The Coup that Wasn't-Armed Standoff Between Wagner Group Chief Prigozhin and Russian Military Ends Within 24 Hours

Some US experts had predicted Wagner head's mutiny would lead to Putin's imminent overthrow describing the armed rebellion as a new Russian civil war only to see it fizzle out quickly

Wagner Group head Yevgeny Progozhin, nicknamed “Putin’s Chef” had been calling for the ouster of President Vladimir Putin’s longtime Minister of Defense Shogiu but Putin accused him of sedition and sacked him instead

July 5th Update: Andrei Illarionov, former Chief Economic Advisor to Russian President Vladimir Putin reported this morning that not a single participant of the Wagner mutiny has been arrested or shot confirming my previous assertion that this was not an actual coup and that Putin did not consider them to pose a major threat to his control over Russia.

This past weekend, the world witnessed one of the most bizarre episodes in Russian history since the fall of the Soviet Union, as the head of the PMC Wagner Group, Yevgenny Pirgozhin staged a major temper tantrum threatening an armed rebellion and mutiny against the Russian military and demanding a meeting with top Russian generals to hear his grievances over his false claims that a Russian airstrike that killed Wagner troops. He had been criticizing top Russian military leaders for weeks citing poor planning and decision, making and providing insufficient ammunition for his troops and even threatening to withdraw his troops from the Ukrainian city of Bakhmut last month if his demands were not met.

As the crisis materialized on Friday evening I predicted:

“If Prigozhin crosses Putin one too many times he will disappear in an FSB prison or gulag or maybe get assassinated and we won't hear from him again.” An hour later, news reports broke that the Russian FSB was charging the Wagner chief with “inciting an armed rebellion” ordering his arrest while Putin accused him of committing treason.

At 9:25am EST Saturday morning I wrote on social media, “This will be resolved quickly. The threat to Putin’s regime remains quite minimal. Putin is likely a far more rational and restrained actor than any of the folks that could replace him.” I continued, “Wagner Group has no air force and Putin controls the Russian army, air force, navy, national guard, border guards, militia, FSB, GRU and Interior Ministry troops totaling close to two million men under arms. By contrast, Wagner has only 25,000 mercs many of which are still deployed at the front. This isn't anything resembling the July 20, 1944, coup when Germany had 11 Field Marshals and 19 Colonel Generals who supported one of the 43 coup or assassination attempts against Hitler. There is no evidence that even one Russian one-star general supports ousting Putin. The only way Putin could be deposed is by his inner circle, which consists of longtime Putin allies, loyalists and siloviki and the chances of that happening are near zero. We have little to no insight as to what they are thinking right now.”

Then I added. “I don't think this is a false flag operation but I don't think it’s a real rebellion either. It's more of an armed protest with the Wagner Group chief letting Putin know he’s Angry. “An hour later I wrote, “A column of Wagner APCs are headed to Moscow. The idea that Wagner troops could successfully march on Moscow is laughable. Russia is the world's premier tank power. I would be more inclined to think this armored column is a Wagner delegation seeking to negotiate directly with Putin to hear out their grievances and negotiate an end to the standoff.” I then added, “This is not a civil war. This is a pissing match between Prigozhin and the Russian Defense Ministry backed by Putin. Anyone want to bet who wins?” Prigozhin subsequently claimed that it was indeed nothing more than “a protest,” not an armed rebellion.

Prigozhin urged Putin to fire the Russian Minister of Defense, General Sergei Shoigu and the Chief of the General Staff, Valery Garasimov. During his short-lived mutiny, Wagner Group mercenaries briefly occupied Russia’s Southern Military District Headquarters in Rostov-on-Don and Prigozhin could be seen drinking tea with the locals. As previously noted in my comments above, he then sent a column of lightly armored armored personnel carriers with 3,000 of his 8,000 Wagner soldiers inside Russia commanded by the Deputy Commander of PNC Wagner to drive in the direction of Moscow while the remaining 12,000-17,000 Wagner Group mercenaries remained deployed at the front.

Map showing the route of the Wagner Group’s brief occupation of Russia’s Southern Military District headquarters in Rostov-on-Don followed by the transit of its column of armored cars barreling their way o Moscow

Putin then declared martial law in Moscow and deployed Rosgvardiya, the Russian National Guard troops he has employed as occupation forces in the newly annexed territories of Ukraine to the outskirts of Moscow with armored vehicles to block the path of the 3,000 Wagner troops on their way to Moscow. Prigozhin knew that any serious attempt to use such a meager force to capture Moscow, which is one of the most heavily defended capitals in the world, and overthrow Putin would be suicidal with no prospects of success and any serious Russian military observer should have know that as well.

As the crisis was materializing, the Ukrainian government made the ridiculous claim that Russia was withdrawing all of its weapons to Moscow to defend the capital. If that had been the case then presumably, Ukrainian forces would have been able to retake all of the territory Russia has occupied and annexed since 2014. In fact, Ukrainian military attempts to take advantage of this brief internal Russian dispute made little progress in retaking additional territory.

Prigozhin Calls Off His Mutiny

Just before 2pm EST on Saturday, it was reported that Prigozhin had reached a peace deal with Putin mediated by Belarussian President Alexander Lukashenko for him to order his motorized rifle brigade, which was then within 120-200 kilometers of the Russian capital, to cease what he called its “March for Justice” and return to its bases according to plan, stating the goals of the armed protest had been achieved.  The Russian FSB agreed to drop all charges against the Wagner Group chief as part of their stand down deal and Prigozhin went into exile in Belarus leaving Putin to presumably hand pick his replacement with a new Wagner Group head loyal to himself, thus ending the crisis with a Putin victory.

Prigozhin seemed to have hoped for a general uprising in the Russian military in support of his rebellion. However, no Russian military forces joined his mutiny so he quickly negotiated a deal where he would be sent into exile in Belarus in exchange for all treason charges against him and his fellow Wagner Group mercenaries who participated in his so-called “Justice March” be fired.  While Prigozhin claimed his mutiny was bloodless, that was untrue. Wagner Group mercenaries shot down a few Russian helicopters and one transport aircraft killing between 13-38 Russian pilots and aircrew.

Neoconservatives like Anne Applebaum wrote an article in the Atlantic claiming that this was the start of a Russian civil war. Hours later the standoff ended with a negotiated deal just as I had predicted it would. Putin pardoned Prigozhin in a backchannel deal, mediated by Belarussian President Aleksandr Lukashenko, who leads Russia’s last remaining satellite. If this was indeed a civil war it was the shortest civil war in recorded history!

The much overhyped “Russian Civil War of 2023” lasted less than 24 hours with only 1-3 dozen Russian military casualties disappointing neoconservative fans of Prigozhin who were hoping he would succeed in overthrowing and replacing Putin as the President of the Russian Federation

Yesterday, Putin gave a speech on June 26^th stating that he was offering the 20,000-25,000 Wagner troops the opportunity to either sign contracts with the Russian military essentially putting them under direct Russian military command or else go into permanent exile with Prigozhin in Belarus. Reports from Russia suggested that the Russian FSB was dropping charges against him and offering immunity to any Wagner Group soldiers that signed contracts. However, yesterday, the Russian media reported that the FSB’s criminal case against him was still open  

Potential CIA Involvement in the Wagner Group Mutiny

Former Russia DIA analyst Rebekah Koffler was interviewed Friday evening and was the first to speculate that the US might have been involved in inciting the Wagner rebellion. Yesterday, Stephen Bryen, who serves as a senior fellow with the Center for Security Policy and has persuasively argued that the war in Ukraine cannot be won and that continued US military assistance to Ukraine is weakening our ability to fight and win a war with Communist China in in the Pacific, wrote an excellent article about the Wagner Group mutiny. He essentially concludes that Prigozhin met with US and Ukraine and tricked them into believing he was going to lead a coup against Putin and that his planned armed rebellion had substantial support among the Russian military, none of which ended up being true.

Bryen cites unconfirmed reports that Prigozhin sent Wagner Group leaders to meet with Ukraine’s SBU, which is an offshoot of the former Ukrainian KGB, to bargain for their support as well as US support to allegedly oust Putin and pull Russian troops out of Ukraine. Bryan states:

“But the real problem for his reputation is found in the reports of his contacts with Ukraine’s secret intelligence services, his alleged offers to sell out Russian command centers and his bargaining for support – not so much from Ukraine but from the United States. It should surprise no one to hear that the CIA was fully informed by its Ukrainian counterparts, who are desperate to see Russia’s leaders overturned and NATO coming to their rescue.

According to the unconfirmed reports, Prigozhin offered a very good deal. In exchange for outside support, he would take over Russia, reorient to the West and leave Ukraine. The offer, at a critical moment when the Ukrainian offensive is faltering, was an offer hard to refuse.”

One unconfirmed source even claimed the CIA offered $6.2 billion to Prigozhin to stage a coup but that seems highly unlikely.

The Coup that Wasn’t

A number of U.S. experts predicted, without evidentiary support, that Moscow was about to fall to Prigozhin, who has proven much more of a Russian hardliner than Putin, in which case we would have our first mercenary president of a nuclear superpower and one who has advocated using nukes against Ukraine. Sam Faddis, a highly-respected former CIA officer speculated that Pigozhin might have succeeded in taking control of Russia’s Southern Military District’s tactical nuclear warheads. However, only Putin has the power to authorize the use of Russia’s nuclear warheads even non-strategic warheads. There are three Russian nuclear suitcases. One is held by Putin, one by Russian Defense Minister Shoigu and one by the Chief of the General Staff General Gerasimov. They all must authorize the use of nuclear warheads unless Putin decides to override their authorizations and launch on his own authority. The former Soviet republic of Kazakhstan reportedly sold a few non-strategic nuclear warheads to Iran in the early to mid-1990s but fortunately without the launch codes, Iran could not use them.  

If Prigozhin had taken control of Russia what would have stopped him from selling hundreds of Russian nukes to the highest bidder? His Western supporters fail to explain how exactly they thought a Russia led by Prigozhin would have been an improvement over Putin. In fact, it is very likely that it would be worse and potentially much worse. Of course, Prigozhin never wanted to overthrow Putin. Sending a brigade sized column of lightly armored BTR-80s Armored Personnel Carrier (APC)s with no chance of entering Moscow did not provide any evidence of an impending coup. Putin’s decision to lock down Moscow and declare martial law demonstrated Putin’s paranoia, but not necessarily an actual coup threat. Russian forces could have easily taken out the Wagner Group APC convoy, but Putin obviously wanted to avoid an armed clash that would negative effect Russian army morale, reduce his popularity with the Russian people and negatively effect the Russian war effort in Ukraine.

Assuming the Wagner Group mutiny was genuine, I would concur that it shows a remarkable degree of disunity not seen since the fall of the Soviet Union. Some U.S. experts concluded that the mutiny showed Putin’s weakness and that, at best, he had achieved a pyrrhic victory with his prestige gravely damaged because he had failed to crush the mutiny and opted to negotiate a deal to end the brief standoff instead. However, I believe Putin ordered Russian army commanders not to engage with Wagner group mercenaries if possible. Putin needs the Wagner Group to help him fight the war in Ukraine and killing hundreds if not a few thousand Wagner Group mercenaries in the armored column heading to Moscow would have negatively impacted Putin’s popularity and seriously damaged Russia’s war effort.

One source even suggested that this mutiny may have been cover to redeploy Russian forces to Belarus and allow Prigozhin to help lead a renewed Russian invasion of northern Ukraine, however, I do not find this explanation to be very believable. They pointed to the recent Russian publication of its deployment of nuclear weapons to Belarus and Moscow’s decision to train Belarussian soldiers to use Russia’s delivery systems leading Belarussian President Lukashenko to claim Belarus was the world’s newest nuclear power.

This crisis had been brewing for weeks if not months. Prigozhin had been making a number of false assertions that the Russian Ministry of Defense was withholding ammunition from Wagner Group mercenaries and that they executed an airstrike that killed a significant number of Wagner soldiers. Putin had been trying to clamp down on rival power centers by getting all Wagner mercenary groups to sign contracts with the Russian army effectively placing them under Putin’s direct control. However, Prigozhin had refused to sign the contracts and reportedly orders were in the works to have him arrested causing him to engage in his so-called Justice March in a failed attempt to increase his bargaining power to prevent the Wagner Group from being taken over by the Russian Ministry of Defense. By all accounts his efforts ended in complete failure as he completely lost his power base inside Russia though it is still possible he could lead whatever Wagner Group soldiers decide to join him in exile in Belarus.

While it can be said that the episode was an embarrassing public display of disloyalty to Putin, the end result is that Putin has emerged stronger with full control of all Russian armed groups and formations within Russia and in Ukraine. Several experts also believe that it has strengthened the hand of Russian hardliners causing them to increase their calls for Putin to act more decisively to crush Ukraine and end the war. Putin has appeared reluctant to utilize his estimated 200,000 troops deployed near eastern Ukraine to launch a new Russian offensive to capture Kharkov and complete the Russian military’s conquest of the rest of the Donbass over three-quarters of which was annexed by Russia back in September and perhaps even re-invade northern Ukraine from Belarus. Such a multi-pronged offensive could force Ukraine to redeploy hundreds of thousands of troops making it easier for Russian forces to gain territory.

Time to Face the Hard Truths About the War in Ukraine

While the Biden administration continues to claim we are fighting for global democracy in Ukraine and against authoritarianism, the truth is otherwise.

Ted Galen Carpenter writes:

"Ukraine’s Western admirers need to face the unpleasant reality about their cherished foreign client. Ukraine is not a democracy, and Zelensky is not a noble, beleaguered champion of democratic values. The Russia–Ukraine war is not part of an existential struggle between freedom and authoritarianism. It is an ugly turf war between two corrupt, repressive governments. America and other Western societies do not have—or at least should not have—a dog in that fight."

It is unlikely that this brief mutiny by Wagner Group forces will have any negative effect on the Russian war effort or assist materially in Ukraine’s ongoing spring counteroffensive which has faltered badly during the past few weeks gaining very little territory and suffering extremely high casualties. Even CNN is reporting that the offensive has failed to achieve any of its stated objectives.  

One of the best articles written to date on the progress and likelihood of success of the Ukrainian counteroffensive in Zaporizhzhia by one of my favorite Ukraine war experts LTC Daniel Davis (USA Ret). As I predicted, Ukraine’s counteroffensive is faring poorly with Ukrainian forces losing up to ten times as many casualties as the Russians according to multiple sources and three times as many tanks.

“Many in the West expected Ukraine to have meaningful success from the beginning, owing to significant NATO training and weaponry. After the first week of fighting, however, Ukraine has been completely thwarted in its main effort and belatedly made some progress towards its secondary objectives. Though it’s too early to declare the operation a success or failure, early signs are alarming for Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF). Ukrainian units showed many of the errors endemic to Russia’s abysmal showing during its first offensive actions in February and March 2022, in which armored vehicles bunched together, making themselves easy targets for Russian artillery. American Bradley Fighting Vehicles, MRAPs, and M113 armored vehicles, German Leopard 2 tanks, and an assortment of other vehicles ran into minefields, were ambushed by Russian Lancet drones, and others destroyed by artillery fire.

As I wrote last month, once Ukraine’s offensive striking power has reached its culmination point – win, lose, or draw – they will be vulnerable to a Russian counterattack (and as noted above, Russian doctrine in the defense includes a plan to go to the offense as soon as the enemy is sufficiently weakened…If reports by Ukrainian intelligence services last February were right – that Russia had around 300,000 troops engaged within Ukrainian borders and up to 250,000 others training for an offensive – Putin may still have a sizable force in reserve that he has still not committed to battle. It is impossible to ascertain the present size of Russia’s strategic reserve, but it cannot be ruled out that Putin could order a major counteroffensive to capture major territory or a city once Ukraine’s offensive has culminated…What either side may do in the future is unknown at this point and includes a fairly broad set of possibilities. Yet one thing remains unchanged: there is no viable path to a military victory for Ukraine.

The most prudent course of action remains for Ukraine to find the balance between gaining all it can now while not risk losing sufficient power to prevent a major new Russian advance and seek to end the fighting under the best terms it can get. Doing so will not turn it into a submissive entity to Moscow, as Kyiv would continue to be free to form its own national defense capacity and engage with Europe to develop its economy long term. Ignoring these realities, however, and pressing on for military victory, continuing to refuse any consideration of a negotiated settlement, and Ukraine risks losing far more than it has to date."

Davis has speculated that actual Ukrainian military casualties since the onset of the war are likely on the order of about 400,000 to date far greater than what liberal Western media sources have been reporting. Ukraine is so desperate for new recruits it recently expanded its draft to include all men ages 18-65 years old. They've already fully mobilized and have almost no one left to draft due to high casualty rates, sagging morale and desertion rates with reports of many military age Ukrainian men attempting to flee the country even at the risk of being shot by Ukrainian border guard troops reminiscent of East Germans trying to escape Communism over the Berlin Wall. Ukraine had to increase the punishment for desertion from 4 years to 7 years imprisonment to try to reduce the high desertion rate many Ukrainian units were experiencing. Other reports indicate Ukrainian soldiers are faking armored vehicle breakdowns in its ongoing counteroffensive to avoid being killed by dug-in Russian forces. The next possible step is to start drafting boys ages 14-17 like Hitler did when the Red Army began advancing on central Germany in the last few months of World War Two. On the bright side, if Ukraine exhausts its manpower reserves it might be more inclined to a compromise peace with Russia and its western backers might as well seeing the futility of continuing the war given the fact that the prospects for liberating additional territory from Russia are basically non-existent allowing us to refocus on great power competition with the larger threat of Communist China.

Ultimately, the war in Ukraine is Vietnam all over again. It is an unwinnable war for both Ukraine and the West while Putin has forced the Russian military to fight the war with constraints reminiscent of those placed on the US armed forces during the Vietnam war projecting an image of weakness which has caused many Western analysts to discount Russian military strength. Despite this, Russian victory in the ongoing war of attrition is all but inevitable as Russia is 35 times larger than Ukraine with an economy 11 times larger with over five times more people, tanks, combat aircraft and artillery systems. Russian victory is assured no matter how many weapons the West sends to Ukraine because even if Ukraine were to recapture all of its internationally recognized territory from Russia, Russia would use its vast, unequalled nuclear arsenal to compel Ukraine’s surrender in accordance with its escalate to de-escalate nuclear doctrine.

In any case, the Biden administration does not support Ukraine retaking Crimea, correctly viewing any Ukrainian ground incursion into Crimea as a Russian nuclear trigger and has briefed Congress repeatedly to tell them Ukraine lacks the military capabilities to do so. After failing to convince Russia and Ukraine to accept a US sponsored peace deal in which Russia would get to keep all of its annexed Ukrainian territory, the administration reportedly told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that he needed to retake as much territory as possible in his spring/summer counteroffensive prior to negotiation of a peace deal later this year because the U.S. is running low on weapons and ammunition it can send to Ukraine. Thus far, the only U.S. presidential candidate that has offered a viable peace plan to end the war Ukraine has been America First conservative Vivek Ramaswamy in an article published earlier this month that I will be covering in my next article.

Competing War Powers Declarations in Congress

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Sen. Richard Blumemthal (D-CT) are co-sponsoring a resolution in Congress which would call on the President to invoke Article V in the event of any Russian nuclear detonation in or over Ukraine. That would include a sub kiloton detonation of 0.1 KT either against Ukrainian troops or over above a city whether it killed any Ukrainian civilians or not. This resolution is extremely dangerous and irresponsible and should be voted down by the U.S. Senate. Graham has stated the US would not respond with nukes if Russia nuked Ukraine but rather should conduct massive conventional airstrikes against Russian forces in Russian annexed territories which would start a nuclear war with Russia. Graham's resolution does not call for US nuclear strikes on Russia. I have heard Lindsey Graham respond to a question if he thought the US should respond with nukes if Russian nuked Ukraine and he said no we should respond by declaring war on Russia and conducting a massive airstrike on Russian military forces in the newly annexed territories.

As the late great visionary Executive Director of the Task Force on National & Homeland Security Dr. Peter Pry warned in January 2022, Biden and NATO are "playing with nuclear fire" by sparking and continuing to fight an unnecessary proxy war with Russia in Ukraine that could escalate to the nuclear level at any time. Of course, it really doesn't matter if Graham supports nuclear war with Russia or not because any hot war between the US and Russia would inevitably escalate to the nuclear/super EMP level within a few weeks.

The American Conservative magazine recently featured an excellent article for anyone who wants to understand Article V of the Atlantic Charter, which doesn't actually mandate we go to war to defend one of our 30 NATO allies as many believe. It just requires us to send military assistance we deem necessary which in theory could be limited to non-lethal military aid. I would like to commend all the conservative Republican sponsors of this outstanding resolution to return war powers back to Congress including Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), who is a lifelong champion of the U.S. constitution and peace.

"Chief among them is NATO, and with it the idea that NATO’s Article 5 automatically compels the United States to join a war. This is of course not so. Article 5 merely initiates a joint defense clause, which compels the treaty allies to come to each other’s defense, without mentioning the scope of the actions. Consider that, after the only invocation of Article 5, after the attacks on September 11, only around thirteen countries actually actively took part in combat sorties. The principle applies in reverse; Article 5 does not compel the U.S. to take part in combat operations without the authorization of Congress.

To that cause, some Republican Senators and Representatives have introduced a resolution to take the war power back into the hands of Congress. Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky in the Senate and Representatives Warren Davidson of Ohio and Chip Roy of Texas are at the forefront, joined by Senators Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, Josh Hawley of Missouri, Mike Braun of Indiana, and Mike Lee of Utah, as well as Reps. Dan Bishop of North Carolina, Troy Nehls of Texas, Harriett Hageman of Wyoming, Paul Gosar and Andy Biggs of Arizona, Andrew Clyde and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, and Matt Rosendale of Montana.

For decades, many legislators have incorrectly interpreted Article 5 as an obligation that unquestionably commits the United States to provide military support should a NATO ally be attacked… But that is not exactly what Article 5 states. Article 5 states, “The Parties agree that an armed take against one or more of them . . . shall be considered an attack against them all and . . . each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense . . . will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith . . . such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force…” In other words, NATO allies are committed to assist each other in the event of an attack, but military action is not mandated, and the United States maintains its sovereign capacity to determine what kind of response is warranted.

Davidson added, “Only Congress can constitutionally authorize the use of military force, and Article 5 of NATO does not supersede the Constitution”—a sentiment also echoed by other senators and representatives. The potential return of war powers to Congress has gotten some serious push lately. Russ Vought, President of Citizens for Renewing America said to me that “NATO is too often treated as a foreign policy holy sacrament, by the foreign policy elite. Like any alliance, NATO’s utility should be constantly reexamined and it should not supersede the Constitution.”

Recent Media Interviews

June 9th—Interview with former Polish Sejm Deputy Mateusz Piskorski to discuss Vivek Ramaswamy’s new peace plan to end the war in Ukraine. I will post the link to the interview as soon as it is available.

June 10th—Interview with Jon Twitchell on his Talk with John show to discuss Biden bribery scandal, Trump indictments and the increasing threat of World War Three with Russia. Here is the link to the interview.

June 19th—Interview with Jon Twitchell on his Talk with John show to discuss the Ukrainian destruction of the Kakhovka dam and the progress of the Ukrainian spring counteroffensive. Here is the link.

June 20th—Interview with Brannon Howse on his Worldview Weekend Broadcast Network to discuss Chinese plans to establish a military base in Communist Cuba which it can use to strike the U.S. Here is the link to the interview.

June 26th—Interview with Jon Twitchell on his Talk with John show to discuss the Wagner Group Mutiny and the progress of the Ukrainian spring counteroffensive. Here is the link to the interview. Here is the link to the interview.

Upcoming Media Interviews

June 29th—Interview with Dr. Pascal Lottaz from Neutrality Studies to discuss Vivek Ramaswamy’s excellent new peace plan to end the war in Ukraine and split the Sino-Russian military alliance.

June 29th—Interview with Brannon Howse on his Worldview Weekend Broadcast Network to discuss the Wagner Group mutiny and whether it was a Russian false flag operation to give Putin plausible deniability for a rogue nuclear strike from Belarus against NATO.

© David T. Pyne 2023

David T. Pyne, Esq. is a former U.S. Army combat arms and Headquarters staff officer, who was in charge of armaments cooperation with the former Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Africa and the Americas from 2000-2003, with an M.A. in National Security Studies from Georgetown University. He currently serves as Deputy Director of National Operations for the Task Force on National and Homeland Security and as a member of the Committee on the Present Danger-China. He recently co-authored the best-selling new book, “Catastrophe Now--America’s Last Chance to Avoid an EMP Disaster." He also serves as the Editor of “The Real War” newsletter at dpyne.substack.com and as a contributor to “The National Interest”. Here is a link to his interview archive. He may be reached at emptaskforce.ut@gmail.com.