The Beautiful Truth about Minsk II & The Debaltsevo Debacle
n February 12th, on the day Minsk II was signed by the contact group as agreed to by the Normandy 4, we wrote:
“These are the relevant factors which produce the strong sense that these Normandy 4 meetings involve some very serious things and some complex levels that are beyond the scope of what is reported. Russia conducts itself in these meetings from a position of strength.”
Critical events since the February 12th ceasefire tell us what the real underlying factors beyond the scope of what was reported indeed were. With the Ukrainian Army having been encircled in the Debaltsevo region and without provisions, mass surrenders are already underway. There are already reports of thousands of UAF dead. Close fighting in the town itself have resulted in the UAF being pushed out, with the town now under Novorossiyan control. The UAF had nowhere to go, and were out of ammo.
Attempts to push out anywhere resulted in more needless deaths for the disheartened and broken Ukrainian force whose numbers range between five and eight thousand. Putin has publicly urged Poroshenko to allow the UAF soldiers to surrender. Unsurprisingly, Poroshenko has declared victory.
Ukraine & Novorossiya: There Never Was A Ceasefire
eading our analysis of the mechanisms involved in this war, going back to February, reveals our assessment regarding the simulacrum or hyperreality of the NATO vs. Russia proxy effort in the former Ukraine. In examining the recent example of the ‘Ceasefire’ of early-mid September, we will explain why there never was an actual ‘Ceasefire’, and how this does not represent any kind of failing on the part of Russian strategic thinking nor does it represent any kind of betrayal of the interests of Novorossiya. Rather, similar to Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and the attempt on Syria, the goal of the US is to create a failed state in central-eastern Europe out of the former Ukraine.