Russian President Vladimir Putin has been deploying body doubles at recent public outings to hide health problems, said a Ukrainian military official who claimed that the decoys have different ears than the strongman.

Ukrainian military intelligence chief Major General Kyrylo Budanov suggested on Ukrainian television this week that Putins ears looked different across several of the leaders public appearances.

The picture, lets say, of the ears, is different. And its like a fingerprint, each persons ear picture is unique. It cannot be repeated, he said, according to a Newsweek account of Ukrainian TV.

But Budanov said that wasnt all that was amiss.

They [Putins body doubles] have different habits, different mannerisms, different gaits, sometimes even different heights, if you look closely, he said.

Budanovs theory about the body doubles, however, was not the first time that the rumor has been floated.

The International Business Times called it one of the more unusual conspiracy theories back in 2018, when a Twitter user cited three photographs of Putin across time to suggest that the ex-KGB spy was in fact three different people.

Budanov, this week, explained the supposed use of body doubles by pointing to widespread speculation that the Russian leader is gravely ill.

But the head of the CIAas well as Britains MI6 chiefboth cast doubt on those reports recently, stating at last months Aspen Security Forum that the Russian leader is apparently quite healthy.

View original post here:

Ukraine pushes Putin body-double theory, points out this head feature - New York Post

Istanbul, Turkey Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan will meet his Russian counterpart on Friday in Sochi, after brokering a grain shipment deal between Moscow and Kyiv and as a new Turkish military intervention in Syria remains a possibility.

The summit with Vladimir Putin comes in the same week that a ship carrying Ukraine grain was able to set sail, the first since the conflict began, under an agreement between the warring sides arranged by the United Nations and Ankara.

The Turkish leaders international credentials have been bolstered by the agreement that resumes exports of Ukrainian and Russian agricultural products, easing the threat to global food security.

Erdogans trip his eighth to Russia since the start of 2019 follows a three-way meeting with Putin and Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi in Tehran last month.

According to Ankara, regional and global developments will be on the agenda, as well as bilateral ties.

By virtue of its role in the grain deal, Turkey has succeeded in positioning itself as Russias diplomatic conduit to the international community, said Eyup Ersoy, visiting research fellow at the Institute of Middle Eastern Studies, Kings College London.

This diplomatic rearrangement has shifted the relational asymmetry more in Turkeys favour and is expected to curtail, to some degree, Russian resistance against Turkish policies and initiatives in issues of common concern.

Analysts said Turkeys principal focus would be Moscows acquiescence or at least its lack of opposition to a Turkish military operation in northern Syria.

Russia, a key backer of President Bashar al-Assad, controls most of the north Syrian air space.

Erdogan raised the prospect of another operation against Syrian Kurdish fighters in May.

We are determined to eradicate the evil groups that target our national security from Syria, he reiterated during the Tehran summit two weeks ago.

Tal Rifaat and Manbij, cities west of the Euphrates river controlled by the Peoples Protection Units (YPG), are likely targets.

The Syrian group is linked to the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which has waged a 38-year armed uprising against Turkey. The PKK is considered a terror group by Turkey, the United States and the European Union.

Ankara has launched four cross-border operations into Syria since 2016 and controls land in the north with the goal of pushing away the YPG and establishing a 30-km (19-mile) secure zone.

An incursion in October 2019 into northeast Syria against the YPG drew widespread international condemnation.

Erdogan wants a green light for a military operation in Syria, said Kerim Has, a Turkish political analyst based in Moscow.

As we saw at the Tehran summit, Iran and Russia are against this operation but I think Erdogan can persuade Putin. Many things depend on the domestic situation in Turkey because Erdogan wants to launch the operation before the elections so he can consolidate at least a few percentage points in the vote.

Turkey is experiencing its worst economic crisis in two decades annual inflation hit 79.6 percent on Wednesday and Erdogan faces presidential and parliamentary elections by June next year.

The Kremlin could ease this instability, especially through natural gas. Russia supplied Turkey, which is dependent on energy imports, with 45 percent of its gas needs last year.

Turkey wants to keep its energy flows from Russia over the winter while maintaining economic cooperation to alleviate its difficulties and opening a [currency] swap agreement or getting investment from Russia, said Emre Caliskan, research fellow at the London-based Foreign Policy Centre.

Erdogan could present this as a victory to the Turkish public and perhaps alleviate the high food and energy prices that are likely to present a challenge in the coming elections.

However, it remains to be seen whether this would be enough to win over voters.

Weve seen these operations in Syria before and they dont do anything to help us, said Istanbul tobacconist Cemil Sener, 39.

People know these are just ploys to give the TV stations something positive to report. And I dont see how the Russians can really help our economy while they are being sanctioned by the West.

Erdogan and Putin may also discuss the possibility of Turkey sharing its armed aerial drone expertise with Russia.

Bayraktar TB2 drones sold to Ukraine have proved to be highly effective against Russian forces.

Last month, Erdogan reportedly said Putin had suggested setting up a drone factory in Russia during their Tehran meeting.

The Kremlin said last week that technical and military cooperation would be on the agenda at Sochi, an indication of Russias interest in procuring Bayraktars, according to Ersoy.

The recent news on the Russian interest to acquire Iranian drones is indicative of the urgency of the matter for Moscow, he added.

However, such a move would undermine the main plank of Turkish support for Ukraine as well as raise eyebrows among fellow NATO members.

Earlier this month, the head of Baykar, which makes the Bayraktar TB2 drones ruled out supplying them to Moscow.

If Turkey was to further participate with Russia in military matters at a time when Russia is considered the greatest threat to NATO, it would seriously damage relations with the West, Kerim Has said.

Original post:

Turkeys Erdogan to meet Putin in Russia: What to expect - Al Jazeera English

Putin in Tehran for talks with leaders of Iran, Turkey

Russian President Vladimir Putin is in Iran on a trip intended to deepen ties with regional heavyweights as part of Moscow's challenge to the United States and Europe during its grinding campaign in Ukraine. (July 19)

AP

On June 23, China virtually hosted the 14thBRICS Summit. The summit is an annual meeting wherethe leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africadiscuss topics such as trade and the economy.

Several social media users have shared a photo of Russan President Vladimir Putin purportedly being saluted at the 10th BRICS Summit in South Africa. The photo shows two uniformed mensaluting Putin as he enters a golden room.

"Russian President Vladimir Putin in South Africa when he was attending the 10th Session of BRICS," oneJuly 17 Facebook post says.

The post garnered over 2,900 likes in its first two weeks. Other viral iterations have been shared on Facebook and Twitter.

Follow us on Facebook!Like our page to get updates throughout the day on our latest debunks

But the claim is not correct. The photo was taken in Russia in 2020, two years after the 10th BRICS Summit.

USA TODAY reached out to the social media user who shared theclaim for comment.

Since ordering the invasion ofUkraine in February 2022, Putin hashad limited overseas travel. His first trip out of the country since the February invasion wasto Tajikistan and Turkmenistan. The trips took place on June 28 and 29.

Putin attended the 14th annual BRICS Summit on June 23 via videoconference, according to the Kremlin's website.

Fact check: False claim that Trump, Putin had recent meeting in Washington, D.C.

Theclaim mentions the 10th BRICS Summit, which was held four years before the Ukrainian invasion, in 2018. While Putin did attend this conference in person, the photo was not taken at the 2018 summit.

The photo was taken by Getty Images photographerMikhail SvetlovinSt. Alexander Hall at the Grand Kremlin Palace on Feb. 5, 2020, in Moscow. Putinwas pictured entering the room withRussian Foreign MinisterSergei Lavrov and attended a ceremony where he received 23 credentials from newly-appointed foreign ambassadors, according to the photo's description.

Photos from the Kremlin ceremony havebeen included in articlespublished byNewsweek and Forbes.

Based on our research, we rate FALSE the claim that a photo shows Vladimir Putin being saluted at the 10th BRICS Summit in South Africa. The photo was taken by a Getty Images photographer in Russia in 2020, two years after the 10th BRICS Summit was held in South Africa.

Thank you for supporting our journalism.You cansubscribe to our print edition, ad-free app or electronic newspaper replica here.

Our fact-check work is supported in part by a grant from Facebook.

Original post:

Fact check: Photo of guards saluting Putin was taken in Russia in 2020 - USA TODAY

As the Russo-Ukrainian war grinds into its sixth full month, we must reckon with strategic reality. Russia is losing ground, and its strategic position will only deteriorate in coming months; further military reversals will intensify its strategic quandary.Three possibilities exist revolution, a palace coup, or horizontal escalation and the United States should prepare for each.

Russia faces a structural strategic impediment that goes beyond war-planning errors and the inefficiencies of an authoritarian kleptocracy.It simply lacks the manpower and capabilities to conquer Ukraine, or even to hold its current strategic position.

Russias military planned its invasion poorly because of a series of flawed assumptions. Its high command believed Ukraine was brittle and feckless with a divided, poorly coordinated army; it assumed the West had no stomach for even a brief confrontation. Hence, only a push would be needed to topple resistance:A multi-axis invasion would overwhelm Ukraine and the West, President Volodymyr Zelensky would flee Kyiv, and by May 9 Putin could announce the reconstitution of the Soviet-Russian Empire, Belarus and Ukraine included.

In the event, Ukraine fought with skill and tenacity.Russias greatest success came in the south, where it appears Russiacompromised Ukrainian intelligence chiefsto facilitate its rapid capture of Kherson, Melitopol and Berdyansk. Russias invasion force, however, was too small to sustain a broad-front offensive for more than a few days.Although it captured much of Kherson and southern Zaporizhzhia oblasts, and took Mariupol following a vicious two-month siege, its momentum was spent.It withdrew from the north, abandoning its thrust towards Kyiv.

Since then, Russia has been stuck in an increasingly insoluble bind, stemming from two structural factors.It possesses tens of thousands of artillery pieces in various calibers, ranging from the 1960s-produced D-30 and 2S3 to the more modern Msta-b and 2S35, along with various multiple rocket launcher (MRL) systems. These systems are relatively inaccurate Russian MRLs lack the precision guidance of Western-designed HIMARS and M270s, while Russian barrel artillery cannot match the American M777, French Caesar or German PzH-2000 with modern shells.

Still, many Western analysts and the Kremlins propagandists insisted Russia would shatter Ukrainian defenses if properly concentrated.And Russia did concentrate: It amassed well over half of its deployed combat power in the Donbas.But observers who predicted Ukraines collapse after an attritional conflict in June forgot the Great War adage, Artillery conquers, infantry occupies.

Short of nuclear bombardment, infantry are needed to take even destroyed cities and pummeled fortifications.Russia lacks trained, disciplined infantry and the command structure to coordinate multiple assaults, break through and then encircle defenders. Its solution was to increase artillery bombardment while restricting its infantry assaults. Casualties remained high, but Russia avoided the loss of ability to conduct offensive operations due to unit overextension and exhaustion.

However, Russias artillery-heavy strategy is increasingly ineffective.Ukraines Western-provided precision weapons have methodically destroyed Russian command posts, logistics hubs and ammunition depots throughout the occupied east and south.

Russias logistics system remains manpower-heavy, rail-dependent and centralized. Hence, pressure on it exposes its frailty: Russias military is intellectually and materially incapable of redistributing its supply depots and replacing rail with road transport. This has led to an appreciable drop in artillery fire in the east, where Russia benefits the most from a dense rail network, and in the south, with much longer logistical lines.

Manpower and logistical constraints prevent Russias military from regaining the operational initiative and make it severely vulnerable to even moderate Ukrainian pressure, which is building.Ukraines counteroffensive in Kherson Oblast is underway, although it remains in the shaping phase. It is dividing the Russian bridgehead on the Dnipro Rivers north bank into segments and using long-range fire to disrupt logistics; over time, it will degrade Russian combat power. Ukraines hope is that Russia will cut its losses and withdraw, much as it did around Kyiv and from Snake Island.

A more consolidated Russian position in the south remains extremely vulnerable, too.Its logistics lines are long, and it must police significant territory for Ukrainian special operations and partisan activity.Ukraine, meanwhile, operates on interior lines, allowing it to shift forces far more rapidly and dictate the pace of operations. Moreover, given Russias manpower constraints, force shifts will be necessary to maintain even the more consolidated position; they have begun, but not in great enough numbers to stabilize the south or to counterattack.

The current Kherson counteroffensive is only the beginning. Ukraine will reset after driving Russia from the Dnipros north bank; continuing an offensive after this into Kherson Oblast is possible but difficult.The Dnipro is wide; crossing it would require a large-scale bridging operation that Russia would oppose and even if it succeeded, losses would be high.Ukraine would then need to push towards the Crimea Canal, Russias second defensive line, assaulting fixed Russian positions for the first time.

More viable may be an offensive in Zaporizhzhia Oblast.The ground is wider, partisan activity appears more intense, and Russian logistics are more exposed, given Ukrainian firing positions.Ukraine can mask a buildup because of its forces in the east; new units could be used for the Donbas and Kharkiv, forcing Russia to guess Ukrainian intentions and risk redeploying incorrectly. Moreover, a Ukrainian counteroffensive that reaches Melitopol, or simply maintains fire control of the M14 Road and attendant railways, would threaten all Russian forces to the west with logistical collapse, especially if Ukraine can disable the Kerch Strait Bridge.This would construct the wars long-awaited first cauldron.

Regardless, Ukraine has a solid chance of retaking the south, or at least pressuring Russian positions hard enough to induce another controlled retreat to Crimea.

Despite prognostications on the failure of sanctions pressure, Russias economy is nearing implosion. Russia cannot sustain its economic interventions, and its industry is entirely starved of foreign-produced high-end equipment.Oil revenues alone are insufficient to prop up Russiaandcannot procure necessary Western technology.A precipitous decline is probable between October and December just as the purported Russian commodity strategy will bite the hardest, with the West placed under the greatest energy pressure.

Putins options are, therefore, limited.

Mobilization remains far too dangerous; arming tens of thousands of young Caucasian, Central Asian and Siberian Russians and shipping them through Moscow to Ukraine is a recipe for revolution.But seeking a limited peace, in which Russia retains the Donbas and Crimea regions, does not solve Crimeas vulnerability nor save Putins domestic credibility.Most likely, the Kremlin will take this peace and Putins security services will batten down the hatches, hoping to outlast the economic downturn and maintain power.

The military, however, will be disillusioned.It will have completely eviscerated its combat power, and for what?A small bit of land in eastern Ukraine and some looted household goods.Russias piddling incentives for combat service, along with high casualties, will create a toxic domestic environment.We may very well witness the reassertion of an old Soviet dynamic that pits the security services against the military, which brought Nikita Khrushchev to power and eliminated Lavrentiy Beria in 1953.

The greatest danger, therefore, comes after a successful Ukrainian push.At this point, Putin will feel the most domestic and psychological pressure, or finally will come around to the militarys argument for either mobilization or extension of the war.

The U.S. and its allies must prepare accordingly and expect a confrontation in the next six months.Four steps are necessary:

First, the West should expand and diversify weapons deliveries to Ukraine.HIMARS and other long-range artillery systems are necessary, but aircraft should be included both fighters and manned or unmanned aircraft with anti-submarine capabilities to undermine Russias Black Sea Fleet even further. The greater the military pressure Russia experiences, the more likely the failure of Putins twin attacks on Ukraine and the international order.

Second, as Putin becomes more desperate, the U.S. and willing allies should prepare to impose a no-fly zone in western Ukraine. Unlike earlier in the war, this is not to ensure Ukrainian civilians are safe from Russian bombardment. Rather, it would be to call Putins escalatory bluff, while deterring any attempted Belarusian intervention.

Third, the U.S. should apply pressure to those corporations still doing business in Russia.Putins regime is increasingly isolated and approaching economic collapse; more departures will accelerate its implosion.

Fourth, the U.S. should encourage Turkey, through positive and negative inducements, to permit a NATO or U.S. naval mission into the Black Sea.Ukrainian grain exports have resumed, though time will tell how much Russia allows to exit the country. Nevertheless, now is the time to push Russias naval position the hardest; absent control of the Black Sea, Russias position in southern Ukraine becomes untenable. This would not involve active combat operations, simply a demonstration of presence and force.

As the war continues, the opacity of Russias weaknesses is replaced by transparency. The West should take the fullest possible advantage.

Seth Cropsey is founder and president of Yorktown Institute. He served as a naval officer and as deputy undersecretary of the Navy and is the author of Mayday:The Decline of American Naval Supremacy (2013) andSeablindness:How Political Neglect Is Choking AmericanSeapowerand What to Do About It (2017).

Read this article:

Putin cant control his Ukraine cataclysm and the US must get ready - The Hill

The Russo-Ukrainian war is coming down to a race between the weakening political will of western democracies and the deteriorating military means of Vladimir Putins dictatorship. But this race will be a marathon, not a sprint. Sustaining that political will requires the kind of farsighted leadership which most democracies are missing. It calls for a recognition that our own countries are also, in some important sense, at war and a corresponding politics of the long haul.

Is this what you hear when you turn on your television in the United States (where I am now), Germany, Italy, Britain or France? Is this a leading topic in the Conservative party contest to decide Britains next prime minister, or the run-up to the Italian election on 25 September, or the campaign for the US midterm elections on 8 November? No, no and no. We are at war, I heard someone say recently on the radio; but he was an energy analyst, not a politician.

The fact that Ukrainian forces are preparing for a big counter-offensive to recapture the strategically vital city of Kherson shows what a combination of western arms and Ukrainian courage could achieve. US-supplied High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (Himars) long-range multiple-launch rocket systems have enabled the Ukrainians to hit artillery depots, bridges and command posts far behind Russian lines. Russian forces have been redeployed from Donbas to defend against the expected offensive, thus further slowing the Russian advance in the east. Richard Moore, the head of Britains Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), observed recently that Russia might be about to run out of steam in Ukraine because of shortages of material and adequately trained troops. So Ukraine has a good chance of winning an important battle this autumn; but its still a long way from winning the war.

In his campaign to defeat not only Ukraine but also the west, Putin is counting on Russias two traditional wartime allies: Field Marshal Time and General Winter. The Russian leader is weaponising energy, reducing gas flows through the Nordstream 1 pipeline so Germany cant fully replenish its gas storage before the weather turns cold. Then he will have the option of turning off the gas entirely, plunging Germany and other dependent European countries into a desperate winter. High energy prices as a result of the war continue to turbocharge inflation in the west while keeping Putins own war chest filled with the billions of euros Germany and others are still paying for Russian gas and oil. Although a few grain ships are now leaving Odesa, his blockade of Ukrainian ports has caused a food price crisis across parts of the Middle East and Africa, resulting in much human misery and potentially in refugee flows and political chaos. Those, too, are Putins friends. Better still: the global south seems to blame this at least as much on the west as on Russia.

Putins cultural and political analysis of the west leads him to believe that time is on his side. In his view, the west is decadent, weakened by multiculturalism, immigration, the post-nationalism of the EU, LGBTQ+ rights, atheism, pacifism and democracy. No match, therefore, for carnivorous, martial great powers which still cleave to the old trinity of God, family and nation.

There are people in the west who agree with him, subverting western and European unity from within. Just read Viktor Orbns scandalous recent speech to an ethnic Hungarian audience in Romania, with its insistence that Hungarians should not become mixed race, its sweeping critique of the wests policy on Ukraine and its conclusion that Hungary needs to make a new agreement with the Russians.

Although the party likely to emerge victorious from next months Italian elections, the Fratelli dItalia, is the indirect successor of a neo-fascist party founded in 1946, it does at least support the western position on the war in Ukraine. But the leaders of the Fratellis probable coalition partners, the Legas Matteo Salvini and Forza Italias Silvio Berlusconi have a pro-Putin past and cannot be relied on to stand firm on Ukraine, as the current Italian prime minister, Mario Draghi, has done. In Germany, a plurality of those asked in a recent opinion poll (47%) said Ukraine should give up its eastern territories in return for peace. European voices calling on Ukraine to settle along those lines will only get louder as the war grinds on. (Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn recently joined them, although his intervention wont affect the strong cross-party consensus in Britain on support for Ukraine.)

Most important are the midterm elections in the US. If Donald Trump announces his presidential candidacy off the back of midterm election successes for his partisans, this could spell big trouble for what has so far been rare bipartisan consensus in the US on large-scale economic and military support for Ukraine. Notoriously reluctant to criticise Putin, Trump has told his supporters that the Democrats are sending another $40bn to Ukraine, yet Americas parents are struggling to even feed their children.

What would it take to prove the Russian leader wrong about the intrinsic weakness of western democracies? Rather a lot. The two largest armies in Europe are going to be slogging it out in Ukraine for months and quite probably years to come. Neither side is giving up; neither has a clear path to victory. All the current peace scenarios are unrealistic. When you cant begin to see how something is going to end, its unlikely to end soon.

To sustain Ukraines resistance and enable its army to recover lost territory requires weapon supplies on a scale that is large even for Americas military-industrial complex. For example, the US has reportedly already sent one-third of its entire stock of Javelin anti-tank missiles. According to a former deputy governor of the National Bank of Ukraine, the country needs a further $5bn a month in macroeconomic support just to ensure that its economy does not collapse close to double what it is currently getting. Thats before you even get to the challenge of postwar reconstruction, which may cost as much as $1tn.

If we stay the course, at scale, then Field Marshal Time will be on Ukraines side. Putins stocks of his most modern weapons and best trained troops have already been depleted. Keep up the pressure and military experts tell us he will be reaching back to 40-year-old tanks, and raw recruits. Western sanctions are hitting the hi-tech parts of his economy, needed for resupply. Could he compensate for the loss of skilled troops by a general mobilisation? Will China come to his aid with modern weapons supplies? Can he escalate? These questions have to be asked, of course, but the pressure would be back on him.

In democracies, leaders must justify and explain to voters this kind of large-scale, strategic commitment, otherwise they will not support it in the long run. Putin would then be proved right in his diagnosis of the weakness of democracy. Estonias Kaja Kallas is giving an example of such leadership, but then her people know all too much about Russia already. At the moment I dont see any leader of a major western democracy doing the same, except perhaps for Mario Draghi and hes leaving.

View post:

Putin is banking on a failure of political will in the west before Russia runs out of firepower - The Guardian

In any international conflict that involves tough political and diplomatic measures and violence of one sort or another, a key question faces the adversaries on both sides: what is the other sides threshold of pain?

More than six months after Vladimir Putins invasion of Ukraine his adversaries would do well to ponder that question.

The threshold of pain is a point which when reached obliges the adversary to re-think its current strategy and seek relief. Some adversaries may try to push that threshold as far as possible even after hearing their bones being crushed. This was the case with Adolf Hitler who was ready to see the whole of Germany turned into a pile of rubble but could not contemplate surrender.

Others like what the late Ayatollah Khomeini did in August 1988, would drink the poison chalice to avoid the collapse of their regime.

The Iraqi despot Saddam Hussein once offered us his own definition of the threshold of pain. He related how as a teenager he and his mates in Tikrit would jump on trucks carrying goods to Baghdad to get a free ride for kicks. The trouble was that the trucks guard would hit them on their fingers with a wire whip that drew blood. According to Saddam all the boys would jump off after a few whip lashes-but he would hang until his hands were dripping with blood. I was proud to see that, as time went on, I was able to hang on for a bit longer.

The Apartheid regime in South Africa proved to have a high threshold of pain and decided to throw in the towel not because of sanctions and proximity pressures but as a result of psycho-political changes within the white ruling elites.

In North Korea and the Islamic Republic in Iran the threshold in question is fixed by the degree of threat to the regime not the sufferings of the masses. In Pyongyang and Tehran every pain is worth enduring as long as the survival of the regime is assured.

So, what is Putins threshold of pain?

Some Western leaders seem to have assumed a rather low threshold, believing that Putin would cave in once crushing sanctions began to show their effect.

To be sure sanctions imposed by the European Union and the United States and a number of other powers notably Japan has not had enough time to affect Putins behavior. In fact some sanctions have remained at the level of announcement. Russia continues to export energy albeit with generous discounts though the brown market outside Europe while Putin has managed to keep inflations under control and, thanks to a war chest created over many years, prevents the rouble from free fall.

It is clear that Putin, having started with the dream of a shirt war ending with victory is now switching to a new strategy of low intensity warfare with a slower rhythm and tempo under his control. Assured that his own Russian territory is treated as a sanctuary, he can pick and choose when and where to turn the heat on Ukraine and the NATO allies supporting it.

Worse still he may already be plotting to open diversionary fronts to confuse his adversaries and stretch their resources. One such front is already taking shape as Serbia, under a pro-Putin team, prepares to invade Kosovo which is likely to drag in Albania as well. Another front is also looming in Moldova where Putin has been shipping vast amounts of arms to a pro-Moscow faction. Russia is also probing the possibility of mischief-making in former French Africa to threaten the supplies of rare metals needed by European industry. Dont be surprised if even Estonia, a member of NATO, is subjected to what is known as proximity pressures.

As far as Russian human losses are concerned, Putin has also succeeded in pushing his threshold of pain higher than expected. To shield the Russian heartland against big losses he has made disproportionate use of volunteers and mercenaries from ethnic minorities. According to best estimates Russia has lost over 70,000 killed and perhaps three times as many wounded or missing in action. Anecdotal evidence shows that casualties sustained by non- Russian republics of the federation are at least 30 percent higher than those of the heartland.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says Putins Special Operation will continue for as long as needed to achieve all its objectives. But he does not say what those objectives are. Putin thinks that the short-termism of politics in Western democracies will lead to a change in public opinion against what is becoming a growingly costly war with no sign of the victory promises by outgoing British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Ms. Nancy Pelosi , Speaker of the US House of Representatives.

The fact that the war in Ukraine has been relegated to inside pages and lower rungs in TV news bulletins in the West encourages Putin in his illusions about a victory he is unlikely to achieve.

The effect of Putins strategy is to cast Russia as an existential threat to the world order, something that would endanger other nations beyond NATO and the European Union. Putin is delusional if he thinks he could foment chaos and expect sympathy and support from China, India and Brazil among the nations he is trying to woo to his side.

Weak leadership in key Western democracies, notably the United States, Britain and France, does not mean weakness in terms of economic, military and cultural power in comparison with a Russia led into the unknown by an overambitious leader.

Putin may have a threshold of pain that is higher than Western experts forecast. But, sooner or later, he is bound to reach that threshold. Even in the 19th century when, after defeating Napoleon, it was the greatest military power in the world Russia was not able to reshape Europe.

Putin may not be ready yet to jump off Saddam Husseins truck but his refusal to end the war produces nothing but more corpses, Ukrainian, Russian, Daghestani, Chechen, Ingush, Tatar, Charkas, Kalmuk, Bashkir, Kamchatkan and so on.

In his novel Dead Souls Gogol notes that We Russians tend to blame others for our miseries, not knowing that whatever wrong is done to us is done by ourselves. Putin would do well to listen to the master of Russian literature, even though he was an ethnic Ukrainian.

The rest is here:

Putins Threshold of Pain - Asharq Al-awsat - English

Sergei Pugachev, who was head of the presidential campaign that brought Vladimir Putin to the Kremlin 22 years ago, gave an interview to El Independiente in which he spoke about how the current president of Russia behaves behind closed doors and gave an indication about what his current state of health is.

Pugachev, nicknamed Putins banker, is an international investor who was part of Vladimir Putins inner circle at the turn of the century. However, since 2011 he fell out of favor with the Russian president and has been immersed in multiple criminal proceedings. As a result, his assets (which amount to 15,000 million dollars) were frozen and he was forced to leave Russia for Great Britain and later ended up in France, where he currently resides.

What one billion dollars really means

From that moment on, Pugachev has never missed the opportunity to take revenge by talking openly about a Vladimir Putin whom he defines as a pathological liar who lies for no reason. He did it to me and he has done it again now in Ukraine. The bombs fall on civilian targets but instead Putin says they do not attack civilians.

Full screen

The person who was Putins shadow during his beginnings in the Kremlin said of the Russian leader, It is evident that he is not in his best state. He was someone who took great care of himself..

Pugachev added that Putin used to swim for four hours a day; then he received massages and they gave him a manicure and pedicure, - care that, according to him, does not correspond to his current appearance.

He is only 69 years old but he looks 90 years old. So, given all the money and resources he has, hes probably very sick. Even people who have worked their entire lives in a mine look better, Pugachev warned.

The interviewee says that when Putin was chosen as a presidential candidate, he made it clear that he was doing it for money. He told us, I can be your president; just pay me.

Regarding the wealth that Putin could have accumulated during his long term in office, Pugachev revealed, Starting out from the fact that there was a tacit agreement to consider that all businesses belong to the leader, and that the businessmen accepted it as a new way of operating, the fortune built up by Putin and his family could exceed trillions of dollars.

About this system, Putins former campaign manager points out that the oligarchs understood towards the end of the 2000s that all the money they had amassed was common property. All their fortunes were under Putins responsibility or belonged to him. Today, the system is like a cooperative in the hands of Putin and those closest to him.

Read the original:

Putins former banker warns about his health - AS USA

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said that "the whole alliance will react" if the Russian President attacks one of the 30 members of the military bloc. The former Norwegian Prime Minister's comments reflect article 5 of the original treaty that established the alliance in 1949 based upon the concept of collective self defence.

This means that an attack on one member of the alliance is judged to be an attack on all member states.

It has been invoked only once following the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States in 2001.

In a speech in Norway on Thursday, Mr Stoltenberg said that Europe was facing its "most dangerous situation since World War 2" in a dire warning.

He also emphasised that NATO countries needed to continue to support Ukraine in order to prevent Russian aggression spreading beyond Ukraine to other countries.

Mr Stoltenberg added that this might mean that NATO countries will need to support Ukraine with weapons and other forms of assistance for a long time to come.

He said: "It's in our interest that this type of aggressive policy does not succeed.

"What happens in Ukraine is terrible but it would be much worse if there was a war between Russia and NATO.

"This is the most dangerous situation in Europe since World War Two.

READ MORE:Putins gas master plan thwarted: UK handed ONE BILLION cubic metres

Following what the Kremlin calls its "special military operation" in Ukraine, previously neutral countries Finland and Sweden have applied to join NATO.

So far the request has been ratified by 23 of the 30 members of the alliance including the United States after Turkey dropped its opposition to the two countries joining.

Despite the current harsh rhetoric between Vladimir Putin and NATO, the Russian President was much more favourable towards the alliance during his first term in office during the early 2000s.

He told American filmmaker Oliver Stone during an interview that he had discussed the possibility of Moscow joining the alliance with US President Bill Clinton in 2000.

The Russian President also made similar positive comments about joining NATO during a BBC interview with David Frost the same year.

Link:

NATO 'will react' if Putin attacks - causing 'most dangerous situation since WW2' - Express

The Kremlin is planning to falsify evidence to frame Ukraine for an attack on a prison housing prisoners of war (POW) in a bid to deter the West from sending more weapons to support the embattled nation, multiple intelligence sources suggest. The Olenivka prison near Donetsk had been used to house many of the Ukrainian soldiers who surrendered at the Azovstal plant in Mariupol several months ago. Last Thursday, the prison came under attack, killing at least 50 Ukrainian POW. Disturbing video footage published on Russian state TV and social media channels show extensive destruction to a building and several bodies.

The Kremlin has been quick to blame Ukrainian troops, who they say were using Western-provided weapons for the attack.

A White House official told CNN they expect Russia will falsify evidence in order to more convincingly blame Ukrainian forces.

The official added that they have "reason to believe that Russia would go so far as to make it appear that [Western-provided] Ukrainian HIMARS were to blame".

This analysis is echoed by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), which found: "Russian forces likely set fire to the prison complex holding Ukrainian POWs in occupied Donetsk Oblast but blamed Ukraine for an alleged precision strike using Western-supplied military equipment, likely to deter additional military support to Ukraine."

Meanwhile, the Ukrainian Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) reported that it determined the Wagner Group deliberately set fire to the prison complex on July 28.

The report is consistent with the damage observable in Russian-published video of the site.

The footage showed the walls of the building were burned but still standing and did not reveal shell craters or other indicators consistent with an artillery strike.

Western-provided HIMARS have reached rock star status in Ukraine, with the Defence Ministry posting slick celebratory videos to social media channels.

On Monday, Kyiv's MoD shared a spoof promotional video for "HIMARS global tour 2022", featuring footage of the rocket launchers wreaking havoc on Russian targets after nightfall, to the soundtrack of Metallica's Enter Sandman.

The tagline read: "Coming soon... to a Russian munitions depot near you."

The United States started providing the key precision rocket weapon system to Ukraine in June after receiving assurances from Kyiv that it would not use them to hit targets inside Russian territory.

In July, US President Joe Biden signed a new weapons package worth up to $400 million, including more HIMARS and ammunition.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky used his overnight speech on Tuesday to celebrate the success of HIMARS.

He proclaimed: "The word 'HIMARS' has become almost synonymous with the word 'justice' for our country.

"The Ukrainian defence forces will do everything to ensure that the occupiers experience more and more painful losses every week thanks to these very effective systems."

They have confirmed that there are at least 20 HIMARS operating on the battlefield.

The delivery of HIMARS comes as fighting intensifies in the southeast of Ukraine, stretching up into the northeast.

Donetsk and Luhansk are the two regions that together form Donbas, the eastern part of Ukraine where the conflict between Ukraine and Russian-backed separatists began in 2014.

The area has become the main focus of Putin's invasion after his troops failed to take over Kyiv earlier this year.

The Russian military has kept up a constant barrage of artillery and missile strikes across the region for several weeks.

The Kremlin claims the goal of what it calls its "special military operation" is to take control of both Luhansk and Donetsk.

See original here:

Putin's horror plot EXPOSED as despot tries to blame slaughter of POWs on West - Express