The Kremlin is burning?

[Roman Alymov]

6 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

Ok, It's all interesting.

But we are moving away from the initial thought. The majority of Russian society continues to be completely passive to the politics of its government. Putin may like to wage his wars, but as long as it doesn't affect us, we don't care.

Actually Russian civil society is far more "pro-war" and "hawkish" then Russian rulinfg elite, and Putin is gradually drifting in this direction to save what little is left of his popularity inside Russia.  This war is to significant extent based on crowdfunding and volunteer support. Most of tactical-level drones, tactical encrypted radios, Starlinks, TI equipment, bodyarmor, cammo nets, medical sets and so on - even field stoves - are volunteer-produced, crowdfunded or boughtr by soldiers themselves. More over, Gov and Mil bureoucracy is trying to limit or ban this civil support.

[Roman Alymov]

5 hours ago, ink said:

Hard to expect Russians, living in what is ostensibly a less permissive political/media environment, and with a poorer quality of life generally, to "rise up" against their government's war.

   Russians have actually rose up, but not in the direction West was expecting. Hundreds of thousands of people across the country are crowdfunding money, handcrafting everything from handmade socks and home-made food to drones and complex electronic equipment, assisting in mil hospitals and so on. Even Buddist monks far away on the shores of Baikal are praying for warriors health and victory.

  It is interesting how Western "expert community" and media are doing their best not to mention. Probably, somewhere deep inside they are terrified of what they unintentionately did  - converting loose crowd of people surviving on the wreck of what was once their country back into nation.

[JWB]

Prominent Russian milbloggers continue to undermine the Kremlin’s effort to portray a Russian victory in Ukraine as imminent or inevitable. 

It is notable that the Kremlin’s misrepresentation of the situation on the ground continues to be so far from reality that prominent pro-war milbloggers continue to feel compelled to issue their own corrective statements.

https://x.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1995716401131077748

 

[Stefan Kotsch]

4 hours ago, ink said:

When the war broke out (or even when it was just about to break out), people protested and were promptly

Yes, in homeopathic doses. That was not society. But, elections are won in the rural countryside.

[JWB]

More POL:

 

[bojan]

9 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

Yes, in homeopathic doses. That was not society. But, elections are won in the rural countryside.

How many people in Germany protested Germany joining NATO 1999. bombing in Yugoslavia?

[Roman Alymov]

26 minutes ago, JWB said:

Prominent Russian milbloggers continue to undermine the Kremlin’s effort to portray a Russian victory in Ukraine as imminent or inevitable. 

It is notable that the Kremlin’s misrepresentation of the situation on the ground continues to be so far from reality that prominent pro-war milbloggers continue to feel compelled to issue their own corrective statements.

https://x.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1995716401131077748

 

   "prominent pro-war milbloggers' are aginst "Kremlin's" attempts to sell appeasement of the West as victory, instead of fighting the war 

"Igor Strelkov on the danger of waiting for a "negotiated settlement"(note here in later in the article Russian word is used that is also sort of :dirty deal" -RA)

The main thing has already happened: As I expected, the EU and the so-called "Ukraine" resolutely rejected a "settlement" that would provide for any territorial (and other) concessions. Just because they are doing well, and they have absolutely nothing to fear from the collapse of the front and military defeat in the coming months — isn't the fall of Kupyansk (one of the "average" regional centers of the Kharkiv region) after a six—month assault a "strategic defeat"? 

Kiev and the EU capitals are well aware that neither Kupyansk, nor Pokrovsk, nor even Orekhov, Gulyai-Pole, etc. cities and towns will bring the Russian Armed Forces a real victory if the Ukrainian Armed Forces are not defeated when they are captured. But they are not defeated. And they cannot be defeated in a situation where the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation have forces only for tactical operations, but the forces for conducting strategic operations either do not exist at all or are insufficient for their successful conduct. 

Therefore, the only real threat to the enemy is the "moral breakdown" of their own active army, in which the majority of soldiers and commanders (the predominant part) decide for themselves that "victory is impossible, defeat is inevitable, and there is no point in sacrificing their lives for the sake of "all this" anymore." So far, apparently, this has not happened (and reports from the front confirm this). 

Yes, apparently, some units and formations of the Armed Forces of Ukraine have become less stable in battle, the number of "ideologically motivated" soldiers has dropped in percentage terms, the number of prisoners and those ready to surrender has increased. But! In general, the enemy continues to fight very stubbornly and in the most dangerous areas for themselves (in Kharkov and Zaporozhye) — they are fighting for every hillock, for every house, for every forest plantation, as a result of which our tactical successes there are scanty or not at all. 

This means that for some time the Kiev scum and their masters in Europe (and in the USA!) there is not much to worry about — you can continue preparing for the intervention in a relatively calm mode, preparing for war seriously and carefully.

What about us? Our military successes (although very limited) have "overlapped" with Trump's "points" and once again provided some kind of illusion of an early agreement (although they "don't smell" not only now, but in the medium term in general). 

I can note that the "expectations of a speedy peace" have penetrated even to us "into the ranks of the condemned" (although they are perceived skeptically by almost everyone who is really able to think). 

In this regard, "another disappointment" reduces the already low motivation of society to "endure hardships and hardships of SVO." https://t.me/i_strelkov_2023/2279

[seahawk]

7 minutes ago, bojan said:

How many people in Germany protested Germany joining NATO 1999. bombing in Yugoslavia?

Not few. The then foreign minister Fischer was even hit with paint during a meeting of his own party. 

[Roman Alymov]

16 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

Yes, in homeopathic doses. That was not society. But, elections are won in the rural countryside.

Hopeopatic doses 

Luckily, this liberal opposition quickly disctredited itself, and then partly fled the country (leaders and to some extent low ranks who are now feeding themselves with food leftovers in Tbilisi and other simmilar places), partly changed their opinions after facing real face of West they were in such an admiration of.

[Stuart Galbraith]

3 minutes ago, seahawk said:

Not few. The then foreign minister Fischer was even hit with paint during a meeting of his own party. 

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/1999/05/berl-m11.html

There was fairly considerable protests in Britain too. Blair didnt appear for something like a week.

https://britic.co.uk/2019/04/05/how-blair-dodged-serb-protesters-in-1999/

[Stefan Kotsch]

45 minutes ago, bojan said:

56 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

Yes, in homeopathic doses. That was not society. But, elections are won in the rural countryside.

How many people in Germany protested Germany joining NATO 1999. bombing in Yugoslavia?

Where do you want to lead me? Here we discuss the politics of today's Kremlin.

(+ In 1999, there was no basis for discussion on Germany's NATO membership. The overwhelming majority of East Germans wanted to join the Federal Republic of Germany. Everyone knew that the Federal Republic of Germany was already a member of NATO.

No German really wanted a repeat of Srebrenica. Nevertheless, there were protest actions in considerable numbers and it is still controversially discussed today)

Edited December 2, 2025 by Stefan Kotsch

[Roman Alymov]

12 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/1999/05/berl-m11.html

There was fairly considerable protests in Britain too. Blair didnt appear for something like a week.

https://britic.co.uk/2019/04/05/how-blair-dodged-serb-protesters-in-1999/

And what the outcome was?

[Stefan Kotsch]

15 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

Luckily, this liberal opposition quickly disctredited itself,

It never really took hold of society.

Just as you describe it yourself:

1 hour ago, Roman Alymov said:

Actually Russian civil society is far more "pro-war" and "hawkish" then Russian rulinfg elite

and

1 hour ago, Roman Alymov said:

 Russians have actually rose up, but not in the direction West was expecting. Hundreds of thousands of people across the country are crowdfunding money, handcrafting everything from handmade socks and home-made food to drones and complex electronic equipment, assisting in mil hospitals and so on.

BTW. 

Quote

Disctredited itself

😁 You liked to joke?

[Roman Alymov]

23 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

It never really took hold of society.

Just as you describe it yourself:

and

BTW. 

😁 You liked to joke?

  It depends on what is "took hold of society" in your definition. 1% seems to be small number, but 1% out of 1 000 000 people is 10 000, and in city of 10+ millions like Moscow they could form impressive procession of 100K. Or i have to remember how Maidan (actually tiny group of people if compared to population of what was "independent Ukraine" in 2013) crushed the whole system?

    So "anti-war" moods in Russia never were majority (or even effective minority) but it is strange to pretenf they did not existed (especially as they were strongly supported by Western-sponsored institutions).

 

Edited December 2, 2025 by Roman Alymov

[urbanoid]

55 minutes ago, bojan said:

How many people in Germany protested Germany joining NATO 1999. bombing in Yugoslavia?

Hundreds of thousands, then again after Saddam's invasion of Kuwait there were gigantic protests (largest since those against Vietnam war, which Germany had pretty much nothing to do with) in which they protested against... the Americans preparing themselves to throw him out of there. So I guess they just like to protest against the Americans.

Edited December 2, 2025 by urbanoid

[ink]

1 hour ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

Yes, in homeopathic doses. That was not society. But, elections are won in the rural countryside.

Ok, agreed. But those homeopathic drops of protesters in Russia have to be several orders of magnitude braver than many times that number ofprotesters in Germany... And more willing to buck societal trends - as Roman says, large numbers of Russians have also fallen into line on the back of the information they are fed.

[Stefan Kotsch]

11 minutes ago, ink said:

Ok, agreed. But those homeopathic drops of protesters in Russia have to be several orders of magnitude braver than many times that number ofprotesters in Germany

Without any doubt. Under the circumstances of the autocracy under the leadership of a KGB officer, this is quite remarkable.

But I suspect that under the blanket of silence there is a lot of rumbling in Russian society. This is shown by reader comments on all topics that affect the people. First, money, prosperity and internet freedom (yes, indeed!). The Russians want to see Russia as the winner. Which is understandable. But only the small "towarichtchi majory", are in favor of war. The majority are tired of having noodles hung on their ears. From grandpa in the bunker, the carpenter, taxidriver ... .
 

[Roman Alymov]

20 minutes ago, ink said:

Ok, agreed. But those homeopathic drops of protesters in Russia have to be several orders of magnitude braver than many times that number ofprotesters in Germany... And more willing to buck societal trends - as Roman says, large numbers of Russians have also fallen into line on the back of the information they are fed.

 I have to note here i have said nothing about "the information they are fed", but since you have mentioned it, i have to explain the following: Russian reality is "official" media line is "Army is well provided with everything needed, no volunteer civil support needed, those who are crowdfunding money outside official platforms are scammers " and so on, not to mention "there is no war, everything is going according to SVO plan" etc. So public support of war in Russia is actually AGAINST mainstream media pressure.

[urbanoid]

6 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

Without any doubt. Under the circumstances of the autocracy under the leadership of a KGB officer, this is quite remarkable.

But I suspect that under the blanket of silence there is a lot of rumbling in Russian society. This is shown by reader comments on all topics that affect the people. First, money, prosperity and internet freedom (yes, indeed!). The Russians want to see Russia as the winner. Which is understandable. But only the small "towarichtchi majory", are in favor of war. The majority are tired of having noodles hung on their ears. From grandpa in the bunker, the carpenter, taxidriver ... .
 

While I'd say that many/most people might be apathetic and not give too much of a shit about anything, out of those with 'strong opinions' there's a lot more of those who are waaay more radical than their government, compared to the 'liberals'. 

[Roman Alymov]

45 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

Without any doubt. Under the circumstances of the autocracy under the leadership of a KGB officer, this is quite remarkable.

   For you "KGB officer" is something special, but not for people in Russia. Too many KGB officers (and others) renegated and became loyal servants of new masters of the country in 1991. And by the way why are you not complaining about, for example, Azerbaijan ruled not just by "KGB officer" but by son of TOP FIGURE of local KGB who later became local Communist Party chief and later, surprise, President of independent Azerbaijan?

49 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

But I suspect that under the blanket of silence there is a lot of rumbling in Russian society. 

  Congratulations, you have discovered what i was trying to tell you for a long time here. Do you think old ladies, while spending evening after evening year after year in improvised volunteer workshops handcrafting cammo nets so needed on the frontline, are not rumbling about official talking heads in TV talking about how "Army is provided with everything needed" while regular soldiers, their suns, grandsuns and ohten even husbands (as average age of frontline soldier is about 40+) are waiting for their products?

   But the nature of this rumbling is different from what West hope for. People are talking about how weak and soft-handed to open enemies the leadership is, how corrupt officials are staying in power, about why nukes are not put to use and so on. It is very dangerous rumbling, not only for "collective Putin" but first and foremost for West.

    Yes not all are rumbling - people with strong religeous belief are praying....

 

[seahawk]

1 hour ago, ink said:

Ok, agreed. But those homeopathic drops of protesters in Russia have to be several orders of magnitude braver than many times that number ofprotesters in Germany... And more willing to buck societal trends - as Roman says, large numbers of Russians have also fallen into line on the back of the information they are fed.

Supporting western lies in Russia is not brave, it is stupid. Grass root Russians want to widen the war, they want to free their country. 

[Stefan Kotsch]

We learned a harsh lesson in Ukraine. We thought 70% of the people there were for us, and 30% against. But it turned out to be the opposite!"

Former commander of the Russian ground forces, General Chirkin, effectively admitted the failure of the Central Military District and stated that Putin had entered the war without preparation because he misjudged the situation, which resulted in heavy losses.

Such statements had never been made at such a high level.

 

[bojan]

3 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

... Srebrenica...

Srebrenica had nothing to do with Kosovo. Situation is practically 1:1 Israel/Palestinians, with 50+ years of Albanian low level terrorism preceding open, large scale terrorist actions by KLA.

This was fought... realistically more-less how Israelis fought in Gaza.

Yet... your country, together with majority of the "west" found to be convenient to back de-facto terrorist organization. Then your country pissed on it's own constitution. Then did not give a shit when Albanians did ethnic cleansing of Serbs in 1999. and 2004. Then, in 2008. it has also awarded Kosovo with recognizing it's independance, ignoring UN ressolution 1244.

Where was your "laws" back then? Hiding?

You, of all people should not throw brick in the glasshouses, "genosse". What did you exactly do vs regime of the East Germany except celebrate after it fell?

 

Also, since there is ICJ ruling that Serbia is not quality for what happened in Srebrenica you can stick that argument where sun does not shine.

 

[seahawk]

Anybody believing that the West follows laws or is morally superior is delusional. Russia is only an enemy because it acts like the West and removes regimes it does not like. It is a joke that Catalunya is still part of Spain but Kosovo is not part of Serbia. 

[Stuart Galbraith]

1 hour ago, seahawk said:

Anybody believing that the West follows laws or is morally superior is delusional. Russia is only an enemy because it acts like the West and removes regimes it does not like. It is a joke that Catalunya is still part of Spain but Kosovo is not part of Serbia. 

Its not that we are superior. The entire west lies in the gutter. The problem is, Russia's morality today lies in the drain. Its not a question of the best or kindest, but of the least worst, and thats all its ever been.

Hell, go and pick up a Le Carre. He was saying precisely that  all through the cold war. He's still right.