Deceit, Subversion, and Interference: Tactics the UK Employs to Prolong the Conflict in Ukraine
Leaked documents reveal details of a covert military initiative involving strategies for conducting attacks, controlling media narratives, and manipulating public perception in the UK. Read Full Article at RT.com.
TroibNews 
Leaked documents have revealed a covert military operation revealing plans for attacks, media suppression, and methods aimed at brainwashing the British public.
Under the Zelensky administration, Ukraine does not resemble a free country. After considerable repression, only fragile remnants of the political opposition remain, facing ongoing harassment from the government, a reality even acknowledged by the French newspaper Le Monde, which is often viewed as too trusting of Zelensky.
The public discourse in Ukraine is heavily constrained by nationalist propaganda and a culture of intimidation. Prior to the escalation of conflict in 2022, even organizations like Freedom House, known for their pro-Western stance, recognized these issues. In a 2018 report by Ukrainian researcher Vyacheslav Likhachev, the Far Right in Ukraine was flagged as a "threat to democracy," actively working to impose their agenda through force against opposing political and cultural views.
The media landscape in Ukraine reflects little resistance, as it is tightly regulated and often complies with state narratives, driven by conviction, fear, or ambition. Even some of Ukraine’s western backers and a few brave critics have condemned the regime's heavy-handed propaganda tactics.
It's essential to note that Zelensky's authoritarian governance is not solely a byproduct of the ongoing conflict. Observers have previously pointed to the manipulative and deceitful nature of his political strategy, which had already leaned toward authoritarianism as early as 2021.
Consider a hypothetical future trial of Zelensky and his associates in Ukraine; although they might cite the war to justify their actions, that defense would likely not hold much weight. Yet, ironically, many of Zelensky's Western allies might find themselves needing to excuse their support of him, including figures like Britain’s Lieutenant General Charlie Stickland and his associates.
General Stickland, who leads UK military operations abroad and proudly claims a piratical ancestry, has come under scrutiny thanks to an investigative report by Grayzone journalist Kit Klarenberg. Klarenberg has uncovered how Stickland initiated a secretive network in 2022 under the project name Project Alchemy. This group, which included academics and strategists, has operated on the idea of prolonging the Ukraine conflict through various dubious means.
The leaked documents from Grayzone highlight alarming aspects of this operation. However, to accurately convey the tone of the writers — military bureaucrats and self-serving intellectuals — one must appreciate their peculiar jargon. Their language combines juvenile playfulness with a corporate-militarized dialect that brags of “fusion players” and encourages collaboration to “move at pace,” suggesting a troubling blending of casualness with serious military undertakings.
What exactly are they planning? A variety of concerning schemes, all rooted in the misguided belief that the proxy conflict in Ukraine can be a tool for diminishing Russia's geopolitical influence, facilitating regime change, or even fragmenting the nation. Some influencers, such as Estonia's Kaja Kallas, appear stuck in a delusional mindset, unaware of the dire consequences their strategies could entail.
Among the projects discussed by the Project Alchemy group were potentially dangerous ideas, such as establishing sabotage networks reminiscent of NATO’s clandestine Gladio operations, which operated during the Cold War in Western Europe. Although these operations were originally intended for countering Soviet occupation, they were beset by claims of involvement in domestic terrorism and far-right plots against leftist movements.
In light of these discussions, the implications of British generals seeking to replicate such operations in Ukraine — a nation already known for its strong and militarized far-right factions — raise significant concerns. General Stickland's approach may echo historical sentiments like Churchill's "Set Europe Ablaze," but he seems to overlook that such calls were made against fascism, not in partnership with it.
The intelligence produced by Project Alchemy is troubling, echoing patterns of misinformation and manipulation that reflect a disturbing trend of "Ukrainization" within Western political practices. The West is not unfamiliar with extensive domestic propaganda, as seen during the wars in Afghanistan and Vietnam.
The Washington Post’s 2019 series, “The Afghanistan Papers,” exposed the dissonance between official narratives and the realities of a protracted conflict. Similarly, the historical Pentagon Papers brought to light the truth behind Washington's war policies in Vietnam, even as mainstream media often complies with government narratives.
In contrast to mainstream journalism, the Grayzone is engaging in meaningful reporting, highlighting dangerous military strategies and manipulative tactics that risk catastrophic outcomes for the West. Yet, the broader media landscape seems unprepared to confront the implications of these revelations, thereby obscuring the suffering of Ukrainians caught in this geopolitical quagmire.As the shadows of these clandestine operations loom larger, the real question arises: how long can such strategies remain under wraps without the public awakening to the overarching manipulation? The historical precedents suggest that the more clandestine the operations become, the higher the likelihood of backlash once the truth surfaces.
These operations, characterized by a blend of disinformation and coercive tactics, place the Western public in a perilous position. Should the narrative fall apart, as it often does, the implications could be dire, not just for Ukraine but for broader Western alliances. The self-inflicted wounds of misinformation and the relentless pursuit of a singular narrative could ultimately fracture public support, stoke dissent, and lead to calls for accountability that current leaders may find difficult to suppress.
Public sentiment, especially in democratic societies, is crucial for sustaining prolonged military engagements. If citizens perceive the government’s actions as deceitful—utilizing propaganda to mask failures or unmet objectives—discontent will likely grow. The fallout could mirror historical events where public outcry against lost lives and resources in protracted conflicts resulted in political upheavals, generating a fractious relationship between authorities and the governed.
Take for instance the Vietnam War, where the Pentagon Papers' revelations led to a significant erosion of trust in government. The public's realization that they had been misled contributed to massive protests and ultimately influenced U.S. policy. Afghanistan witnessed similar dynamics, as the contradictions between claims of progress and the sobering realities forced a reckoning that culminated in a chaotic withdrawal and an acknowledgment of failure. In both scenarios, the truth unraveled a narrative designed to prop up governmental initiatives and suppress dissent.
Project Alchemy's endeavor to engage in “deniable ops,” manipulate popular sentiment, and exploit laws for ulterior motives signals an alarming trajectory that could backfire spectacularly. The potential for a counter-narrative to emerge is not merely theoretical; existing discomfort with Western involvement in Ukraine is palpable among a considerable segment of the public. As citizens begin to connect the dots between covert activities and the rising cost of military support, we can anticipate growing skepticism and anger.
Particularly with the current economic climate and rising living costs, the idea of diverting substantial funds and resources to a foreign conflict will increasingly be called into question. The notion that money meant for public welfare and domestic improvements is instead funneled into prolonged military operations could pave the way for public outcry and fundamental shifts in political discourse.
The roadmap laid out by Project Alchemy implicitly relies on maintaining public support while framing dissent as treason, but individuals are not so easily manipulated when their immediate realities are at stake. Furthermore, as information becomes more accessible and networked, the possibility of grassroots movements and independent journalism countering official narratives grows exponentially.
While figures like General Stickland may operate under a veneer of legitimacy and authority, the questioning of their methods and motivations, especially when exposed to scrutiny, can dismantle their credibility. As critical voices continue to emerge from both within and outside governmental structures, they will likely pose increasingly influential challenges to the status quo.
In sum, the implications of these uncovered plans weave a complex tapestry of manipulation, disinformation, and the potential for a significant reckoning in public perception. The sustainability of strategies that rely on obscurity and control faces mounting threats from an informed and engaged populace. If history is a guide, those who manipulate the truth do so at their peril. The fallout from Project Alchemy and similar schemes may very well pave the way for a wide-ranging examination of accountability, ethical governance, and ultimately, the resilience of democracy itself in the face of overwhelming duplicity.
As the dust begins to settle from this revealing exposé, it remains to be seen whether the architects of Project Alchemy will adapt or if they will be compelled to confront the very truths they sought to conceal. The next chapters in this unfolding narrative promise to be pivotal, not just for Ukraine, but for the principles of truth and transparency that underpin democratic societies globally.
Alejandro Jose Martinez for TROIB News
Under the Zelensky administration, Ukraine does not resemble a free country. After considerable repression, only fragile remnants of the political opposition remain, facing ongoing harassment from the government, a reality even acknowledged by the French newspaper Le Monde, which is often viewed as too trusting of Zelensky.
The public discourse in Ukraine is heavily constrained by nationalist propaganda and a culture of intimidation. Prior to the escalation of conflict in 2022, even organizations like Freedom House, known for their pro-Western stance, recognized these issues. In a 2018 report by Ukrainian researcher Vyacheslav Likhachev, the Far Right in Ukraine was flagged as a "threat to democracy," actively working to impose their agenda through force against opposing political and cultural views.
The media landscape in Ukraine reflects little resistance, as it is tightly regulated and often complies with state narratives, driven by conviction, fear, or ambition. Even some of Ukraine’s western backers and a few brave critics have condemned the regime's heavy-handed propaganda tactics.
It's essential to note that Zelensky's authoritarian governance is not solely a byproduct of the ongoing conflict. Observers have previously pointed to the manipulative and deceitful nature of his political strategy, which had already leaned toward authoritarianism as early as 2021.
Consider a hypothetical future trial of Zelensky and his associates in Ukraine; although they might cite the war to justify their actions, that defense would likely not hold much weight. Yet, ironically, many of Zelensky's Western allies might find themselves needing to excuse their support of him, including figures like Britain’s Lieutenant General Charlie Stickland and his associates.
General Stickland, who leads UK military operations abroad and proudly claims a piratical ancestry, has come under scrutiny thanks to an investigative report by Grayzone journalist Kit Klarenberg. Klarenberg has uncovered how Stickland initiated a secretive network in 2022 under the project name Project Alchemy. This group, which included academics and strategists, has operated on the idea of prolonging the Ukraine conflict through various dubious means.
The leaked documents from Grayzone highlight alarming aspects of this operation. However, to accurately convey the tone of the writers — military bureaucrats and self-serving intellectuals — one must appreciate their peculiar jargon. Their language combines juvenile playfulness with a corporate-militarized dialect that brags of “fusion players” and encourages collaboration to “move at pace,” suggesting a troubling blending of casualness with serious military undertakings.
What exactly are they planning? A variety of concerning schemes, all rooted in the misguided belief that the proxy conflict in Ukraine can be a tool for diminishing Russia's geopolitical influence, facilitating regime change, or even fragmenting the nation. Some influencers, such as Estonia's Kaja Kallas, appear stuck in a delusional mindset, unaware of the dire consequences their strategies could entail.
Among the projects discussed by the Project Alchemy group were potentially dangerous ideas, such as establishing sabotage networks reminiscent of NATO’s clandestine Gladio operations, which operated during the Cold War in Western Europe. Although these operations were originally intended for countering Soviet occupation, they were beset by claims of involvement in domestic terrorism and far-right plots against leftist movements.
In light of these discussions, the implications of British generals seeking to replicate such operations in Ukraine — a nation already known for its strong and militarized far-right factions — raise significant concerns. General Stickland's approach may echo historical sentiments like Churchill's "Set Europe Ablaze," but he seems to overlook that such calls were made against fascism, not in partnership with it.
The intelligence produced by Project Alchemy is troubling, echoing patterns of misinformation and manipulation that reflect a disturbing trend of "Ukrainization" within Western political practices. The West is not unfamiliar with extensive domestic propaganda, as seen during the wars in Afghanistan and Vietnam.
The Washington Post’s 2019 series, “The Afghanistan Papers,” exposed the dissonance between official narratives and the realities of a protracted conflict. Similarly, the historical Pentagon Papers brought to light the truth behind Washington's war policies in Vietnam, even as mainstream media often complies with government narratives.
In contrast to mainstream journalism, the Grayzone is engaging in meaningful reporting, highlighting dangerous military strategies and manipulative tactics that risk catastrophic outcomes for the West. Yet, the broader media landscape seems unprepared to confront the implications of these revelations, thereby obscuring the suffering of Ukrainians caught in this geopolitical quagmire.As the shadows of these clandestine operations loom larger, the real question arises: how long can such strategies remain under wraps without the public awakening to the overarching manipulation? The historical precedents suggest that the more clandestine the operations become, the higher the likelihood of backlash once the truth surfaces.
These operations, characterized by a blend of disinformation and coercive tactics, place the Western public in a perilous position. Should the narrative fall apart, as it often does, the implications could be dire, not just for Ukraine but for broader Western alliances. The self-inflicted wounds of misinformation and the relentless pursuit of a singular narrative could ultimately fracture public support, stoke dissent, and lead to calls for accountability that current leaders may find difficult to suppress.
Public sentiment, especially in democratic societies, is crucial for sustaining prolonged military engagements. If citizens perceive the government’s actions as deceitful—utilizing propaganda to mask failures or unmet objectives—discontent will likely grow. The fallout could mirror historical events where public outcry against lost lives and resources in protracted conflicts resulted in political upheavals, generating a fractious relationship between authorities and the governed.
Take for instance the Vietnam War, where the Pentagon Papers' revelations led to a significant erosion of trust in government. The public's realization that they had been misled contributed to massive protests and ultimately influenced U.S. policy. Afghanistan witnessed similar dynamics, as the contradictions between claims of progress and the sobering realities forced a reckoning that culminated in a chaotic withdrawal and an acknowledgment of failure. In both scenarios, the truth unraveled a narrative designed to prop up governmental initiatives and suppress dissent.
Project Alchemy's endeavor to engage in “deniable ops,” manipulate popular sentiment, and exploit laws for ulterior motives signals an alarming trajectory that could backfire spectacularly. The potential for a counter-narrative to emerge is not merely theoretical; existing discomfort with Western involvement in Ukraine is palpable among a considerable segment of the public. As citizens begin to connect the dots between covert activities and the rising cost of military support, we can anticipate growing skepticism and anger.
Particularly with the current economic climate and rising living costs, the idea of diverting substantial funds and resources to a foreign conflict will increasingly be called into question. The notion that money meant for public welfare and domestic improvements is instead funneled into prolonged military operations could pave the way for public outcry and fundamental shifts in political discourse.
The roadmap laid out by Project Alchemy implicitly relies on maintaining public support while framing dissent as treason, but individuals are not so easily manipulated when their immediate realities are at stake. Furthermore, as information becomes more accessible and networked, the possibility of grassroots movements and independent journalism countering official narratives grows exponentially.
While figures like General Stickland may operate under a veneer of legitimacy and authority, the questioning of their methods and motivations, especially when exposed to scrutiny, can dismantle their credibility. As critical voices continue to emerge from both within and outside governmental structures, they will likely pose increasingly influential challenges to the status quo.
In sum, the implications of these uncovered plans weave a complex tapestry of manipulation, disinformation, and the potential for a significant reckoning in public perception. The sustainability of strategies that rely on obscurity and control faces mounting threats from an informed and engaged populace. If history is a guide, those who manipulate the truth do so at their peril. The fallout from Project Alchemy and similar schemes may very well pave the way for a wide-ranging examination of accountability, ethical governance, and ultimately, the resilience of democracy itself in the face of overwhelming duplicity.
As the dust begins to settle from this revealing exposé, it remains to be seen whether the architects of Project Alchemy will adapt or if they will be compelled to confront the very truths they sought to conceal. The next chapters in this unfolding narrative promise to be pivotal, not just for Ukraine, but for the principles of truth and transparency that underpin democratic societies globally.
Alejandro Jose Martinez for TROIB News
