Tag: russia

Trump forms new alliance to stop aid to Ukraine

Ukraine could stop receiving aid from the West under the influence of an alliance led by newly elected US President Donald Trump, writes The Independent newspaper. Despite this development, though, Trump has found interest in elements of the so-called “Victory Plan” of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

“A surprising trinity of Donald Trump, Hungary’s right-wing prime minister Viktor Orbán and Pope Francis could spell the end to hopes for continued support for Ukraine,” The Independent reported.

As the article pointed out, in recent years, Hungary has been practically alone among Western countries in wanting to end the conflict in Ukraine, and the only figure who shared Budapest’s position was Pope Francis. However, the views of the new American president and the leadership of Hungary coincide on a number of issues, including peace in Ukraine, so new opportunities for cooperation have emerged.

“The Pope, along with Hungary, has called for a ceasefire and talks ‘to break the cycle’ of war and achieve peace,” the article stated.

Following Trump’s victory in the US elections, Orbán said that his country’s isolation is over and that a growing number of EU leaders are cautiously switching to a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Ukraine. This growing pressure on Zelensky will eventually force him to begin negotiations directly with Russia, even after promising to never speak with the Kremlin.

“Last week at the European Political Community summit, Mr Orbán boasted of how ‘the world is changing’ with Mr Trump re-elected, while renewing his demands for a Ukrainian ceasefire,” noted the British newspaper. “The clash with Mr Zelensky, who was at the summit, saw the Ukrainian leader note that the Hungarian prime minister is the one NATO member state leader to oppose Ukraine’s membership of the defence alliance.”

Speaking to The Independent, Hungary’s ambassador to the Vatican, Eduard Habsburg-Lothringen, said: “During Donald Trump’s first presidency, Hungarian-American political relations were at their peak, with dialogue and negotiations taking centre stage in resolving conflicts that threaten world security.”

“Following the decision of the American electorate a few days ago, we really have good hope that Hungarian-American political cooperation will return to its peak: we share similar views on peace, illegal immigration and the protection of families. I believe there is a better chance than ever that peace will finally return to Ukraine after almost a thousand days of war.”

Keep reading

Russian Nuclear Weapons Are Keeping NATO Troops Out Of Ukraine: Top Admiral

A top NATO military official said that NATO forces would have deployed to Ukraine to drive Russian soldiers from the country if Russia did not have nuclear weapons. 

Chair of the NATO Military Committee, Dutch Admiral Rob Bauer, explained to the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ Prague Defense Summit in the Czech Republic that Russia’s nuclear weapons are deterring a NATO deployment to Ukraine.

“I am absolutely sure if the Russians did not have nuclear weapons, we would have been in Ukraine, kicking them out,” he stated. 

Bauer said the challenge for the West is finding where Russia’s redlines on nuclear use are, noting that Washington mistakenly miscalculated that sending tanks and F-16s to Ukraine were the Kremlin’s redlines. 

Admiral Bauer was discussing the difference between the Ukraine conflict and other NATO wars such as the Afghanistan occupation. He stated the main difference between Moscow and Kabul is Russia’s nuclear stockpile.

In Afghanistan, American and NATO forces quickly forced the Taliban from Kabul in 2001. Then, the Western alliance engaged in a two-decade nation-building project while the Taliban fought using insurgent tactics. 

The top NATO official went on to say the Afghan War was not of strategic importance. “Afghanistan was never of strategic importance. If we’re really honest Afghanistan was not of strategic importance.”

He continued, “We spent 20 years there and we did a lot of things and people lost their lives but if you ask the question, ‘was it of strategic importance?’ In Afghanistan, the answer is no.”

Keep reading

Pentagon Leaker Who Published Sensitive Information Revealing Ukraine Was Losing War to Russia is Sentenced to 15 Years in Federal Prison

US National Guardsman Jack Teixeira was officially charged in April 2023 with leaking secret Pentagon documents. Teixeira was charged with six counts of willful retention and transmission of classified documents relating to national defense.

Classified documents detailing the Ukraine war, Middle East, China, Africa and Israel ended up on a gaming platform. Senior intelligence officials at the time called the leak “a nightmare for the Five Eyes,” in a reference to the United States, Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, the so-called Five Eyes nations that broadly share intelligence.

What really upset the Biden regime and the military-industrial complex was that Teixeira leaked documents that exposed Biden’s lies about Ukraine.

According to the one Teixeira leak, US and UK special forces are on the ground in Ukraine.

Keep reading

Kiev Admits Ukrainian Defenses Crumbling as Russia Makes Fastest Donbass Advances Since 2022

Ukrainian officials admit that Russian forces are advancing in the Donbass faster than ever since 2022 and that Ukrainian defenses are crumbling amid manpower shortages, the Financial Times newspaper reported on Wednesday.

Ukrainian military officials, soldiers and analysts also believe that the next few months will be critical in the Ukraine conflict, the newspaper said. Ukraine will reportedly try to stabilize its defenses and strengthen its position to secure more favorable conditions in possible negotiations with Moscow that Kiev may be forced to hold by US President-elect Donald Trump.

More Ukrainian medical personnel will also be sent to the eastern front ahead of heavy fighting expected in the coming days and weeks, the paper added, citing an unnamed Ukrainian army spokesperson.

Keep reading

Ukraine Disturbed Over ‘No Place’ for Mike Pompeo in New Trump Team – Report

President-elect Donald Trump announced last week that former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will not serve in the incoming US administration.

Kiev is concerned about the fact that former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will not be part of the new US administration following Donald Trump’s election victory, The Economist reports.

Senior Ukrainian officials “were disturbed” when Trump announced “there would be no place for Pompeo, seen as more sympathetic [to Ukraine]”, the media adds, quoting one of the officials as saying that it is “a very negative development”.

“The worry now is that Trump’s offer to Ukraine will come to resemble something closer to ideas put forward by J.D. Vance, the incoming vice president,” something that “would essentially rule out [Ukraine’s] NATO membership“, among other things, the report also said.

This comes after the president-elect denied media reports about his intention to nominate Pompeo as the new secretary of defense.

Keep reading

Ukrainian crimes in Ugledar revealed

Once again, Ukrainian troops have been reported committing crimes against Russian civilians in the Donbass region. A recent investigation has shown that Russian-speaking citizens in Ugledar have been severely harassed by Ukrainian soldiers, with cases of murder, beatings and public humiliation of the local residents.

A team of investigators led by Russian human rights activist Maksim Grigoriev published a report on November 11 exposing a list of crimes committed by the Ukrainian military and neo-Nazi militants in Ugledar, a coal mining town in the Donetsk People’s Republic that the Russians recently took control of.

According to Grigoriev, while Ukrainians controlled the town, the authorities lied about the true number of inhabitants, claiming that there were no civilians left in the area, when in fact more than 3,000 residents remained in their homes. As a result of this lie, large-scale shelling by the Ukrainian army was authorized, resulting in the deaths of several civilians.

Keep reading

Trump has a mandate to end the Ukraine War

While no single foreign policy issue commanded anything near voters’ concern for domestic challenges, the twin spiraling crises in Europe and the Middle East led a large swathe of the electorate to conclude that foreign policy is too important to be left to the technocrats.

President-elect Trump deftly exploited this lingering anti-establishment sentiment first by picking JD Vance as his running mate and then by defining himself against Harris — who did everything she could to advertise the Democratic party to anti-Trump neoconservatives, up to and including by christening Liz Cheney a core campaign surrogate — as the anti-war candidate.

The difficult but necessary work of resolving the Ukraine war, the most dangerous and destructive conflict on the European continent since 1945, now falls to the incoming Trump administration. But doing so requires coming to grips with, and rejecting, the shibboleths and superstitions that have characterized the established approach to Ukraine.

When diagnosing the crises facing U.S. foreign policy, it pays to consult the prior generation of American diplomats. As is well known, the Cold War exercised a disciplining effect on its American and Soviet figurants. The neck to neck nature of that rivalry, coupled with what both parties recognized as the catastrophic consequences of direct confrontation, meant that neither side was in a position to dictate to the other.

The two superpowers were bound to a shared logic of strategic caution that permitted and, indeed, necessitated competition on the margins but harshly discouraged an uncompromising “winner takes all” mentality on existential questions of war and peace.

This provided fertile ground for the development of a decision-making community eager to learn from their mistakes, obsessively grasping for even the most minute ways in which U.S. policy can be refined or reformed. It is not brute coercive force but rather a persistent open-mindedness, tempered by a nagging recognition and respect for the limits of American power, that produced such exertions of political genius as the long telegram and policy of detente that enabled the U.S. to contend on favorable footing with its Soviet competitor.

Keep reading

Critiquing The Former CFR Chief’s Proposed Compromise For Ending The Ukrainian Conflict

He deserves credit for saying what no policy influencer of his caliber has dared to, and his proposal for phased sanctions relief is also very pragmatic, but other parts of his proposed compromise are unrealistic.

Former Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) President Richard Haass recently published a detailed article for his think tank’s journal about how “The Perfect Has Become the Enemy of the Good in Ukraine: Why Washington Must Redefine Its Objectives”. He observed that the US never clearly defined what victory means, which has led to false expectations, deep disappointment, and confusion about the endgame. Haass then proceeds to explain why the US should push Ukraine to compromise with Russia.

According to him, it can’t realistically restore its pre-2014 borders, nor outlast Russia in the ongoing “war of attrition”. Zelensky’s much-ballyhooed “Victory Plan” “is not a plan for victory, but a prescription for continued war”, Haass wrote, warning that “If Kyiv’s allies walk away, it could end up being a prescription for defeat.” Instead, he suggests settling for Ukraine remaining “an independent, sovereign, and economically viable country”, which requires ending hostilities as soon as possible.

To that end, its Western partners “should tell Kyiv that Western support cannot be expected to continue at or near current levels without it. But they should also make an ironclad pledge to do everything in their power to provide Ukraine with arms for the long haul.” This includes giving it long-range weapons as a deterrent to Russia resuming the conflict at a later date. A buffer zone would also ideally be carved out along the Line of Contact, potentially with peacekeepers, but neither side would give up their claims.

Keep reading

Five Reasons Why Trump Should Revive The Draft Russian-Ukrainian Peace Treaty

Trump has everything to gain by picking up where everyone left off over two and a half years ago.

The Wall Street Journal’s report that Trump wants to create a Western-patrolled DMZ along the Line of Contact (LOC) for freezing the Ukrainian Conflict, which was analyzed here and here, dangerously runs the risk of escalating tensions with Russia to the point of a Cuban-like brinksmanship crisis. It would therefore be much better for him to revive the draft Russian-Ukrainian peace treaty from spring 2022 instead.

Keep reading

10 Obstacles To Trump’s Reported Plan For Western/NATO Peacekeepers In Ukraine

It was recently assessed that “The Clock Is Ticking For Russia To Achieve Its Maximum Goals In The Ukrainian Conflict” after the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump plans to organize a Western/NATO peacekeeping mission in Ukraine without the US’ participation in order to freeze the conflict. This is obviously a lot easier said than done.

Here’s what can offset this scenario by either delaying it long enough for Russia to end the conflict on its own terms or capsizing Trump’s plan completely:

1. The Europeans Fear A Direct Kinetic Escalation With Russia

France’s tough talk earlier this year about conventionally intervening in the conflict and Poland subsequently refusing to rule out its participation as well mask the Europeans’ fear of a direct kinetic escalation with Russia. Trump will have to masterfully leverage the US’ influence over them and NATO as a whole in order to coerce his country’s European partners into putting their security on the line by going through with this risky plan. It could always backfire, after all, and inadvertently spark World War III.

2. Public Opinion In The Polish Lynchpin Is Strongly Against This

It’s difficult to imagine a Western/NATO peacekeeping mission in Ukraine without Poland’s leading participation, but public opinion is strongly against this after a reputable survey over the summer showed that 69% of Poles are opposed to dispatching troops to that neighboring country in any capacity. As mutual Polish-Ukrainian mistrust worsens as explained here, here, and here, it’ll become a very tough sell, plus Poles fear that they’ll once again be exploited by the West while getting nothing at all in return.

3. Trump’s Prior Rhetoric About Article 5 Doesn’t Inspire Confidence

Another hurdle that’ll have to be overcome is regaining confidence in Trump due to his prior rhetoric about Article 5 after he declared in February that the US won’t protect those NATO members who haven’t spent at least 2% of their GDP on defense. He even threatened that “I would encourage [Russia] to do whatever the hell they want.” Even though most now meet that target, they might still fear that he’ll attach more strings to Article 5, which they’ll rely on for defense if they participate in this mission.

4. It’s Unclear Exactly What Trump Would Do If Russia Hit NATO Troops

Trump will also have to convince NATO members that his response to Russia hitting their troops will balance the line between fulfilling Article 5’s perceived commitments while avoiding an escalation that could spiral into World War III. They also need to be sure that he’ll go through with it and not back down. Moreover, this would have to be clearly communicated to Russia too, who he’ll have to deter. There’s a lot that can go wrong anywhere along this sequence of events so its success can’t be taken for granted.

5. NATO Is Unprepared For A Prolonged Non-Nuclear Hot War With Russia

Even in the extremely unlikely scenario that neither Russia nor the US resorts to nukes in the event of direct kinetic exchanges between them, then NATO would be unprepared for waging a prolonged non-nuclear hot war with Russia. It’s losing the “race of logistics” by far, no progress was made during the last NATO Summit on the “military Schengen” for facilitating such movements eastward, and the bloc only has 5% of the air defenses needed to protect itself. NATO might therefore ultimately lose to Russia.

Keep reading