In the lead-in to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, all of the U.S. involvement in the country was operated by bureaucrats and politicians from the U.S. State Dept, CIA, Intelligence Community and Senate. The Pentagon played a far lesser supportive role.
As a consequence of that previous investment, the current U.S response to the Russian “special military operation” has been spearheaded by the same DoS officials, intelligence agencies and politicians. The Ukraine engagement is a political operation using NATO and western allies. As we saw in the Afghanistan withdrawal, the Pentagon is a tool for the politics.
The division between the two interests (Pentagon vs State Dept) surfaces most quickly and easily when things SNAFU, and the blame casting begins. That’s when the division becomes noticeable to the public. The important point to remember is this… despite the involvement of NATO in the current Ukraine response, it is not the Pentagon calling the shots, it’s the state dept.
Earlier today, Army Gen. Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the House Armed Services Committee “[Ukraine] is a very protracted conflict.” Milley anticipates many months, if not years, of combat fighting inside Ukraine as Putin carves out the eastern side of the country permanently.
According to Milley, “I think it’s at least measured in years… this is a very extended conflict that Russia has initiated. I think NATO, the U.S., Ukraine and all of the allies and partners supporting Ukraine are going to be involved in this for quite some time,” he said. The nature of Milley’s remarks outlines what will likely become an insurgency/proxy war funded by the United States for years against Russia.
As much as JC Milley is a political figure, Milley is operating his role under the assumption and direction of what the State Dept is creating. As a consequence of that long-term conflict prediction, the Pentagon is recommending several new rotating military bases for U.S. troops in eastern Europe.
It is also critical to recognize what is not being said by those same DoS and U.S. intelligence officials. The absence is deafening. What is not being advanced is any discussion of a diplomatic resolution or negotiated settlement. Milley’s defense request is predicated on a position that no diplomatic solution will be advanced. This is a key part of both General Milley and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s testimony.
Ukraine cannot fight without the United States sending money and weapons. Combine that with Austin and Milley’s statements about Ukraine, and what you quickly see, albeit undiscussed in media, is that a long-term war is baked into this cake. The United States will not allow Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to enter negotiations with Vladimir Putin.
When we review western media statements about Putin not willing to enter “peace talks” with Zelenskyy, keep the testimony from Milley and Austin at the forefront of your mind.
Why would Putin enter any negotiations with Zelenskyy, knowing the U.S. position is to carry out a long-term insurgency war in Ukraine against Russian military forces? What would be the purpose of Putin talking with Zelenskyy when the U.S. is openly saying the Ukraine military will be used by the State Dept. to maintain a conflict against Russian forces?
Russian President Putin knows the only group he could negotiate with are in the United States. However, that truth would expose the puppet strings, so the United States government must play the pretend game.
The position of Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a puppet to the U.S. State Dept and Intelligence Community interests, is inherent in the Pentagon position. If Zelenskyy was free to make decisions, Austin and Milley could not be so assured as to put a timeline on the Ukraine conflict.
This context becomes increasingly important as we look at how the media are positioning all resources to support a protracted war. Anyone who is not 100% pro war in Ukraine, for whatever length of time the DoS/IC determine is needed, is immediately cast as a Putin apologist.
This war emanated from the bowels of politics via U.S. political influence in Ukraine to the extreme. This level of U.S. involvement in Ukraine ultimately triggered Putin to say enough, and he started the “special military operation.” In many ways the operation is not so much against Ukraine – but more against the U.S. involvement in supporting Ukraine against Russia.
Because it started from political origins, the Ukraine conflict will continue to be run from the nerve center of U.S. politics, the U.S. State Dept, the U.S. Senate, and CIA operations. The actual Pentagon involvement will be transport and logistics for State Dept military operations.
Do you remember when the DoS Benghazi mission was attacked, and the Pentagon had no idea there was even a U.S. operational mission taking place in eastern Libya? That same “Operation Zero Footprint” disconnect is what I am describing above. It’s likely the Pentagon has very little idea what the State Department and CIA are doing in Ukraine right now.
This context is also why the propaganda around Ukraine in the United States has been so critical and important. We will see this level of propaganda continue so long as it is the DoS/CIA running the western response to the war.
What makes this conflict a little more interesting, is the need for the U.S. to control the information. We have seen the initial first phases of their control with Big Tech saying they will not permit anything that does not follow the official U.S. government narrative on social media.
Additionally, the State Department launching their own cyber-control division is an extension of this same intent. They are planning for the long-term usefulness of Ukraine as a proxy battle against Russia.
.
Websites like CTH, who talk honestly about the background of what is happening in Ukraine, may eventually need to start using coded language in order to share information. There are trillions at stake, and the people who control the events are not going to permit too much exposure.