Biden and Zelensky are irritated and annoyed with each other these days. Zelensky is accusing Biden of needlessly panicking and of spreading panic (possibly to bluff him into Minsk compliance). Biden’s handlers meanwhile feel that Zelensky is sticking his head into the sand and refusing to see reality staring him in the face.

So whether you think the Russian redeployment westward is a feint or disguised preparation for the real thing it has worked incredibly well. If it’s a feint it’s one that Biden has bought hook, line and sinker and that has left him deluded. If it’s a masked buildup for a live offensive then the masking has worked splendidly on Zelensky, leaving him paralyzed and in denial.

The fact that the White House alarm over the prospect of a Russian military move is causing a rift with Zelensky tells me that the US fear is genuine. The Americans have no reason to irritate Zelensky to this counterproductive extent in a propaganda op. They could be wrong, but they do seem sincere (if a little overenthusiastic).

So far the Russian buildup has had the positive effects for Moscow of:

— causing a rift between the Biden and Zelensky administrations

— of forcing the US and UK to admit that Russia would enjoy a free hand in Ukraine militarily

— of highlighting differences within NATO

This has come at the price of:

— some 30 maneuver battalions with support elements not being able to train because their equipment has been shipped to the self-deployment range of the Ukrainian border

— a stock market decline (but that will likely be reversed if no offensive materializes)

— a blow to the ruble (will likely be reversed)

If this is a feint then making the West and Kiev fear invasion could serve to make them appreciate just how lucky they are that Russia for the moment still doesn’t want greater bloodshed. The shock of it could theoretically cause them to do some soul-searching but in reality within months the likely narrative that would win out was that “Putin was deterred” by sanctions threat, Javelins, “insurgency fears”, and so on.

The Americans are, in a typical fashion, exaggerating how far into the preparations the Russians are which is hurting their overall case. (Possibly those talking to the media are embellishing what the CIA has actually told them.) Unlike what they claim an invasion is not “imminent”. At the current pace, the Russians would still need a few more weeks of shifting material. Even then an offensive doesn’t become imminent until troops are sent to fall on the prepositioned equipment and start making the 200-kilometer trek from the depots to the border.

At the same time, if the Russians really are considering expanding the war and launching an overwhelming counterstroke then Zelensky has very good psychological reasons to be in denial. If the Russians are coming then he is the person who provoked the destruction of Ukraine. He won an overwhelming election victory on a peace-leaning platform then almost immediately raced off to the right. If only he had kept his election promise of giving a peaceful resolution an honest shake we wouldn’t be in this situation now. It is a helluva thing for anyone to admit he has blundered, especially when the repercussions are this great.

A bigger man than Zelensky would struggle to admit that because of his own cleverness a hammer may be falling down on him and everyone around him any time now. Something similar happened to Stalin who couldn’t face the reality that the unexpected (and fluke) fall of France had made the 1939 pact with Hitler a blunder of mythical proportions and opted to deny the reality of what was now surely coming — a showdown years before he expected it and at least a year earlier than he could prepare for — opting to make himself blind to it rather than admit and adjust.

Also between Langley and Kiev it has to be said the latter has the poorer record of correctly predicting imminent Russian offensives in Ukraine. This is the first time the CIA has sounded such alarm, so if they are wrong it will be the first time, whereas Kiev has done it repeatedly over the years.

Last October Medvedev wrote an article on Ukraine saying Kiev was led by mercenary opportunists all too happy to sell Ukraine’s sovereignty and interest to foreigners whose interest in Ukraine starts and ends with having an Anti-Russia on Russia’s border. Medvedev’s prescription on what to do about this is to wait:

“Then the eternal and main question arises: what to do in this situation? Nothing. Wait for the emergence of a sane leadership in Ukraine, which is aimed not at a total confrontation with Russia on the brink of war … but at building equal and mutually beneficial relations with Russia. … Russia knows how to wait. We are a patient people.”

However, if Ukraine very clearly isn’t a democracy, if politicians get elected on one platform and pursue another, if the opposition is being hounded by treason charges, house arrests, US sanctions, and the closures of their media, if the Russia-friendlies are working under such constraints and in such an unfair competition then what exactly is there to wait for? Waiting seems more like a code word for resigning oneself to the occupation of Ukraine by Anti-Russia. Is everyone in Kremlin as “patient” as Medvedev?