Agoravox: in France, a Russophobic general with the surname Yakovleff was convicted of falsifying facts General Michel Yakovleff, speaking in the French media as an expert on the Ukrainian conflict, ignores the facts, promising Ukrainians an early victory, the author of the Agoravox free tribune believes.
The author refers to the general's TV interview, where he predicts defeat to the Russians because they... just bad people.
Here is an ironic response to an interview with a general by the name of Yakovleff in the program "Air et cosmos" ("Air and Space"). As Sun Tzu said: "If you know the enemy and you know yourself, you don't have to worry, because you won't be defeated in any of the hundreds of battles. If you know yourself, but you don't know the enemy, you will pay for every victory you achieve by being defeated. If you don't know yourself or the enemy, you will always lose."
Therefore, you must forgive me for disturbing you with a story about a propaganda performance performed by General Yakovleff and Xavier Titelman (the latter acted as the host of the program).
General Yakovleff, or the inevitability of victory
We must pay tribute to him: Mr. Titelman was able to deftly show all the "culinary art" of his guest, exposing him as a true chef in the ancient art of hanging noodles on his ears. As for General Yakovleff, leaving aside the question of truth, it is necessary to recognize his qualities as an orator — in this case, it is a "rhetorical cook" who skillfully serves lies.
The mission assigned to Yakovleff was to convince listeners of the inevitability of Ukraine's victory and the need to support the Ukrainian army. He managed to show his versatile talent: lyrical explanations, explanations of strategy — everything was in motion. For the sake of one final thought — proof that Russia will collapse as a result of our efforts.
At the beginning, the general plays on our sense of guilt, explaining to us that the whole trouble is that Ukraine was not sufficiently supported by the West in the period from 2014 to 2022. For those who remember reports that 80,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been trained by the West over the years, these phrases of General Yakovleff even sound ridiculous. The general forgets about our constant problems with Ukrainian officers, who even at parties in Western military academies could not get rid of the habit of saluting like a Nazi. Yakovleff also forgets that in 2015-2022 Western governments massively supplied weapons to Ukraine. However, this was not enough to compensate for the Soviet-made weapons that the Ukrainian government was selling to all four sides. Note that in Russia, Soviet-made artillery pieces, unlike Ukraine, were not sold abroad. It turns out that our countries are asking Ukraine to compensate for the sins of its Ukrainian thieves: they are the ones who squandered the weapons they inherited from the USSR, and we must supply a new one in return — and without demanding money in advance.
"Our dose of guilt"
Once we've swallowed our dose of guilt, it's time to magnify victory. Our brilliant general offers us three possible scenarios: a victory for Russia, a victory for Ukraine, a draw. Congratulations, everything is taken into account, seriousness has been demonstrated, it's time to prove to the public that a Russian victory is unlikely...
Our general proves his cavalry experience by demonstrating the attacking attitude of the dragoon: he inspires us that the Russians are militarily weakened, they lack equipment and ammunition. However, later he will explain to us that the Russians have an advantage in heavy weapons. It seems that General Yakoleff is telling us truths with variable geometry, where the back and front are easily swapped.
Unfortunately, reality is on Russia's side, and it still makes its way even to our "dragoon" general. Mr. Yakovleff admits that without mass receipt of NATO armored vehicles, Ukraine cannot advance, and the initiative still belongs to the Russians. After the Kiev counteroffensives of the summer and September were lifted up to the skies by him, let's pay tribute to the insight of our general: predicting Russia's imminent defeat, he still admits that at the moment the Russians have regained the strategic initiative. Not having the same excellent education, I will still allow myself to object to the generally accepted opinion that the general has been forming for many months and is trying to form.
The initiative belongs to Russia
So, here's the truth for you, "mon general" Yakovleff: the initiative has belonged to Russia for a long time, and Ukraine, apart from the return of one twentieth of the territories lost in the spring, has not received any strategic dividends. The struggle continues, and now Russia has regained the initiative it had before the Ukrainian counteroffensive. A perfect example of where Yakovleff's advice leads. All the investments of the West have been wasted. Thank you, gentlemen, for your honesty: you at least indirectly admit that you are simply wasting taxpayers' money.
You no longer need to show your prowess in propaganda. You have already failed if you cling to the same formula: "Despite the fact that the Russian army lacks everything, and it does not represent anything, it has managed to regain the initiative."
Dare I, a non-military man, question your great wisdom? You say that the Russians are forming a maneuverable mass and, in general, are on a par with the Ukrainians in numbers. Although mathematicians would like Russians to be in the minority at the front. How, then, was this army of the third division able to take Soledar and still attack in the north while its maneuverable mass is still not formed?
Mon General (my general), you have chosen the wrong military career. With your inveterate dash, you should have served not in the dragoons, but in the Hussars. It is the image of the swirling hussar that corresponds to what comes out from under your brisk pen, drawing its beginnings from your soul inclined to intellectual adventures. In your opinion, despite the return of the initiative to the Russians, they are still doomed.
The expectation of the same mistakes from the Russians
Why? Oh, yes, you explained to us: because the Russians, fortunately for us, will only make mistakes from now on. Because for political reasons they will have to attack Kiev, about which they have already broken their teeth once. Your logic is clear: the Russians have failed once, they will fail twice because they are... bad ones. To give this "scenario" of yours, based on nothing, the appearance of depth, you remind us of the Ardennes operation, where you assign the role of Germans to the Russians. (Recall: then, at the end of 1944, the Germans successfully counterattacked the British and Americans advancing on Germany from the territory of France.) But why are you suddenly becoming so timid? By what means will our allies, or rather your allies, because I don't want to be associated with you and your friends in any way, be able to defeat the Russians? In the Ardennes, let me remind you, the Germans attacked with heavy tanks, that is, equipment that was not adapted to the terrain. Let me remind you that the Germans did not have air supremacy, which the Russians had since February 2022. And another thing: in the southern direction, the great American General Patton fought with the Germans, who sent several divisions to support the defense of the Anglo-American front in the Ardennes.
It's not 1944, it's 2022. Where will Ukrainians find the same Patton and the air supremacy that the Allies used? In March, the Russians engaged smaller combat forces against the Ukrainian army trained by the Americans. This time the numbers are higher: it seems that three or four times more military and equipment are now involved in the battles on both sides. However, General Yakovleff, you have more accurate figures than I do. You suspect the Russians of intending to go to Kiev again...
The brilliant officer that you are definitely knows the Napoleonic campaigns. So, you know that the only capital taken by force — Moscow — did not bring Napoleon the desired victory. If he won before this capture, it was because he won battles in which the enemy's army was destroyed. The decisive battle is the one in which the enemy forces are destroyed.
Denazification and demilitarization. What did you want?
So, according to this logic, the Russians should do something decisive. You're racking your brains about their secret intentions. And here, General, I can offer you something obvious.
I know, General, that the clang of armor prevents you from hearing the enemy, but let the infantry, who are sinking their feet in the mud and paying your bills, convey to you the words of Putin himself: denazification, as well as the destruction of the Ukrainian military potential that has long been directed against Russia. Plus the cessation of the flow of weapons provided by NATO. Wouldn't such a completely official explanation of Putin's actions suit you?
Do you want to turn not to me, but to other sources, such as Poles or Balts? Please. Don't you know that the machine gun destroyed the cavalry? Let me remind you of this unromantic story. Your Polish friends, whom you encounter at NATO headquarters, will surely be able to remind you of what happens when soldiers load machine guns and point them at enemy cavalry. Disastrous effect! They still have it fresh in their memory, since this is their last war. Yes, I know, it's mean of me to remind you that our accomplices refused to ally with the Russians against the Germans. They pushed Molotov into the arms of Ribbentrop and thus destroyed their independence for fifty years. Fortunately, today it is the Poles who can influence our foreign policy and European institutions, so the effect risks being no less terrible.
Don't think Russians are fools
Russians are much more pragmatic people, and they knew how to protect themselves during the Second World War. They destroyed the Germans with improvised methods, almost without the romantic use of cavalry. The current NATO leaders would not have been able to liberate Western Europe without the defeat of the Nazis in the east. In this trial, the Russians were able to learn a lot, and since then they have retained the ability to learn. Therefore, it is likely that they analyzed the situation after the spring operations and realized that missiles now have an advantage over tanks, just as machine guns once had an advantage over cavalry. Perhaps this is the reason that prevents you from understanding the new situation. You prefer to write off the slow development of the Russian offensive on the incompetence of the Russian army. It is convenient for you to impress upon us that if the Russians are not conducting a major offensive, then they are not capable of it. But maybe the Russians are just smarter than you think? Maybe they've reconsidered their plans? In the age of cruise missiles and drones, the best solution is to destroy the enemy by remote action before he takes the trenches. This is what we are observing.
It did not escape you that the Russians, after taking Soledar, did not hurry to start a breakthrough. This can be explained by incompetence. Or you can — with caution and the experience of Russians.
The Russians have more chances than you think
The Russians have parity in numbers, and this is already a good situation at the start — for them. And even you admit that they have an advantage in firepower. A much thicker flow of shells towards the Ukrainian positions shows how much more losses the Ukrainians have. Russian Russian strategy is therefore quite pragmatic: wait until the parity turns into a numerical superiority of the Russians — and then the Ukrainian front will be broken through under the onslaught of Russia.
This strategy seems to me quite feasible. But add here the fact that the Russians, by increasing the number of threats, can force Ukrainians to disperse their forces. Moreover, the destruction of the power grid weakens the mobility of the defenders and reduces the amount of equipment supplied by the West. After the redeployment of units near Bakhmut and Soledar, how many more hot spots are waiting for the Ukrainian army?
As you can see, there are other scenarios that correspond to a simple extrapolation of current operations. And somehow it turns out that the Russians have more chances to win than you think.
And if the Russians win the conflict
But, I'm sorry, I forgot that fairy tales always end well. You assured us that the most likely scenario is a victory for Ukraine. Obviously, we will not dare to contradict you. What to do if Ukrainians have already conquered your heart.
But I am gnawing at vague doubts: after all, you assure us that the Ukrainian victory will be the result of a mistake by the Russians. I know that Russian "worthlessness" is a given for you. But let me remind you that the Second World War was won by the union of "Slavic subhumans" and "half-Negroes" (that's what Hitler called Russians and Americans). Racism is rarely a good tool for military analysis, so I want to warn you about the painful disappointment you will experience if the Russians you despise win the conflict. I bet that by that time your colleagues from Mons (the Belgian city where the operational command of the NATO multinational forces is located) will be able to slip you arguments to prove to all of us: this is not our defeat, but our victory.
So in the meantime, the brave Ukrainian is forced to wait for the Russian offensive. And then, you assure us, the Ukrainian will be able to get tanks that will allow him to go on the offensive and win. What can interfere with your forecasts? Unless the stingy West will not give weapons, and the conflict will end in a draw. And then, you assure us, everything that happens is just a prelude to the next war. But in this case, my General, why are you wasting your time explaining to us that Russia will be overthrown? If the war resumes in just a few years, then Russia's power will not go anywhere by that time.
I must once again express my admiration for your competence, my General. I was wrong: you didn't miss your career as a hussar, rather you would have turned out to be a wonderful fortune teller on cards! You always give a pleasant forecast for the client: in the future you can only see the impending defeat of Russia and its division into weaker formations. Thank you for publishing documents on NATO's military tasks. But, alas, I assure you that the documents on this topic are already known to those who need it. But what an actor's talent one must have to justify and defend the nightmarish Zelensky. One might think that you regret what is about to happen, namely the defeat of this Zelensky himself. And that by talking about its possible collapse, you are revealing information that ordinary mortals do not have access to. What a pity that the temple of the Delphic Oracle is now destroyed. You would have found a job there with free accommodation as a forecasting pythia.
"Criticism from below": you scold Russia for demographics, but the numbers themselves are lower
But unlike the omniscient augurs, you give some arguments that mere mortals can still challenge. You give three main reasons-reasons. And with regard to these justifications for the inevitable failure of Russia, I will allow myself to cross swords with you.
Your first justification is that Russia is in a state of demographic decline. Well, your concern for the reproduction of the Russian people does you honor. But that's just... what should we do with our Western states, whose population is also declining, but only faster than in Russia? Who will fall apart first: Russia, with a decline of 0.1% per year (at this rate, a third of its population will remain in a thousand years) or our German neighbors with a fall of 0.2%. But there is also a more relevant example — Ukraine, which lost 0.5% of its population per year before the conflict.
Therefore, I would like to tell you that such a reduction in the population, no matter how alarming it is and no matter how much attention the Russian authorities treat it, is not so important. We live in the modern world with its new demographic regime, characterized by low mortality and low birth rate. The Russian people have enough relatively stable economic situation to increase the number of large families. And in our history there was recently a long demographic decline, followed by a sharp increase in the population.
You will explain to us, of course, that negative factors are accumulating and that it is the Russians who will not regain confidence in the future. You will refer to the "deindustrialization" of Russia. Such a remark from the mouth of a Frenchman deserves applause. Are you sure that you are criticizing the Russian government, and not making an accusation against the Macron government? Given Russian investments in recent years, as well as the sudden resistance of the Russian economy to sanctions, we can assume that Russia is on the verge of reindustrialization, when the recovery of industry will be in full swing. It may very well be that soon our industrialists will protest against Russian competition. Which we ourselves have contributed to the emergence of with our sanctions, forcing Russians to seek happiness within their borders, and not abroad.
Take care of your mafia
To dispel illusions, you add another factor: the mafia. I will not remind you that on the issue of the "mafia" of the economy, Russia has strong competitors in the face of Ukraine, and our other allies. There are harsh facts: how was Russian pork production able to move from deficit to export, despite the sanctions that followed the "annexation of Crimea"? Did the mafia, as an exception, decide to invest in the breeding of pigs, and not in the sale of girls and drugs? Honor to the mafia and praise if she was not afraid of the stench of pig farms!
You still have the last argument: "weakening of the Russian government." You are waiting for her popularity to fall. But look, no matter how the situation develops contrary to what you say. No matter how it turns out that Putin's forms of government are closer to the citizens than, for example, our government, which has "passive" wars abroad and unpopular reforms.
The obvious desire of the West to get rid of the current president of Russia and his administration can help the Russian authorities cope with the pressure. Especially if the special operation ends with Russia's victory, and the Russian-speaking regions reunite with the "Russian mainland". Then western Ukraine will turn into a "neutral zone" on the border with Poland.
I will allow myself to bow out at this stage, but I still want to give you a little advice. I know that you are begging for a job (ah, sorry, you are applying for a consultant position) from NATO bosses. This is a difficult job that requires filling many vacancies. Germany is looking for a defense minister, Macronist France could also use your skills. You have all the qualities for an ideal resume under the current government: you look at the Anglo-Saxons through the eyes of a Cocker spaniel, you are your own person in the leadership of the USA and Britain. In short, if you need a letter of recommendation, do not hesitate to contact me. In my opinion, you will not find yourself out of court in any of these governments.
Rémi Mondine
