Let’s begin with Mark Wauk and his “A Theory Of The Prigozhin Regime Change Farce”: https://meaninginhistory.substack.com/p/a-theory-of-the-prigozhin-regime
****************************
It’s the third day after the Prigozhin regime change farce in Russia, and nothing has risen from the ashes of the farce. The rumors continue to swirl, ranging from Scott Ritter’s conviction that this attempt at regime change in Russia was orchestrated by the US/UK intel services, to the usual “maskirovka” theories that this was all theater that Putin and Prigozhin worked up between them, and that Prigozhin will shortly emerge from exile in Belarus to lead some new excellent adventure of Wagner PMC. I tend to Ritter’s view and, in the absence of hard data, this seems like a good time to indulge in speculation—and I think there’s a way to incorporate at least some of the ‘theater’ elements of the farce into Ritter’s theory.
The first thing we need to do is to ask …
Why Wagner In The First Place?
I wish I could say I’m an expert on the Russian Constitution and Russian laws, but I’m not. I tried to do a bit of research, but was unable to readily find the information I was looking for: war making powers and any laws/regs governing deployment of military forces. Baron of the Taiga yesterday posted a tweet in which he maintained—unfortunately, without specific citations—that Wagner PMC was set up as a way for Putin to work around “stifling restrictions” in the Russian Constitution. I took that to obviously refer to restrictions on war making and force deployment, but couldn’t locate those provisions. Not quickly, anyway.
However, if we all think back a bit, I recall that when Putin announced the Special Military Operation (SMO)—not a Declaration of War—we learned that the use of an SMO carried restrictions under Russian law. Those restrictions had to do with the use of draftees (as opposed to contract personnel of the professional army) outside Russian borders, the possibility of doing a general mobilization, etc. That also explains the referenda in the territories that were incorporated into Russia—under the results of those referenda, all hostilities appear to be on Russian territory at this time. However, none of that applies to a PMC like Wagner. Thus, back in February, 2022, we saw articles like this from Politico:
Lawmakers give Putin permission to use force outside Russia
Russia’s upper house of parliament has given President Vladimir Putin permission to use military force outside the country.
It also explains the legal problems faced by the Russian MoD in dealing with Prigozhin:
Russian military leaders can’t seem to get Wagner and its boss, Prigozhin, to fall in line, and it’s a mess that goes beyond dysfunction (September, 2022)
All this was unlikely to have been the thinking behind the setting up of Wagner originally, but it worked in the current context—legally. And Putin is very big on following the law. The resort to a PMC like Wagner was probably more in view of having a rapid deployment force available for use outside Russia—in Africa, the Middle East. However, there is always a danger in setting up a PMC of the stature of Wagner, with close ties to the the governing establishment. That danger is the possibility of the PMC leaders becoming involved in national (here, Russian) politics. A threat to the government. Even worse, there would also be the possibility that foreign intelligence services could contact with such a PMC as Wagner and launch a regime change effort in collusion with the PMC. There is a respectable amount of evidence available to suggest that that’s exactly what may have happened.
I wish I had more legal details to offer, but that’s a working context for now.
The Theory Of A Wagner Nexus With US/UK Intel
We’ll start with some general context—timing.
The Prigozhin farce didn’t happen in a time vacuum. It happened in the leadup to three major NATO events, both located in close proximity to the borders of Russia. The first is the NATO airforce war games, which are scheduled to take place in Romania—one of the NATO countries most openly hostile to Russia and directly involved in the trans-shipment of war materiel to Ukraine. It’s also a base for NATO intel flights over the Black Sea. The second is the NATO pow wow scheduled to take place in Vilnius, Lithuania. It is reported that NATO will announce major new initiatives against Russia at that meeting. The third is the NATO/Ukraine “counteroffensive”. That’s the time context for the Prigozhin farce.
I have heard the claim—I can’t recall where, Ritter?—that the plan was that when the “counteroffensive” breached the first Russian defense line, Prigozhin would spring into action. Now, it’s important to bear in mind that operations of this sort cannot be activated without serious preparation. Even the movement of relatively small numbers of Wagner troops that we saw would have required planning and preparation going back some time—you can’t just tell the “guys”, OK, hop in the trucks—we’re off to Moscow! I suggest that there had to have been a hard D-Day set.
Backing up that suggestion is the well documented fact that for the past few weeks Prigozhin had been engaging in increasingly provocative and outrageous statements that appeared to be coordinated with the Urkainian “counteroffensive”. All these statements reflected Western intel propaganda talking points—that Russian forces were poorly prepared, poorly motivate, poorly led, were led by corrupt generals and a corrupt Russian MoD, were suffering massive casualties that were being covered up, that the Ukrainians were on the advance and sweeping “our guys” before them. All these statements were being broadcast to the Russian populace. Why? To prepare them for drastic action by the hero of Bakhmut, to put an end to this betrayal of the nation?
In his final pre-farce statements, Prigozhin claimed that there was no justification for the SMO at all—no threat to Russia from Ukraine or NATO. Despite his later statement that he wasn’t leading a coup, that his beef was with the MoD—with Shoigu and Gerasimov—that statement is a direct accusation against Putin. It amounts to a call for regime change against a regime that Prigozhin was claiming had deceived the nation and was sending thousands of soldiers to their deaths under incompetent leadership. As events turned out, the “counteroffensive” fell on its face, but Prigozhin kept repeating his scripted lines as D-Day approached. If this theory is correct, a desperate final attack was launched—breaking the “pause” and with no hope of success, but to coincide with Prigozhin kicking off his farce.
Again, consider the logistics. This farce, goofy as it turned out, appears to have been planned and even choreographed. Prigozhin announced his action and headed for Rostov to confront the Russian military leaders at the Southern Command. Prigozhin’s deputy, Utkin—a former Russian general—hit the road for Moscow. My suggestion is that the original plan was for Prigozhin to actually “arrest” the military commanders in Rostov and charge that they were responsible for the Ukrainian “breakthrough”. Since that “breakthrough” never developed and the D-Day action had been launched on a wing and a prayer, Prigozhin was necessarily improvising in Rostov. He arrived in Rostov accompanied by or met by prepared contingents of the National Guard. It sounds like he did a bit of shouting, but got nowhere. My suspicion is that the military there had been prepped by the FSB (more below), and that they informed Prigozhin: It’s over, turn around and go back. You’ll receive instructions on your future later. In the meantime, get in touch with Utkin and tell him the same.
While this was playing out the Western MSM—but especially the UK outlets—were broadcasting all sorts of alarmist and totally bogus “news”. Even a few US outlets, like The Atlantic, got on board, with Ann Applembaum’s goofy story about Russia “sliding into civil war” with Putin meeting his Nicholas II fate. Some things you just can’t make up. This all has the appearance of a desperate and prearranged effort to create mass alarm amongst the Russian public in favor of a would-be savior—Prigozhin. Most intriguingly, there are (unconfirmed) reports of Moscow residents receiving phone calls urging them to get out in the streets in support of Prigozhin—MI6/CIA in action? As we know, by this time it was all winding down.
By this account, then, the FSB would have known of the plot well ahead of time. The reactions of the Russian authorities, both civil and military, appear to have run like clockwork. It was all under control.
Interestingly, today both the WaPo and the NYT are running stories in which the CIA claims that, Oh, yeah, we’ve known about this plot for months and we were worried about Russia’s nukes if instability resulted. Hmmm. How about this. Maybe the CIA was actually part of the original plot—that’s how they knew about it! And maybe the narrative about being worried about the nukes was the one they were going to deploy if Prigozhin gained some traction—to justify some sort of NATO intervention, to gin up nuclear hysteria in Russia, something of the sort. And so the stories claim that Zhou was briefed on it all—one pictures him absently licking an icecream cone while getting the brief, then asking when he can leave for the beach house.
So, the Neocons were playing Prigozhin for a dupe and the FSB, well, they were doing the same thing. Why would the FSB do that? Think about it. Putin got to make his speech and talk about treason and a stab in the back of the nation. I expect purges to follow—all according to law, but the ultra nationalist elements will be marginalized while support for Putin’s handling of the war will increase. I expect this to actually work out well for Putin and this could serve as a prelude for a meaningful escalation of the war. For a preview of what might be coming, we turn to John Helmer: https://johnhelmer.net/putin-orders-reality-check-no-ukrainians-left-on-the-battlefield-no-sovereignty-in-kiev/
****************************
In brief statements issued late last week in Moscow – their significance missed in the western press — President Vladimir Putin ordered a reality check of Russia’s war strategy. He then answered himself by declaring the war will be over when no Ukrainian army will be left on the battlefield, nor NATO weapons. (emphasis added)
The Foreign Ministry answered by pointing out that Russia does not recognize there is a legal Ukrainian state because the reality is that the mutual recognition treaty between Russia and the Ukraine was cancelled by Presidents Petro Poroshenko and Vladimir Zelensky in 2018 and 2019.
“We can conclude,” Putin said at the Security Council meeting on Thursday morning, “that they can certainly send in additional equipment, but the mobilisation reserve is not unlimited. And Ukraine’s Western allies really seem determined to fight with Russia to the last Ukrainian. At the same time, we must proceed from the fact that the enemy’s offensive potential has not been exhausted; they may have strategic reserves yet unused, and I ask you to keep this in mind when making fighting strategies. You need to proceed from reality.”
Putin was following by a few hours the statement by the Foreign Ministry that Russia does not recognize the legal sovereignty of the regime in Kiev, and that following the cancellation of the treaty between the Ukraine and Russia in 2019, there will be no Ukrainian state left to sign an end-of-war agreement. (emphasis added)
At her weekly briefing of reporters, the ministry spokesman Maria Zakharova, was asked “when will Russia initiate a legal procedure to terminate the bilateral treaty with Ukraine on its sovereignty?” Zakharova answered: “The procedure for terminating the bilateral treaty with Ukraine on its sovereignty is hampered by the absence of such a treaty. In Article 1 of the Treaty on the Principles of Relations between the RSFSR and the Ukrainian SSR of November 19, 1990, the two republics recognised each other as ‘sovereign states.’ The 1990 treaty was then replaced by the Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation, and Partnership between the Russian Federation and Ukraine of May 31, 1997 (Article 39), which was denounced by Ukraine and terminated on April 1, 2019.”
No army, no state. But the war will continue because it is the one between the US and the NATO powers and Russia. That too will have an ending, but longer.
“If [NATO Secretary-General] Mr Stoltenberg again says on behalf of NATO that they are against freezing the conflict in Ukraine,” Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on June 21, “this means that they want to fight. So let them fight. We are ready for that. We realised NATO’s true goals in Ukraine some time ago as their plans took shape over the years that followed the coup. Today, NATO is attempting to implement them…they are directly involved in the hybrid and hot war declared on Russia.” (emphasis added)
I am reminded, Lavrov added, “of a Soviet-era joke noting that the Soviet Union is located too close to US military bases.” The Soviet Union was dismantled, but the war continues against Russia. It will end when the US is pushed to a safe distance. How safe, Putin asked Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu to explain in answer to two questions?
Putin’s question: “we know that the enemy is to receive additional Western equipment. What does the Defence Ministry think about threats in this connection?”
Shoigu’s answer: “All arsenals, accumulated by the Soviet Union and countries of the former socialist bloc, have now been virtually depleted. We can say the same about former Ukrainian resources… the amount, due to be delivered throughout 2023, as well as those weapons that have already been delivered, will not seriously affect the course of hostilities. Additionally, most of the armoured vehicles and fighting vehicles belong to the previous generation, or even to an earlier generation. On the one hand, their armour is weak and ineffective, compared to modern equipment. Mr President, we do not see any threats here.”
Question: “Mr Shoigu, what is the percentage of Western equipment out of the equipment that has been destroyed since June 4, which Mr Patrushev has just reported giving generalised data? Approximately.”
Answer: “Of the 246 tanks destroyed, 13 were Western made. At the same time, it should be noted that, if we consider the equipment that was delivered, tanks in particular: 81 Western-made tanks have been delivered. Of the 81 Western tanks, 13 [16%] have been destroyed. Of the armoured fighting vehicles, 59 Western ones have been destroyed. To date, Western countries have supplied Ukraine with an estimated 109 Bradley armoured fighting vehicles. Of the 109 BFVs, 18 [17%] have been destroyed. Overall, 59 Western-made armoured vehicles have been destroyed. As for field artillery and guns, here, of course, I can estimate right away that out of the 48 pieces destroyed, about 30 percent were Western made.”
The “reality”, Putin concluded publicly, not for Shoigu or the General Staff, is that the percentage of NATO weapons destroyed on the battlefield will rise sharply because “the enemy’s offensive potential has not been exhausted; they may have strategic reserves yet unused.” When those reserves are defeated, there will be neither NATO arms nor Ukrainian men left. (emphasis added)
The significance of this re-tuning of Russia’s war aims was diverted for several hours by the Prigozhin affair.
The return of the Wagner columns to their bases in Lugansk, the dissolution of Wagner by the Defense Ministry, and the exit of Prigozhin to house arrest in Belarus remove the distraction from the battlefield and the General Staff’s war strategy. If Prigozhin cannot bear the silence, the lack of access to the fortune he has accumulated, and his loss of freedom of movement, he may attempt a break-out to Africa, to plot his return to Russian politics. He will also be aware of the Lebed precedent – and the danger of taking helicopter rides.
Russian military sources believe the outcome of the one-armed rebellion will be salutary for the key decision-makers including Putin and Shoigu; least of all the General Staff and the chief, General Valery Gerasimov, who have come out of the affair with greater political leverage over the Kremlin. According to one Moscow source, “Now that the General Staff have saved the president, the latter will allow General Patience to continue doing its work, as Generals Iskander and Kinzhal seem to be doing theirs now.”
President Putin in a visit to the headquarters of the Dnieper battlegroup near the Kherson front on April 18. Tass reported: “While at the headquarters of the Dnepr battlegroup near the Kherson front, Vladimir Putin heard reports delivered by Airborne Troops commander Colonel General Mikhail Teplinsky [left], Dnepr battlegroup commander Colonel General Oleg Makarevich [right] and other field commanders.”
The last comment is a reference to long-range missile strikes against Ukrainian command headquarters, airfields, reserve stocks of ammunition and fuel, and NATO storages. After Shoigu had publicly warned on June 20 of decapitation strikes if the Ukrainians attacked targets in the Crimea and other Russian regions, and there was a Storm Shadow attack on the Chongar bridge in the Crimea on June 22, the Defense Ministry reported that it had launched a June 23 salvo “ in response to a strike on a road bridge across the Chongar Strait [as well as] , a warehouse with Storm Shadow cruise missiles was destroyed at a Ukrainian airbase near the settlement of Starokonstantinov in the Khmelnitsky region.”
Left: Missile explodes on impacting the Chongarsky bridge on June 22; right, impact crater on the bridge road surface. Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk
As for the impact of the affair on the conduct of the war, the assessment reported in the broadcast several hours before the end of the affair, was between next to nothing and not very much. The no Ukrainian army, no NATO weapons, no Kiev state goals are much more important now.
A NATO veteran comments on what he expects to see next at the front. “The Ukrainians are going to have a problem disengaging at the front lines and passing on to a conventional defence. I’ve noticed that the Russians, especially on the Lugansk People’s Repubic/Kharkov front, have massed significant forces and are applying pressure. This is causing the Ukrainians to shift and commit forces to the area either to stop the Russians, or to gain the initiative via attack. Unless they are willing to accept losing territory in favour of sparing their reserves — which they don’t seem to be — they will continue to be ground down at the front. While this is going on, their logistics will disintegrate at an increasing scope and rate due to Russian strikes, made up in large part of cheap Iranian-designed drones augmented by missiles. (emphasis added)
“Stavka is moving away from the battalion tactical group as the fulcrum of operations and back to division-level formations. The forces built up on the Kharkov front are indicative of that. When your enemy knows how you think on a fundamental level, it’s a trifle for them to figure out what you’ll do next. After that, it’s about how to maneuver the enemy into doing it when and where they choose. I’m going to keep watching Kharkov.” (emphasis added)
****************************
Mark gets the last word
One wonders. Did Putin know all about the CIA/MI6/Prigozhin plot, the Neocon too-clever-by-half regime change plot, even as he issued the statements Helmer describes? If so, imagine the degree of resolve all this will have engendered among Russia’s rulers.
As George Smiley famously said, It’s a theory. I’m open to revisions.
Econophysics2020 