Way back in 2001 at the dawn of what was to be the “American Century,” the RAND Corporation noted that “…the demise, capture, or incapacitation of an enemy leader typically does not result in a favorable change in enemy policy or behavior.”
Yet Washington think tank landia continues to argue that on all fronts the US and its vassals simply need to keep up the pressure until Russian President Vladimir Putin dies. Until Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei dies. And until Chinese President Xi Jinping dies or passes power. There is a whole cottage industry of experts pontificating on how US goals to “democratize” these countries could succeed once their current rulers die—either from natural causes or by assassination.
Washington’s proxies certainly have the green light. Israel went after Khamenei. Iran’s previous president Ebrahim Raisi died in a suspicious helicopter crash on a return trip from Israel’s partner in crime Azerbaijan. Ukraine has tried to kill Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The RAND observation from 2001 might remain true, but the en vogue argument now appears to be that the US doesn’t necessarily need a stable and friendly puppet government. It will find ways to feast on any whiff of a succession battle.
Let’s look at these hopeful strategies of death.
Russia
Last year, RFE/RL admitted the failure of Project Ukraine in its own quiet way. In a piece titled ‘Crowdsourcing Russia’s Future: Poll Of Experts Considers What Comes After Putin’ it is noted that rather than Ukraine triggering Putin’s downfall, it has strengthened his position and that the most likely path of his exit is through death of old age.
Systema —RFE/RL’s Russian “investigative” unit—spoke to 40 Russian “experts,” almost all of whom listed this among the most probable paths for Russia, while eight listed it as the only possible route.
So Project Ukraine mission failed, and there’s no need to keep funding the meat grinder, right? Not so fast!
Who knows when Putin’s death might come, and in the meantime the US needs to keep its Ukraine hail mary options open, argues former senior CIA analyst and Principal Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Russia and Eurasia at the National Intelligence Council Peter Schroeder, writing at Foreign Affairs that, “what is certain is that, at some point, he will die.” More:
There is only one viable option for ending the war in Ukraine on terms acceptable to the West and Kyiv: waiting Putin out. Under this approach, the United States would hold the line in Ukraine and maintain sanctions against Russia while minimizing the level of fighting and amount of resources expended until Putin dies or otherwise leaves office. Only then will there be a chance for a lasting peace in Ukraine.
Well, sure, but what does that guarantee Washington? Absolutely nothing. It could increase the odds of a more hardline government:
Russia self-destructed twice last century, sure. But not because Nicholas II died — he abdicated.
Gorbachev wasn’t killed. He got locked in a cuck corner and lived 30 more years.
The real heuristic: Russia dies when its ruler cucks out.
— Russians With Attitude (@RWApodcast) August 3, 2025
What the above notes is the same observation made by RAND a quarter century ago, and yet some combination of military-industrial-tech complex money, delusion and desperation keep Washington dancing to the same tune.
China
Another more recent piece in Foreign Affairs makes a similar argument about China and its President Xi Jinping.
It is penned by Tyler Jost, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and an assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at the Watson School of International and Public Affairs at Brown University, and Daniel C. Mattingly, an associate Professor of Political Science at Yale University who focuses on “authoritarian regimes.”
They begin by listing all the horrible acts committed by Xi, from purges and suppression of dissent to encouraging “wolf warrior” diplomats and state involvement in the economy. What is the poor ol’ US supposed to do with such a mad man? Simply, keep on doing what’s it doing, of course. Wait and bait, we could call it:
Soon, however, everything will start to change. As the CCP elite begins the search for a leader to replace the 72-year-old Xi, China is transitioning from a phase defined by power consolidation to one defined by the question of succession. For any authoritarian regime, political succession is a moment of peril, and for all its strengths, the CCP is no exception.
Jost and Mattingly proceed to salivate at the potential damage a succession battle could do to the Middle Kingdom, including such fantasies like a failed invasion of Taiwan that leaves China an international pariah. They conclude that it all just might break Washington’s way:
Instead of meddling, the United States should let the process unfold while watching it closely. Although the party’s geopolitical assessments and ideological convictions are bigger than Xi, it is not unreasonable to expect a course correction from the post-Xi years, in which a more moderate and temperate leader emerges—someone who is not stridently nationalist and who can break down the walls that the current leadership has built around the country.
Indeed, in the past, the CCP has corrected course through the succession process. There is a hopeful lesson for the coming years in the transition from Mao’s radical socialism to Deng’s more pragmatic policy of reform and opening. “If we don’t reform, the party is at a dead end,” Deng famously said. Xi’s successor might come to the same conclusion.
Perhaps this theme of waiting for inevitable deaths and maintaining a hands-off approach is a way of acceptance in the US that it cannot control the world. If it were to become reality, that would be welcome.
I’m not sure I like those odds. A recent mega-report from the Hudson Institute is more likely to accurately describe what a US attempt to destroy China would look like in the case of any destabilization upon Xi’s passing the baton.
The chapter “OSS in China Again: The Role of US Special Operations Forces after CCP Collapse,” written by an anonymous author, dreams of Xi’s exit causing chaos—upheaval that the US would rush to exploit. Here are some more juicy snippets from the three phases, starting with a Phase 0:
Long before the CCP’s collapse, US government agencies should launch a steady campaign of strategic messaging, public diplomacy, information operations, and covert influence. Their aim should be to reinforce the partitions between the party and the state, the party and the armed forces, and the party and the people. These partitions, however slight, will prove instrumental to a tenable state, military, and society after the fall—maximizing the likelihood that the party’s collapse does not also bring down the rest of China with it. The capabilities of US special operations forces (US SOF) are well suited to this task, in concert with the US Department of State and other government agencies. Together, they should conduct a steady campaign of what George Kennan called political warfare, growing in scale and intensity as the fall of the CCP looms.
…During this campaign, the US SOF—including US intelligence agencies like the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) Special Activities Center and other elements—will develop surrogate networks, train partner forces, enable cyber operations, and support other clandestine methods to deliver truthful information to populations inside China.
If recent history is any indication, US spooks might have a tough time with this operation. Let’s recall that more than 10 years ago China uncovered and crippled CIA networks in the country, killing many sources. Around the same time Beijing also began exposing American agents in Europe and Africa. Nonetheless, onto Phase 1:
As soon as possible following regime collapse, the US government should surge diplomats and defense attachés to the US embassy in Beijing and consulates in Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenyang, and Wuhan, along with roughly 20 US SOF at each location. Through existing channels, US diplomats and defense attachés should establish crisis communications between the US ambassador and the provisional State Council, and between the US Department of Defense and the [Central Military Commission].
In these initial engagements, the United States should offer humanitarian assistance as the contingency requires, diplomatic recognition of the provisional central government of China, and an intelligence-sharing agreement to warn of opportunistic incursions along China’s land borders. It should propose three urgent lines of effort for the provisional government, which the newly formed Chinese military will carry out and US [Special Operations Forces] will assist: border security, humanitarian assistance in affected areas, and safeguarding of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and related material.
…Finally, US SOF should provide on-the-ground warning intelligence and options of last resort to prevent the proliferation of WMDs and related material. Joint contingency planning between the US government and the provisional central government of China should account for and secure key munitions stockpiles, facilities, and delivery platforms under the command and control of the provisional central government, including of sea-based nuclear ballistic missile submarines. Additional US SOF teams should accompany PLA Army and Rocket Force units to secure the most critical sites, provide early warning of imminent threats, and develop contingency plans to safeguard WMDs in an emergency. These plans should provide that, as a last resort, US SOF based outside China will conduct direct action missions to render WMDs and related materials safe. In its combined operations with US SOF—keeping watch over land borders, delivering humanitarian relief, averting the catastrophic proliferation of WMDs, buying time for a free and legitimate government to coalesce—the PLA will take up a noble calling in a new China and leave behind its former charge as the military arm of the CCP.
Bonkers stuff. There’s more, but you get the picture, and you could understand why the author wanted to remain anonymous. Arnaud Bertrand argues this increased, umm, “ambition” says a lot more about the lunatics in Washington than it does anything about China:
Witnessing the end of American primacy, some members of the imperial establishment are transforming themselves into a grotesque caricature of themselves, taking every toxic aspect of American foreign policy and amplifying it to absurd extremes, becoming more imperially ambitious and delusional than ever before, planning interventions of unprecedented scale and audacity, as if doubling down on their worst impulses might somehow restore their waning dominance.
Onto Tehran, where the “real men go.”
Iran
It’s another case in which US threats of military force carry little weight and decades of coercion have proved ineffective at toppling the government in Tehran. Rather than simply wait for the death of Khamenei, however, there is a hope in DC that the Israelis can assassinate him. The neocon Middle East Forum certainly hopes so—and not just Khamenei:
Ultimately, Khamenei’s death would pose an even greater challenge to the Islamic Republic’s stability than Ruhollah Khomeini’s passing in 1989. This would be especially true if he were killed alongside his son, Mojtaba Khamenei, whom many observers view as a potential successor.
Israel might have to assassinate even more, according to the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs:
…senior security officials say it is doubtful that the assassination of Khamenei and his son Mojtaba alone would destabilize the regime. According to them, Israel must eliminate not only Khamenei and Mojtaba, but also all members of the Guardian Council and the Assembly of Experts — about 100 individuals in total. Only a powerful blow to the ideological, political, and religious structure of the Islamic Republic will bring about its collapse.
The core leadership of Iran consists of:
- Ali Khamenei – the ultimate authority.
- Mojtaba Khamenei – the designated successor, closely linked to the IRGC and considered more radical than his father.
- The Guardian Council – preserves the Islamic identity of the state and blocks any constitutional reforms.
- The Assembly of Experts – appoints the Supreme Leader and grants religious legitimacy to the regime.
Security sources say that the Mossad and the IDF could carry out such an operation, and that there is a high probability it would lead to the regime’s collapse.
What could go wrong?
It’s worth remembering the above accounts are not from ostracized crackpots. They are from the foreign policy establishment and respected (by most) institutions of higher learning, and they are actively cheering for the collapse of governments that collectively cover about 1.6 billion people on earth and two of which possess vast nuclear arsenals.
And even scarier: a few of these policy prescriptions might actually represent progress as they at least don’t advocate for direct military confrontation, which could escalate to nuclear war. Squint and you could make the case that these scenarios of infighting in China, Iran, and Russia perhaps offer a creeping realization that all Washington’s tools of coercion are becoming useless against the above three targets and that the best option is waiting.
Unfortunately, advocating for patience doesn’t mean the crazies are giving up, just that they need to prepare for and pick their spots.
Well, they managed to completely destroy Europe through patience, money, cocaine and most likely Epstein-stuff (I am waiting for this to come out). The utter fools ruling most countries now are retards and bred and paid for to be idiots.
The sad thing is that there are zero reliable politicians behind them. Chop the head of every state leader in Europe and you get 10 more identical idiots ready to sell out their population. There has been an adverse selection process of 1) those that get into politics at all and 2) those who then stick around and pledge to sell out the countries in order to reach the top.
I am not sure that there is a solid and large enough future leadership-cadre in China, Russia or Iran that cannot be bought or Epstein-forced to kill their own countries. Scott Ritter warned some time ago, when he travelled to Novosibirsk, that there are plenty of corrupt Western-oriented local politicians, stil Navalny-fans, to throw Russia into chaos after Putin leaves the scene.
In the meantime the EU and UK are collapsing. As they pour ever more billions into the lost cause that is Ukraine, wringing their hands at the genocide in Gaza and the West Bank while continuing to supply arms and intelligence to Israel, and kow towing to US interests and expensive energy, politicians are gleefully telling plebs that the welfare state is unaffordable, retirement age must ever increase – barking mad lasted less time than a lettuce Liz Truss said it must go up to 80 – everything must be privatised, enshittified and make life for plebs ever more unaffordable. At some point the dam must break in Europe. The question can only be when. There will be stronger rebellions than waving flags and painting roundabouts red and white and attacking migrant hostels.
“Wishfull Thinking”
I had a dream, and I believe it is either prophetic or, at the very least, an example of inspired technological forecasting.
The SMO has defanged, de-industrialised Europe, left it friendless, and will leave it to drown in a sea of debt and tribute paid to Russia in respect of the stolen assets. The US élite, as well as Fox viewers, seem convinced pf the US’s invulnerability like a simpleminded teenager taking a long piss on a live rail, and don’t seem to realise that the US is rather more liable to abrupt political change accompanied by social upheaval than the civilisational states of China, Russia and Iran – who may well decide to wipe out many members of the elites, corporates and donors by relatively simple measures like changing agreement and treaties governing US and European IPR in non-US and European states.
It is rather more difficult to knock off US political leaders because of the 2 and 4 year farcical cycles where even the different turns out to be the same, and the US is currrently doing a remarkably good job of knocking off its permanent government and losing the skillsets necessary to good/compettent governance in both peace, war and emergencies in the form of pandemics, naughty, naughty climate events with its reliance on unicorn technologies, Danegeld ,and a wing and a prayer, but I’m sure that if it becomes necessary the Forces of Good will follow the US, UK and Mosad example and deliver drones, bullets and bombs with a will.
And, let us not forget, if it should really come to the worst, there is always the Second Coming to sort things out, a thousand year war between Good and Evil and the joys of the Rapture will leave heaven heavily overpopulated by Orthodox Christians, Muslims of various stripes (but not those who’ve accepted money from the West), followers of Confucius, the Tao, Karl Marx, Norman Finkelstein, Noam Chomsky, Bob Dylan, and really nice dogs and cats.
The rest will descend to the deepest pits of hell to repent of their sins as their flesh burns continuously for eternity where the Zionists set the standard for ultimate suffering for the ultimate crimes of stealing another people’s land and genocide and their punishments will be supervised by Adolf Hitler-Heinrich Himmler wrecking crew doing God’s work.
great post
Adolescent day dreams always have happy endings, but these Three scenarios. Possible? Yes. Probable? No Likely? No. But look at the US. The president is pushing toward 80. His vice president while neither lean nor hungry might be suspected of having that “lean and hungry look.” He certainly has a backer, mentor, supporter who quite openly looks to a different future for the US. The federal government is composed of hostile factions scrambling for preferment, position, power and plunder. The leadership is shot through with the old and hidebound. The population is restless, discontented. The words “soft secession” are whispered. Write your own scenario for “regime change.” Ask yourself. Possible? Probable? Likely?
One might say that Eestern elites seem to have similar view towards specifically Trump–that is basically what TDS is, isn’t it? They assume that the opposition towards them is “personal,” built around certain “troublemakers,” and once they are somehow made to disappear, they’ll have their way. A sort of weird variation on “Great Men” theory.
Why do “they” think that Russia, China and Islamic Republic are run differently than the US where the elected are directed by a neocon deep state?
Of course, accusing the enemy of being Hitler works.
Because we don’t know who our leaders are, while we know who theirs are? So, maybe they don’t know who to target, while we do? It’s all decoys. No one must know who runs the place…
…our strategy is to walk the Planck?
Cool. And to the Max… because the West with it’s visionary magnificent technologies for which your tech hayseeds pay so much good money attempting to realise something as abstract as a multi-purpose technology without defining the purposes/fantasies because the tech hicks have got to engage in highly conspicuous consumption of valuable capital to pretend how much better they are than the cheap and cheerful Chinese who spoil the game by open sourcing their tech once they’ve developed something they know works well. Naughty, naughty Chinese.
What is as perennial as the grass?
How about BS being spouted by the council on foreign relations crowd.
I think this story isn’t the poor logic of the authors of current foreign affairs articles. It is the history of the council on foreign relations.
Back when cecil rhodes,Stead and other british empire hit men.. created the british roundtable in 1891, they did so to create disinformation and spread it through their newspapers and gov’t contacts. When they created the council on foreign relations 1919/1921 in the US; and royal institute of international affairs/chatham house in 1919 in UK, this was the beginning of a formal propaganda campaign to lie to people and get them to think what they want them to think.
They knew that with never ending streams of money to fund these information campaigns, their goals would be strengthened, and would be kept afloat despite always being “stupid”.
Well, the city of london and the wall street interests… created the national security state. the deepstate was created. the elitist views were spread from the top to the bottom, and created our modern culture. the national security act of 1947, the federal reserve in 1913, the state of israel. from the balfour (one of them) declaration… the UN.. the cold war, the war on drugs, the war on terror… the war on the bill of rights… the war on the vast majority of the population of the globe.. neoliberalism, neo-conservatism… all of this and more were the result of groups of people who created communities of intent.. who go around the world and defile logical communication. They are always armed with the certainty that no matter how stupid they are. No matter how bad their efforts turn out… they will always find another paying job. In government, in academia, in business… the liars code of these people is strong.
They have “waited out”… everything so far, and done it from comfortable dwellings around the globe. the class war, upholding wealth inequality… creating disaster, to pick up the pieces at a discount price…
Just like in Carroll Quigley’s tome “Tragedy and Hope” @ 1961/1966… described the networks and their history of the world for the twentieth century. These council members were called “the association of helpers”…. and not the “circle of initiates” who actually decided the path forward.
this is what they have done…. and they still enjoy being able to ignore their past folly, and still have a voice for future idiocy.
People who look forward to Putin’s demise should be careful what they wish for. I am certain that Putin’s successor will be far more nationalistic than he ever was. Putin is an internationalist and–like most Russians of his generation–he has a residual respect for the USA and for the West (or at least for what they used to be long ago). Younger Russians (at least the ones I talk to in Moscow–by far the most liberal city in Russia) don’t view the West this way, not anymore. And the recent behavior of the West towards Russia has created a trust gap that will be difficult to overcome.
Putin’s high approval ratings mask the fact that there is dissatisfaction with his rule, but it comes mainly from the nationalist side (the liberal pro-Western side is politically irrelevant nowadays). His foreign policy is seen as too soft towards UKR and the West, while his domestic policy is seen as overly oligarch-friendly (and too tolerant of corruption) and neoliberal (e.g., 20% interest rates). Post-Putin, a charismatic nationalist promising a crackdown on corruption and a non-neoliberal economic policy (and yes, there are Russian economists who are familiar with MMT), together with a hard-nosed Russia-first foreign policy, could achieve wild popularity.
In any case, Putin is a sprightly 72 and shows no signs of shuffling off this mortal coil anytime soon.
Maxwell,
Really appreciate your man on the street views on the inside looking out, you have a unique glimpse based on being a worldly type guy not limited to just 1 empire.
Hoping to capitalize on Xi’s demise in China is even stupider. Have the morons who run the US ever seen China? I have. It reminded me of the U.S. of my youth, when everything was shiny and new. And in excellent repair. Never saw a single person begging for change, like we do in every corner of the U.S.
Xi lifted hundreds of millions of Chinese out of poverty. China’s the world leader in too many areas to count. To think they are going to throw all that away after Xi’s death to become Syria or Iraq or Libya
Hoping to capitalize on Xi’s demise in China is even stupider than thinking they can capitalize on Putin’s.
Have the morons who run the IS ever seen China. I have. It reminded me of the U.S. of my youth, when everything was shiny and new. And in excellent repair. Never saw a single person begging for change in China like we do in every corner of the U.S.
Xi lifted hundreds of millions of Chinese out of poverty. China is the world leader in too many areas to count. And unlike the US, it’s improving every day. To think they are going to throw all that away after Xi’s death to become Syria or Iraq or Libya is beyond ridiculous. It also shows a complete ignorance of how the Chinese political system works. We are led by fools.
I had a good laugh at this part:
If they really follow this strategy, there won’t be any Ukraine left to negotiate over.
There might not be a West either.
Do foreign policy “elites” in Western countries, when they publicly and in writing consider assassinating dozens of foreign leaders, ever consider the fact the the same prescriptions could be used on them?
I had to chuckle at the sentence regarding China quoted by a US foreign policy hawk with absolutely zero sense of irony –
” “If we don’t reform, the party is at a dead end,” Deng famously said.”
Keep spending decades planning one regime change operation after another to bring about foreign puppet governments that are just right for US exploitation and domination, and these brain geniuses just might find that the dead end comes in the form of a hypersonic up their nether regions.
Just reading this article yesterday
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2025/08/24/review-of-gideons-spies-the-secret-history-of-the-mossad/
I don’t think it’s controversial to suggest that the Mossad has always operated as a kind murder incorporated with the notion that anyone who doesn’t like Israel being an “existential threat” serving as the jusitifcation. Spielberg even made a movie about it–the assassination campaign that followed the Munich Olympic event in particular. Of course one advantage of the covert route is that it provides “strategic ambiguity” and may forestall retaliation. And there is of course always the media double standard. If Iran tries to kill Netanyahu or Putin targeted Biden then world outrage would be infinite. Putin hasn’t even been willing to take out Zelensky who, from the Russian standpoint, surely has it coming.
The above discussion is part of the “it’s ok when we do it” mental disease of our elites. Of course those academics aren’t suggesting that the US bomb the Kremlin–retaliation–but clearly wouldn’t mind if the Mossad took care of the problem for them. We believe in a “rules based order” only when convenient.
Indeed, though I wonder where this comes from. Is it a lack of foresight, of political imagination, or a failure to connect the dots about retaliation — or is it more the natural extension of believing oneself and one’s tribe to be superior, appropriately credentialed, “chosen”, etc.?
Do these openly stated threats and actual activities make our opponents more authoritarian and censorious? They at least give these governments the excuse to be so, and cast suspicion on peace and democracy activists with no foreign connections.
For some reason, while the economies of the USA and its vassals are turning neofeudal, these think tank and policy writers seem to think that time is on their side. A sceptic reader could be excused for concluding this is mainly an exercise in exuberant projection.
It’s worth noting that Adolf thought FDR dying late in the war was a game changer.
The death of Empress Elizabeth of Russia in 1762, which gave the throne to a questionably-competent Prussophile who hurried to make peace, saved Prussia from near-certain catastrophe in the Seven Years War. I understand Hitler believed he was due for a similar miracle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_House_of_Brandenburg#Second_Miracle_of_the_House_of_Brandenburg
That sort of thing does happen, but it is never wise to hinge all your plans on a miracle. Policy continuity regardless of changes in leadership is more common. I have no idea who would take Putin’s place when he goes, but I doubt it would be a new Peter III who deeply admires America and wants to ally with it pronto – such people exist, but, I think, not anywhere near the highest rungs of our current national political elite.
Frankly Russia, China and Iran have their own plans. And what are they? To do nothing of course. Just hold the line with American attacks on them and watch how things unravel in the US itself. They will tell each other that the US military is not the same one from even twenty years ago and the Ukraine has show up their equipment’s flaws in actual combat situations. That America is setting on fire their seed corn by taking a wrecking ball to the scientific research and development establishments which put America on top in the 20th century. In addition, they are destroying relations with all their allies by trying to humiliate them and charge them a “fee” for the privilege of trading with America while they are expected to relocate their industries to America along with their sovereign wealth. And major countries like Brazil and Canada have their people almost become hostile to any American goods. It’s a very long list but something’s gotta give and it won’t be them.
They do nothing aggressive, but they are building settlement systems and routes of trade that are not controlled in any way or form by US.
Agreed. But unfortunately, the only thing that will result in a change in course is a lot of pain and suffering.
The “Allies” are not the ones who are going to pay the fees (Trump’s tariffs). It is the USA consumer.
I wish more people would realize that. But those tax cuts for Billionaires have to be paid for somehow.
Still, it would be enticingly easy to infiltrate money into the US to fund anti-government forces of chaos – I wonder about the trend of utility power transformer shootings. Purely homegrown? Collapse the grid and the US economy collapses, and shortly thereafter, the hegemony – the system has its resiliency rationalized out, leaving a lean and precarious system, like the US workforce.
It’s easy to find examples:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/05/us/power-outage-moore-county-investigation-monday/index.html
“Those whom the Gods wish to destroy, they first make mad”
The self-reinforcing delusion loops gripping the US foreign policy establishment mean the empire is muddling through the madness phase in its slow walk to total destruction.
Just as the Roman Catholic Church collapses every time the Pope dies.
These people should be called out for the idiots they are.
John Paul 1 had a very brief papacy. John Paul 2 one of the longest. I have no idea what #1 might’ve done. But #2 surely left a not-so-nice legacy in multiple dimensions.
Hopefully better “strategic planning” is underway elsewhere as to how to secure US nukes etc during the West’s upcoming disintegration and US collapse.
I’m not worried about China. They will do just fine without Xi. Russia, on the other hand, is a country built by Putin alone. I don’t believe anyone other than Putin can rule Russia. Russia without Putin would be like Yugoslavia without Tito.
Your theory that Russia will disintegrate after Putin, as Yugoslavia did after Tito, is difficult to believe.
Boris Yeltsin held the country together with mostly success when he led Russia from 1990 to 1999. And he was a drunk who introduced economic policies that impoverished tens of millions, with life expectancy plunging from 68.89 years to 64.47 in 1994. That means millions of people died early. If Yeltsin held the country together, what makes you think Putin’s successor could not?
Real Hitler-in-the-bunker vibes from that Hudson Institute piece.
Just because the West’s ossified geriatric ruling class has no concept of the future doesn’t mean the rest of the world is in the same boat.
nothing more risible than the US’ asinine belief in its own waining powers, greatly exagerated in the modern world and always, always these clowns in Think Tank Land (and more in Govt) simply imagine the enemy will sit still and watch it happen whilst doing nothing in return. The US foreign Policy massif are so banal and uninformed it would be hilarious where it not so dangerous.
Pariah State dreams of making powerful nations who view it with cautious disgust into pariah states.
A wish fulfillment dream!
“It’s worth remembering the above accounts are not from ostracized crackpots.”
That depends on where you’re sitting, here maybe, RoW, definitely ostracized crackpots, but the weapons they wield ever more clumsily still command respect.
Which respect the crackpots naturally assume is directed toward them.
Thanks for this article. It amazes me how we see again and again that we are led by people who are unable learn anything at all. Yet these people have been chosen to lead us by those who need to hear the bullshit these people tell them. The incompetence is breathtaking.
But does hopium cut both ways?
Do the Russians, Chinese, Iranians and others in the Global Majority ‘hope’ that the West will eventually change its warring ways, and learn to live in peaceful coexistence with the rest of the world?
I suspect that they are a lot more pragmatic and realistic than their western counterparts.
No, the Global Majority does not hope that the West will eventually change its warring ways, and learn to live in peaceful coexistence with the rest of the world, but that it will collapse on itself (causing all kinds of trouble for everyone in the process). Demographic, economic, industrial, political, and religious trends tend to point downwards. For example, in the UK bunch of churches are turned into mosques, and the most popular name for newborn babies is becoming Mohammad. One does not need a crystal ball to see the future there. Also, none of the politicians in charge have support of the population. You don’t arrest people for posting on the Internet, unless the system is on shaky grounds. Trends can change, but the way they are pointing is not promising for the old West. Hard rains are gonna fall.
In the alt-sphere it has long been conventional wisdom that Russia has chosen to fight a war of attrition against “Ukraine” (read NATO), and for numerous reasons it cannot help but win it. Concomitantly the behavior of the West has been seen as not only misguided but entirely irrational. The usual suspects scratch their heads and struggle for explanations.
What they miss is that for the West it has likewise become a war of attrition. It was not begun that way, and the likelihood of success may be low, but it looks very much like a tacit consensus among the leadership class that it is the best of bad alternatives. Simplicius offers a telling quote from Mario Draghi:
The Western fantasy—or desperate hope—is that it can wear Russia down, eventually cause its collapse from within through ideological colonization (a bribe or two would not hurt), and collateralize and extract its vast assets. Old World leopard (with New World inventories), same spots. All serve the Empress TINA, singing praises of her war-drobe.
Until then powers that be will fear monger and do everything necessary to assert control. Throw elections in Moldova and Romania. Instigate a public square revolution in Georgia and Serbia. Pay off corrupt leaders in Armenia and Azerbaijan. Wink at attacks on and withhold funds from Hungary and Slovakia.
I left off the concluding line from the Draghi quote. It is this: “This year will be remembered as the year in which this illusion evaporated.” May it be so. But I have my doubts. This is a larger war of attrition, and many Western power elites are in it to win it. Their political lives and livelihoods depend on it.