Endgame: Ukraine

Doctorow, Karlof1, and Trenin

The Banderites’ “homeland” is Galicia, which was once part of Poland under the Austrian Empire. And which expanded into Russian and Russo-Ukrainian speaking Ukraine—then part of Russia.

What we call the “Ukrainian” language is really a Galician dialect of Russo-Ukrainian, although Galicians live on both sides of the Polish-Ukrainian border. Galicia and Volhynia once had a significant Polish population of whom a few enclaves remain. The rest were wiped out in Ukrainian genocides. Naturally, we don’t talk about those today.

Below is a linguistic map of Ukraine.

From the map you can see why Russian is the most common language in Ukraine, which every ethnic group can use to transcend ethnic boundaries.

But the Banderites want to everyone to speak Galician…oops, “Ukrainian”. Russian-speaking Ukraine, however, is really everywhere where the yellow parts in map. Zelensky speaks Russian. His “Ukrainian” is as bad as my Spanish.

It is important to understand such things as context for what Gilbert Doctorow has recently written recently. Not just Doctorow but other noted analysts with similar preconceptions.

(W)hat Trenin is recommending is a division of the Ukrainian nation into two political camps roughly along lines that go back further in time than WWII. Before WWI, the Lvov region, Volhynia and Galicia were all part of the Austro-Hungarian empire and everything to the east was part of the Russian empire. The Austrians encouraged use of the Ukrainian language and Ukrainian ambitions as a battering ram against the part of Ukraine east of the Dnieper that was the Russian Empire, where the Ukrainian national feelings were tamped down by the ruling dynasty. That was not a solution that survived 1914 and it is not a solution for today. Not local but Europe-wide solutions are needed. Gilbert Doctorow

This is part of an article that Doctorow has written —partly its seems—in response to Karl Sanchez’ s article on Dmitry Trenin, one of Russia’s more important and credible geopolitical researchers and analysts. and Ray McGovern’s misinterpretation of his recent opinions on solutions to the Ukraine problem.

Karlof1 quotes Trenin’s article on Russia’s options for resolving the Ukrainian crisis and NATO’s and the EU’s threat to its security.

As you can see, Doctorow does not agree with Trenin’s solution— nor, if you read further, with Karl Sanchez’ analysis —which reflect the mainstream in Russian geopolitical analysis— and the trajectory of future policy.

Nor does he really “grok” Sanchez’s and Trenin’s vision of future events—influenced it seems by Western assumptions. He’s a professional Russia watcher — but lives in Brussels….! I guess he believes somehow in Europe.

The Sanchez Grok point

Karl Sanchez does see Europe the same way as Doctorow. I should mention before going further that Karlof1 is one of the best sites on Substack. Visit! And….um… “grok”.

Indeed, for the new Eurasian Security System Russia and other Eurasian states want to be made viable, NATO must die, for the Eurasia envisioned includes the Europeans, not just those in the Eastern portion of Europe. Yes, the Balts will cry and perhaps the Swedes too. IMO, when the rest of Europe finally understands that they don’t need to spend 2-3+% of their GDP on useless weapons produced by the Outlaw US Empire and they can once again get inexpensive energy resources that will help them dig out of the economic depression they’ve allowed themselves to be drubbed by, their relationship with the declining Outlaw US Empire will change comprehensively. The length and depth of the economic drubbing will determine when that change commences.

Now, for European institutional dissolution to occur, that is, for NATO and the EU to be put out of their misery, Ukraine must be completely defeated, demilitarized, and the Banderites purged through war crimes trials and the like –as an ideology as odious as German Nazism, with laws just like in Germany prohibiting it.

That will be difficult to do. It requires Ukraine to surrender unconditionally — as Germany did—and Japan, too.

No one has really gone much into the nitty-gritty of what “denazification” would involve.

Military victory and defeat of the West must come first. One step at a time.

In any case, a “Western Ukrainian” rump state may be necessary, a kind of ideological zoo.

Rump state basics

Setting up a Galician ass…er…rump state would require:

1. Time

2. Driving the Banderites westwards from Kiev to ethnic home in Galicia. Keep in mind they are not “Ukrainian” — they are Galician.

3. Temporary occupation of Galicia to purge the Banderite ideology and its proponents,forcing many to flee further West to Poland, where they will be most unwelcome thanks to WWII pogroms against Poles . Those with money will go to London.

4. Recruitment of non-Nazi Galician nationalists to form an independent non-aligned Galician State, with the promise of freeing them from debt-obligations to the West. Not every Galician is a Nazi believer— just as not every German was a Nazi believer.

5. Investment from Eurasia – China and India, as well as from Russia, to rebuild. When people are poor and their economy shattered, money matters.

6. A new constitution must be passed asserting an independent but neutral Galicia—with safeguards against Western influence and assuring a path forward—one safe also for Russia.

7. An option to join the Russian Union as Belarus did.

“Western Ukraine” aka Galicia is Russophobic

Russia sees Galicia as a non-Russian entity, even hostile. After all, “Western Ukrainians” have been brainwashed from kindergarten up since 2014. The linguistic map gives you the key to where modern day Banderite Ukraine (Galician) begins and ends. But now Galicia and Volhynia comprise neverending graveyards.

So Russia will not offer a new Galicia all options it will offer the rest of Ukraine through referenda o– including membership in the Russian Federation—which woudl access to one of the world’s fastest growing economies, or some form of autonomy as “union states”.

If Galicia wants to join later — fine— but first it must prove itself worthy.

Given voting histories from 2014, Odessa, and the Black Sea oblasts will want to join the Russian federation.

That will cut off Galicia from the Black Sea and give Russia extra leverage. But it will also give the Black Sea states protection from NATO subversion or aggression through Romania or Moldova —as well as Turkiye (who knows what the New Ottoman Empire wants!)

It is, of course, absolutely necessary that Russia control all of what used to be Ukraine’s Black Sea coast line to ensure security.

How many years to accomplish this? I am guessing the rest of Putin’s term. Putin and Trump will talk but Lavrov says any agreement would have be guaranteed under law. But no such law exists at present. The US flouts international law and legal obligations casually. In other words, there will be no meaningful agreement between Russian and the US. Facts on the ground will have to be accepted — or not.

Karlof1 quotes Trenin

Karl quotes Trenin in full, with important parts in italics and bold.

The liberation mission of Russia–-its historical task–-does not end with the liberation of the cities and villages of Donbass and Novorossiya. It is aimed at liberating the whole of Ukraine from the anti-Russian Bandera regime, its neo-Nazi ideology, as well as from the influence of external forces hostile to the Russian world.

Like any other country, Ukraine belongs first and foremost to the people living on its territory. Russia, however, is closely and inextricably linked with this people and the land on which they live. After the end of the war, we owe it to ourselves, first of all, to help our neighbors build a new Ukraine–-initially a reconciled and then a peaceful neighbor, in the medium term–-a partner, and in the long term–-an ally.

Russia has historical experience in turning military opponents into friends or reliable fellow citizens. Suffice it to recall the revival of the Chechen Republic, which became a stronghold of stability in the North Caucasus; the alliance of former mujahideen with the Afghan "northern alliance" or the example of the GDR and a number of other satellite countries of Nazi Germany after World War

Doctorow (and many others) by contrast, thinks that:

a.) NATO will continue to exist into the foreseeable future

b.) So too, the EU

c.) Galicians will maintain their implacable hatred of Russians, fostered by Austria long ago in the same way that the US stirred up anti-Russian sentiment in the Caucasus.

In other words, the West remains as it is.Same-old. Same-old.

He is likely wrong on all counts— if only because nothing lasts forever, especially when it is not working properly—which is an understatement in the case of the West, including the US, UK, and Europe.

But Doctorow is an Ivy League trained elite journalist —so perhaps a little biased despite generally sensible contrarian views.

Western antipathy to Russia and belief in the superiority of all things Western is beaten into our minds day in, day out by the MSM, which is owned by Western elites — the Davos crowd.

With the growth of BRICS economies, they will soon need to change course or go bankrupt, if not face revolution. The West is losing WWIII.

Forget Switzerland, in Galicia, anti-Russian hatred is local and viscerally cultural —expressed in the Banderite ideology, which must be exterminated. Partial measures are not enough.

Trenin writes:

In the recent example of Syria, we received a clear confirmation of the military maxim of the great Alexander Suvorov: an undercut forest grows.

Assad made the mistake of ignoring Russian and Iranian appeals to turn the undercut forest into farmland. He didn’t “grok”. The Russians did, however.

Just because you have a brainwashed population in Ukraine — does not mean that they stay brainwashed — just they don’t think for themselves.

As it happens, ideologies shift as their leaders shift— which happens often

That is because most political “leaders” are psychopaths and do not have an “ideology” rooted in a real beliefs—since that would require them to identify with others. They have use “ideology” as a mask to get others to identify with them — and serve their interests.

What’s the difference between terrorist and a Wall Street Banker? A stylist and a barber

Chappy ….slow progress

I am making slow progress getting Chappy to trust me. But it IS progress!

He still hides but I can play with him and feed him treats by hand. I expect it will take time—months before we have a “relationship”...

I hope he doesn’t need to see a vet — because it will be difficult for me to catch him and take him until he is fully acclimated to his new environment!

Ichi is getting used to him. They do not play but “talk”… meow, meow…unfortunately at 4 AM! Feline insomnia?

Buy us coffee please. I need to wake up in the morning, for one thing! Click HERE!