Take a step back. Look at what we've accomplished. The ultimate timeline is going back to the start of civilisation. But to understand more recent developments we need a 'cut' that seems to be appropriate. Like most 'Realists' commenting on the war in Ukraine, I opt for 2007, Putin's warning at the Munich security conference. NATO-expansion, he said, had to stop, or there could be a war with Russia. Immediately, in 2008, NATO invited Ukraine and Georgia to join. I maintain that this signalled to Putin that NATO wanted war. But on whose terms?
At the time Russia was in no position to confront NATO militarily, other than at the nuclear level. In itself that was sufficient protection, as long as certain conditions were met. But how about a more conventional confrontation? How about using proxies? Georgia immediately went on a rampage, trying to take 'breakaway' parts of what used to be the Georgia Oblast in Soviet times, which opted out of joining Georgia after that Oblast had claimed and got independence, by force. Russia intervened, and gave the Georgians a bloody nose. NATO made some noises, but kept its distance. An EU report on the confrontation confirmed that it had been Georgia which had opened fire. Russia didn't take all of Georgia though, and withdrew after teaching its neighbour a lesson.
In 2014 NATO launched a regime change operation to take Ukraine by 'revolutionary means', bypassing the ballot box. It did take over in 'Kiev', but semi-independent Crimea voted to leave the federation, and join the Russian federation instead, while people in the 'Donbas' revolted against the coup. After 'Team Nuland' installed her handpicked transition-team, which organised 'elections' which offered a choice between two main contenders, both pro-NATO, the new president launched a civil war, with 'commentators' going public with the message that they needed to kill at least one and a half million pro-Russian countrymen. HERE and HERE.
As always, consider that certain people saying things, or acting in this way, or that, does not necessarily translate into an official policy. But the 'mood' was clear. The civil war ended in a defeat for Ukraine, aided by NATO, and a victory for the Donbas militia, aided by Russia. Ukraine was left licking its wounds, while NATO started planning for a rematch. As Merkel, Hollande and Porochenko, as well as Zelensky, confirmed, the 'Minsk Accord' was only meant to gain time, in order to re-arm Ukraine. NATO did not *expect* another war. It *wanted* (sought) another war. The 2019 Rand-report with the catching title: 'Overextending and Unbalancing Russia', by throwing Ukraine under the bus, spelled it out.
Again, like I said above, do not assume that every 'asset' needed to make it work was informed. Do not assume that every 'asset' which was informed understood what it meant. In fact, the writers of that report had no clue what they had triggered, if we are to take the later added disclaimer, that any reference to their report as the cause of the 2022 'Special Military Operation' the Russians started was 'Russian disinformation' seriously. That disclaimer was added in April 2022, with the war well underway, and the 'Istanbul' concept shredded, as NATO convinced Zelensky to stay in the race. All of a sudden we were in it for the long-haul, while the Rand-report felt that Russia only needed a bit of push to collapse onto itself.
Based on my own analysis, I wrote that the Russians, who had desperately tried to avoid war in 2021, through proposals for a lasting peace in Europe to NATO, which never even received a reply, would not conquer all of Ukraine, if a military confrontation would erupt. And when it did, I noted that the Russians would settle for something close to 'Minsk' if Zelensky took the message of Russian troops banging on the door for what it was: 'Posing, Scaring', hence the term 'Special Military Operation', sold as an 'R2P' operation in public statements, to stop the bloodshed in the Donbas, and save Ukraine as a whole from destruction. I added that if it would come to a full blown war, Russia would limit itself to taking those Oblasts within Ukraine that were 'culturally Russian', relatively easy to incorporate into the Russian federation. Opening up a corridor to Southern Europe over land, and through the port of Odessa, for 'BRICS'.
NATO, on the other hand, thought that Russia *would* take all of Ukraine in a hurry, which would expose the country to the risk of being 'Overextended and Unbalanced', like the Rand-report wanted. Coupled to 'Sanctions from Hell', and 'Stay Behind' military, commanded from NATO territory, very much like the successful 'Afghanistan' operation using Al Qaeda, Russia, that 'Gasstation with nukes', was bound to stumble and fall. Offering the NATO-countries all the riches of Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and all the rest, and take NATO to the border with China. By April, when the Rand-Corporation added that disclaimer, it had become clear that things would not develop as planned. First and foremost, the sanctions did not have the anticipated effect. Secondly, Russia didn't even attempt to take Kiev, let alone all of Ukraine. And thirdly, the predicted shortfall of ammo and equipment didn't come about.
Now, hold it right there.
In the UK, the predominant agitator looking for war with Russia, a 'cell' within the Military/Intelligence complex developed the strategy I've highlighted, based on using 'Stay Behind' military and sabotage, while Zelensky and his staff assumed NATO was going to help him regain territory and defeat the Russians. This 'cell' was not the back-up plan. It was the plan. But those plotting needed Russia to take all of Ukraine, and claim victory, which never happened. While the Putin led government deftly proceeded with their own plan, which called for a 'War of Attrition' once it had been established that shocking Zelensky into returning to the 'Minsk Accord' had failed. The ultra nationalists in Russia felt he was showing weakness. Prigozhin among them, and I'm still undetermined on the question of who this Prigozhin was actually working for. Was he truly a Russian 'hothead', or someone set to take center stage after Putin had been removed, representing the pro-Western oligarchs in Russia? But that doesn't really matter today. Seen from Putin's perspective he was, or became, a 'useful idiot', and the 'War of Attrition' was a smart, and highly successful move.
Like I said before, I have every reason to assume Zelensky was never informed about the preconceived plan to use his country as bait. Maybe someone like Budanov understood what it was all about. And Zalushny, the general fired by Zelensky and Nuland after the failed 'Spring/Summer-offensive', which played straight into the hands of Russia, must have known by the time he was forced to launch that offensive, with not enough of anything, and no effort underway to recruit more men. What is crucial to understand, is that NATO never anticipated the need to fight a protracted 'War of Attrition' lasting years, while Russia was. NATO's plan hinged on Putin conquering Ukraine right-away, or being 'teased' into occupying the entire country.
As it is, it does look like everything is going Russia's way, while the 'cell' is biting the dust. And with it the UK as its underwriter, especially if Trump will hand over managing this war to Europe, landing themselves in a hornets nest as their own economy, and that of the EU-countries, is going down the drain, with obligations it cannot handle. Non of this marks me as 'Putin's Puppet', or alternatively a 'Zelensky Apologist'. It is personal for me in this sense that a bunch of nitwits were given the keys to our collective future, thinking that spreading 'LGBT+' and being a 'pirate' qualified them to lead us down this path to destruction as our 'Elders'. But I cannot even believe that non of our guardian angels in the established media, or in politics, smelled a rat. You really did not have to have a crystal ball to see this one coming. It reminds me of this famous experiment, where you are asked to watch the ball in a ballgame, and tell the researcher how many time the ball hit the ground, or something like that. And while you are busy focusing on the ball, a man in a gorilla costume moves through the players from right to left. Amazing though it sounds, a majority of the people never see the gorilla. But now, take a step back, and watch again.