13 Comments

I think in lot of your analysis you overvalue what the Germans want or does not want.

As a non German living in Germany I have seen first hand the level of servility to the US that this country is able to show.

People should not be mistaken for some strikes here or there, of course there is critics of the US but there are critics of the US even in the utmost Rusophobic UK. Moreover most of them are old.

Absolute majority, specially people younger than 50 years will simply accept everything. And their elites are not different.

If US decides that is strategically favorable that Ukraine attacks Transnistria, their agencies will say in the media that this attack it is liberating Traninistria from the terrible Russians.

Moreover Sandu will agree, and the Moldovan diaspora in the EU, that are highly fanaticise by NED and Open Societh will appear in all the media defending such operation.

If Moldovan people living in Moldova (that are really favourable to Russia protest) Sandu will ask for help of Romania pretending than civilians are Russians agitators.

So special forces of the army or the police from Romania will intervene in Moldova under the agreement of the Moldovan government and suppress any opposition.

The Moldovan people alone has no option against Moldovan government, Romanian forces and Ukrainian army.

The only option for them would be Russian support, but currently the Russians are far away and with no easy way.

And I repeat, you will have all the Moldovan diaspora in the news justifying this. All the youmy generations that use their Romanian passports to go and work in Germany will appear in the TV defending the operation.

Whatever feeling German elites may have they will have to shut up. The full operation will be portrait as a total success against Russia.

So I would not discard this option so quickly.

Expand full comment
author

I agree to almost every point you made. And here is the issue. "If US decides that is strategically favorable that Ukraine attacks Transnistria, their agencies will say in the media that this attack it is liberating Transnistria, from the terrible Russians."

Yes.

And therefore my assumption is, that it is NOT "strategically favorable" for the US.

The fallout of the actions that would follow would benefit no one. I hinted to that in my article.

I value some degree of importance (still) to Germany since the US does.

See, there is no black or white. The US needs Germany (still, it might change) to control Europe.

If you want to have a motivated slave/colony you can't treat it everytime like shit.

There needs to be a balance between autonomy and colonialism.

The role of the Germans is still not to be underestimated and only if it follows with "heart and soul" then you get the best results in controlling Europe. If you show overtly (Almost like the blowing up of Nordstream) that you abuse it etc. then the results will get worse and worse.

Now consider the geographical position of Germany within Europe.

This should answer all remaining questions, if you consider logistics and trade, which is the cornerstone of imperial control.

Expand full comment

Thanks, this is so helpful. I read with great interest. As I noted on VOS, God will guide us. Goodby, to my pal, Andrei, VOS, so thankful you led me to this site.

Expand full comment

Don't kid yourself. The German government has no authority in its own house, nor do any of the other countries of Europe.

Baerbock said that she would let Germans freeze and starve rather than stop supporting Ukraine. I would tend to believe her.

Expand full comment

2 in a roll, very prolific this days, I though Transnistria wold be held hostage Moldavia wold turn eyes away on anything.

Expand full comment
author

Please don't ask haha. I need a break :-) And I WILL take a break :D

Well, let's wait and see.

Last time I was right. Hopefully (for the sake of tens of thousands of lives) I'm again right.

Otherwise things would turn really ugly.

Expand full comment

is ugly enough as it is, but it make sense from the ukranian side to create points of conflicts that move away the media and military pressure from the east, also in the belarusian border. never the less it seams dumb to do it, even with all the media on their side is imposible to hide this. the moldovan gov will collapse, the super duper ammo depo probably will blow up, or left in a state of poor condition, so the mission basically fails

Expand full comment

Transnistria has it's own militia/armed forces. Best course of action is to open up Cobasna to the militia and help them organize and expand. This was done in the 1992 war. It is the only possible action until Russia can recover Odessa and has a safe and direct land linkage with the territory.

Expand full comment

Russia warns US, NATO, and Ukraine over Transnistria:

https://www.veteranstoday.com/2023/02/24/russia-warns-us-nato-and-ukraine-over-transnistria/

Expand full comment
author

Yes of course. I recommend to listen the first 10 minutes of this video.

It basically confirms my analysis here.

And it mentioning also what you just quoted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY7iPCUMGI8

Expand full comment

It makes no sense to allocate any resources to such a huge and risky mission, and it would probably be hard pressed to even attempt to organize anything like that. It would hugely extend the front line with costly supplying over the Black Sea near Ukraine's coast probably filled with mines and UK sea missiles. Unfortunately it's not certain the putting pressure on Moldova of consequences will work, Maia Sandu is a US agent and doesn't care about Moldovan interests. We'll see

Expand full comment
author

Of course it doesn't make sense :-) That's why I wrote that it is extremly unlikely that such a thing will happen.

That's what I wanted to work out with this article with Slavyangrad.

Essentially "Everything is alright with regards to Transnistria".

Check out the first 10 Minutes here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY7iPCUMGI8

Expand full comment

>> It would be blown up in advance, even though it means huge losses for everyone involved, since the explosion could be compared to a tactical nuke.

It is as likely that the West would claim that it WAS a tactical nuke, and use the explosion as cover for an escalation.

Expand full comment