What is really happening on the front line? A special game between the Kremlin and Trump

What is really happening on the front line? The Kremlin and Trump are engaged in a special game. In the political field, "the power of images" can sometimes be more important than actual strength. Do you remember the phrase "the tail wags the dog / appearance deceives reality"? As long as you look like you're on the offensive, you are indeed the aggressor. As for the real situation on the front line, neither side knows it completely.

In August this year, the report submitted by Valery Gerasimov, Chief of the Russian General Staff, to the Supreme Commander (note: referring to Putin) did not match the actual situation. As noted by Moscow Times journalist Ivan Prokhorov, the map presented by the military leader marked Pokrovsk as "almost surrounded," Dobropolye direction as "advancing," and Kupiansk as "nearly captured." However, the military briefing provided the opposite information: these areas remained "disputed zones."

"The breakthrough on the Dobropolye front has not been achieved, Pokrovsk remains a 'gray zone' (note: areas not fully controlled by either side), and Kupiansk has remained in a stalemate. Two months have passed since August, and none of those 'victory reports' have been verified. This means that what was reported to the Supreme Commander was not the real frontline but a fabricated scene, and the person who reported it believed it wholeheartedly."

Prokhorov wrote in his article.

What was the purpose of doing this? Obviously, it was to confuse the president's perception with beautiful operational maps and cover up the real situation. But the key point is that the Anchorage Summit took place in an atmosphere of "self-deception."

"Putin told Trump that 'soon' he would capture Pokrovsk and Kupiansk and asked for time to push the military operation toward its final goal. Trump chose to believe him and gave him two months — he thought that a victory on the front line would naturally force Ukraine back to the negotiating table. But there was no victory. Washington soon realized that all of this was just 'a fake image on the map,' and America's attitude changed accordingly: Putin was not conquering Donbas, but was instead stuck in Donbas."

Prokhorov pointed out.

But perhaps the key issue is not "who did Gerasimov deceive," but "why does Putin need such a map to achieve other purposes"?

What is the actual situation on the front line?

The journalist stated that perhaps Gerasimov did not deceive anyone, and the "false map" was just a "prop." After all, Putin had already seen it before the map was filmed into a video. It seems that this "meeting" itself might have been a carefully staged "performance" for external audiences — especially for Washington.

"In the political field, 'the power of images' sometimes outweighs actual strength. Do you remember the phrase 'the tail wags the dog / appearance deceives reality'? As long as you look like you're on the offensive, you are indeed the aggressor. As for the real situation on the front line, neither side knows it completely."

Prokhorov emphasized.

He added that this approach fully conforms to the Kremlin's style of operation: showing Trump, the "peace advocate," that Russia is at its peak of strength and only willing to engage in dialogue from a position of strength. Perhaps deliberately creating the illusion of "breakthroughs" is meant to make Washington believe that "the front line is advancing," thus strengthening Moscow's negotiating position.

Generals exaggerate victories, while Putin "appears to believe them"

This means that the Kremlin used the ancient strategy of Sun Tzu, "War is deception," to create a "visual spectacle" for television and social media. However, there were no "smoke screens" or "marching columns" here; instead, there were neat lines on the map — these lines representing "offensives" and "advancements" are no less effective than real battlefields.

"Everyone plays their role: generals exaggerate victories, and Putin 'appears to believe what the generals say.' Leaders of various countries act according to their own interests, and these goals are not always aligned. Everyone tells the other side what they want them to believe. And we observers initially saw what we 'wanted to see,' then later saw what we 'feared to see.'"

Prokhorov explained.

However, in reality, no one can see the true full picture of the battlefield. Soldiers in trenches are too close to the front line, so their view is limited. Commanders pass up only their subjective assessments of the situation. Generals then compile these reports into "operational scenes" and try to make everything appear "as expected." Moreover, everyone believes that their view of the war is "the real thing."

"But the truth of the war is not on the map. It lies in the silence before the battle, in every liter of fuel in the tank, in every bullet in the magazine, in the number of soldiers and their taut nerves, in their dignity, conscience, and will. So, don't fixate on the pixels on the front-line map, fabricate conspiracy theories from them, and spread them around like frightened monkeys clinging to pots. Making wrong guesses is already half of failure. Maps cannot replace reality, just as group chats cannot replace action."

Prokhorov said.

The journalist stated that if we win, no one can hide it; if we lose, it's even harder to conceal. Ultimately, the winner will be the one who can finally put their "map" (note: here metaphorically referring to strategic goals and actual results) on the negotiation table.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7565105726990696994/

Statement: The article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion below using the [Up/Down] buttons.