This is Part II, and you need to read Part I to understand where this is coming from. Before 2014, before Nuland's coup in Ukraine, the Russians understood that a conflict was brewing. They were not alone. Various other countries, with China in the lead, felt we'd lost it. Both countries did convert to 'Capitalism', but after Russia had been robbed blind in the Nineties by following the advise of the 'Harvard Boys' under Yeltsin, it understood the difference between 'Industrial Capitalism', which brought wealth for the nation, and 'Financial Capitalism' which brought wealth for a tiny elite. Putin reversed course to impose an 'Industrial Capitalist' system, creating arch enemies in 'Wallstreet' and the 'London City', and at home under the oligarchs which lacked a sense of responsibility. He didn't revolutionise the way they had to do business, but treaded carefully, and tried to win their trust. Xi Jinping copied that approach recently, as he sought to convince the 'Jack Ma's' that they owed their astonishing wealth to the people, and that they were obliged to re-invest the money they made in the Chinese economy predominantly.
Both the Chinese and the Russians tried to warn us that 'Financial Capitalism' would be our undoing, and called upon us to return to the format of a multipolar world, with countries developing within their own strengths, respecting the culture of the people as an asset, and not as a commodity to be exploited. As such the 2014 coup in Ukraine did not surprise Putin and those around him. Dangling a superior offer in front of the nose of Yanukovitch, compared to the proposition coming from 'Brussels', based on respecting Ukraine's autonomy, not imposing 'Brussels'-style rulings on 'Kiev', and including the country into the planned 'Belt and Road Initiative', the 'New Silk Route', launched in 2013, developing the resource rich country as an important node in that chain, was a 'no brain' choice, really.
The only way the 'Collective West' could win the country over, was through a coup, using extremists in the country who hated the Russians for all the wrong reasons. The coup succeeded, but the Russians executed their own 'Plan B' with astonishing succes, leaving the 'Collective West' staring into the pitch black abyss of utter failure, even before war broke out in the country when the 'Chocolate King' they hauled onto the throne was ordered to take the Donbas using military means. A crucial blunder. Crimea had been semi-independent since Ukraine declared independence from 'Moscow', after the people on Crimea rejected to join a 'Kiev' led Ukraine. They had their own 'Rada', and a 2014 referendum confirmed that the people of Crimea rejected the rule of 'Team Nuland', and opted for switching back to becoming part of the Russian Federation. The democratic will of the people was not even a simple majority, but overwhelming. And it still is, as an American journalist discovered when he visited Crimea recently.
No such possibility to shield the Donbas from the onslaught of Porochenko under tutelage of NATO, but the march on the hastily declared 'Donetsk' and 'Luhansk' Peoples Republics was a disaster. The Ukraine military had split, taking their weapons and ammunition with them to their respective loyalties, and the 'DPR/LPR'-side came close to a decisive victory when the 'Kiev'-side found itself locked in a cauldron at Debaltseve, as it broke a truce in an attempt to force a territorial split between the 'DPR' and 'LPR'. In a speech to his party members the fiercely anti-Russian Social Democrat minister of foreign affairs of Holland at the time admitted that NATO had run out of options. Increasing their involvement would offer Russia an excuse to do the same, and NATO was not ready for an armed conflict with Russia on Ukrainian soil. Enter the 'Minsk Agreement', when Merkel visited Moscow on a face-saving mission.
The 'Minsk Agreement' was a total victory for Putin, although it didn't satisfy the more nationalistic sentiments in Russia itself. But Putin and his government do not share those dreams of the restoration of the Russian Empire, contrary to what the 'Collective West' is claiming. Putin does want to restore the 'Standing' of Russia, for which it does not need territorial gains at all. The 'Minsk Agreement' called for a Federalised Ukraine, with plenty of autonomy for the 'Regions' in an economic and cultural sense. If implemented, it would leave Russia with partners ('Oblasts') in the East and South of Ukraine eager to do business with their energy and natural resources rich neighbour, developing the huge potential of those 'Oblasts'. Without the headache of having to deal with extremists in the rest of the country.
All of a sudden the 'Collective West' understood that Russia was about to reap all of the benefits, boosting the 'BRI-bridge' into Southern Europe, while the EU and 'Washington' would be left with the piss poor parts of the country requiring huge amount of subsidies, with nothing in return but Songfestivals, Gay Pride parades, soccer tournaments, MMA-clubs feeding into the 'White Supremacy' community, and 'spam' on your computer offering Ukrainian women for marriage. It is my understanding that Porochenko, Merkel and Hollande, who signed this 'Minsk Accord' on behalf of the 'Collective West', never had any intention to live up to their obligations, and were already planning to take Putin out, using Ukraine as bait, as recently acknowledged by them in various interviews.
The entire development of the military confrontation which kicked off in February last year is revealing to me that the Russians 'came prepared'. They desperately wanted to save the peace, and to avoid an all out war, hoping to push 'Kiev', 'Paris' and 'Berlin' to honour their signature after all, but under no circumstances would they allow NATO to roll back their plans to include the Eastern and Southern part of Ukraine into the 'Belt and Road Initiative', and turn the culturally Russian Ukrainians into second rate citizens. As they intervened when 'Kiev' and NATO increased shelling of the Donbas region from February 17th in preparation of an invasion into the DPR and LPR, with designs to take Crimea to boot, they envisioned that threatening Kiev would bring Zelensky to the table to avoid disaster for his people and his country. It almost worked. But the 'Collective West', already exposed as the 'brain' behind this attempt to remove Putin from power, 'convinced' Zelensky to rather destroy his country and slaughter his people, than to bring peace and prosperity to his country.
Now, the 'Big Question' is: Can Russia pull it off? Is a country with a military budget as big as that of France capable of defeating the 'Collective West' militarily? In a more condensed form I discussed this with 'TTG' on the Turcopolier website, since I am under the impression that, yes, they will 'grind NATO down', while he is convinced that a NATO victory is around the corner. My assessment is based on sources which revealed the huge losses on the Ukrainian side, in manpower and equipment, while the losses on the Russian side are modest to negligible in comparison. His sources are telling him it is the other way around, and a Ukrainian Spring offensive, with military equipment provided by the 'Collective West' is sure to be hugely successful.
Smoke and Mirrors in our part of the world are obscuring the reality 'on the ground' if you ask me. Various Western sources appear to corroborate the over all picture I'm presenting to you, though I'm not saying Russia has unlimited resources and is practically invulnerable. Tactical and strategic mistakes, or limited capacity in certain crucial areas, bad logistics, treason, tragic miscommunication or infighting can sack the entire effort of any nation. But up till now Russia is performing above expectations from my perspective, since they even seem to have been able to dodge the bullet on the economic front, and apparently managed to save a lot of the funds the EU said they had 'frozen'. Original estimates of the amount of money stolen from Russia were later amended to far lower figures, to the chagrin of Ursula von der Leyen.
A third essay on what might be next is tempting, but clearly premature. A Russian victory doesn't look like this Bush-show, of the American president addressing the American people from the flight deck of an aircraft carrier in the Gulf to declare victory over Iraq, when the whole mess of ISIS and Fallujah, spilling over to Syria, was still in the future. The Russians defeated the Ukrainians almost immediately, but NATO is keeping the suffering going, and at which moment will the 'Collective West' come to terms with the fact that they are out of options? When will there be this 'Vietnam-moment'? This 'Kabul-moment'? This 'Debaltseve-moment'? It may be a month away, or several years if the 'Collective West' decides to impose a war-time economy on the population, while sending their sons and daughters to recapture Bakhmut. Switching to a war-time economy has the added advantage that the 'Collective West' can obscure the collapse of the Dollar-based system in one throw. Rationing food, housing, energy, and skipping the 'Green Dream' to build tanks, artillery and produce ammunition because this mythical place Bakhmut suddenly became more important than providing for the people, and living at peace with your neighbours. I sure hope we'll come to our 'Collective Senses' before we allow the crazies to run the asylum, but we already missed so many opportunities on our way to this war with Russia, that I'm not optimistic.