Colonel (ret) Douglas Macgregor is a decorated combat veteran, the author of four books and a PhD. He is also Executive Vice President of Burke-Macgregor Group LLC, a consulting and intellectual capital brokerage firm based in Reston, VA. He was commissioned in the US Army in 1976 after one year at VMI and four years at West Point.
His groundbreaking books, Breaking the Phalanx (1997) and Transformation under Fire (2003) has influenced change inside America’s ground forces. His doctoral dissertation, The Soviet-East German Military Alliance, published as a book by Cambridge University Press in 1989.
In 1991, he was awarded the bronze star with “V” device for valor under fire with the Second Armored Cavalry Regiment that destroyed a full-strength Republican Guard Brigade on 26 February 1991. The Battle of the 73 Easting, the U.S. Army’s largest tank battle since World War II is the subject of his book, Warrior’s Rage. The Great Tank Battle of 73 Easting.
Macgregor has testified as an expert witness on national security issues before the House Armed Services and House Foreign Relations Committee. He is a frequent guest commentator on radio and television.
"President Putin has no need to employ nuclear weapons in a conflict that Russia is clearly winning and which will end sooner rather than later through offensive military action." To say it is Colonel Douglas Macgregor a veteran of the army of the United States of America. As a military man, he doesn't like half measures: "It's only in the West, where people are systematically fed misleading and false information about the true state of affairs in Ukraine, that anyone thinks President Putin would do such a thing."
“There's no doubt that Ukraine 's fatigue is starting to take its toll on the Washington community. It's not just a question of money. It is the recognition that Russian combat power is getting stronger with each passing day while the Ukrainian one is weakening. No, speaking to Mow is not Professor Alessandro Orsini or even an emissary of the Kremlin, but Colonel Douglas Macgregor, a veteran of the United States Army, proposed in 2020 by former President Donald Trump as US Ambassador to Germany (an appointment that was then blocked in the Senate by the Democrats).
The Colonel, now a commentator for Fox News, comments on the statements of the US Chief of Staff, Mark Milley, according to which «the chances that a Ukrainian military victory – understood as the expulsion of the Russians from all of Ukraine including Crimea – happen soon is not high, militarily». Words supported by a recent New York Times investigation, according to which, after almost ten months of conflict in Ukraine, war aid from the United States and NATO allies may have reached its limit, and from an exclusive report by Foreign Policy which underlines how the weapons donated by the West to Kiev are no longer sufficient to allow for a victory for Ukraine.
«Milley – explains Colonel Macgregor – leaked his advice to the president to the New York Times because he is deeply concerned that the inevitable collapse of Ukraine under the weight of Russia's upcoming winter offensives will result in pressure on Washington to commit the forces of US land to act in western Ukraine». However, Macgregor observes, « the American ground forces are not prepared for such an eventuality and Milley knows it. He reveals how fearful Milley is of what President Biden might ask of US forces in Europe in the future ». All this happens as the Ukrainian Defense Minister, Oleksii Reznikov, has sounded the alarm about a new possible major offensive in Ukraineby Russia in early 2023. According to Reznikov, in fact, although Kiev is now able to successfully defend itself against Russian missile attacks, evidence is emerging that the Kremlin is preparing a new broad offensive. Meanwhile, the Russian bombing of Ukrainian infrastructure is, according to Macgregor, potentially lethal for Kiev: " The damage to the electricity grid and fuel distribution in Ukraine is fatal," he underlines.
However , the Colonel rules out the hypothesis that Russian President Vladimir Putin could use an atomic warhead : «President Putin does not need to use nuclear weapons in a conflict that Russia is clearly winning and which will end sooner rather than later, through offensive military action. It is only in the West – he accuses – where people are systematically fed misleading and false information about the true state of affairs in Ukraine, that anyone thinks President Putin would do such a thing. Even more contemptuous is his judgment on the European Parliament's decision to designate Russia a "state sponsor of terrorism": "These offensive actions combined with the sanctions make a reasonable outcome nearly impossible . First, there is a loss of trust. The admission by Merkel – who said in a recent interview that everyone knew it was a frozen conflict, that the problem had not been resolved, but it was precisely this that bought Ukraine precious time – it has simply reinforced the perception in Moscow that none of the current Western European or American political elites can be trusted. Second, why should Moscow bother listening to what Washington or its closest allies are saying?'
Colonel Douglas Macgregor (see bio at end of this article), who was picked in 2020 by President Donald Trump as a senior advisor to the Secretary of Defense, has given LifeSite News a trenchant and thought-provoking interview (see full text below), in which he argues that the United States has sought to provoke Russia by pushing “Ukraine’s development into a regional military power hostile to Russia.”
In the interview, Macgregor also points to the 2014 Maidan coup that toppled the officially elected pro-Russian Ukrainian government, in turn establishing a pro-American government. “The Maidan coup allowed Washington’s agents in Kiev to install a government that would cooperate with this project,” the West Point graduate and scholar with a PhD in international relations told LifeSite.
See below an interview with Colonel Macgregor from one month ago that presents a completely different perspective from that of all western media and governments regarding the conflict in Ukraine.
Macgregor’s statements are in line with an Open Letter to President Joe Biden that LifeSite published in May of 2022, which too argued that the U.S. was involved in setting up a new pro-American government in Ukraine in 2014.
The text, which was signed by conservative journalists such as Charlie Kirk, Jack Posobiec, Jack Maxey, and Judge Andrew Napolitano, stated about the events in 2014: “At that time, a telephone conversation of your [Biden’s] collaborator Victoria Nuland (Assistant Secretary of State under President Barak Obama) revealed how she discussed which leaders should be placed into the new government in Ukraine. The transcript of that conversation also exposed your own direct involvement in this interference with a foreign nation state.”
Macgregor, who served in the U.S. military from 1976 until his retirement in 2004, argues that the U.S. “badly miscalculated” the Russian military strength and that its policy against Russia is actually harming U.S. allies in Europe.
When asked about the driving force behind this war-mongering policy of confrontation with Russia, by way of Ukraine, the book author advises that one should look to “names of the members of the World Economic Forum,” indicating a connection of this war to Great Reset machinations.
Another video interview below titled, ‘The complete destruction of Ukraine is unavoidable.” Again, a total contradiction to western media and Biden administration propaganda. This interview took place on Dec.8.
Macgregor sees a natural alliance between Europe, especially Germany, and Russia, and even calls upon Europe to reassess its own alliances for the sake of avoiding yet another world war. Explaining this, he writes:
The two world wars were destructive episodes that should never have occurred. There is no reason to repeat past mistakes. Berlin must now confront the reality that Washington’s strategic interests and the strategic interests of the German Nation are not identical and adjust its relations with Washington and Moscow appropriately. If Berlin adjust its foreign policy along these lines, Berlin can once again restore stability and prosperity to Europe.
As it seems, this military expert and senior advisor dares to argue outside of the mainstream media’s narrative about the Russia-Ukraine conflict, in regards to both its causes and its development. He runs a YouTube channel on which he comments almost daily on the real developments of the war, countering the talking points of CNN and other channels.
Dec. 8/22 Interview with Dr. Michael Vlahos. Recorded December 8th – Odessa falls and Ukraine becomes a landlocked country.
My husband, Dr. Robert Hickson, a former professor of the Air Force Academy and the Joint Special Operations University, much appreciates Colonel Macgregor’s outspoken and honest interviews, which are so needed in a time where propaganda seems to reign the public discourse. May this voice be heard, for the sake of the preservation of world peace.
Full text of the interview below:
LifeSite: Who in your eyes is the main guilty force behind the escalation of the Ukraine conflict?
Macgregor: Washington’s proxy war with Russia is the result of a carefully constructed plan to embroil Russia in conflict with its Ukrainian neighbor. From the moment that President Putin indicated that his government would not tolerate a NATO military presence on Russia’s doorstep in Ukraine, Washington sought to expedite Ukraine’s development into a regional military power hostile to Russia. The Maidan coup allowed Washington’s agents in Kiev to install a government that would cooperate with this project. PM Merkel’s recent admission that she and her European colleagues sought to exploit the Minsk Accords to buy time for the military building in Ukraine confirms the tragic truth of this matter.
LifeSite: In light of today’s situation, how would you describe the importance and the consequences of the 2014 coup that took place in Ukraine with heavy involvement of the U.S.?
Macgregor: See the response above.
LifeSite: How could the conflict be resolved peacefully and diplomatically, what would be aspects of an agreement between the conflict parties?
Macgregor: Washington and its allies in Western Europe badly miscalculated. They believed that Russia’s economic weakness made an effective Russian military campaign to destroy Ukrainian military strength impossible. Russia’s initial performance assumed that Washington and its allies would recognize the seriousness of the matter and acknowledge Russia’s legitimate security interests in Ukraine. Once it became clear that Washington was determined to not only preserve its strategic military control of Ukraine with the goal of utterly destroying Russia, Moscow changed course. Moscow now treats Ukraine as a theater of war, not as a brother Slavic Country. The war will only end on terms that Moscow creates. As President Putin says repeatedly, ‘Only Moscow is the guarantor of Ukrainian territory.’
LifeSite: Who is the driving force that tries to prevent a peaceful resolution of the conflict?
Macgregor: The names of the members of the World Economic Forum is a good place to start in your search for the answer to this question.
LifeSite: You seem to argue that the U.S.- pushed escalation of the conflict in Ukraine is harming the United States’ relations with Europe. Could you explain your position?
Macgregor: When imposing sanctions, it is always important to avoid sanctioning yourself. Russia is not isolated. In fact, Russia enjoys an unassailable geographical position with access to markets, goods and services that the United States cannot obstruct. Thus, Washington’s allies, as well as, Americans, are now the victims of Washington’s thoughtless and arrogant financial and economic policies.
LifeSite: There are some voices who claim that the Ukraine war actually has helped the U.S. economy by increasing weapons production and gasoline sales to Europe. Would you agree with this assessment or what would you say about who benefits most from this war in Ukraine?
Macgregor: Military sales do not enhance the economic health and well-being of any economy. Investments in military power are sunken costs. The resulting equipment has little salvage value. Whenever a Nation-State builds more military power than is necessary for its own defense, it deprives other economic sectors of the capital they need to grow and prosper. This was President Eisenhower’s argument in 1953 when he said, “Security cannot exist without prosperity. Americans deserve both.”
LifeSite: Do you consider Russia to be a military threat to Europe, or do you think the German-Russian economic collaboration was beneficial for Europe?
Macgregor: Russia was not a threat to Europe when the war in Ukraine began. Washington’s proxy war has compelled Moscow to reexamine its assumptions about Russian security. From now on, Russia will maintain larger and more robust high-end conventional forces with the goal of securing itself from future Western attacks. For most of the last 300 years, Berlin has been Moscow’s natural partner in commercial trade and regional security matters. The two world wars were destructive episodes that should never have occurred. There is no reason to repeat past mistakes. Berlin must now confront the reality that Washington’s strategic interests and the strategic interests of the German nation are not identical and adjust its relations with Washington and Moscow appropriately. If Berlin adjusts its foreign policy along these lines, Berlin can once again restore stability and prosperity to Europe.
A German-language version of this interview will appear in the Austrian Catholic newspaper Der Dreizehnte.
Colonel Macgregor bio as written on Jay Dyer website:
“Col. Douglas Macgregor is a decorated combat veteran, the author of five books, a PhD, and a defense and foreign policy consultant. He was commissioned in the Regular Army in 1976 after 1 year at VMI and 4 years at West Point. In 2004, Macgregor retired with the rank of Colonel. In 2020, the President appointed Macgregor to serve as Senior Advisor to the Secretary of Defense, a post he held until President Trump left office. He holds an MA in comparative politics and a PhD in international relations from the University of Virginia.
Macgregor is widely known inside the U.S., Europe, Israel, Russia, China and Korea for both his leadership in the Battle of 73 Easting, the U.S. Army’s largest tank battle since World War II, and for his groundbreaking books on military transformation: Breaking the Phalanx (Praeger, 1997) and Transformation under Fire (Praeger, 2003). Macgregor’s recommendations for change in Force Design and “integrated all arms-all effects” operations have profoundly influenced force development in Israel, Russia and China. In 2010, Macgregor travelled to Seoul, Korea to advise the ROK Ministry of Defense on force design. In 2019, Transformation under Fire was selected by Lt. Gen. Aviv Kohavi, Chief of the Israeli Defense Force (IDF), as the intellectual basis for IDF transformation. His fifth book, Margin of Victory: Five Battles that Changed the Face of Modern War from Naval Institute Press is available in Chinese, as well as, English and will soon appear in Hebrew.
In 28 years of service Macgregor taught in the Department of Social Sciences at West Point, commanded the 1st Squadron, 4th Cavalry, and served as the Director of the Joint Operations Center at SHAPE during the 1999 Kosovo Air Campaign for which he was awarded the Defense Superior Service medal. In January 2002, at Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s insistence, the USCENTCOM Commander listened to Colonel Macgregor’s concept for the offensive to seize Baghdad. The plan was largely adopted but assumed no occupation of Iraq by U.S. Forces. Macgregor has also testified as an expert witness before the Senate and House Armed Services Committees and appeared as a defense analyst on Fox News, CNN, BBC, Sky News and public radio. He is fluent in German.”
Washington’s refusal to acknowledge Russia’s legitimate security interests in Ukraine and negotiate an end to this war is the path to protracted conflict and human suffering.
During a speech given on November 29, Polish Vice-Minister of National Defense (MON) Marcin Ociepa said: "The probability of a war in which we will be involved is very high. Too high for us to treat this scenario only hypothetically." The Polish MON is allegedly planning to call up 200,000 reservists in 2023 for a few weeks’ training, but observers in Warsaw suspect this action could easily lead to a national mobilization.
Meanwhile, inside the Biden administration, there is growing concern that the Ukrainian war effort will collapse under the weight of a Russian offensive. And as the ground in Southern Ukraine finally freezes, the administration’s fears are justified. In an interview published in the Economist, head of Ukraine’s armed forces General Valery Zaluzhny admitted that Russian mobilization and tactics are working. He even hinted that Ukrainian forces might be unable to withstand the coming Russian onslaught.
Yet, Zaluzhny rejected any notion of a negotiated settlement and instead pleaded for more equipment and support. He went on to insist that with 300 new tanks, 600 to 700 new infantry fighting vehicles, and 500 new Howitzers, he could still win the war with Russia. Truthfully, General Zaluzhny is not asking for assistance, he’s asking for a new army. Therein lies the greatest danger for Washington and its NATO allies.
When things go badly for Washington’s foreign policy, the true believers in the great cause always draw deeply from the well of ideological self-delusion to steel themselves for the final battle. Blinken, Klain, Austin, and the rest of the war party continue to pledge eternal support for Kiev regardless of the cost. Like the “best and the brightest” of the 1960s they are eager to sacrifice realism to wishful thinking, to wallow in the splash of publicity and self-promotion in one public visit to Ukraine after another.
This spectacle is frighteningly reminiscent of events more than 50 years ago, when Washington’s proxy war in Vietnam was failing. Doubters within the Johnson administration about the wisdom of intervening on the ground to rescue Saigon from certain destruction went into hiding. In 1963, Washington already had 16,000 military advisors in Vietnam. The idea that Washington was supporting a government in South Vietnam that might not win against North Vietnam was dismissed out of hand. Secretary of State Dean Rusk said, “We will not pull out until the war is won.”
By the spring of 1965, American military advisors were already dying. General Westmoreland, then commander of Military Assistance Command Vietnam, reported to LBJ: “It is increasingly apparent that the existing levels of United States aid cannot prevent the collapse of South Vietnam... North Vietnam is moving in for the kill... Acting on the request of the South Vietnamese government, the decision must be made to commit as soon as possible 125,000 United States troops to prevent the Communist takeover.”
The Biden administration’s unconditional support for the Zelensky regime in Kiev is reaching a strategic inflection point not unlike the one LBJ reached in 1965. Just as LBJ suddenly determined in 1964 that peace and security in Southeast Asia was a vital U.S. strategic interest, the Biden administration is making a similar argument now for Ukraine. Like South Vietnam in the 1960s, Ukraine is losing its war with Russia.
Ukraine’s hospitals and morgues are filled to capacity with wounded and dying Ukrainian soldiers. Washington’s proxy in Kiev has squandered its human capital and considerable Western aid in a series of self-defeating counter-offensives. Ukrainian soldiers manning the defensive lines facing Russian soldiers in Southern Ukraine are brave men, but they are not fools. The Spartans at Thermopylae were brave, and they still died.
The real danger now is that Biden will soon appear on television to repeat LBJ’s performance in 1965, substituting the word "Ukraine" for "South Vietnam":
Tonight, my fellow Americans I want to speak to you about freedom, democracy, and the struggle of the Ukrainian people for victory. No other question so preoccupies our people. No other dream so absorbs the millions who live in Ukraine and Eastern Europe… However, I am not talking about a NATO attack on Russia. Rather, I propose to send a U.S. led coalition of the willing, consisting of American, Polish, and Romanian armed forces into Ukraine, to establish the ground equivalent of a “no-fly zone.” The mission I propose is a peaceful one, to create a safe zone in the Western most portion of Ukraine for Ukrainian Forces and refugees struggling to survive Russia’s devastating attacks…
Disaster wrapped in rhetoric is not the way to save the people of Ukraine. The war in Ukraine is not a Call of Duty fantasy. It is an enlargement of the human tragedy that NATO’s eastward expansion created. The victims do not live in North America. They live in a region that most Americans can't find on a map. Washington urged the Ukrainians to fight. Now Washington must urge them to stop.
NATO’s governments are divided in their thinking about the war in Ukraine. Except for Poland and, possibly, Romania, none of NATO’s members are in a rush to mobilize their forces for a long, grueling war of attrition with Russia in Ukraine. No one in London, Paris, or, Berlin wants to run the risk of a nuclear war with Moscow. Americans do not support going to war with Russia, and those few who do are ideologues, shallow political opportunists, or greedy defense contractors.
When U.S. forces finally withdrew from Southeast Asia, Americans thought that Washington would exercise greater restraint, recognize the limits of American power, and pursue a less militant, and more realistic foreign policy. Americans were mistaken then, but Americans and Europeans know now that Washington’s refusal to acknowledge Russia’s legitimate security interests in Ukraine and negotiate an end to this war is the path to protracted conflict and more human suffering.
The U.S. is sending Patriot missiles to Ukraine in a last ditch PR move. Colonel Douglas Macgregor joins Natali and Clayton Morris to talk about Putin's massive oncoming offensive which will have three main goals.
Michael Vlahos and Douglas Magcregor meet in the library of the Army-Navy Club, Washington, D.C., to reflect on the war in Ukraine: Past, Present, and Future. Part 1
Michael Vlahos and Douglas Magcregor meet in the library of the illustrious Army-Navy Club, Washington, D.C., the Imperial City, to reflect on the war in Ukraine.
Part 2 examines the strategic choices that have led to NATO strategic failure in Ukraine, conflict with Russia, and lays bare how deliberate deceit and denial have misled the American people.
In Part 3, we explore the many pathways to American military defeat and strategic failure, and how these have worked in concert, as they are now culminating in Ukraine.
Posts
