So here is Latynina's view on things. And, I have to say, I find it the most convincing of all.

Yes, these are demonstrative actions, it is important to emphasize, because all this happens in the daytime, without any disguise. But we must understand that if the demonstration does not have an effect, then it can get out of control.

And, of course, we also must not forget Russian propagandists who tell us about an innocent baby which was killed by “Ukrainian fascists” for ritual purposes, by using a drone.

There are statements by Russian officials to the effect: “of course, we do not want to fight, but if the Ukrainian fascists attack, we will fight back”, which they do not inspire optimism.

Because somehow, since the beginning of the Soviet Union, the official line has always been: “we never attack, but we only fight back”.

So when these Ukra-fascists blow up a radio station in some Gleiwitz near Mariupol - we will immediately retaliate with the entire Baltic Fleet, which has accidentally relocated to the Black Sea by this time and is standing by.

And to assume that in such conditions, Putin is simply testing Biden, and will not fight, is irresponsible. Felgenhauer put its it remarkably aptly: “if you bought a racing car, filled it up gasoline, drove to the start, put a foot on the gas pedal ...

Well, maybe you won’t go, maybe yes, may be you bought this car just to show off. But you must agree that it is at least worth taking a closer look at.

And it is clear that the Kremlin knows its Sun Tzu, and they know that the best thing is to have a plan and not to have one at the same time. And it should be possible at a moment’s notice to turn a crushing blow into a feint, and a feint into a crushing blow.

So no, the war is not necessarily over. There is simply the sad truth, which is that if Putin decides that the war is profitable, then there will be war, and if he decides that it is not profitable, he will limit himself to blackmail and the switching of the agenda from

Navalny to Ukraine.
And you may ask, what does it mean “profitable”? And this is the saddest answer to that question - that the benefit in this case is not some abstract territorial or political benefit determinable by purely objective parameters.

No, this benefit is entirely in Putin's head. And this benefit is determined in the world in which he lives - as Merkel said, an alternative reality - by the answer to a question as simple as a traffic jam: will this war strengthen Putin's grip on power or will it weaken it?

There are simply no other motivations there.

(Here I skipped a longish part)

So the script may go like this. We will be told that “Ukrainian fascists are crushing their own population in Mariupol with artillery strikes, and we are trying to reach Mariupol to rescue it.

And here is a very important detail: most likely, the Kremlin is assuming that the West will immediately intervene and will try to stop hostilities at any cost, as it already happened in Georgia in 2008, as it was in Ukraine in 2014.

And here I strongly disagree with Felgenhauer, because, as I said, he believes that Putin's military goal will be: to cut off Ukraine from the sea; restore approximately Taurida province, at least, if not Novorossia, and lay a land corridor to Transnistria.

I think that this is rather what he will frighten the West, so that they quickly make peace. It is clear that in a war, circumstances determine everything.

But my guess is that what they plan in the Kremlin, is indeed, a short war (if they plan it), but not because they are planning a blitzkrieg, but because they are assuming that Europe is now terribly afraid that Putin will send his tanks to take Kiev.

We have Macron, who is the most likely candidate for mediation, because he is a person who is constantly trying to compensate for the complete failure of his domestic policy in France with some kind of foreign policy clownery.

And Macron will visit Putin, then return home in triumph, declare that he saved Ukraine from Putin. Accordingly, the Kremlin at this moment, with a display of reluctance, will satisfy itself with a coastal strip from Mariupol to Kherson to the extent which turns out.

And, accordingly, this will make it possible to please the hearts of citizens with a small victorious war and completely solve with the help of popular enthusiasm all the unpleasant problems associated with the impoverishment of the country, with the epidemic, corruption and,

of course, with Alexei Navalny.

But you will say: “But what about the sanctions? After all, we will be disconnected from SWIFT! " Well, as far as the sanctions, which are supposed to be so scary, I must disappoint you.

I think that Putin needs sanctions, and even, they are necessary for him. It is called: scaring a hedgehog with one’s bare ass.

Because the country has taken a course towards zeroing the obligations of the state to citizens, or rather, the final redistribution of money from the population to Putin’s closest friends, and you only need to explain to the population why the money has ran out.

Being able to blame it on Western sanctions is just a heart warming gift.

Because there was the old model of relations between the authorities and the plebs, which developed during the period of high oil prices and, in principle, it looked like this:

there was a Russian budget that was arranged like a sieve. Everything flowed from it, mainly to Swiss banks. But is it possible to carry water in a sieve? It is possible if more water is poured into the sieve than is poured out.

Accordingly, a lot of water was poured into the sieve, and the common people got a little. Accordingly, now there is less water in the sieve, there is no money for the people, there is not enough for yachts themselves, plus there is also the National Guard.

Accordingly, social obligations will be nullified in favor of yachts and in favor of the National Guard.
And the same pension of 14 thousand, even when Putin came to power, was worth almost $ 500, and it was possible to live on it.

Now it is already worth $ 200. If it becomes $ 50, imagine what will happen to the Russian budget, and how much will remain for the National Guard.

You know, the one who has bread thinks about freedom, the one who has no bread thinks about bread.

And, in principle, the Kremlin does not need people who make money. Unfortunately, this is how any modern dictatorship, any modern authoritarian state works.

Earlier, in the 19th century, rulers had to think that people would physically starve to death if they did not have normal living conditions. And now the minimum subsistence level in fact with the help of potatoes and pasta is quite easy to provide to the people.

Accordingly, it is easy enough to turn the entire population into handouts. This is not even necessary in authoritarian governments.

We see that successful Western - even Europe and America - democratic governments are moving quite quickly in this direction - in the direction of replacing the mass voter who works with the mass voter who sits on various types of social programs.

In authoritarian states, this is simply realized at a completely different monetary level, because in authoritarian states, people who are on benefits are, indeed, beggars. And to rejoice at beggarly handouts, you have to be beggars.

The trick here is to explain to the layman why he became impoverished. War is the perfect explanation: It's all the damned West, it's all sanctions.