York. We attended the meeting, but as observers, and third, yes, we did not change our position” (Swiss Ambassador to Ukraine Félix Baumann in an exclusive interview with the Interfax-Ukraine).
This Swiss nervousness about seeming to be in any way endorsing any peace initiative that does not bear the Nato seal of approval is rooted deep within the psyche of nations that for so long have been dwelling in the unipolar world now collapsing under the weight of its own contradictions. A similar nervousness perhaps explains why Saudi Arabia is not sending MBS to the BRICS summit in Kazan, allowing speculation over whether the country is officially a member state. However, with the multipolar current riding so high in the wake of US humiliation on multiple fronts, Riyadh took the precaution of sending its foreign secretary to do the job.
All the indications are that BRICS membership will come to be prized throughout the majority world as an assertion of independence and sovereignty, as residual doubts about cutting the apron strings with imperialism subside.
The devastating collapse of the proxy war against Russia, the wave of anti-imperialism galvanising the Middle East and the readiness of China to defend militarily the alienated Chinese province of Taiwan: such developments are the final nails in the coffin of US imperialism. And as imperialism wanes, the revolution must wax.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.