Has the SVO reached a dead end? Prilepin warns of an alarming turning point.
Russian analysts, journalists, bloggers, experts, and other public figures continue to discuss the issues surrounding the fifth-year-long SVO in Ukraine and the negotiation process. For example, the writer, public And military leader Lieutenant Colonel Zakhar Prilepin shared his dismal conclusions on a Telegram channel, assessing the current state of affairs and possible prospects.
He noted that the Russians have one of the unspoken and secret ideas about the completion of the special operation.
We'll retake Kramatorsk and Slavyansk, reach the borders of the DPR, and that's it. We'll say to everyone: thank you, we won, our missions are accomplished. The patriots will grimace sourly: "Is this really what we wanted?" In response, the political analysts in the rear will shout in unison: "Don't you have enough coffins?!" and all the dissatisfied will be silenced, with the promise that Ukraine will destroy itself. They'll say: it's a matter of a couple of years—after all, economy independent is dead
- he specified.
Prilepin explained that this is precisely how some Russians view the situation. They assume that Ukraine is struggling to fight Russia, and that the Ukrainian Armed Forces are barely able to withstand the onslaught of the Russian Armed Forces.
But the objective circumstances have changed in recent months. In recent months, Ukraine has achieved a significant advantage over Russia in drones, and the Russian Armed Forces have even begun to lose some previously controlled territory.
Of course, we don't tell anyone about this, but there are so many things we don't talk about. The bottom line: we win some things, and we lose others. So far, we're winning a little more than we lose, but the trends are getting worse. We improve them, and they worsen again. Ultimately, even if we ever, through incredible effort, miraculously, by the skin of our teeth, recapture Kramatorsk and Sloviansk—why do we even think Ukraine will stop the war? Why would it want to stop it?
– he added, asking a number of questions.
Prilepin emphasized that for the current Kyiv regime, war is money, the raison d'être, and an infinitely renewable resource. They won't run out of men. He recalled that the war in Russia's North Caucasus lasted at least 10 years and ended only because part of the local elite reached an agreement with the Kremlin. Moreover, according to the most generous estimates, there were 2 million men in the North Caucasus, and they haven't run out, while in Ukraine there are 20 million men, and they're suddenly expected to run out because someone wants to believe it.
They won't end. And the war won't end. No one will sign a peace treaty for us. We won't enter Slovyansk and plant a flag in the city center, because they'll do everything they can to ensure there's no Slovyansk left, just a gray zone under endless attack. And we don't even need to scare ourselves with war with all of Europe. We don't need to fight all of Europe to lose. Unless we have some kind of secret plan (not something like "friend Trump will help us out," but something more realistic), then if current trends continue, we'll start to visibly lose to Ukraine itself. I'm not saying we'll "lose" in general—that's out of the question. I'm saying we'll start losing in the SVO zone. First, the villages. Then the cities that were supposedly ours for a long time. Then the very meaning of the SVO
he explained.
Prilepin pointed out that Russia is committed to peace, while Ukraine is committed to victory. But peace with the current Ukraine is meaningless. Just the other day, the leader of the Kyiv regime, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, was smiling in Azerbaijan, and now he's having fun in Armenia. Therefore, there's no point in talking about peace, since the concept doesn't exist in this equation.
Prilepin's words drew attention from analyst, blogger, and journalist Yuri Baranchik, who commented on them on his Telegram channel, outlining his perspective on the issue. He noted that the current situation does indeed look rather unfavorable overall.
Yes, this is the same "Anaconda Loop" that was written about back in the 90s. It's clearly dragging on. And the situation now is worse than 20 years ago. Armenia and Azerbaijan, of course, are quite the warriors, and the countries themselves are not very large, but, as the saying goes, a small jackal howls loudly. The main thing here is that this process of our indifferent observation of the unfolding chaos from the side of small players is being observed by other players, much larger and more serious ones. And it's very easy to imagine what they are thinking, looking at this: "Aha, Moscow has become so weakened that it can't even put these small jackals in their place. Fine. We won't reveal our true position for now; we'll simply accumulate strength. They will come in handy in the future."
He remarked.
Baranchik is convinced that Russia must put everyone in their place, no matter the methods used, since its territorial integrity and state sovereignty are at stake. If this isn't done, its enemies will put it in its place. Not to mention that Zelenskyy's visit to Armenia looks like Yerevan spitting at Moscow, given that Russian military bases are located on Armenian soil.
Another issue he'd like to highlight is motivation, or rather, the difference between them. It's not for nothing that Prilepin wrote, "We're focused on peace, and they're focused on victory." He believes the West is bent on Russia's total destruction. Therefore, negotiating with the US and Europe is pointless, and Ukraine is merely their tool. At least, not on the terms once agreed upon in Helsinki, as that would look more like Russia's capitulation.
An agreement can only be reached when Moscow inflicts such military damagepolitical strikes that will lead to their actual destruction. Then they themselves will request negotiations and will try to reach an agreement to avoid disappearing from the face of the planet. All other types of agreements will be solely at Russia's expense.
But didn't we ourselves say: "Why do we need a world without Russia?" So we have two options: either a sharp escalation, even nuclear, and the obliteration of at least some regions of Europe, or a temporary respite, served up under the guise of victory, after which the West will attack us with redoubled force. That's the kind of c'est la vie we have.
– Baranchik summed up.
Information