Time Mag Writer Who Claimed Putin Wouldn't Invade Ukraine, Now Claiming Putin is Losing in Ukraine

With a track record like that, I see no reason not to believe him.


With a track record like that, I see no reason not to believe him.

Simon Shuster, not to be confused with the imprint, is Time's reporter in Moscow. On Feb 25th, he assured the world that "No, Russia Will Not Intervene in Ukraine".

So what does all that mean for Russia? It means that to undermine Ukraine’s new leadership, the last thing Russia should do is send in troops. Nothing unites rival political forces like a common enemy, especially a foreign aggressor. Besides, any attack on Ukraine right now would raise the chances of a militantly anti-Russian candidate becoming the next President of Ukraine. So the gentle and accommodating tone of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Tuesday should not come as a surprise. During a visit to Luxembourg, Lavrov said Russia had “confirmed our principled position of nonintervention in Ukraine’s internal affairs.” He even suggested that Russia respected the European choice of the Ukrainian people: “We are interested in Ukraine being part of the European family, in all senses of the word,” Lavrov said.

... about that gentle and accommodating tone... it usually precedes an invasion. But Simon was just echoing the progressive media echo chamber.

And now Simon is back to deliver the mainstream media's official meme with "4 Reasons Putin is Already Losing in the Ukraine."

You know that country he wasn't supposed to even be in.

Even a week ago, the idea of a Russian military intervention in Ukraine seemed far-fetched if not totally alarmist. The risks involved were just too enormous for President Vladimir Putin and for the country he has ruled for 14 years.

Number of actual risks faced by Putin in the Obama era... zero.

But the arrival of Russian troops in Crimea over the weekend has shown that he is not averse to reckless adventures, even ones that offer little gain.

Really? Simon is just now figuring out that a KGB thug who killed a political enemy with radioactive poison in London is not averse to reckless thuggery?

So let's skip to the four reasons...

At home, this intervention looks to be one of the most unpopular decisions Putin has ever made. The Kremlin’s own pollster released a survey on Monday that showed 73% of Russians reject it.

The same can be said of Obama and Libya. And unlike Russia, American elections are generally open and legit. Also more recent polls seem to suggest that the domestic propaganda is working.

The economic impact on Russia is already staggering. When markets opened on Monday morning, investors got their first chance to react to the Russian intervention in Ukraine over the weekend, and as a result, the key Russian stock indexes tanked by more than 10%. That amounts to almost $60 billion in stock value wiped out in the course of a day, more than Russia spent preparing for last month’s Winter Olympic Games in Sochi.

While that looks like a disaster, for insiders surrounding Putin it could well be an opportunity. And Putin is thinking long term, instead of playing it safe, which isn't an option anyway considering Gazprom's situation.

Even Russia’s closest allies want no part of this. The oil-rich state of Kazakhstan, the most important member of every regional alliance Russia has going in the former Soviet space, put out a damning statement on Monday, marking the first time its leaders have ever turned against Russia on such a major strategic issue: “Kazakhstan expresses deep concern over the developments in Ukraine,” the Foreign Ministry said. “Kazakhstan calls on all sides to stop the use of force in the resolution of this situation.”

China is backing Russia on this, which matters far more to Putin than a nervous press release from Kazakhstan.

Russia’s isolation from the West will deepen dramatically

Yes, Obama has withdrawn the Paralympics delegation. What else could that mean but absolute defeat for Vlad the Invader?