This was already the stated goals at the beginning of the invasion: Blitzkrieg to Kyiv, capture the government and execute the "kill lists", install a Quisling (a Vichy regime, we'd say in French), forcibly assimilate the population into Mother Russia and eliminate all the opponents. We are so much into Godwin territory this is not even funny.

Only trouble: the genius plan didn't survive first contact with reality and failed at step #1. What makes this fella think it can still be forced upon now?

I'm not a political scientist, but I thought the general definition of socialism was the public ownership of the means of production under an authoritarian government, while fascism is the private ownership of the means of production under an authoritarian government.

By those definitions, there are hardly any communist countries around any more (maybe Cuba?) and plenty of fascist ones--including Russia as perhaps the outstanding current example.

That line of argument says that Russia accusing Ukraine of being run by Nazis is simply projection.

Some insight from western officials obtained by the Guardian's defence editor, Dan Sabbagh:

Western officials believe that Russia's retreat from around Kyiv and the north east of the country is now "largely complete" and that it will take "at least a week" before reconstituted units could go to Donbas and perhaps longer given how many losses they have suffered in the war so far.

The officials believe that the Kremlin wants to see some kind of victory in the eastern Donbas region in time for Russia's traditional Victory Day parade on 9 May, an important date in the country's military calendar.

One official said that Putin will want to have an "announceable success" by then, which could create "some tension" with Russian commanders as to "what they want to do in the military terms".

This means that exhausted Russian forces are likely to be thrown into battle fairly soon in an attempt to gain ground in the east.

The belief is that Russia will prioritise capturing the entirety of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, or seek to create a land bridge to Crimea or both, with Russia "reshaping its narrative" so it can redefine its idea of victory.

A few days ago RIA Novosti, a pro-Russian government state-controlled media outlet, published an article entitled What should Russia do with Ukraine? It was written by Timofey Sergeytsev, an influential commentator who has worked on the Presidential campaigns of Mikhail Prokhorov in Russia and President Yanukovych in the Ukraine.

In it he states that "the special operation revealed that not only the political leadership in Ukraine is Nazi, but also the majority of the population. All Ukrainians who have taken up arms must be eliminated - because they are responsible for the genocide of the Russian people".

He clarifies this by stating: "Denazification means de-Ukrainianisation. Ukrainians are an artificial anti-Russian construct. They should no longer have a national identity. Denazification of Ukraine also means its inevitable de-Europeanisation."

He argues that "Ukraine's political elite must be eliminated as it cannot be re-educated. Ordinary Ukrainians must experience all the horrors of war and absorb the experience as a historical lesson and atonement for their guilt".

He then lists the tasks which must be undertaken by Russia, including the liquidation of Ukrainian armed forces and all supporting infrastructure; the formation of an anti-Nazi (read pro-Russian) government; the installation of a Russian information space; a mass investigation programme into Ukrainian war crimes and support for the Nazi regime; forced labour, imprisonment and death sentences for all accomplices of the "Nazi regime"; and the creation of permanent de-nazification bodies.

Timofey Sergeytsev places the conflict in the context of the eradication of US subjugation and western totalitarianism and their ungrateful treatment of Russia after all that Russia has done for the west by way of providing alternatives to capitalism.

Given that President Putin has also spoken about the need to de-nazify Ukraine, and that Ukraine isn't a real country, perhaps the Government might like to summon ambassador Filatov to explain whether this represents official Russian government policy?

The answer to both questions is provided by a broadside produced by the Bryansk metropolitanate of the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate that has been distributed to Russian soldiers there by the office of that church responsible for relations with the military and the police.

It tells Russian troops in the most direct way, "Your task is to wipe the Ukrainian nation off the face of the earth," a directive from church officials that many Russian soldiers will see as giving them carte blanche as far as violence against the Ukrainian people are concerned.

"The first phase has been a Russian military failure of colossal proportions, a truly impressive thing. It will be the subject of study at military academies due to the accumulation of mistakes," says François Heisbourg, a special advisor for France's Foundation for Strategic Research (FFRS), the leading French center of expertise on international security and defense issues. The core cause, says Heisbourg, is an erroneous political analysis by the Kremlin that led officials to believe there would not be such a strong resistance by Ukrainians, a fact that also led to inadequate military planning.

"It's been a disaster," agrees Ruth Deyermond, a scholar at the Department of War Studies at King's College London who specializes in security in the post-Soviet space. "We are observing great losses, communication and logistical failures, signs of corruption. They are being forced to resort to mercenaries, and they are withdrawing from Kyiv. No doubt Russia is losing the war. We cannot confidently say that Ukraine is winning, but we can clearly say that Russia is losing," she says.

Ria Novosti, a pro-Russian government state-controlled media outlet, recently published an article entitled What should Russia do with Ukraine?

It was written by Timofey Sergeytsev, an influential commentator who has worked on the presidential campaigns of Mikhail Prokhorov in Russia and Viktor Yanukovych in Ukraine.

In it he states that "the special operation revealed that not only the political leadership in Ukraine is Nazi, but also the majority of the population. All Ukrainians who have taken up arms must be eliminated - because they are responsible for the genocide of the Russian people".

He clarifies this by stating: "Denazification means de-Ukrainianisation. Ukrainians are an artificial anti-Russian construct.

"They should no longer have a national identity.

"Denazification of Ukraine also means its inevitable de-Europeanisation."

He argues that "Ukraine's political elite must be eliminated as it cannot be re-educated".

"Ordinary Ukrainians must experience all the horrors of war and absorb the experience as a historical lesson and atonement for their guilt," he states.

He then lists the tasks which must be undertaken by Russia, including the liquidation of Ukrainian armed forces and all supporting infrastructure; the formation of an anti-Nazi (read pro-Russian) government; the installation of a Russian information space; a mass investigation programme into Ukrainian war crimes and support for the Nazi regime; forced labour, imprisonment and death sentences for all accomplices of the "Nazi regime"; and the creation of permanent denazification bodies.

Mr Sergeytsev places the conflict in the context of the eradication of US subjugation and western totalitarianism and their ungrateful treatment of Russia after all that Russia has done for the West by way of providing alternatives to capitalism.

Given that Russian president Vladimir Putin has also spoken about the need to denazify Ukraine, and has also claimed that Ukraine is not a real country, perhaps the Government here might like to summon ambassador Yuri Filatov to explain whether this represents official Russian government policy?