I read the … piece earlier in the week. The author is a good analyst. I think that I have encountered him before. However, there are a number of very good analysts out there. How often do they agree? None of them have access to the whole story. It is probably too convoluted to easily grasp.
I suspect that some of the key players themselves may not understand the double and perhaps triple games being played. Do you ever read espionage thrillers?
So, a plausible case, and one not to be dismissed lightly, but in the end, all analysts are really giving a sophisticated reading of the tea leaves. I lean towards it being more or less correct, but what do I know?