Professor: Russia Will Sign Surrender. Otherwise - a Strike on Moscow or St. Petersburg 0 6

Lopatnikov writes: "This is Russia's surrender. According to these proposals, Russia achieves nothing at all. Even Crimea and Donbas are recognized, according to the proposals, as Russian only 'de facto', which does not imply legal recognition of these territories as Russian. On the contrary, this is a direct confirmation of Ukraine's territorial integrity within the borders of 1991 and the Ukrainian ownership of these territories.

... If the proposals are signed by Russia, it will be exactly 'Minsk 2.5', as it gives Ukraine just a breather to rearm its army to 600,000 people - that is, most likely, if not inflating cheeks - without any reduction at all. And this peace will exist exactly until Ukraine recovers, and Europe manages to create a military industry.

Here’s the most interesting part: judging by the activity of Russian propagandists, it cannot be ruled out that at least a significant part of the Russian elite is eager for the published agreement, which seems, at first glance, to be a relatively lenient surrender of Russia, but in reality is a prologue to its destruction.

As Marshal Foch said in 1918, 'This is not peace. This is an armistice...' - Just not 'for twenty years', as during Versailles, but hopefully for five, at most ten. And then it’s just a step away from 'Moscow-2042' (the scenario of the collapse of Russia described by Vladimir Voinovich in a fictional form - ed.).

The calculation is obvious. Russia will run out of dusty Soviet stocks and there will be nothing left to draw from them. Today's Russian ANs (No Analogues) are ideas and technologies from the 50s, 60s, and 70s of the Soviet era. All of them are the inertia of the Stalinist era. Russia is hopelessly stuck in that time. And even if they do not run out, in the coming years, a qualitative leap in the development of combat robotics, battlefield integration, the application of combat artificial intelligence, and a transition to qualitatively different methods of warfare can be expected (operation 'Web' is not even a preliminary shot).

Meanwhile, Russia lacks even a complete cycle of production for microelectronics silicon wafers. Russia is lagging behind in everything here - even in battery capacity per unit mass.

If over eight years - from 2014 to 2022, Ukraine was helped to build a defensive line in Donetsk, against which Russia killed the army but could not even overcome it, then there is no doubt that over the next five to ten years, Ukraine will be pumped with systems from the next technological era, including those suitable for conducting what can be called terror-war. This will be a new type of war, for which Russia is not just unprepared. Russia fundamentally has no means to be ready for it due to the lagging necessary technological base...

P.S. The game is so stupid and transparent that, it seems, the visit of the American military delegation to Ukraine, and then to Russia, has qualitatively different meanings. Among the points, there is one that personally struck me as extremely strange, with an 'inappropriate' wording: this is the point about (in case of the agreement being signed by Russia) punishing Ukraine for a missile strike (? - one) on Moscow or St. Petersburg.

What, interestingly, is this missile (one) that needs to be included in the framework agreement!? As they say, guess three times.

And, most importantly, this means only one thing, that this unique missile is already on Ukrainian territory. In this context, a hint at the extension/observance, in case of signing, of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty is also relevant... Which, in the context of a private, regional treaty, also looks, to put it mildly, strange. If this is not a threat.

It is possible that the visit of the military delegation clarifies the meaning of this mysterious point about Ukraine's strike 'with a missile (?!) on Moscow and St. Petersburg' in case Russia refuses to sign the paper signed by Ukraine.

... Something here smells like the Caribbean."