Let’s begin by stating the obvious: those who now claim that the Biden Putin summit did not produce anything tangible and was, at best, a waste of time are plainly wrong, mainly because they misunderstood what was really at stake (and what still remains at stake following the Summit).
What is the evidence for this?
The first and most obvious sign that something very real took place is the absolutely hysterical reaction of the War Party (which I define as follows: the entire US media, the Neocons, the MAGA-GOP gang in Congress, the “non-Biden gang” inside the Democratic Party, the US energy sector, the US MIC, the entire US “deep state”, the Israel lobby, the Ukie lobby, the UK lobby, the Polish lobby, etc.) The Biden administration is coming under HUGE pressure from the War Party to continue to threaten Russia will all sorts of sanctions and “consequences” unless Russia stands down from her current “threatening” stance and give up Putin’s “dream” to invade the Ukraine and “restore the Soviet Union”. The fact that none of that verbiage has any connections to reality is not an impediment for the War Party. You could say that the War Party is a choir which only knows how to sing one song.
[Sidebar: on a recent talkshow on Russia TV one guest observed that it is truly hilarious to see the West threaten Russia with “sanctions from hell” while the latter are an absolute joke compared to the devastating crisis Russia survived in the 90s when the West was “helping” Russia. He is quite correct. I would also add that a country which lost 27 million people rather than to bow down and accept the become a colony of (Hitler’s) “United Europe” is unlikely be deterred by being disconnected from the SWIFT, especially since doing so would cripple the EU much more than Russia!]
Second, there are indirect but consistent signs of a very serious internal struggle inside the “Biden” administration. This is nothing new, it all began with Obama, continued under Trump and is still happening today: when a President is very weak, the various agencies and departments begin to develop their own, quasi private, foreign (and internal) policies. Under Obama and Trump this was not too much of an issue since neither President was willing or able to seriously negotiate with the Kremlin (which is when the Russians began to speak of their US counterparts as “non-agreement-capable”). This time around, however, “Biden” clearly made a concerted effort to try to initiate some kind of dialog, hence this time there is something very real at stake.
Third, the tone in Russia has changed rather dramatically. Just read the transcript of the interview of the Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov: it is particularly amazing to hear that kind of language coming from a top Foreign Ministry official (Russian diplomats are very old fashioned and rarely use such a direct language). Most striking in this interview is Ryabkov’s deep pessimism about the USA being able to actually reach a negotiated agreement with Russia on pretty much anything.
So what is really at stake here?
First, we need to note that we still don’t know what really took place between Putin and Biden. All we know is that both sides agreed to continue their dialog on the expert level. However, we can make some educated guesses based on how both sides have behaved since the Summit.
Second, there are clear signs that the “Biden” Administration is still apparently trying not to fully cave in to the War Party. The problem is that this stance is only partial (different officials express often diverging opinion) and hesitant (even Biden himself seems to be zig-zagging about what is actually going on between the US and Russia). Most western analysts out there see the following as the key issues between Russia and the USA:
- Russian plans to invade the Ukraine
- North Stream 2
- Russian subversive covert actions in the West (Skripal)
- Putin’s desire to re-create the USSR, if needed by using military force
- Russian support for non-democratic forces and regimes worldwide (Syria)
I happen to think that all of these are only secondary issues, pretexts.
Again, this is the only song the War Party choir knows how to sing, so why expect anything else from them?
So what is really at stake here?
Think about the recent Summit for Democracy and ask yourself: what was this all about? It sure was not about democracy or human rights, not with countries like Israel or Latvia attending, both of which undeniably are Apartheid states. Not to mention what the US and UK are doing to Julian Assange whose life, apparently, is much less valuable that Navalny’s. All that nonsense is just PR, nothing else.
As I mentioned in my article about this summit, the real purpose of the summit was to issue certificates: those invited were certified as loyal House Negroes while those not invited were labeled as evil and dangerous Field Negros. Now, considering the extreme weakness and vulnerability of the United States, it is pretty clear that the actual value of the “good House Negro” certificate was very limited for those who received it. So this is not about the Negroes at all, it was about the Master of the house and his need to show that he still was the master and that he could still command a sizeable force of nice and obedient slaves to do his bidding. In other words, it was a show of force for (an otherwise rather desperate) Uncle Shmuel.
This is absolutely crucial: for a dead Empire and a dead USA, appearances are much more important than reality. As I have mentioned in the past, the AngloZionist Empire died on 8 January 2020 when the Iranians attacked US bases with missiles and the US did absolutely nothing while the USA, at least as we knew them, died on January 6th of 2021 (these two events were almost exactly a year apart, which makes me wonder what else could happen in January of 2022?). The main objective of the Summit for Democracy was to hide these realities as much as possible and the very fact that the US had to organize such a silly non-event to try to still look relevant tells us everything we really need to know about the real condition of the Empire and the USA (both dead).
In the light of the above, now let’s look at the current dialog (however tenuous) between the USA and Russia.
US position: first, and above all else, the White House needs to avoid giving the appearance that Russia and the USA are negotiating on an equal footing. This desire to maintain an appearance of superiority is made even harder by the stark reality which shows that far from being equal, Russia is the stronger party in this negotiation, and by a big margin at that (militarily of course, but also socially, politically and economically). This is the key to the USA’s dilemma: how do you negotiate with a stronger opponent while maintaining the appearance of your own (non-existing) superiority?
Russian position: the Kremlin is ready to negotiate, but only if the US accepts that both sides have equal rights and obligations. For example, if the USA gets to declare that it has “interests” thousands of miles away from home, then Russia gets to declare that she too has “interests”, especially in countries on her own border.
Clearly, those two positions are mutually exclusive.
Furthermore, both sides recognize that.
The USA’s method to deal with this problem is to do one thing while saying its opposite, that is to quietly accept the Russian stance on negotiations while publicly denying this.
The Russian method is even more simple: do nothing and simply wait. Wait for the EU to freeze, wait for the USA to further drown in its many and very serious internal crises and wait for country 404, the “moldy bagel” to use Dmitri Orlov’s very accurate expression, to simply rot away. Here is how the vast majority of Russian analysts and officials see the situation:
- Russia has no need, plan, desire or even interest in invading country 404.
- NS2 is important to Russia, but not crucially so.
- Militarily, Russia can deal with the Ukie military in a few hours without sending a single soldier across the border.
- Russia can also defeat the US on any level of warfare, from local tactical to strategic and nuclear.
- Russia, being a much more free and democratic country than most of the House Negros invited to the Summit, has no interest whatsoever in the West’s verbiage about human rights.
- Russia has no need to subvert or interfere in any of the countries which are so hostile to her simply because these countries are already quite busy committing economic, moral, spiritual, political and cultural suicide all by their own with no need for any further help from Russia
- Russia is quite happy to work with the “bad” Field Negroes to build a multi-polar world composed of truly sovereign countries which agree to base their relations on international law.
- Russia simply does not care what the House Negroes will do or say, simply because they have no agency (except for a few special cases like India).
Then what about the Russian forces near (relatively) the Ukrainian border?
Actually, several retired Russian generals have repeatedly explained what that is all about. This force is simply not large enough to consider an invasion (and subsequent occupation!) of the Ukraine. Its true purpose is quite simple: they are quite capable of stopping any Ukronazi invasion of the LDNR should the LDNR’s defenses collapse. And for this much more limited mission, this force is more than sufficient to quickly and successfully execute such a mission. No less important is that the presence of such an “insurance force” is a very clear message to the Nazi regime in Kiev: there is absolutely no way you will ever invade the LDNR – try this, and we will move our forces into the LDNR, disarm you, and recognize the LDNR as independent states.
Here is it important to repeat something one more time: it is not the West’s worst nightmare that Russia might invade the Ukraine. The West’s worst nightmare would be for Russia not to move a single solider across the border. That is the “peace nightmare” which the War Party wants, and needs, to avoid at any cost.
So, where do we go from here?
I get a sense that there are some people in the Biden Administration who are smart enough to choose a “soft landing” for the USA over a “crash and burn” scenario. They are quite aware of all the facts I describe above and what they aim for is an orderly retreat while negotiating for the best possible terms for the USA with Russia (and other countries, by the way). The problem is that any notion of an orderly retreat is presented by the War Party as abject surrender.
[Sidebar: this is not a uniquely US problem: ever since Putin came to power there were those who called the many Russian orderly retreats as signs of caving in to the West: they said that Putin was an obedient agent of “Davos” or Israel, and they blamed him for his alledged weakness and indecisiveness. The truth is that both in politics and in military art, orderly retreats are a very difficult maneuver to successfully pull-off and, worse, even when they are successfully executed, they still very rarely get any praise but, instead, get only disgusted accusations of weakness bordering on treason. “Couch-generals” have the luxury and time to demand a heroic counter-attacks, but they don’t have to then live with the responsibility for the inevitable consequences of such “heroic” grandstanding.]
Still, I am convinced that there are those in the Biden Administration who want an orderly retreat, not for the sake of peace, of course, but in order to buy time to regroup, reorganize, rearm, retrain and basically circle the wagons on a smaller, but better protected, part of our planet.
For the rulers of the USA, it is preferable to have the size of their plantation shrink, even quite significantly, than to have some combination of Field Negroes to completely burn down their house. So they want to settle for a smaller plantation and fewer House Negroes.
Sadly, I don’t see the Biden White House capably of riding out the hysterics of the War Party, if only because the War Party fully compensates what it lacks in common sense with a maniacal determination to prevail, if only because should “peace break out” they would lose their incomes. I sure hope that I am wrong here, but it would take a quite charismatic leader to dare to openly take on the War Party (we all remember how the swamp quickly drained Trump rather than the other way around).
Most analysts see that 2022 will be the year of a massive internal crisis in the USA, with inflation, crime, riots, shortages, etc. all dramatically rising. Optimists will see that as a good sign (surely the US won’t start a war when it is itself in a quasi-civil war state!) while pessimists will see that as a sign that the US will certainly start some kind of war (war is an old and effective trick to avoid dealing with internal collapse).
Here we can only hope (and pray!) for the best, while preparing for the worst.
Then there is the UK+3B+PU gang which is absolutely desperate for some kind of war, hopefully short and triumphant. They are absolutely horrified at the idea that this war might not happen. Yes, in theory, the USA does have enough weight to bring them to heel, but the problem is that the US executive is itself very divided (and, not to mention, very corrupt). Russia most definitely cannot stop them, because for them even losing a war to Russia is preferable to not having one in the first place.
The USA is deeply divided and cannot even give the appearance of accepting Russia as an equal partner.
The EU is run by a class of narcissistic infantiles who are terminally out of touch with reality.
The War Party will only increase its hysterics as it sees war as the only option to remain relevant.
Russia has done all she should and could by forcing the USA into a strategic retreat and now all she can do now is wait.
My personal conclusion will be in the form of a short video clip that eloquently shows what happened the last time around when the West wanted to crush Russia.