The Democrats are basing their election strategy on the issue of the Russian-Ukrainian war. Having “pushed” American aid to Ukraine with great effort, they made the success of their election campaign dependent on the course of this war. Thus, placing themselves in a narrow corridor of the strict parameters they set:
***
In March 1998, elections to the Verkhovna Rada were held in Ukraine.
The Social Democratic Party of Ukraine (United) built its election campaign purely on the success of Dynamo Kyiv in the Champions League.
In political advertising, the top five appeared in Dynamo scarves to the song “Our Youth Team.”
But in Kyiv, right before the elections (the match took place on March 18, and the elections on the 29th), Dynamo was defeated 1-4. Result: and only after a “very thorough recount of votes” did the Social Democrats crawl into parliament by only 0.01% exceeding the entry barrier.
American democrats (not social, but simply) did exactly the same thing - they tied electoral success to the military successes of the ZSU, simultaneously driving themselves into a very narrow corridor of decisions.
***
The United States delayed providing aid for a long time, risking losing its reputation as a world leader and its conceptual power.
Washington played a delicate game, forcing Europe to get involved in the process of financing and ensuring the security of Ukraine, as well as its own.
Having received what they wanted, the States calmly put the aid package to Ukraine to a vote.
The Sullivan-Burns plan, which the authors wrote about , is good for consolidating the West around the United States to confront the Axis of Evil led by Putin’s Russia and stimulating the accelerated development of the West in the face of a constant threat from the Axis of Evil.
But the Sullivan-Burns plan in its pure form (a demonstrative non-defeat of Russia) does not allow for two things:
1) The United States - to give a convincing signal to Europe that the United States remains the main force in the world;
2) Democrats win the presidential election in November 2024.
From an electoral point of view, the Sullivan-Burns plan will look like a manifestation of weakness and indecisiveness of the current administration. And so it needs to be adjusted a little.
Namely. In July, Washington will host the anniversary NATO summit, which should become a landmark and mark the reassertion of US leadership, which fits into Biden’s election slogan “America is Back.”
In addition, the Alliance summit will inevitably be used as a pre-election move by the Democrats, especially since it will take place just before the primaries.
The NATO summit should become not so much alarmist as alarmist-mobilization.
Its two-phase nature will be based on the structure: threat - salvation.
A future Russian offensive, likely in the Donbass and Kharkov directions, will focus on what could have been if not for the aid package.
The military assistance package will help the front hold on, and in addition, the package contains long-range ATACMS missiles that can change the situation strategically.
It is important to pay attention to the haste demonstrated by the current American administration.
Having made sure of the full involvement of Europe in the process of military assistance to Ukraine and a full-scale restart of the European military-industrial complex, as well as having achieved the adoption by the Verkhovna Rada of the law on mobilization, the United States literally within a few days delivered the first package of military assistance from the 61 billion voted.
It should be noted that on June 15-16, the Global Peace Summit will be held in Lucerne, Switzerland, in which from 80 to 100 states will take part.
The summit is expected to create a framework that Russia will naturally not agree to.
Accordingly, the West and Ukraine, and the countries that have joined them, will give a mandate to resolve this issue in a different way.
And this is less than a month before the NATO summit.
Why is the Washington NATO summit important?
Firstly, it is an anniversary – 75 years since the founding of the organization.
Secondly, it is necessary to confirm the need for the organization (although the authors assume in any case the transformation of the Alliance within the framework of a new global security system).
Third, despite the beginning of the process of large-scale militarization of Europe, and even taking into account the already received signals that a large-scale package of American aid to Ukraine may be the last, the summit should confirm the leadership role of the United States
Therefore, literally before the summit itself, an event should occur that will confirm the relevance of the second and third tasks.
Naturally, this should be associated with the Russian-Ukrainian war as the main conflict that determines the future balance of power for several decades to come.
Consequently, Ukraine’s military success should be, although local, bright and significant for its European partners, and also electorally significant for American voters.
Therefore, the authors risk suggesting that it will be Crimea!!!
Based on the range of weapons, there is almost the only possible scenario - cutting off logistics, suppressing Russian air defense, and destroying military facilities. The flight of Russian security forces and the occupation administration from the peninsula will plunge the residents of Crimea into complete disorientation.
The Russian Black Sea Fleet will most likely be completely deprived of the ability to remain a combat-ready unit.
That is, in fact, Crimea will become a demilitarized region!
Moreover, the ZSU does not have to enter Crimea; a raid with the installation of Ukrainian flags on the territory of the peninsula is enough.
The Pentagon says Ukraine could use new weapons to strike Russian targets in Crimea. And this is already, in fact, happening.
As The New York Times writes : “The goal of the new long-range systems is to put more pressure on Crimea, where Russian air and ground forces are concentrated and where, according to a [ US ] Department of Defense official , “Russia now has a relatively safe haven.”
But there is one caveat!
The summit will take place from July 9 to 11, and the US presidential election is on November 5. In 4 months, American voters will forget about significant events, and the voter should follow the news “from the other side of the planet” with bated breath and in November want to cast his vote for the Democrats.
Therefore, the effective use of American weapons must be continually demonstrated, and Ukraine must show decisive success on the battlefield.
At the same time, according to the Sullivan-Burns plan, Russia should not be defeated (at least, the processes occurring in connection with the defeats should be predictable).
Republicans, observing this move, voted for the Ukraine aid package, thereby placing full responsibility on the Democrats and closely monitoring the slightest mistakes.
The scenario of upcoming events will be forged within these strict parameters.
As it will be?
Today, the Russians are using new tactics to break through the front line: they launch KABs from airplanes, which destroy fortified areas, then introduce small mobile groups and armored vehicles.
Today, it is almost impossible to break through the front line in any other way, and there are currently no countermeasures against KABs dropped from aircraft.
American missiles will make it possible to destroy Russian air defense on the line of combat contact. Next, our air defense and F-16s should be used, which will have to shoot down or drive away Russian aircraft away from the line of combat contact.
Also, with the help of ATACMS, Ukraine will be able to hit Russian supply centers, cutting off the aggressor troops from ammunition, fuel and lubricants and food.
Based on the parameters that the democrats have set for themselves, by November Ukraine should really achieve serious success in de-occupying its territories.
Lawrence Friedman, writing for the Financial Times, wrote : "Kiev may face pressure to achieve significant military gains that can be demonstrated by the November US elections to justify aid..."
But there is no talk yet about the complete restoration of territorial integrity - this will be a “temptation” for American voters to vote for a candidate who can ensure victory over Evil for Ukraine and greatness for America.
How much does America's greatness cost the taxpayer?
The Democrats approached the issue as a business project - they need to show at all costs that they can not only skillfully manage taxpayers' money, but also increase it.
Each adult American taxpayer paid $200 for the Ukraine aid package.
But $200 is not a charitable contribution. This is an investment in greatness.
And unlike Russia, the United States knows how to convert greatness into prosperity and vice versa.
Make America Great Again! America is becoming great again. And even without Trump.
Donald was very skillfully used as a scarecrow for Europe, who would allegedly destroy NATO and the Old Continent would be left alone with Putin, armed to the teeth.
As soon as Europe confirms its commitment to US leadership at the NATO anniversary summit in Washington in July, it is very likely that Donald Trump will be dumped by the Republicans themselves, who will receive fabulous contracts for the rearmament of NATO, AUCUS, Ramstein and other formats of the American “diplomatic variable geometry”.
The reason could be some kind of bad criminal article, which will allow the Republicans to remove Trump from the race in the name of saving the party’s reputation.
What will happen next?
The restoration of Ukraine's territorial integrity will definitely not happen before the elections in the United States (and it is not a fact that it will happen in the near future).
By March 2025, we will most likely reach some form of stopping the war. The war will finally turn into a Cold War.
The correction of the Sullivan-Burns plan created room for maneuver for the Patrushev group in the struggle for power in Russia.
The terrorist attack in Crocus City (in which it is impossible to find a Ukrainian trace, but one can easily find a Russian one) provided an opportunity to launch a discourse about “ethno-confessional balance” that is dangerous for Russia. Automatically, following this, the topic of national unity and territorial integrity of the Russian Federation will inevitably be tabooed.
In addition, on the eve of Putin’s inauguration and the appointment of a new government, the FSB dealt a powerful blow to the Russian Army by demonstratively arresting Shoigu’s closest ally, Deputy Defense Minister Ivanov, who is responsible for defense construction and procurement. In essence, an important message was sent: “Russia cannot win, because the Russian Army (at least its leadership) is a traitor and thieves!”
The West is gradually coming to a conclusion, which the authors have been repeating for two years now: Putin is a puppet figure , whose behavior reflects the resulting balance of power in the Russian elite. And this alignment again leans in favor of the FSB.
Leon Aron for The Atlantic wrote :
“His [Patrushev’s] fame is a reminder that if Putin were to lose power tomorrow, his potential successors could be more, not less, belligerent and expansionist.”
And Putin’s successor may not be the younger Patrushev, but the older one.
Patrushev’s belligerence and his continuation of the line of de-Westernization of Russia and even greater rapprochement with Iran, Syria, North Korea, the Taliban, Hezbollah, the Houthis and Hamas, creates objective preconditions for the consolidation of the West (in a broad sense), gives it incentives for development and new passionarity in the face of cannibals of the Axis of Evil.
This will determine the format of the New Cold War for a long period.
It should be recalled that the previous Cold War lasted from 1946 to 1991, that is, 45 years!
Authors:
Vladimir Shevchenko , political scientist, Doctor of Philosophy
Andrey Savarets , analyst, lawyer, author of telegrams for the “ Minority Opinion ”