Tag: russia

Trump Believes Russia Will Win In Ukraine, It’s Just A Matter Of How Long

“The president’s view is Russia is going to win, it’s a matter of how long it takes,” said a senior, unnamed White House official to Politico this week, reflecting on President Trump’s view on where the war stands.

“Russia has the bigger economy, has the bigger military, has more than enough bodies to throw into the meat grinder, and just doesn’t care. And although they are making slow progress, they are still making progress,” the official added. “The president just wants to stop the killing.”

Indeed the last several weeks have seen clear Russian gains on the ground in Eastern Ukraine, with a steady flow of reports of towns, settlements, and villages being newly captured in Donetsk and elsewhere.

There’s been some confusion over Trump’s policy in arming Kiev. He has gone further than he ever has before in approving new anti-air defense systems, but still appears to be ruling out long-range offensive weapons, amid conflicting reports.

Has realism finally set in concerning Washington policy? It should have been evident from the start of this horrific ‘war of attrition’ that Ukraine was never going to win.

Still, Zelensky has resisted doing the one thing which could end the war – make territorial concessions. He hasn’t so much as offered to give up Crimea.

Keep reading

Trump Clarifies No Long-Range Missiles To Ukraine, Declares “I’m On Nobody’s Side”

Only this week are further contents of a July 4 phone call between Presidents Trump and Zelensky being revealed, but it comes amid accusations of fake news and taking statements out of context.

“Volodymyr, can you hit Moscow? … Can you hit St Petersburg too?” – that’s reportedly what Trump posed to the Ukrianian leader in their July 4th call, which came the day following the president had a disappointing call Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

Zelensky responded: “Absolutely. We can if you give us the weapons.” All of this is according to a report in Financial Times, which the White House is now pushing back against. The FT presented the exchange as indicative of a new US approach of quietly encouraging Ukraine’s military to strike Moscow and other targets deeper inside Russia.

Press secretary Karoline Leavitt has said the FT’s framing of the call was misleading and without proper context. “The Financial Times is notorious for taking words wildly out of context to get clicks because their paper is dying,” she has stated.

Trump sought to clarify in remarks to reporters on Tuesday that Zelensky “shouldn’t target Moscow” and proclaimed in interesting and ironic remarks that he’s “on nobody’s side” – but that simply he wants the killing to stop.

The major announcement which had been planned for Monday did not include any new package of offensive long-range missiles (that the public knowns about at least).

“President Trump was merely asking a question, not encouraging further killing. He’s working tirelessly to stop the killing and end this war,”  Leavitt has added.

All of this helped paint a picture of Trump doing a complete 180 on Ukraine policy. To some extent he has – given he has continued sending Kiev arms packages, albeit ‘defensive’ in nature, supposedly. More anti-air defenses have been approved, despite that America’s own stockpiles are being depleted.

But clearly the White House is somewhat feeling the sting of pushback and angry criticism from among the Right and Trump’s base.

Keep reading

Here’s How Trump Was Manipulated Into Mission Creep

Zelensky, anti-Russian US hawks, Melania, and the Mainstream Media each exploited in their own way his false expectation that Putin would agree to a ceasefire-partnership deal.

Many are struggling to make sense of Trump’s decision to clumsily thread the needle between radically escalating US involvement in the Ukrainian Conflict and walking away from it. The preceding hyperlinked analysis concluded that he was manipulated into this by his advisors, who exploited his false expectation that Putin would agree to a ceasefire that doesn’t resolve the root security-related causes of the conflict in exchange for a resource-centric strategic partnership. This observation will now be elaborated upon.

Trump campaigned on the promise of ending the Ukrainian Conflict “on day one”, which he later admitted was an “exaggeration”. He claimed that his friendship with Putin and keen dealmaking skills would easily bring this about. In pursuit of that end, Trump tried sweet-talking Putin by blaming the conflict on Biden and Zelensky, lending credence to Russia’s claims that Ukraine’s NATO aspirations posed a threat to its security, and promising that “Crimea will stay with Russia” once the conflict ends.

To further sweeten his proposal for an unconditional ceasefire that would essentially freeze the conflict along the Line of Contact, Trump also suggested a resource-centric strategic partnership with Russia. For his part, Putin suggested the same, albeit with the intent of encouraging Trump to coerce Zelensky into Russia’s demanded concessions for peace. Nothing was ultimately achieved due to the resultant deadlock, which Trump apparently took personally, thus making him susceptible to manipulation.

After spring’s US-Ukrainian minerals deal was signed, Zelensky began more loudly talking about his earlier interest in an unconditional ceasefire, which influenced Trump into thinking that Putin is the only obstacle to peace due to the ceasefire conditions that the Russian leader demanded in June 2024. Trump had already speculated that Putin is “tapping [him] along” so Zelensky’s rhetorical reversal from pledging to fight till Russia’s strategic defeat to calling for an unconditional ceasefire was timely and strategic.

It wasn’t just Zelensky whispering in Trump’s ear that Putin was playing him but also anti-Russian hawks like Lindsey Graham and even his own wife Melania, who Trump revealed on Monday would challenge his claim of “wonderful” calls with Putin by pointing out that Russia was still bombing Ukraine. In parallel with this, the Mainstream Media claimed that Putin was “humiliating” Trump, which aimed to take advantage of his pride and desire for praise from his critics alike to push him into mission creep.

Keep reading

Russia Unleashes ‘Most Massive’ Attack Since War’s Start On Zelensky’s Hometown 

Russia unleashed a massive overnight assault on Ukraine, deploying 400 Shahed and decoy drones along with a ballistic missile, Ukraine military authorities say.

The drones rained down primarily on four major cities, including Kharkiv in the northeast, Kryvyi Rih in central Ukraine – which is President Zelensky’s hometown, Vinnytsia in the west, and Odesa in the south. These fresh strikes primarily targeted energy infrastructure and injured at least 15 people.

This month has seen record numbers of daily Russian drone strikes on Ukraine, coming also at a moment of conflicting reports over Trump policy toward arming Ukraine.

“Russia continues to rely on the same tactics,” President Zelensky said in response to the latest attacks, while emphasizing the need for stronger air defenses. He’s calling for a stronger support stance from Washington. 

According to details of the fresh attack on Zelensky’s hometown:

Kryvyi Rih, in central Ukraine, faced “the most massive attack … since the beginning of the war,” said the head of the city’s military administration, Oleksandr Vilkul, adding that it involved a ballistic missile and 28 drones. The onslaught sparked several fires and left parts of the city without electricity and water, he added.

Zelensky said Russia had targeted energy infrastructure in the city and that 15 people had been wounded there.

Trump’s much touted major Monday announcement merely threatened more Russian sanctions, and set a 50-day deadline for peace talks to happen.

However, the 50-day deadline has left some US lawmakers and European officials fearful that this simply gives Russia time to gain more ground before any potential peace deal is finalized.

“We appreciate President Trump’s decision to supply more weapons to Ukraine, but we would like the US to share in the cost,” said EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, at a moment Trump is calling for NATO states to do more.

Below: Kryvyi Rih, Zelensky’s hometown, faces blackouts and water cuts after waves of Russian strikes…

Keep reading

Russia warns of nuclear Armageddon after Trump’s latest Ukraine move

Donald Trump was today warned by Moscow that he is pushing Russia towards nuclear war with his new go-ahead for arms to Ukraine and the threat of punitive sanctions.

State TV propagandist and war pundit Aleksandr Sladkov said: “Trump is trying to scare us with missiles, but this is difficult to do… Trump should be scared. Everyone is trying to push us to turn Kyiv and Lviv into Hiroshima and Nagasaki.”

The Ukrainian leadership – in calling for new missiles to strike Russian territory – “is taking the most active part in this”. It comes as Fox News fans declare it’s the ‘end of MAGA’ as Donald Trump loses it in press conference.

The new Trump deal green lights the supply of possible $10 billion worth of defensive and offensive missiles and other arms, to be paid for by US allies in Europe along with Canada, as well as the threat of sledgehammer sanctions if Putin refuses to negotiate in 50 days.

Sladkov declared: “Imagine our country under attack by American cruise missiles, like Yugoslavia, Iraq, etc. I am sure that the Yars should go in response.”

Yars are Russia’s main land-based strategic nuclear weapons – each missile typically carries three or four nuclear warheads.

Each has a yield estimated between 100 and 300 kilotons, making each warhead between seven and 20 times more powerful than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

Frothing Putin TV propagandist Vladimir Solovyov claimed the arming of Ukraine by NATO meant a full scale war.

“The question is about the survival of our country,” he fumed on Kremlin-funded state TV. We are already at war. It cannot be avoided. The [Western] task is to destroy our country…. We are not fighting in Ukraine, we are fighting with NATO. Understand this already.”

Keep reading

Russia’s Doctrine of “Peaceful Coexistence”. A Solution to Avoiding WWIII?

Introductory Note 

The doctrine of peaceful coexistence was first formulated by Moscow in the wake of the 1918-1920 war against Soviet Russia.

It was presented to the Genoa Conference in April 1922.

The “unspoken” 1918-20 war against Russia (barely acknowledged by historians) was launched two months after the November 7, 1917 Revolution on January 12 1918.

It was an outright “NATO style” invasion consisting of  the deployment of more than 200,000 troops of which 11,000 were from the US, 59,000 from the UK. 15,000 from France.  Japan which was an Ally of Britain and America during World War I  dispatched 70,000 troops. 

The article below entitled Genoa Revisted: Russia and Coexistence was written by my late father Evgeny Chossudovsky in April 1972 (in commemoration of the Genoa 1922 Conference). It was published by Foreign Affairs.

“Half a century ago, on April 10, 1922, Luigi Facta, Prime Minister of Italy, solemnly opened the International Economic Conference at Genoa.Lloyd George, the prime mover of the Conference, was among the first speakers. He called it “the greatest gathering of European nations which has ever assembled,” aimed at seeking in common “the best methods of restoring the shattered prosperity of this continent.” (See text below)

At the height of the Cold War, the Foreign Affairs article was the object of a “constructive debate” in the corridors of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).  According to the NYT:

“Mr. [Evgeny] Chossudovsky wants a United Nations Decade of Peaceful Coexistence, a new Treaty Organization for European Security and Cooperation which would embrace all Europe, and comprehensive bilateral and multilateral cooperation in everything from production and trade to protection of health and environment and “strengthening of common cultural values.” …

Skeptics, of course, can point out that Mr. Chossudovsky’s argument; has lots of holes in it, not least in his strained efforts to prove that peaceful coexistence has always been Soviet policy. Nevertheless, he has made such a refreshing and needed contribution to the East‐West dialogue that it would be neither gracious nor appropriate to answer him with traditional types of debating ploys.

Unquestionably, East‐West cooperation in all the fields he mentions is very desirable, and so is East‐West cooperation in other fields he doesn’t mention such as space. And he is pushing an open door when he laments the colossal burdens of the arms race. (Harry Schwarz, The Chossudovsky Plan,  New York Times, March 20, 1972, emphasis added)

Keep reading

By the Numbers — Western Propaganda on Russian Losses

Over the past week, the Western media has frantically pushed the narrative that Russia is suffering massive losses. Marco Rubio’s remarks in Kuala Lumpur a couple of days ago is a typical example.

One hundred thousand since January? But it is not just Rubio… The Economist provides a more modest estimate, but the key word is estimate:

As of July 9th our tracker suggests there have been between 900,000 and 1.3m Russian casualties since the war began, including some 190,000–350,000 deaths. That updates assessments from other sources, which put total casualties above 1m at the end of June. Our numbers suggest roughly 31,000 Russians may have been killed in the summer offensive so far, which began in earnest on May 1st.

There is too little data to generate a comparable live estimate for Ukraine. However, a catalogue of the known dead and missing from UALosses, a website, implies that between 73,000 and 140,000 Ukrainian soldiers have died since the invasion began.

Talk about lazy reporters. There is plenty of data out there if you simply do basic analysis. For example, start with social media. In the age of ubiquitous smartphones and social media platforms, it is impossible to hide death notices — aka obituaries — and pictures of funerals and graveyards. There are hundreds of images of Ukrainian funerals and of graveyards with a literal sea of Ukrainian flags fluttering over a vast expanse of freshly dug graves. Not so in Russia. There are a few, but nothing to match the quantity displayed on Ukrainian channels. Here is one example from the cemetery in Khmelnitsky.

Again, there are a few videos of some cemeteries in Russia, but nothing to match the scale of what we can see in Ukraine.

Western intelligence analysts have access to satellite imagery and the capability to look at cemeteries in both Russia and Ukraine and compare where the most new graves are being dug. I swear I wrote an article on this with those images, but I can’t find it. But I did make an interesting discovery while searching for it… Western satellites and media companies are doing nothing to make that comparison.

Keep reading

NATO Turning Moldova Into ‘Cannon Fodder’ To Confront Russia: Kremlin

Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) on Monday issued a rare statement accusing the West, under US leadership, of turning Moldova into a military outpost aimed at confronting Russia, akin to what has happened over several years with Ukraine.

The SVR’s provocative statement said Washington wants to use the country as “cannon fodder” in future hostilities, which is allegedly being fast-tracked by Western foreign policy decision-makers.

The statement further alleged that NATO wants to turn tiny Moldova into a “military testing ground” by modernizing its railways to European specifications and constructing major logistics hubs for future Western military deployments. This also includes serious upgrades to airfields, to host military planes, according to Russian state media.

Russian intelligence also accused Moldovan President Maia Sandu of surrendering national interests to Western powers, dubbing her administration a “comprador regime” – and that her pro-European Party of Action and Solidarity is being propped up and strengthened by the West.

These charged can’t exactly be dismissed as paranoia or propaganda, given for example that just last year the United Kingdom inked a new defense pact with Moldova, precisely to counter ‘Russian aggression’ – as we previously detailed.

The tiny Eastern European nation bordering Ukraine has experienced the same kind of internal political pro-EU vs. pro-Russia tug of war historically on display in other countries such as Ukraine or Georgia.

The UK foreign ministry described the defense agreement as about “building on extensive cooperation between the two countries and strengthening Moldovan resilience against external threats.”

One thing which has long alarmed the West is the presence of Russian ‘peacekeeping’ troops in Moldova’s breakaway Transnistria region. 

As for Transnistria, although it has diverse ethnic demographics almost equally apportioned between Russians, Moldovans, Romanians and Ukrainians, the Russian demographic slightly ekes out its counterparts with a plurality of 29% of Transnistrians belonging to the group.

Keep reading.

WAPO: TRUMP WANTS TO BOMB MOSCOW AND ST PETERSBURG

The Mockingbird Media press is releasing comments allegedly from President Trump during his recent conversations with Ukrainian President Zelenskiy.

During one of the conversations with Zelensky, Trump wondered why Ukraine had not yet struck Moscow. Zelensky replied: “We can if you give us weapons,” reported WaPo.

In response, Trump said that Ukraine should put more pressure on Putin – not only in Moscow, but also in St. Petersburg.

The WaPo also reports Trump considered transferring Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, wrote Clash Report. The Tomahawk is an infamous long-range U.S. cruise missile that carried nuclear weapons in the past.

Although these missiles are not currently included in the military aid package, their supply may be activated later — as a tool to increase pressure if Trump wants to.

Keep reading

Over $4B Pledged to Ukraine Reconstruction

The Ukraine Recovery Conference 2025 (URC) on July 10-11 in Rome concluded with joint agreements to provide Ukraine with 3.55 billion euros for reconstruction. “We received a clear message from Ukraine’s friends and partners: they are ready to invest in our recovery,” Oleksii Kuleba, Deputy Prime Minister for the Restoration of Ukraine and Minister for the Development of Communities and Territories stated. There is false hope that Ukraine will exist after this prolonged conflict.

The Ministry approved of five agreements worth over 370 million euros during this conference. The Italian Foreign Ministry agreed to offer 100% insurance coverage for banks on export loans up to 1.5 billion euros. If a bank lends money to support exports to Ukraine but the borrower fails to repay, the government-backed institution will take the loss. The claim is that the guarantee will safeguard Italian companies so that they may continue exporting goods and services to Ukraine. Ukrainian buyers will also have access to credit, and with the 100% insurance guarantee, banks may lower credit standards to otherwise risky borrowers. The potential for fraud is enormous. Worse, the Italian government and therefore the Italian people will be on the hook for 1.5 billion euros amid a highly unstable environment where repayment is not guaranteed.

The European Union and development banks also signed 10 agreements worth 929.3 million euros at the Rome conference. The World Bank through in $200 million as well for good measure. “Rebuilding Ukraine is not just about our country. It’s also about your countries, your companies, your technology, your jobs,” Zelensky said. Quite contrary as these government programs are selling out domestic policy in favor of a foreign government. The people do not benefit in any meaningful way as Europe has never relied on Ukraine for trade. Europe was more beholden to Russia before this ongoing war, which is precisely why they are experiencing a worsening energy crisis.

Keep reading