While everyone praises the Ukrainian resistance and thinks they can solve every problem using sanctions and sending weapons to the poor people who crash, someone has forgotten a small, insignificant phenomenon that we call reality.
We must understand that Putin, however ill-advised and politically fragile (all to be ascertained, including my deductions), has a real problem. A practical problem. It is measured in kilometers, it is measured in meters of height.
The problem is simple to describe:
Between Ukraine and Moscow there is practically only a plain with a few hills. If Ukraine joins NATO, Moscow is indefensible.
Are you hoping that Putin will lose power and collapse? Good. But the next president will do the same: he will attack Ukraine. Do you want a democracy in its place? He will attack Ukraine. Do you want a theocracy? He will attack Ukraine.
And it will do so because Ukraine has signed a memorandum to enter NATO. He did not apply, but the memorandum usually precedes the request.
That is the question. And as long as no one in the US has a proposed military treaty on the deployment of weapons, Russia (whoever is in government) will invade Ukraine.
The heroic resistant narrative is powerful. And it contains elements of reality, mind you. But the elements of reality are not talked about, to feed the false hope that the Ukrainians can make it. But in reality, obviously it will cost more, obviously it will cost Russian deaths, but eventually Ukraine will fall. The disproportion is too high: barring miracles, of course.
Today's narrative pushes you to exaggerate economic sanctions, pushing you to believe that wars can practically be stopped only with economic or financial instruments.
Does this make you feel better? Not me.
Claiming that sanctions will stop the war is like saying that in the banks, financial circuits and large companies that are (triumphantly!) Abandoning Russia, there are the means to govern the whole world.
No, it does NOT make me feel better. Because some might wonder if by chance these sanctions could not be decided independently by SWIFT SC, banks, rating agencies and central banks, and all those companies that are withdrawing investments.
Congratulations, you have just ousted governments from the government of the planet. No, it doesn't fit me.
Fortunately, these sanctions will not stop the war, and its evolution will be linked to the usual Biden, Putin, Zelenskyy and company. But the press is trying, being owned by those who would like to be the government of the planet without having been elected.
While such a war brings governments and politicians back into vogue, depriving companies.
Let's go back to the military level.
What is happening in Ukraine, as well as what happened in Afghanistan, and what is happening in other places, has a name.
The return of the infantryman.
Of course, it is a very different infantryman from the traditional one. It does not march lined up and covered, it does not live in the trenches, but organizes itself in small groups and does what once would have been called "guerrilla", or for the Italian commands "insidious war".
Because it is important? Because for years and years the "normal" infantryman has been mistreated in favor of:
- who needs the infantry if I have planes?
- who needs the infantry if I have chariots?
- who needs light infantry if i have mechanized / armored infantry?
- who needs ground infantry if i have helicopter sky infantry?
- Who needs the infantry when I have the landing infantry (The marines, so to speak)
- who needs infantry when i have parachuted infantry?
everything, everything, everything was considered more powerful than the foot soldier. All.
It was also useful for the military industry, mind you, because an infantryman on foot, however well equipped, does not cost as much as a tank, or a plane, or a helicopter, or a ship.
But the point is that, especially in Afghanistan but also in Ukraine, the good old footman with the marble head and the butt in his mouth seems to be tremendously effective.
And here is the point: do we really want to believe that the Ukrainians will repel the Russians thanks to an operation similar to what we have called "Gladio?".
Do we really want to believe that Afghanistan was captured in two weeks when 80,000 determined Taliban infantry were activated? Good.
But then it's time to redesign the armed forces anew, and put the infantrymen at the center. They will be infantry armed with ManPads, that is, with portable anti-aircraft missiles. They will be infantry armed with anti-tank missiles. They will be scattered throughout the territory and trained for insidious warfare.
But they remain simple, very normal infantrymen.
So, now let's ask ourselves: are we willing to stop buying very expensive gadgets to favor a massive multitude of infantrymen?
Are we willing to go against the military gadget industry?
Last topic: "no flight zone". There are so many ways to get one. One is to use planes. But nobody wants a direct confrontation.
The second is to start from a boundary. Let's say a border between Poland and Ukraine. And they pile up SAMs there. Let's say self-propelled and fast enough.
Missiles like the Patriot are placed, capable of creating a "vacuum" for a certain number of kilometers. Under this umbrella, stations are built.
Of course, the entire Ukrainian sky is not occupied, but a safe space for profiges is being built.
What I mean? I mean that so far I have seen only one actor in this story who is also hesitant.
And it's Bidem. Who would not accept the idea for fear of the Third World War.
As if it hadn't just erupted.
