Girkin, aka Strelkov, was once Russia's "god of war". In 2014, he led the Ukrainian armed forces, defeated the Ukrainian army, freed the two regions of Luton from Ukrainian control, and also participated in the "annexation" of Crimea to Russia. However, in July of this year, he published an article recommending that Russia abandon Crimea and fully withdraw its troops from Ukraine, and disclosed the problem of arrears of the Ministry of Defense in the salaries of soldiers. As a result, he was charged with "inciting extremism".
Recently, he was interviewed by Russia ** in prison, where he insisted on his point of view and analyzed the domestic and foreign situation facing Russia. Does his analysis make sense?Should Russia really withdraw its troops from Ukraine?
Strelkov said in an interview: "I'm here, I can't see clearly what's going on outside. But I**, this conflict will not stop, and the two sides will not compromise. Some people hope that a miracle will happen and that all problems will be solved. But the West will not allow this. They want to destroy Russia. ”
He also said: "The current Russian-Ukrainian relations are in a very unstable period. Prigozhin's betrayal, and the manner in which he was killed, speaks for itself. ”
Strelkov said: "I would like to remind everyone that the so-called military victory is only temporary. It does not change an important fact: the conflict has been going on for 21 months and shows no signs of ending. Nor did any progress be made in the planning of a special military operation. ”
So, Strelkov still believes that Russia should consider abandoning Crimea and withdrawing its troops completely.
Strelkov's argument is based on his analysis of Russia, both domestic and international.
1.The situation in Russia: very unstable.
Strelkov believes: "Russia is entering a very unstable period!"He relied on the Wagner affair and the fate of Prigozhin.
But does that make sense?
Girkin. Strelkov.
We can see that since Prigozhin was "exiled" in June, and then died in a plane crash, and Strelkov in July, Russian military bloggers have fallen silent, and Russia's ** has also begun to "comply".
This could be a kind of control in a state of wartime, and this is what Strelkov himself once called for: a declaration of war on Ukraine, the imposition of martial law throughout the country, and a general mobilization. However, Strelkov used this as proof that Russia is very unstable at home, which is obviously unjust.
2.International: The West wants to destroy Russia.
Strelkov believes that the West wants to destroy Russia, so Russia's "victories" on the battlefield are short-lived: it does not change the course of the war, does not change Strelkov's conclusion based on a war of attrition that Russia will lose.
Recently, there has been news on the network that the United States has disagreements on the bill to aid Ukraine, there has also been infighting in the top echelons of the Ukrainian army, and the Russian army has taken the initiative on the battlefield in the Donbass - Russia is in the "best" period since the conflict.
But what is the real battlefield like?Russia still has not broken through Ukraine's core defenses, and it has paid a huge price: some data show that Russia's ** has exceeded 300,000, more than 95% of the first batch of personnel to enter Ukraine to fight have been sacrificed, and the loss of equipment is also very serious, which has made Russia's armaments regress for 18 years. That is, the main battle equipment produced over the past 18 years, especially the land combat equipment, has been consumed.
In this case, whether the West wants to destroy Russia, or, as German Chancellor Surz said: Russia must lose, withdraw from the territory of Ukraine, these are two different things entirely.
Strictly speaking, so far there is no evidence: the West wants to destroy Russia. Otherwise, there will be no hesitation in their assistance, because the West is far from reaching the "limit", whether it is funding or **, but can only say: there is no full effort, rapid production. The West, especially the United States, does not necessarily have to destroy Russia.
Overall, Strelkov's claim that Russia is in a state of great instability is more likely a sign of Russia's gradual activation of wartime controls, which Strelkov had hoped for, but he did.
And Strelkov said: the West will not change its goal of destroying Russia, it may be too pessimistic: Kissinger said that Russia has its important role;Moreover, how could Russia, as a civilization, be destroyed so easily?
However, this also does not prove that Russia is sure of winning the war, and strategically, after the failure of the attack on Kyiv, Russia loses the initiative: this is something that no tactical victory can compensate. Withdrawal, perhaps, is the best option for Russia!