Mood in Russia TURNING. New War Reality (& Bears) | Stanislav Krapivnik

## Targeting civilians and terror claims The images from Starobelsk — a ruined teachers’ college, a dormitory reduced to rubble, craters gouged deep into the earth — are not just the aftermath of a battlefield engagement. They read like a deliberate campaign to terrify. The conversation makes plain that these were not stray munitions or misfired rockets. Multiple large, fixed-wing drones, each carrying close to a quarter-ton of explosive, were observed overhead for hours before a coordinated strike that flattened an entire urban block and left dozens permanently maimed or dead. That pattern pushes the act into the realm of terrorism: systematic attacks aimed at civilians and civilian infrastructure to coerce, punish, or provoke. What distinguishes these strikes is scale and intent. Unlike small FPV drones used for harassing attacks, the weapons described are airplane-class drones engineered to breach deeper defenses and deliver catastrophic payloads. The carnage in Starobelsk — 21 killed, many more severely maimed — and other strikes on civilian buses, apartment buildings, and private homes are cited in the exchange as part of a widening tactic: weaponizing terror to achieve political or military ends. The deliberate targeting of soft, civilian targets not only inflicts immediate human suffering but has strategic logic: create social panic, break morale, and force a political response. This is not only about the physical reach of munitions; it is about the narrative and moral framing. The speakers advance a stark moral judgment about the perpetrators’ intent, suggesting dehumanization of the target population and a willingness to inflict atrocities. Whether one accepts every historical anecdote offered, the broader point remains: when a conflict’s technology enables remote but massive destructive power, the temptation or strategy to use it against civilians becomes a looming ethical and strategic danger. That danger is intensified when the actors behind the hardware and targeting decisions are not the ostensible local forces alone but include foreign advisers, technologies, and political encouragement. ## Diplomacy, trust, and Trump Diplomacy in this war has been repeatedly tested and repeatedly shown to falter. The conversation reflects a deep skepticism about Western diplomatic sincerity, arguing that public negotiations and private military support have run on parallel but divergent tracks. This duality — offering parleys while simultaneously enabling or encouraging strikes deeper into an adversary’s territory — corrodes trust and makes future bargaining fraught. A central strand of the analysis singles out high-level political messaging as particularly corrosive. Where earlier Western leaders might have been content to provide arms and intelligence discreetly, the claim here is that some political figures have openly egged operational escalation. The argument that encouragement to strike deeper into Russian territory is not merely rhetorical but operationally consequential feeds a perception in Moscow that diplomacy is tactical theater: words intended to conceal actual intentions to escalate. That undercuts any genuine prospect of negotiated de-escalation because it leaves one party convinced that the other is bargaining in bad faith. Trust, once lost, is extraordinarily difficult to regain. The exchange emphasizes that the cumulative record — broken agreements, surreptitious arms transfers, public encouragements of risky strikes — means that when Western representatives return to the table, their credibility may be too eroded to matter. In such a context, diplomacy is no longer a mechanism for reducing uncertainty; it is a stage on which preparations for continued conflict are masked. The net effect is predictable: hardliners gain influence, and the political space for compromise narrows. ## Russia prepares for wider war The conversation paints a picture of a state moving out of reactive posture into deliberate preparation for larger-scale conflict. The logic is both defensive and deterrent: if attacks can now reach civilian centers once considered beyond the battlefield, then the threatened state must reconfigure its force posture, civil defense, and strategic signaling to deter further strikes and to prepare for retaliatory or pre-emptive measures. Several technical and operational trends are highlighted. One is the diffusion of capable long-range strike systems — from HIMARS-type rocket artillery to large attack drones manufactured abroad — which extend the reach of battlefield actors. Another is the involvement of allied or external personnel in targeting and strike execution, which transforms localized engagements into proxy-facilitated campaigns. The response, as described, involves not only bolstering air defenses and shooting down incoming drones but also retooling production, refurbishing missile stocks, and making operational plans for counterstrikes at greater depth. The broader strategic posture shifts too. Where the conflict once concentrated on front-line attrition, the extension of strikes into rear areas and even into pre-2022 national territory forces a reframing: war is no longer confined to a linear frontline but has become a theater of reciprocal vulnerability across depth. That reframing pushes the threatened side toward muscular measures — public threats to hit critical infrastructure in return, open discussions of targeting logistics, and preparations to escalate in a calibrated but visible way to restore deterrence. ## Retaliation and war aims Retaliation is never merely about equivalence; it is about signaling resolve and reshaping an adversary’s calculus. In the discussion, retaliation emerges as both a necessary response to civilian-targeted terror and a lever to define war aims. If terror strikes aim to coerce populations and international opinion, then a clear, proportionate, and credible retaliatory strategy is intended to restore deterrence and increase the political cost of continued aggression. But retaliation carries political and moral dilemmas. The conversation underscores the risk of escalation: each retaliatory step can be framed by the other side as unjustified aggression, feeding cycles of reprisals that magnify civilian suffering. This dynamic compels leaders to make fraught choices about what targets to hit — military logistics, command-and-control, dual-use infrastructure, or symbolic urban centers — and how far to calibrate proportionality in order to achieve strategic objectives without plunging the region into generalized war. Equally important is the question of war aims. If strikes on civilians are designed to provoke overreaction, then the threatened party must ask: does retaliation seek punitive retribution or strategic recalibration? The former satisfies immediate anger and domestic demands for justice, but the latter can change the adversary’s capacity or willingness to fight. The speakers suggest that Russia’s emerging posture is moving from a narrow, limited objective set toward broader aims that include degrading the enemy’s ability to project similar terror and, potentially, to secure buffer zones or political gains that make future attacks less feasible. ## NATO control and war cohesion No modern European conflict unfolds in a vacuum, and the conversation focuses attention on NATO as the central external axis around which cohesion, control, and escalation management revolve. Two intertwined themes stand out: first, the degree to which external alliance politics shape operational behavior on the ground; second, the fragility of alliance cohesion when costs rise. On the first, the claim is blunt: external actors — NATO members and their military advisers — play a hands-on role in extending the strike reach and enabling operations that risk escalation. The implication is that battlefield tactics are not simply the product of local commanders but of broader alliance-level d

Mood in Russia TURNING. New War Reality (& Bears) | Stanislav Krapivnik Stanislav Krapivnik returns to discuss his recent Donbass trip, including the destroyed school in Starobelsk, drone strikes on civilians, and why he sees them as terror tactics. He and Pascal cover Ukraine’s war aims, US and NATO roles, failed diplomacy, Russia’s military build-up, possible strikes on NATO targets, Finland’s nuclear move, and fears of a wider European war. Links: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@mrslavikman X / Twitter: https://x.com/STANISKRAPIVNIK Telegram English: https://t.me/staswasthereenglish2 Telegram Russian: https://t.me/stastydaiobratno Neutrality Studies substack: https://pascallottaz.substack.com Merch: https://neutralitystudies.com /shop Donation: https://neutralitystudies.com/donate Timestamps: 00:00:00 Donbas school strike report 00:08:20 Targeting civilians and terror claims 00:19:01 Diplomacy, trust, and Trump 00:26:23 Russia prepares for wider war 00:35:23 Retaliation and war aims 00:45:51 NATO control and war cohesion #Pascal Welcome back, everybody. Today again with Stanislav Krapivnik, our friend and colleague from Russia, who's updating us on everything that's happening over there. Stas, welcome back. #Stanislav Krapivnik Welcome back. Well, my day—I got back yesterday from the Donbass. It wasn't quite as exciting as going into the woods in Japan with the bear attacks. #Pascal We were just on your program, and we talked about the fact that Japan has an insane number of bear attacks—238 in 2023—and 13 fatalities that year. And Japan wins against Russia, right? You guys only have four fatalities. #Stanislav Krapivnik And that's up. That was, you know, two years ago it was one. Yes, last year it was three. Or the year before last was three. Two years ago was one. Last year was four. And I have to divulge a secret to you. It's the bear cavalry—the untrained bears, you know. #Pascal -- 1 of 20 -- Yeah. And ladies and gentlemen, you can see we're so desperate with the situation in Europe that we'd rather talk about bears and woods than about what actually matters. But that's what we're going to switch to right now because, again, I would like to talk to you about what you've learned from the Donbass. You were there. You uploaded videos on your channel, Mr. Slavic Man, Stas Krapivnik, on YouTube. Everybody, look it up. You put videos there, among others, of the school that got bombed where 21 kids in Lugansk died, right? Can you tell us a little bit about your impression at the moment of the Donbass? #Stanislav Krapivnik I mean, this was in Starobelsk. Starobelsk is a town. It's not a city. It's a town of maybe like 40,000, 50,000 people, which I guess in medieval times would have been a major city. But these days, that's just a town. And this was a college for future teachers. And just, I mean, it's a small college, right? So you've got the administrative/classroom building, which is an old czarist-era building. And there's a—I'll come back to that, by the way, emphasizing that point. And next door is the dormitory. I think it was just a girls' dormitory. There are some other buildings in that area, too. But first of all, what you saw was just those two buildings. The reality is they took out—first of all, these buildings are in an area of the town. They're surrounded by residential buildings. They took out an entire block with these drones. Across the street, perpendicular to these two buildings, is a five-story building, which was the arts center for the local schools. The building's destroyed. I mean, it took a direct hit. Had nothing to do with the college. There was nobody there, thankfully, at night in that building. Beside it is a private house that took a direct hit. Across from the dormitory is another house that took a direct hit. So they were just taking everything out around it too. There are two craters from these drones. One of those craters, where they got the engine parts out of—pulled it out of the ground and the remains of the drone—it's over two meters deep and about four meters wide. They're packing about 250 kilos of explosives on these drones. And these are big drones. These aren't the little anti-personnel drones that you see—the quadrotor drones, FPV drones. These are airplane drones. Some of these drones give up version length. These are big drones. They get to be the size of a small—some of them will actually, not in this case, but some of the ones that they get tossed toward Russia—no, toward Moscow and other deeper areas of Russia, they get up to the size of small Cessna planes. Just to understand the size of these. Yeah, the explosive wave was so strong, and the direct hits on the Imperial building—that was the administrative/classroom building. In part of the video, you see where I'm standing and looking at the wall. The wall thickness is about two-thirds of a meter of bricks. These are not what you call modern bricks. Modern bricks are crap, mass-produced crap from primarily clay. The old bricks would last for just about ever because in every brick, the standard was you add in an egg yolk into the mix. Egg yolks act like superglue on the bricks. You'll have bricks that are 500 years under sun and water, and they look almost brand new. I mean, it takes a lot of chickens, obviously, for anything that size for mass production. But -- 2 of 20 -- yeah, it makes super bricks. They're more expensive. You just need the yolk, right? So you use the egg white and mix it. Right, right. #Pascal Anyhow, let's continue. Sorry. #Stanislav Krapivnik You have mountains of rain if you're making a whole building. I mean, they used to build castle walls that way, right? So this building is, I mean, the walls are cracked. The floors, the concrete flooring between levels, are sunk in from the hit. But the interesting thing is, just as something I put up too, we saw this video of supposedly Moscow hitting the Lavra, the upper Lavra, which is a cathedral. And what people pointed out, I pointed out also, if you look at it—now, if there was a missile strike on the Lavra, Russia would never strike it. It's been desecrated every which way they can. They've made discotheques out of it that show. They probably had orgies. I don't know. I mean, they've done everything under the sun to desecrate the Lavra since they took it from the church. But the interesting thing is, it's a settlement on fire, blowing up. There are pictures that came out during the day. Somebody in the back was taking pictures as the filming crew was setting their equipment up. And in the middle of the night, the guy was sitting there videotaping the fire on the Lavra. So obviously, it was a setup job. They knew it was going to hit. But the windows—if you look at the windows—not only is the glass in the panes, not only the panes in the windows, but the glass is in the panes on the Lavra. So there's no explosion. And what I was pointing out, if you look at the panes in these walls that are two-thirds of a meter thick, the panes are ripped out. And that was from the explosion that was outside, and that explosion was a good 10 meters away, where it missed the building and hit the ground and just dug a big hole into the ground with explosive force. And the panes are ripped out of the windows, still hanging there at angles. You know, the glass has obviously gone out of it too. That's the explosive wave. I mean, they were carrying massive explosives. So, 21 killed—18 girls, 3 boys—40 injured. But, you know, a lot of those injured are invalids for life. Yeah. This isn't the, "Hey, do you need some stitches, or can we cover up that bruise?" No, these people, their lives have been destroyed. And they're lucky that it's only 21 killed. If you look at that building, I mean, the building's demolished. #Pascal Part of the building had to quite literally fall in on itself. As murder. Hey, just a very quick note: the best way to support this channel is by signing up for my free Substack. You can also help with a paid subscription there, or you can get some of our new merch on neutralitystudies.com. Links below. See you there. What is the analysis of why this target was chosen, or whether it was a mistake or something? Because there's obviously no military reason behind that. And on the other hand—and -- 3 of 20 -- we have to talk about this—there might be now this strategy of the West to actually provoke Russia into something much more that Russia tried to avoid for the longest time, right? And what is it, according to what the current wisdom says in Russia? #Stanislav Krapivnik Oh, this was strict terrorism. Ukraine is losing on the battlefield up and down the entire line, a thousand kilometers at the front. I mean, I just don't understand how the West is reacting or how much truth it's telling you. You know, about three weeks ago, the Ukrainians started waxing romantically about how they may have to leave and abandon Miragrad or Dimitrov. Yeah, seven months ago, they were surrounded and wiped out in Miragrad. They're just now talking about, "We may have to leave it." I mean, this is the reality, the, quote, bare reality they live in. This is strict terrorism. Look, even if you ignore the fact that there were recon drones flying overhead for half a day before the strike, during the daylight hours—16 drones flying—this is not an accidental missile that went in the wrong direction. This is 16 drones that hit that set of buildings. So, five buildings, 16 drones. #Pascal But why that targeting? Because even from a Ukrainian perspective, it's like... you're basically hitting a school building filled with people who you claim are your own, right? You're claiming those are Ukrainians. That's the claim in Lugansk, right? I mean, if you want to do this terrorism, why is it there? Why is it not in, you know, pre-2022 Russia? Oh, it's there too. #Stanislav Krapivnik Well, I'll tell you what, you know, this is what they're claiming. But if you listen to the various videos floating around of various Ukrainian politicians speaking before 2022, I'll tell you, these are roaches we have to stamp. These are rats we have to destroy. They want the land. They just don't want the people there. They want the resources. They don't want the people that these resources belong to. They consider us—consider they themselves are mostly Russians by ethnicity—mentally degenerate. That's obvious enough because no mentally non-degenerate person would ever do this. Look, you can look up lots of videos from the late 2010s leading up to the special military operation. They were having parties, cutting cakes that looked like Russian babies with little Russian flags. "It's a baby, look, we're eating little babies." The Satanism was incredible. That just perfectly permeated society. Whether they were actually sitting at an altar of Satan or just believing in an atheistic Satanism where they support the exact same thing—some believe in an entity called Satan—it's still Satanism. The attacks on everything that would be normal in a society. I mean, if somebody brings out a cake shaped like a baby, and people are thrilled because it's got a little Russian flag on it—I mean, there were videos of them putting out cakes in the shape of a -- 4 of 20 -- Russian soldier's leg with a piece of uniform on top of it that came off a dead Russian soldier. They upload these videos. Azov was committing human sacrifices, burning people on crosses, burying people up to their heads and chopping their heads off. And they're videotaping this. They are the ones that put these videos up on their channels as recruitment videos. I mean, the insanity is very, very heavy in that area. So they flat out said, you know, these aren't real people. We don't need these. It's hatred and racism on that level. #Pascal I have no problem believing that there are people who act like that. But when we talk about this military level—because 16 drones and whatnot—I mean, this is a very