Only for news & views directly related to the Ukraine conflict.

The current open thread for other issues is here.

Please stick to the topic. Contribute facts. Do not attack other commentators.

Last week's post on Moon of Alabama:

• Apr 24 – Why Kim Dotcom Connects The DNC Email Leak To The Murder Of Seth Rich (Updated)
  Related:
  – Exclusive: Hunter Biden’s Lawyer Controls Entity with 10% Stake in Chinese State-Backed Investment Fund – Breitbart

• Apr 25 – Biden Prepares To Give Up On Ukraine
• Apr 27 – Ukraine Peace Talks – A Grown Up Is Taking Charge
• Apr 28 – The Last Hurrah
  Related:
  – Spot that Nazi – Mark Sleboda
  – AP Interview: Pelosi says Ukraine, democracy 'must win' – AP
  – Russian ground forces ‘bigger today’ than at start of the war in Ukraine, US general says – CNN

• Apr 28 – U.S. Argues For More Protectionism And Subsidies
  Related:
  – America Has Dictated Its Economic Peace Terms to China – Foreign Policy– The Rise of China (and the Fall of the U.S.?) – Alfred McCoy / Naked Capitalism
  – US officials scramble to slow China’s advances – Asia Times
  – And you wonder why we are unpopular – Money illusion

> Now the US has abandoned the Washington Consensus and decided to go all in with protectionism and industrial policy. And that’s because we supposedly need to do this to keep from falling behind. But weren’t we told that these policies slow economic development?

It’s annoying when you get lectured to by more successful countries. It’s especially annoying when the lecture comes from self righteous societies that don’t follow their own advice. Is it any wonder that developing countries have lost respect for the US government. <

—
Other issues:

Cont. reading: The MoA Week In Review – (Not Ukraine) OT 2023-102

ZubuBrothers has a piece that reports about a talk given by the Chief of the General Staff of the Polish Armed Forces General Rajmund Andrzejczak:

Andrzejczak said that the situation doesn’t look good for Kiev at all when considering the economic dynamics of this conflict, with him drawing particular attention to finance, infrastructure issues, social issues, technology, and food production, et al. From this vantage point, he predicts that Russia can continue conducting its special operation for 1-2 more years before it begins to feel any structural pressure to curtail its activities.

By contrast, Kiev is burning through tens of billions of dollars’ worth of aid, yet it still remains very far away from achieving its maximum objectives. Andrzejczak candidly said that Poland’s Western partners aren’t properly assessing the challenges that stand in the way of Ukraine’s victory, including those connected to the “race of logistics”/“war of attrition” that the NATO chief declared in mid-February. Another serious problems concerns refugees’ unwillingness to return to their homeland anytime soon.
…
As Andrzejczak himself admitted, “We just don’t have ammunition. The industry is not ready not only to send equipment to Ukraine, but also to replenish our stocks, which are melting.” Considering that Poland is Ukraine’s third most important patron behind the Anglo-American Axis, this strongly suggests that all other NATO members are struggling just as much as it is to keep up the pace, scale, and scope of support, if not more since many are a lot smaller and thus less capable of contributing in this respect.

Accordingly, this observation means that Kiev’s upcoming counteroffensive will likely be its “last hurrah” prior to resuming peace talks with Russia since the West won’t be able to keep up its assistance for much longer. Andrzejczak seems keenly aware of this “politically inconvenient” fact, hence why he wants his side to give its proxies as much as possible until the end of that operation in the hopes that they can then be in a comparatively more advantageous position by the time these talks recommence.

I agree with the General's analysis.

bigger

Bakhmut/Aryomovsk is to 90% under Russian control and the rest will be captured during the next few days. Ukrainian losses in the city must have been huge. The Ukrainian troops who try to escape from the city immediately come under artillery fire. The latest daily Russian clobber report counts 575 'enemy losses' in Bakhmut over the last 24 hours for a total of 815 along the whole frontline. This is the largest number reported over the last two months.

Holding onto the city at all cost was in my view the wrong decision. A more mobile defense would have cost more land but also would have had much fewer losses than occurred in those static positions under strong artillery fire. As Ukraine is geographically big but has relative few mobilizable soldiers it would have been better to trade land its for time and not its soldiers.

The defense of the lowland city cost the Ukrainian army dearly as it eroded its material and human reserves. Those will be missing to patch the holes in the front line when that long announced 'last hurrah' counteroffensive fails to make any serious gains.

Only for news & views directly related to the Ukraine conflict.

The current open thread for other issues is here.

Please stick to the topic. Contribute facts. Do not attack other commentators.

Last week Secretary of the Treasury Janet L. Yellen gave a speech on the U.S.-China economic relationship. I called it a declaration of war.

Yesterday National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan held a speech on 'Renewing American Economic Leadership' which touched on some of the same themes as Yellen's speech.

Sullivan argues that the U.S. must change course from opening markets and liberalization to targeted protectionism and subsidies for specific sectors. The main argument for it is 'national security' but the real aim seems to be the suppression of competition from others. In a core sentence Sullivan says:

[W]e are protecting our foundational technologies with a small yard and high fence.

As I’ve argued before, our charge is to usher in a new wave of the digital revolution—one that ensures that next-generation technologies work for, not against, our democracies and our security.

We’ve implemented carefully tailored restrictions on the most advanced semiconductor technology exports to China. Those restrictions are premised on straightforward national security concerns. Key allies and partners have followed suit, consistent with their own security concerns.

We’re also enhancing the screening of foreign investments in critical areas relevant to national security. And we’re making progress in addressing outbound investments in sensitive technologies with a core national security nexus.

These are tailored measures. They are not, as Beijing says, a “technology blockade.” They are not targeting emerging economies. They are focused on a narrow slice of technology and a small number of countries intent on challenging us militarily.

I do not understand what the 'small yard' is supposed to mean but the U.S. is indeed building a high fence. It is not a fence to protect the U.S. but a fence that is build to isolate China.

The U.S., by pressing its 'allies' in Europe and Asia, is trying to deny China the ability to acquire or produce computer chips. The newest lithographic machines The Dutch company ASML produces are now prohibited from export to China. Its CEO says that if the restrictions are held up others will build similar machines:

Cont. reading: U.S. Argues For More Protectionism And Subsidies

The U.S. is unwilling to yet give up in its proxy war with Russia in Ukraine. Russia can not stop the war without securing its legitimate interest to keep NATO and/or the U.S. out of its neighbor state. A loss of the war would create an existential danger for Russia. 

With the two major powers engaged in a war a third party is needed to solve the conflict.

In the spring of last year Turkey and Israel successfully helped to find a peace agreement. A good solution was found and Russia as well as Ukraine agreed to it. But the U.S. needed the war to continue. It sent the British prime minister Boris Johnson to Kiev to sabotage the deal. The Ukrainian president was told that the country would lose all 'western' support should it sign an agreement with Russia.

As the somewhat neutral middle powers were unable to push any agreement through it became obvious that a third party with more heft was needed to seal a deal.

The time of moving towards a deal also needed to be right. On February 24, exactly a year after the war had started, China announced its Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis. This was not a peace plan but a lay out of things that will need to be understood and done to come to a sustainable solution of the crisis.

A months later China took the next step that will be needed in the process. It introduced a high ranking diplomat who will hold the preliminary talks in Ukraine and Russia to find the potential ways to proceed. The announcement was made after a phone call between the presidents Xi and Zelensky:

Cont. reading: Ukraine Peace Talks – A Grown Up Is Taking Charge

Only for news & views directly related to the Ukraine conflict.

The current open thread for other issues is here.

Please stick to the topic. Contribute facts. Do not attack other commentators.

News & views (not related to the war in Ukraine) …

The much ballyhooed Ukrainian 'counteroffensive' is destined to fail its purpose of severing Russia's supply line to Crimea and to liberate 'occupied territory'. The Biden administration has finally recognized this and is out to lower expectations and to preemptively blame everyone but itself.

The first to be briefed was Politico:

Biden’s team fears the aftermath of a failed Ukrainian counteroffensive
Behind closed doors, the administration worries about what Ukraine can accomplish.

The New York Times joined in:

Ukraine’s Spring Offensive Comes With Immense Stakes for Future of the War
Without a decisive victory, Western support for Ukraine could weaken, and Kyiv could come under increasing pressure to enter serious peace talks to end or freeze the conflict.

From the Politico piece:

Publicly, President Joe Biden’s team has offered unwavering support for Ukraine, pledging to load it up with weapons and economic aid for “as long as it takes.” But, if the impending fighting season yields limited gains, administration officials have expressed privately they fear being faced with a two-headed monster attacking it from the hawkish and dovish ends of the spectrum.

One side will say that Ukraine’s advances would’ve worked had the administration given Kyiv everything it asked for, namely longer-range missiles, fighter jets and more air defenses. The other side, administration officials worry, will claim Ukraine’s shortcoming proves it can’t force Russia out of its territory completely.

That doesn’t even account for the reaction of America’s allies, mainly in Europe, who may see a peace negotiation between Ukraine and Russia as a more attractive option if Kyiv can’t prove victory is around the corner.

The Times offers less drama:

Cont. reading: Biden Prepares To Give Up On Ukraine

Last week we learned a new fact about the DNC email leak in 2016 and of the events that likely led to the killing of Seth Rich.

A quite aggressive Wikipedia page discusses the Murder of Seth Rich:

The murder of Seth Rich occurred on July 10, 2016, at 4:20 a.m. in the Bloomingdale neighborhood of Washington, D.C. Rich died about an hour and a half after being shot twice in the back. The perpetrators were never apprehended; police suspected he had been the victim of an attempted robbery.

The 27-year-old Rich was an employee of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and his murder spawned several right-wing conspiracy theories, including the false claim, contradicted by the law enforcement branches that investigated the murder, that Rich had been involved with the leaked DNC emails in 2016. It was also contradicted by the July 2018 indictment of 12 Russian military intelligence agents for hacking the e-mail accounts and networks of Democratic Party officials and by the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion the leaked DNC emails were part of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Fact-checking websites like PolitiFact, Snopes, and FactCheck.org stated that the theories were false and unfounded. The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post wrote that the promotion of these conspiracy theories was an example of fake news.

Well, that is not what really had happened.

Yes, Seth Rich worked as IT administrator for the Democratic National Committee. He was a fan of Bernie Sanders. During the 2016 primaries DNC functionaries did their best to work against Bernie Sanders and for Hillary Clinton. To make that public Seth Rich collected an archive of all DNC emails, copied it onto an USB stick and looked for someone who would publish them.

UPDATE 20:00 UTC

The former British ambassador Craig Murray said that he was given the USB stick by an intermediary of a disgusted Democratic whistleblower and brought it from Washington DC to Wikileaks which eventually published the emails. The data involved were not only from the DNC but also from Clinton's campaign chair John Podesta:

WikiLeaks made the DNC messages public in July and the incriminating emails from Podesta were published in October. The messages predominantly showed that DNC officials were bent on sabotaging the presidential campaign of Bernie Sanders in favor of Hillary Clinton. Murray insisted that the information was leaked and not hacked by Russia.

“Neither of the leaks came from the Russians. The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks…leakers were motivated by disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders.”

/End Update/

Craig Murray did not mention Seth Rich. Up to last week we did not know if Seth Rich really made contact with Wikileaks.

But we did know that the DNC was never 'hacked' by anything Russia. The date/timestamps of the leaked files were consistent with local copying and inconsistent with an internet transfer. The company Crowdstrike which was hired to protect the DNC's networks and which did an investigation into the case never observed an actual 'Russian' hack or any data exfiltration from the DNC network. As ITwire wrote in May 2020:

Cont. reading: Why Kim Dotcom Connects The DNC Email Leak To The Murder Of Seth Rich (Updated)

Only for news & views directly related to the Ukraine conflict.

The current open thread for other issues is here.

Please stick to the topic. Contribute facts. Do not attack other commentators.

Last week's post on Moon of Alabama:

• Apr 18 – China Brings Peace To Yemen, Syria And … Palestine?
  Related:
  – Saudi Arabia’s evolving foreign policies explained – Majallah
  – The missile strikes that killed Israel’s deterrence – The Cradle
  – Washington Fuel War in Yemen And Then Was Absent from Peace Talks – Al Masirah

• Apr 19 – The United States Of Gerontocrats
  Related:
  – Dianne Feinstein Crisis Leaves Democrats Paralyzed – Newsweek
  – Feinstein absence blocks push for supreme court chief Thomas testimony – Guardian
  – Democrats advance seven Biden judicial nominees with GOP support in Feinstein’s absence – NBC News

• Apr 20 – Russia And NATO Agree – The War In Ukraine Will Continue
  Related:
  – Nazi collaborator monuments in Ukraine – Forward
  – Modern Trench Warfare Footage – The lessons behind the Propaganda – Erik Zimerman
  – The planning of the Ukraine invasion from the Russian point of view (maybe) – Sonar 21

• Apr 21 – U.S. Cuts Itself Off From Future Chinese Profits
  Related:
  – US investment curbs on tech firms infuriate China – Asia Times
  – China’s 4th Industrial Revolution rattles US tech stocks – Asia Times
  – One of the world’s oldest and largest investment banks warns ‘Greedflation’ has gone too far – Fortune

• Apr 21 – The Biden Campaign's Deep State Conspiracy To Discredit The Hunter Biden Laptop by Debs is dead
  Related:
  – I.R.S. Official Is Said to Assert Political Meddling in Hunter Biden Inquiry – New York Times
  – Most Dems Don’t Want Biden To Run Again As He Prepares Announcement – Conservative Brief
  – Ex-CIA chief spills on how he got spies to write false Hunter Biden laptop letter to ‘help Biden’ – New York Post

—
Other issues:

Cont. reading: The MoA Week In Review – (Not Ukraine) OT 2023-97

by Debs is Dead
lifted from a comment

Frankly I'm not sure where to post any more as 'not Ukraine' threads age for so long before being replaced that I doubt many but the most assiduous readers get to discover news which is actually vital to comprehending the Amerikan empire decline.
Not to worry I'll stick to the ancient rules & post here.

Which discloses former temporary CIA boss Michael Morell's conspiracy to discredit the Hunter Biden laptop tosh:

An all-time media blackout is in effect. We’re experiencing real-time Sovietization. by Matt Taibbi

It transpires that the infamous incident before the 2020 election in which 50 former intelligence officials signed an open letter declared a New York Post expose about Hunter Biden’s laptop to have the “classic earmarks of a Russian information operation” was instigated at the behest of the Joe Biden campaign. This at least is the allegation in a letter to Secretary of State Anthony Blinken released by Jim Jordan, chair of the House Judiciary Committee, and Subcommittee on the Weaponization of Government.

In that letter, which is not easy to find, you’ll see three snippets of dialogue from questioning of Morell, who appears to have organized the open letter. In the first snippet, he explains that the idea originated with a call from Blinken, then of the Biden campaign, and that absent that call, Morell wouldn’t have done what he did:

bigger

In the second snippet Morell bluntly explains that he did it because “I wanted him to win,” him being Joe Biden.

The snippets are from congressional record. Matt has them, read them through the link above I provided.

Cont. reading: The Biden Campaign’s Deep State Conspiracy To Discredit The Hunter Biden Laptop

Only for news & views directly related to the Ukraine conflict.

The current open thread for other issues is here.

Please stick to the topic. Contribute facts. Do not attack other commentators.

Yesterday Secretary of the Treasury Janet L. Yellen gave a speech on the U.S.-China economic relationship. It's a bit like a declaration of war:

Our economic approach to China has three principal objectives.

First, we will secure our national security interests and those of our allies and partners, and we will protect human rights. We will clearly communicate to the PRC our concerns about its behavior. And we will not hesitate to defend our vital interests. Even as our targeted actions may have economic impacts, they are motivated solely by our concerns about our security and values. Our goal is not to use these tools to gain competitive economic advantage.

Second, we seek a healthy economic relationship with China: one that fosters growth and innovation in both countries. A growing China that plays by international rules is good for the United States and the world. Both countries can benefit from healthy competition in the economic sphere. But healthy economic competition – where both sides benefit – is only sustainable if that competition is fair. We will continue to partner with our allies to respond to China’s unfair economic practices. And we will continue to make critical investments at home – while engaging with the world to advance our vision for an open, fair, and rules-based global economic order.

Third, we seek cooperation on the urgent global challenges of our day. Since last year’s meeting between Presidents Biden and Xi, both countries have agreed to enhance communication around the macroeconomy and cooperation on issues like climate and debt distress. But more needs to be done. We call on China to follow through on its promise to work with us on these issues – not as a favor to us, but out of our joint duty and obligation to the world. Tackling these issues together will also advance the national interests of both of our countries.

To use undefined "values", undefined "vital interests" and undefined "international rules" always make for a sorry excuse for mischief. To claim "unfair economic practices" in China when it is the U.S. that is breaking its own rules left and right is embarrassing. As Edward Luce writes In today's Financial Times:

Today’s US cannot make trade deals, cannot negotiate global digital rules, cannot abide by WTO rulings and cannot support Bretton Woods reforms. [So] how can China be squeezed into a US-led order in which America itself has stopped believing?

One can of course forget about the third point when the first and second are made. There will be no cooperation when the other points create a hostile confrontation.

Yellen then discusses the three points in more detail. Under 'National Security' she says:

Cont. reading: U.S. Cuts Itself Off From Future Chinese Profits

NATO chief says Ukraine’s ‘rightful place’ is in the alliance – AP – Apr 20, 2023

KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg defiantly declared Thursday that Ukraine’s “rightful place” is in the military alliance and pledged more support for the country on his first visit to Kyiv since Russia’s invasion just over a year ago.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy urged Stoltenberg, who has been instrumental in marshaling support from NATO members, to push for even more from them, including warplanes, artillery and armored equipment.

Prevention of Ukraine’s accession to NATO remains one of special op’s goals — Kremlin – Tass – Apr 20, 2023

MOSCOW, April 20. /TASS/. Prevention of Ukraine’s accession to NATO remains one of the special military operation’s goals, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters Thursday.

"Of course, because, otherwise, this will pose a serious, significant threat for our country’s security," the spokesman said, answering a question.

News & views (not related to the situation in Ukraine) …

Only for news & views directly related to the Ukraine conflict.

The current open thread for other issues is here.

Please stick to the topic. Contribute facts. Do not attack other commentators.

Like all beings people grow old. In the later stages of live this usually comes with physical and mental impairments. That is why people older than 70 tend to get nudged out of their office. 

But that is not true for the U.S. Congress which fits the definition of a gerontocracy:

A gerontocracy is a form of oligarchical rule in which an entity is ruled by leaders who are significantly older than most of the adult population. In many political structures, power within the ruling class accumulates with age, making the oldest individuals the holders of the most power. Those holding the most power may not be in formal leadership positions, but often dominate those who are. In a simplified definition, a gerontocracy is a society where leadership is reserved for elders.

This comes with political consequences.

Democrats still face Feinstein dilemma as replacement bid fails

Democrats’ plan to replace an ailing senator on the Senate Judiciary Committee fell apart amid Republican opposition Tuesday, leaving the party still grappling with a dilemma over stalled judicial nominees that has inflamed some in the Democratic base and complicated the Senate race to succeed her in California.

Republicans prevented Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) from temporarily replacing Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who has been absent since February while recovering from shingles, on the panel with another Democrat on Tuesday evening.

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) objected to the move, saying it would allow Democrats to “pass out a handful of judges that I think should never be on the bench.”

That leaves Senate Democrats still grappling with how to deal with their oldest member’s extended absence, which has resulted in some of President Biden’s judicial nominees stalling out in the Judiciary Committee without her tiebreaking vote. The powerful committee, which is probing allegations of financial conflicts of interest against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, also lacks the votes to issue subpoenas in her absence.

“It creates a real dilemma for us,” said Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.), a member of the Judiciary Committee. “We’re stuck, if it’s [a] 10-10 [split between Democrats and Republicans]. That’s not an opinion — that’s a reality.”

It is a bit weird that a story about a procedural problem caused by the old age of a member of Congress quotes of many old people.

• Senator Dianne Feinstein was born on June 22, 1933. She is 89 years old.
• Senator Charles E. Schumer was born on November 23, 1950. He is 72 years old.
• President Joe Biden was born on November 20, 1942. He is 80 years old.
• Justice Clarence Thomas was born on June 23, 1948. He is 74 years old.
• Senator Lindsey O. Graham was born on July 9, 1955. He is 67 years old.
• Senator Peter Welch was born on May 2, 1947. He is 75 years old.

A bit further down in the story:

Cont. reading: The United States Of Gerontocrats

Peace is breaking out in the Middle East and the U.S. is pushed aside by more friendly actors.

On March 10 the world was surprised with a China mediated deal that restored ties between Saudi Arabia and Iran:

There are winners and losers in this.

The winners are:

• Iran, which will now be even more able to break through the sanctions wall the U.S. has put up around it.
• Saudi Arabia, which now will likely be able to end its disastrous and costly war on Yemen.
• China, for outplaying the U.S. State Department by achieving this.
• Iraq, Syria, Yemen as they will become more peaceful as the two middle powers influencing policies on their grounds end their rivalry.

The losers are:

• Israel, because the chances for its attempts to get the U.S. into a war with Iran are now diminished. Its hoped for coalition with the Saudis will not come into being.
• The U.S. for having been outplayed on its traditional 'home grounds' in the Middle East.
• Anti-Iran hawks everywhere.
• The Emirates for losing at least some of the sanction busting trade with Iran to Saudi Arabia.

…
Reviving relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran will make a lot of new things possible.

That Iran and Saudi Arabia accepted China's mediation is a recognition of Beijing's new standing in world policies. That alone is enough reason for the White House to hate the deal.

I predicted that the U.S. and Israel would do their best to sabotage the deal or at least make its implementation difficult.

The U.S. sent CIA director Bill Burns to warn the Saudis off. However the deal has held so far and the Saudis are repairing their relations with countries against which they previously waged wars. Yesterday a senior Saudi official visited Sanaa and shook hands with Yemeni Houthi officials:

Cont. reading: China Brings Peace To Yemen, Syria And … Palestine?