SearchRecent comments
Democracy LinksMember's Off-site Blogs |
bad ideas at the time — the brits love them....![]() Leaked documents reviewed by The Grayzone reveal that a blueprint for Ukraine’s failed effort to capture the village of Krynky was assembled by Project Alchemy, a secret military-intelligence cell created by the British Ministry of Defence which sought “at all costs” to “keep Ukraine fighting.” The Krynky plot led to a bloodbath that remains one of the war’s biggest disasters.
UK intel behind Ukraine’s disastrous Krynky invasion, leaked documents reveal
On the morning of October 30 2023, dozens of Ukrainian commandos on small boats glided across the Dnieper River to control of Krynky, a village in Russian-occupied Kherson. They had spent the prior two months in remote areas of the British isles with similar terrain, running drills under the watchful gaze of UK generals. Now, they believed their hard work was about to pay off. Both British and Ukrainian officials were convinced the operation would turn the tide of the war, creating a beachhead allowing Kiev’s forces to march on Crimea and all-out victory. Instead, the British-trained Ukrainian marines were led like lambs to the slaughter. The catastrophically planned effort saw a seemingly endless stream of heavily overloaded Ukrainian boats attempt to reach Krynky without air cover, under relentless fire by Russian artillery, drones, flamethrowers and mortars. Marines that made the journey were ill-equipped, resupplying those troops proved virtually impossible, and evacuating them was out of the question. As the promised missile cover failed to materialize in the ensuing weeks, it became clear the effort had amounted to a disaster. Yet for the next nine months, wave after wave of British-trained Ukrainian marines were dispatched to almost certain death to Krynky. The decision to let the costly quagmire drag on, at a human and material cost no NATO military would ever allow, has come to be seen as one of the worst tactical mistakes of the war — and it appears top British generals are to blame. Leaked documents reviewed by The Grayzone expose how the British not only presided over the training of the Marines involved, but built from scratch the “Maritime Raiding Force” which would ultimately be sacrificed over the course of the Krynky suicide mission. British spooks convince Kiev to invade SevastopolThe origins of the stillborn amphibious landing operation in Krynky can be traced back to a leaked file produced just months after the Russia-Ukraine proxy war erupted by a secret British Ministry of Defence-created military-intelligence cell called Project Alchemy. The Grayzone previously exposed Project Alchemy as a hybrid public-private military partnership between top British academics and military strategists with the stated goal of working “at all costs to keep Ukraine fighting.” In a June 2022 document titled “Building a Ukrainian Maritime Raiding Capability,” the Alchemy planners proposed a “new Maritime Raiding Force” to “be trained specifically to the operational area of the southern coastal area of [Ukraine] to the Kerch strait.” Alchemy forecast the Ukrainians being given “high-speed RIBs,” [rigid inflatable boats] along with “autonomous vessels and aerial drones and Swimmer Delivery Vehicles [SDVs]… specially designed for attacks against the ports, submarines and surface warships.” After their training in the UK, Ukrainian marine commandos would “target radar stations and air defence assets on Crimea and support regular units fighting in Kherson through attacks from the Dnipro River,” with certain units being “specially trained in mountain warfare and cliff assault.” The end goal, they stated, was “to grind down [Sevastopol’s] defences… with a view to conducting a large-scale commando assault of the missile complex.” “The hostile environment dictates a highly mobile raiding force at its core operating at night conducting hit and run operations to avoid detection,” Alchemy declared. The cell determined that in the area spanning “from the Romanian border to the Kerch Strait,” Ukraine’s “coastal areas” had yet to be sufficiently “exploited.” In addition, Russian forces “don’t see a risk of an attack from the sea or riverine areas along the coast,” claimed Alchemy. Internally, the group lamented that Sevastopol’s ports, upon which the Russian navy was “totally reliant,” had suffered “very little direct action” since the proxy war’s inception. Due to Ukraine’s “lack of capability and/or resources… to conduct such missions,” it fell upon British military and intelligence veterans to provide them with what they needed. Accordingly, “a joint, inter-agency operational campaign planning team will run concurrently while training is being conducted,” Alchemy explained. The group “will contain serving and former service people with specialist knowledge in their given fields including experts from UA [Ukraine] to undertake planning and target analysis of the RU [Russian] coastal assets,” they noted. For the technical details, they decided that “academics should also be included, using the latest technology resources to ensure the success of raids conducted especially in terms of the destruction of key infrastructure.” Therefore, “a formal request” to the British Ministry of Defence “on the latest intelligence imagery and plans” regarding Crimea’s heavily-fortified underground complex “will need to be planned in extreme detail.” Britain’s obsession with wresting Sevastopol from Moscow’s grasp dates back to the Crimean War of 1853-1856, but the leaked documents clearly show the city’s seizure is still considered a vital, and achievable, objective from London’s perspective. Though Project Alchemy described the military port as home to the world’s “largest concentration of anti-ship missiles” and a bunker complex “immune to air or missile strike,” the group’s operatives still believed the area to be “vulnerable to commando forces.” An investigation by Ukrainska Pravda confirmed that Britain – “perhaps Ukraine’s most active and determined ally” – had been pressuring Kiev to use marines “for waterborne operations and deceptive manoeuvres” since the proxy conflict began. However, these proposals reportedly “did not resonate” with then-Commander-in-Chief Valerii Zaluzhnyi or President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. This changed in early 2023, when Britain dispatched a senior delegation to meet with Zaluzhnyi in Kiev, where London’s contingent promised to provide the Ukrainians with anything and everything they needed to conduct the “waterborne operations” the UK had so far avoided. According to Ukrainska Pravda, this came to pass in May 2023, when “the British team persuaded Zaluzhnyi, and he said: that’s it, we’re creating the Marine Corps.” What followed was precisely foreshadowed in the leaked Project Alchemy files. In the leaked documents, the British cell foresaw Ukrainian marine commandos being “ready to deploy on operations” in just three months. Accompanying tables laid out how many Ukrainian marines would be trained, where, in what field of warfare, and for how long. “If our training program is approved,” the British Defence Ministry “must give us priority on Otterburn and other training areas outlined.” “Candidates chosen for specific branches” would receive “a further 4 weeks of continuation training,” Alchemy wrote. These forces would consist of 60 “Mountain Leaders,” 20 ‘snipers/ spotters,” a 40-member mortar squadron, 20-member air defense, anti-tank, and gunner squadrons, 70 demolition engineers, 36 combat signallers, 16 pilots for the submersible crafts needed to deliver divers, 124 combat swimmers, 10 members of a coxswain raiding squadron, 10 gunners and 10 navigators to pilot Swedish-built CB90-class fast assault boats, 40 combat medics, and 20 clandestine special operations executives.
The Brits noted that “UA currently bans men of fighting age leaving UA,” so “it is likely that we will need the Kiev authorities to relax this rule for our program to assist us [in] recruiting the target number of 1,000 recruits to start training.” In addition, “the recruitment of UA nationals will have to be cleared through [the] UK Home Office,” they explained. The Ukrainians were to be trained at a variety of sites in Britain including remote battle camps dotted across the Scottish wilds, including Otterburn, Garelochhead, Loch Long, and Cape Wrath, Britain’s most north-westerly point. All practice raids were to be “carried out at night”, and once the program was complete, “it will be decided if certain recruits are suitable for commando training due to injuries or other factors.” Alchemy’s training scheme appeared to be confirmed by Ukrainian fighters dispatched to Krynky, who told Ukrainska Pravda that “the British gave us the same kind of area to train in as the one where we actually ended up performing the tasks.” There, they “realised they were being prepared for something big and different from their previous tasks.” In August 2023, British and Ukrainian officials announced almost 1,000 marines had “completed training…to conduct small boat amphibious operations, including beach raids.”
Project Alchemy declared that the effort “could be the tip of the spear to a larger offensive with an aim of retaking Crimea… something deemed impossible by many including [the] Kremlin, that may be their undoing.” Previous reports by The Grayzone on Project Alchemy’s clandestine activities have revealed how much of the cell’s plotting was informed by deluded conceptions of perceived historic British military glories, such as the World War II-era Special Operations Executive, a forebearer of CIA/MI6-run Operation Gladio. Given the belligerent bravado with which Project Alchemy approached its Ministry of Defence-endorsed projects, it is all too easy to envisage its members filling the heads of London’s Ukrainian trainees with fantasies of recreating D-Day through the Krynky operation. British bunglers create Krynky killzoneBeginning in October 2023, poorly-trained and ill-equipped Ukrainian marines began to be ferried en masse to Krynky. Per Ukrainska Pravda, “almost immediately, the operation’s biggest flaw – its planning – began to work against” the invasion force. Two months later, a participating commando described the nightmare situation that awaited Kiev’s forces there to the BBC. They spoke of “constant fire” throughout river crossings, with boats carrying their “comrades” sunk and “lost forever to the Dnipro river”: “We must carry everything with us – generators, fuel and food. When you’re setting up a bridgehead you need a lot of everything, but supplies weren’t planned for this area. We thought after we made it there the enemy would flee and then we could calmly transport everything we needed, but it didn’t turn out that way. When we arrived…the enemy were waiting. Russians…were tipped off about our landing so when we got there, they knew exactly where to find us.” Elsewhere, Ukrainska Pravda documented vital supplies and life jackets being airdropped by hexacopter to heavily wounded Ukrainian marines. Other injured commandos were forced to float back to Ukrainian territory using “car tires” due to a lack of available boats, “drinking water directly from the Dnieper due to a lack of logistics.” Some even resorted to “committing suicide because there was no evacuation.” Among the “seriously injured”, one soldier in his early 40s “sustained an injury to his arm in December 2023,” and “attempted to leave Krynky by boat twice,” with Russian FPV drones blocking his path. He managed to escape “swimming with just one arm,” then spent “then spent six hours walking back and forth on the shore” of a nearby island, “soaking wet…to avoid freezing to death.” While ultimately escaping to safety, “he lost his arm.” Meanwhile, another British-trained marine reported: “Each time our battalion entered [Krynky], the situation got worse and worse. People got there, only to die. We had no idea what was going on. Everyone I knew who was deployed to Krynky are dead.” The onset of winter was “when the situation [in Krynky] started to really deteriorate,” a Ukrainian source stated. The Russians, they said, transferred significant assault forces to the area, used glide bombs “to destroy a large part of the village,” and “figured out how best to target Ukrainian forces’ river routes, especially at the turns, where the boats had to slow down, and landing points.” The resulting artillery onslaught left Krynky “cratered like the moon.” So it was, “some” Ukrainian marines “intentionally got lost” to avoid landing in the Krynky killzone. At least two survivors of the operation consulted by Ukrainska Pravda “received orders to set up positions…closer to the Russians,” but “refused to act…as doing so would have been suicidal.” Come winter, Kiev’s forces began “to gradually withdraw.” By May 2024, the situation “was a disaster,” although the last surviving marines were withdrawn two months later: “Most people we spoke to…are convinced that the operation dragged on for at least several months longer than it should have. ‘We had to withdraw in spring at the latest, during the foggy season. We could have got all of our soldiers out at that point. It would’ve saved people’s lives. But instead we waited until nothing could be done any longer. Until the very last moment,” one marine officer lamented. As major legacy media outlets now dissect Kiev’s military failures in forensic detail, the reporting consistently underlines the British Ministry of Defense’s pivotal role in planning some of the war’s biggest disasters. Each of these setbacks left many thousands of Ukrainians dead or wounded, yet no one in London appears to have faced any professional consequences. To the foreign officers who sent them into the kill zone, those who lost their lives were nothing more than proxies. https://thegrayzone.com/2025/04/23/uk-intel-ukraines-krynky-invasion/
YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.
Gus Leonisky POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.
|
User login |
shadow hostilities....
The UK could stage a provocation against Russia, and has a track record of conducting hostile activities against Moscow, the head of the country’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), Sergey Naryshkin, has claimed.
Speaking to TASS on Saturday, he did not rule out the possibility that the UK could deploy chemical weapons in Ukraine to frame Russia as the perpetrator.
”Britain could resort to provocations on the territory of any state if Britain is interested in it,” the official said, adding that the SVR is well aware of London’s covert hostile activities aimed at Russia.
In a statement on Thursday, the SVR also alleged that British and French intelligence agencies have been secretly working to undermine US President Donald Trump’s peace efforts in the Ukraine conflict and derail normalization between Washington and Moscow.
Commenting on recent Western media reports regarding the scale of Britain’s involvement in the Ukraine conflict, the Russian ambassador to the UK, Andrey Kelin, said last week that he was not at all surprised by the revelations.
”We’ve known and publicly spoken about this for a long time. Previously, though, such statements were presented here as Russian propaganda, and now British journalists are writing about it,” he added.
Kelin also suggested that a lack of public discussion about London’s role in the Ukraine conflict in the wake of the media reports served as a “tacit admission that Britain is engaging in unannounced hostile actions against us.”
Earlier this month, The Times, citing unnamed Ukrainian and British military officers, reported that the extent of the UK’s involvement in the hostilities between Kiev and Moscow has been far more extensive than previously known. The newspaper claimed that “UK troops were secretly sent to fit Ukraine’s aircraft with the [Storm Shadow long-range cruise] missiles and teach [Ukrainian] troops how to use them.”
London also reportedly played a key role in helping Ukraine prepare its much-touted 2023 counteroffensive against Russian forces, as well as in mediating between Kiev and Washington when the operation failed to meet US expectations.
https://www.rt.com/russia/616359-svr-chief-naryshkin-uk-provocation-russia/
READ FROM TOP.
YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.
Gus Leonisky
POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.
likely to continue....
Why the war in Ukraine is likely to continue
by Guy Mettan, freelance journalist*
After causing uproar in a warmongering Europe and raising hopes in the rest of the world, Donald Trump’s peace offer to Russia has stalled. The reason for this is simple: too many actors, starting with the Ukrainians, the Europeans and the American warmongers, have an interest in the war continuing. Even if an agreement were to be reached between Trump and Putin and a temporary ceasefire were to be implemented, the hostilities would not really end. At least not for the time being.
A sober and unbiased look at the current military, political and diplomatic realities leave little room for optimism.
Ukrainian war profiteers do not want peace
On the Ukrainian side, the will for peace is zero. Only the little people and the forcibly recruited soldiers want an end to the war. But their opinion is not sought. Those in favour of dialogue and a negotiated peace have been suppressed or imprisoned. The nationalist circles close to Zelensky and the big bourgeoisie, who drive Porsche Cayenne and Tesla cars in our cities, have no interest in this. They have been living for three years on money from the West, which has been tirelessly supplying military equipment, training troops, coordinating their attacks (see the recent revelations in the New York Times), financing fundraising trips abroad and paying for the difficult end of the month with billions.
So, there is no reason to interrupt this continuous stream of favour. All the more so as, should peace unexpectedly come, elections would have to be organised – with the risk of losing them. Since the regime in Kiev decided to stall negotiations with Russia in April 2022, and as long as Russian progress on the ground and pressure from Donald Trump can be contained in favour of genuine negotiations, Kiev has no objective reason to want peace. On the ground, it can be observed that Ukraine has done everything it can to sabotage the meagre agreements reached by continuing to bombard Russian energy targets.
European power elites also live from warmongering
On the European side, the mood is also one of war. All ruling political parties are vying for warmongering, with the most militaristic in the north and east – Scandinavia, Denmark, the Baltic states and Poland – and the more moderate in the centre and south, with the exception of Great Britain in the west of the continent, which is afflicted by a militaristic fever. Only Hungary and Slovakia are exceptions. But they hardly carry any weight. As far as the people are concerned, they have no more say than in Ukraine, where parties opposed to the war are relegated to the opposition or asked to change their minds when they come to power. See Austria, the Netherlands or Italy.
The differences of opinion on the war are therefore cosmetic – more or less sanctions, more or less arms supplies, more or less billions donated unconditionally. But they do not go to the heart of the matter. And they will remain all the more marginal as the European leaders need the war to stay in power: The conflict – and Donald Trump’s whims – have launched or revitalised the careers of Macron, Merz, Starmer, von der Leyen, Mette Frederiksen, and Donald Tusk. They need the Russian big bad boy and, for the last two months, the big bad Trump too much to consolidate their shaky power and make them forget their unpopularity and their domestic political difficulties.
The unreal world of European rulers
The European ruling class is also living in complete unreality. On the one hand they are offended at being excluded from the negotiations, on the other they refuse to talk to Putin. Where is the logic? They also refuse to see the contentious issues of the conflict, the security concerns that have prompted the Russians to launch their defensive war against NATO’s advance and the nuclearization of Ukraine. And it continues to live under the illusion that the “very brave and heroic” Ukrainians can strike down the Russian bear. As long as it fails to realise that Europe’s security cannot be guaranteed at the expense of Russia’s security and that Europe has more to lose from a devastating defeat of Ukraine than from a presumed Russian victory, there is no way to peace.
Negotiations – on what basis?
After all, Russia immediately grasped the hand extended by the Trump administration, the first of its kind in fifteen years of continuous deterioration in US-Russian relations. But Russia remains very wary because it has lost all faith in the West’s word. The promise not to expand NATO eastwards in 1991 has been broken. Most of the strategic security agreements signed by the US were unilaterally cancelled by the American side: the ABM Treaty from 2002, the Open Skies Treaty, the INF Treaty in 2018. The breach of the latter directly paved the way for Ukraine’s nuclear armament. As a result, Russia suspended the last strategic agreement in force, New START, which is due to expire next year anyway.
Similarly, the Minsk Agreements – although confirmed by the UN in 2015 – were not implemented by Ukraine or by France and Germany, which guaranteed them. They were even used to enable Ukraine to rearm, as François Hollande and Angela Merkel themselves admitted. The way in which the US terminated the JCPOA agreement on the Iranian nuclear programme after its laborious signing in 2015 does not inspire confidence either. How can we believe in Western honesty under these circumstances? Isn’t the general ceasefire desired by Trump and demanded as a prerequisite for peace negotiations just another manoeuvre to trick Russia and allow the NATO armies to recover before going on the offensive again?
From the Russian point of view, the West’s promises are therefore worth nothing. This is why Putin is demanding that he first wants to see concrete deeds and signs of goodwill before getting involved. And that negotiations must first be held to establish the general framework for a comprehensive peace before a general ceasefire is established on the ground. He knows very well that if there is a temporary ceasefire and the planned negotiations fail (which is certain to happen as Ukraine will not compromise under the circumstances), Russia would be blamed for all evils and ostracised by the nations if hostilities resume (even if this resumption comes from the Ukrainians).
Finally, the fact that the Russian armies are slowly but surely advancing is no reason for the Russians to negotiate, even if this is not the decisive element.
The United States is also divided. While Donald Trump and J.D. Vance are in favour of a negotiated solution, many Republicans are not: Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Advisor Michael Waltz and Senator Lindsey Graham are avowed Russophobes who can lean on the Democrats. Donald Trump is also a man in a hurry. But he will not achieve the hoped-for results within the deadlines he has unwisely set himself. It turns out that even a temporary ceasefire on bombing against energy targets and a limited agreement on shipping in the Black Sea have proved very difficult to implement in practice.
What do we want?
Therefore, a resumption of the war, support for Ukraine and economic sanctions to put pressure on Russia cannot be ruled out. Second hypothesis: The USA continues to hold bilateral talks and reaches an agreement limited to Russia, after which it resumes diplomatic and economic relations with Russia, while allowing Ukraine to continue the war with the help of the Europeans. In both cases, the war continues.
Conclusion: since the Russians are not backing down because it is an existential threat to them, and the Ukrainian and European leaders are dependent on the war to stay in power, just like Netanyahu with his war in Palestine, the development of the situation on the ground will be decisive.
In plain language: the war will decide the peace. If the Ukrainians are forced to give up, their supporters will finally be forced to accept reality and end the fighting on Russia’s terms. If, on the contrary, they succeed in resisting, for example by sending European troops on the ground, Russia would deploy its tactical nuclear missiles. In both cases, Europe will lose.
It is up to you to choose the option that seems the least bad to you.
https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2025/nr-9-15-april-2025/warum-der-krieg-in-der-ukraine-wohl-andauern-wird
READ FROM TOP.
YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.
Gus Leonisky
POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.
SEE ALSO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQZ6WOvQAb8
Lt Col Daniel Davis: Russia takes Kursk / Putin will NEVER negotiate w/Zelensky