Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14413
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Tue Jun 03, 2025 6:05 pm

WHEN THE STRATEGY OF WORDS FIGHTS THE STRATEGY OF FORCE, WHO WINS THE WAR

Image
By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

On the one hand, there are the words.

In the analysis of Oleg Tsarev, the leading Ukrainian opposition leader now in Crimea, the end-of-war terms presented by the Russian side at Istanbul on Monday afternoon are “’not an ultimatum at all,’ [Russian delegation head Vladimir] Medinsky has stressed. Of course, Medinsky (lead image, left) is right. This proposal is not an ultimatum, but only a requirement for the complete and unconditional surrender of Zelensky.”

On the other hand, there is the force.

Moscow military blogger reports and the Defense Ministry bulletin on the battlefield operations of Monday indicate little change in the volume of Russian drone attacks, the Ukrainian casualties, and territorial gains around the May average. In fact, Monday’s casualty rate was fractionally below Sunday’s. While the Russian Army continues its westward advance along each of the five army group directions, there has been no resumption of the Russian electric war campaign. There has also been no reply to the Ukrainian operation of June 1 striking the strategic bomber airfields at Murmansk, Irkutsk, Amur, Ryazan and Ivanovo, and the bridge and railway attacks at Kursk and Bryansk. “I hope”, commented Boris Rozhin, author of the influential Colonel Cassad military blog, “that the military-political leadership will find a way to adequately respond. The blow should be painful… As long as we are waging a limited war, the enemy is waging a total war, the purpose of which is the destruction of our country and people. And no peace talks will change this. The longer it is in coming, the more unpleasant surprises.”

On the one hand, at the Çırağan Palace on June 1, there was the meeting of 12 Russian negotiators (unchanged from the first meeting) with 14 Ukrainian negotiators (minor changes ) for just over one hour. The Russian delegation leader, Vladimir Medinsky, then briefed the press for nine minutes. He followed the press briefing by Rustem Umerov (lead image, right) for the Ukrainian side, also reading from a notepaper like Medinsky. Umerov, the Ukrainian Defense Minister, was the nominal delegation leader but outranked by Andrei Yermak, the chief policymaker for Vladimir Zelensky in the presidential office. Yermak told the press: “The Russians are doing everything not to cease fire and continue the war. New sanctions are very important now. Rationality is not about Russia.”

On the other hand, before the three o’clock session Medinsky met in private with the nominal head of the Ukrainian delegation, Defense Minister Rustem Umerov, for two and a half hours. There has been no disclosure of who also attended on each side and what was said, except that, according to Tass, “this predetermined the effective course of further negotiations.”

This fatuity cannot conceal that real negotiations had taken place. But the realities on the ground had already overtaken the agenda, as leading Moscow security analyst Yevgeny Krutikov points out. Because the Russian side had already received the Ukrainian term sheet on May 28, and the Russian term sheet was drafted before the Sunday rail, bridge and airfield attacks, “those two memorandums…no longer correspond to the changed realities, but they will have to be discussed, because this was announced in advance, this agenda cannot be abandoned… so the main task of the Russian delegation is to translate the negotiations into a constructive course, if there is any possibility.”

On the one hand, in Moscow on Monday President Vladimir Putin had just one official meeting in the morning; this was with Maria Lvova-Belova to discuss Children’s Day and the welfare of orphans across the country.

On the other hand, in Washington President Donald Trump’s schedule for the day was empty except for lunch, which he ate at one o’clock. He has issued no tweet or press statement on Russia and President Putin since May 27 when Trump announced: “What Vladimir Putin doesn’t realize is that if it weren’t for me, lots of really bad things would have already happened to Russia, and I mean REALLY BAD. He’s playing with fire!”

Interpreted in the warfighting context, as it must be, Trump was saying that the US, including its European allies and the Kiev regime, is holding escalation dominance and intends to keep it. This means the firepower to decide what happens to Russia next without being deterred by anything Russia says or does. The “fire”, Trump meant, he intends to keep for the US and its allies in the European war. The “fire” doesn’t and won’t belong to Russia – Trump means to deter Putin from “playing” with it.

Calling the five airfield strikes terrorism rather than acts of war; dating the operational plan to the Biden Administration, not to Trump; minimizing the physical damage, cost, and number of Tupolev bombers hit; unravelling the logistical details from source of explosives to drone launch; and faulting Russian internal security and airbase defence – these details, comments a well-informed Moscow source, are “beside the point. The reality of this is on Putin. So what did he tell Lavrov to tell Trump through Rubio on Sunday night? What did he tell Medinsky to tell Umerov and Yermak for Zelensky on Monday afternoon? This is now simple strategic either/or and yes or no – no more operational tit for tat. Either Putin told Trump to order de-escalation, or Russia will escalate and destroy the enemy’s capabilities to fight on. This is the Oreshnik moment.”

A western military source responds: “I’ve read the [Russian] terms from beginning to end but I can’t find a correlation between them and what we’re seeing, full spectrum, on the battlefield. Either Putin releases the General Staff to assert escalation dominance now, or there is no point in continuing negotiations on the memorandums and term sheets, no point in ceasefires, no point at all in meeting Trump or letting him grandstand for peace. The discipline, if I can call it that, of the Russian warfighters is unrealistic.”

June 1 — here is the map of the Ukrainian strikes against the Russian nuclear bomber force:
Image

Anticipation of an attack on these airbases, where the nuclear-capable Tupolev-95 and Tu-22M3 bombers are parked in the open to comply with Russia-US treaty inspection requirements, was published in this US source in April 2024. The satellite imagery of the five airfields and their bomber and tanker aircraft since the Sunday strikes which have been published so far does not substantiate the Ukrainian damage claims. Analysis by Oleg Tsarev of reports in Kiev of competition between the military intelligence agency GUR, headed by Kirill Budanov, and Vasily Maslyuk, head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), suggests the former was in charge of the railway attacks in Kursk and Bryansk, while the SBU was responsible for the airfield operation. “Many write that behind the attack on the strategic airbases are the British. Possibly but unlikely – the GUR in Ukraine is under the MI6 while the SBU is under the CIA. These agencies compete fiercely…The consequences of competition between the GUR and the SBU will have far-reaching consequences.”

June 2 — Follow the timeline and the details of the daylong proceedings in Istanbul reported by the state press agency, RIA Novosti.

This source also revealed that an hour and a half before the main session began, the Ukrainian delegation had “met with the representatives of Germany, Italy and the UK and coordinated positions.”

Western and Ukrainian media reports indicate this meeting was at deputy ranking level, not at the level of principals. It is unclear, so far unreported, who represented the US and France following General Keith Kellogg’s announcement last week that “we’ll have what we call the E3 with us, that is the national security advisors from Germany, France, and Great Britain.” The British representative yesterday, for example, was Nicholas Catsaras, nor Jonathan Powell who was at the first Istanbul round on May 16.

Image
No name and country identifications have been published by these sources of the deputy officials in their Istanbul meeting photograph. Sources: https://x.com/Barnes_Joe/status/1929512752793432076 and https://x.com/SpoxUkraineMFA/status/1929474274865115430

This downgrade on the western side, in parallel with the secretive Medinsky-Umerov talks, and the absence of Rubio as US national security advisor and Kellogg as Trump’s negotiator indicate there was preliminary understanding that nothing more significant would take place than public exchange of term sheets; announcement of agreement on a new and large exchange of prisoners and corpses; and the names of children Kiev is claiming for return.

Umerov has intimated that the June 2 session was little more than a mail drop and PR show. “Our teams will have a week to study the documents, after which we will be able to coordinate further steps”, he reportedly said, according to Moscow press reports. The third round is proposed by the Ukrainians between June 20 and 30.

Umerov is also reported as telling reporters in Istanbul: “If the Russians were ready for a ceasefire, their planes would not have been blown up. Russian journalists asked Umerov questions about the passenger train blown up in the Bryansk region, but he ignored them.”

Image
The principals in the Russian delegation include Alexander Fomin (2rd from left, Defense Ministry), Igor Kostyukov (GRU), Vladimir Medinsky (Kremlin), and Mikhail Galuzin (Foreign Ministry).

Here is the full verbatim text of the Russian term sheet published in Istanbul as “Proposals of the Russian Federation (Memorandum) on the settlement of the Ukrainian crisis”.

Image
“Proposals of the Russian Federation (Memorandum) on the settlement of the Ukrainian crisis

Section I
The main parameters of the final settlement

1) International legal recognition of the entry of Crimea, the LPR, the DPR, the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions into the Russian Federation; the complete withdrawal of units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and other paramilitary formations from their territories;

2) the neutrality of Ukraine, which implies its refusal to join military alliances and coalitions, as well as a ban on any military activities of third states on the territory of Ukraine and the deployment of foreign armed formations, military bases and military infrastructure there;

3) termination and refusal to conclude in the future international treaties and agreements incompatible with the provisions of paragraph 2 of this Section;

4) confirmation of Ukraine’s status as a state free of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, with the establishment of a direct ban on their receipt, transit and deployment on the territory of Ukraine;

5) establishment of the maximum number of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and other military formations of Ukraine, the maximum number of weapons and military equipment and their permissible characteristics; the dissolution of Ukrainian nationalist formations as part of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the National Guard;

6) ensuring the fullness of the rights, freedoms and interests of the Russian and Russian-speaking population; giving the Russian language the status of an official language;

7) the legislative prohibition of glorification and propaganda of Nazism and neo-Nazism, the dissolution of nationalist organizations and parties;

8) removal of all existing and refusal to introduce new economic sanctions, prohibitions and restrictive measures between the Russian Federation and Ukraine;

9) addressing a range of issues related to family reunification and displaced persons;

10) waiver of mutual claims in connection with the damage caused in the fighting;

11) lifting restrictions on the UOC [Ukrainian Orthodox Church];

12) gradual restoration of diplomatic and economic relations (including gas transit), transport and other communications, including with third countries.

Section II
Ceasefire terms

Option 1.

The beginning of the complete withdrawal of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and other paramilitary formations from the territory of the Russian Federation, including the DPR, LPR, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, and their withdrawal to a distance agreed by the Parties from the borders of the Russian Federation, in accordance with regulations to be approved.

Option 2. “Package offer”:

1) a ban on the redeployment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and other paramilitary formations of Ukraine, with the exception of movements for the purpose of withdrawal to a distance agreed by the Parties from the borders of the Russian Federation;

2) cessation of mobilization and the beginning of demobilization;

3) termination of foreign supplies of military products and foreign military assistance to Ukraine, including the provision of satellite communication services and the provision of intelligence;

4) exclusion of the military presence of third countries on the territory of Ukraine, termination of the participation of foreign specialists in military operations on the side of Ukraine;

5) guarantees of Ukraine’s refusal to undertake sabotage and subversive activities against the Russian Federation and its citizens;

6) creation of a bilateral centre for monitoring and control of the ceasefire regime;

7) mutual amnesty of ‘political prisoners’ and release of detained civilians;

8) lifting martial law in Ukraine;

9) announcement of the date of the elections of the President of Ukraine and the Verkhovna Rada, which must take place no later than 100 days after the lifting of martial law.

10) signing of an Agreement on the implementation of the provisions contained in Section I.

Section III
Sequence of steps and timing of their implementation

1) starting work on the text of the Agreement;

2) the announcement of a 2-3-day truce to collect the bodies of the dead in the “gray zone”;

3) unilateral transfer of 6,000 bodies of Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers;

4) the signing of a Memorandum on a ceasefire with specific dates for the fulfillment of all its provisions and the date of signing of a future Final Settlement Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the Agreement);

5) from the moment of the beginning of the withdrawal of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, a 30-day ceasefire regime is established. At the same time, the complete withdrawal of AFU units from the territory of the Russian Federation and the full implementation of the ‘package agreement’ must be completed within these 30 days.;

6) holding elections and forming government bodies on the territory of Ukraine;

7) signing the Pact;

8) approval of the signed Treaty by a legally binding UN Security Council resolution;


9) ratification, entry into force and implementation of the Treaty.
https://johnhelmer.net/when-the-strateg ... more-91764

******

Playing with fire
Scott Ritter

June 2, 2025 , 12:39 pm .

Image
A 6-kilometer-high column of US nuclear bombs rises from ground zero over the ruins of Hiroshima (Photo: George Caron/US Army)

In 2012, Russian President Vladimir Putin declared that "nuclear weapons remain the most important guarantee of Russia's sovereignty and territorial integrity and play a key role in maintaining regional balance and stability."

In the years since, Western analysts and observers have accused Russia and its leaders of irresponsibly invoking the threat of nuclear weapons as a way to "show off their military might," a strategic bluff to hide the operational and tactical deficiencies of Russian military capabilities.

In 2020, Russia published an unclassified version of its nuclear doctrine for the first time. The document, "Basic Principles of the State Policy of the Russian Federation in the Field of Nuclear Deterrence," noted that Russia "reserves the right to use nuclear weapons" when Moscow acts "in response to the use of nuclear weapons and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and/or its allies, as well as in the event of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is endangered." The document also stated that Russia reserved the right to use nuclear weapons in the event of "an adversary's attack on critical government or military facilities of the Russian Federation, the disruption of which would undermine the response actions of nuclear forces."

In 2024, Vladimir Putin ordered an update to Russia's nuclear doctrine to take into account the complex geopolitical realities that had emerged from the ongoing Special Military Operation (SMO) in Ukraine, where the conflict had devolved into a proxy war between the collective West (NATO and the US) and Russia.

The new doctrine stated that the use of nuclear weapons would be authorized in the event of "aggression against the Russian Federation and/or its allies by any non-nuclear State with the participation or support of a nuclear State, which would be considered a joint attack."

Russia's nuclear arsenal would also come into play in the event of "actions by an adversary that affect critical state or military infrastructure of the Russian Federation, the disabling of which would disrupt the response actions of nuclear forces."

The threats didn't have to come in the form of nuclear weapons. In fact, the new 2024 doctrine specifically stated that Russia could respond with nuclear weapons to any aggression against Russia that involved "the use of conventional weapons, which poses a critical threat to its sovereignty and/or territorial integrity."

Operation Spider Web, the large-scale unmanned drone attack on critical Russian military infrastructure directly related to Russia's strategic nuclear deterrence, has clearly crossed Russia's red lines regarding triggering a nuclear retaliation and/or a preemptive nuclear strike to prevent further aggression. The Ukrainian SBU, under the personal direction of its chief, Vasyl Malyuk, has claimed responsibility for the attack.

Operation Spider Web is a covert direct action offensive against critical Russian military infrastructure and capabilities directly related to Russia's strategic nuclear deterrence capabilities. At least three airfields were attacked with FPV drones operating from the back of KAMAZ civilian trucks converted into drone launch pads. Dyagilevo Airfield in Ryazan, Belaya Airfield in Irkutsk, and Olenya Airfield in Murmansk, home to Tu-95 and Tu-22 strategic bombers and A-50 early warning aircraft, were attacked, resulting in the destruction and/or severe damage to numerous aircraft.

This would be equivalent to a hostile actor launching drone attacks against U.S. Air Force B-52H bombers based at Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota, and Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana, and against B-2 bombers based at Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri.

The timing of Operation Spider Web is clearly designed to disrupt the peace talks scheduled for June 2 in Istanbul.

First of all, it must be understood that it is impossible for Ukraine to seriously prepare for substantive peace negotiations while planning and executing an operation like Operation Spider Web; even if the SBU carried out this attack, it could not have happened without the knowledge and consent of the Ukrainian president or the defense minister.

Furthermore, this attack could not have occurred without the consent of Ukraine's European partners, particularly Great Britain, France, and Germany, all of whom held direct consultations with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky in the days and weeks leading up to the execution of Operation Spiderweb.

Europe has encouraged Ukrainians to be seen as active supporters of the Istanbul peace process, with the idea that if the talks fail, the blame would fall on Russia, not Ukraine, making it easier for Europe to continue providing military and financial support to kyiv.

American actors appear to be playing a significant role as well: Senators Lyndsay Graham, Republican from South Carolina, and Richard Blumenthal, Democrat from Connecticut, made a joint visit to Ukraine last week, where they coordinated closely with the Ukrainian government on a new package of economic sanctions linked to Russia's willingness to accept peace terms based on a 30-day ceasefire, one of Ukraine's main demands.

Operation Spiderweb appears to be a concerted effort to push Russia away from the Istanbul talks, either by provoking a Russian retaliation that would serve as an excuse for Ukraine to stay home—and an excuse for Graham and Blumenthal to move forward with their sanctions legislation—or by provoking Russia to withdraw from the talks while it considers its options going forward, an act that would also trigger sanctions action by Graham and Blumenthal.

It is unknown to what extent President Trump, who has been pushing for a successful Russia-Ukraine peace talks, was aware of the Ukrainian actions, including whether he approved them in advance—Trump appeared to be unaware of the fact that Ukraine had attacked Russian President Putin with drones during a recent trip to Kursk.

Russia's response to this latest Ukrainian action remains unclear; the drone attacks on Russian military bases followed at least two Ukrainian attacks on Russian railway lines that caused significant damage to locomotives and passenger cars and left dozens of civilians dead and injured.

But one thing is clear: Ukraine could not have carried out Operation Spider Web without the political approval and operational assistance of its Western allies. US and British intelligence services have trained Ukrainian special operations forces in guerrilla warfare and unconventional warfare, and previous Ukrainian attacks on Russian critical infrastructure (the Crimean Bridge and Engels Air Base) are believed to have been carried out with the assistance of US and British intelligence services in the planning and execution phases. Indeed, both the Crimean Bridge and Engels Air Base attacks were considered triggers for the publication of the 2024 Russian nuclear doctrine amendments.

In the past, Russia has responded to provocations from Ukraine and its Western allies with a mixture of patience and determination.

Many have interpreted this stance as a sign of weakness, something that may have influenced the decision by Ukraine and its Western facilitators to carry out such a provocative operation on the eve of crucial peace talks.

The extent to which Russia can continue to show the same level of restraint it has shown in the past is tested by the very nature of the attack: a massive use of conventional weapons that struck Russia's strategic nuclear deterrent, causing damage.

It is not unreasonable to imagine this tactic being used in the future as a means to decapitate Russian strategic nuclear assets (aircraft and missiles) and its leadership—the attack on Putin at Kursk underscores this threat.

If Ukraine can position KAMAZ trucks near Russian strategic airbases, it could also do so against Russian bases housing Russia's mobile missile forces.

The fact that Ukraine is carrying out such an attack also shows the extent to which Western intelligence services are testing the waters for any future conflict with Russia, for which NATO and EU members say they are actively preparing.

We have reached an existential crossroads in EMO.

For Russia, the red lines it deemed necessary to define regarding the possible use of nuclear weapons have been flagrantly violated not only by Ukraine but also by its Western allies.

President Trump, who has claimed to support a peace process between Russia and Ukraine, must now decide how the United States will respond to these developments.

His Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, has acknowledged that under the previous Joe Biden administration, the United States was engaged in a proxy war with Russia. Trump's special envoy to Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, recently acknowledged the same thing about NATO.

In short, by continuing to support Ukraine, both the United States and NATO have become active participants in a conflict that has now crossed the threshold into the use of nuclear weapons.

The United States and the world are on the brink of a nuclear Armageddon of our own making.

Either we break away from the policies that have led us to this situation, or we accept the consequences of our actions and pay the price.

We cannot live in a world where our future is dictated by the patience and restraint of a Russian leader in the face of provocations for which we ourselves are responsible.

Ukraine, not Russia, represents an existential threat to humanity.

NATO, not Russia, is responsible for encouraging Ukraine to behave so recklessly.

And so is the United States. Contradictory statements by US policymakers about Russia provide political cover for Ukraine and its NATO enablers to plan and execute maneuvers like Operation Spiderweb.

Senators Graham and Blumenthal should be charged with sedition if their intervention in Ukraine was carried out to deliberately sabotage a peace process that President Trump claims is central to his vision of future U.S. national security.

But it is Trump himself who must decide the fate of the world.

In the coming hours, we will undoubtedly hear from the Russian president how Russia will respond to this existential provocation.

Trump must also answer.

Telling Graham and Blumenthal and their supporters to abandon sanctions policies against Russia.

Ordering NATO and the EU to cease and desist from further military and financial support to Ukraine.

And taking sides in the EMO.

Choose Ukraine and trigger a nuclear war.

Choose Russia and save the world.

https://misionverdad.com/traducciones/jugando-con-fuego

Google Translator

******

Six Years of Dashed Hopes for Peace and Reconciliation in Ukraine
June 1, 2025

Image
Ukrainian "President" Volodymyr Zelensky, with collages of soldiers and a war-ravaged locality in the background. Illustration: Mahdi Rteil/Al-Mayadeen English.

By Dmitri Kovalevich – May 30, 2025

Zelensky’s presidency, once seen as a hope for peace, has instead deepened conflict, extended authoritarian rule, and aligned Ukraine with Western geopolitical goals, leaving the nation fractured and disillusioned.

Six years ago, on May 20, 2019, Ukraine inaugurated a new president who had defeated by a large margin the incumbent Petro Poroshenko, elected in May 2014. That election occurred barely three months following the coup that ousted Ukraine’s elected and constitutional president, Viktor Yanukovych, and its national legislature.

Poroshenko is one of the richest men in Ukraine. His five-year presidential term firmly placed Ukraine on the global map as a hostile, ‘anti-Russia’ at the service of the Western powers.

Following the 2019 election campaign, the candidate who became president, Volodomyr Zelensky, continued the radical, ethnic nationalism of his predecessor, Poroshenko, even though Zelensky’s election campaign had deceptively suggested that he would end the bloody civil war being waged by Kiev against the people of Donbass since 2014. He hinted he would end the political and cultural repression of pro-Soviet Ukrainians, which was fast becoming generalized in post-coup Ukraine.

Not long after the votes were counted in April 2019, it became clear that the political course laid down by Western embassies during and since the 2014 Euromaidan coup would remain unchanged. Zelensky gradually changed his rhetoric to resemble that of his billionaire predecessor.

A turning point noted by analysts at the time was Zelensky’s visit to London in October 2020 with British intelligence chief Richard Moore. There, dire warnings of ‘Russian interference and aggression’ were relayed to Zelensky by the British official, who reportedly received a sympathetic ear. Eighteen months later, then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson made a special visit to Zelensky in Istanbul in order to sabotage peace talks underway with the Russian Federation. The peace talks were initially positive, but Johnson’s sabotage succeeded.

A ‘president’ with no electoral legitimacy
Zelensky’s term of office expired in April 2024, but more than one year later, he shows no sign of resigning or convening an election. The Ukrainian constitution stipulates elections every five years to the presidency and the legislature (Rada). Zelensky’s political image has undergone significant changes during the past six years.

Prior to 2019, Zelensky was a popular comedian and actor. Today, he is a warmaking president who sees conspiracies against him everywhere. Ukraine’s secret police agency faithfully and regularly publicizes alleged ‘conspiracies’ against him (for the sake of their career prospects).

Power in capitalist states corrupts those who wield it, and for Zelensky, military action against Russia and a claimed need for mass political repression inside the country have become an excuse not only to prolong his rule but also to maximize a concentration of power. Western politicians and mass media have fully encouraged him along an authoritarian path of usurpation of power under the pretext of ‘defending democracy’. However, this pretext is not ‘democracy’ as a fundamental structure of society. Rather, it is used as a tool of power, wielded by authoritarians appropriating the term ‘democrat’ as a kind of trademark for themselves.

A leading figure of the Euromaidan coup of late 2013/early 2014, former Rada legislator Igor Mosiychuk, today compares the behavior of Kyiv’s Western allies to the behavior of looters during a brawl. “Do you know what they remind me of? When two neighbors fight until they bleed, break each other’s arms, and set each other’s house on fire. Other neighbors then shout ‘Put out the fire, stop the fight!’, but at their first opportunity, they run into the house in order to steal everything of value. These are the kind of Western partners we have,” says the now-disillusioned Ukrainian nationalist.

Mosiychuk lives in exile in Europe. On May 25, Zelensky announced new sanctions against him and others deemed to “threaten the interests of Ukraine.”

Six years ago, Zelensky said that he was not afraid of losing his ratings and power as long as people did not needlessly suffer and die. He even promised respect for the language and cultures of Russian-speaking citizens in Ukraine, a lowering of some taxes, and improvements to social services and pensions. However, during his past six-plus years in power, Zelensky has rarely even visited Ukraine outside of Kiev. His recorded video messages to the population of the country are usually produced abroad.

Much travel abroad for the ‘Zelensky project’
Britain’s Sunday Times newspaper reported on May 17 that during his presidency, Zelensky has visited 134 countries. Germany has been the most frequent destination, at 11 times, followed by France at ten and the United States at nine.

Since the beginning of 2025, Zelensky has made 23 trips abroad to 18 countries, reports the newspaper. In 2025 alone, he has made 23 trips to 18 countries and states. Such an emphasis on foreign trips is a sign of Ukraine’s deteriorating independence and of Zelensky’s alienation from his own country. This is a man who wishes that his homeland were other than Ukraine and that his residence were somewhere in London.

There is another reason for Zelensky’s constant tours, and that is the Western powers and their ‘Zelensky project’, whereby the man, the cause he espouses, and the tears he sheds before the cameras are used to split the countries of the Global South away from the influence of Russia and China and return at least some of them ‘to the fold’ of subordination to the West.

Former adviser to the Office of the President of Ukraine, Alexei Arestovych, says that Zelensky’s public relations handlers are continuing an anti-Russian course, thereby condemning so many Ukrainians to death on the battlefields and risking death to the country as a whole. According to Arestovych, many in Ukraine are now hoping for a dreamscape option according to which the Western powers decide to ‘wake up’ and directly join the fighting against Russia. “This is the Zelensky regime’s last hope for keeping its hands over the eyes of the people of Ukraine and preventing them from seeing what lies before the country. It is a last hope because after that, only naked reality remains to be seen, and this is unbearable for many.”



An insoluble conflict?
Legislator Aleksander Dubinsky, a former member of Zelensky’s Servant of the People party, believes that the main goal of Zelensky and his European masters is to turn the war between Ukraine and the Russian Federation into an insoluble ethnic conflict that becomes eternal. However, he is certain that Zelensky and the rabid, ethnic nationalists who surround him are already a thing of the past. Almost no one in Ukraine is betting on their futures.

Dubinsky believes that Zelensky and the ultra-nationalists surrounding him have plenty of troubling warning signs ahead: popular anger over dashed hopes for peace, or at least a lessening of tensions, with Russia following the 2019 election; contempt for Zelensky’s theatrical narcissism; humiliations suffered by the Ukrainian military; and anger by soldiers who who have been beaten and humiliated while risking their lives against their will with a great many losing their lives. All these factors could explode in Ukraine with a new outbreak of violence, a kind of revenge for everything hateful and destructive that has happened since 2014.

Dubinsky’s former colleague, legislator Artem Dmitruk, who has fled to London and resides there, calls May 20, 2019 (the date of Zelensky’s inauguration) the day when hope began to turn into catastrophe. “Nobody could have imagined that everything would end like this… That we would find our country on the brink of extinction; that death would become commonplace; that murders committed in basements or on the streets would become the norm; that hysteria would replace common sense; that ignorance would become a privilege and truth would become a crime.” That is how the former ‘Servant of the People’ apparatchik sums up the results of the six-year rule of his former boss.

According to Dubinsky, it is urgently needed to draw conclusions from the national tragedy being experienced. He warns, in particular, against any kind of theatrical showcasing when choosing future political leaders.

A former employee of the Ukrainian embassy in the United States, political scientist Andrey Telizhenko, has recently projected that a new Ukrainian politician to replace Zelensky will sign a peace agreement with the Russian Federation this year. “This war will continue until the end of the year. At some point, a ‘neutral’ government may come to power, and Zelensky will no longer be there. A temporary government will be formed, and an agreement will be reached between Washington and Moscow to end the conflict. Following that, a new peace process may begin,” he predicts.

According to positive forecasts now being aired in or around the country, Ukraine will be cleansed of neo-Nazi formations, a political opposition will take part in an election process provided safety can be assured all around, and many citizens will return home to participate and vote once they feel it is safe to do so.

Prisoner exchanges are more than they appear
The number of political prisoners being detained in Ukraine is still unknown, but the authorities report daily the detention or arrest of people being accused of ‘treason’. These include anti-fascists, Ukrainians who honor their grandfathers who died in the ranks of the Red Army during the Great Patriotic War, and any and all public critics of Zelensky.

Added to that are businessmen and other people of property who these days find themselves arrested by Ukrainian special police services, and their property is then confiscated. Ransoms are demanded in exchange for the cancellation of arrests.

During the halting peace talks that took place in Istanbul earlier this month, Ukraine and Russia agreed to exchange prisoners, 1,000 on each side. Kiev demanded a ‘one-for-one’ exchange. However, there are far fewer Russian prisoners of war in Ukraine compared to Ukrainian soldiers imprisoned in Russia.

The Russian army has been steadily advancing in recent months; it is mainly Ukrainians who are being captured and taken prisoner. It turns out that Ukrainian authorities are including civilian dissidents disloyal to the Zelensky regime among their ‘Russian prisoners of war’ in the prisoner exchanges. “On the eve of the largest prisoner exchange to date of ‘1,000 for 1,000’, pretrial detention centers in Ukraine began to fill up with prisoners accused of ‘treason’, ‘separatism’, ‘collaborationism’ and other similar political charges. These prisoners were then used in the prisoner-of-war exchange,” reports the Ukrainian online publication Strana on May 20.

Those whom Kiev is offering to exchange for its captured soldiers include businessmen, youth caught taking photos or video of military facilities (strictly forbidden under Ukraine’s martial law regime), people setting fire to the vehicles of military recruiters, and people who were simply set up or betrayed under accusations of ‘pro-Russian’ views or sympathies.

Finding fault for Ukraine’s crisis
Ukrainian political scientist Oleg Yasinsky writes from Chile that the project implemented in Ukraine has aimed at weakening Russia, if not altogether destroying the Russian Federation’s unity, pure and simple. He argues that the project arose long before 2022, even before 2014. According to him, “roles and masks” are now changing, but the Ukrainian state, which has allowed itself to be used in the anti-Russia project, has been “eaten, swallowed and digested by the global corporate power long ago, polluting the political landscape with what is left over”.

According to him, what remains in Ukraine is a desecrated territory, a destroyed people, and a heartless money-making plan that neither Donald Trump nor companies such as BlackRock will be able to realize.

We Ukrainians share blame for the unfolding disaster, according to Yasinsky. “When our tragedy was being drawn up and calculated in advance, many of us clearly saw it, but we lacked the courage, wisdom, or simply the right words to stop the rush into the abyss,” he says.

The most urgent task today, writes Yasinsky, is to use all available means to raise the consciousness of the people of the Western countries upon which Ukraine still depends to wage war. He says what is needed is not “rallies for peace” but mass disobedience and “burning of the military factories in Borrell’s garden.” (Here, Yasinsky is referring to the racist words of EU Foreign Minister Josep Borrell in 2022 when he compared Europe to a “garden” and called the rest of the world a “jungle”.)

Six years of Zelensky’s rule—five years following a stunted presidential election, followed by a one-year-and-counting usurpation of power—has shown Ukrainians that words pronounced in the halls of power in the West mean nothing. If earlier, the rule of Ukrainian presidents at least somewhat correlated with their program and promises, the rule of Zelensky’s regime displays a complete, 180-degree turn, cynically masked by the man’s tears and hysterics.

Ukraine will soon get out of this war and be rid of Zelensky. But the same deception of voters, encouraged and incited by the West, will linger. Indeed, the same deceptions are being tested on citizens of other countries. They, too, are being called upon to sacrifice for the sake of maintaining Western capitalist hegemony. Those among them with a heart and a soul will resist and join with others to chart a path to a different future, one of social justice and respect, and equality between peoples. This cannot come soon enough.

https://orinocotribune.com/six-years-of ... n-ukraine/

*******

Attempt to blow up the Crimean Bridge. 03.06.2025
June 3, 15:03

Image

During the night attack on the Crimean Bridge, the enemy used a submerged kamikaze drone (possibly foreign-made), trying to blow up a bridge support. He failed to do so, but the very fact that the underwater drone passed under the line of barriers clearly hints that there are gaps in the existing bridge security system.

(Video at link.)

Also, during the night attack over Crimea and the Sea of ​​Azov, 4 aerial drones were shot down.

In the morning, the bridge was opened for traffic.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9877269.html

Ivanovo airfield after drone attack 01.06.2026
June 3, 19:02

Image

Satellite images of the airfield in Ivanovo (taken on June 3) appeared after an attempt to attack the airfield with kamikaze drones launched from special trucks. The images do not show any serious damage to the airfield or damaged/burned aircraft.

Image

The planes are still parked in the open, as before.

This confirms that the aircraft were lost at airbases in the Irkutsk and Murmansk regions. The truck did not reach Ukrainka in the Amur region. Judging by the photos, everything is fine in Ivanovo.
Photos of the airfield in the Ryazan region (but according to reports on June 1, they also fought back there) and in Olenegorsk, where a number of aircraft were hit, have not yet been published.

In general, there are certainly no 40 destroyed aircraft. In reality, 12-14 aircraft were damaged at two airfields, some of which were destroyed, some were out of action for lengthy repairs.
I predict that the loss of several Tu-95MS in the coming months will force the program of replacing Tu-95s with Tu-160s, which was stretched out until 2035-2040, to be accelerated. We currently produce 4 Tu-160s per year. At this rate, replacing retired and simply outdated aircraft is, frankly speaking, not a quick matter. But we will have to speed up - strategists are needed one way or another, because it is unclear when the PAK DA will be there again.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9877778.html

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14413
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Wed Jun 04, 2025 11:47 am

From progressive escalation to unrestricted war
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 04/06/2025

Image

“A year ago, the number of Russian drones used in last night's attacks on Ukrainian cities would have been considered a record. Now, it is below average. Russia's war is now fully focused on Ukraine's civilian population, and with an average of about 300 drones and missiles each day, the pace is only increasing. Daily evidence shows the truth: Russia's delusional plan is to destroy Ukraine and its people, no matter how many years it takes. The Russians will continue to murder our people until they are stopped,” Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy Yulia Svyrydenko wrote yesterday. Her message, evidently propagandistic and directed at her foreign allies even though it is written in Ukrainian, contains a series of manipulations and omissions common in official discourse that are representative of the current situation.

Far more capable of manipulating the narrative than the Kremlin, Ukraine has made it seem as though Russian drone and missile attacks were—at least until Sunday, when the bold, ingenious , and audacious attack against part of the nuclear triad was successful enough to be used as an argument in its favor—the only air battle in existence. The start of negotiations is the most dangerous time for the different parties to the war , eager to continue fighting until they gain the necessary strength to impose the terms of the negotiations. And it is also the moment to do their best to show up at the negotiating table with their opponent on the ropes. In this context, the sharp increase in the use of Ukrainian drones began, specifically targeting Russian airports, a civilian infrastructure whose operation they sought to disrupt coinciding with the start of the good weather season and increased travel. The increase in Russian drone and missile bombings was not only a response to the increase in Ukrainian aerial activity, but also focused on industry, not civilian targets. Even Keith Kellogg's post condemning the attacks on Ukrainian cities, which called for a "ceasefire now," was accompanied by an image of the bombing of the Antonov factory, not a civilian target.

Nor are the 300 drones Svyrydenko mentions that Russia can deploy in a single day an exception, as this is also the volume currently being used by Ukraine. However, judging by the news coverage, it might seem that the only Ukrainian airstrike was Sunday's, a Pearl Harbor praised by the headlines, which have failed to mention that this reference equates Ukraine with a member of the Axis, or that the attack was described by Franklin Delano Roosevelt as "a day that will live in infamy." Of course, the media have chosen not to calibrate the comparison or to include in their headlines that the dozen aircraft Russia lost on Sunday are a blow to its credibility, but they will not change the course of the war. As Bloomberg , one of the few media outlets to emphasize this, admitted yesterday, Ukraine does not need a large number of bombers to continue waging war as it has been doing. Ukraine may boast of its success in drone production, but as media outlets such as The Times admit , Russia far surpasses it, and the gap is not only not narrowing, but actually widening. The consequence is that drones have partly replaced missiles, so bombers are now less necessary than they were a year ago, when Ukraine began planning Sunday's operation and the Kinzhal missiles were much more prevalent, and this week's losses would have been more worrying.

Just as it did about a year ago, when Ukraine attacked early warning radars that have no bearing on the current conflict but whose loss would undermine Russia in a broader conflict with the West, the West's demonstration not only seeks to humiliate the Kremlin but also sends a message to its allies and creditors. Kiev may not be able to win this war, considering victory to be the recovery of most or all of the lost territories, but it wants to present itself as a springboard in the common struggle against Russia. This is not only about the defense of Western civilization that Kiev has been touting for years, calling itself an external frontier and fortress against Asian barbarism, but also about offering an added reward of weakening a nuclear enemy. In the delusions of grandeur of those who only stay afloat thanks to loans and subsidies from their allies, the nuclear game does not require the possession of nuclear weapons of their own.

And yet, Donald Trump, who just a few weeks ago accused Volodymyr Zelensky of "playing with World War III," has not reacted in more than two days to an attack in which the question of whether or not the United States was notified in advance remains. Axios , an outlet that generally relies on well-sourced sources within the Washington administration, initially reported that the White House had received the warning, only to later deny it. However, the silence of more than two days from a man who usually conducts much of his work in front of the media and who has not hesitated to write his condemnations of certain bombings in capital letters, must be understood, perhaps as a sign of approval or simply a step back. Before the start of the Istanbul meeting, US representatives insisted on the need to conclude a ceasefire, once again expressed their weariness with the delay in reaching an agreement, and once again pointed to Russia as the cause. Bankova, who, like the Kremlin, has presented a completely unworkable memorandum of maximum terms as a starting point for negotiations, has also been more successful in getting her message across to the Western press, which is always keen to see in Russia the sins it doesn't see in Ukraine.

In any case, convincing Donald Trump remains Ukraine's main incentive, which just minutes after the meeting ended, demanded its allies approve new sanctions against Russia because of the memorandum. The reality is that trust between the parties, which has always been extremely low, is even more limited in these times of military escalation, and even those aspects that until now had worked relatively easily cannot be taken for granted. This is the case with the proposed exchange of bodies of soldiers killed at the front. After the meeting, Vladimir Medinsky clarified that a 6,000-for-600 exchange had not been agreed upon, but that Russia was offering to deliver that number of bodies, which will be transported on a specially prepared train. "If Ukraine sends something our way," the Russian negotiator stated. "We will accept our soldiers," he added, doubting that possibility and implying that Ukraine does not have that number of soldiers or that it will try to pass off Ukrainian soldiers as Russian ones. The same has been suggested, in a much less credible way, by Volodymyr Zelensky, who has suggested that the imbalance between the number of bodies that Russia has handed over this year (4421) and the number that Ukraine has handed over (221) is due to Russia sending bodies of Russian soldiers.

Following Sunday's attacks, in which Ukraine not only targeted military bases with nuclear bombers but also demolished bridges in Zaporozhye, Bryansk, and Kursk, yesterday an SBU operation, which claimed to have used more than a thousand kilos of explosives, unsuccessfully attempted to attack the Kerch Bridge, which connects Crimea with mainland Russia. From a war managed by the United States as a progressive escalation in which military supplies to Ukraine would gradually increase so as not to provoke a direct confrontation with Russia, January saw a shift to a phase of threats and inducements in which Donald Trump naively believed that his good relationship with Vladimir Putin would eliminate the main contradictions between kyiv and Moscow, which cannot be erased with the stroke of a pen in a meeting without a prior negotiation process in which both sides would have to give in. Having failed to achieve this rapid and impossible path to a settlement of the conflict, which could only be false, the war now finds itself in a phase in which all restrictions have disappeared and threats outweigh the inducements.

This is the objective of Ukraine, which has sent a delegation led by Svyrydenko and Ermak to consolidate its relationship with the United States, ensure it is not the party found guilty of the lack of progress in diplomacy, and, above all, to get Donald Trump to support Lindsey Graham's legislation to impose secondary sanctions in the form of 500% tariffs on countries that purchase Russian gas, oil, or uranium. To these objectives, Svyrydenko has added "protection against Russian disinformation." Ukraine, which in these three years and in the previous eight, has enjoyed the protection of the Western media en bloc, the largest communications machine in the world, not only requires weapons, ammunition, intelligence, and funding to sustain the state, but also demands total control of the narrative.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/06/04/de-la ... ricciones/

Google Translator

******

Brief report from the front, June 3, 2025
Expanding the flanks of "driven wedges" destroys the monolith of the Ukrainian Armed Forces' defense. Report by Marat Khairullin with illustrations by Mikhail Popov.
Zinderneuf
Jun 03, 2025

Sumy "Buffer" Zone

From the Russian Ministry of Defense report: Units of the "North" Group have liberated the settlement of Andreevka in the Sumy region through decisive operations.

Andreevka is a small village (approximately 80 residents, marked with a Russian flag).

Image
Буферная Зона=Buffer Zone. ЛБС 31.5.2025=Line of Combat Contact May 31st, 2025. Зона Активности=Zone of Activity.

After the liberation of the settlement of Alekseevka (June 1), it became clear that our command would expand the wedge on the right flank (toward the village of Kondratovka) and move into the rear of the Armed Forces of Ukraine's defensive positions in the Nikolaevka-Yablonovka area.

As of June 3, west of Andreevka, Russian forward units have advanced to the outskirts of Kondratovka, while to the south, in the direction of Alekseevka-Malaya Korchakovka, they have reached the commanding height of 221.5. We are observing a flank expansion of the wedge driven in on June 1 and a deep envelopment of the AFU’s defensive area in Nikolaevka-Varachino-Yablonovka, which is now cut off from its flanks and has only one remaining supply route: Maryino-Yablonovka.

The key feature of our positions along the Kondratovka-Andreevka-Alekseevka-Belovody line is that we now control three watersheds in the area, providing a tactical advantage over the AFU’s positions:

- The villages of Kondratovka and Andreevka are situated on the slopes of the watershed between the Sinyak River (western slope) and its tributary stream, which transitions into the Korchakovsky Yar ravine (eastern slope).

- The Andreevka-Alekseevka line lies on the watershed between the Korchakovsky Yar ravine and the Blakhovets River.

- The Alekseevka-Belovody line is positioned on the watershed between the Blakhovets and Snagost rivers.

The AFU’s defensive area in Nikolaevka is doomed. Along with it, Yunakovka will also fall.

The Russian Armed Forces have begun the final dismantling of the AFU’s first (conditional) defensive line in this sector of the buffer zone.

Pokrovsk to Chasov Yar

Amid ongoing activity on the Pokrovsk sector of the Donetsk front, the situation near Chasov Yar appears stagnant. However, as of today, Russian forces control nearly the entire city. A methodical clearing of the outskirts and adjacent territories is underway.

Image
ЛБС 02.01.2025=Line of Combat Contact January 2nd, 2025. ЛБС 01.02.2025=Line of Combat Contact February 1st, 2025. Продолжение Зона Активности=Zone of Continuing Activity.

The city is situated on elevated terrain, where urban structures themselves serve as ready-made defensive fortifications hindering advancement. Additionally, the surrounding area features extremely challenging terrain—quarries, mines, ravines, and a network of ponds—all utilized in the engineering of defensive structures and obstacles.

Russian units control the commanding heights around the entire perimeter of the city. Enemy positions are lower, which is an advantageous. In our assessment, the current lull in this sector will persist until objectives are achieved by neighboring forces to the south. Once the command’s goals are met on the adjacent Dzerzhinsk (Toretsk) sector and the right flank of the Pokrovsk sector—and once a sufficiently deep envelopment line around Konstantinovka is established and reinforced—coordinated operations will begin in the Chasov Yar area.

Image
ЛБС 17.9.2024=Line of Combat Contact September 17th, 2024. Участок Активности=Area of Activity.

For now, the primary task in this sector is to expand control zones, develop strongpoints, supply first and second echelons with material resources, and pin down significant enemy forces. In other words—preparing a foothold to push off from when the "время Ч" ("Ch-hour" a military for the decisive moment) comes.

The Chasov Yar area, in the current operational context, serves to support the main active zones: the Toretsk sector and the right flank of the Pokrovsk sector.

Image
ЛБС 09.4.2025=Line of Combat Contact April 9th, 2025. Зона Активности=Zone of Activity.

Over the past week, reports have indicated advances by Russian forces:

- In the Chasov Yar sector: the village of Stupochki.

- In the Toretsk sector: the settlements of Ozaryanovka, Dyleevka village, Dyleevka station, and Dachnoe.

- In the Pokrovsk sector: From Novaya Poltavka toward Popov Yar and Rusin Yar and from Novoolenovka (Novoalenovka on the map) to Yablunovka (the name wouldn't quite fit, but it's just northeast of “Novoalenovka” on the map).

A process of "drilling boreholes" is underway across this entire stretch of the Donetsk front. These "boreholes" are then "filled with explosives" (second-echelon forces are introduced), followed by "detonation" (flank expansion). The result is that the monolith of the AFU's defense collapses.

******

Larry Wilkerson: “We’re Looking at Nuclear War”
Posted on June 3, 2025 by Yves Smith

We posted shortly after news broke of the Ukraine drone attacks on Russian strategic bombers. The losses appear much less severe than initially reported but it appears at least five Tu-95 bombers were seriously damaged and two were destroyed. In comments, readers took issue with a report by Scott Ritter, that these attacks were on Russian nuclear deterrent assets, crossed a Russian red line, and would allow for nuclear retaliation under Russia’s nuclear doctrine, not that the fabulously cool-headed Putin would do such a thing. They also disputed the seriousness of the attack on these aircraft, disputing their status as part of Russia’s nuclear triad.

Larry Wilkerson, without having any apparent knowledge of Scott Ritter’s post, comes down fiercely on his side of the argument. Some readers tried to dismiss Ritter as over his skis in attempting to interpret the Russian doctrine. Whether Ritter is expert or not, Wilkerson was close to incandescent in excoriating the stupidity and sheer reckless of this attack.

Moreover, he has confirmed from his own source that the US was deeply involved in this attack.1

Below is the entire video, which I encourage you to watch in full. [I will transcribe some key part I am a terrible and very slow transcriptionist, so you may initially see only time stamps, I want to sketch out some the implications first and return to providing the backup in written form, although you can find it by listening at the indicated times in the interim]

Recall that Wilkerson has extremely deep experience in US cold war and geopolitics as Colin Powell’s chief of staff and other roles. Some readers attempted to discount Ritter as alarmist about nuclear war risks. That has not been a feature of Wilkerson’s commentary.



At 0:55:

Imagine, if you will, just to set up an analogy, Mexico or Canada or any third party, particularly one that was proximate to our borders, launching missiles that hit our airforce base and destroyed B-2 bombers, or hit Barstow in Louisiana or Minot in North Dakota and destroyed B-52 bombers., or came in on Groton, Connecticut, where a ballistic missile submarine was being refurbished, and hit it. These are things that during the Cold War, we swore to each other, Washington and Moscow, that we would never do. These are things that are so destabilizing that Putin would be in his every right with regard to all the lessons we have learned, and they are many, to attack and to attack with nuclear weapons, and to say to the rest of the world, “They provoked me,” they surely did, “and I’m not losing my devices for responding should I be really provoked by a first strike.”

And that’s what you are talking about. Never, never hit the assets that your nuclear-armed enemy needs to assess whether or not you are attacking them. That’s a no-no. Always been a no-no. No one disputed that in Moscow or Washington or for that matter in the other capitals of the world. Now we’ve broken that bug-a-boo. Now We’ve said, “Now it’s OK to do this.”

And here’s what we did, Nima. You’re a smart man. We did this under Trump’s tutelage, brain-dead though I am assuming more and more he is, meaning his cabinet and others around him, we did this because we wanted to establish negotiating leverage for the next meeting. Establish negotiating leverage by allowing your proxy to destroy serious nuclear assets of your enemy. This is unbelievable. I can’t believe the Trump Administration has shown repeatedly since the inauguration, confirming much of what it showed in the 2016 forward years. That it is, I won’t say brain-dead, but completely captured by that element of fascistic neoconservative autocratic advisors who are moneyed to the neck, within its realm. That’s what’s running it. It isn’t Donald Trump. Donald Trump didn’t even know, watch his face, that Putin’s assassination was attempted, and that we had probably something to do with the intel that fed that.

I will tell you this right now, I’ve had long conversations with people who know, we were integral, we, the United State intelligence community writ large, we were absolutely necessary for these strikes. My question to Donald Trump is “Did you know that?” And if you didn’t, why is Tulsi Gabbard still in her job?

At 8:30:

Putin is right. He is, in effect, at war with an alliance led by the United States of America. He has every right now, and he has expressed it time and time again, to put a nuclear weapon on a NATO capital.

At 12:30:

These strikes make me think I have lived too long. These strikes make me think that all that I have lived, all that I have learned, all the things that I was taught, that we heard endlessly during the Cold War and afterwards about nuclear weapons have just been set aside, completely set aside. I believe there are people in this country, in the Empire, who think they can win a nuclear war and are not cowed in the least by the fact that Putin has a stockpile that outnumbers our own, has weapons systems that can deliver that stockpile that are better than our own. They want this confrontation to happen, come hell or high water. And they are convinced they are going to win by making him back down.

But I’ve got news for them…

At 34:30

He [Putin] knows damned well we had everything to do with these strikes. Now it seems to him, we’re in the war. 100% in the war. And the next thing he better do is go out and make sure all his nuclear attack early warning systems are working. ‘Cause the next thing he can expect is what Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute, and a host of others have argued is said we can win if we go first.

At 42:05:

We’re looking at nuclear war. That’s what we’re looking at. Everyone on this planet is looking at it.

Some commentators have chosen to dismiss the significance of the drone attack in light of the fact that it will not have any impact on Russia’s prosecution of the war. Russia is believed to have at least 50 combat ready Tu-95s and per Simplicius and Alexander Mercouris, needs only 6 at any time for its Ukraine effort. So the loss of 5 or even 10, if Russian sources are understating the total number loss, indeed does not diminish Russia’s war making capability.

Wilkerson argues forcefully that the US participation in the airbase drone strikes means the US has no interest in peace. Worse, it confirms that we are dedicated to the neocon strategy of trying to bleed Russia and thus will never give up on fighting. He contends that we will reach for the nuclear arsenal when other methods have failed. Wilkerson says he knows individuals personally who advocate for nuclear because they think we could “win” it and/or to reduce global overpopulation.

Russia may indeed not change its battlefield tempo but not due to blowing off this attack, but that will be due to digesting its very important and disturbing information content and determining that the current pace of attrition is still the best course of action.

Indeed, one reason for not accelerating the pace much is that Russia is clearly dealing with crazy people, and it’s not prudent to make sudden moves near them. That would argue for playing along with the farce of the peace negotiations, and even eventually indulging Zelensky’s request for a meeting with Putin (although the more likely course still seems to be to impose conditions that make it a non-starter, like asking Ukraine to present a proposed agenda, and then saying most of the items need to be handled by expert staff first before any big dogs meeting can occur).

Another issue is that this confirmation of the US and European determination to keep the war going no matter what, and that means among other things terrorism even after the Ukraine army and state collapse, is that Russia almost certainly to take all of Ukraine, or perhaps save Lvov, particularly if it can deke the Poles into absorbing it. Russia will need to take control of current Ukraine territory so as, among other things, to force everyone in its territory to become Russian citizens, which means getting Russian passports and presumably providing biometric information. Russia has likely been gathering information on members of the SBU and neo-Nazi groups like Right Sector and can better and more aggressively hunt them down than through a friendly but independent state (unless treaties give Russia policing rights inside the new rump Ukraine’s borders limited to hunting down terrorists, which may seem irregular but ipso facto should not be impossible).

Even though Russia will not be able to eliminate the neo-Nazis, its aim is to limit their ability to live in post-war Ukraine and have to operate from outside. Remember that even though the drone attack had the appearance of being implemented from outside Russia, Alexander Mercoursis pointed out it almost certainly relied heavily on networks of agents, and these attacks were costly since many of them would have been burned. Denying the neo-Nazis their old home bases (as in literally their homes) and their communities won’t stop them, but it ought to impede their operations.

We have pointed to but not studied end of World War II arrangements which provided for limited duration occupation (“limited” meaning years) with Germany gradually getting back its national sovereignity. Russia could also use these precedents.

On the flip side of this ledger, we have pointed out that one of the many factor that Putin has had to consider in the pacing of this conflict is keeping the support of his economic allies, particularly China, India, and Turkiye, all of whom took risk in defying the US and continuing to trade with Russia. Putin and Lavrov’s repeated banging on about the history of US duplicity, the measured way in which they have conducted the war (particularly the avoidance of civilian casualties), and the contract with Ukraine terrorism (continued shelling of civilians in Donetsk city, the attack on the Crimea beach, among other examples) have earned the Russian more trust even with leaders like Modi who were initially ambivalent about supporting Russia.

The utter recklessness of this attack, and the fact that it confirms that the West is determined to keep fighting Russia no matter what, should boost the Russian case in the court of international opinion and reduce constraints on that front against more aggressive action and/or more territorial seizure.

One more set of considerations is the debate with Putin’s top team. Even though we regularly stress that, contrary to Western propaganda, Putin is not a dictator and needs to be mindful of public opinion, more subtly, he also needs to not trample important power centers, importantly the General Staff and the military. Even though they all accept his status as supreme commander and would not challenge him, a good manager, and Putin is a superb manager, does not want people in key roles angry and disaffected with his decisions.

John Helmer has been reporting for some time that the General Staff has been unhappy with Putin refusing to prosecute the war more aggressively, particularly electrical grid and production attacks. They may argue that these attacks prove them to be correct (although a heavy US and European hand in them might argue otherwise).

The core problem is a bad rerun of this incident from the Cuban Missile Crisis. We’ve cited this incident occasionally, the first time in 2015. Per Jonathan Glover’s book Humanity:

One lesson some of the Kennedy administration had learnt from The Guns of August was not to allow military drift. Kennedy himself was worried about the use of nuclear weapons by American forces in Turkey and Italy. He ordered that specific orders were to be sent underlining the
need for presidential authorization.

The Defence Secretary, Robert McNamara, insisted on controlling the way the navy carried out the blockade. He saw Admiral Anderson the day before the first Soviet ship was due to reach the quarantine line. He asked how the ship was to be stopped, and the Admiral said they would hail it.

McNamara asked whether this would be in English or Russian, and what would happen if they did not understand or did not stop.

He later recounted the Admiral’s response:

‘We’ll send a shot across the bow,’ he said.
‘Then what, if that doesn’t work?’
‘Then we’ll fire into the rudder,’ he replied, by now clearly very annoyed.
‘What kind of ship is it?’ I asked.
‘A tanker, Mr Secretary,’ he said.

‘You’re not going to fire a single shot at anything without my express permission, is that clear?’ I said.

That’s when he made his famous remark about how the Navy had been running blockades since the days of John Paul Jones, and if I would leave them alone they would run this one successfully as well.

I rose from my chair and walked out of the room, saying this was not a blockade but a means of communication between Kennedy and Khrushchev; no force would be applied without my permission; and that would not be given without discussion with the President.

‘Was that understood?’ I asked. The tight-lipped response was ‘Yes’

The problem is that Putin has been trying to communicate with the US and NATO since 2008 to de-escalate. Not only is no one listening, but the disarray under Trump means no one seems to be home.

____

1 Both Wilkerson here and Larry Johnson in a different Dialogue Works claim that CNN reported that Hegseth watched the drone attacks in real time. I have not been able to find that story, nor any tweets that link to it. But if this is accurate, not only is the US admitting to intimate participation but also poked Russia in the eye about it.

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2025/06 ... r-war.html

*******

Coffee and a Mike: How will Putin Respond to the recent attacks from Ukraine?



Yesterday’s 52-minute chat with Mike Farris covers some of the issues that I have addressed in other recent interviews but updates them with the latest news, as for example relating to the Ukrainian attacks Sunday on air force bases across the Russian Federation, or goes into greater depth, as for example the discussion of my newly published book War Diaries. The Russia-Ukraine War, 2022-2023.

The real punch comes in my words about what response we may expect from President Putin to the Ukrainian destruction of some as yet unquantified number of Russia’s heavy bombers that are an important part of its nuclear triad.

With respect to the last named, I have been shocked by the remarks yesterday by some of my best-known peers speaking on some of the best-known interview programs questioning whether Trump had been informed by the CIA ahead of the attacks. They speculated that Trump was not so informed, following the long-standing practice of keeping the Boss ignorant for the sake of deniability. They speculated that Defense Secretary Hegseth was watching the Ukrainian attack in real time.

Of course, none of us has a crystal ball, and I do not insist that what I am about to say is irrefutable. But, let’s go at it.

Firstly, the notion that Trump would have discomfort lying is other worldly. Reading The Washington Post for the last 5 years, you would assume that everything he says is a lie. They ran a Pinocchio index daily to prove that point.

More seriously, however, the notion that the CIA was presently involved in the attack on Russian nuclear triad assets ignores what Ukraine said explicitly about Operation Spider Web: that it was planned and preparations began 18 months ago. That is to say, the project dates from the last third of the Biden presidency when the CIA indeed could have had a hand in it. I find it inconceivable, however, that after the purge of the intelligence agencies from the first days of the Trump presidency that the leadership of the CIA would have facilitated an attack on Russia that goes directly against the policy of détente espoused by The Boss in the Oval Office.

The glove fits for the British MI6, where their ultimate boss, Prime Minister Keir Starmer, is an out-and-out war monger. I personally have little doubt that the Brits assisted Kiev from start to finish with Operation Spider Web. At the same time, I say that we should not patronize the Ukrainians: they are in some ways more capable of modern warfare than their British ‘curators.’

As regards the idea which retired British diplomat Alastair Crooke, a Middle East specialist, put forth on his latest interview with Judge Napolitano, namely that Israel’s Mossad had a hand in these attacks, I am left speechless. Crooke’s only argument in favor of this is the well-known antipathy of Jews for things Russian going back to the tsarist days. I leave it to readers to determine for themselves how sound they find that argumentation.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025.

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2025/06/03/ ... m-ukraine/

******

NATO watches Ukrainian Armed Forces attacks
June 3, 2025
Rybar

Image

While the Ukrainian side carries out one attack after another, NATO reconnaissance aircraft are watching what is happening, as they say, with all their eyes. And today, during the Ukrainian Armed Forces' attack on the Crimean Bridge, the same situation occurred.

▪️South of Kerch , at a fairly close distance of just over 100 km, in the period 09:00 – 14:30, an American high-altitude U-2S aircraft was operating, which monitored the actions of our troops and Ukrainian BEKs.

▪️In addition, flights of the Italian B-350ER electronic reconnaissance aircraft and the US CL-650 ARTEMIS aircraft, which patrolled along the Romanian coast, were observed in the western part of the Black Sea.

▪️And another important aircraft was flying near Snake Island – a Turkish E-7T AWACS, which is already operating for the second time in a week in the interests of Ukrainian formations in the North Atlantic Alliance format.

▪️Also, one or two Tekever AR5 UAVs have been flying non-stop over the Golitsyn gas production facilities for over a week, usually operating in tandem with unmanned boats. For example, for two nights in a row, the Tekevers guided the UAVs to the Tendrovskaya Spit .

Such reconnaissance activity, especially when the number of aircraft involved exceeds 4 units, is a complex operation to identify our positions, tactics of action and objective control over the actions of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

Yes, at some point it may seem that their flights are becoming routine, but a full-fledged analysis is based on collecting information, accumulating it and drawing certain conclusions.

This is what we are getting at again, that we cannot ignore NATO's activities in the Black Sea zone. For example, there was similarly high activity recently on the Kola Peninsula . And we all know what it led to.

https://rybar.ru/nato-smotrit-za-atakami-vsu/

NATO satellites helped the SBU in the attack on Olenya
June 3, 2025
Rybar

Image

NATO satellites not only monitor the current activity of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in Crimea , but also took direct part in reconnaissance of targets and planning of SBU sabotage operations at Russian airfields on June 1.

And there are specific examples of this. In particular, the American military satellites TOPAZ thoroughly studied the situation on the Kola Peninsula (we also talked about this earlier on a closed channel ).

Over the last seven days of May, just before the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ attack on Olenya , 102 photographs were taken, of which only two were in medium detail, while the rest were in high and maximum detail, which provide an accuracy measured in meters.

The largest number of times (24 photos) was taken of the arsenal of non-strategic nuclear weapons at Bolshoe Ramozero . The deer was photographed 20 times.

The satellites photographed the territories of the Nerpichye naval bases in Zaozersk and Gadzhiyevo 17 and 16 times, respectively .

The Kilpyavr airfield was tracked 11 times , as well as the equipment site east of Murmansk in maximum detail .

Also, near the Kola Peninsula in the third ten days of May, American and Norwegian P-8A anti-submarine aircraft, as well as a Swedish Gulfstream IV electronic reconnaissance aircraft, flew.

There is a saying: don't wave your fists after the fight. The failure of June 1 can no longer be corrected. However, this post has only one goal - you can't underestimate the enemy and it is important to monitor his activity.

Because the growing attention of enemy satellites to certain objects is always noticeable and should at least cause alertness and prompt action before something irreparable happens.

https://rybar.ru/sputniki-nato-pomogli- ... na-olenyu/

Google Translator

******

Waiting for the Oreshniks, while the Istanbul kabuki proceeds “not negatively”

Pepe Escobar

June 3, 2025

This was the mood in informed Moscow – only a few hours before the renewed Istanbul kabuki on Russia-Ukraine “negotiations”. Three key points.

1.The attack on Russian strategic bombers – part of the nuclear triad – was a US-UK joint operation. Especially MI6. The overall tech investment and strategy was provided by this intel combo.

2.It’s patently unclear whether Trump is really in charge – or not. This was confirmed to me at night by a top intel source; he added that the Kremlin and the security services were actively investigating all possibilities, especially who issued the final green light.

3.Near universal popular consensus: Release the Oreshniks. Plus waves of ballistic missiles.

Predictably, the Instabul kabuki came and went like a tawdry spectacle, complete with the Ukrainian delegation in military fatigues and Defense Minister Umarov incapable of speaking even mediocre English at a messy press conference after the brief 1h15 meeting. The Turkish Foreign Ministry epically described the kabuki as concluding “not negatively”.

Nothing strategic or politically substantial was discussed: only prisoner exchanges. The mood in Moscow, additionally, was that top Russian negotiator Medinsky should have presented an ultimatum, not a memorandum. It was, predictably, interpreted as an ultimatum by the Beggar of Banderastan; but what Medinsky actually handed out to the Ukrainians was a de facto road map memorandum, in 3 sections, with 2 options for the conditions for a ceasefire, and 31 points, a great deal of them expressed in detail by Moscow for months.

Examples: first option for a ceasefire should be a complete UAF withdrawal from DPR, LPR, Kherson and Zaporizhia, within 30 days; international recognition of Crimea, Donbass and Novorossiya as part of Russia; Ukraine neutrality; Ukraine holding elections and then signing a peace treaty – approved by a legally binding UN Security Council resolution (italics mine); and a ban on the receipt and deployment of nuclear weapons.

None of that, of course, will ever be accepted by the terror-infused set up in Kiev, the neo-nazi outfits that control it, and assorted, fragmented collective West warmongering backers. So the SMO will go on. Possibly all the way to 2026. Along with extra versions of the Istanbul kabuki: the next one should be held by late June.

The current kabuki, incidentally, composes the Last Chance Saloon for Kiev to retain some measure of – fractious – “sovereignty”. As Foreign Minister Lavrov has been reiterating, everything will be really decided in the battlefield.

How to destroy the New START Treaty

Now to the attack on a branch of Russia’s strategic triad – which mired Western propaganda media in layers and layers of stratospheric hysteria.

The point has been made over and over again on why Russia left its strategic bombers unprotected in the tarmac. Because that’s a New START Treaty requirement – signed in 2010 and extended until February next year (when it may go six feet under, considering what just happened).

The New START Treaty stipulates that strategic bombers should be visible to “national technical means (NTM) of verification, such as satellite imagery, to allow monitoring by the other party.” So their status – nuclear-armed or converted to conventional use – should be always verifiable. No chance of a “surprise” first strike.

This operation single-handedly blew up what was, up to now, a decent Cold War relic preventing the start of WWIII via a simple mechanism. The recklesness involved is off the charts. So there’s no surprise that the highest echelons of power in Russia – from the Kremlin to the security apparatus – are feverishly working to ascertain whether Trump was in the loop or not. And if he was not, who gave the final green light?

No wonder the highest echelon, so far, is mum.

A security source told me that it was US Secretary of State Marco Rubio that called Lavrov – and not the other way around, to offer condolences for the bridge-on-train terror attack in Bryansk. No word whatsoever about the strategic bombers. In parallel, the former platoon commander in Iraq then Fox News talking head turned head of the Pentagon followed the drone attacks on the Russian bases in real-time.

On the efficacy of such attacks – beyond the gleefully spun to death fog of war. Several conflicting estimates point to possibly three Tu-95MS strategic bombers – known as “The Bears” – hit at the Belaya base in Irkutsk, plus one of them partially damaged, and three other T-22M3s hit, with two of them irreparably. Of the three Tu-95MS, fires seem to have been localized, so they may be repaired.

At the Olenya base in Murmansk, other four Tu-95MS may have been hit, plus one An-12.

As it stands, Russia had 58 Tu-95MS up to this weekend. Even if five of them have been lost for good, that’s less than 10% of their fleet. And that does not count 19 Tu-160 and 55 Tu-22M3M. Of the five bases that were supposed to be attacked, success happened in only two.

These losses, as painful as they may be, simply will not affect further strikes by Russian aero-spatial forces.

Example: the standard weapon carried by a T-95MSM is the X-101 cruise missile. A maximum of 8 for each mission. In recent strikes, not more than 40 missiles have been launched simultaneously. That implies only 6 Tu-95s in action. So Russia in fact only needs 6 Tu-95MSM ready to fly to conduct strikes as intense as in the previous days and weeks. Tu-160s, moreover, are not even being used for the latest strikes.

Evaluating Maximum Strategy

At the time of writing, Russia’s inevitably devastating response has still not been green-lighted. This is as serious as it gets. Even if it’s true that POTUS was not informed – and that’s what the Kremlin and the security services want to be absolutely sure of before unleashing Hell from Above on Kiev – still the contours will be clear of a NATO op – US/UK – directly conducted by the CIA/MI6 intel combo, with Trump being offered plausible deniability and Ukraine breaking the START protocol big time.

Were Trump to have authorized these strikes, this would constitute no less than a declaration of war by the United States on Russia. So the most probable scenario remains Trump blindsided by the neo-cons embedded in privileged silos scattered across the Beltway.

As much as the attack on the Voronezh-M early warning radar system last May, an attack on Russia’s strategic bombers fits the scenario of increasingly prodding the Russian system to enable disabling it ahead of a nuclear first strike. Aspiring Dr. Strangeloves do entertain this scenario in their wildest dreams for decades.

As sources carefully confirmed, the prevailing interpretation among the high echelons of power in Russia is that of a P.R. operation forcing a harsh – possibly nuclear – Russian response, coupled with Moscow’s withdrawal from the Istanbul kabuki.

So far, the Russian reaction is quite methodical: total silence, a wide-ranging investigation, plus going through the motions in Istanbul.

Yet there’s no question the – inevitable – response will require Maximum Strategy. If the response is in tune with Russia’s own updated nuclear doctrine, Moscow risks losing the Global South’s nearly unanimous support.

If the response is lukewarm, domestic blowback will be massive. There’s a near universal consensus on “Release the Oreshniks”. Russian public opinion is becoming seriously fed up with being the target of serial terror attacks. The hour of fateful decision is getting late.

Which bring us to the ultimate dilemma. Russian power is mulling how to defeat the collective warmongering West without launching WWIII. Inspired by China, a solution may be found via an alliance of remixed Sun Tzu coupled with Lao Tzu. There’s got to be a way – or layered ways – to destroy a strategy-deprived nihilistic enemy’s ability and will to wage endless war.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... egatively/

******

Zelenskyy’s Reckless Strikes Risk Undermining New START Treaty: The Role of Visible Nuclear Bombers

By Iain Muir, Substack, 6/2/25

The United States and Russia maintain their commitment to the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), a vital framework for global nuclear stability. Signed in 2010 and extended until February 2026, the treaty limits each nation to 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads and 700 deployed delivery systems, including intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments.

A key aspect of compliance involves parking nuclear-capable bombers in open view at airbases, enabling verification through satellite imagery. However, Ukraine’s drone attacks on 1 June 2025, authorised by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and targeting Russian strategic bombers at bases such as Belaya, Diaghilevo, Olenya, and Ivanovo, have raised concerns about the treaty’s stability.

While reports claim over 40 aircraft were damaged or destroyed, only 8-10 losses or damages have been visually confirmed.

This article examines the reasons behind U.S. and Russian adherence to New START, the role of visible bomber deployments, the risks posed by Zelenskyy’s actions, and the possible sources of satellite imagery used for Ukraine’s strikes, including the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

New START Framework

Implemented in 2011, New START seeks to reduce nuclear escalation risks by capping the strategic arsenals of the U.S. and Russia. The treaty allows 18 annual on-site inspections, biannual data exchanges, and notifications for changes in delivery system status, such as converting a bomber from nuclear to conventional roles. According to the September 2022 data exchange, the U.S. reported 659 deployed delivery systems and Russia 540, both within the 700-unit limit. Heavy bombers, such as the U.S. B-52 Stratofortress and B-2 Spirit or Russia’s Tu-95 Bear and Tu-160 Blackjack, count as one delivery system each, regardless of warhead capacity.

Satellite imagery is central to New START’s verification regime. Bombers stationed openly at bases like Minot Air Force Base (North Dakota) for the U.S. or Engels Air Base for Russia allow both nations to confirm compliance with treaty limits without relying solely on inspections. Although not mandated, this visibility supports transparency. Ukraine’s recent attacks, approved by Zelenskyy and targeting openly deployed bombers, have sparked concerns about the treaty’s future.

Reasons for U.S. and Russian Compliance

The U.S. and Russia adhere to New START due to strategic, diplomatic, and practical considerations:

1. Strategic Stability: By limiting warheads and delivery systems, New START fosters predictability. Russia’s Tu-160 fleet at Engels, constrained by the treaty, assures the U.S., while U.S. B-52s at Barksdale offer similar reassurance to Russia. This mutual transparency stabilises deterrence, supporting a balanced strategic environment.

2. Robust Verification: The treaty’s mechanisms, including satellite monitoring and on-site inspections, ensure compliance. Openly parked bombers, visible via commercial satellite imagery from providers like Maxar, allow both nations to verify adherence to the 700-delivery-system limit. For example, the U.S. declares which B-52s are nuclear-capable, and Russia follows suit for its Tu-95s, with open deployments facilitating verification.

3. Diplomatic Credibility: Compliance strengthens both nations’ global standing. For the U.S., adherence highlights leadership in non-proliferation, reinforcing alliances and influence in forums like the United Nations. For Russia, it supports its position as a responsible nuclear power, enhancing diplomatic engagement. Visible bombers signal transparency, affirming commitment to the treaty.

4. Economic Pragmatism: Building additional bombers or warheads beyond treaty limits would require substantial investment. Both nations focus on modernisation within constraints—the U.S. with the B-21 Raider and Russia with the Tu-160M. Open parking avoids the high costs of hardened shelters or underground facilities, impractical for large fleets like the U.S.’s 66 B-52s or Russia’s 60+ Tu-95s.

5. Avoiding Escalation: Adhering to New START prevents actions that could prompt the other side to expand its arsenal, maintaining stability. Visible bombers reduce suspicions of covert buildup, as concealment could suggest non-compliance. Russia’s open deployment of Tu-95s at Ukrainka, for instance, aligns with treaty obligations, as does the U.S.’s approach at Minot.

Zelenskyy’s Attacks and Risks to New START

On 1 June 2025, Ukraine, under President Zelenskyy’s authorisation, launched a drone operation, codenamed “Web,” targeting Russian airbases hosting strategic bombers. The strikes, involving 117 drones, targeted aircraft at Belaya, Diaghilevo, Olenya, and Ivanovo. While initial reports claimed over 40 aircraft, including Tu-95s and Tu-22M3s, were damaged or destroyed, affecting a significant portion of Russia’s strategic cruise missile carriers, only 8-10 losses or damages have been visually confirmed through satellite imagery and other sources. Although Ukraine, a non-signatory, cannot directly violate New START, Zelenskyy’s decision to target these assets raises concerns about the treaty’s stability:

1. Exploitation of Transparency: New START’s Article VI requires observable strategic arms to prevent concealment, with Russia deploying Tu-95s and Tu-22M3s openly at bases like Olenya to comply. Zelenskyy’s strikes leveraged this visibility, using precise targeting data to hit bombers integral to Russia’s strategic forces. This could lead Russia to reconsider open deployments, potentially affecting treaty verification.

2. Potential Treaty Tensions: The attacks targeted aircraft linked to Russia’s strategic capabilities, which its nuclear doctrine (updated November 2024) considers critical. While Russia continues to engage with New START, Zelenskyy’s actions could prompt adjustments in deployment practices, complicating transparency and verification as the treaty nears its 2026 expiration.

3. Perceived U.S. Complicity: Despite Ukraine’s claim that the U.S. had no prior knowledge, suspicions of U.S. involvement, particularly through agencies like the CIA, may arise due to intelligence-sharing. Such perceptions could challenge trust, hindering future arms control discussions.

4. Strategic Imbalance: The confirmed loss or damage of 8-10 bombers reduces Russia’s delivery systems, potentially bringing it below the 700-unit limit. While not a violation, this could disrupt the treaty’s intended balance, possibly influencing Russia’s modernisation efforts within treaty constraints.

Ukraine’s Claim and Satellite Imagery Sources

Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) asserts that the U.S. had no prior knowledge of the 1 June attacks, supported by reports from BBC and Axios indicating independent planning under Zelenskyy’s direction. The operation’s precision, targeting remote bases like Belaya (4,000 km from Ukraine), suggests access to high-quality satellite imagery. Possible sources include:

1. Commercial Providers: Companies like BlackSky, Maxar, and Planet Labs have provided imagery throughout the Ukraine conflict. For example, Maxar imagery from May 2025 showed 40 Tu-22M3s and 11 Tu-95MSs at Olenya, aligning with strike targets. Ukraine likely acquired such data, which offers sufficient resolution to pinpoint aircraft.

2. Ukrainian Capabilities: Ukraine’s advanced drone programme, with models reaching 3,000 km, likely conducted reconnaissance to complement satellite data. The SBU’s deployment of 117 drones, some launched from Russian territory, suggests additional on-the-ground or aerial intelligence.

3. Western Allies: NATO allies like the UK, which shared imagery of Russian naval assets in 2024, or Germany, supporting Starlink systems, may have provided indirect assistance. However, commercial sources are more likely given Ukraine’s claim of independence.

4. U.S. Intelligence, Including CIA: The U.S., potentially through the CIA or National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), has shared imagery with Ukraine since 2022, primarily for defensive purposes, as seen in the 2022 Moskva sinking. The CIA’s role in intelligence coordination could suggest its data was indirectly used for Zelenskyy’s strikes. U.S. officials, including Pentagon spokesman John Kirby, maintain that intelligence is not provided for offensive operations, and no direct evidence links CIA imagery to the 1 June attacks. Ukraine’s claim suggests any U.S. data was repurposed independently.

5. Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT): Groups like AviVector published detailed analyses of Russian airbases, such as May 2025 imagery of Olenya, shared on platforms like X. Ukraine’s intelligence, under Zelenskyy’s oversight, likely used such data for targeting.

The most likely scenario involves Ukraine combining commercial imagery from Maxar or BlackSky with drone reconnaissance and OSINT, enabling precise strikes without direct U.S. involvement. However, the CIA’s broader intelligence-sharing role could have indirectly contributed, potentially raising questions about U.S. neutrality in the context of New START.

Conclusion

The U.S. and Russia uphold New START due to strategic stability, robust verification, diplomatic credibility, economic pragmatism, and the need to maintain balance. Openly parked bombers at bases like Minot and Engels facilitate satellite verification, ensuring compliance with the 700-delivery-system limit. However, Ukraine’s 1 June 2025 attacks, authorised by President Zelenskyy, target this transparency, with only 8-10 aircraft losses or damages visually confirmed. These actions risk disrupting the treaty’s framework. Ukraine likely sourced targeting data from commercial satellite providers, its own drones, OSINT, and possibly indirect CIA or allied intelligence, supporting its claim of no U.S. prior knowledge. Zelenskyy’s provocative actions underscore the challenges facing arms control as New START approaches its 2026 expiration.

For further details on New START, consult the U.S. State Department or Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs treaty resources.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/06/rus ... -analysis/

******

Airbase in Olenegorsk and Ryazan after drone attack. 03.06.2025
June 4, 13:05

Image

Satellite images of the airbase in Olenegorsk (Murmansk region) have appeared after the drone attack on June 1. Taken on June 3.
The images claim to show 1 Tu-95 and 1 An-12 destroyed. Part of the Tu-95 parking lot is hidden by clouds, so there could potentially be 2-3 more damaged aircraft there.

Image

In any case, there are certainly no dozens of destroyed aircraft in Olenegorsk.

Plus, yesterday there was a photo of the airbase in Ryazan, which was attacked by several drones launched from a truck.
There is no damage or burnt aircraft at the airbase.

Image

Thus, the satellites confirm that the aircraft were hit only at "Olenye" ​​and "Belaya".
It remains to get clearer images of the base in Olenegorsk (the enemy will probably post them in the coming days) and there it will be clear how many aircraft were damaged. But in any case, there is no talk of any "40 destroyed aircraft". There is damage, it is significant, but not catastrophic.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9879145.html

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14413
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Wed Jun 04, 2025 6:11 pm

Ukraine Terrorism and the Question of U.S. Involvement
Margaret Kimberley, BAR Executive Editor and Senior Columnist 04 Jun 2025

Image
Senator Lindsey Graham, President Volodymyr Zelensky and Senator Richard Blumenthal meet in Kiev on May 30, 2025. President.gov.ua

The U.S has been involved in every aspect of Ukraine’s military activity against Russia. The recent drone attacks and sabotage were likely committed with U.S. help. Of course, it is possible that president Trump was aware, but if past history is a guide, he may also have been circumvented by forces in his own administration.

“Who is in charge in Washington? Is it the white house or the pentagon? . . . It was quite significant and not accidental that it (the attack) happened just two days before the Russian-American arrangements were supposed to come into full force” - Vitaly Churkin, Russia’s ambassador to the United Nations, 2016

“The American bombing of Syrian soldiers was no ‘mistake’ – it was a mutiny by the War Party in the U.S. military and government, who want victory for the jihadists.” - Black Agenda Report Executive Editor Glen Ford

On September 17, 2016 United States forces bombed Syrian army positions in the Deir al-Zour region of that country and killed more than 60 Syrian soldiers. The United States and Russia had concluded an agreement which was to begin just two days later that would have brought U.S. and Russian forces into coordination to fight ISIS and Daesh, the jihadist groups who had benefited from U.S. support.

But there was a problem in Washington. The Obama white house and the State Department wanted the agreement but the Defense Department did not and said so publicly. Lo and behold, a military strike ended the agreement before it could begin. The U.S. claimed that the strike was a “mistake” but no one who was really paying attention believed that explanation. Black Agenda Report’s Glen Ford and many others asked if the attack was a pentagon mutiny against the Obama administration. Those events of 2016 are relevant today as we see what may be a similar dynamic pertaining to the three year long U.S. proxy war using Ukraine against Russia. Ukraine’s recent drone strikes on Russian airfields and terror attacks on civilian infrastructure point to the possibility of U.S. involvement and perhaps another example of a presidential administration facing internal divisions.

Donald Trump made a commitment to end the war and has been negotiating, without success, ever since his second inauguration. Trump himself is partly responsible for the lack of progress. He claims he wants to end the war but his reasons for doing so are not straightforward and are not about any real desire for peace. He wants a ceasefire, a freeze in the fighting, so that he can hand the conflict over to the Europeans and concentrate on antagonizing China without being distracted by a conflict with Russia. Russia’s continued request for a security agreement that might bring permanent peace is ignored by Trump just as it was by Obama and Joe Biden.

After three years of fighting and continued success on the battlefield, the Russians are in no mood for a freeze when they can see victory. Surely they have not forgotten the lessons of Syria, where their allied state went down to defeat in December 2024. A textbook CIA operation undermined the government and the military after a ceasefire left fighters in place who struck at the appropriate moment under U.S. direction. The U.S. never stopped backing its jihadist allies and Syria’s current self-proclaimed president, Abu al-Jolani, was among those supported with U.S. money and weapons since 2011.

Trump does want to be rid of the U.S. commitment in Ukraine, albeit to support the U.S. drive for hegemony in Asia. The world watched as he and vice president Vance argued with Ukrainian president Volodomyr Zelensky in full view of the cameras during a February 28, 2025 white house meeting. The bizarre scene was a reflection of the fact that Trump wants to see a change in U.S. policy but is being thwarted by a problematic ally.

Ukraine’s supporters in the U.S. and Europe were not deterred. UK prime minister Keir Starmer and French president Emmanuel Macron had pushed for the meeting with Trump. They both met with him to lay the groundwork for Zelensky and they never gave up even after the debacle and actually embraced Zelensky all the more. They have supporters in Washington too, where members of an anti-Russian clique still hold positions in the pentagon, intelligence agencies, and in congress.

The drone strikes on Russian military bases on June 1, 2025 were foreshadowed the previous week and should not have come as a surprise. Germany’s new chancellor Friedrich Merz suddenly announced that the Collective West NATO nations would no longer impose range limits on Ukrainian weapons. Republican senator Lindsey Graham, a staunch Russophobe, and democratic Richard Blumenthal, traveled to Ukraine and were there when a long planned drone attack damaged or destroyed 10 Russian war planes with nuclear capabilities, and bridges were exploded by drone fire and resulted in civilian casualties.

The damage was meant to be psychological rather than military and impartial observers do not believe there was any significant damage to Russia’s overall capabilities. But the message was clear. Ukraine and its supporters are not interested in peace and they have friends willing to help. The larger question is whether the Ukrainians had U.S. help and if Donald Trump was aware of these plans. Of course there are denials of U.S. involvement but just as in Syria in 2016, those declarations cannot be taken at face value.

Graham is the most outspoken anti-Russia hawk in the senate. His presence in Ukraine signaled not only his knowledge and approval of the plans, but that of European nations and U.S. intelligence agencies which have worked with the Ukrainians for many years. It is difficult to believe that Ukraine would suddenly act alone and without any U.S. support. But the question remains. What did Trump know? Would the anti-Russia forces keep him in the loop or give him plausible deniability and keep him in the dark? The need to ask these questions is an indication that the situation will remain murky.

But as in Syria in 2016, these attacks from Ukraine make clear that U.S. presidents are not all powerful. They can be thwarted by what is popularly known as the “deep state,” the permanent security apparatus within the government which always defends the primacy that the U.S. seeks. The deep state is willing to act against the wishes of the person who may be thought of as the most powerful man in the world but who can be undone if it so chooses.

In this case the deep state has friends in other countries, in congress, and among former officials who still hold sway. Graham and Blumenthal were not the only prominent people in Ukraine during the attacks. Mike Pompeo, former CIA Director and Secretary of State in the first Trump administration was also in Ukraine at that time. He warned against accepting Crimea as a Russian territory, despite it being under its control for 11 years. He also added , “But I think they all also know that, in the end, there’s no walking away from this for the United States.”

That belief in control, in full-spectrum dominance, is one that the deep state will not give up. It is a constant that explains how the U.S. behaves around the world. Those who really run the country never believe in walking away, and if the wishes of a president must be undone, so be it. The deep state is forever; presidents are not.

https://blackagendareport.com/ukraine-t ... nvolvement

******

After "Victory."

How much is enough?
Aurelien
Jun 04, 2025

<snip>

After last week’s little excursion into Buddhism and the Ego, we’re back with a crunch this week to the Ukraine crisis and the politico-military issues that surround its ultimate resolution. This is because the “debate,” if you can call it that, has begun to tip-toe towards speculation about how the war might end, and what victory conditions the Russians (as opposed to the West) might accept. As usual, there’s a lot of loose thinking being thought, and a lot of hot air being generated, so let’s try to dispel some of that by going back to first principles, and then applying those principles to the current situation. Let’s also remember that very often in history victory conditions haven’t been met, or turn out to have been wrongly formulated, or were just never possible anyway. And sometimes they have unexpected and even disastrous consequences.

It’s not clear to me that the Russians can escape these traps altogether. I make no claim to special knowledge about what Moscow is thinking, I do not pretend to instruct its Army about how to proceed, nor what political end-state its leaders should be thinking of. I don’t know the country personally and I don’t speak the language, so this essay remains, for the most part, at the level of general principles illustrated by examples. In any event, objectives and strategies change and adapt with time, and for that reason I’m not going to speculate endlessly about the significance of this or that person’s last statement: things may well have changed by the time I get to the last paragraph, anyway.

<snip>

So western strategy towards Russia at the highest level doesn’t exist; or if it does exist, it’s very well hidden. Rather, there’s a soggy consensus over disconnected short-term objectives which all, or most, nations can support, and which amounts to little more than:

Keep the war going somehow.

Stuff happens.

Putin falls from power.

?

Beyond that, there are fantasies about breaking up Russia, and fantasies about Russia turning into an ally of the West, and fantasies of other kinds as well, but none of these are connected to each other, let alone to reality, and none grapple with even medium term issues.

So the three criteria then, are (1) a political end-state which you can describe and which is politically feasible (2) an operational plan which is at least in principle capable of bringing about that political end-state and (3) the military, economic and organisational capacity to formulate and implement the plan.

<snip>

Even military “victory” can be debated. What does “destroying” the Ukrainian Army mean in this context? How would you know when Ukraine was “disarmed.” After all, when Germany and Japan surrendered in 1945 they both still had substantial forces left. We say that they were “defeated” at this point, because we judge that they were no longer capable of “winning,” or at a minimum that they could not prevent us from “winning,” according to our definition of that state. At least in the case of Germany, the capital was occupied, and there were no independent forces capable of disputing Allied control of the country. In the case of Japan, though, it’s far from clear that an invasion of Honshu, the main island, and the capture of Tokyo, was even practicable. And if the Japanese had had enough petrol, their air force could have continued fighting for some time.

Thus, definitions of this sort are contextual and subjective. War is not like a sport with agreed rules where you can say someone has objectively “won,” or at least is now so far ahead that the opponent cannot mathematically catch up. I don’t know what the Russians have decided, but I suspect that they will make a pragmatic definition of victory: when Ukrainian forces are no longer capable of organised resistance to the Russian Army. But a moment’s thought suggests that there’s more to “victory” than that. The other two principal Russian demands seem to be for the eviction of extreme nationalists from government, and the permanent neutrality of the country. So the question is, how precisely would “victory” in the sense I’ve described lead to the other two concessions being achieved? (As well as potentially territorial concessions too.) The short answer is that there is no obvious reason why it should. The War might actually be the easy bit.

First, there is the political recognition of defeat, which has to happen in some form. I’ve talked about some of the complications of this in the past, and at the very least some authority will have to make an agreement with some Russian authority about how surrenders will be taken, troops disarmed, prisoners exchanged and the like. Yet in reality, and in spite of the defeat of its forces, a Ukrainian government could actually just refuse to surrender, perhaps calling for some kind of popular resistance. (Pretty much what happened France in 1870-71.) Whilst the Russians could theoretically occupy much more of the country, and conceivably even Kiev, they simply don’t have the forces, and couldn’t generate them, to control the whole territory against opposition. And anyway, the more territory they control, the more they make themselves a target for freelance drone operators and saboteurs.

Thus “victory,” even if defined in this very narrow way, actually turns out be a very complicated objective. In effect, three things are required. One is an authority capable of ordering surrender, a second is an actual decision to do so, and the third is the capability to enforce it. It’s not clear that any of these actually exist at the moment. Any government ordering surrender would have to appear legitimate to the soldiers concerned. We don’t know what such a government would look like, and neither do the Russians. We don’t know whether surrender would be politically possible: whether, in terms of this essay, we are in an Algeria or Ulster situation. In any event, there will be those who refuse to surrender, because there always are. The question is how many there will be and how much trouble they can cause. Nobody, including the Russians, knows that. There is clearly the chance of serious conflict and opposition to any surrender, whether it is containable, as was the case over Algeria, or much graver, as with the civil war of 1921-23 which pitted the Irish republicans who accepted the ceasefire with the British against those who did not. If violence were widespread, there is probably no way the Russians could avoid becoming involved.

What the Russians are probably aiming at is a Vichy-style collaboration regime in Kiev, made up of politicians who believed that the best interests of the country (and themselves) would be served by working with the Russians. The problem, of course, is the acceptability and the resilience of such a regime, and its willingness to actually enforce the terms of whatever surrender document was negotiated. The less the regime can do this, the deeper the Russians are likely to be drawn into trying to do it for them. We could yet see the Russians in the position of the US in Afghanistan, trying to shore up a weak regime. The Russians will no doubt try to veto certain parties and individuals from taking part in government, but that will make the construction of an effective government even more difficult, and there is nothing to stop parties changing names or leaders. And that’s before we get to issues like protection of Russian speakers, which will require legislation to make it happen. What are the Russians going to do, park a tank regiment outside the Rada? And what happens if the law is repealed a month later? In practice, Russia will either have to abandon such aspirations, or be prepared to stay in Ukraine a long time.

But let us assume that some kind of generally-accepted interim government emerges which is acceptable to the Ukrainian people and to Russia, and that it is able to declare and enforce surrender of what remains of its forces. It would have to be accepted, in that case, that there would be rough edges, and that there would probably be lots of light weapons left, and perhaps small armed groups somewhere between bandits and a resistance. Although it’s difficult to reconstitute a functional military clandestinely, it’s not impossible, and there would have to be measures to try to control any illegal arms flows. This would be very difficult with drones: you could constitute quite a decent capability from drones, civilian vehicles and suitable electronics. And even then, the new Ukrainian government would have to be heavily armed enough to maintain the monopoly of legitimate force against bandits and bitter-enders.

At that point, the Russians seek to impose a longer-term relationship on Ukraine, to fulfil the neutrality requirement. It’s hard to know what this actually means in practice, and if the Russians have specific ideas, they haven’t said much about them. It obviously has at least two components, one practical and one legal. The best outcome for Russia would be a shaken and bruised Ukraine which is nonetheless still capable of acting as a state, and voluntarily agrees to adopt the kind of neutral status that Sweden and Austria had in the Cold War, because they think it is in their interests. The complication here is that neutral states often have substantial armed forces, precisely to protect their neutrality: there is no example I can think of, of a state which is both neutral and disarmed. The key issue is likely to be a decision that no foreign forces can be stationed in the country. (This has its own problems as we’ll see.) But the problem I foresee is that there will be an attempt to codify this in a treaty. Now let me remind you once more that treaties only work if they set down in writing what the parties have already basically agreed to. They cannot and should not be used as weapons to force things to happen.

(Much more at link, historical examples and theory, well worth the time.)

https://aurelien2022.substack.com/p/after-victory

******

The US DID Provide ...

... data for the attack on Russian bombers:

Le Monde: Ukraine's attack on Russian airfields would not have been possible without US intelligence:

Ukraine would not have been able to carry out a large-scale attack on Russian airfields using drones without information from US intelligence. This was stated by a former high-ranking officer of the French army, Guillaume Ansel.

Russians know this, which merely confirms what everyone with IQ above room temperature know--US will lie, cheat and stab you in the back. And here Mr. Medinsky today explaining (in Russian) why ukrops lamented that it is easy for Russians--they have only ONE boss. 404 has THREE and that makes any agreements with 404 worthless.

(Video at link.)

Russians know the game, it is Trump and his cabal who are delusional. What did you expect from a TV personality.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/06 ... ovide.html

No Comments)))

Image

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/06 ... ments.html

*****

AFTER RUSSIA’S RED LINES HAVE BEEN BREACHED, INCLUDING THE STRATEGIC NUCLEAR RED LINE, PUTIN IS AT THE ORESHNIK MOMENT – NEW PODCAST WITH DIMITRI LASCARIS

Image
By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

The point is not whether the June 1 attack on the Tupolev nuclear bombers across Russia can be called a terrorist operation or an act of war; nor is the point whether President Donald Trump was knowing in advance, during or afterwards; nor is the point whether a proxy intelligence service or US intelligence agency was engaged. The point is that the gravest breach of Russia’s national security since 1941 has succeeded.

The Empire has now escalated to nuclear war against Russia by demonstrating that it can and will attack the deterrent nuclear balance between Russia and the US, that it has the will and means to defeat Russia’s capacity to defend against and deter a first strike of ingenuity, countrywide coordination, simultaneity, and surprise. Like never before, the red line of mutual assured destruction (MAD) has been crossed by Russia’s warfighting enemies.

Those in the US and in the allied states who believe nuclear war can be waged against Russia and won believe they have demonstrated that this is the way to MAGA by MEGA — Make American Great Again, Make the Empire Great Again.

“A decision has been made,” President Vladimir Putin told government ministers on May 22, “to create a buffer security zone along the Russian border. Our Armed Forces are working on this now. They are also effectively suppressing enemy firing points.” After the June 1 attacks, it is obvious that the enemy’s firing points have not been suppressed across the border; instead, they have multiplied inside the country. Their next targets may be the country’s nuclear power plants, nuclear enrichment centres, nuclear weapons storages, nuclear submarine berths, mobile nuclear missile launchers.

For the moment the Ukrainians hold, or think they hold, the initiative; behind them the US, the French, Germans, and British believe they control the escalation required to force Putin to submit.

Listen to the discussion with Dimitri Lascaris. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_jQmghifv0

The Reason2Resist podcast can viewed here. https://www.youtube.com/@reason2resist/featured

https://johnhelmer.net/after-russias-re ... more-91777

******

Ukraine - Cost Of 6,000 Dead Soldiers, Thousands 'Abducted' Children Have Vanished

Busy, so just a few items on Ukraine.

Colonel Markus Reisner of the Austrian Army just published a new overview (vid) on the state of the war in Ukraine.
During the negotiations in Istanbul Russia offered to 'unilaterally' deliver to Ukraine the 6,000 bodies of service members of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
Today the Russian delegation leader in Istanbul, Vladimir Medinsky, reported to President Putin:

We proposed, unilaterally, to transfer to Kiev over 6,000 bodies of Ukrainian troops. They will be transferred using refrigerator cars where they are currently kept. We are ready to begin shortly. We understand Ukraine may have bodies of our troops as well although in much smaller numbers. But we are ready to take them over, if any.

The bodies were mostly recovered by the Russians after the hasty retreat of the Ukrainian army from its incursion into Russia's Kursk oblast.

This offer is a significant problem (in Russian) for the Ukrainian government. Family members of the deceased soldiers are of course pressing to receive and to bury those bodies. But acknowledging that those dead are indeed Ukrainian soldiers would be quite costly.

The dead are currently only listed as 'missed'. If they are declared dead their families will be entitled to receive 15 million hryvnias (UAH) (US$ 1 = UAH 41,50) each (3 million at once and the rest over three years and three months).

The return of six thousand bodies of military personnel killed in battle will cost 90 billion hryvnias (~US$ 2.2 billion) of payments from the Ukrainian budget. This is almost 10% of the military budget of Ukraine for the whole of the year.

The Ukrainian government will have to take the bodies. But it is likely to declare most of them 'unidentified' to then slow walk the process of identifying and naming them.

(The high cost for the budget also explains why the official Ukrainian death count is always kept low.)

Mediniski made another point which is also of interest:

Finally, the Ukrainian side handed over to us the list of 339 children allegedly kidnapped from the territory of Ukraine. Here is the list. We are working on it, through the office of the Commissioner for Children’s Rights. We will investigate every name.

But I must note that, for propaganda purposes, they earlier claimed that tens and hundreds of thousands of children had been brought over here. In fact, the actual number is 339 and we still need to check how many are in Russia, evacuated by our soldiers from under fire, and how many will eventually turn up in Europe, as experience shows.


The 'experience' Medinsky mentions refers to this item from last year's April:

Ukrainian children deported by Russia have been found in Germany: details have emerged

Ukrainian law enforcement officers, with the assistance of their German colleagues, have established the whereabouts of 161 Ukrainian children abducted by Russia in Germany. They were wanted as forcibly transferred to the temporarily occupied territories or deported to Russia and Belarus.


Those Ukrainian children, abducted by the bad, bad Putin, had fled with their parents to Germany ...

Posted by b on June 4, 2025 at 17:21 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/06/u ... l#comments

******

Kiev regime attacks Russia to boycott peace process

Lucas Leiroz

June 3, 2025

Ukraine has made it clear repeatedly that it is not interested in peace, leaving the Russians with no alternative but total military victory.

The Ukrainian terrorist attacks between May 31 and June 1 cannot be interpreted as isolated maneuvers. The Kiev regime has hardened its terrorist tactics to boycott the Istanbul talks at their highest point in three years. As a decadent, unpopular regime that relies on war to maintain its parasitic elite in power, the Kiev junta has launched massive provocations on internationally recognized Russian territory, making it clear to Moscow and the entire world that its participation in the diplomatic process is merely propaganda and that Ukraine’s real intentions are to take the conflict to its ultimate consequences.

This week, a new round of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine began in Istanbul, directing international attention to a peace process that, although often underestimated, carries profound geopolitical implications. The Russian delegation comes to the table with a concrete proposal, the result of years of repeated demands: Ukrainian neutrality, abandonment of military ties with the West, rejection of the anti-Russian ideology promoted by Kiev, and full and undisputed recognition of Russia’s New Regions.

For many Western analysts, such demands are unacceptable. However, to ignore this plan is to continue to deny the new reality that has been established in Eastern Europe since 2022. Moscow has not only consolidated territorial gains, but over the past three years it has also built a diplomatic position that is increasingly difficult to shake. For the first time since the failure in the summer of 2022, Russia has put its vision for a resolution in writing—a move that gives legal and symbolic weight to its position.

Ukraine, on the other hand, is coming to the negotiations with its own “project,” based on the illusion of “territorial integrity” and Western military security “guarantees.” The proposal, almost identical to the one presented in London in April, demands binding commitments from NATO and its allies for Ukraine’s territorial defense. However, as has been evident on previous occasions, these guarantees rarely materialize. The history of the relationship between Kiev and its partners is marked by broken promises and strategic retreats — as well as by incentives for tragedy, such as the British veto in 2022, when Boris Johnson undermined a possible ceasefire agreement.

Faced with this diplomatic impasse, Kiev is trying to change the balance of the negotiations through force — or rather, the appearance of force. On Sunday, the eve of the talks, Ukrainian drones hit air bases deep inside Russian territory, in regions such as Murmansk and Irkutsk. Although the Russian Defense Ministry’s personnel repelled most of the attacks, the move reflects a desperate attempt by Kiev to maintain strategic relevance in an increasingly adverse scenario.

This type of symbolic action, more than an effective military maneuver, represents a media effort. Ukraine has already used this tactic on previous occasions, such as in the attacks on the Crimean Bridge or in the constant launching of drones against Russian airports. The logic is clear: to create ruptures in the narrative of Russian stability and force reactions that could wear down the Kremlin — both internally and externally. But these actions have proven ineffective in practice. Instead of producing concrete gains, they only serve to justify new Russian attacks in response and accelerate the collapse, not of Russian diplomacy, but of Ukraine’s already weakened infrastructure.

While the Western media celebrate these operations with theatrical enthusiasm, events on the battlefield follow a different rhythm. In May, Russian forces advanced exponentially, consolidating positions in the New Regions and pushing toward territory that is still nominally under Ukrainian control. Russia’s operational superiority became evident, while the Ukrainian Armed Forces are facing an unprecedented crisis: lack of ammunition, low morale, and units operating with less than half their strength. In the first three months of 2025 alone, more than 45,000 cases of desertion or abandonment of post were documented — a figure that highlights the physical and psychological exhaustion of the Ukrainian army.

On the Russian side, the advance is steady and methodical. Unlike Ukraine, which needs high-profile operations to maintain external support and sabotage diplomacy, Moscow prioritizes tangible results on the ground. The logic is simple: to turn tactical gains into diplomatic advantage. The new Russian proposal in Istanbul reflects this approach. It is not just about demands — it is about an invitation to reality, based on consolidated superiority and the failure of the Ukrainian counteroffensives of 2023 and 2024. And the longer Ukraine delays in surrendering, the greater will be Kiev’s territorial and human losses.

As the respected analyst Sergey Polataev has correctly pointed out, in historical terms, the situation is reminiscent of the end of World War II, when Germany relied on “miracle weapons” such as the V-2 rocket. Although terrifying, these innovations did not change the course of the conflict. Today, Ukraine is relying on drones and sabotage actions that, although they attract attention, have limited effect on the military balance. Spectacle replaces strategy — a substitution that could cost dearly.

In short, the negotiations in Istanbul represent a rare opportunity to end a conflict that has already gone beyond tolerable limits. But it is naive to think that negotiations alone will produce any results. The Kiev regime has repeatedly demonstrated its lack of diplomatic goodwill, leaving Moscow with no alternative but to use force to protect its people and its legitimate interests.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... e-process/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14413
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Thu Jun 05, 2025 10:15 am

Dance of accusations
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 05/06/2025

Image

“I spoke to the media on the day of remembrance for Ukrainian children killed by Russia,” Volodymyr Zelensky wrote yesterday, insisting in a previous message that “every year, on this day, we honor the memory of children killed by Russian aggression.” The narrative demands that we forget how the Donbass war began—the origin of the current one, without which the current situation in Russia and Ukraine would be unthinkable—and the children who have died on the other side of the front over the past eleven years, leaving behind images such as the dismembered body of a baby next to her mother's corpse in a park in Gorlovka on a weekend day. One of Ukraine's main successes has been its ability to impose the narrative from that first moment, when its use of military means to resolve a political problem led to bloodshed. This dynamic continues today in the exchange of reproaches over the memoranda exchanged, in which both Moscow and kyiv presented, not their negotiating proposals, but rather the maximum proposals, two unworkable texts on which a good mediation should be able to separate the wheat from the chaff.

In his message, the Ukrainian president states that "in Istanbul, the Russians gave us an ultimatum, not a memorandum . Peace requires a meeting of leaders. I am ready to meet in the coming days with Putin, as well as with Presidents Trump and Erdoğan." This brief post summarizes the Ukrainian position, which is increasingly seeking a scenario similar to the negotiation of the Minsk agreements, in which Poroshenko had the support of two of his allies, Germany and France, and a roadmap imposed from above was agreed upon—never to be fulfilled, as both the Ukrainian government at that time and the current one now recognize. This roadmap contained only the basic points, without going into the fine print that was to be negotiated within the Minsk Trilateral Contact Group. This format was systematically sabotaged by Ukraine until the Russian invasion put an end to a peace process that Kiev never took seriously.

That seven-year process, during which Russia, through Donetsk and Luhansk, constantly made concessions and demanded only basic, even symbolic, compliance on some points, is too recent to forget that a conflict cannot be resolved in a single meeting and that a ceasefire is not viable without a clear political framework and the will of both parties to make it sustainable. Hence, Russia's intention is for this meeting of three or four presidents, if Erdoğan is indeed the chosen mediator, to take place once there are a series of results from the technical meetings on which to base the final decisions. For Ukraine, the roadmap is already written, the minor details are unimportant, and its memorandum , absolutely unviable as a peace agreement which, as even Ukrainian analysts admit, would amount to Russia's capitulation, is the agreement that Vladimir Putin must sign. Having learned the lesson of populism in the most pejorative sense of the term—offering simple solutions to complex problems—Zelensky proposes exactly the solution Donald Trump wants to hear.

“We are ready for the leaders' meeting. Anywhere: Istanbul, the Vatican, Switzerland. We propose a meeting starting Monday or later. A ceasefire before then is important. When we meet, it will be clear whether there is a willingness to de-escalate. If not, the ceasefire will end that same day,” Zelensky insisted, adding that “if we see a willingness to continue dialogue and seek de-escalation, we will maintain the ceasefire with guarantees of US mediation. If Russia does not want a prolonged ceasefire, the leaders' meeting can be held any day starting tomorrow. The ceasefire will last two to three days.”

It is curious that it is Zelensky, whose secret services have attacked nuclear-important military bases in recent hours, demolished bridges causing civilian casualties, and attempted to demolish the Crimean bridge, who, with the arrogance of someone who knows he will continue to have the funding and political support of his allies no matter what, demands from his enemy a willingness to de-escalate. However, the fact that Donald Trump has not yet mentioned Sunday's Ukrainian operation and that Keith Kellogg referred to it in a manner that cannot be described as harsh or accusatory gives Ukraine even more confidence in its ability to impose terms that do not correspond to the balance of power between the parties. "We would appreciate President Trump's support for this idea. I trust that President Erdoğan will support it. During our meeting, he told me that he wanted a meeting of four leaders: President Erdoğan, President Trump, me, and Putin. We are ready for such a meeting any day," the Ukrainian president stated.

By demanding a meeting of heads of state, Ukraine is trying to escape the Istanbul process and the long, tough negotiations necessary to reach an agreement that resolves, or at least limits, the causes of the conflict between the two countries and lays the foundations for future coexistence. This type of negotiation would seek a final treaty, something kyiv is trying to avoid, as it would consolidate Russian gains and entail a series of Ukrainian concessions that would be, perhaps not definitive, but binding in the short and medium term. With a more or less definitive peace, Ukraine would cease to be one of the focal points of international relations, with the loss of diplomatic strength and reduction in revenue that this would entail.

Russia's response to the flurry of memoranda and accusations of escalation came yesterday. During his meeting with the government, Vladimir Putin questioned the possibility of holding a meeting of presidents following last Sunday's "terrorist attacks." The Russian president was not referring to the bombing of Russian military bases—an issue the Kremlin prefers not to dwell on, partly to avoid embarrassment for failing to protect its infrastructure, but also to control the nationalist wing on its right, which is demanding a tough response—but to the attacks on railway infrastructure. “In Ukraine, the decision to commit such crimes was made for political reasons. What happened in the Bryansk region is a targeted attack against civilians. All the crimes were aimed at disrupting the diplomatic process in Istanbul. The illegitimate regime in Kyiv is gradually degenerating into a terrorist organization. And its sponsors are becoming accomplices of terrorists,” the Russian president stated, in terms that do not differ much from those Zelensky usually uses to refer to the Russian authorities.

Under media and political pressure, and with a Ukrainian delegation in the United States seeking even more American support, Russia is simply wondering how it could negotiate with a government that clings to war to maintain power and stoops to attacking infrastructure, knowing it will cause civilian casualties. In this struggle to dictate how diplomacy will be managed—whether from above with a meeting of presidents to create a scenario similar to that of Minsk or from below, with a much slower process but capable, if successful and willing, of achieving a more stable peace—the only recourse Russia has right now is military pressure. Russia has already captured a dozen villages in Sumi, its FPV drones are reaching the regional capital, and both the Russian advance and Ukrainian evacuations continue while Ukraine tries to respond by pressuring Russia in the Tyotkino area, Kursk region. But it is in Donbass, a priority area for Moscow although not for Kyiv for some time, where progress is most significant. Step by step or street by street, Russia is advancing in Chasov Yar and approaching Konstantinovka from three directions, potentially creating a difficult situation for Ukraine at one of the last obstacles to the Slavyansk and Kramatorsk conurbations. As Zelensky stated yesterday, and Vladimir Putin would agree, "wanting a ceasefire doesn't mean we won't do anything in the meantime."

The war continues, and the danger of a sharp escalation persists. Ukraine has demonstrated its capabilities and suggests it will continue to try to strike Russia in the rear, whether at civilian or military targets. And although no inflammatory statements have been made following the drone attacks on military bases across Russia, as Donald Trump stated yesterday, reporting on his conversation with Vladimir Putin, "he said, and very firmly, that he will have to respond to the recent attacks on the air bases." Trump, who has neither condemned nor commented on the Ukrainian attacks, also appears to accept the future Russian response. Not even the President of the United States, possibly the most optimistic man in this conflict, sees an agreement close. Referring to his 75-minute conversation with his Russian counterpart, Donald Trump indicated that, while it was "good," it was "not a conversation that will lead to peace."

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/06/05/baile-de-acusaciones/

Google Translator

******

RAY McGOVERN: Putin Would Not Rise to the Bait
June 4, 2025

The black-eye given Russian security services will eventually heal while the artful destruction of a handful of bombers – like earlier high-profile, but misguided operations – will have zero effect on the war in Ukraine.

Image
The TU-160, one of the types of Russian strategic bombers damaged by Ukraine, seen here over Moscow, Victory Day 2014. (Alex Beltyukov/Wikimedia Commons)

By Ray McGovern
Special to Consortium News

Ukraine’s drone attacks on air bases deep inside Russia on Sunday were timed to provoke Russia into shunning the Russia-Ukraine talks set for the next day in Istanbul. Volodymyr Zelensky and his European puppeteers also may have thought they could provoke Vladimir Putin to escalate attacks on Ukraine to such a degree that the U.S. could not “walk away” from Ukraine without appearing cowardly.

The PR benefits of destroying Russian aircraft far from Ukraine was part of Kyiv’s calculus. It was a huge embarrassment and a tactical victory in a short-lived, narrow sense.

But the black-eye given Russian security services will eventually heal. Most important, the artful destruction of a handful of bombers – like earlier high-profile, but misguided operations – will have zero effect on the war in Ukraine.

Doing Diplomacy For Once

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov called U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio immediately after the drone attacks on the Russian air bases and the sabotage/destruction of two rail bridges in Russia earlier that day.

The Russian readout said that Secretary Rubio “conveyed sincere condolences on the civilian casualties from the rail infrastructure blasts in Russia’s Bryansk and Kursk regions.” This is a sign that Lavrov did not come in with accusatory guns blazing, so to speak.

It does seem certain that Lavrov asked Rubio whether he knew of the drone attacks beforehand. And what did President Trump know?

Please Donate to the
Spring Fund Drive!

In my view, it is conceivable that neither had prior knowledge. When the drone operation was planned the geniuses working for Joe Biden were in charge of such things – the ones who destroyed the Nord Stream pipelines.

Most likely the U.S. was kept informed, but the operation itself bears the earmarks of the sabotage the British are so fond of carrying out – with particular lust after bridges.

They did so famously during World War II and they are quite good at it. Then, as now, such sabotage had little-to-no effect on the war – merely a transitory strengthening of their proverbial upper lip.

The Talks Went On, and Will Continue

Putin and Donald Trump wanted the negotiations in Istanbul to proceed, and those were their instructions to Lavrov and Rubio. They did, and with some tangible progress on small, but significant matters like the exchange of bodies. There was a highly important exchange of papers on the terms sought by each side, and a pledge to study them before the next meeting.

Bottom Line

The driving issue is bigger than Ukraine. Both Trump and Putin want improved U.S.-Russia relations. Other matters, including Ukraine, are secondary. As of now, at least, both sides seek a negotiated settlement to the war as the primary option.

And each side will do its best to avoid escalation and show a measured flexibility – and even patience – until such time as Ukraine’s army disintegrates.

It appears that this will happen soon. I believe that, at that point, Putin will be happy to supply as much lipstick as may be needed to conceal the pig of defeat for Ukraine-and-the-West.

Ray McGovern’s first portfolio as a C.I.A. analyst was Sino-Soviet relations. In 1963, their total trade was $220 MILLION; in 2023, $227 BILLION. Do the math.

https://consortiumnews.com/2025/06/04/r ... -the-bait/

******

Yes, That Was The Plan.

And Lula really doesn't provide any new information here. Still, the testimony of the leader of one of the BRICS countries is important.


Former US President Joe Biden wanted to see Russia “destroyed” during his time in office, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has said in an interview with Le Monde. The Brazilian leader, who has consistently pushed for a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine, objected to attempts to single out Moscow as the sole culprit behind the conflict, telling the French newspaper on Tuesday that “Western countries also bear part of the responsibility.” “Joe Biden, with whom I spoke at length, thought Russia needed to be destroyed,” Lula said, without elaborating when the conversation took place. “And Europe, which for a long time embodied a middle way in the world, has now aligned itself with Washington and is spending billions on rearmament. That worries me. If all we talk about is war, there will never be peace.”

Joe Biden is a moron, as was his admin--a collection of war criminals and ignoramuses. In its present state the US, as represented by its "elites" is an existential enemy of Russia and Russian people. Trump admin is no different, just with its own twist and flavor. Hence this from Putin today:


Президент России Владимир Путин заявил, что требование Киева о проведении саммита с Россией выглядит странно на фоне террористических атак украинских формирований, передает ТАСС. Глава государства отметил, что украинская сторона одновременно просит о приостановке боевых действий на 30 или 60 суток и о встрече на высшем уровне. Путин задался вопросом: «Но как же проводить в этих условиях подобные встречи. О чем говорить?» Он также подчеркнул: «Кто вообще ведет переговоры с теми, кто делает ставку на террор? С террористами? И за что их поощрять, предоставляя передышку в боевых действиях». Российский лидер указал на несостоятельность подобных инициатив в условиях, когда Киев продолжает атаки на объекты мирной инфраструктуры, и выразил сомнение в возможности переговоров на таких условиях.

Translation: Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Kyiv's demand to hold a summit with Russia looks strange against the backdrop of terrorist attacks by Ukrainian forces, TASS reports. The head of state noted that the Ukrainian side is simultaneously asking for a suspension of hostilities for 30 or 60 days and a summit meeting. Putin asked the question: "But how can such meetings be held under these conditions? What should we talk about?" He also stressed: "Who negotiates with those who rely on terror? With terrorists? And why should they be encouraged by providing a respite from hostilities." The Russian leader pointed out the inconsistency of such initiatives in conditions where Kyiv continues to attack peaceful infrastructure facilities, and expressed doubt about the possibility of negotiations under such conditions.

So, it is kind of self-evident. About NATO losses:


(Bloomberg) -- The US is refusing to provide air defenses to back the “reassurance force” the UK and France are planning in a postwar Ukraine, people familiar with the matter said. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has insisted a US so-called backstop is essential to deter Russia from breaching any future ceasefire deal. But European allies have concluded during discussions with their American counterparts that President Donald Trump won’t provide the guarantees they have sought to back the Europe-led ‘coalition of the willing,’ according to the people, who requested anonymity disclosing private discussions.

As I repeat ad nauseam, NATO is simply not in the position to fight a conventional conflict in Eastern Europe against Russia. Especially in the air where combined NATO air forces are paper tigers and it is worth mentioning that already by late 1970s Russia's central industrial district could withstand massive NATO air (space) operation. Since then ... well, since then the US lost the arms race and a bunch of sore losers from US Military, who migrated to abuse sinecures in all kinds of "think-tanks" continue to write "briefs" like that, from CSIS:


Russia will likely hit the 1 million casualty mark in the summer of 2025—a stunning and grizzly milestone.
No, no, no, Mr Seth G. Jones, why so low, go for 2, nay 5 million. After all, with you background in "government" and bottom feeding in the rear of the "finest fighting force in history" you have zero qualifications to even understand war dynamics, not to speak of how REAL armies operate and fight. But with "professionals" like that, the US will continue to have humanities dumb-down morons represent what passes in the West for strategic thought. Or as they say--cope harder.

In conclusion, Vladimir Putin verbatim:

Спонсоры Украины — пособники террористов.

Translation: Ukraine's sponsors are accomplices of terrorists.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/06 ... -plan.html

******

Ukraine 'Burns Bridge' of Peace Talks With New Round of Provocations
Simplicius
Jun 03, 2025
Today Ukraine made another major attempt at taking down the Kerch bridge, resulting in its most miserable failure so far. (Video at link.)

I’m no structural engineer, but Ukraine claimed to have ‘damaged’ an underwater piling that’s critical to one of the Kerch’s main spans:

Image
Image
Image

The attack featured several waves of drones, the first of which tried to bypass Russian perimeter defenses in the form of water barriers by blowing them up. There is some dispute over what ‘object’ Ukraine actually hit the bridge with: Ukraine claims they spent months secretly delivering 1,000kg+ of explosives to the bottom of the piling, while some Russian sources claim this is a lie and that the bridge was hit with another garden variety sea drone, though it is not visible in the footage above. Other sources like Oleg Tsarev yet say the new Ukrainian underwater Toloka drone was used, shown here: (Video at link.)

Crimean Bridge is intact. SBU is lying as usual

➖"Ukraine shows an attempt to blow up the Crimean Bridge and claims that more than a ton of explosives were attached to one of the underwater supports of the bridge. The SBU is lying, - notes Oleg Tsarev .

➖"According to my information, it was an underwater drone attack. You can see it in the video, which I will not publish, if you look closely. The drone was clearly small, the power of the explosion was very small, the SBU's goal was exclusively PR and recording a video of the explosion. It is not for nothing that it ends BEFORE all the "steam" has gone - the damage is purely cosmetic.

▪️ The bridge is functioning normally, cars are driving from Crimea and to Crimea, there is zero damage ."


In fact, the attack was mostly repelled as both Russian Lancets and FPV drones took out a large amount of Ukrainian sea drones: (Video at link.)

More importantly is the timing of the attack: again after a week-long spate of terror strikes on Russian trains, assassinations of Russian civilians (Gurtsiev incident), culminating in the mass drone attack on Russian bases which also used unwitting civilians as expendable cargo.

Former Ukrainian Economic Minister:

Image

Image

Now, apparently the Kerch was supposed to be brought down as a major coup de grace.

Imagine the plan’s sweep as Zelensky envisioned it: the entire Russian strategic bomber fleet was supposed to be taken out with the Kerch bridge toppling over nearly the next day. The information package surely prepared for such an event would have seen news outlets worldwide screaming that Russia has fallen, inciting thousands of ‘disgruntled’ Russians to storm the streets and oust Putin. How ‘glorious’ it all must have looked in the crenulated crevices of Zelensky’s foggy brain.

But it was for naught: both attacks failed.

A Russian source reports that the results of Ukraine's second attack on the Kerch bridge failed to cause any damage to the bridge itself, and only damaged 2 mesh fences and a decommissioned barge which served as a barrier. The Russian coast guard and Black Sea Fleet destroyed most of the USVs.

Even now, more images have streamed out showing the vast majority of Russian bases did not suffer any damage as claimed by Ukraine during the ‘surprise drone attack’.

Image

Image

Even new photos claiming to show “destroyed” planes is more than questionable:

Image

How does one possibly affirm those as “destroyed” in the satellite snap above?

AiTelly did release a useful video showing how the attacks were carried out at least: (Video at link.)

All in all, it turns out all Russia’s most important bases which actually take part in the SMO—like Olenya, Engels, Ryazan Dyagilevo, etc., repelled the attacks, while the only base that appears to have suffered hits was the least consequential one in the Far East region of Irkutsk. It’s a given this one had the least defensive capabilities or preparedness compared to the flagship bases.

During the Ukrainian strike on the Crimean Bridge, NATO recon planes — U-2S, B-350ER, CL-650, E-7T — closely monitored the battle. Routine flights? No — coordinated ops to track Russian positions.

Image



The other news item of note was the second round of Istanbul talks. Though the talks transpired in exactly the way we all predicted, the one interesting development was the slight ongoing clarification of Russia’s position which seems to be taking place with each new exchange:

Full text of the Russian memorandum on ending the conflict in Ukraine:

▪️International recognition of Crimea, LPR, DPR, Zaporizhia, Kherson regions as part of the Russian Federation.

▪️Prohibition of Ukraine from joining any military alliances and coalitions.

▪️Withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from new Russian territories and establishment of a 30-day ceasefire.

▪️Dissolution of nationalist groups in Ukraine.

▪️Legislative ban on the glorification and propaganda of Nazism.

▪️Giving the Russian language official status.

▪️Lifting martial law in Ukraine and holding elections.

The conditions for a ceasefire remain the withdrawal of the Ukrainian Armed Forces from four regions, the cessation of arms supplies and mobilization.

Military Informant


Though we’ve known most of the items above for a long time, there were many uncertainties about some of the notions, which Russia has gradually spelled out more clearly. For instance, rather than the deliberately vague “deNazification” mandate, now they specify “dissolution of nationalist groups in Ukraine” as well as legislation banning the glorification of Nazism.

Similarly, when Putin had seemingly contradicted earlier “no ceasefires first” positions by vaguely claiming Russia would “immediately” halt all fighting if Ukraine were to simply take the step of withdrawing from annexed Russian regions, we now see how that ties into the overall Russian design: Russia will agree to a 30-day ceasefire only upon the total withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from the designated territories.

Apart from that, the negotiations were dismissed merely as “humanitarian” in nature, in that they did not advance any real eye-to-eye between the two sides but rather dealt again with very preliminary coordinating of further prisoner and dead body exchanges.



I have to cut this report short as I’m traveling and there’s been a severe power outage where I’m staying. But we’ll mention a few last items.

Russian advances have continued in the Sumy region, with troops pushing down the main road from Oleksiivka:

Image

Sumy city itself is now visible from Russian positions at less than 20km out:

Image

On the map above, circled in yellow is Yablunovka where Russian forces continue to storm the northern part of the village. Confusingly enough, Russian forces of the 33rd Regiment have begun storming a different Yablunovka on the Konstantinovka front, which they released fresh footage of, and a note on the tactics used below:

Image

(Video at link.)

Geolocation: 48.393561,37.620765

Image

The network got a good video of the 33rd regiment's work in storming villages and fortified points of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the offensive on Konstantinovka. First of all, Maviks fly into enemy positions with discharges, which clear the dugouts and smoke out the AFU infantry from there.

Then fly FPV drones, suppressing the infantry that survived in the trenches, catching up with the AFU in any nooks and crannies. While this is happening, our stormtroopers are infiltrating the landing and clearing out the survivors.

The enemy pulls up units for a counterattack, but it is repulsed again with the support of our mavists and their coordination from the air. Our snipers are firing at approaching heavy drones of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. All these maneuvers and interactions are not given just like that - the skill is practiced at the training ground.




Last note, though the new Ukrainian terror and provocation campaign has mostly failed thus far, there are whisperings of further large-scale action. Not only have some Ukrainian accounts posted their usual ‘winking’ hints, but Russian sources suggest that even the Kerch bridge attack was a possible prelude to another larger operation:

GUR of Ukraine is planning something in Crimea. Recently, a consolidated unit from the 2nd detachment of SpN 10 of the separate SpN GUR center arrived in Primorskoye. Up to 70 people, plus up to 30 former prisoners. The group is commanded by Captain Dmitruk, call sign "Cross".

In September 2024, he led special operations of the GUR on the Black Sea, including the attack on the Crimea-2 offshore platforms. The arrival of UAV operators in the number of 25 people from the same 2nd detachment, with 40 light drones of the "Dart"aircraft type, is expected soon.


The naval drone attack on Kerch could have been just a precursor to probe defenses, with something else in the works; lord knows the British never sleep when it comes to their perennial quest to harm Russia.


A few last items:

In a rare lightbulb moment, Kellogg demonstrates an inkling of intelligence when it comes to Ukrainian attacks on Russia’s strategic nuclear triad:
(Video at link.)



New Ukrainian report on Russian missile stockpiles:

Image

Well, it seems she does see a light at the end of the tunnel after all. Hope lives on.

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/ukr ... eace-talks

******

Numbers: wheat, deaths, and Poles

EU tariff offensive, industrial decline, book-burnings, 'collaborationists', default, new mortality record
Events in Ukraine
Jun 03, 2025

June - summer, change. Or perhaps, more of the same.

One major change is set to enter into effect on June 6 - no more tariff-free trade with the EU, a temporary treat given to Kyiv in 2022. I wrote a month ago about the deleterious effects this is set to have on Ukraine’s already massive trade deficit with its Civilized friends. Back to the usual neocolonial quotas on Ukrainian goods.

On May 23, Bloomberg put out a new article on the topic. Notably, not one member state of the EU opposed the decision to restrict Ukraine’s exports. So much for European Solidarity against Eastern Barbarism.

Image

Ukrainian analysts see no need to hide their pessimism:

Since the beginning of the war, the European market has become key for our agricultural exports. For example, last year Europe accounted for 55% of all shipments, and for organic products (vegetables, berries, etc.) this figure reached 95%.

In theory, Ukrainian exporters could partially redirect supplies to other markets. But as Oleh Pendzin, head of the Economic Discussion Club, says, Ukraine's economy will still lose about 3 billion euros this year.

This will not only slow economic growth (which is already declining), but may also prompt authorities to resort to hryvnia devaluation to support exporters and compensate for budget revenue losses from reduced EU supplies.


The Polish government, for its part, is glad to hear that quota limits on Ukrainian production are to return. Agriculture minister Cheslav Sekersky celebrated on May 26:

These figures are very favorable for us because these import volumes (of Ukrainian products set by the quotas - ed.) are extremely low.

Image

Ukraine’s agrarian minister, in turn, warned of the ‘moral losses’:

“What about the moral losses? This is not calculated in billions, but millions of Ukrainian citizens supporting integration into the EU,” Koval said during an appearance at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council (AGRIFISH) in Brussels on Monday.

Koval said that the war has decimated Ukraine's other major industries, such as chemicals and steel, leaving agriculture to account for 17% of the country’s GDP. That means that a return to pre-war tariff quotas with the EU will work out at losses of between €2.8 billion and €3.5 billion for Ukraine in 2025.[/img]

As usual, the Ukrainians are unhappy with their colonial status vis a vis the EU. Anyway, it isn’t like their opinion ever mattered much. Long live more of the same!

At least the Poles are happy. One of my favorite figures is that released by the Polish National Bank in 2019 - since 2014, the millions of underpaid, highly abused Ukrainian migrant laborers in the country were responsible for 11% of Polish GDP growth. The more unemployment in Ukraine, the better for Poles.

Image
Ukrainians are crucial for Poland’s agriculture. In 2018, it emerged that Poland would lose 40% of its strawberry harvest if all the Ukrainian migrants went home. Many face abuse or have their passports taken from them while working on these fields. ‘Going to the strawberry fields’ has long been a popular meme in Ukraine.

They have high hopes for the future as well. Polish prime minister Donald Tusk stated on May 26 that he hoped his country would make a great deal of money off the ‘reconstruction’ of Ukraine:


Tusk made these remarks during a press conference while visiting Sławków, Poland, home to a major container terminal.

"There's nothing wrong with stating this honestly," he said.

"We want to make significant profits from Ukraine's reconstruction. We aim to help, but we also intend to benefit financially. That’s why we need this hub, this dry port," the politician stated.

According to local authorities, the expansion of the Sławków container terminal will be carried out in five phases, with the project cost estimated at €1 billion.

Tusk emphasized that once completed, the facility will become Europe's largest logistics hub.

Regardless, Kiev continues its one-sided romance with its western partners. On June 2, Zelensky signed into law joint mobile roaming with the EU. Brussels is yet to respond.

Onto some more numbers.

Ukraine’s industrial output has been falling more rapidly than before:

Image
Cement factory in Ukraine

https://eventsinukraine.substack.com/p/ ... -and-poles
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14413
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Fri Jun 06, 2025 1:17 pm

"Like children fighting"
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 06/06/2025

Image

“Thank you for the opportunity to convey the truth,” Pavlo Palisa, deputy head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, the only effective government currently existing in the country, wrote at the end of his post , describing his appearance before Kyiv’s most important audience: American senators. Part of Palisa’s truth- telling is his assertion that “since 2022, Russia has received more than 8.4 million artillery shells in the form of aid. They are actively building anti-Western alliances, although they themselves speak of isolation.” Although he doesn’t name them, Palisa is evidently referring to some of his audience’s usual obsessions: the People’s Republic of Korea and Iran, targets of US sanctions and military threats for decades, and possibly also China, a rival and opponent in the current battle for hegemony.

All of them, in different ways, have collaborated with Russia, whether through the acquisition of technology (the Iranian Shaheds), ammunition (North Korean artillery shells), the recent agreement under which North Korean troops fought at Kursk, or simply by not adhering to Western sanctions and continuing normal trade. However, unlike Ukraine, the West has subsidized the war, not because, as Palisa claims, "Ukraine is not just defending itself; we fight for the same principles of freedom and justice as you," but out of a shared interest in weakening a historical enemy. Russia, which is also the closest ally of the true rival, is alone in financing this war. The aid mentioned by the Ukrainian representative is merely an example of commercial acquisitions, despite the fact that Kiev, its allies, and the sympathetic press try to present the facts differently, for example, repeatedly insisting on Chinese involvement, a useful mantra for propaganda, although impossible to prove since it is nonexistent. China's role is not military, but rather that of an ally that helps by staying out of both the battle—Beijing has not contributed a single dollar to the Ukrainian war effort, or even the humanitarian effort—and the Western economic war.

As the opening of his message showed, in which he wrote that he was speaking "on behalf of Ukrainian military personnel in support of Senator Lindsey Graham's sanctions bill," Ukraine's main objective is always to achieve more sanctions against Russia. Like Ukraine, which since 2022 has been trying to get China to distance itself from Russia and comply with Western sanctions, which, like Moscow and much of the Global South, it views as illegitimate because they do not originate from the United Nations Security Council, Graham's bill also looks to Beijing. While he is still trying to convince Donald Trump of the appropriateness of adopting legislation that implies 500% tariffs on countries that purchase Russian oil, gas, or uranium, the belligerent Republican senator's latest proposal has been to exclude countries that support Ukraine from these sanctions (for example, the United States, which, according to various sources, continues to purchase Russian uranium). "If he wants to avoid tariffs, he should help Ukraine," mocked Graham, who, if he gets his way with Donald Trump, will have found a way to punish, in one fell swoop, two of his personal enemies, China and Russia.

“Sanctions are a proven tool against Putin,” affirmed Andriy Ermak, echoing Palisa, adding that “they are now discussing truly tough and effective sanctions; we are talking about energy, oil, and the banking sector.” kyiv is not content with secondary sanctions against countries that still trade with Russia, but continues to press for something as close as possible to the dream of imposing the blockade of Cuba against the Russian Federation. Ermak, like the rest of the Ukrainian officials, does not bother to explain why, if sanctions are a tool that has proven its effectiveness, more rounds are necessary beyond the seventeen that have been approved since 2022. Just as on the front lines, in economic warfare, too, it is necessary to pretend that everything is going well and that a final offensive will bring down the enemy's defenses.

Palisa's second objective in his speech to the senators, like Ermak's in his meeting with the State Department and Svyrydenko's with the Treasury, is to present the war in Ukraine as an opportunity for the United States and to insist that, contrary to Donald Trump's claims a few months ago, kyiv is not "losing the war." On this point, Palisa's speech also aligns perfectly with Ermak's, who stated that "Ukraine is not going to lose this war, and Russia is not going to win it." However, in his argument, Ermak suggests that kyiv may not lose the war, but neither can it win it. "After more than three years of war, we are surviving, fighting, and capable of achieving a lasting peace," he explained. Survival may have been the goal in 2022, but it is no longer the expected outcome, for example, when Ukraine promised to reach Crimea in the months leading up to the 2023 counteroffensive, or what Zelensky hoped for when he boasted about his troops' control of part of the Kursk region.

Due to their simplicity and brevity, Palisa's comments on the speech he gave, dressed in camouflage clothing, to US senators are representative of Ukraine's goals and actions. The deputy head of the President's Office used simple and limited arguments—just two—but effective for the intended audience. "We are not losing this war. In 2024, the enemy captured only 0.5%, and another 0.2% since the beginning of this year. But at the cost of 167 occupiers killed per kilometer. This does not look like a quick victory," he explained, elaborating slightly on the idea raised by Ermak, although he did not take into account that Russia is currently advancing in Sumi and Donbass, the most fortified area of ​​the front and where Ukraine is facing increasing personnel difficulties. A result of this is the news that emerged this week, when it was announced that the Armed Forces of Ukraine will accept volunteers over the age of 60. “Finally, all veteran thought leaders and professional patriots will have the glorious opportunity to set an example, showing the younger generations how to properly fight and die for Mother Ukraine,” wrote Ukrainian historian Marta Havrysko critically.

To deny difficulties, Ukraine prefers not to use square kilometers as a measure and instead measures advances in Europe's second-largest country solely as a percentage of territory, without mentioning the trend it represents or the fact that they are occurring in the most suitable place for defense. It is also necessary to conceal the fact that, according to Ukrainian media outlets such as DeepState , Russian advances this past month have been the fastest since last November, despite the fact that offensive actions have only increased by 19%, indicating greater Russian effectiveness against Ukraine's weakened defenses. If we add to this casualty estimates that border on the delusional, the argument becomes even more compelling for senators, potential lobbyists for the Ukrainian cause.

Palisa's second argument, as was to be expected this week, is Operation Spider Web , the successful Ukrainian attack on Russian military bases, which was accompanied by a series of sabotages against Russian railway infrastructure that are still ongoing—yesterday another one occurred in the Voronezh region—which the Ukrainian representative preferred not to mention. The civilian casualties caused are a poorer justification than the bombings of facilities where nuclear bombers of the old Cold War enemy are stationed when the objective is to convince US representatives. “I explained why we can no longer simply shoot down missiles; we need to attack their source. The SSU's Operation Spider Web became a symbol of our new approach: in one hour, we lost 41 Russian aircraft, including AWACS aircraft,” Palisa said, using that number—41—which is becoming Ukraine's main slogan, even though even Western experts suggest the true number of destroyed or damaged aircraft is closer to 14. In the propaganda game, impact is more important than facts.

Palisa, unlike Ermak, who was received by the Undersecretary of State instead of Marco Rubio as he had hoped, preached to a dedicated and convinced audience. Ukraine is trying to convince not the Senate, where Lindsey Graham knows he has the majority necessary to pass the law imposing tariffs on countries that trade with Russia, but Donald Trump, who, the absolute dominator of the Republican Party, sets the tone. The US president insists, as he stated yesterday, that he is "with Ukraine," adding that "what I really want is for the death to stop." And for now, he is holding the brakes on Senate legislation, even as he uses the prospect of imposing those sanctions as a continuing threat against the Russian Federation, a tool to use when, through “stunning” operations—as Axios privately called Operation Spider Web —and by offering exactly what he’s asking for, a meeting of presidents, Zelensky convinces him that he’s not the “bad guy” he now perceives him to be, but an ally against the real common enemy.

Progress in that direction is limited. Yesterday, threatening to impose harsh sanctions on Russia but suggesting that Ukraine could also be punished, Donald Trump reiterated his views on the war. "Sometimes you see two kids fighting like crazy. They hate each other, they're hitting each other on the playground, and you try to separate them. They don't want to be separated, and sometimes it's better to let them fight for a while and then separate them," he declared, perhaps to justify the four months in which he has still not managed to stop the war.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/06/06/como-ninos-peleando/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
The exchange of bodies of the dead has begun.
Today we took 42 of our dead and handed over 503 killed Ukrainian soldiers out of the announced 6,000.

Peace be to the ashes of our fallen soldiers.

***

The Ukrainian Armed Forces have carried out a second strike on the courthouse in Belgorod when the regional governor Vyacheslav Gladkov arrived there .

The enemy carried out the second strike with an aircraft-type drone when the head of the region went inside to assess the consequences and extent of the damage from the first attack. As a result, a passing driver was injured and hospitalized with barotrauma.

In addition, the courthouse's windows were knocked out and the façade was damaged.

***

Colonelcassad
Tonight, in response to the terrorist acts of the Kiev regime, the Russian Armed Forces carried out a massive strike with high-precision long-range air, sea and land-based weapons, as well as attack UAVs, on design bureaus, enterprises for the production and repair of weapons and military equipment of Ukraine, workshops for the assembly of attack drones, flight training centers, as well as warehouses of weapons and military equipment of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The goal of the strike was achieved. All designated objects were hit.

(c) RF Ministry of Defense

***

Colonelcassad
Drone attack in the direction of Moscow repelled.
Sobyanin reported that 9 drones were shot down.
One was shot down near Podolsk.

Meanwhile, strikes on Kiev continue.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Brief Frontline Report – June 5th, 2025

Report by Marat Khairullin with illustrations by Mikhail Popov.
Zinderneuf
Jun 05, 2025

Image
The inscription in the box in the center-west portion of the map (near the reserves) reads: "In the first days of June, the enemy withdrew its reserves to the left bank of the Oskol River.” Bottom left: ЛБС 20.4.2025=Line of Combat Contact April 20th, 2025. Зона Активности=Zone of Activity.

On June 4, 2025, after liberating the settlement of Redkodub and thus expanding their foothold on the dominant heights of the watershed, the Russian Forces continue to exert strong pressure on the enemy. Fighting is ongoing on the outskirts of the settlement of Karpovka (west of Redkodub, partially obscured by a red arrow), where the enemy is defending crossings over the Nitrius River. (In case you are unaware, the Oskol is the large river running down the middle of the map, and the Nitrius is the smaller river directly west of Redkodub.) Advanced RF units, advancing along the watershed ridge while bypassing the settlement of Zelenaya Dolina, are operating in the direction of Shandrigolovo (Shandrylohovo)-Srednee with the aim of destroying crossings and the road junction supplying the Armed Forces of Ukraine grouping in Kolodezi-Zelenaya Dolina.

With the advance to the Shandrigolovo-Karpovka-Andreevka line, the RAF gains control over the watershed of the Oskol and Nitrius Rivers, where the AFU’s primary defensive stronghold is established, securing the approaches to the cities of Oskol and Krasny Liman.

Recognizing the threat, the AFU command began transferring a large reserve force to the left bank of the Oskol River in early June and deploying them along the watershed ridge. The terrain, crisscrossed by ravines, rivers, and streams—tributaries of the Oskol—facilitates covert movement into operational zones.

These reserves have been pulled from other sectors, and as they consolidate in their assigned areas, the RAF command is intensifying operations in weakened directions, further destabilizing the AFU’s defenses.

Moreover, if the situation develops favorably on the flanks—the right (Borovaya-Senkovo area) and the left (advancing toward Rubtsy)—and with fire control established over the Oskol River crossings, the RF will pose a threat of encirclement to the entire AFU grouping in this sector. The enemy will not have time to transfer such a large number of personnel and equipment to the right (west) bank of the Oskol. This creates a zugzwang (no win scenario) for the AFU: the more reserves they ferry to the left (east) bank, the greater their eventual losses when this group is cut off.

https://maratkhairullin.substack.com/p/ ... e-5th-2025

******

Execution of refuseniks near Krasnoarmeysk
June 5, 13:13

Image

The Ukrainian Armed Forces shoot the refusers who do not want to go to "zero" in the Krasnoarmeysk direction.
One tries to run away, but not far.

(Video at link.)

The executioners were from the 68th Jaeger Brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9881135.html

The Abrams are running out, but Babchenko is still not here...
June 5, 15:08

Image

Another 2 captured Abrams tanks captured by Russian troops in the Sumy direction.

(Video at link.)

Babchenko is missing again. Where the hell is he?

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9881587.html

Combined strike on Ukraine. 06.06.2025
June 6, 11:16

Image

From 11 p.m. to 7 a.m., the Russian Armed Forces carried out a powerful combined missile and unmanned aerial strike on Ukraine.
Ballistic missiles, air- and sea-based cruise missiles, and various drones were used.
Targets in 12 regions of Ukraine and in Kiev were hit. A large number of different objects were hit - mainly various enterprises, energy facilities, etc.

One of the most epic is the series of arrivals in Lutsk.

(Video at link.)

The enemy claims that the number of Geraniums used has exceeded 400.
Overall, this was one of the most powerful combined attacks in recent months.

More videos of strikes were posted on the channel https://t.me/boris_rozhin (if anyone is interested, subscribe)

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9882879.html

Google Translator

******

Is Russia’s Pearl Harbor approaching?

Lorenzo Maria Pacini

June 3, 2025

The war will continue and things are going badly for Kiev on the ground: Russia is advancing steadily across the front, capturing two villages a day.

First the facts, as far as they are known, then personal opinions

It is 1 June 2025. Five Russian airports – Olenya, Belaya, Diaghilev, Ivanovo and Ukrainsk – have been attacked, with Ukraine claiming responsibility. The targets were strategic bombers used in the Ukrainian conflict to launch conventional missiles, but which are also part of Russia’s so-called “nuclear triad”.

According to Ukraine, the operation was the result of more than a year and a half of preparations: hundreds of drone components were brought into Russian territory, stored in a warehouse in Chelyabinsk (not far from the border with Kazakhstan, where they presumably entered), assembled, loaded onto wooden structures and then onto trucks headed for the vicinity of the bases. From there, the drones were launched against the aircraft. It is unlikely that the truck drivers knew what they were transporting (one of them was found dead, suffocated with an electrician’s cable tie). This is a familiar scenario, as in the case of the truck that exploded on the Crimean bridge, an incident that was shrouded in silence, given the embarrassment that followed, despite the truth being blatantly obvious.

Ukrainian sources reported by Western media minutes after the attack spoke of 40 aircraft destroyed, including bombers, cargo planes and reconnaissance aircraft. Zelensky then spoke of a 34% loss of the fleet, or 23 aircraft out of a total of about 70 (if the known figures are reliable, given that the exact figure is classified). The videos available – from Ukrainian sources – show five Tu-95s hit (four in Olenya, one in Belaya), two Tu-22M3s (both in Belaya) and an An-12 transport aircraft (in Olenya). Another video shows two fires in Belaya, but it is unclear what is burning. Further damage is possible, but the lack of footage makes verification difficult. Russia does not usually have any problems releasing videos of this kind. More precise figures will have to wait for satellite images. The number “forty” may be more of an initial target. However, it appears that at three of the five airports, including the very important one in Ryazan, the attack was intercepted: in one case, the drones set fire to the truck transporting them, in another, civilians at a service area climbed onto the vehicle to prevent the drones from taking off after realising what was happening.

An isolated incident or the point of no return?

As for the scope of the action, this is probably an isolated incident, which will likely be mentioned in history books. It is difficult to replicate an operation of this magnitude: the logistics network has now been compromised and, although the damage is serious, it was not as devastating as expected, as it would have been if the attack had been successful at all five airports.

It should also be noted that, despite its losses, Russia still has a sufficient number of bombers and, to date, has never deployed more than 18 at the same time (and only once, in December 2023). The idea that Russian strategic aviation is now out of the game therefore appears rather fragile, just as the idea that the sinking of the Moskva prevented the Black Sea fleet from continuing to launch Kalibr missiles was.

However, the success is undeniable from a media perspective (overshadowing other events, such as last night’s railway attacks, with civilian casualties that will soon be forgotten) and also from a military perspective, as these are expensive, technologically complex and difficult to replace aircraft, even if they are partly obsolete.

Strategically, Ukraine is justified in targeting any Russian military assets, especially those used to bomb it. The fact that they are part of the nuclear triad is irrelevant, as Ukraine does not possess nuclear weapons and atomic weapons are not involved in the current conflict. One could argue, if anything, about the use of unwitting civilian assets for military purposes, but this is a secondary detail at this point.

The real issue is another: how long will it take before NATO actively enters the fray?

Statements by NATO countries do not help to reassure the situation. Just yesterday, with surprising timing, the United Kingdom announced its intention to acquire aircraft capable of dropping free-fall nuclear bombs, designed specifically for anti-Russian deterrence. Tomorrow, Monday, just as new negotiations between Kiev and Moscow are scheduled to take place in Istanbul, Keir Starmer will present the United Kingdom’s new anti-Russian strategic plan.

Meanwhile, Stars & Stripes has published the results of RAND simulations commissioned by the US Air Force, according to which a possible Russian invasion of NATO territory would be stopped… but only if Western aircraft and defences were financed with colossal sums of money. Alternatively, Ukrainian drones could be used. This is a cheaper option, but one that Moscow could interpret as a direct provocation.

The silence of the last few hours – neither the Kremlin (except for a generic statement from the Ministry of Defence), nor Washington, nor the “willing allies” have spoken – suggests that frantic consultations are underway. It is possible that Moscow is trying to understand whether we are on the brink of a real war, and no longer a “special operation”. The absence of statements even from Medvedev suggests that Russia is not at all satisfied with the responses it has received.

Difficulty there will be immediate retaliation – we hope – unless civilian infrastructure (such as dams or power stations) is targeted. The war will continue and things are going badly for Kiev on the ground: Russia is advancing steadily across the front, capturing two villages a day.

Amid media euphoria over the attack on the airports, even the commander of the Ukrainian ground forces, General Mykhailo Drapatiy, resigned following a Russian attack on a training camp in Gvardeyskoye, in the Dnipropetrovsk region, where the 158th and 33rd brigades were stationed. The exact number of casualties is unknown. The same sources that speak of 40 aircraft destroyed report 12 deaths, but it is difficult to believe that 12 casualties are sufficient to justify a change at the top.

As for the internal political consequences in Russia, we will have to wait at least 48 hours. Some rumours speak of the appointment of former President Medvedev as head of the Special Military Operation, while others speak of an imminent exemplary counterattack of a nuclear-tactical nature. The new Russian doctrine approved on 19 November 2024 does indeed provide for the use of nuclear weapons in the event that an attack renders key nuclear forces unusable, but there are no targets in Ukraine that would justify such an escalation and, if there were ever a response, it would not be directed at Kiev (for obvious reasons).

What is certain is that President Putin will now have to face an internal attack, which is bound to materialise, just as further provocations on other fronts are bound to materialise, in order to disperse Russia’s energies.

Now more than ever, Russia, its people and its government must be united.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... proaching/

*******

Full Text of Russian and Ukrainian Memorandums Presented at Istanbul Talks on June 2, 2025
June 5, 2025
Russian Memorandum

Published by RT on 6/2/25:

The Russian delegation presented its peace proposal to the Ukrainian side during the talks in Istanbul on Monday.

Among the main points, Moscow’s memorandum calls on Kiev to withdraw its troops from the former Ukrainian territories that have joined Russia and confirm its neutral and non-nuclear status.

Draft as of June 1, 2025

Proposals of the Russian Federation (Memorandum) on the Settlement of the Ukrainian Crisis

Section I

Key Parameters for a Definitive Settlement

1. International legal recognition of the incorporation into the Russian Federation of Crimea, the LPR, the DPR, and the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions; full withdrawal from these territories of Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) units and other Ukrainian paramilitary formations;

2. Neutrality of Ukraine, implying its refusal to join military alliances and coalitions, as well as a ban on any military activity by third-party states on Ukrainian territory and the deployment of foreign armed formations, military bases and military infrastructure there;

3. Termination of all existing international treaties and agreements inconsistent with the provisions of Paragraph 2 of this Section, and refusal to conclude any such agreements in the future;

4. Confirmation of Ukraine’s status as a state without nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction, with a direct ban on their receipt, transit and deployment on Ukrainian territory;

5. Establishment of maximum limits for the size of the AFU and other Ukrainian military formations, the quantity of armaments and military equipment, and their permissible specifications; dissolution of Ukrainian nationalist formations within the AFU and National Guard;

6. Guarantees of the full rights, freedoms and interests of the Russian and Russian-speaking population; granting the Russian language official status;

7. Legislative prohibition of the glorification and propaganda of Nazism and neo-Nazism, dissolution of nationalist organizations and parties;

8. Lifting of all current economic sanctions, bans and restrictive measures between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, and refusal to impose new ones;

9. Resolution of issues related to family reunification and displaced persons;

10. Waiver of mutual claims for damages incurred during hostilities;

11. Removal of restrictions imposed on the Orthodox Church of Ukraine;

12. Gradual restoration of diplomatic and economic relations (including gas transit), transport and other connections, including with third-party states.

Section II

Ceasefire Conditions

Option 1.

Commencement of complete withdrawal of the AFU and other Ukrainian paramilitary formations from the territory of the Russian Federation, including the DPR, LPR, and the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, and their pullback from the borders of the Russian Federation to a distance agreed upon by the Parties, in accordance with Provisions to be approved.

Option 2. “Package Proposal”:

1. Prohibition on redeployment of the AFU and other Ukrainian paramilitary formations, except for movements aimed at withdrawal from the borders of the Russian Federation to a distance agreed upon by the Parties;

2. Cessation of mobilization and commencement of demobilization;

3. Cessation of foreign supplies of military products and foreign military assistance to Ukraine, including the provision of satellite communication services and intelligence data;

4. Elimination of military presence of third countries on Ukrainian territory, cessation of participation of foreign specialists in military operations on Ukraine’s side;

5. Guarantees of Ukraine’s renunciation of sabotage and subversive activities against the Russian Federation and its citizens;

6. Establishment of a bilateral Center for Monitoring and Control of the Ceasefire Regime;

7. Mutual amnesty for “political prisoners” and release of detained civilians;

8. Lifting of martial law in Ukraine;

9. Announcement of the date for elections of the President of Ukraine and the Verkhovna Rada, which must take place no later than 100 days after the lifting of martial law;

10. Signing of an Agreement on the implementation of provisions contained in Section I.

Section III

Sequence of Steps and Timeline for Implementation

1. Work commences on drafting the Treaty text;

2. A 2-3 day ceasefire is declared for collection of bodies of the fallen in the “gray zone”;

3, Six thousand bodies of AFU servicemen are unilaterally transferred to the AFU;

4. A Ceasefire Memorandum is signed with specific dates for fulfillment of all provisions, determining the date for signing the future Treaty on Final Settlement (hereinafter, the Treaty);

5. A 30-day ceasefire regime takes effect from the moment the AFU withdrawal begins. Complete withdrawal of AFU units from the territory of the Russian Federation and full implementation of the “package agreement” must be completed within these 30 days;

6. Elections are conducted and government bodies are formed on the territory of Ukraine;

7. The Treaty is signed;

8. The signed Treaty is endorsed by a legally binding UN Security Council resolution;

9. The Treaty is ratified, enforced, and implemented.

***

Ukrainian Memorandum

Published by Reuters on 6/1/25:

KYIV, June 1 (Reuters) – Reuters has seen the text of the peace proposals that Ukrainian negotiators plan to present to the Russian side at peace talks scheduled to take place on June 2 in Istanbul.

The text of the Ukrainian document is published in full with no changes.

Ukraine-Russia Negotiations Framework

I. Key Principles of the Agreement and the Negotiation Process

• Full and unconditional ceasefire in the sky, on land and at sea as a necessary background and prerequisite for peace negotiations.

• Confidence-building measures – addressing humanitarian issues: unconditionally return all deported and illegally displaced Ukrainian children. Exchange of all prisoners (the “all for all”

principle). Release by Russia of all civilian hostages.

• Non-repetition of aggression: The aim of the negotiations is to restore a permanent basis for lasting peace and security and to ensure that aggression does not occur again.

• Security guarantees and engagement of the international community: Ukraine must receive robust security guarantees. The parties will invite the international community to participate in the negotiations and provide guarantees to ensure the implementation of the agreements.

• Sovereignty: Ukraine is not forced to be neutral. It can choose to be part of the Euro-Atlantic community and move towards EU membership. Ukraine’s membership in NATO depends on consensus within the Alliance. No restrictions may be imposed on the number, deployment, or other parameters of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, as well as on the deployment of troops of friendly foreign states on the territory of Ukraine.

• Territorial issues: Territorial gains made by Russia since February 2014 are not recognized by the international community. The contact line is the starting point for negotiations. Territory issues are discussed only after a full and unconditional ceasefire.

• Sanctions: Some sanctions may be lifted from Russia, but in stages and only gradually, with a mechanism for resuming sanctions if necessary (snapback). Frozen Russian sovereign assets are used for reconstruction or remain frozen until reparations are paid.

• Implementation: Agree on a clear, balanced and achievable roadmap for implementation and enforcement of the agreements.

II. Next step – agreeing ceasefire and agenda of the leaders’ meeting

• After the meeting in Istanbul, the parties continue the talks which shall focus on: (1) full and unconditional ceasefire: its modalities and monitoring; (2) confidence building measures; (3) preparation, agreeing agenda and structure of future leaders’ negotiations on key topics.

• Negotiations to be held with the U.S. and Europe participating.

III. Ceasefire

• Full and unconditional ceasefire in the sky, on land and at sea at least for 30 days (with the possibility of rolling extensions every 30 days) as a necessary background and prerequisite for peace negotiations.

• Ceasefire monitoring, led by the US and supported by third countries.

IV. Confidence-building measures

• After successful exchange of PoWs after Istanbul talks, the parties continue the exchange process for all prisoners of war (“all for all” principle).

• Agreement on unconditional return by the Russian Federation of all deported and displaced Ukrainian children, and release by Russia of all civilian prisoners. These measures should include all categories of persons listed, starting from February 2014.

V. Leaders’ meeting

• The leaders of Ukraine and Russia meet to agree on key aspects of final peace settlement.

• Key topics of peace agreement to be agreed by the leaders:

1) Permanent and complete cessation of hostilities: conditions, monitoring, sanctions for violations

2) Security guarantees and non-repetition of aggression

3) Territorial issues

4) Economy, compensation, reconstruction

5) Penalties for breach of agreements

6) Conclusion of a final peace agreement

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/06/ful ... ne-2-2025/

*****

"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14413
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Sat Jun 07, 2025 11:58 am

War in the air
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 06/07/2025

Image

“On the night of June 5-6, 2025, Russia launched a combined attack in Ukraine against the cities of Kyiv, Ternopil, Lutsk, Chernihiv, and the Lviv region,” Ukrainska Pravda wrote yesterday in its war report , citing data supplied by Yuri Ignat, according to which the Ukrainian air force claimed that “Russia deployed 452 air missiles, including missiles and drones. Air defenses shot down 406 targets, with hits recorded at thirteen locations and damage caused by falling shrapnel.” As usual, the high rate of interceptions claimed by the Ukrainian air force clashes both with the images published throughout the day and with the prayers of a Ukraine supposedly at the mercy of Russian missiles and in desperate need of new air defense systems.

The reality shown by experts' observations and the numerous images of targets hit by Russian missiles and drones—often videos provided by Russian forces to show their successes, something Ukraine also did in its major attack last weekend—is far from the downing of virtually all Russian missiles. One of the videos released yesterday showed kyiv's air defenses trying unsuccessfully to shoot down a Russian missile, after which a loud explosion on the ground, presumably from the air defense system, can be seen. That part, about the shortage of ammunition for defense against Russian missiles and drones, is based on reality and is one of the reasons why Russian bombings are more successful with fewer missiles—not as many projectiles are needed to overcome defenses that are no longer as powerful—than they were a few months ago.

According to the Russian Ministry of Defense, the targets of the night attack were weapons design and production sites, drone repair and assembly workshops, flight training centers, and warehouses of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Among the impacts recorded, according to the Ukrainian newspaper Strana , was a hotel in Lutsk where the Ukrainian athletics team was staying. According to images published by the athletes themselves, none of whom were injured, one of them indicates that several military personnel who were also staying at the hotel were damaged. The Russian attack, in which, according to Volodymyr Zelensky, 40 missiles and 400 drones were used, affected large areas of the country and left at least four dead and around twenty injured, figures that hardly justify headlines like that of El País , which yesterday stated that "Russia launches its largest bombing raid on Ukraine after Putin's threat of revenge." The Spanish media added that "kyiv is the main target of a massive attack involving more than 400 bomb drones and 45 missiles several days after the Ukrainian operation against Russian air bases."

“Once again, Putin is attacking cities, homes, and civilians. These are not military targets, but acts of barbarism. Among the dead were members of the State Emergency Services who were working tirelessly to save and protect lives,” said British Foreign Secretary David Lammy, with an indignation he rarely displays when commenting on Israeli bombings. The European modus operandi is clear and consists of two very simple points: ignore any Ukrainian attack and condemn each and every Russian move as if it were a deliberate attack on civilians, whether true or not. The objective is none other than to justify further Western involvement, especially from the United States, if the changing opinion of its president can still be modified to continue the supply of real-time intelligence and renew the arms supply once the funding inherited from the Biden era runs out.

Western representatives act in perfect coordination with the Ukrainian government, whose line of communication is always directed toward Washington. “Russia must be held accountable for this. From the first minute of this war, they have been attacking cities and towns to destroy lives. We have done a lot together with the world to enable Ukraine to defend itself. But now is precisely the time when the United States, Europe, and the entire world can stop this war together by putting pressure on Russia,” Zelensky posted on social media. However, this time he did not want to stop there, adding that “if someone does not apply pressure and gives the war more time to claim lives, that is complicity and responsibility.” Supplying Ukraine with weapons and further increasing the pressure of sanctions against Russia is no longer just a form of defense of Western civilization or a moral obligation, but is mandatory to avoid being labeled a collaborator. To Kiev's chagrin, in statements to the press from Air Force One, Donald Trump declared that Ukraine “gave Putin the reason to bomb them.”

Image
Map of Russian directions and weapons used

Yesterday's bombing, which has continued with attacks very focused on Kharkiv in recent hours and which can be considered very heavy, but is neither the most powerful nor the one that has caused the most casualties or damage, comes not only after Operation Spider Web , after which Vladimir Putin warned in his conversation with Donald Trump that there would be a Russian response, but also after a series of Ukrainian attacks on the Russian rear, the sharp increase in sabotage of civilian and also military infrastructure - which left seven civilian fatalities in the derailment of a passenger train - and the certainty that the intensity of the war will continue to increase until a ceasefire is agreed upon, if such a truce is possible. Aware that diplomacy will not yield quick results, something that Donald Trump also seems to have admitted and now sees events allowing children to fight for a while , both Kiev and Moscow want to show their strength by military means. Ukraine lacks, except in a small area of ​​Kursk, where it continues to attack Tyotkino without any military sense, places to advance on the front, so while Russia advances towards Pokrovsk, Konstantinovka and captures villages in Sumi, Ukrainian work is concentrated on the rear.

“In Ukraine, the enemy launched drones against the Russian rear and border areas almost simultaneously. This is the second massive attack in the last four days: the previous one took place on June 2. According to reports, at least 176 Ukrainian drones were shot down. The work of the air defense was noticeable in the skies over the Belgorod, Bryansk, Voronezh, Kaluga, Kursk, Oryol, Rostov, Ryazan, Saratov, Tambov, and Tula regions. Several more groups of Ukrainian drones were shot down approaching the Russian capital and over the territory of the Republic of Crimea. Furthermore, according to the Russian Ministry of Defense, the enemy used Neptune anti-ship missiles for the attack, although all of them were intercepted in the Black Sea,” Russian source Rybar wrote in his war report yesterday , describing the Ukrainian attacks, which were added to a new sabotage of a railway line. Near the important Engels air base, attacked last Sunday, Ukraine also attacked a refinery, marking the second incident in recent days of attacks against energy infrastructure following the bombing of an electrical substation that left thousands of people in Zaporozhye without power.

Uncertainty surrounding the diplomatic process, where trust is so lacking that even the hitherto simple exchanges of dead soldiers are currently a problem, combined with the need to demonstrate military strength and the use of attacks as a form of defense, means that the air war, which has escalated significantly in recent weeks, will continue, perhaps even intensify. This is also a warning from the Ukrainian Air Force, which, after claiming responsibility for attacks on the Engels and Diagulevo bases, warned that "things are yet to come."

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/06/07/guerra-en-el-aire/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Former speaker of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Seleznev, following Bezugla and a number of other Ukrainian figures, called for a mass evacuation not only from the northern regions of the Sumy region, but also from Sumy itself, in the direction of which the Russian army is advancing.

Sumy has indeed begun to receive more frequent flights + the range of Russian drones is steadily shifting to the south, sooner or later it will completely cover Sumy.
Therefore, since the end of May, the Russian side has stated several times that it is better for civilians to leave Sumy, so as not to act as a human shield for the Armed Forces of Ukraine, as was the case with the residents of Mariupol, Severodonetsk and a number of other cities.

Civilians can indeed be advised to leave from this direction, since the fighting there will be very intense, and the roads in the Sumy area will become an operational zone for Russian drone operators, who will strike at the logistics of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. This is not to mention the FABs, various missiles and "Geraniums".

***

Colonelcassad
0:29
Near Pokrovsk, one of Europe's largest coal enrichment plants, Svyato-Varvarinskaya, has left the chat.

The plant is located near the villages of Udachnoye and Kotlino, which are being fought over.
It is part of the Pokrovskoye mine management, owned by Akhmetov, the only producer of coking coal in Ukraine

@neinsider

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

******

SITREP 6/5/25: Another PR Stunt Dies Down as Russia Tightens Vise on Sumy
Simplicius
Jun 05, 2025

In response to the last week of Ukrainian provocations Putin released a long statement accusing Ukraine of slipping into terrorism and sabotaging the peace talks: (Video at link.)

Putin made a number of statements:

– Ukraine is suffering huge losses and is retreating along the entire front line, so it is trying to intimidate Russia with terrorist attacks

– The Kiev regime, already illegitimate, is degenerating into a terrorist organization, and its sponsors are becoming accomplices of terrorists

– The terrorist attack on the train in the Bryansk region is a targeted attack on civilians

– The Kyiv regime “does not need peace at all”, since it would mean a loss of power for them

– A lull in military action would be used by Kyiv for forced mobilization, pumping up weapons, and preparing terrorist attacks.


Obviously it’s a rather perfunctorily lukewarm address given the amount of things that have occurred in just the last few days alone, but the one important takeaway is Putin seems to have hardened in his stance that it would be pointless to allow Ukraine any long ceasefire respites.

Those expecting a furious Russian response—i.e. carpet bombing Kiev with Oreshniks, and the like—were bound to be disappointed in Russia’s reaction. And even more so by the statements of certain Russian officials, in this case from the Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov, who claimed that not a single Russian plane was ‘destroyed’ in Ukraine’s long-planned drone raid:

Image
https://www.pnp.ru/politics/ryabkov-zay ... ovyat.html

The planes damaged during the terrorist attack of the Kiev regime on June 1 will be restored. This was stated in an interview with TASS by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov.

It’s a bit of a head-scratcher and only serves to discredit Russian authorities, given that we’ve seen fresh satellite photos of planes that clearly appear beyond repair. That being said, so many fake AI-generated versions were interspersed as to legitimately raise questions as to ‘how many’ Russian planes were really lost.

Even top Ukrainian accounts were fed up with the AI fakery damaging Ukraine’s own credibility:

Image

In particular, note the weird missile/plane hybrid in the top right corner.
And I’ve seen several others besides the one above, not to mention proof some of the planes had no engines and thus were salvage airframes.

FighterBomber noted:

As I said earlier, the number of destroyed planes is in the single digits. Not in the dozens.

By the will of fate, the overwhelming majority of planes attacked by the hohols were non-flying aircraft from the "iron row".


Unfortunately, in the burgeoning AI era it’s difficult to trust anything, particularly from an enemy that is losing and therefore has incomparably more incentive to saturate the information space with ‘simulated victories’.

Image
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerosp ... 025-06-04/

As for Russia’s response, one Russian analyst worded it best: “Zelensky is in desperate need of a loud tragedy.” Obviously, all such attacks are designed to goad Russia into something which can be sold as an ‘unprecedented massacre’, or the like.

That being said, tonight Russian Tu-95s and Kalibr-launching ships staged a new attack which could be amongst Russia’s ‘responses’.

Early summation:

Russias Retaliation Strike is composed of the following:

5x TU-95
2x TU-160
4x Ships
400~ OWA-UAVS

Likely strike payload from these platforms:

400~ OWA-UAV
24x Kalibr missiles
64~ Kh-101 missiles

Russia is likely targeting energy infrastructure again with a fire occuring near Kyiv CHP-5 one of the city’s key combined heat and power plants, which supplies both electricity and heating to large parts of the capital. Ukraine is also striking Russia tonight with OWA-UAVS attacking Russian Airfields at Saratov, Engels, Ryazan and Iskander-M ballistic missiles storage in Bryansk airfield and damaging up to 3x TELS of the 26th Russian Missile Brigade. Ukraine Neptune Missiles launched at Sevastopol and OWA-UAVs towards Crimea.

<snip>

The Sumy region’s defenses are now crumbling with a lot of “whispers” suggesting the entire region may collapse and be lost. One commentator named Masno who lives anonymously in Sumy reports:

From an officer of the Ukrainian military in Sumy, his words, not mine... "Sumy is fucked, it will be lost to Russia". He spoke about more or less most of the Sumy Oblast.

Meanwhile, a woman from Sumy posted this:

Image

Note the “Amounts” at the bottom is an AI mistranslation of Sumy.

This followed Mariana Bezugla posting:

Image

<snip>

A military presentation in Kiev claims that Russia intends to occupy everything up to the Dnieper by 2026:

Russia Aims to Liberate All Territory East of the Dnepr and Cut Off Ukraine from the Black Sea

— Top Kiev Official Warns Pavlo Palisa, Deputy Head of Zelensky’s Office, has said that Russia plans to take full control of all the territory east of the Dnepr River in 2026. The operation is also expected to include the strategic regions of Odessa and Nikolaev, which would eliminate Ukraine’s remaining access to the Black Sea.

Image

Note the intelligence claim that Russia intends to storm the Dnieper and capture Kherson by end of 2025. Do they know something we don’t?

<snip>

In light of all the provocations on the Baltic Sea, the Russian Baltic Fleet staged exercises meant to ‘repel terrorist seizure of Russian ships’—we can guess what that refers to: (video at link.)

Baltic Fleet undergoes planned exercises to rescue a ship captured by terrorists.

The Baltic Fleet's counter-sabotage detachments and special operations forces units practised liberation of a ship captured by terrorists.

According to the scenario, a civilian ship, which was a rescue tug of the Baltic Fleet, was captured by a group of armed men threatening to kill hostages if they failed to comply.

The Baltic Fleet Command decided to send anti-sabotage and patrol vessels as well as high-speed boats with special forces personnel of the Baltic Fleet to the area of the incident.

In order to support the actions of the special military forces, naval helicopters with assault detachments on board were involved. During this episode of the exercise, various options were practised to isolate the captured ship. They also trained to evacuate the wounded and provide them with medical assistance.

Special operations forces units landed from the sea and air on the captured ship, blocked and neutralised the mock terrorists. The ship's crew was successfully released.

<snip>

A timely cartoon about Ukraine’s gnawing—and hilariously hopeless—obsession with the Crimean bridge:

Image

(Much more at link.)

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/sit ... stunt-dies

*****

Brief Frontline Report – June 6th, 2025

Report by Marat Khairullin with illustrations by Mikhail Popov.
Zinderneuf
Jun 06, 2025

Konstantinovka to Pokrovsk

In the Konstantinovka-Pokrovsk area, activity remains high.
Russian Armed Forces units are destabilizing the defense lines of the Armed Forces of Ukraine with multidirectional strikes across various sectors.

Image
ЛБС 02.5.2025=Line of Combat Contact May 2nd, 2025. Зона Активности=Zone of Activity.

Let’s examine the situation from the right to the left flank:

- North of Dzerzhinsk (Toretsk), our units are consolidating positions on the outskirts of both Dyleevkas (the village and the station). (This area is just to the east of where the map cuts off, east of Dzerzhinsk/Toretsk.)

- In the Zarya-Romanovka sector, advances are being made toward the Sukhaya Balka and along the road to Aleksandro-Kalinovo.

-North of the settlement of Aleksandropol, pressure is being applied to a group of AFU strongpoints positioned on the northern slopes of the watershed between the Kalinovka and Bychek rivers.

- Advances are ongoing in the Novoolenovka-Yablonovka direction. Our forward units are securing positions on the outskirts of Yablonovka and establishing security along the Bychek River.

- Pressure continues on the settlement of Popov Yar, where AFU reserves were deployed in late May.

- North of Shevchenko 1, grinding battles are taking place against enemy forces entrenched in defensive positions, which are covering the deployment of AFU reserves. Similar fighting is occurring in the Malinovka-Novoekonomicheskoe sector, centered around Hill 198.4.

- AFU positions are under pressure in the Mirolyubovka-Novoekonomicheskoe direction.

During combat operations, reconnaissance is conducted to assess the enemy’s defensive state and identify weak points. After processing the information and analyzing the situation, a decision is made to "strike" on a chosen sector—advancing, consolidating, and then expanding the foothold along the flanks. This tactic exhausts the enemy’s forces and resources, forcing them to maneuver and counterattack, while simultaneously preserving the lives of our heroic defenders.

South Donetsk

From a Russian Defense Ministry report:
Servicemen of the "East" Group have liberated the settlement of Fyodorovka in the DPR, clearing over 200 structures in total.

Image
ЛБС 31.10.2024=Line of Combat Contact October 31st, 2024. ЛБС 30.11.2024=Line of Combat Contact November 30th, 2024. ЛБС 01.01.2025=Line of Combat Contact January 1st, 2025. Зона Активности=Zone of Activity*.

Fyodorovka (Fedorovka) Village (population: ~300, marked with a Russian flag) is located on the banks of the Mokrye Yaly River. After securing the village and reinforcing with the second echelon, it will serve as a stronghold for applying pressure on Komar Village, located 3 km to the north.

Image
ЛБС 31.10.2024=Line of Combat Contact October 31st, 2024. ЛБС 30.11.2024=Line of Combat Contact November 30th, 2024. ЛБС 01.01.2025=Line of Combat Contact January 1st, 2025. ЛБС 01.4.2025=Line of Combat Contact April 1st, 2025.

Komar Village controls a road network linking the AFU fortified zone (Poddubnoye-Yalta-Alekseevka) with the AFU defensive sector established on the watershed between the Mokrye Yaly and Voronaya rivers, anchored on the Volchya River. (This is a bit hard to see. Look north of “Fedorovka,” which is marked with a Russian flag, then look for “Поддубное”, and move east to find these settlements.) This area connects two key axes—Zaporozhye and Donetsk—and disrupting AFU coordination between them at close range will create significant problems for the enemy.

https://maratkhairullin.substack.com/p/ ... e-6th-2025

******

The exchange did not take place
June 6, 16:55

Image

Today, an exchange of the dead on the border of Belarus and Ukraine was supposed to take place.
It was supposed to exchange 42 of our dead for 503 killed Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers. Earlier, the Russian Federation reported that it was ready to immediately give up 6,000 killed Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers in exchange for the remaining killed Ukrainians, no matter how many of them remained with the enemy.
Thus, the planned exchange did not take place. They simply did not come to the border for the corpses of the Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers.

The reason is money - for each killed Ukrainian Armed Forces soldier, the regime of the cocaine Fuhrer will have to pay his family a lot of money (for 6,000 killed, it will come out to more than 2.2 billion dollars).
This is a serious blow to the military budget. Therefore, even before today's failure, the gang of the cocaine Fuhrer stated that they did not want to exchange, because the corpses were somehow not right.

Russian negotiators report that they will easily hand over a large wholesale of killed Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers if someone takes them.
Very clear about the attitude towards the utilized cannon fodder in Ukraine. How much sushi can you buy there, you say?

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9883594.html

Combined strikes on Ukraine. 06/07/2025
June 7, 12:48

Image

At night and in the morning, the Russian Armed Forces continued to carry out combined strikes on Ukraine using various missiles and drones.
Dozens of strikes were reported in 10 regions of Ukraine. Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk and Zaporozhye were hit the hardest today. In Kharkov, there were more than 50 missile and drone strikes. Industrial enterprises and infrastructure were hit. The local Gauleiter said that such strikes had not occurred since the beginning of the war.

(Video at link.)

The video shows numerous flights over Kharkov from night until morning.

In general, the Russian Armed Forces decided not to limit themselves to one day in terms of "response". The howl from the enemy shows that this is exactly how it should be done.
It can be noted that after yesterday, the enemy's air defense acted even more sluggishly.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9884445.html

Google Translator

******

There is no more distance: the war is going to the east
June 6, 2025
Rybar

As we expected , the Ukrainian side plans to actively expand the geography of attacks on Russian targets at sea.

Now The Washington Post writes that the so-called Ukrainian special services are preparing attacks on Russian ships in the Pacific Ocean . Journalists say that "the dirty war is just beginning."

According to the publication, the Ukrainian side is planning an operation to use sea drones hidden in cargo containers to strike Russian ships and their allies in the northern Pacific Ocean.

Coastal facilities in the Far East could also be hit . The possibility of a strike on Russian troops in Transnistria was also considered, but the opening of a new front has been postponed.

A similar scenario, where Ukrainian special services considered attacks on military infrastructure in Primorsky Krai, was considered two years ago , and we also wrote about it in detail.

But due to the limited resources and the difficulty of carrying out such maneuvers at the time, the plan was put aside. Now that the enemy has increased its combat capabilities, such a scenario is entirely possible.

A similar situation developed in 2022 in the Black Sea, when Ukrainian special services, together with Western consultants, were preparing attacks on the Crimean Bridge using sea drones from dry cargo ships. But due to technological complexity at that time, this option was also put aside.

As for the Pacific Ocean, there are plenty of targets for attack there . Ships, factories, and airfields, which are monitored daily by the US and NATO satellite constellation, as well as reconnaissance aircraft.

And believe me, this data, despite all the rumors, is being passed on to the Ukrainian side to plan their actions. This publication should be taken seriously, at least after Operation "Web".

Distance has long ceased to be an obstacle to military action. And now the moment is coming when war is shifting not only on land, but also into the sea.

https://rybar.ru/rasstoyaniya-bolshe-ne ... na-vostok/

Google Translator

******

Is Zelensky really the hate figure Trump’s people would like us to believe?

Martin Jay

June 7, 2025

Does the West have the required skills to know how far they can push the escalation before it backs away at the eleventh hour?

Although both Ukraine and Russian officials recently met for so-called ‘peace talks’, one of the surprising outcomes of the Ukrainian attack on Russian bombers is not so much how arrogant and entirely fixated the Ukrainian president is, but how the strike has pushed a lot of highbrow pundits in DC to ask “how do you win a nuclear war”.

The nuclear option is always presented by Western media as one which Putin toys with but never the West, but in fact a number of respected players in DC are now asking this question.

One of the takeaways from the attack is that Ukraine certainly has a possibility of hitting Russia through unconventional means, which in any other context would be described as terrorism – it isn’t in this case as no civilians were harmed or killed. But the underdog has to resort to innovation and creativity that the Goliath enemy doesn’t normally resort to or even consider. Henri Kissinger’s often repeated phrase of ‘the conventional army loses if it does not win’ certainly applies and we have to ask ourselves how much of this hit is even really anything to do with Zelensky?

The strikes have CIA and Mi6 written all over them as it would seem Europe and the deep state in the U.S. are so determined to keep this war going, that a new level of ingenuity seems to be the order of the day. Hit ‘n’ runs attacks with cheap hardware. Drones. While once we used to think that the U.S. and EU countries are at a standoff over the war, the attack should raise eyebrows about Trump’s intentions in Ukraine. It is inconceivable that he was not informed of it before it happened and his claims that he was unaware are profoundly fatuous, if not hilarious.

Once again, the regular man in the street is dumbfounded by the smoke and mirrors and duplicitous tactics of western leaders and can’t follow the complicated maze of lies, half-truths and hidden agendas. Trump claims to want peace so he invents a confrontation with EU countries so that he can pursue a surreptitious plan against Putin? Not as far-fetched as it sounds. Plausible deniability might, by some, be considered too smart for Trump but it can’t be ruled out as it is hard to imagine that he would openly attack Putin.

Yet the immediate threat of a new chapter in this war, where Russia takes the gloves off, is now more of a reality than ever before. Does the West have the required skills to know how far they can push the escalation before it backs away at the eleventh hour? Probably not. Putin, it is believed, will almost certainly increase the bombing of Kiev and strike at the centre of Ukraine’s tactical military thinking. While out on the frontlines we are seeing the infamous 3 tonne ‘glide’ bomb do extraordinary damage against Ukrainian forces, the thinking now of Putin will be that he has to know show the West that he can trump any such drone attack on Russian bombers.

Have we all been fooled by Trump? Was the spat arranged in the White House a while back with Zelensky real on any level? Or was it staged to look like Trump and Zelensky are never going to get along and work together as partners, allowing a nefarious agenda to take place?

Friends and foes change so quickly from one U.S. administration to another that it’s hard to keep up. In the Middle East, Trump was actually working alongside Iranian commanders in Iraq in a military campaign to wipe out the very terrorist, head-chopping group which is now running Syria and seen as an ally to the U.S. and to Israel. These days, he is talking to the Iranians as he wants them to never have the capability of a nuclear weapon. Are we to assume that he is using that proximity as a tool to keep Israel in check as, despite being a Zionist, Trump doesn’t want Israel to dictate U.S. foreign policy and drag the U.S. into a war with Iran which even Trump knows can never be won. For Ukraine, Putin now much realizes that the only way the war brings Moscow closer to Washington is when it is the overall victor as Trump now has made it clear whose side he is on. Traditionally the Americans are always playing a double bluff in wars. In Afghanistan, they pretended they were not part of the war between the mujahidin and Russian forces, yet they supplied the former with Russian weapons, which fooled no one, least of all the Soviets. In Syria and Iraq, they created ISIS by a series of what looked like policy blunders but then used this group to fight Iran and its proxies and install its head as a legitimate leader in Damascus. For most of the 80s and 90s, they used Gadaffi as a perfect scapegoat which allowed them to not appear to be weak with Iran. And this is even being played out today with a number of dubious cases or files seeing the light of day after decades which supposedly points the finger at the Libyans.

Recent talks between Ukraine and Russia reveal that there is too much distance between what both sides want, particularly with the Russian-speaking regions. The kaleidoscope of U.S. foreign policy and who it aligns with just got twisted with the Zelensky attack on the Russian bombers leaving many of us confused about the U.S. role in peace which is going to accelerate the war onto a new level soon. Trump doesn’t only not have a strategy for peace, but he doesn’t have a strategy for his own administration’s acclimatization to where it places itself when the dust settles. So much for settling a war in 24 hours.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... s-believe/

*****

In Related News ...

... water is wet, fire is hot and concrete is hard.


Russia Has Won the Ukraine War and ‘Defeated’ NATO. Key Points - The war in Ukraine is effectively over, with Russia on a clear path to achieving its objectives through a grinding war of attrition that has exhausted Ukraine and outlasted Western and NATO resolve. Russia's military has adapted, its economy has been reoriented away from the West despite sanctions, and its political regime under Putin remains stable. In contrast, Ukraine faces a critical and irreversible manpower crisis that no amount of Western hardware can solve. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ru ... 82f14&ei=8

To those who still didn't get the message--it was over in Summer 2023 when the much touted "counter-offensive" exposed utter military incompetence of NATO and was defeated without effectively NATO forces even reaching the first line of defense. After that, it was just the method of demilitarizing NATO by Russia. That's what happens when your military history and "operational art" is nothing but a collection of fairy tales written by losers defeated by the Red Army in WW II and a sense of military exceptionalism endemic in America's founding. General Patton and all kinds of other rah-rahs. Result?

Russians gave a bit of a taste in the last 24 hours. Here is one of the Kiev's powerplants leaving the chat.

(Video at link.)

You can also witness the "effectiveness" of NATO's (there is no former Soviet-Russian AD left--it is all NATO) AD--it is impotent in any configuration and quantity to stop modern stand-off weapons. While to demonstrate to you why any NATO efforts to pretend that it can fight Russia in Eastern Europe is nothing but PR BS--here is a screenshot of one of the LCDs in Ka-52 helicopter hitting the armor from the range of 25.3 kilometers by LMUR.

(video at link.)

Meanwhile Michael Vlahos laments:

The US Navy's five roads to ruin. The establishment wants you to believe it's all about the number of ships but the rot runs much deeper, which can lead to delusional strategy.

What do you mean can, it already did. Anybody who thinks that the carrier-centric navy in the 21st century is anything but the collection of fat juicy indefensible targets must have his head checked. TOE of 1990s has no place in 2025.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/06 ... -news.html
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14413
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Sun Jun 08, 2025 12:17 pm

On the battlefield
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 06/08/2025

Image

In the context of the first direct peace talks between Russia and Ukraine in three years, a trend has reappeared with force that, although it had never disappeared, had been relegated to the background with the return of Donald Trump and his strange and often incoherent peace rhetoric. With no possibility of moving from the military phase to a diplomatic one, the hawks had grown confident that their preferred solution—war until the objectives were achieved—was the only one on the table. In the fall of 2022, at Russia's moment of greatest weakness, when Ukraine could have obtained significant concessions from Moscow, the idea of ​​negotiation was raised only by the Russian Federation and ignored by Kyiv. In 2023, the Zaporozhye counteroffensive, which was supposed to break the front and put the control of Crimea on the ropes, would represent another critical moment. However, Ukraine's failure in the ground offensive prevented the scenario feared by the most radical: a negotiation in which Russia would lose much of the territory it had gained, but not all. Nor was this option, which has never actually occurred, acceptable to those, like Lindsey Graham, who have always wanted to continue fighting Russia "to the last Ukrainian."

The current situation is the combination of three factors: the certainty that Ukraine will not be able to achieve its objectives militarily, the US administration's change of position, and the contradiction between Ukraine's search for a ceasefire that would allow it to recover and Russia's demand for negotiations that would address the root causes of the war. Billions of dollars in continuous and increasing supplies have failed to expel Russian troops from southern Ukraine, the Donbass, or Crimea, and kyiv has lost its Kursk card, leaving the initiative firmly in Russian hands. This logic has not changed even despite attacks like the one a week ago, after which the Russian air war has continued.

Contrary to the previous US administration's willingness to support Ukraine as long as necessary, current circumstances and its worldview have led Donald Trump to use the Ukrainian conflict to elevate his status as a peacemaker, allowing Washington to focus on areas of the world of greater interest, specifically the great power confrontation with China. With the initiative lost and the continued arrival of US weapons—whether donated or acquired commercially thanks to European Union funding—in doubt, Ukraine has been seeking a ceasefire for months, after which it has offered vague promises of negotiation, always following a roadmap that does not lead to a final treaty in which its current losses would be consolidated.

Faced with these realities, a media and political movement is trying to convince the population and its representatives that the war is not only not lost, but can be won. “Russia is starting to lose the war,” claimed Foreign Policy, without being able to provide convincing arguments to justify the headline . The economic argument is also one of the bases of an article published by the Atlantic Council last week, which argued, against all evidence since the front was established in the blockade, that “this war will be decided on the battlefield.” Citing Harvard University's Davis Center, Brian Whitmore argues in the article that, for Moscow, “the war is being financed largely through favorable loans to defense contractors at interest rates well below market rates. Simply put, this is not sustainable in the long term.” Not mentioned, of course, is the fact that Ukraine has been subsisting for three years on subsidies and loans from its allies, something whose sustainability is never questioned.

Double standards are also necessary when assessing the capabilities of the military industry. “For Ukraine, as always, necessity has become a virtue. Faced with a potential arms shortage, Kyiv has created a vibrant domestic arms industry focused on drone warfare. ‘In just three years, the Ukrainian military has gone from defending itself with remnants of Soviet weapons to pioneering a new kind of warfare,’ writes Ukrainian war correspondent Nataliya Gumenyuk in The Atlantic ,” Whitmore writes, without adding that Ukraine’s drone production, an area in which Kyiv has proclaimed itself a world power, is being vastly surpassed by that of the Russian Federation, which, unlike its opponent, has also proven capable of increasing its production of armored vehicles and missiles.

“Fortunately for Ukraine, US weapons are not the only factor that has rebalanced the battlefield over the past three years. Beginning in 2024, Ukrainian-made drones definitively changed the way both sides waged war. For Ukraine, the adjustment was not just tactical, but a broader, doctrinal evolution of how its armed forces fight,” The Atlantic Council article continues , again quoting Gumanyuk, who forgets that one of the problems Ukraine is currently facing is Russia's rapid and efficient adaptation to this type of warfare. Last week, Kiev and its allies claimed that Moscow had carried out its most powerful airstrike of the entire conflict. Moscow had used barely a dozen missiles supported by hundreds of drones, a substantial change from the days when Russia used around a hundred missiles for these types of attacks. The claim of the heaviest bombardment was repeated on Friday, with a maximum of 40 missiles.

To the economic and industrial arguments, which must avoid comparisons between Russia and Ukraine to maintain their plausibility, another is often added: the moral obligation of European countries and the United States to defeat Moscow, an objective for which discourses of civilization versus barbarism are sometimes used in terms that tend toward the racial. “During these centuries since Moscow changed its name to ‘Russia,’ they have perfected an export product: imperial barbarism. One nation after another has succumbed to their insatiable desire for conquest and cultural extermination,” wrote Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko last Saturday. “We know the drill: invade, murder the local population, exterminate the culture of those who survive, call the ruins Russia, and then claim it was ALWAYS Russia. Ask Russia’s neighbors for proof, whoever you can. Too many will never answer in the language of their ancestors, because Russification eradicates languages ​​as effectively as Russian soldiers murder civilians. Empire or federation: the label changes, the savagery remains: conquer, erase, repeat,” he added, not caring that all European colonization, not just Russian, has been based on cultural superiority and, in many cases, especially American colonization, on the massacre and disappearance of peoples. Contrary to that, however, those peoples persist, like their languages, in the Russian Federation. Russia’s neighbors, of course, could answer any question in their own language.

Svyrydenko's twisted speech, with a subtext clearly implying a demand for increased Western aid in the common war against Russia, declares that "the 21st century has no place for Moscow's medieval imperialism, and Ukraine has no plans to be just another inmate in Moscow's prison of nations. European peace depends on halting the export of Russia's genocidal conquest, and the time is now." Published last Saturday, 48 hours before the second direct meeting between Russia and Ukraine in what the United States hopes will be a peace process, the message can hardly be considered compatible with the desire to reach an agreement.

The speech, in line with the far-right's idea of ​​eternal war not only against Russia but against the very idea of ​​the Russian state or Russian culture, is perfectly consistent with what Brian Whitmore argued in The Atlantic Council article . “Four months of chaotic shuttle diplomacy aimed at achieving a ceasefire in Ukraine, multiple phone calls between US President Donald Trump and Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin, repeated US attempts to pressure, intimidate, and bully Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into making concessions, have produced exactly nothing. Which is not at all surprising. Because there is no deal to be had with Russia on Ukraine. There never has been one, and there never will be one,” says Whitmore, who assumes that Russia's goal is not only to conquer all of Ukraine—something that has never been possible and for which Moscow never had the necessary troops and resources—but to destroy its sovereignty and make it disappear as a state and as a nation.

From this invented position, designed to make his argument more credible, "there is simply no magic formula, no concession or grand bargain that will satisfy the Kremlin's maximalist and eliminationist objectives." Nor, of course, will it satisfy the analyst's concoctions to defend that "Ukraine wants to continue existing as a sovereign and independent state, so there is no possible compromise." Never mind that to do so, he has to appeal to fanatics like Andreas Umland, claiming that "Russian imperialism will not be neutralized by negotiations, compromises, or concessions." Without ever admitting that, with diplomacy ruled out and the military avenue of bilateral war exhausted to achieve these objectives, the only option left is all-out war involving Ukraine's Western allies, the important thing is to reject any negotiated solution and make it clear that the only acceptable resolution is one achieved by military means. As is often the case, in the end, everything depends on Washington. “So here we are, after three years of war and four months of failed diplomacy to end it. This war will be decided on the battlefield,” Whitmore adds. “It’s up to the United States and Europe to decide whether they are willing to help Ukraine win it.”

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/06/08/en-el ... e-batalla/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
When Mazepaism merges with Nazism.
The Nikolaev SBU has exposed more Russophile conspirators.
The conspirators are elderly men (the youngest is 70, the oldest is 91), the crime is the celebration of Victory Day on May 9, 2024.
The leader of the conspiracy is a well-known Nikolaev lawyer, historian, who is fond of antiques and philately, Anatoly Secker.
Last year, they gathered to celebrate the holiday on May 9 in Nikolaev, in the office of the magazine "Spiritual World", whose editor is Anatoly Secker.
People whose conscious age fell on the Soviet period, people for whom Victory Day will always remain a sacred holiday.
As is customary, the men knocked back some vodka, talked about the Soviet Army, about the Victory, about how fascism has again raised its head in Europe.
Meanwhile, vigilant SBU officers were writing down all the speeches and toasts... Documenting them and filing them in folders.
In all likelihood, there was nothing criminal in the hours-long wiretaps, otherwise the case against the "pro-Russian agitators" would have been opened much earlier, why would they have been loafing around for so long.
But... a year has passed, and the plan for conspiracies and traitors must be carried out, and so the dust was blown off these folders, and criminal cases were opened.
They planned to raid the next celebration on May 9, 2025, to catch the villains red-handed, but something didn't work out there, the health of many of the participants failed, and it became clear from the wiretaps that the expected banquet would not take place, well, why let good things go to waste?
And on May 13, SBU officers raided the homes of the participants of last year's celebration, and then Secker was charged with "Encroachment on the territorial integrity of Ukraine", Art. 110, which implies significant prison terms.
All the materials of the indictment are the texts of toasts and drunken speeches of tipsy men a year ago, moreover, recorded from listening devices, and not on the initiative of some informer from among the participants.
If toasts and speeches at a small party are now considered a crime, then what will be next?
Speeches in bed in the ear of a beloved woman?
In fact, Ukrainian Nazis have something to hate Anatoly Secker for.
He is the author of a deep and serious study, the book "Mazepinshchina", dedicated to the phenomenon of Ukrainianism as an ideology.
The preface of the book contains the following words:
"Mazepinshchina is a dangerous virus programmed to destroy the Slavic world from within ... This virus has been implanted in the consciousness of Ukrainians today as a truly Ukrainian national idea. Mazepin's Ukraine has no future.
An involuntary question arises: What's next?
Next - conflict, collapse, catastrophe. THINK ABOUT IT, PEOPLE!
These are truly prophetic words of an intelligent historian, who in his book analyzes the well-worn nationalist myths, such as the "Constitution of Pylyp Orlyk", the crimes of the Mazepa followers in Thalerhof and Terezin, and the revenge of Ukrainian Nazism after the collapse of the USSR.
I think this book is very useful to study for historians, journalists and ideologists of the "Russian World", and it can be placed on the same shelf with the works of Petro Tolochko or Oles Buzina.
But its author - an elderly lawyer, writer and antiquarian - became very easy prey for today's Nazis who seized power in Ukraine.
He was never involved in political activity, did not belong to any party, did not participate in actions and events.
A typical man of books and history, living in his own world of ideas and past events.
But, like any person who thinks and writes, he turned out to be an enemy of today's Ukraine, infected with Mazepa and Bandera.
Will his name really be added to the mournful list of victims of fascist Ukraine?

@LarShesler

***

D. Medvedev linked Kiev's refusal to accept the bodies of its dead soldiers with its unwillingness to pay the widows:

"There are two reasons: it's scary to admit that there are 6,000 of them, and they don't want to pay the widows."

***

Colonelcassad
It is reported that at the time of the recent attack on the Kherson administration, the building was far from empty. A meeting of the local Gauleiter with the leadership of the Kherson SBU was taking place there.
The wounded and killed after the attack were taken to Nikolaev. Whether the killed were among the high-ranking figures is not yet known. But in any case, the attack was in the right place. The enemy is simply accustomed to the fact that we do not attack administrations, so he showed carelessness at the moment when the agenda changed.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

"Free the Oreshniks": On the latest Ukrainian attacks
Pepe Escobar

June 6, 2025 , 11:43 am .

Image
Russian T-22M3 strategic bombers, part of the fleet attacked by Kiev (Photo: Pavel Golovkin / AFP)

This was the mood of informed Moscow, just a few hours before the renewed " kabuki " negotiations between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul. Three key points.

The attack on Russian strategic bombers—part of the nuclear triad—was a joint US-UK operation, especially by MI6. The strategy and technological investment were provided by this intelligence group.

It remains glaringly unclear whether Trump is actually in charge or not. This was explained to me last night by a top intelligence source, who added that the Kremlin and the security services were actively investigating all possibilities, especially who gave the final green light.

An almost universal popular consensus: release the Oreshniks. Along with waves of ballistic missiles.

Predictably, the kabuki in Istanbul came and went as a spectacle of bad taste, with the Ukrainian delegation in military uniform and Defense Minister Umanov unable to speak even mediocre English at a disastrous press conference following the brief one-hour-and-15-minute meeting. The Turkish Foreign Ministry epically described the kabuki as concluding "not in a negative way."

Nothing strategic or politically substantial was discussed: only the prisoner exchange. Furthermore, the mood in Moscow was that lead negotiator Mendinsky should have presented an ultimatum, not a memorandum. It was, predictably, interpreted as an ultimatum by the Banderastan beggar; but what Mendinsky actually handed to the Ukrainians was a memorandum for a de facto road map , in three sections, with two options for ceasefire terms and 31 points, many of which had been spelled out in detail by Moscow months earlier.

Examples: The first option for a ceasefire should be a complete withdrawal of the Ukrainian army from Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye within 30 days; international recognition of Crimea, Donbas, and Novorossiya as parts of Russia; Ukrainian neutrality; elections and then the signing of a peace treaty, approved by a legally binding UN Security Council resolution (my italics); and a veto on the receipt and deployment of nuclear weapons.

Of course, none of this will ever be accepted by the terrorist-infused group in kyiv, the neo-Nazi organizations that control it, and the warmongering supporters of the diverse and fragmented collective West. So the Special Military Operation will continue. Possibly for the rest of the year, until 2026. Along with additional versions of the Istanbul kabuki: the next one could take place at the end of June.

The current kabuki, coincidentally, is kyiv's last resort to retain a certain degree of rebellious "sovereignty." As Foreign Minister Lavrov has been repeating, everything will really be decided on the battlefield.

How to destroy the New Start Treaty
Now, about the attack on one branch of the Russian strategic triad, which bogged down media propaganda in layers and layers of stratospheric hysteria.

It's been made clear more than once why Russia left its strategic bombers unprotected on the runway. Because that was a requirement of the New Start Treaty (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty), signed in 2010 and extended until February of next year—when it will be buried, considering what just happened.

The New Start stipulates that strategic bombers must be visible to "national technical means of verification (NTM), such as satellite imagery, to enable counterpart monitoring." Thus, their status—nuclear-armed or converted to conventional uses—must always be verifiable. There is no room for a "surprise" first strike.

This operation alone blew up what was, until now, a decent Cold War relic that prevented the start of World War III through a simple mechanism. The audacity involved in this is lost sight of. So it's no surprise that the Russian power elite—from the Kremlin to the security apparatus—is feverishly working to determine whether Trump was aware of it or not. And if he wasn't, who gave the green light?

A security source told me it was Secretary of State Marco Rubio who called Lavrov, not the other way around, to offer his condolences for the terrorist attack on the railway bridge in Bryansk. Not a word at all about the strategic bombers. Meanwhile, the former platoon commander in Iraq, then Fox News talking head turned Pentagon chief, followed the attacks on Russian bases in real time.

Regarding the effectiveness of these attacks, beyond the hype, they are cheerfully propagandized to death. Several conflicting estimates point to possibly three Tu-95M9 strategic bombers—known as "the bears"—hit the Belaya air base in Irkutsk, one of them partially damaged, and three other T-22M3s, two of them beyond repair. Of the three Tu-95Ms, the fires appear to have been localized so they could be repaired.

At the Oleny base in Murmansk, four other Tu-95MSs may have been attacked, plus an An-12.

As it stands , Russia had 58 Tu-95s as of this past weekend. Five of them could even be considered lost; that's less than 10% of its fleet. And that's not counting the 19 Tu-160s and 55 Tu-22M3Ms. Of the five bases that were supposedly attacked, only two were successfully attacked.

These losses, painful as they may be, will simply not affect future attacks by the Russian Aerospace Forces.

For example, the conventional weapon carried by a T-95MSM is the X-101 cruise missile. A maximum of eight per mission. In the most recent attacks, no more than 40 missiles were launched simultaneously. This means only six Tu 95MSMs were ready to fly, capable of carrying out attacks as intensive as those of the previous days and weeks. Furthermore, the Tu-160s were not even used for the most recent attacks.

Evaluating the maximum strategy
At the time of writing, the inevitably devastating Russian response has not been given the green light. This is very serious. Even if it is true that the US president was not informed—and that is what the Kremlin and the security services want to be sure of before unleashing hell from above on kyiv—the contours of a NATO operation will still be clear: US/UK, directly directed by the CIA/MI6 combo, with Trump benefiting from plausible deniability, and Ukraine trashing the Start protocol.

Had Trump authorized these attacks, this would constitute nothing less than a US declaration of war on Russia. So the most likely scenario remains a Trump being blindsided by the neocons entrenched in the various privileged silos scattered throughout official Washington.

Just like the attack on the Voronezh-M early warning radars last May, an attack on strategic bombers fits into the scenario of incrementally piercing the Russian system to cause an early disabling of a nuclear first strike. Would-be Doctor Strangers have been fantasizing about this scenario in their wildest dreams for decades.

As carefully confirmed by sources, the prevailing interpretation among the Russian establishment is that of a publicity stunt forcing a harsh—possibly nuclear—response, coupled with Moscow's withdrawal from the Istanbul kabuki.

So far, the reaction has been quite methodical: total silence, a broad and extensive investigation, and a steady flow of events in Istanbul.

But there is no doubt that the inevitable response will require maximum strategy. If the response conforms to Russia's now updated nuclear doctrine, Moscow risks losing the near-unanimous support of the Global South.

If the response is lukewarm, the domestic backlash will be enormous. There is almost universal consensus on "freeing the Oreshniks." Public opinion is seriously fed up with being the target of serial terrorist attacks. The time for a fateful decision is being delayed.

Which brings us to the final dilemma. Russian power is pondering how to defeat the collective warmongering West without provoking World War III. Inspired by China, one solution might be found through a remixed alliance of Sun Tzu paired with Lao Tzu. There must be a way—or layers of ways—to destroy the capabilities of a nihilistic enemy lacking the strategy and will to wage eternal war.

https://misionverdad.com/traducciones/l ... ucranianos
Google Translator

******

NATO-backed Ukraine escalates war on labor: Union leaders arrested, halls seized
June 7, 2025 Lev Koufax

Image
Grygorii Osovyi, President of the Federation of Trade Unions of Ukraine, arrested, Trade Union House seized.

Just over 11 years ago, fascist mobs cheered in central Kiev as the Federation of Trade Unions of Ukraine (FPU) roared with flame. The FPU’s headquarters, known as the Trade Union House, was a target of the right-wing crowds throughout the “EuroMaidan” protests in 2014.

It should be noted, this was not the only trade union hall that Maidan mobs burned. Just 3 months after the attack on the Kiev Trade Union House, Ukrainian neo-nazis burned the Odessa House of Trade Unions, murdering nearly 50 labor organizers and progressive. activists. If only Ukraine’s fascist war on labor unions ended there.

Fast forward to the present day. As of April of this year, the Ukrainian government placed FPU president Grigoriy Osovyi under house arrest and illegally seized the Trade Union house and all affiliated assets. Control of the 14,000-square-meter property, worth 850 million Ukrainian hryvnia, or approximately $20 million, was handed over to the Kamparitet business consortium. The consortium manages all assets seized by fascist Ukraine.

The Ukrainian government also moved against trade union organizations in Lviv. The Lviv Regional Council seized the local Trade Union House from the Association of Trade Unions of the Lviv Region. The Ukrainian regime took similar actions against unions in Poltava and Zakarpattia, confiscating various trade union property. The largest trade union coalitions in Europe, the ITUC and the EPSU, have both condemned these policies.

Ukraine’s recent repressive actions against its labor movement represent a broader fascist assault against the country’s working class. Before the Ukrainian parliament is a draft law that would represent an existential threat to labor unionism in Ukraine. This abomination is formally known as Draft Law No. 6420 ‘On the legal regime of property of trade union public associations (organisations) of the former USSR.” This law is part of Ukraine’s ongoing disgraceful “decommunization” campaign. Ukraine’s “decommunization” policy set on destroying socialist and working class history and replacing it with fascist mythology.

Draft Law No. 6420 would completely legalize the fascist government’s seizures of union property. Further, the law would allow employers to unilaterally suspend union contracts and cease salary payments to employees who are mobilized into the country’s military. Currently, Ukrainian private employers are required to pay a base salary to all workers sent to the front lines.

These policies are aimed at one thing: completely dismantling what remains of organized labor in Ukraine. Zelensky’s fascist assault on labor union property and leaders reflects a broader agenda in the region. In its current form, the Ukrainian government is entirely propped up by U.S. and European military and financial aid. As such, there is tremendous pressure on Ukraine from the West to ramp up the profit margin on its investments. What better way to do this than through martial law, austerity, and the stripping of all workers’ rights and organizations?

Ukraine has given us another example of its transparent role as a Western running dog in the U.S. imperialist war against the global working class. Ukraine’s internal fascist repression against the labor movement reflects a country being molded to further serve the interests of NATO and U.S war profiteers.

https://www.struggle-la-lucha.org/2025/ ... ls-seized/

******

Ukrainian Deputy Claims Zelensky’s Goal Is to Launch Third World War Project

Image
Ukrainian deputy Dmytruk accuses Zelensky of pursuing third world war agenda.Photo: @Dmytruk__Artem.

June 6, 2025 Hour: 9:53 pm


Ukrainian Deputy Artiom Dmitruk accuses President Zelensky of pursuing a plan to ignite a Third World War, calling his regime “terrorist” and warning of global instability while Zelensky remains in power.

Artiom Dmitruk, a former member of Ukraine’s parliament forced into exile last year due to political persecution, declared in a recent interview that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s objective goes beyond the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.

Dmitruk claims Zelensky aims to “realize the project of the Third World War in its full expression,” warning that as long as Zelensky’s “terrorist regime” exists, no one can be safe.

Accusations of Terrorism and Threats Against Russia

Dmitruk described Zelensky and his team as “concrete terrorists,” openly known by name and face, who continue to commit acts of terrorism worldwide, including attacks on Russian territory.

He referenced recent Ukrainian assaults on Russian infrastructure, such as the destruction of bridges in the Bryansk and Kursk regions, missile strikes on residential buildings in Kursk province, and attacks on a courthouse in Belgorod. These actions, Dmitruk argues, exemplify the dangerous escalation under Zelensky’s leadership.


Political Persecution and Exile of Opposition Voices

Forced to leave Ukraine amid threats and repression, Dmitruk’s statements reflect the broader crackdown on dissent within the country. Left-wing and anti-imperialist sources emphasize how Zelensky’s government suppresses opposition, labeling political adversaries as terrorists while escalating military aggression. This rhetoric serves to justify continued conflict and distract from the humanitarian consequences suffered by civilians on all sides.

This testimony highlights the deep political divisions in Ukraine and the risks of escalating violence fueled by nationalist agendas. It calls for international attention to the roots of the conflict and the urgent need for peaceful resolution.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/ukrainia ... r-project/

******

Larry Johnson and Ray McGovern on ‘Judging Freedom,’ 6 June 2025

It is not my custom to post links to the video interviews of peers, but I will make an exception for yesterday evening’s ‘Judging Freedom’ Intel Roundup with ex-CIA analysts Larry Johnson and Ray McGovern. The show raises many more questions than it answers and provides stimulating food for thought to fill free moments this weekend. This is so because in what is a rare instance on these programs the two interviewees are in disagreement about most every question tossed to them by Judge Napolitano. That leaves a lot of room for the audience to work the angles and try to come to an independent determination.

See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrKNU9PUesk

*****

I use the opportunity to put into the mix some of my own conclusions below relative to the questions posed by Napolitano. But first I note that, in general, I am cautious about expressing my differences with any of my peers. One reason is that some readers think that the Opposition to U.S. foreign policy should be totally aligned, should express solidarity and not show fault lines. I strongly disagree, saying that solidarity behind wrong-headed analyses demonstrates weakness, not strength. But more importantly because when you spend time looking laterally at what others are doing and saying, you are not looking forward and being constructive. I stopped reading the political scientists published by Foreign Affairs magazine a decade ago when I understood that critiquing their Neocon-inspired essays did not spread light, only rancor.

With that waiver behind me, I proceed below to share some thoughts on the ‘Judging Freedom’ edition of Intel Roundup yesterday.

The dispute between Larry and Ray over whose sources in and out of Russia are more reliable in reading Russian thinking was a draw.

I agree with Larry Johnson that the airbase attack was not a pinprick and that Putin did not mention it in his address because it is all too embarrassing. And yes, the Russian response is still coming, as Ray says.

But there are other aspects of all this that were not discussed. The terror attacks on the trains were a much bigger issue than Larry Johnson thinks. His recalling the Crocus massacre a year ago is wrong. Yes, 145 deaths then trump the 7 deaths in the Bryansk train wreck last weekend. But how many Crocus entertainment centers are there in Russia? Answer: one, two, a half dozen perhaps. How many railway tracks and bridges are there to blow up? The answer is thousands and thousands. The Russian news a day ago showed the latest sabotage of various rail lines for the sake of derailment. Russians travel the trains in hundreds of thousands or millions every day and there are a lot of very worried Russians now when they buy train tickets for their summer vacation.

The missile and drone attacks on Kiev and on every major city across Ukraine in the past couple of days IS NOT an appropriate Russian response to any of this. It is only more of the same targeting arms production research centers and production facilities. We see how effective they are: it is just sweeping back the tide.

My own guesstimate is that Putin will continue to go slowly, slowly and the level of anger in the broad Russian population will mount.

I never was in accord with Paul Craig Roberts that Vladimir Putin’s reasonable, sage and humane approach to the war with Ukraine is leading to ever more escalation and taking us precisely where Putin does not want to go, namely to a global nuclear war. I never was in agreement with Sergei Karaganov that Russia must stage a devastating strike in Western Europe to puncture the bubble of condescension and scorn for Russia’s supposed weakness and bring the European leaders to their senses.

However, I am becoming much more sympathetic to both of these positions day by day. We have already lost prospects for renewed arms negotiations talks thanks to the airbase attacks.

You cannot watch every kilometer of rail track or rail bridges across Russia to ensure the security of Russian citizens. The only solution, now that Putin has identified the Kiev regime as a terrorist state, is to destroy the decision-making centers, starting with Mr. Budanov and his whole team of terror planners and operatives in downtown Kiev. One Oreshnik hypersonic missile can do that. Will Mr. Putin do what has to be done, or not?

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2025/06/07/ ... june-2025/

******

New warning signals in Sevastopol
June 7, 20:59

Image

New warning signals in Sevastopol

Held a meeting of the Operational Headquarters. It was decided that in Sevastopol we will introduce two additional warning signals: "Sea danger!" and "Air raid and sea danger!" (Videos at link.)

❓Why were 2 more signals introduced? By decision of the Operational Headquarters, since the enemy may intensify attacks with surface UAVs, as well as carry out combined attacks using missiles, UAVs and sea UAVs.

‼️We have developed a new video and sound alert. When information is received from the military, it will be broadcast over all communication channels. What the danger and all-clear signals look and sound like - watch the videos attached to this post.

‼️Depending on the threat, the military will announce:
⚠️ air raid alarm
⚠️ ballistics
⚡️ sea danger
⚠️⚡️ air raid alarm and sea danger

❗️❗️ If the enemy uses sea drones to attack, do not neglect the danger signal under any circumstances.

❗️❗️ If the "Marine danger" signal catches you while a boat or ferry is moving, wait until the vessel moors to the nearest shore, go ashore, take shelter in the installed shelters, in capital buildings located nearby.

❗️❗️ If the "Marine danger" signal catches you while moving on a boat, catamaran, or you are on any watercraft - you must moor / get out of the water to the shore, take shelter in the installed shelters, in capital buildings located nearby.

❗️❗️ If you are on the beach: leave the danger zone and move at least 100 meters away from the water. Immediately go to the installed shelters or capital buildings on the beach. The natural terrain is also suitable for shelter.

(c) Governor of Sevastopol Razvozhaev

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9885539.html

*******

"Keep it for yourselves!": Kyiv regime rejects the living and the dead
June 7, 2025
Rybar

Today, within the framework of the agreements reached in Istanbul , an exchange in the “640 for 640” format was to take place, as well as the free transfer to the so-called Ukraine of 1,212 bodies of members of Ukrainian formations out of the more than 6,000 planned.

When the Russian side representatives arrived at the point with the prisoners and refrigerated trucks, Kiev abruptly postponed the process for an indefinite period. The Ukrainian diplomats did not show up at all for the meeting, later telling about some "violations of the agreed algorithm."

This once again perfectly demonstrates that Zelensky does not care at all about Ukrainians, both living and dead. His regime is ready to make a show out of even handing over the bodies of fallen members of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, ignoring their relatives and generally throwing aside any moral considerations.

We would not be surprised if the real reason for this approach lies in the unwillingness of the Ukrainian authorities to compensate relatives for the deaths of those who can no longer be recognized as missing. Especially since the Kiev regime is already trying to avoid such payments.

It is worth noting separately the competent coverage of the situation from the Russian side, which promptly published the video and comments from the delegation members. In terms of media, the Kiev regime looks completely savage against this background.

https://rybar.ru/sebe-ostavte-kievskij- ... i-mertvyh/

Kharkov in the crosshairs: about a massive raid on objects in the city
June 7, 2025
Rybar

Tonight, Kharkov was hit by the most powerful blow since the beginning of the SVO. According to the enemy, more than 50 Geraniums, as well as missiles and aerial bombs from the UMPK, were used in the attack.

Several fires were recorded in the city. It is noteworthy that the work of Ukrainian air defense systems was practically absent in the published footage.

Where were the arrivals recorded?
The largest number of strikes fell on the areas of the Kommunar plant. This facility is an old acquaintance of ours: back in 2022, we wrote in detail about the creation of rocket components and other equipment there, which then even resulted in one strike on the enterprise. Since then, the scale of production at Kommunar has only grown.

Several of the strikes hit one of the oil depots in one of the districts of Kharkov , which is indirectly confirmed by footage from the Internet, where you can see how the city is covered in impenetrable black smoke.

Overall, there is an increase in the scale of strikes on Kharkov. The range of ammunition used is also expanding: FPV drones, FABs with UMPK, Kh-35, Iskanders are flying at targets. And the same Geran-2s are launched in a group at one object, which allows for more effective penetration of air defense.

Calling this the notorious "retaliatory strike" is reckless: what happened should be part of the usual systematic work to destroy targets in the city. The main thing is that they are chosen rationally and not hit with "splayed fingers."

There are plenty of suitable objects in Kharkov, and thanks to the loyal part of the local population, the activities of the overwhelming majority of them are known in detail. And their defeat mostly rests on organizational rather than technical issues.

https://rybar.ru/harkov-podpriczelom-o- ... -v-gorode/

People vs. TCC
June 7, 2025
Rybar

Yesterday morning, information appeared about a car explosion in Odessa, and by the evening it became known that the victim was Colonel Oleg Nomerovsky , the head of the fourth department of the city TCC.

The explosive device attached to the bottom was detonated remotely. Despite the announced plan to intercept and search, the direct perpetrator was never apprehended.

This is far from the first such example: there have been previous attacks on TCC workers in Dnepropetrovsk, Nikolaev and Western Ukraine. But then they literally threw bombs at them, and this time the action turned out to be technically more complex.

The reaction in local social networks is also symbolic - the news was met with general enthusiasm. Which is not surprising given the busification and racketeering of the population by military commissars that is taking place all over the so-called Ukraine.

And this should be used: the population living in the territory controlled by the Kiev regime is today unanimous in its hatred of the TCC. Even among those who hate Russia, there are enough people who want to get even for the busification of friends-neighbors-colleagues.

And how is this not a reason to remind the enemy that certain games can be played together?

https://rybar.ru/lyudi-vs-tczk/

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14413
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Mon Jun 09, 2025 11:48 am

Everything is justified
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 09/06/2025

Image

“The United States believes Russian President Vladimir Putin’s threat of retaliation against Ukraine for its drone attack last weekend has not yet been seriously acted upon and is likely to be a significant and multi-pronged attack, US officials said,” Reuters wrote yesterday , adding that Washington is speculating about the timing of what it considers the true response to the attacks on Russian strategic bases a week ago, although it expects it to come “within days.” The US version offered by Reuters is consistent with the perception that the latest bombings, particularly heavy in the city of Kharkiv on Friday night and widespread across the country, were in fact a response to the escalation of the war and Ukrainian sabotage of railway infrastructure within Russian territory within its internationally recognized borders. As reported by Ukrainian and Western media since Friday’s Russian bombing, Russian President Vladimir Putin presented the attack as retaliation for “terrorist attacks.”

The timing and Russia's comment led the press to assume that this terrorism referred to the Ukrainian bombings of Russian air bases, which Moscow has preferred not to talk about at length and for which the Kremlin has never used that term. Although far more spectacular than any other operation Ukraine has been able to carry out during the war years, the attacks against Engels and other Russian strategic bases have failed to weaken the Russian war effort and, due to their complexity, are difficult to repeat. However, as other attempts to repeat sabotage, such as the one that crashed a passenger train, show, the Russian-Ukrainian border is not difficult to penetrate, and it is relatively easy to plant explosive devices on the tracks of a country the size of Russia, making the transport of cargo—both civilian and military, especially important in the logistics chain of war—and passengers less reliable.

Both types of operations, both the less spectacular sabotage and the attacks that the Western press considers audacious and irrationally praises as Russia's Pearl Harbor, despite their potential to activate Russian military doctrine, rely heavily on intelligence structures. This aspect has already been highlighted in the past by media outlets such as The New York Times and The Washington Post as an area of ​​extensive collaboration between Ukraine and the United States. “ With Trump stepping back as a peacemaker, at least for now, Ukraine will rely more than ever on its intelligence services,” writes David Ignatius, one of The Washington Post ’s star columnists , who in his piece on the SBU and the GUR insists that “they have demonstrated their ability to strike at Russian forces deep inside their country and around the world. The dirty war has only just begun,” concludes Ignatius, who, without the slightest critical spirit, adds that “the SBU and the GUR, Ukraine’s two spy agencies, have been working for more than three years to fulfill the motto of the Ukrainian special forces: ‘I’m coming for you.’” The objective, insists the American journalist, “has been to strike in unexpected places by devious means and to make Russia bleed far beyond the front lines in Ukraine.” And practically as an announcement, he writes that “the front line inside Ukraine will continue to be a hell of drones and artillery. But covert operations could expand into a dirty war beyond the front lines, with more targeted assassinations, sabotage, and attacks on countries that supply arms to Ukraine and Russia, respectively.

“Countries bordering Ukraine could become new battlegrounds as the war continues. One example is Transnistria, a breakaway region of Moldova on Ukraine's western border that is aligned with Moscow and hosts a Russian "peacekeeping" force. Using Russian defectors and other local forces, Ukraine considered an operation to attack Russian troops there but decided not to open this new front,” explains Ignatius, who puts quotation marks around the mission of Russian troops in Transnistria—the only real guarantee that there could be no attempt by Chisinau to follow the path Ukraine followed in Donbass in 2014—but who at no point questions either the Ukrainian operations, their outcome, legality, or, of course, the figures provided by people like Kirilo Budanov, part of whose job is precisely disinformation. Ignatius has no problem accepting the motives, methods, and figures provided by the GUR regarding operations carried out, for example, in Sudan against Wagner soldiers. Like the BBC article he links to, Ignatius fails to mention the Islamist nature of the attack against Malian and Russian soldiers, in which Ukraine boasted of collaborating.

Oversights and omissions are an important part of the two articles published this week praising Ukrainian intelligence operations away from the front lines. Ignatius fails to mention, for example, that the SBU's role has been key to the Ukrainian war effort not only since 2022, but also since 2014, the year in which, according to the two major American newspapers, close collaboration between Ukrainian and American intelligence began. “Under Maliuk’s leadership, the SBU has quickly become a feared and creative agency, targeting Russian military installations, equipment, and military and pro-war figures in a series of brazen attacks. Maliuk has embraced new technologies, particularly drones, and is adept at detecting Russia’s weak spots and attacking them with spectacular results, officials say,” writes The Wall Street Journal in its feature on the current SBU director, “Ukrainian spy agency behind stunning attack on Russian bomber fleet.”

Neither Ignatius, whose only mention of targeted killings by Ukrainian intelligence is the murder of Daria Dugina, supposedly privately criticized by the United States - but after which similar actions have continued to occur - nor The Wall Street Journal go into too much depth about the program that the SBU has carried out since the beginning of the war in Donbass and that Valentyn Nalivaychenko, then director of the intelligence agency, openly admitted in September 2023 in a report published by The Economist .

“The security service has carried out audacious assassinations on Russian soil. It used an explosive scooter to kill a Russian general in Moscow and a bomb hidden in a statuette to eliminate a Russian war blogger in St. Petersburg. The agency has also been active in Ukraine hunting spies and saboteurs,” The Wall Street Journal writes , summarizing, without elaborating, that the ingenuity of spectacular operations is a program that has existed for more than a decade and through which Ukraine has assassinated public officials, prosecutors, and, in the case of Alexander Zakharchenko, one of the signatories of the Minsk agreement. For years, and until Nalivaichenko's implicit confession in 2023, Ukraine claimed internal struggles or the Kremlin's secret hand in getting rid of its proxies .

In addition to the operation against Russian strategic bases and targeted assassinations, always avoiding any criticism, the other operation highlighted by both The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal is the attack on the Crimean bridge. “In an October 2022 attack planned and executed by the SBU, a truck loaded with explosives detonated on the Kerch Bridge linking mainland Russia with Crimea. The explosion set fire to the fuel cars of the passing freight train and damaged the bridge, a project favored by Putin and critical to his military logistics,” writes The Wall Street Journal . The forgettings and omissions are not limited to targeted assassinations, but also to this attack against Putin's project , in which it is more convenient for Ukraine not to remember used a truck bomb in which the driver, an innocent person who was unaware of the load he was carrying or what his objective was, was sent to his death as a suicide driver.

Nothing matters except the outcome, not just the attacks themselves, but their involvement. “As a result of these successes, the SBU's reputation has soared among the Ukrainian public. Trust in the agency stood at 73% last September, according to a survey by the Kyiv-based pollster Rating, up from 23% in 2021. Ukraine's postal service has launched a special stamp celebrating SBU operations,” The Wall Street Journal insists . War creates heroes, and the media magnifies them.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/06/09/todo- ... stificado/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
According to information from loyal sources behind enemy lines, among other things, up to 5 MiG-29 aircraft were destroyed at the Dubno airfield.
Immediately before the attack, there was also 1 F-16 at the airfield, if we were lucky, it too was laid to rest along with the MiGs.
In addition, a strong fire continues on the airfield territory, including aviation fuel tanks, local residents hear secondary detonation, which once again confirms our information about the destruction of a warehouse with missiles.
No less important is that the enemy lost over 60 personnel killed and wounded, including quite valuable personnel from the airfield personnel.


NgP raZVedka

It was still burning there in the morning, so we covered it well. We are waiting for data from the Russian Ministry of Defense on the breakdown of losses.

***

Colonelcassad
According to RIA Novosti, the Russian Armed Forces destroyed and captured as trophies 26 of the 31 American Abrams tanks delivered to Ukraine. Thus, if the calculations are correct, the enemy has 5 potentially combat-ready vehicles left.

However, this year they are planning to transfer a batch of Abrams tanks decommissioned in Australia to Ukraine - about 40 units, so the hunt will continue.

P.S. We are not losing our chance to find Arkady.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Russia Strikes Back as Ukraine Bets House on Asymmetric 'Terror' War
Simplicius
Jun 08, 2025

Russian strikes have been ravaging Ukrainian cities for the past few days, hitting what reports claim has been a combination of energy infrastructure and weapons manufacturing hubs. Zelensky fumed in a recorded address: (Video at link.)

“Last night Russia hit Kyiv and Lutsk—400 drones, 40+ missiles. People killed. A hotel with athletes gone. Homes wrecked. Russia drags out the war.”

Track of the strikes: (Video at link.)

This exclusive compilation video shows Russian Kh-101 missiles firing off flares before hitting Lutsk Repair Plant in the far western region of Ukraine:
(Video at link.)

Russian strikes on "Lutsk Repair Plant Motor". The enterprise carries carried out repairs of aircraft engines AL-21, AL-31 and RD-33

A strike in Kiev was said to have penetrated deep underground to destroy a rumored drone manufacturing base: (Videos at link.)

The most interesting shots appeared to show a pair of presumable ballistic missiles descending on Kiev, with the Patriot battery sending salvo after salvo of interceptors after them. Here’s an exclusive compilation of every angle of the confrontation—note the 0:35 mark where the ‘Iskander’ appears to hit the Patriot position: (Video at link.)

Many have assumed this video captures the first ever interception of at least one Iskander missile by the Patriot system. However, the trajectory and flight characteristics of the missiles seem a little odd: in the opening video they appear to be descending at a shallow angle. This is more consistent with the famous hit on Kiev a few months ago which many believed was done by the North Korean KN-23 ballistic missile, which is a kind of Iskander knockoff often dubbed the ‘Kimskander’: (Video at link.)

Note how it descends more at a diagonal angle, whereas Iskanders almost always appear to come straight down at 90 degrees.

Either way, it proves that Patriot batteries do infact respond with at least 2 missiles per ballistic threat, and even more so. And the rate of interception is at most 25% or less, judging by the first video.

By the way, the strikes have been ongoing, now with Kharkov city being subjected to what is called the largest ever strike on the city of the whole war. Reuters claims Russia’s response is only just spooling up:

Image

U.S. officials believe Russia’s response has “not yet happened in earnest and is likely to be a significant, multi-pronged strike.” Another senior Western diplomat anticipated a further devastating assault by Moscow. "It will be huge, vicious and unrelenting," the diplomat said. "But the Ukrainians are brave people."

Reuters



The notorious David Ignatius has a new piece in the discredited rag of WaPo that paints an alarming picture of the lengths Ukraine is preparing to go to in order to provoke Russia via expanded terror ops:

Image
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... espionage/

There are quite a few revelations. The most compelling has to do with PMR, otherwise known as Transnistria. We spoke many times here about Ukraine’s suspected plans to “open up a new front” by attacking the Russian garrison in PMR, perhaps seize ‘Europe’s largest’ ammo depot in Cobasna. Each time it never came to fruition because Russian intelligence got wind of it and either took precautions or indirectly made certain threats that caused Ukraine to back off. Ignatius, via US ‘intel sources’, confirms the operation was in fact planned—and undoubtedly still is, as a contingency:

The countries bordering Ukraine might become new battlegrounds as the war continues. An example is Transnistria, a breakaway region of Moldova on Ukraine’s western border that is aligned with Moscow and hosts a Russian “peacekeeping” force. Using Russian defectors and other local forces, Ukraine considered an operation to attack the Russian troops there but decided against opening this new front.

Now, Russia is considering sending 10,000 additional troops to Transnistria and seeks to destabilize pro-Western Moldova, the Moldovan prime minister claimed in an interview with the Financial Times this week.


Take special note of the last paragraph, which demonstrates the fetid hypocrisy of the West. MSM literally admits it was Ukraine that planned to launch an illegal attack on another uninvolved country’s territory, yet they clutched pearls and cried alarm this week when it was announced Russia was considering bolstering its peace keeping force there:

Image
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/35261802/ ... an-nation/

Putin’s “chilling plot” to start WWIII…all while admitting Ukraine is the one planning to invade another country. See how it works?

The other big revelation is that Ukraine “was”—and, again, likely still is—planning to do ‘Operation Spiderweb’-style attacks on Russian merchant marine ships as far as the North Pacific; note the “and its allies” part.

Ukraine has considered a naval version of the sneak-attack tactic it used so effectively on Sunday. The sources said the SBU weighed sending sea drones hidden in cargo containers to attack ships of Russia and its allies in the North Pacific. But, so far, they apparently have yet to launch these operations.

Somehow Ukraine gets a pass for planning to attack various other sovereign nations, just as it did during the Nord Stream terror attacks and others. In fact, the article casually mentions Ukraine’s assassination of civilian Daria Dugina as just another ‘intelligence plot’, naturally omitting to mention the war crime nature of it. Just look how gleefully Zelensky smiles, along with his smugly grinning ABC interviewer, as he reveals Russian civilian truck drivers were once again used as sacrificial lambs in his drone attack: (Video at link.)

Image

He “forgets” to mention the trucks ‘self-destructed’ afterwards, seemingly killing these very civilian drivers as one video clearly showed. Terror is a palatable commodity when it serves the West’s interests.

The more sinister ramifications of the above revolve around how Ukraine’s terror is being nurtured in conjunction with the UK’s plot to quell Russia’s “shadow fleet” and economy in general. This is clearly the case of Ukraine being used as the arrow tip for the London archer: Ukraine is meant to cripple Russian economic interests via increasingly illegal terrorist activity which will be given ‘pass’ under the sham of ‘international law’.

In response, Russia has again hosted a series of even larger Baltic Fleet exercises. Last time I posted a video of ‘anti-terror’ drills simulating the rescue of Russian ships “captured by [terrorists]” in the Baltic Sea. This time over 20 warships and other ground assets took part as a show of force against anyone daring to overstep:

Russian navy flexes hard in the Baltic Over 20 warships, Kalibr cruise missile carriers, and Tsirkon hypersonics join large-scale drills — striking targets up to 1,500 km away (Video at link.)

On top of that, a Russian jet reportedly intercepted a Swedish Gripen over the Baltic Sea. Look closely—the Swede appears to salute the Russian pilot: (Video at link.)
Russian interception of a Sweden Air Force JAS 39 Gripen (reg 39228) over the Baltics Sea today.


A few quick updates from the front. There were a lot of small advances in less significant sectors by Russian forces, such as Seversk and even Zaporozhye—but for now we’ll focus on the couple significant ones.

North of Bogatyr, Russian forces are making their way through Oleksiivka:

Image

Do not confuse it with the roughly three other Oleksiivkas currently under assault by Russian forces.

Likely the biggest advance has been just southwest of there, in the area north of Velyka Novosilka. Recall it was just a couple days ago Russian forces captured Fedorovka, now they have finally entered Komar, with reports claiming Ukrainian troops are fleeing the settlement:

Image

Even further southwest from there Russian forces expanded toward Malinovka, which I reported on last time. They are slowly building up the flank for an eventual enveloping pressure on Gulaipole:

Image

There weren’t any dramatic new gains on the Sumy front, but Russian forces slightly increased their territory, working further south down the main roads from Yablonovka and the other Oleksiivka:

Image

Nearby in the Tetkino region of Kursk, Ukraine reportedly had a little success in capturing a small patch of territory, as Zelensky continues desperately clawing at a shred of Russian land for PR purposes. However, Russian forces are holding and will likely expel the AFU forces after whittling them down with enough losses. Here’s what Tetkino looks like today, littered with Zelensky’s expendable meat.

One report from Sumy region:

"Our source reports that the Ukrainian Armed Forces have a terrible shortage of UAV groups in the Sumy direction, which were urgently redeployed to the Pokrovskoe-Konstantinovskoe direction, as well as to the Kursk direction near the settlement of Tetkino, since Bankovaya threw all its forces into taking this urban-type settlement, it is very important for them for PR. For more than a month, the best units of the Ukrainian Armed Forces have been conducting a massive offensive there to achieve results.

At the same time, the Russians have seized tens of square kilometers in the Sumy region in a month and are approaching the conditional second line of defense of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the direction of the city of Sumy. The city is now being prepared for evacuation.

Bankova's strategy of "PR attacks" will lead to sad results."




A few last items:

Russians soldier used an unexpected secret weapon to stop a Ukrainian fiber-optic drone which was hunting them: (Video at link.)



A Russian Fab-3000 bomb atomizes a Ukrainian apartment bloc converted into a stronghold: (Video at link.)



Ukrainian journalist Volodomyr Boiko reports that a whopping ~91,000 AFU have already deserted from the armed forces in 2025 alone:

Image

A military catastrophe is coming: More than 90,000 since the beginning of the year - a Ukrainian Armed Forces soldier on the scale of desertion in the troops

Kiev journalist Boyko, who serves in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, reports the shocking scale of flight from the army.

In the first 5 months of 2025, 90,590 criminal cases were registered on the facts of escape from military units:

January – 18,145,

February – 17,809,

March – 16,349,

April – 18,331,

May – 19,956.

A total of 213,722 cases of desertion have been registered since the beginning of the Second World War.

Boyko notes that these data reflect only those cases for which criminal proceedings have been initiated; the real situation is much worse .

According to him, deserters are not actually sought out; they do not return to service.

"The reason for the military catastrophe approaching Ukraine is obvious: the demonstrative evasion of mobilization by court fabulists like Sternenko, Leshchenko or Bigus, mass shabuning - when tens of thousands of shabunins, vakarchuks, kipianis and other leaders are fictitiously listed in the troops and the lack of law and order in the Armed Forces of Ukraine and other military formations, caused by the liquidation of the military prosecutor's office in 2019," he writes.

Boyko also notes that in reality there are from 30 to 50 thousand Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers on the LBS from the Ukrainian side.

"The consequences of this situation are not difficult to predict," he concluded. RVvoenkor


We must admit that the numbers are hard to believe because they raise a number of questions. If Ukraine is really that hard up on men, then why isn’t the frontline collapsing much faster?

To play devil’s advocate, a few possible answers:

Ukraine’s ‘drone miracle’ really is as effective as they claim, where small clusters of drone units are able to hold entire fronts on their own against far more numerous Russian forces.

Most of the Ukrainian AWOLs return back. The above specifically posits they do not—however, previous reports always painted the AFU as a lax organization where troops constantly went AWOL to visit their family, or “get their head right”, then eventually returned, even if it was weeks or months later. We can assume some potentially-significant percentage of the above AWOLs end up returning or being brought back by force.

The final possibility: Ukraine is nearing total frontline collapse, as those numbers are simply impossible to sustain.

We know Ukraine reportedly press-gangs upwards of 15-25k men a month, but loses upwards of 20k+ to hard losses (KIA plus disabled), and if we are to believe the above numbers, another 20-30k a month to desertion. This would give somewhere near 20k net depletion of manpower per month, or 240k per year, which is impossible to sustain.

By the way, note the journalist’s own assertion above, which would affirm my option #1: he claims Ukraine only has 30-50k men along the entire frontline. This seems very difficult to believe at face value, however consider the following. Both sides are claimed to have 600-800k total manpower, however only a portion of this refers to ‘combat troops’ along the actual frontline. Combat troops are usually 20% of the total force or less. Many recent Ukrainian reports claim Russians outnumber them from 5:1 to 8:1 on various fronts. If Russia has about 250k combat troops along the front with the rest being the ‘tail’, then perhaps it’s conceivable Ukraine’s own combat numbers are really that low—but still hard to believe, simply because it seems almost too catastrophic to be possible. But we may know the truth soon, given various predictions of Ukraine’s “collapse” this coming summer.

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/rus ... raine-bets

******

Simplifying Putin’s Ukrainian multi-dimensional matrix

Declan Hayes

June 8, 2025

Not only does the Western media have no connection to the truth but, outside of sport and weather forecasts, it is not meant to have any such link.

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Ephesians 6:12

If Putin’s Ukrainian issue was merely about dealing with Donald Rumsfeld unknown unknowns, Russia would have put paid to it years ago. But things are infinitely more complicated than that. Putin, which we use as a shorthand for Russia’s High Command, must achieve his strategic objectives, which include but are not confined to eviscerating the Nazi hardliners and their MI6 handlers at the centre of power in Kiev, kicking NATO bag and baggage out of Russia’s front yard, and securing regional stability to benefit the varying geopolitical and economic national interests of Russia and contiguous countries. Even that abbreviated web encompasses a vast array of political, military, informational, and economic dimensions, which are further compounded by the various irredentist movements, diplomatic double crosses, disinformation campaigns, and military interventions NATO use to frustrate Russia’s goals, all while cranking up international pressures and violent, internal Russian dissent.

Although Russia needs a layered, interconnected approach encompassing military actions, diplomatic efforts, and information warfare, to apply some sort of a tourniquet to these torrents, the best I can presently do is to help clarify how these elements must interplay to shape Russia’s policies and actions in Ukraine, and to thereby suggest an appropriately calibrated and nuanced approach to this ongoing conflict and its geopolitical dynamics.

The first thing to note is it is NATO, not Russia, that picked Ukraine as its staging post. There are two pertinent reasons for this. The first of these is that, unlike the Baltic pimple states, NATO’s Banderite spider’s web stayed largely intact after the Third Reich’s surrender. Not only had the Banderite cult vast human and other reserves in such countries as Canada but well-connected English aristocrats like Baroness Birdwood, made the necessary introductions into British High Society at the time of Barbarossa for Yaroslav Stetsko and other leaders of the extreme right-wing Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) for MI6 and their CIA chums to build on. Add in spook-for-hire Reinhard Gehlen, Hitler’s super spy, and MI6 and the CIA had good cause to fancy their chances against their Russian counterparts.

The immediate relevance of all that is a very substantial minority of Ukrainians have been marinated almost from birth with a very deep-rooted loathing for everything Russian. Not only is that expressed in destroying harmless statues with the most innocuous of connections with Mother Russia, but we have seen it with the very rough treatment elderly Russian civilians, Ivans and Orcs as the invaders called them, got when Zelensky’s mercenaries overran Kursk. Although Russian standing orders seem to be to treat these sociopaths with kids’ gloves, perhaps much tougher love would be more appropriate in their cases to show them that being a sieg heiling, Ivan killing Nazi can have fatal consequences.

This is not to say that those Ukrainian mercenaries, who torture Russian soldiers and civilians, are the worst of the pack. They are not and my second article for this periodical pointed the finger at hard line Ukrainian Nazi ideologue Olena Semenyaka, who bears her own substantial part of the blame for these war crimes. If anyone in Kiev deserves a suspended (from a rope) sentence, she does.

But she is not the only one. Consider the case of American senator Lindsey Graham, who has been one of Washington’s most vitriolic blood vultures since at least 2003. Although much could be said against this loud mouth, suffice it to say that he charged the American taxpayer $500,000 for his recent weekend romp in Kiev, causing Steve Bannon to demand that he be thrown in prison for the term of his natural for that, and for his material assistance in helping Ukraine attack Russia’s strategic nuclear arsenal.

Although former British Prime Minister Bojo Johnson was amongst the well connected philanderers slapping the Kiev regime on the back for that spectacular (and the concomitant mass slaughter of Russian civilian train passengers), it leaves the Russian High Command with the sticky question as to whether they should surrender the strategic escalation initiative to NATO’s Ukrainian puppet.

Given that NATO repeatedly called these crimes spectaculars, it is worth mentioning that the IRA repeatedly used this tactic against their supposed British opponents, the idea being that one spectacular in the belly of the beast (England) was worth a hundred such incidents in the north of Ireland and, of course, the British also used this tactic in their no warning bomb atrocities in Dublin and Monaghan, the idea being to kick the supine Irish regime into line.

Ukrainian spectaculars have consisted of murdering non-combatants like Darya Dugina, blowing up civilian bridges and attacking anything and everything connected near or far with Russia’s military and civilian nuclear programs, the idea being, like the IRA’s before them, to get the Russians to over-react and to then cry foul.

Without getting too flippant about it, Russia’s response has to be to talk quietly and to carry a heavily studded baseball bat. To take them in reverse order, Russia has to revise and perhaps expand her list of legitimate targets to consider who should live and who should die in Ukraine and, when we recall Nordstream and the interdiction of Russian yachts on the high seas, beyond Ukraine as well

But even there, we have a problem, as NATO is deciding that any of their facilities that are even a millimetre to the west of Ukraine are inviolate and Rheinmetall’s Ukrainian division believes it should have a free pass to manufacture weapons to murder Russian women and children. Although the IRA ignored such geographical demarcations in their eclectic choice of targets, Russia’s dilemma is how to respond at least in kind without the war escalating in the way Bojo, Graham and NATO’s other parasites wish it to. Though that, as they say, is Russia’s problem, it seems the big bullseye Rheinmetall has painted on itself offers Russia’s air force a way of beginning to solve it, even if that draws Romania into the quagmire.

As regards talking quietly or talking at all, the Istanbul peace (sic) talks circus is notable for a number of things., one of them being that many of the Ukrainian delegation arrived with Nazi insignia sewn on to their pretend field uniforms, which was a rather crude way to give the Russians the finger without giving them the finger.

And, though that opens up the Pandora’s box of perceptions, it most particularly shows that NATO loves rubbing Russia’s nose in Nazi manure and, extrapolating from that, we can deduce that Russia has not a hope in hell of even holding its own in the battle for hearts and minds within NATO or the European Union, as the cards are so heavily stacked against them in that regard.

Although it is a full three years since I wrote this piece in praise of German citizen(-journalist) Alina Lipp, the European Union have now banned her and Thomas Röper, another independent-minded German, from ever again entering the European Union, all because they report from the Russian side of the lines if for no other reason than they would be immediately murdered, as Gonzalo Lira was, should they cross into Zelensky-held Ukraine. Although I could say their treatment is a scandal, it is par for the course with the witches who rule the roost in Brussels. When a young German woman like Lipp is so thoroughly vilified, what chance has the truth got in getting a fair hearing?

All of which brings us to the example of the fall of the Syrian Arab Republic and the ongoing massacres of Alawites and other defenceless minorities occurring there with NATO’s full blessing and logistical support. Although it is easy to be a Monday morning quarterback or, as we say, a hurler on the ditch with respect to Syria, perhaps leaving the Nazis fester in Idlib rather than finishing them off was a mistake, though God knows what the Western media and NATO’s NGOs and mercenaries might have said and done had the heroic Syrian Arab Army finished those savages off when they had the chance. One wonders if Putin will agree to a ceasefire so that Zelensky’s Nazis and their foreign mercenaries can regroup and bag more innocent Ivans that the Western media will calumniate, just as they continue to do with their equivalents in Syria.

Not only does the Western media have no connection to the truth but, outside of sport and weather forecasts, it is not meant to have any such link. It is, just like election rigging, but one more weapon in NATO’s self-declared arsenal of democracy. Look at the ludicrous charge that Russia abducted half a million Ukrainian children at the start of this conflict. Not only was that the brazen lie and libel against Putin, Maria Lvova-Belova and the Russian Armed Forces I said it was at the time it happened, but that was so obviously the case that only those, like NATO’s media and NATO’s international criminal courts, who argued otherwise, must have known they were lying as part of NATO’s war aims. Quite what Putin intends to do with NATO’s attempts to clap him in irons I do not know, but he has a right to be angry and to seek redress by any means Russia’s Armed Forces can from those behind that outrage and a thousand others like it.

But that raises the question as to how you can argue or make a treaty with serial liars and the general answer to that, which Yasser Arafat found to his considerable cost, as well as the specific one with respect to Russia’s NATO’s experiences is you cannot, meaning that Russia will have to bite the bullet and hit far harder and far more often until Bojo, Graham and their ilk wake up either in this world or the next from the delusion that their war crimes carry no personal downside risks for themselves.

Although none of this is optimal, game theory offers no optimal solutions to moral quagmires like these, except for the obvious one of not getting into them in the first place. Given that that ship has long ago sailed, it is incumbent on Russia’s High Command to ensure their forces prevail and that some of their opponents’ more vociferous pieces are permanently removed from the chessboard.

Not, it is true, the advice of a chess grandmaster but, then I always found it better to reduce the chess pieces and, given that Putin is currently too busy to play chess, he should instead take a leaf out of General Giap‘s playbook and focus on playing hard ball, something many of his senior generals excel at.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... al-matrix/

******

Ukraine does not want to take back 6,000 killed
June 8, 17:45

Image

Report by war correspondent Dmitry Kulko.
"We've been waiting for the second day near the border for Ukraine to take back its dead."

(Video at link.)

I wonder if 6 thousand corpses were laid out on the border at the "zero" and piled up, would people from Ukraine come for them?

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9887102.html

Shelters at Khalino airfield
June 9, 11:11

Image

The enemy has posted satellite images indicating that aircraft shelters have been built at the Khalino airfield in the Kursk region.
There was a time when they tried to prove that aircraft shelters at airfields were not needed. As it turned out, they were needed. And as practice shows, they are indeed being built.

Image

Changes in the nature of warfare make it clear that a number of approaches to securing aircraft and airbases must be reconsidered.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9888278.html

Google Translator

******

Russia’s Efforts To Return Displaced Ukrainian Children To Their Families Discredit The ICC
Andrew Korybko
Jun 09, 2025

Image

It’s always tragic whenever children are displaced or orphaned by conflict, but evacuating them from the front lines and giving them proper care isn’t akin to “abducting” them, let alone when they’re later returned to their relatives.

The “International Criminal Court” (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Putin and Children’s Rights Commissioner Maria Lvova-Belova in early 2023 on the grounds that they’re responsible for Russia’s alleged “abduction” of Ukrainian children from the regions that voted to join Russia in September 2022. The reality though, as Russia has consistently maintained, is that these children were taken under government care per global norms as a result of them being displaced or orphaned by the conflict.

Moreover, Qatar contributed to reuniting some of these children under Russia’s care with their Ukrainian relatives on several occasions, thus discrediting the basis upon which the ICC issued warrants for Putin’s and Lvova-Belova’s arrests. While neither of them cares about what that partially recognized and scandalous body claims, especially since they don’t plan to travel to any of the countries that would act on their warrants, the issue has once again become central to the conflict after the latest Istanbul talks.

Head of the Russian delegation Vladimir Medinsky confirmed that the Ukrainian side handed over a list of 339 children’s names during the second round of their newly resumed bilateral negotiations that he in turn passed along to Lvova-Belova. She met with Putin earlier that same day on officially unrelated business, but the timing suggests that Russia expected to receive such a list and is prioritizing it. She later told reporters how the number of allegedly “abducted” Ukrainian children dropped from 900,000 to 339.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova also spoke on this issue during last week’s inaugural Global Digital Forum, declaring that “There are no Ukrainian children abducted by Russia, as they put it. You just need to know this and that should be the starting point when discussing this problem.” That’s a self-respecting approach since it would be an implicit admission of false guilt for Russia to accept Ukraine’s bogus premise that it “abducted” children as the starting point of discussions.

Zakharova continued by explaining that “There are children of different nationalities, different citizenships. Moreover, many of them may not have any papers at all or may be victims of people who falsify documents, and they are wanted by relatives, parents, and other next of kin. There are certain procedures in this work.” She also blamed Ukraine’s “Lack of clear data, lack of transparency, transparency in work, endless manipulation” for why the issue hasn’t yet been resolved.

Most importantly, however, she claimed that “a huge number of children have indeed disappeared, those with Ukrainian citizenship or Ukrainian parents, but only on the territory of the European Union.” This deserves to be investigated, but it’s unlikely that the EU or top NGOs will seriously do so since there’s more political capital to be gained in lending false credence to the claim that Russia “abducted” Ukrainian children, which is discredited by its efforts to return those under its care to their relatives.

Reflecting on the insight that was shared on this issue, it appears to be the case that Ukraine is “put[ting] on a show for bleeding-heart European old ladies with no children of their own” exactly as Medinsky was reported to have told the Ukrainian delegation when receiving their list. It’s always tragic whenever children are displaced or orphaned by conflict, but evacuating them from the front lines and giving them proper care isn’t akin to “abducting” them, let alone when they’re later returned to their relatives.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/russias- ... -displaced
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14413
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Tue Jun 10, 2025 11:37 am

Devotees of the good war instead of the bad peace
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 10/06/2025

Image

Exchanges have been the main—and so far only—tangible outcome of the two meetings Russia and Ukraine held last month in Istanbul. These meetings, being the first direct contacts in three years, are positive in themselves even if progress appears limited. The first meeting resulted in an exchange of 1,000 personnel for each side and was carried out in stages, with a speed that made Donald Trump think the dynamic between the two countries had begun to change. The second meeting in Turkey led to the exchange that began yesterday and the commitment to hand over the bodies of fallen soldiers whose remains are in the hands of the other side. The difference between the way these two proposals have been handled is a good indicator of the lack of trust between the parties and also of the prevailing interests, which derive directly from the needs of war.

Yesterday afternoon, images were released of the first of several exchanges of soldiers under 25 years of age that kyiv and Moscow agreed to in Istanbul, which could potentially reach the figure of one thousand people returned to their country by each side. Contrasting these images of happiness and emotional first calls to families are the difficulties Russia is encountering in getting Ukraine to accept the 1,212 bodies of Ukrainian soldiers, the first of many shipments the Kremlin hopes to make in the coming days to complete the 6,000 it offered at the second meeting between the delegations of the two countries. The disagreement was perfectly predictable, as the reaction of both capitals was, from the beginning, the same: to question the other's intentions. Barely a few hours had passed since the announcement of the intention to exchange 6,000 bodies for each side when Vladimir Medinsky questioned the possibility of Ukraine having such a large number of Russian soldiers killed at the front whose remains had been left in territories under kyiv's control. Medinsky's doubt was legitimate, especially considering the imbalance that has occurred in the exchanges of recent months, in which Russia received only a few dozen bodies and returned hundreds. If Ukraine had thousands of bodies of Russian soldiers, one might ask, why were they not repatriated to their country?

Zelensky's version was as swift as that of the Russian lead negotiator, although much more convoluted. In this way, Ukraine has tried to kill two birds with one stone, on the one hand denying any constructive Russian willingness—such as allowing families to say goodbye to their loved ones, buried with dignity—and calling into question the previous exchanges. kyiv's version implicitly suggests that Russia was able to hand over such a large number of bodies because it sent its own soldiers to Ukraine. Casting doubt on the identity of the soldiers the Kremlin has handed over so far helps justify Bankova's position of delaying or preventing the handover, citing all sorts of technicalities, demanding that the handover not be unilateral but agreed upon, and trying to impose the terms.

The reality of these two types of exchanges obscures kyiv's current priorities. The return of younger soldiers, presumably in better health to continue fighting after a period of rest and treatment, contrasts with Ukraine's lack of desire to receive the bodies of dead soldiers, a return that entails, among other things, the payment of compensation. Receiving the bodies of 6,000 soldiers would represent an enormous cost for Ukraine, which kyiv is trying to postpone until such time as all the funding no longer needs to be spent on the acquisition and production of weapons.

Last week, the Ukrainian Rada approved new legislation stating that missing persons cannot be declared dead until two years after the end of the war, a political move with clear economic implications, as families will not be able to receive the compensation to which they are entitled during that time. Ukraine, which already used the non-payment of pensions to the population of Donbass during the years 2014-2022 as a form of savings, is now making the same calculation. The war is the absolute priority, and the funds received from its partners and allies must be used to finance the war, not to compensate families for the losses caused by the conflict. Keeping the list of missing persons high also helps contain the number of dead soldiers, a figure that, a state secret, Bankova is doing everything she can to hide. The only casualties Ukraine wants to talk about are the Russian ones, and the dogma that they far outnumber the Ukrainian ones has been consolidated in the international press despite clear evidence that should question it. Zelensky and his team's refusal to plan for the demobilization of those who have been on the front lines for years, their attempt to get them to enlist without having to expand the mobilization process for those under 25, and their extension of the age at which volunteers can be recruited beyond 60 suggest that the personnel losses are alarming (whether or not they are greater than those in Russia).

The need to constantly recruit to replace soldiers killed at the front or wounded who will never fight again collides with two factors: demographics and the reduced flow of volunteers willing to die to gain a position of strength with which to negotiate with Russia. "Russia is escalating the war and has no intention of stopping it. Any escalation can only be stopped by force," wrote Andriy Ermak yesterday on social media. He is one of Ukraine's most influential and belligerent voices. He never tires of demanding more weapons and ammunition from his allies for a military solution that will bring Russia to the negotiating table, even though it is at a disadvantage and forced to accept the terms imposed by Kiev.

This vision of war not only implies the continuation of missile attacks, as occurred again yesterday with more than 400 Russian drones launched against Ukraine, but also a growing sacrifice to an already exhausted society. Ukraine's ability to resist and continue fighting depends, on the one hand, on maintaining funding and the flow of materiel, something that European countries seek to guarantee regardless of whether the United States withdraws from its role as supplier. On the other hand, kyiv's ability to keep its army on the front lines also depends on social peace and the maintenance of a certain order in which there are enough men to mobilize for the front.

“This is a matter of law and justice. If you follow Ukrainian law, mobilization, you have to be in Ukraine. From there, you can fight or work,” Zelensky stated at the 2024 Davos Forum, as Ukrainian historian Marta Havryshko recalls in an article published by the Berliner Zeitung, in which she states that this is “a poor man’s war.” “The rich count their money, the poor bury their children: What role do class, power, and corruption play in Ukraine’s war? And why do politicians send their children to the West?” she asked on social media. Her conclusion is clear: “While quite a few children of the political establishment enjoy a quiet and comfortable life in the West, working-class families are the first to bury their children in the country’s cemeteries.”

War is always a class issue, as another news story Havryshko highlighted yesterday shows. “A group of young Ukrainians was captured while trying to escape forced mobilization and flee to Romania. They hid in a truck among the cattle and posed as shepherds. Each man paid $18,000 for this life-saving service,” he wrote, noting that the average salary in Ukraine is around $560. It's clear what kind of population can afford to risk their lives fleeing rather than losing them in the trenches.

The result is not only rising inequality, but also the worsening of a decades-long demographic crisis that Ukraine shares, albeit in an even more pronounced form, with the Russian Federation. “There are approximately 32 million people living in Ukraine. Of these, 10.5 million are pensioners. If Ukraine continues fighting until 2030, as the collective West seems to desire in order to rearm and prepare for war with Russia, there simply won't be any Ukraine left,” Havryshko laments, going on to explain that “Ukraine is, above all, its people. And they are the ones who are dying and leaving the country. In massive numbers. Especially the young, who refuse to make eternal war the purpose of their existence.” The historian, whose native language is Ukrainian, defended Maidan, and comes from the west of the country—although she openly clashes with the far right over her rejection of nationalism and the glorification of fascism—concludes that “those who advocate the good war instead of the bad peace are, in fact, wiping Ukraine off the face of the earth, while making money from it.”

With a lack of soldiers and scarce funds, the schemes multiply, the people continue to pay while the political class protects their descendants. Meanwhile, Ukraine enthusiastically welcomes soldiers who will soon be returning to the front and puts obstacles in the way of receiving those who gave their lives for the cause, whose families should be able to collect the compensation they were promised for sacrificing their lives.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/06/10/devot ... -mala-paz/

Google Translator

*******

Ukraine Update
Roger Boyd
Jun 08, 2025

A month since my last update, and the Russian army has made some significant progress.

The Ukrainian AWOL Problem
More information has come out about the level of desertion from the Ukrainian army and the numbers are quite astonishing. The numbers below are for the actual criminal proceedings being brought against deserters so the real scale of the problem is probably larger:
January: 18,145

February: 17,809

March: 16,349

April: 18,331

May: 19,956
These numbers are at least equal, if not greater than, the number of new press-ganged recruits; 90,950 in just five months. The strength of the Ukrainian army is not just being drained away by the casualties inflicted by the Russians, which are now in the region of 50,000 per month and can be expected to escalate as the Russian offensive intensifies, but also as the number of desertions outnumber new recruits. And the press-ganging is becoming harder and harder as the population’s resistance stiffens, as shown by the car bombing of a colonel of the press-gangers.

Kramatorsk to Pokrovsk
The advance of the Russian army toward the north and northeast from between Malynivka and Romanivka threatens to create an ever expanding pocket to the east. The Russian army is entering an area lacking in fortified positions to the east of Kostyanynivka that stretches all the way to just south of Kramatorsk. A large gap between two Ukrainian defensive lines.

Between Kostyantynivka, Chasov Yar and Toretsk

Between Oleksijevo-Druzhkivka (north east of Kostyantynivka), Chasov Yar and Toretsk

Between Druzhkivka (north east of Oleksijevo-Druzhkivka), Min’kivka (north of Chasiv Yar) and Toretsk

Between Kramatork (north of Druzhkivka), Min’kivka and Toretsk

The areas enclosed by each one of these pockets include some of the mostly densely fortified and varying elevation areas of eastern Ukraine. Their loss will force a huge hole in the Ukrainian defences.

As is already happening, the Russian gains are forcing the Ukrainian military to commit the last of its reserves and strip units from other areas. The more the Russians gain, the more the Ukrainians will strip other areas of troops, the perfect meat grinder for the Ukrainian military.

At the same time the Russians will have excellent supply routes such as the H20 from Donetsk to Kostyanynivka, the T0516 from Horlivka to Kostyantynivka and the T1302 from Lysychans’k to Bakhmut, while the Ukrainians will only have long back roads from the north. This area could serve as the graveyard for the remaining fighting capabilities of the Ukrainian army.

Image

Image

Zherebets Bridgehead
At the same time, the continual expansion of Zherebets bridgehead to the north threatens to cut off those northern supply routes through Slovyansk/Kramatorsk and create a new pocket on the east of the Oskil river between Lozove and Bohuslavka.

The Russian army has already taken Karpivka, which is only 8km east of a Lozove that sits across the southern supply route to the the Ukrainans east of the Oskil river, and 24km east of Izyum and Kam’yanke which sit astride the northern supply route to Slovyansk/Kramatorsk. Combined with the progress above, this would cut the whole area east of a line between Kam’yanke and Kosyantynivka off from supplies. Which would lead to the compete collapse of Ukrainian defences and the fall of the whole Slovyansk/Kramatorsk/Kostyantynivka agglomeration; the most densely fortified area of the Ukrainian defence line.

The Ukrainians will be forced to throw whatever they have left against the expansion of the Zherebets bridgehead, creating another Ukrainian army meat grinder and further thinning the lines in other areas. It would be as if there was a large magnet sucking the Ukrainian army into the middle of the eastern front, depleting the flanks.

Image

Kupyansk / Kharkov
The depletion of forces may allow the Russian army to fully cut off the Ukrainian army on the eastern side of the Oskil between Kupyansk and Kruhlyakivka, by taking Kupyansk. Then driving north/north east to join up with the Russian forces advancing from Vovchansk to form a front line along the Siverskyi-Donets river east of Kharkov and onto Chuhiv on the M03. Retracing the steps of the late 2022 retreat. The Ukrainian army may be then put into the conundrum of which part of the front to give up on, as Kharkov would be a huge prize for the Russians and a huge loss for the Ukrainians.

Image

Sumy Region
The biggest winner of the Ukrainian conundrum, for the Russian army, may be in the Sumy region. The Russian army is already making good progress toward the city of Sumy, which is only 10km away from the front line, against a much thinned out Ukrainian opposition; thinned by both the massive losses of the Kursk fiasco and from transfers to Pokrovsk and Kostyantynivka fronts.

The loss of the city of Sumy would only be a local tactical loss, as it would not threaten any of the major supply routes to the other parts of the front (e.g. 80km away from Poltava on the M03 and 180km from Kiev), and the Sumy region is lightly populated. The city of Sumy does act as the hub of the transport spokes of the Sumy region, so its fall could facilitate a relatively rapid advance in the general area. A more rapid drive southwards could place Poltava at risk, threatening to cut off Kharkov from its main supply route and even to cut the Ukrainian forces on the east side of the Dniepr in half. As the Ukrainian army degrades and is increasingly unable to plug holes in the front, those holes can be rapidly expanded.

Image

South East Front and Zaporizhzhia
The best approach here is to keep grinding on to fix as much of the Ukrainian army in place as possible. Although the distances are relatively small, 20km to Zaporizhzhia and 30km to Pokrovs’ke (a different place to Pokrovsk), the Ukrainian defences have the benefit of significant fortifications and they will stiffen as the Russians get closer to the large cities of Zaporizhzhia and Dnipro.

At some point the Ukrainian defences may become denuded enough to allow for a larger breakthrough, perhaps to the critical supply towns of Pokrovs’ke and Omel’nyk which may then lead to a greater collapse. But until that point these fronts will remain as a grinding battlefield.

Image

Kherson
The retreat from Kherson was a painful loss, which was shown to be an excellent decision after the intentional Ukrainian flooding of the lower Dnieper. That event could still be repeated on a smaller scale if the Ukrainians opened up the dam further up the river at Zaporizhzhia, but with the huge reservoir south of there already drained the effects would be much less. But the possibility of even a catastrophic destruction that dam cannot be ruled out given the greater and greater acts of desperation and terrorism that the Ukrainian regime is resorting to; to be blamed on the Russians of course.

As the Ukrainian forces opposite them are further and further thinned out to fill gaps in others parts of the front, the Russian forces will find it very enticing to cross what is left of the river and launch themselves into the weak underbelly and the rear of the Ukrainian defensive lines. They must make sure though that they can deal with an opening, or even a destruction, of yet another dam by the Ukrainians.

Kiev, The Killer Blow?
As one defensive unit after another is removed from the Ukrainian rear, a repeat of the 2022 attack on Chernihiv (to protect the eastern flank) and drive to the west of Kiev may become more and more doable. The capital city itself would not have to be taken, rather it would be cut off from the west; the E373 to Chelm in Poland and the E40 that runs to Zhytomyr and then Lviv. Finishing the job farther south with the E95 that runs south to Uman.

The ability of the West to further supply the Ukrainian army on the eastern front would be severely impaired, and the capital city completely cut off from the West. The Russian forces would also be far behind Ukrainian lines, facing limited opposition to further advances southward that would threaten to cut off the whole Ukrainian eastern front (e.g. taking Uman to cut the E50 to Dnipro). If this front is opened up by the Russians we can assume that the Ukrainian War endgame is close.

Of course, the European and British warmongers would be driven to desperation, but without the support of US air power and the Polish, Slovak and Hungarian heads of state, their options would be severely limited. But given their increasingly foolhardy actions, the Russians must plan for all eventualities. The fall of Ukraine will be an existential crisis for the European and British oligarch regimes.

As the Ukrainians (and of course the UK and US security states) have shown with their attack upon the Russian nuclear bombers, they are ready to take greater and greater risks as defeat becomes more and more evident. The Russian leadership must be engaging with parts of the Ukrainian political and military leadership that have more level heads and be ready for a full decapitation strike upon Ukraine (including senior Western “advisors” within Ukraine) to facilitate a move to a more reasonable Ukrainian leadership if necessary. Nothing can be assumed to be beyond the realm of the possible with the Ukrainian nationalists and the UK and US security states.

https://rogerboyd.substack.com/p/ukraine-update-9c8

******

Sanctions Bill or Embargo--The Graham-Blumenthal Act
The Losers are Mad They're Losing which is driving them Mad.
Karl Sanchez
Jun 08, 2025

Image

Some may have heard of this very provocative legislative proposal that supposedly had veto proof majorities backing it in Congress. The proposed bill includes a steep 500% tariff on imports from any country that continues to buy oil, gas, uranium, or other key commodities from Moscow. Two of those nations are China and India, along with the Outlaw US Empire itself as it must buy enriched Russian reactor fuel for its nuclear power stations. US Senator Rand Paul wrote in Responsible Statecraft that the bill “essentially amounts to an embargo” and could trigger “economic calamity on a scale never before seen in our country.” Lots of reporting about the Trade War has occurred at the Gym, so most readers are aware of what’s happening between the Empire and China. This bill would trash the Geneva agreement and do what Senator Paul described. We saw the panic Trump’s 145% tariffs caused. China was prepared for such a challenge and remains prepared. The Empire wasn’t prepared and remains unprepared because it’s deindustrialized to the point where there’s nothing it can do. The initiators are busy writing amendments to exempt a few key trading nations, but those will do little to lessen the economic damage the bill will cause since much of what stocks retailers shelves are made in the nations being targeted, not just China but India and the entire ASEAN, South Korea and Japan. And many goods are components to items that are constructed within the Empire—things like screws, nails and other fasteners, for example. And like China, most of those nations have made plans for losing the Empire as a trading partner.

It should be clear what’s fueling this legislation and why so many favor it—the Outlaw US Empire has lost the war it started when it invaded Ukraine in 2014 to destroy its Russian speaking population and acquire Crimea, and US Exceptionalists don’t like losing. Just to be clear, all 28,595 sanctions imposed on Russian companies and individuals have done nothing to stymie Russia’s economy; instead, President Putin has actually thanked the West on several occasions for them as they spurred Russian development. So, as with all those that came before, this next application will be a “bone crushing” own goal.

One-third of Gym readers reside within the Empire. Some may be unaware of this coming act of Congressional Insanity, so this is a warning for you. It’s not just Team Trump that’s dysfunctional; the vast majority of Congress is too, and most of them are millionaires and have no clue how most Americans suffer from their deeds.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/sanction ... the-graham

******

The Real Response ...

... is only coming.


Москва. 8 июня. INTERFAX.RU - Президент России Владимир Путин на предстоящей неделе проведет большое заседание Совета безопасности РФ, в его планах также мероприятия, посвященные Дню медицинского работника. В минувшую среду глава государства в ходе совещания с членами правительства сообщил, что на ближайшем заседании Совбеза обсудит с главой МИД России и представителями силового блока теракты, произошедшие 1 июня в Брянской и Курской областях, в преддверии переговоров в Стамбуле.

Translation: Moscow. June 8. INTERFAX.RU - Russian President Vladimir Putin will hold a major meeting of the Russian Security Council next week, and his plans also include events dedicated to Medical Worker Day.Last Wednesday, the head of state announced at a meeting with members of the government that at the next Security Council meeting he would discuss with the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry and representatives of the security bloc the terrorist attacks that took place on June 1 in the Bryansk and Kursk regions, ahead of the talks in Istanbul.

I reiterate, any strike, especially massive one, like the one which is ongoing right this very moment, requires preparation. What 404 is getting IS NOT a response to terrorist acts. These are strikes which have been planned some time ago. In other words--this is planned combat activity. What the "real" response could be--who cares, we'll know when the time comes. Stay tuned.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/06 ... ponse.html

******

The Silence of the Bears

Alastair Crooke

June 9, 2025

The silence of the bears will soon be ended and we will know more about Russian resolve.

Russia’s leadership is in ‘conclave’ determining its riposte.

Trump has been silent for two days. Unprecedented. In the last days, Ukraine and its facilitators attempted a massive attack on Russia’s strategic nuclear bomber-force; succeeded in collapsing two bridges onto civilian trains heading to Moscow; attacking the Kerch Bridge; and assassinating a Russian general via explosive body bomb.

As Clausewitz noted two centuries ago, the point of military force is to compel an outcome: i.e. that an adversary finally does what is wanted of him. Thus, in respect to military adventures there is need for clarity of thought from the outset. It must have a realisable political objective that has a prospect to be implemented.

What then, was the objective behind these Ukrainian ‘irregular’ attacks? One certainly was demonstrative – PR exercises to say that Ukraine and allied services are still capable of mounting special forces style, innovative operations. And are therefore worthy of continued support. As Colonel Doug Macgregor cautions:

“For the most part it was a PR stunt to try and convey the impression that Ukraine is capable of carrying on the war. Anything you hear from the Western outlets … are probably untrue or at least grossly exaggerated … We damaged ourselves and our relationship – what there is left of it – with Moscow … that’s the real fallout from this”.

Okay. But PR stunts are no strategy, nor do the attacks hold any prospect for a shift in the overall strategic military paradigm. It doesn’t say that the West or Ukraine has suddenly discovered a political strategy towards Russia per se. That doesn’t exist. For the most part, the innumerable western declarations come as a hodge-podge of fantasies.

The second objective however, may indeed have had a clear strategic end-state – and has demonstrated feasibility and the possibility to compel a desired outcome: The various attacks have imposed on Trump the uncomfortable reality that he, as President, does not control U.S. foreign policy. The collective Deep State has just made that plain.

As General Mike Flynn has warned:

“The Deep State is now acting outside of the control of the elected leadership of our nation … These persons in our Deep State are engaged in a deliberate effort to provoke Russia into a major confrontation with the West, including the United States”.

In effect, the likes of Generals Keith Kellogg and Jack Keane, with their adolescent narratives that only through pressure, more pressure and pain will compel Putin (always presumed to be weak) to accept a frozen conflict in the hope that it can obvert from an American defeat in Ukraine.

The British during WW2 similarly believed that the Nazi regime was not strong, and could be overthrown by strategic bombing, intended to bring about the collapse of German society. Today, General Kellogg advocates ‘bombing’ Russia with sanctions – mirroring the British conviction that such tactics ‘must be bad for morale’.

Trump’s advice from his Generals either did not meet the criterion of political realism – because it was based on fantasies of incipient Russian collapse and a hopeless misreading of Russia and its Army. Or perhaps his Advisers, either inadvertently or deliberately, ‘shafted’ Trump and his agenda of normalising relations with Russia.

What will Trump say now to Putin? That he was indeed forewarned (recall his writing just days ago that “bad things – if it were not for me – I mean REALLY BAD things would already have happened to Russia”) and claim that his advisers did not give him the full details; or will he candidly admit that they deceived him? Alternatively, will he take the line that the CIA was merely operating to an old Presidential ‘Finding’ that authorised attacks into the depth of the Russian hinterland?

All such putative answers would spell one thing – that Trump is not in control. That he and his European allies (such as Britain) cannot be trusted.

Either way, Trump’s advisers will have understood that Zelensky and by extension his NATO enablers, were exploiting the SALT/START Treaties’ vulnerability – in order to use concealed drones, hidden in civilian containers, to attack the very bombers covered by USA-Russia treaties: Article XII of the START treaty specifically requires “a display in the open of all heavy bombers within the airbase”. This provision was a confidence building act (visible monitoring) to guard against a surprise ‘first strike’ nuclear attack.

START 1 cut long-range or strategic nuclear arsenals by 30-40 percent. New START slashed accountable deployed strategic arms by another three-quarters. In 2021, Presidents Biden and Putin extended New START until February 2026.

Of course, these unidentified enablers understood the gravity of striking the strategic nuclear force of a major rival nuclear weapons power.

How would the U.S. respond if an adversary (perhaps a non-state actor) launched a strike against strategic long-range nuclear capable bombers in the USA using cheap and easily available drones hidden in containers? We are in a new era of risk – one in which pagers and cell phones can be weaponised as bombs – and of ‘sleeper’ drones that can be remotely activated to attack airfields, either civilian or military.

Larry Johnson has observed that after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour in December 1941, intended to destroy the U.S. aircraft carriers berthed there, the Japanese Admiral Yamamoto reportedly said the following in the aftermath of Japan’s great victory at Pearl Harbour: “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve … We have won a great tactical victory at Pearl Harbour and thereby lost the war”.

The silence of the bears will soon be ended and we will know more about Russian resolve; but a relationship in which Trump is understood to ‘mean what he says, and does what he says’ likely is over. The Russians are furious.

What happens next is unknown.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... -of-bears/

******

Russia Seeks 'Asymmetrical' Response For Strike On Its Nuclear Assets

There is some confusion over Russia's response to the June 1/2 attacks on railway infrastructure and its strategic nuclear forces.

To recap:

On Saturday/Sunday Ukrainian diversion groups used explosives to destroy two Russian railroad bridges in the Kursk and Bryansk region. These bridges were located some 50 kilometer north of the Sumy region frontline. The hits will impact, if only for a short time, the railway bound supply of Russian forces north of Sumy.

One of the bridge explosions destroyed a civil passenger train. Some 10 people were killed and some 100 were wounded. This was likely intended and thereby a terror attack.

On Sunday morning a large scale operation by the Ukrainian secret service managed to attack multiple strategic airfields throughout Russia. Ukrainian sources claimed attacks on five airfields and the destruction of more than 40 strategic bombers.

Current damage assessment confirms attacks on two airfields and the destruction or damaging of up to 10 bombers.

It is very important to distinguish these attacks. While both coincided with negotiations between Ukraine in Russia in Istanbul, and were clearly timed to influence those, the purpose was larger.

The railroad attacks were planned to hinder rearward logistics of Russia's operation in Ukraine's Sumy region. That a civilian train was hit by these was likely seen by the Ukrainian forces as an additional feature but not as a main purpose. Still, it is the mass harm of civilians that make this otherwise permissible attack on a quasi-military target a terrorist act. The Russian side has emphasized this.

The attack on the strategic bombers of Russia's nuclear triad (land based nuclear missiles, submarine based nuclear missiles, air carriers for launching nuclear bombs and missiles) hit at a much higher level. It was a military attack on a strategic military target. Russia's publicly announced doctrine allows for the use of nuclear forces to retaliate for such an attack on its nuclear assets. This independent of the immediate source of the attack.

The attack on the railway bridges were an operation that is typical for British services. It has been reported and is well known that British services have advised and helped the Ukrainians to launch sea drones against Russia in the Black Sea, to cross the Dnieper river in Krinki and in other operations of higher propaganda value.

The Russian Foreign Minister has accused the U.K of direct involvement in the terrorist attack.

Several western experts of U.S. special services believe, as the Russian's do, that the operation against its nuclear forces have a different actor behind them - most likely the CIA. It is unlikely that Ukraine would have been able to identify and target those airfields without the intelligence acquired by U.S. sources. There is also no military benefit for Ukraine to attack Russian air bases far from its territory.

It has been reported that since 2014 the CIA had build some 20 stations in Ukraine from where it operates against Russia. Several high ranking Ukrainian intelligence actors, including the head of its military intelligence service General Budanov, have been trained by the CIA and are actively cooperating with it.

The CIA has a special unit dedicated to long term plans to harm Russia. As the Washington Post once described it:

The warren of cubicles was secured behind a metal door. The name on the hallway placard had changed often over the years, most recently designating the space as part of the Mission Center for Europe and Eurasia. But internally, the office was known by its unofficial title: “Russia House.”
The unit had for decades been the center of gravity at the CIA, an agency within the agency, locked in battle with the KGB for the duration of the Cold War. The department’s prestige had waned after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and it was forced at one point to surrender space to counterterrorism officers.

But Russia House later reclaimed that real estate and began rebuilding, vaulting back to relevance as Moscow reasserted itself. Here, among a maze of desks, dozens of reports officers fielded encrypted cables from abroad, and “targeters” meticulously scoured data on Russian officials, agencies, businesses and communications networks the CIA might exploit for intelligence.


'Russia House' was deeply involved in creating the hoax about Russian interference in U.S. elections. Former nuclear weapon inspector Scott Ritter as well as others have asserted that political control over 'Russia House' is less stringent than desirable.

Another data point for the CIA's involvement was a piece by David Ignatius, its spokesperson at the Washington Post which openly threatened further attacks on Russia's strategic nuclear assets:

Ukraine’s dirty war is just getting started (archived) - David Ignatius / Washington Post

Ukraine has considered a naval version of the sneak-attack tactic it used so effectively on Sunday. The sources said the [Ukrainian intelligence service] SBU weighed sending sea drones hidden in cargo containers to attack ships of Russia and its allies in the North Pacific. But, so far, they apparently have yet to launch these operations.


'Russia House' continues to be busy. Still, even 'Russia House' needs a legal bases to act which usually comes in the form of presidential findings.

The conclusion from this is that the CIA, with the knowledge of the White House, has planned and directed the Ukrainian attack on Russia's strategic air fields.

The different qualities of the two attacks on June 1/2 require different responses. One response, throughout the last days, has come by strong Russian missile and drone attacks against military and military-industrial targets throughout Ukraine.

The Washington Post erred when it headlined:

Ukrainian cities pounded by Russia in retaliation for Sunday drone strike (archived) - Washington Post

The assault appears to be retaliation for Ukraine’s extensive attack on Russia’s bomber fleet on Sunday, targeting air bases across Russia and damaging many nuclear-capable aircraft.
The Russian attacks, by each some 500 missiles and drones over several nights, have obviously been in the plans for some time. They are not very special. Russian sources have explicitly said that these attacks were in response to Ukraine' terrorist attack:

Russian military retaliated against Kiev’s ‘terrorism’ – MOD - RT

The barrage, which included air-, sea-, and land-based missiles as well as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), was a response to recent “terrorist acts” carried out by Kiev, Russia’s Defense Ministry said on Friday.

Ukraine blew up railway bridges in Russia last week, derailing civilian and freight trains and killing at least seven and injuring over 120.
What we have so far seen as Russia's response to the attacks was only related to the terror attack which harmed civilians.

The retaliation for the attack on Russia's strategic nuclear assets has yet to come.

The U.S. knows this:

US Believes Russia Response To Ukraine Attack Not Over Yet: Officials - Reuters

The United States believes that Russian President Vladimir Putin's threatened retaliation against Ukraine over its drone attack last weekend has not happened yet in earnest and is likely to be a significant, multi-pronged strike, US officials told Reuters.
...
The first official said Moscow's attack would be "asymmetrical," meaning that its approach and targeting would not mirror Ukraine's strike last weekend against Russian warplanes.

Russia launched an intense missile and drone barrage at the Ukrainian capital Kyiv on Friday and Russia's Defense Ministry said the strike on military and military-related targets was in response to what it called Ukrainian "terrorist acts" against Russia. But the US officials believe the complete Russian response is yet to come.
...
Putin told President Donald Trump in a telephone conversation on Wednesday that Moscow would have to respond to attack, Trump said in a social media post.

Trump later told reporters that "it's probably not going to be pretty."


Trump claims that the U.S. had not known of the attack on Russia's strategic bombers. It is possible that Trump did not know about it. He may not have been informed to enable him to give a plausible denial. He may also simply lie about it. There is no doubt though in my mind that the U.S. was involved in it.

There is speculation that Russia will respond by attacking government buildings, especially those of the special services, in Kiev.

I doubt that this is a sufficient response for the attack on strategic nuclear assets. The Ukrainians would take a beating by such a strike but the U.S., which is undoubtedly behind the attack, would be left unharmed.

There would be nothing to deter the U.S., or others, to further chip away at Russia's nuclear retaliation capability by, for example, attacking - as Ignatius already announces - the bases of Russia's nuclear submarine fleets.

No. Any response for the attack on Russia's nuclear forces must include a very strong warning to the U.S. to not further walk down that path.

I do not know if the U.S. military still has some B-52 bombers on Diego Garcia. Destroying those would be adequate. Other potential targets are U.S. submarines and their bases. An attack on U.S. personnel that was involved in planing the attack would also be appropriate.

But all such operation could potentially lead to escalation. Especially while a hawkish Senate and blob is pushing against Trump's attempt to reestablish good relation with Russia.

Russia will need something different:

Let’s be honest: repeating slogans like “our response will be success on the battlefield” won’t cut it here. Ukraine’s leadership isn’t acting out of military logic, but emotional desperation. Their calculation is political. So Russia’s response must be political, too – emotionally resonant, unmistakably firm, and, above all, creative.

This doesn’t mean rash escalation, but we can’t rely on the old playbook. Hitting the same military targets again and again achieves little. Striking Ukraine’s energy infrastructure? Done. Launching another missile as a ‘demonstration’? Predictable. Escalating to mass casualties? Unnecessary and, frankly, counterproductive.

So what’s left?

Innovation.

Russia must now think asymmetrically. That might mean a covert action so unexpected that it catches Ukraine completely off guard. Or it could involve striking symbolic targets that shift the psychological balance. The key is to remind Kiev – and its patrons – that nothing they do goes unanswered, and that the cost of provocation will always outweigh the benefit.


You are invited to brainstorm in the comments what kind of operation might those criteria.

One asymmetrical response I can think of would be an attack on British, not U.S. owned, strategic assets. Any hit on Britain would be well deserved anyway. A strike against British nuclear assets would be strong enough to be understood by the U.S. as a severe warning while it would be unlikely to lead to escalation. The Brits are unable to escalate on their own and the U.S. will be unwilling to go there.

The planning for any asymmetrical operation will take a while. It therefore do not expect the Russian response for the attack on its nuclear assets to occur with the next days.

Later this week there will be another meeting of Russia's security council. The revenge for the strike on Russia's strategic assets will certainly be part of its agenda.

Posted by b on June 9, 2025 at 15:38 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/06/r ... .html#more

******

Am I someone's slave?
June 9, 23:04

Image

Yes, because you have no human rights. They have been abolished, and officially.
That is why the Nazi regime is catching people like you and sending you to be slaughtered. With the full approval of the West.
This crap is called "War to the last Ukrainian". This is what Ukrainians, including in this blog, were warned about at the beginning of the war, when it was still customary to laugh at it, saying that it was all Russian propaganda. Now it is not funny. Opportunities to hide from the Nazis in Ukraine are decreasing. The last huts are already occupied.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9889828.html

Google Translator

******

Surveillance is in full swing: which airfields and airbases are under target?
June 9, 2025
Rybar

Image

More than a week has passed since Operation Spider's Web was carried out. Despite this, the activity of the American military satellite group TOPAZ remains - 165 images of 13 air bases in different parts of Russia were taken in a week.

It is clear that the greatest interest on June 1 and 2 was observed in the Olenya base on the Kola Peninsula, but other objects, even extremely remote ones, became the object of research by American intelligence, such as Tiksi and Yelizovo .

What is this connected with?
The first days after the operation, the high intensity was justified by studying the scale of damage from Ukrainian drones. However, later the main goal became monitoring the flights of strategic and transport aviation in different parts of the country.

Thus, the Americans provide fresh data on the presence of cruise missile carriers at certain airfields to the Ukrainian authorities and update information on the number of operational aircraft after the strike.

The intensity (even though some airfields were filmed in maximum detail) is not yet so high as to speak of new strikes. The last time the attack was carried out precisely at the moment of a mass flight of bombers to Olenya and Belaya, which contributed to the operation.

Against this background, a sharp increase in satellite activity was noted. Therefore, it is extremely important to monitor such actions by Western countries in support of the so-called Ukraine and not to lose sight of the characteristic signs.

https://rybar.ru/nablyudenie-idet-vovsy ... priczelom/

Google Translator

*****

Brief Frontline Report – June 9th, 2025
Report by Marat Khairullin with illustrations by Mikhail Popov.
Zinderneuf
Jun 09, 2025
Sumy Buffer Zone

Combat operations to establish a buffer zone in the Sumy Oblast continue.

Image
ЛБС 31.5.2025=Line of Combat Contact May 31st, 2025.

Advanced units of the Russian Armed Forces have reached the outskirts of the settlement of Malaya Korchakovka. Reconnaissance and sabotage activities are underway, and conditions are being prepared for the advancement of the main units.

To the west, in the Tetkino-Novy Put sector, the enemy persists in attempts to break through into Kursk Oblast.

Units of the Ukrainian Armed Forces are particularly active in this area: mainly the 24th Separate Assault Battalion (near the village of Tetkino) and the 425th Separate Assault Regiment (near the village of Novy Put). All enemy attempts are being thwarted by comprehensive firepower from Russian Armed Forces units guarding this section of the state border.

The Ukrainian military command recognizes the severity of the situation and is deploying additional reserves to the Tetkino-Sudzha sector. On the night of 07.06.2025, the enemy moved one of the few remaining Patriot air defense systems in their arsenal to the city of Sumy. Observing the activity of Russian Aerospace Forces, they prepared an ambush.

The enemy’s target was one of our aircraft (Su-35), whose pilot ejected in time and is now safe.

Russian intelligence has identified the location of the American air defense system within a densely populated residential area of the regional center. Amid the crisis on all fronts of the special military operation, the enemy has resorted to terrorist tactics and provocations, deliberately endangering civilians in their border regions by using them as a "human shield."

The entire operation to down the Russian aircraft was designed for this purpose: to draw the attention of the Russian military command to the Patriot missile launcher and force them to strike residential neighborhoods of the city. Against this backdrop, the enemy aims to launch an information campaign in Western media, diverting global attention from the Kyiv regime’s failures in implementing the Istanbul agreements on prisoner exchanges and the repatriation of the deceased.

https://maratkhairullin.substack.com/p/ ... e-9th-2025
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14413
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part V

Post by blindpig » Wed Jun 11, 2025 11:44 am

Serving foreign geopolitical interests
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 11/06/2025

Image

Last May, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio predicted that, at the June summit, NATO member countries would agree to increase defense spending by 5% over the next decade. The 2% requirement is a thing of the past, and Washington is now demanding a rapid increase to at least 3.5%, seeking to prevent the inclusion of items it considers non-military and which could increase security spending with a simple change of columns in a database. In a sense, this is a tug-of-war between European countries and the United States, in which both are demanding that their ally live up to its promise. European countries are offering to increase military spending—for some countries, the 3.5% commitment means doubling defense investment—as a guarantee that Donald Trump will not abandon the Alliance, reduce its presence, or simply forget about its European allies. The United States, for its part, proposes increased spending as a necessary measure for European countries to achieve the strategic autonomy they demand and to be able to effectively support Ukraine as they desire.

In reality, the entire increase in military spending is taking place within NATO, so the Pentagon is aware that it is only about rearmament—in many cases with increased arms purchases from the US military-industrial complex—and not about European strategic autonomy , which is impossible within the Alliance and when European countries are trying at all costs to maintain their ties with Washington. Using the rhetoric of an abuser, Kaja Kallas, head of European Union diplomacy, stated last week that "tough love" from the United States was better—an expression that sometimes devolves into "I killed her because she was mine," but which perfectly reflects Brussels' subordination to the United States.

On February 24, 2022, Russia's invasion of Ukraine accelerated a geopolitical shift that, although already underway, was much more evident, causing an internal realignment within certain blocs and a repositioning of others. 2014, with the continental rupture caused by the Maidan, the Russian reaction in Crimea, and the outbreak of the Donbass war with the anti-terrorist operation through which Ukraine sought to resolve a political problem by military means, had been the starting point for a policy of distancing relations between Berlin and Moscow and rapprochement between Moscow and Beijing. With its decision not to pressure Ukraine to comply with the Minsk agreements as a way to resolve the Donbass conflict and the open refusal of European capitals and Washington to commit to halting NATO's expansion to Russian borders, the ground was paved for the risk of war. Having lost all soft power and with no possibility of negotiating a solution that would hardly have been traumatic—neither the United States nor Germany were in favor of accepting Ukraine into the Alliance, although they were unwilling to offer any promises—Moscow perceived war as its only way out.

The moment Russia recognized the independence of the DPR and LPR, and two days later its tanks crossed the Russian-Ukrainian border, the European Union chose to link its fate to that of the United States, Moscow definitively turned to China, and both began the struggle to attract the Global South. The United States and the European Union did so with warnings, threats, and pressure, demanding that the rest of the world join unilateral sanctions that had not been adopted by the United Nations Security Council. Russia, for its part, revived some of the anti-colonial rhetoric that had given the Soviet Union credibility during the years of European colonial or neocolonial imposition and interference from former metropolises or the United States, and called for an open world that would not return to bloc politics. Of course, it did so while seeking to strengthen its economic relations with the BRICS, especially India, as a measure to avoid the harshest consequences of Western sanctions. The attempt to force countries of the Global South to join its sanctions, which the latter consider illegal, led to the failure of the economic war in the short to medium term. The dream persists, and the EU announced yesterday the beginning of the process to impose its 18th package of sanctions, targeting the banking and energy sectors. Once again, the EU, whose values ​​include free trade, wants to dictate the price at which Russia can sell oil to its customers around the world.

Incredibly, the sanctions announced yesterday by Ursula von der Leyen also include "leaving Nord Stream 1 and 2 behind forever." The explosions of the act of international terrorism, which the countries involved in the investigation seem in no hurry to resolve, were not enough, and European Union sanctions are needed to reiterate Brussels' decision to forgo cheap Russian energy in favor of, for example, American liquefied gas, which is more expensive and has a worse carbon footprint, but ideologically correct and a potential tool for rapprochement with Donald Trump. Isolated from Russia, expelled from Africa, and economically at odds with China, the European Union's only option is the United States, despite Washington's insistence on imposing tariffs on European products and making it clear that the continent is no longer a priority.

For Brussels, everything depends on maintaining its relationship with the United States, even at the cost of economic concessions and political submission, pending a political change in three years. Europe's ability to continue supplying the weapons, ammunition, and intelligence necessary to continue the war in Ukraine also depends on this. This is the justification for the rearmament policy and the geopolitical shift toward irrelevance, subordination, and perhaps disaster. Acting as NATO's political arm, European countries have launched rearmament, warning of the Russian threat. This task is fully engaged by NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, whose statements in recent days complement the EU's sanctions rhetoric. While von der Leyen announces sanctions to "force Russia into peace"—that is, into a peace in which it must accept Ukraine's dictates—Rutte warns of the danger and demands rearmament far beyond the bloc's capabilities. In recent hours, NATO's Secretary General has demanded that member countries increase their air defenses by 400% to "counteract Russia." Curiously, this demand for something that only two countries in Europe are using—Russia and Ukraine—comes at a time when Zelensky is pleading with his allies for more systems and ammunition for their defenses. It should be clear to everyone that the acquisition of air defense systems, primarily from the United States, the main producer, is the necessary step for these weapons to be transferred to kyiv.

"The danger will not disappear even when the war in Ukraine is over," Rutte insisted, focused on consolidating the idea that peace is as dangerous as war. “Rutte says that once there is a ceasefire in Ukraine, ‘the clock will start ticking for NATO’ because, he claims, Russia will be ready to attack in five years. Why Russia, no matter who is in charge, would precipitate its own demise and that of the rest of humanity is a mystery that Rutte and his ilk will never be able to explain,” complained Russian opposition journalist Leonid Ragozin yesterday, who specified, however, that “time is ticking for the weapons industry to secure financing and lay the groundwork for a new Cold War with Russia and China (described by Rutte in his speech as Moscow’s crucial military ally). Because once there is a ceasefire, the nasty pacifists will start talking about terrible things like trade, cultural exchange, open borders, tourism: everything that contributes to a normal life for any normal person, but not for a weapons industry professional.” Avoiding this terrible scenario requires perpetuating the continental divide in economic and cultural terms and creating an armed peace based on the rearmament justified by the war in Ukraine.

Echoing Marco Rubio's demands, Rutte stated yesterday, referring to the United Kingdom, that "if you don't achieve 5% [of GDP in defense spending], you can still have public healthcare and the pension system, but you'd better learn Russian." A statement that has "exasperated" even analysts like Mark Galeotti, who believes there is a Russian threat in Europe, but not one of occupation. "No, the danger of physical occupation of the United Kingdom is not even remotely credible," wrote the Times columnist , demanding that the authorities stop using "implausible and frankly misleading rhetoric" to justify an increase in defense spending that he considers necessary.

It depends on him, for example, whether Ukraine can continue fighting safely as a proxy force for the West in its attempt to keep Russia occupied while rearmament takes place. “I am convinced that every Western politician who wants to fight Russia should first send his own son to the front in Ukraine, to the infantry, where soldiers are most needed. And let him fight with the quantity and quality of weapons that the West has provided,” wrote Ukrainian historian Marta Havryshko, increasingly critical of the militaristic policy of her country and its allies, whose actions imply the continuation of a proxy war in which Western countries wish to continue fighting, but in which they do not want to become directly involved. In other words, European countries, and to a certain extent the United States, which is increasingly less involved in the search for a resolution, wish to continue waging war against Russia, but without getting anywhere near the front lines. Even Starmer and Macron's grand plan to send an armed mission to Ukraine—whether for peacekeeping, deterrence, or simply enough presence to raise national flags and claim the territory for the EU or NATO—to remain a safe distance from the separation line has disappeared from the news.

What hasn't disappeared, at least judging by Volodymyr Zelensky's statements to a Hungarian media outlet, are the demands and pressure on Ukraine. "We didn't mobilize 18- to 24-year-olds, but offered them one-year contracts. I've never talked about this before, but since you asked, I'll tell you what I think, because it's a sensitive issue: I don't think we should mobilize people over 18, as other leaders have suggested," the Ukrainian president stated, adding that "as for sanctions, when Western partners list the reasons why they decided not to impose them, they include the fact that Ukraine hasn't mobilized those over 18." To continue, the war requires not only funding, weapons, ammunition, and intelligence, but also cannon fodder serving economic and geopolitical interests that are generally alien.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/06/11/al-se ... os-ajenos/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
The main points from the statements of D. Peskov, the press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation:

- Contacts with Ukraine on the issue of handing over the bodies of the Ukrainian Armed Forces servicemen to it continue, Moscow expects Kiev to fulfill the Istanbul agreements;

- A new round of consultations between Russia and the United States will be carried out through diplomatic agencies;

- The dialogue between Moscow and Washington continues, but one should not expect quick results;

- If necessary, Russia will be ready to provide services for the removal of excess nuclear material from Iran;

- Lowering the price ceiling for Russian oil will not contribute to stabilization on the market, but Moscow knows how to minimize the consequences of such decisions.

***

Colonelcassad
The lack of compromise on the part of Kiev will only lead to greater territorial losses for Ukraine, Medinsky said in an interview with the WSJ:

Also from his statements:

- the conflict deepens the differences between Russia and Ukraine, so Moscow wants to end it as quickly as possible;

- Russia wants peace, but if Ukraine continues to be guided by the national interests of other countries, then Moscow will be forced to react;

- it is impossible to wage a long war with Russia, it wins protracted conflicts, such as the 21-year war with Sweden;

- the West's mistake is that it perceives the Ukrainian conflict as similar to the conflict between England and France - two countries with their own history and culture.
Russia and Ukraine are essentially one people, they are destined to be close allies.

(And I remember the woman whose parents had brought her here from Odessa as a child saying with great vehemence, "We are all Russians!")

Google Translator

******

WAITING FOR TRUMPO

Image
By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot (1953, lead image) was a serious comedy. It ends without the outcome the characters had been waiting for so they decide to hang themselves, but they can’t find enough rope. “Well, shall we go? Estragon says to Vladimir in the concluding dialogue of the play. “Yes, let’s go”, Vladimir replies. “They do not move” is the last line in the script. Vladimir was either French or Irish and is not related to any Russian you know.

Waiting for Trumpo (2025) is a farce in which the principal character lacks the power for the ending he says he is waiting for. He has plenty of rope, though, using it to hang everyone else and leave him the last man standing. He too doesn’t move.

President Vladimir Putin told President Donald Trump on June 4 that he is waiting for him to show he is moving the Kiev regime to sign the terms of the Russian Memorandum — publicly released in Istanbul on June 2 — starting with the cessation of fresh US and NATO military deliveries to Kiev and the provision of the intelligence on which the next round of Ukrainian attacks depends.

Sources in Moscow confirm that the drone attack of June 1 on the Russian nuclear bomber fleet has shortened the waiting time Putin has agreed with the General Staff, the intelligence agencies, and Foreign Ministry to give Trump. In return for shortening this interval, the Defense Ministry has announced it is restricting its retaliatory strikes in the meantime to the tactical level. “Last night,” the Ministry reported on June 10, “the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation launched a massive strike with high-precision long-range air-launched weapons at one of the airfields of the AFU [Armed Forces of Ukraine] tactical aviation aircraft in the Dubno area of the Rivne region. This is one of the retaliatory strikes against the terrorist attacks on Russian military airfields committed by the Kiev regime.”

The Defense Ministry waited nine days before saying this much.

On June 6, in summary of battlefield operations for the preceding week, the Ministry had reported: “Last night [June 5], in response to the terrorist acts of the Kiev regime, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation launched a massive strike with high-precision long-range air, sea and land-based weapons, as well as unmanned aerial vehicles, at design bureaus, enterprises for the production and repair of weapons and military equipment of Ukraine, workshops for the assembly of unmanned aerial vehicles, flight personnel training centres, and as well as warehouses of weapons and military equipment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The objective of the strike has been achieved. All designated targets have been hit.”

Two days before, in their telephone conversation of June 4, Putin had agreed with Trump to overlook US involvement in the attack on the nuclear triad and avoid triggering Section 19( c) of Russia’s nuclear deterrence strategy which provides for Russian nuclear response to “actions by an adversary affecting elements of critically important state or military infrastructure of the Russian Federation, the disablement of which would disrupt response actions by nuclear forces”.

Renaming the Kiev regime a terrorist organisation and the attacks on strategic Russian targets as terrorist actions is another Russian waiting move. Delay of strategic retaliation – tactical nuclear targeting, Oreshnik launch with non-nuclear warheads – is another waiting move.

Trump replied on June 6. Asked if as a result of the attack on the bomber airfields, he is “worried that there might be a nuclear breakout with Russia, Ukraine? “ Trump replied: “I don’t. I hope not. I hope not. I think it’s a war that would’ve never happened. If I were president, that wouldn’t have happened. I certainly hope not.” He also implied he had accepted that Putin’s retaliation would be limited. The Ukrainians “gave, they gave, uh, Putin a reason to go in and bomb the hell out of ’em last night. That’s the thing I didn’t like about it. When I saw it, I said, “Here we go. Now it’s gonna be a strike.’”

According to the interpretation in Moscow, Trump was also allowing the Ukrainians, their NATO allies, and their US advisors to continue their strategy of escalation in order to resist the Russian end-of-war terms.

Since then Trump has declared war on California Governor Gavin Newsom, the front-running presidential candidate for the Democratic Party. Over the weekend at Camp David, Trump said “we have meetings with various people about very major subjects. Now we thought we’d do it at Camp David. There’s probably better security there than anyplace. We’ll be meeting with a lot of people, including generals, as you know, and admirals.” He took Secretary of State and National Security Adviser Marco Rubio with him to Camp David.

Russian sources say they are expecting to be told what these meetings decided on the Russian Memorandum. They are also expecting Putin will call a meeting this week to decide the consensus of officials, commanders, and advisors on what will happen next. “We have to wait,” one source said privately, “and see what pressure the Security Council wants to apply before the next [Istanbul] meeting.”

Leading Moscow military blogger Boris Rozhin reports the retaliatory strikes so far are “not yet a response. Soon there will be a meeting of the Security Council where the ongoing response will be discussed…If the pace [of retaliatory strikes] continues, we can expect strikes on the critical nodes…of the central and eastern [electrical] power systems of Ukraine.”

“There is time,” the confidential Moscow source says, “for Trump to deliver the Ukrainian signature on the Memorandum in Istanbul by the end of the month. If he fails and Zelensky does not sign it, then I think we will see a massive escalation. In the meantime, pay less attention to the daily news from the front – at least until one or two fronts collapse and there is [Russian] breakthrough in substantial numbers.”

The Russian Security Council routinely meets at the end of each week unless the President is travelling. The last recorded Security Council meeting was on May 30; there was no meeting last week. Instead, there was the June 4 session with government officials at which Vladimir Medinsky reported on the Istanbul talks and discussion followed on the options for responding to the “terrorist” attacks.

The meeting decided, as Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recommended: “despite the serious criminal provocations that have taken place in recent days, I believe it is important not to fall into the trap of these provocations, which are clearly designed to derail the talks and continue arms deliveries from European nations.”

Image
At the June 4 meeting, President Putin listens while Vladimir Medinsky reports (centre of screen); below him on right is Foreign Minister Lavrov. Source: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/77099

Following immediately after that meeting and decision, Putin and Trump spoke by telephone; for analysis of what they said, read this.

For reminder, here are Sections I, II and III of the Russian Memorandum presented in Istanbul on June 2; altogether, there are 31 terms.

Image
Image
Image
Image
Source: https://www.interfax.ru/russia/1029172

Returning from Camp David on Sunday, Trump told reporters his priority now is his war in California on Governor Newsom: “I would do it [arrest Newsom] if I were Tom [Homan, White House Executive Associate Director of Enforcement and Removal Operations]. I think he’s [Homan] great. Gavin [Newsom] likes the publicity, but I think it [arrest] would be a great thing… The people that are causing the problem are professional agitators. They’re insurrectionists. They’re bad people. They should be in jail.”

As he spoke, Trump had already ordered units of US Marines to leave Camp Pendleton and begin to deploy in Los Angeles.

https://johnhelmer.net/waiting-for-trumpo/#more-91824

*******

Brief Frontline Report – June 10th, 2025
Report by Marat Khairullin with illustrations by Mikhail Popov.
Zinderneuf
Jun 10, 2025
South Donetsk Direction

On the southern sector of the Donetsk axis, activity has intensified in the area of the village of Alekseevka. More than a month has passed since the defeat of a large area of the Armed Forces of Ukraine defensive zone in Andreevka-Konstantinopol-Ulakhly. However, westward movement was halted near the village of Alekseevka.

Image
ЛБС 31.10.2024=Line of Combat Contact October 31st, 2024. ЛБС 01.01.2025=Line of Combat Contact January 1st, 2025. ЛБС 01.02.2025=Line of Combat Contact February 1st, 2025. ЛБС 01.3.2025=Line of Combat Contact March 1st, 2025. Продвижение после предыдущей сводки=Progress since the previous summary. Граница областей=Oblast Border*.

Alekseevka is a large village (approximately 1,200 residents) located on the right bank of the Volchya River, opposite the village of Bogatyr (under Russian Armed Forces control). The terrain in this sector is abundant with natural obstacles and is well-suited for organizing defensive positions, which the enemy has exploited. The Volchya River valley and its banks are carved with ravines and gullies. Deep within the defensive lines, on the western outskirts of the village, lies the commanding height of 166.1. To the west, a series of settlements—Dachnoe, Yalta, Zaporozhye, and Filiya—have been prepared as defensive zones and interconnected into a single fortified area, with flanks secured by the Volchya River and its tributaries: the Solena, Mokrye Yaly, and Kamenka rivers. This is the last in-depth, well-developed fortified zone on the border between the DPR and Dnepropetrovsk Oblast, the boundary of which partially follows the course of the Volchya River.

The village of Alekseevka previously served as the command post for the entire AFU grouping in the Kurakhovo-Komar direction.

The dismantling of the last AFU defensive zone on the operational-strategic Maryinka-Kurakhovo-Komar axis has now begun. This stronghold secured the right flank of the AFU grouping, from which they had planned to launch a piercing strike from the southwest into DPR territory in 2022.

Today, our heroic defenders are finishing the destruction of this hornet’s nest. Reports are coming in of clearing in Alekseevka, with the enemy beginning to withdraw. On their heels, advanced Russian assault groups have reached the outskirts of the village of Zeleny Kut.

Simultaneously, pressure is being applied from the village of Otradnoe along the highway to Komar, as well as an advance along the left bank of the Mokrye Yaly River from the village of Fyodorovka toward Komar. To the north, units of the 90th Guards Tank Division are completing the encirclement of the village of Orekhovo. On the map, the wedges driven from four directions into this heavily fortified AFU defensive node are clearly visible.

In an attempt to reinforce this sector, the AFU command has begun withdrawing reserves from the Zaporozhye axis.

To our defenders—strength, patience, and victory!

https://maratkhairullin.substack.com/p/ ... -june-10th

******

Russia’s Arrival In Dnipropetrovsk Puts Ukraine In A Dilemma
Andrew Korybko
Jun 10, 2025

Image

It’s very difficult to imagine how Ukraine can prevent any further Russian advances after this.

The Russian Ministry of Defense announced on Sunday that their forces had entered Ukraine’s Dnipropetrovsk Region, which Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed is part of Putin’s buffer zone plan. This was foreseen as early as late August once the Battle of Pokrovsk began but has been achieved even without capturing that strategic fortress town. Russian forces simply went around it after breaking through the southern Donbass front. This development puts Ukraine in a dilemma.

It’ll now have to simultaneously fortify the Dnipropetrovsk front together with the southern Kharkov and northern Zaporozhye ones in case Russia uses its new position to launch offensives into any of those three. This could put serious strain on the Ukrainian Armed Forces as they’re already struggling to prevent a major breakthrough in Sumy Region from Kursk. Coupled with depleting manpower and questions about continued US military-intelligence aid, this might be enough to collapse the frontlines.

To be sure, that scenario has been bandied about many times over the past more than 1,200 days, but it nowadays appears tantalizingly closer than ever. Observers also shouldn’t forget that Putin told Trump that he’ll respond to Ukraine’s strategic drone strikes earlier this month, which could combine with the abovementioned two factors to achieve this long-desired breakthrough. Of course, it might just be a symbolic demonstration of force, but it could also be something more significant as well.

Ukraine’s best chances of preventing this are for the US to either get Russia to agree to freeze the frontlines or to go on another offensive. The first possibility could be advanced by the carrot-and-stick approach of proposing a better resource-centric strategic partnership than has already been offered in exchange on pain of imposing crippling secondary sanctions on its energy clients (specifically China and India with likely waivers for the EU) and/or doubling down on military-intelligence aid if it still refuses.

As for the second, the 120,000 troops that Ukraine has assembled along the Belarusian border according to President Alexander Lukashenko last summer could either cross that frontier and/or one of Russia’s internationally recognized frontiers. Objectively speaking, however, both possibilities only stand a slim chance of success: Russia has made it clear that it must achieve more of its goals in the conflict before agreeing to any ceasefire while its success in pushing Ukraine out of Kursk bodes ill for other invasions.

The likelihood of Ukraine cutting its losses by agreeing to more of Russia’s demands for peace is nil. Therefore, it might inevitably opt, whether in lieu of the aforesaid scenarios or in parallel with one or both of them, to intensify its “unconventional operations” against Russia. This refers to assassinations, strategic drone strikes, and terrorism. All that will do, however, is provoke more (probably outsized) conventional retaliation from Russia and thus painfully delay Ukraine’s seemingly inevitable defeat.

With an eye towards the endgame, it appears as though an inflection point is about to be reached or already has been in the sense of irreversibly shifting the military-strategic dynamics in Russia’s favor. It’s very difficult to imagine how Ukraine can extricate itself from this dilemma. All signs point to this being impossible, though the conflict has already surprised observers on both sides before, so it can’t be ruled out. Nevertheless, it’s a far-fetched scenario, and it’s more likely that Ukraine’s official defeat is nigh.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/russias- ... ropetrovsk

*****

The Pelle Neroth Taylor Show/The Pulse: an interview

Over the past couple of years, I have on occasion been interviewed by one end or another branch of the TNT radio network which appears to operate in both the UK and in Australia. My latest rendez-vous with those folks was last week when I was given 30 minutes on the Pelle Neroth Taylor Show (The Pulse).

Our chat covered my new book War Diaries. The Russia-Ukraine War, 2022-2023 and how it complements other volumes dealing with the war such as Scott Horton’s Unprovoked. We discussed in particular what the failed peace negotiations of March-April 2022 should tell us about the chances of current peace talks in Istanbul succeeding. We discussed the reasons why Russia launched its Special Military Operation in February 2022 – both those that are best known, meaning the military strategic reasons, and those which were promoted most consistently to the Russian public, namely the obligation to defend their fellow Russian-speakers in the Donbas from an imminent invasion by Ukrainian armed forces that would have led to mass ethnic cleansing if not to outright genocide. We also discussed in this interview the Bucha massacre that was a false flag operation engineered by MI6. And finally we talked about the recent revenge attacks by the Russians in response to terror and other provocations by the Ukrainians.



https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2025/06/10/ ... interview/

******

On USAID's Role in Overthrowing Yanukovych
June 10, 15:28

Image

On USAID's Role in Overthrowing Yanukovych

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene:
During the Euromaidan, the agency spent billions of dollars supporting initiatives aimed at destabilizing the pro-Russian government of Yanukovych. In an attempt to bring Ukraine closer to the West, USAID funded NGOs and media outlets -- nine out of ten of Ukraine's largest media outlets receive money directly from the agency. Mr. Roman, should American taxpayers be paying for propaganda?

USAID Administrator Greg Roman:
If it's pro-American propaganda, then yes. But if it's support for another, anti-American regime, then no.

https://www.brighteon.com/cb1af336-a9e4 ... e2c0c7be2a - zinc + video

No one actually denies the fact that the democratically elected regime of Yanukovych was overthrown with American money. Except for alternatively gifted characters.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9890820.html

Construction of shelters at air bases in the southwest of the Russian Federation. May-June 2025
June 10, 13:02

Image

And more about aircraft shelters. The enemy has posted satellite images of airfields in southwestern Russia. All the images show recently built aircraft shelters at the airfields. The work is systematic.

Image

Image

Image

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9890564.html

(Other images at link but you get the idea...)

Strikes on Kyiv. 10.06.2025
June 10, 21:06

Image

Strikes on Kyiv. 10.06.2025

The night strike on June 10 on Kiev ( https://t.me/rt_russian/244096 ) was a logical continuation of a whole series of massive attacks that in recent days have covered not only the capital, but also most of the regions of Ukraine. The first wave of Geraniums and decoy drones was launched on the evening of June 9 and soon grew into a full-fledged complex operation that lasted most of the night. A significant number of modernized Geraniums and Iskander OTRK missiles were used in the strike on Kiev. The Ukrainian Air Force air defense acted atypically sluggishly - the missiles heading for the Zhulyany airport passed without interference, as did a significant number of drones that reached their targets within the city.

Image

According to preliminary data, fuel tanks and warehouses in the area of ​​the Zhulyany airport were hit, and the air defense systems positions were probably also hit. Apparently, another strike was carried out on the industrial complex of the Artem plant, one of the key points of the Ukrainian military-industrial complex. As in previous cases, damage from falling debris from downed drones was noted: the facades and roofs of civilian buildings were damaged.

Image

The mechanics of the strikes fully confirm the line of official statements ( https://russian.rt.com/ussr/news/149082 ... -udar-kiev ) of the Russian Ministry of Defense: the targets remain exclusively military and industrial infrastructure facilities. It is curious that against the backdrop of this strike, strange statements are also recorded that the Ukrainian Armed Forces have begun to save on anti-aircraft missiles. According to rumors, the commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Oleksandr Syrsky, has banned the use of anti-aircraft missiles against drones, concentrating the remaining ammunition on intercepting missiles. If this information is confirmed, this will be another sign of the growing pressure on Ukraine's air defense and its wear and tear with the help of much cheaper drones.

Image

This, in turn, confirms that the Russian military industry is currently on the rise: 200 to 300 drones are launched in Ukraine per day, with a peak of up to 450. Western military analysts predict that by the end of August, Russia will reach an average daily rate of 500 drones. And this is not the limit. The peak of serial production is ahead.

Image

The characteristics of the drones are also changing. If the Gerani ( https://russian.rt.com/russia/article/1 ... 23-novinki ) of 2022 were actually copies of the Iranian Shahed 136, then the 2025 version is a completely different generation. The speed and power of the warhead have been increased, maneuverability and noise immunity of communication channels have been improved. All this directly affects the accuracy and stability of operation. The night strike on Kiev clearly demonstrated this: the hits are clear, the strikes are extremely accurate. ( https://t.me/rt_russian/244091 )

Image

And most importantly, this is not the end. The attacks from June 6 to 10 only marked the beginning of a new wave. In the coming days, an equally intense series of combined strikes is expected, using Kinzhal, Iskander, Onyx and X-series cruise missiles, in combination with massive drone attacks. Apparently, this time Russia's response will not be limited to a single action. It will be systemic — and, judging by the strikes on June 10, quite noticeable for Ukraine.

(c) Specially for Russia Today

https://t.me/+-M-swOror1s1ODRi - zinc

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9891682.html

Ukraine received frozen assets from Russia
June 11, 13:13

Image

Ukraine has finally received frozen assets from Russia.
A total of 1,212 bags were handed over from refrigerated trucks located on the border.
Russia has agreed to give up another 4,788 bags as part of the asset transfer.

Image

The funniest thing is that the Nazi clowns in Kiev said that the frozen assets were obtained as a result of great efforts, while they should have come a week ago and simply picked them up from the border. The case with the dead at the border was becoming completely toxic, so they decided to pick them up, but now they are thinking about how not to pay their families for them.

In the West they write that the Russian Federation has up to 40,000 killed Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers in a frozen state. So 6,000 is certainly not the limit.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9892849.html

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply