Alea iacta est?
The plot thickens (around Zelenskyy); Free
On Wednesday, I wrote:
Now, if one sought a (lasting) ceasefire during the next 40 days, we would need to see three developments:
Russia would need to break through the lines of the AFU in the Donetsk region, reaching the heavily fortified Slavjansk-Kramatorks in the north.
The popularity of President Zelenskyy would need to collapse, paving the way for his exodus from Ukraine.
A semi-pro-Russian candidate to replace Zelenskyy would need to appear.
Like I note above, #1 seems to be occurring as I write these lines. Without such development, it would be difficult for the Kremlin to demand all of Donetsk in the negotiations, or at least it would make President Trump to look weak if he were to agree to it without #1. #3 is required for the Kremlin to accept a ceasefire. I have no expertise to assess whether there is such a candidate, but I am sure one will appear if #2 starts to manifest, e.g., through the anti-corruption demonstrations.
On Thursday, we looked to get something of a confirmation for #2 when the Telegraph published this. This is the first direct attack towards President Zelenskyy in the Western media I can think of.
I would say that the next week will show us the direction of travel. If the demonstrations spread and if both Western and domestic media turn against President Zelenskyy, we know that his time is up. Moreover, the support for such an action needs to come from Washington (the Kremlin has no such influence in Ukraine anymore). Therefore, if the above happens, we can conclude that there’s a plan to oust President Zelenskyy in the administration of President Trump.
To reach a lasting ceasefire, Zelenskyy's administration simply needs to go. There is zero trust between the Kremlin and the administration of President Zelenskyy, which is required for any successful negotiations. The candidate to replace him also needs to be somewhat pro-Russia and (most definitely) pro-peace. The Kremlin will, most likely, not accept a ceasefire without such a candidate. This makes, for example, the former commander-in-chief of the AFU and current ambassador to the U.K., Valerii Zaluzhnyi, an unfit candidate. He seems to be completely in the ‘pocket’ of the War Triad, stating, e.g., that the war with Russia could last until 2034. It is thus no surprise that PM Keir Starmer, probably the most corrupt prime minister in the history of Britain, is planning to replace Zelenskyy with him.
Coming to the Middle East. I am still trying to dig up some information on what truly happened in Fordow, like I promised I would, but I have been unsuccessful thus far. The fact that also Iranian accounts seem to be rather quiet on this implies the existence of a background deal. The silence would support the narrative of President Trump that “All three sites were completely obliterated!” a reference to Iranian nuclear research sites in Fordow, Natanz, and Estafan. Irrespective of whether the Fordow site is destroyed or not, it will not be revealed even in Iran to maintain the narrative put forward by President Putin and to protect the fragile status quo between Israel and Iran, if there’s a deal.
Despite the recent positive developments, the Peak Escalation hypothesis indicates that both the Middle Eastern and European theaters will eventually reignite, even if a ceasefire is found in Ukraine. I am also waiting for the Southeast Asia theater to open at some point. Comments from the political leadership continue to raise two timetables: 2027 and “ready in five years.” They could indicate that the Southeast Asia theater is set to open in 2027 and that the NATO-Russia war is being planned to get (truly) going in 2029-2030, i.e., after the presidency of Donald Trump.
Have a great weekend!
Tuomas
Disclaimer:
The information contained herein is current at the date of this entry. The information presented here is considered reliable, but its accuracy is not guaranteed. Changes may occur in the circumstances after the date of this entry, and the information contained in it may not hold true in the future.
No information contained in this entry should be construed as investment advice. Neither GnS Economics nor any of the authors can be held responsible for errors or omissions in the data presented. Readers should always consult their personal financial or investment advisor before making any investment decision, and those using this post do so solely at their own risk.
Readers must make an independent assessment of the risks involved and of the legal, tax, business, financial, or other consequences of their actions. Neither G&S Economics nor any of the authors can be held i) responsible for any decision taken, act, or omission; or ii) liable for damages caused by such measures.
Backpfeiffengesicht. Poka.