Strategic assessments by Andrei Martyanov: Is the West as omnipotent as it thinks?

The Spanish newspaper La Vanguardia reports that the West will never supply Ukraine with US Patriot AD complexes "to not provoke Russia". For lay observers this rationale seems sound, but, of course, in matters of politics in the West which is primarily smoke and mirrors and virtual reality, the main reason is completely different. It is here (in Russian) where Russian MoD demonstrates annihilation of the two launchers of the US-supplied HIMARS and also a radar unit of one of the Ukie S-300. 

The Patriot has a troubled history, but apart from its "effectiveness" being questioned from the times of the First Gulf War, one inevitably is forced to recall a global FUBAR in Saudi Arabia in 2019. The failure against "homemade" drones and missiles was so spectacular that one inevitably has to ask the question of how those Patriots will fare against a salvo of 3M14 Kalibr, let alone supersonic P-800 Onyx which also maneuvers if need be. You know the answer. Western weapon systems (together with its "operational art") have already sustained massive reputational losses--enough to recall barely 20% "effectiveness" of much-touted wunderwaffe such as Switchblade or Javelins--so, nobody in the West needs a full demonstration by means of physical annihilation of Patriot PAC 3s, likely with NATO's personnel in them, by all kinds of Russian high precision stand-off weapons. And that IS the main reason why Patriots, at least for now, will not appear in Ukraine. Simple as that. So, no muddying waters and spin can hide now a systemic issue in not just tactical and operational, but doctrinal views of the combined West on modern warfare.

Translation:

So, what could this "direction" be that "doesn't suit" Russia? Let me speculate a bit, or, hell with it, go on a limb here and I wrote about it for a long time. I think the issue here is the engine, namely PD-35 which is in the works and was supposed to be installed on the CR-929. China depends on foreign engines when it comes to commercial aviation and this tradition will not change [soon] because, as with nuclear submarines, Chinese technology in this respect lags, and lags significantly behind the West and Russia. Stating concerns with sanctions China, and here I begin to speculate, most likely wanted technologies for PD-35 "appropriated" as in the "indigenous" Chinese engine. This is not the "gift" Russia is willing to give to China. And rightly so. Modern jet engine technologies are one of the most advanced and sensitive technologies anywhere.

It is inconceivable for Pratt and Whitney or Rolls Royce, or GE to simply "share" with China, even at the peak of West-Chinese cooperation in 2000s and 2010s their engine technologies. As I already stated on several occasions--China lags here. Why she lags--it is a whole other issue altogether. Creating competitive commercial aircraft with her own indigenous engine is a hell of undertaking and if China, including through cooperation with Ukraine at some point, wants to take this road alone, sure. But it has to be clearly stated that at this very moment China doesn't have a competitive engine for both the Comac 919 (which was planned to be "motorized" by LEAP-1) and, especially, the CR 929. 

Here is the thing which has to be considered:

Pay attention to the date. So, by any measure, the Chinese expect at least 18 years of developing such an engine. As of today [there is] no serial produced competitive indigenous engine available for Chinese commercial aviation. Consider a development cycle for PD-14 whose first run was in 2014 (the concept of engine was presented in 2009) and is now in serial production since 2021. Draw your own conclusions. China's achievements in economy, some technologies, science etc. are very impressive and demand admiration and appreciation. But there are a few specific and crucial fields in which China still lags greatly behind the West and Russia. Commercial aviation is one such field. There is a hefty number of other industries. But Borisov's statement is a good indication of Russia's full intent to remain one of the leading nations in design and engineering of a very high-end technology and Russia is not going to make "presents" in this respect to anyone. Especially, recalling how China (and not only China) was transporting planeloads of technical documentation from Russia and Ukraine on the latest Soviet commercial and military technologies. In the end, Russia has a ready and wonderful platform for IL-96 to be re-motorized with the PD-35 and no one is a better marketing "director" for this than Vladimir Putin himself. 

This is a primer for today.  

The Duran guys and Larry got together today and discussed all those important issues of narrative. I had a chance to only browse it for 5 minutes, but all three are the people you want to have your analytical input from.  

I know, it is the 4th but still, life doesn't stop. So, Shoigu gave the count (preliminary):

Translation: "An offensive operation was successfully carried out to liberate the territory of the LPR. Within two weeks, groups in the Gorsky cauldron in the areas of Lisichansk and Severodonetsk were surrounded and liquidated. <...> The operation was completed yesterday by the liberation of one of the largest cities of the LPR, Lisichansk. control of 670 square kilometers of territory. The total losses of the Armed Forces of Ukraine amounted to 5,469 people, including irretrievable 2,218," he said. According to Shoigu, the Armed Forces of Ukraine also lost 196 tanks and armored vehicles, 12 aircraft, one helicopter, 65 drones, six long-range anti-aircraft missile systems, 97 multiple launch rocket systems, 166 field and mortar artillery guns, 216 vehicles. "In Lisichansk, the enemy threw 39 tanks and other armored vehicles, 11 guns and mortars".

The reason I say "preliminary" is because it will take some time before additional KIAs of VSU will be removed from the rubble, forest areas etc. This removal, usually, lasts a couple of weeks and numbers will only grow in terms of KIAs. 

Of course, students of NATO warfare, which is primarily PR, such as Ze' "adviser" Arestovich already stated (in Russian) that the loss of Severodonetsk and Lysichansk was "a successful operation of VSU". What can I say, it is a well known fact that Nazi Germany also defeated the Soviet Union. So, it is all good. These people are darlings of the Western "elites" because they are very much alike. 

In related news, Combat Approved finally (finally!) went back decades ago and told the story of Victors-III, project 671RTMK SSGNs, capable to carry a strategic cruise missile Granat (they still do).

From this book:
 

Larry debunks yet another BS from WaPo regarding losses:

We all know that no Western media outlet will accept this challenge. As I stressed in my last video--to work in Western establishment media one has to a) either make a deal with own consciousness b) be a complete psychopath ready to lie non-stop. I admit the existence of the third type--a completely sublime idiots who believe in this "freedom of speech" BS, but for the most one has to be a damaged human being to accept job at WaPo, NYT or BBC. 

Our very own Larch also makes some excellent points today precisely on this issue:

We all know by now that BS about "Russia sustaining huge losses" was prepared well before SMO and this narrative was "shaped" including by the US military "experts" such as Petraeus and Keane, plus other neocon losers who lost every single war in their lives but for some reason pass for "experts" on Russia which no one of them is. You get what you paid for. Real professionals knew that the thing was over once VSU was pinned down in defensive positions and was largely denied any kind of operational mobility. The "reinforcements" were gladly welcomed into what is called in Russian Fire Sack (Огневой Мешок) which is a perfect arrangement for killing the enemy which has a severely limited mobility. 

While great Western military "minds" were trying to come up with yet another fairy tale of how Russia loses to VSU, which, for all intents and purposes, doesn't exist as a competent army anymore, even Yahoo News dimwits started to notice that:

The piece has a pretentious title: Will the race to develop hypersonic weapons spark the next global arms race? You know what, I don't have to contain myself within the framework of basic politeness and decorum, so here it is. Most those "journos" are retards capable of re-narrating, on the level of high school or student newspaper, things which are beyond their comprehension and this title is a full proof of that. The hypersonic "arms race" has been "sparked" in 1960s with USSR developing a line of supersonic anti-shipping missiles, which went from M=1.3 in such systems as early ASMs P-6/35 to M=2.5 in P-700 and P-800 Onix and then with a very high supersonic ASMs air-launched X-31 and M=4.2+ X-32. I am on record, this "arms race" is a complex thing because while the US already lost it, it is also nowhere near the second, crucial, component of it--Anti-hypersonic weapons. US Air Defense is not even in the same league as S-400, let alone S-500, S-300V4 and S-550, let alone A-235 Nudol. 

But, of course, there would be no good reason to pen this BS article if British and French "experts", such as this boy from Chatham House--a proud bearer of a tradition of intellectual, academic and human degeneracy of British and French "elites"--wouldn't try to commence the therapeutic session. The name of the boy is Mathieu Boulègue.

A typical product of Bologna Process and carrier of fake soft degrees in nothing, with zero affiliation with any military matters. But he surely is a sore loser. 

The boy, obviously, lacks basic facts on the physics of hypersonics and has zero understanding of technological issues pertaining hypersonic development, but then again, he is an Exhibit A of why combined West is in a deep shit and cannot win a war against people with AK-47s and RPGs. Why the West needs enemies when it has such "experts". I have a news for him--political science IS NOT a valid academic field. Especially in terms of defense technologies which require serious STEM degrees and good understanding of the tactical, operational and strategic issues related to modern warfare--a body of knowledge which, now it can be stated with confidence, Western "elite" doesn't have. Not to mention the fact that the boy wouldn't last a year in serious military academy or STEM institution in Russia. Too hard. Here is another real professional talking about UK which is "irrelevant" as a military force, as is France, in modern world.