The fall of Bakhmut, whose significance entailed the exposure of Zelensky as the mass murderer that fed Territorial Defense Forces into its ‘meat-grinder,’ is provides an unfavorable backdrop for the continued call to launch a ‘Spring’ counteroffensive. Zelensky, who is reeling from the city’s loss, has launched a massive campaign in the media to damper the forthcoming consequences of its catastrophic effects.
In the immediate aftermath of the fall of Bakhmut, which comes as a surprise to everyone one but the socialists (who have analyzed its inevitable fall as the most likely outcome of the battle arising from Sergey Surovinkin’s successful implementation of a military strategy in honor of Gregory Zhukov, a general whose brilliance in the 21st century is second only to his former commanding officer, Leon Trotsky, the Commissar of War), Washington is at a loss. Rather than launch its long heralded “Spring” counteroffensive, for which no less than 13 brigades have been prepared, Washington has had to reschedule its attack to the Summer, if not altogether.
The situation with respect to the “Spring” counteroffensive is so bad that one of the military commentators on the Ukraine war from Britain, Sean Bean (whose analysis of the war is far more advanced than the primitiveness of the pauper’s brew Ben Hodges serves his listeners), has begun to air a special appeal, seeking to clarify why the “Spring” counteroffensive has not yet been launched. It is clearly an attempt at pro-war propaganda, whose ultimate aim is designed to shore up support for Zelensky ahead of NATO biannual summit. Zelensky, whose regime reached its lowest level after his refusal to withdraw from Bakhmut resulted in the mass murder of Ukrainians, is facing his greatest political, economic, military challenge, as Ukrainian armed forces appear incapable after their defeat.
In his appeal called, “Ukraine war: Why hasn’t the spring offensive started yet,” which Sky News published on June 4th, 2023, Sean Bean seeks to explain why “Ukraine’s much anticipated Spring counteroffensive hasn’t started.” The reasons he provides, however, merely proves in the negative that the Ukrainian “Spring” counteroffensive is nothing short of a propaganda myth. His first reason is the weather. The second is the new equipment Ukraine received. The third is the time needed to train Ukraine’s ‘new’ troops.
At least the first of these reasons in particular point to a profound lack of understanding among the members of NATO, especially the United States, regarding the situation facing Ukrainian armed forces. It is well known from as early as the 1940s that one of the primary challenges one may face in the territory of the Ukraine is the so-called rasputitsa. The fact that NATO’s brass failed to take into account the rasputitsa in planning the counteroffensive is not just a justification for delay but a reflection of their ignorance of geography. It is incomprehensible how anyone could have announced a planned ‘Spring’ counteroffensive without knowledge of the rasputitsa. At the end of the day, however, none of these three reasons, especially in regards to the rasputitsa, amount to anything more than an excuse for Ukraine’s disastrous situation. If Ukraine can not launch a counteroffensive, then it should not. It should not but least of all because it can not. It should not because the war should come to an end now.
In addition, Bean embarks upon a Biblical comparison. Zelensky has had to work hard, he says, to instill confidence in the more than 31 Member States of the NATO alliance that “a David Ukraine can actually prevail against a Goliath Russia.”
In his comparison of Ukraine to Russia, however, Bean, who is generally not a fully partisan advocate for the Ukraine war, breaks ranks, actively proclaiming his support for its ultimate outcome. Despite the analogy breaking when one begins to wonder what ‘pebbles from the brook’ Ukraine may hurl at Russia’s ‘cyclops’ in the sky, as Ukraine has been incapable of establishing superiority in the air, the attempt to portray Ukraine as a victim of Philistine oppression is not only utterly incomprehensible but ahistorical and one-sided.
Towards the end of his broadcast, Bean stated: “President Zelensky has proven to be a brilliant war time leader but he doesn’t have the military experience to help him.make a judgement about when to begin the Spring counteroffensive. He has only been a politician for a few years. He was an actor and a comedian before that. If it was difficult for Churchill, it is incredibly difficult for President Zelensky.”
The attempt to portray Zelensky as Churchill is an undeniably unfitting analogy. Zelensky’s position does not relate to that of Churchill’s in any way, shape, size, or form. Zelesnky is not a part of besieged Allied Powers under threat of death from an incredibly powerful Nazi war machine under the command of a fascistic dictator, Adolf Hitler. Zelensky is a puppet of the NATO regime, whose unsuccessful exploitation of Ukrainians as cannon fodder in a war Ukraine cannot win portends the direct intervention of a NATO Member State’s troops.
In Bean’s description of Churchill’s conversation with his wife, Clementine, during dinner prior to the Allies’ invasion of Normandy on D-Day, Bean seeks to relate Churchill’s remark about the loss of 20,000 lives before dinner’s end to Zelensky’s recent remarks about the predictable loss of Ukrainian life in its upcoming ‘Spring’ counteroffensive. In a report released by ABC News entitled, “Zelensky issues grim warning ahead of Ukrainian counteroffensive,” Zelesnky signaling that his troops are ready but telling the Wall Street Journal that “a large number of troops will die.”
Who will die? In an article entitled, “Ukraine Arms Race,” which Time published in Volume 201, numbers 17 through 18 during the week of May 8th – May 17th, 2023, the authors mention nonchalantly towards the end of a double, two page spread, covering more than four pages, how U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin examined “troops at Germany’s sprawling Grafenwöhr base, the former site of Nazi training grounds.” Inevitably, the troops trained under U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s examination at Grafenwöhr base are scheduled to die.
Knowledge of twelve of the thirteen brigades comes from Jack Texeira’s release of classified NATO war planning documents. One of the documents declares that “12 combat credible [brigades] can be generated for the spring Counteroffensive: 3 internationally by Ukraine, and 9 are US, Allied & Partner trained and equipped.”
The more than 13 brigades, trained not in a single location for the sake of its cohesion but in a disintegrated fashion at different times, places, or under different commanders, have been cobbled together into what can only be described as Ukraine’s last assemblage, a forth Ukrainian army.
While Bean emphasizes how the West hopes Ukraine will deliver decisive success with its forthcoming “Spring” counteroffensive, he did not rule out a catastrophe but nothing less than a catastrophe awaits Ukraine, if the not the world.
The New York Time, however, is far ahead of Zelensky, having reported as early as July 10th, 2022 Biden’s commitment to stand with Ukraine for “as long as it takes,” even if “neither he nor anyone else can say how long that will be or how much more the United States and its allies can do over that distance, short of direct military intervention.” Published months ago, even months before the beginning of the battle of Bakhmut, the New York Time’s admission is all the more pressing now than at any time prior to its publication.
The New York Time‘s description of a direct military intervention entails the outbreak of Third World War, a cataclysm of immeasurable consequence. A direct military intervention by one or more of the NATO Member States, be it in an air raid on Crimea, an amphibious landing of troops from multiple Member States in NATO as in Bean’s description of D-Day, or otherwise, would not, however, be the sole result of individual, personalist, or subjective decisions on the part of Zelensky or Biden but, rather, the result of capitalist nations in historic chaos.
“Capitalism has created the material conditions of a new Socialist economic system,” Trotsky wrote. “Imperialism has led the capitalist nations into historic chaos. The War of 1914 shows the way out of this chaos by urging the proletariat on to the path of Revolution.”
As Leon Trotsky, the leader of the Petrograd Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies, noted after his successful leadership in the 1917 October revolution resulted in the transfer of all power to Soviets, “The revolutionary reaction of the masses will be all the more powerful the more prodigious the cataclysm which history is now bringing upon them.”