Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 12/19/2024

“Supporting Ukraine right now is not just a moral obligation. It is also a strategic imperative. The world is watching. Our friends – and even more so our enemies – will be watching closely to see how we maintain our support for Ukraine. It has to be unwavering,” Ursula von der Leyen wrote on Wednesday. The President of the European Commission, one of the faces of the political faction that seeks to continue the war until the final defeat of the Russian Federation, was referring in that tweet to the speech given before the European Parliament. December is a month of summaries of the year and of evaluation of the last twelve months and, on this occasion, the countries and institutions of the European Union have even more concerns than a year ago. Increasing funding in view of the possibility of a decrease in the American contribution is the main task, so, as can be seen daily from the headlines and official statements, it is necessary to raise the level of alert of a major war or the danger of a possible Ukrainian defeat to justify the status quo .
The EU is also facing the fatigue of a war that even Ukraine admits cannot be won by military means today - Kiev does not lose hope of achieving a sufficiently striking success against Russia for its allies to believe in an impossible victory again - and which affects both the populations of the member countries and the Ukrainian population. For the first time, polls show a majority in favour of stopping the war even if the agreement implies territorial concessions. This is a return to the situation before the Russian invasion, when the majority of the Ukrainian population was in favour of complying with the Minsk agreements for the reintegration of Donbass in exchange for the political and economic guarantees implied by the roadmap agreed in the Belarusian capital in February 2015. This was one of the reasons for Volodymyr Zelensky's overwhelming electoral victory in the 2019 presidential elections when, promising dialogue and compromise, he countered Petro Poroshenko's bellicose speech. At that time, as during the seven long years of negotiations linked to the Minsk roadmap, there was no support or pressure from the European Union to advance the peace process. Once its main driving force, Angela Merkel, left her post as Chancellor in Germany, there was absolute disinterest in the only peace agreement ever signed in this war. Only on the eve of the Russian intervention, when it was already too late, did Olaf Scholz resort to the peace agreement again to try to achieve a last-minute agreement to avoid the Russo-Ukrainian war: compliance with the Minsk agreements and security guarantees despite maintaining neutrality to prevent invasion.
Then, as now, the aim was not to prevent the spread of the war or to close the frozen, ignored and forgotten conflict in Donbass, where the European Union had seen no problem with the non-payment of pensions to the most vulnerable population, but to weaken, wear down or even defeat a historical opponent. kyiv, Washington, London and most of the capitals of the European Union agreed on this, with the obvious exception of Germany, which had part of its economy at stake. As he would later do, Chancellor Scholz had warned that the already completed Nord Stream-2 would not come into operation in the event of a Russian invasion of Ukraine. In these almost three years, the voluntary rejection of cheap Russian energy - ties described by its allies as a burden, but which have been one of the bases of the competitiveness of German industry - has made it possible to see that the sanctions on the Russian energy sector were also directed against Germany. Compromises and political considerations prevailed over economic interests, and despite initial doubts and certain traces of his pacifist past, Olaf Scholz succumbed to pressure and made Germany Ukraine's second largest military supplier, only to resist pressure on the issue of Taurus missiles. Berlin would not send missiles capable of reaching Moscow, the chancellor promised, a promise he has kept despite the demands of Ukraine, his allies and opponents, who circulated images of the days of long hair and bell-bottoms when the current chancellor crossed the iron curtain to participate in meetings - perfectly public and well-known - in the GDR. The campaign did not work as a measure of discredit and was completely unnecessary considering that the economic conditions were serious and explicit enough to blow up the government coalition and sink the three ruling parties in the polls, awaiting the victory of the CDU in the early elections in February.
The German case is paradigmatic. Unlike Macron, who held a six-hour meeting with Vladimir Putin, Olaf Scholz made a stop in Moscow to cover up the case and be able to claim that he had tried to convince the Russian president, but his most serious call was to Ukraine, not Russia. Zelensky rejected his offer and Berlin aligned itself with the rest of the European and Atlantic countries to prevent the fall of kyiv, did not support the Istanbul process that could have stopped the Russian-Ukrainian war in its initial phase and did not even protest when it became clear that it was not one of its enemies but one of its allies who had blown up the Nord Stream. Germany has also adapted to other types of changes, such as the shift of power in the European Union towards the Baltic countries and Poland, ideologically closer to London and Washington than to Brussels. The state that until recently was the economic engine of the European Union and its main continental power has been treated as the weakest link, the state to be reproached for its common (economic) past with the Russian Federation, to be constantly demanded for more military supplies and to be condemned for its recent – and more than timid – diplomatic opening. Olaf Scholz said, after being publicly censured by Volodymyr Zelensky and all kinds of insults, that he would try to contact Moscow again to push for a resolution of the war favourable to Ukraine. However, such contact has not taken place and is unlikely to take place before the chancellor leaves office. Scholz no longer has the time, and possibly the will, to use an attempt at peace as an electoral calling card. The continuation of the war is too important to be jeopardised for electoral reasons.
In these three years of war, Ukraine and its European and North American allies have demonised from the start China's negotiation proposals, Lula da Silva's initiative and the attempt at diplomatic opening by several African countries led by South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. Until Viktor Orbán's trip to Moscow in 2024 on a personal and propagandistic initiative that was not even accompanied by a concrete political proposal, all diplomatic openings to try to achieve a negotiation have come from the global south. The Brazilian president's political gamble of negotiation was rejected in a particularly humiliating way, including a stand-off at the G7, and no progressive leader has dared to follow his path. This has left open for the populist right, mainly Orbán and Trump, the monopoly on the language of diplomacy.
The European Union faces Trump's arrival with a composition that has shifted to the right and towards the most belligerent countries on the continent, with an overrepresentation of the Baltic countries that translates into control of diplomacy and defence policy. In 2022, Brussels chose subordination to the United States as a way of guaranteeing its security. It then shared with the White House the same objectives in Ukraine and also the way to achieve them. Now, with Donald Trump as the person with the greatest interest in achieving a ceasefire and willingness to cross the only red line in this war, diplomacy, Brussels is trying to adapt at forced marches to the fact that Europe is not in the interest of the future president of the United States. It is not pacifism that moves Trump and his team, made up of hawks and ex-military, but the need to focus on the political and economic scenario of the president, which is no longer Europe, but Asia-Pacific. Trump's first term in office demanded that European countries comply with the NATO-mandated investment of 2% of GDP in defence, and there is now talk of 3-4% on a voluntary basis. The need to maintain the favour of Washington's ally forces Brussels to adapt to Trump's methods, which are not particularly diplomatic and which denote the loss of power of the former European powers, a secondary theatre in a cold war in which they are no longer protagonists.
With no interest in the future of Ukraine or Zelensky and with much to gain from achieving peace – his rival Obama won a Nobel Peace Prize, which Trump is likely to aspire to – Donald Trump and his team have made it clear that achieving a ceasefire is one of their priorities. It is not about abandoning Ukraine, but about achieving the best possible conditions, even if kyiv has to accept a compromise. The plan does not exist and it will not be until January when Keith Kellogg, the general in charge of managing the conflict for the White House, makes an “exploratory mission” trip to kyiv and, perhaps, since the general has shown himself “open to the possibility”, also to Moscow. Obviously, the timing makes it impossible for a negotiation to take place even before Trump’s inauguration, as the then candidate commented. However, the constant references to ceasefire, negotiation and peace, which have become a daily routine, are an important element of pressure on European countries, which are looking for ways to increase their contribution in order to prevent a possible reduction in US military funding from forcing Ukraine to violate its most sacred rule: to negotiate without being in a position to dictate the terms. Hence the need for Europe to raise its rhetoric and to once again insist on linking its own security with the outcome of the Russo-Ukrainian war.
Continuing the war to weaken and try to defeat Russia is the priority, but it cannot come at the cost of causing acrimony in the most important relationship, that between Brussels and the White House, even if it is run by someone like Donald Trump. In an appearance on CBS ’s Sunday political show Face the Nation , the future US national security adviser seemed overwhelmed by the expressions of appreciation and phone calls from political leaders that the president-elect is receiving. European countries received an express mention in that interview, with Mike Waltz stating that “the Secretary General of NATO came here to Mar-a-Lago and is talking about Europeans taking a bigger role, whether on the ground or otherwise, after this conflict is over, and that is exactly what President Trump has been asking for.” In addition to increasing annual military spending far beyond what Trump demanded, European countries are offering the United States a significant increase in their military assistance to Ukraine to reduce the burden borne by Washington and are also offering to pay for, equip and manage the day after the conflict. As has already been published in all major media, it would be an armed peacekeeping mission that European countries want to send to Ukraine and that would mean sending troops from NATO countries to a de facto border with Russia, a mission that the United States could support from a distance, but in which it would not participate. In other words, the conflict would be in the hands of a European Union heading towards the abyss led by the most belligerent sectors that have not hesitated to use the war to recover their obsessions, hatreds and revenges of the past. A militarized Europe, in need of military equipment to be purchased from the world's main market, the United States, is in the interest of Washington, which has always tried to keep the continent divided, making it impossible to create the feared Berlin-Moscow axis as a first step towards extending to Beijing.
Donald Trump hasn't even begun to pressure his allies yet, but he's already getting exactly what he wants from them.
https://slavyangrad.es/2024/12/19/hacia-el-abismo/
Google Translator
*****
From Cassad's telegram account:
Colonelcassad
"Peacekeepers? Without Russia's consent? No. Participants in the conflict? Welcome to Hell" (c)
Actually, Putin's comment on the proposals to introduce NATO "peacekeepers" to Ukraine after the end of hostilities. This is unacceptable for Russia.
Regarding the negotiations.
1. Russia is ready to negotiate on Ukraine without preconditions.
2. The negotiations must be based on the Istanbul Agreements.
3. They must a priori take into account the realities on the ground (i.e. minus 4 regions, in addition to Crimea).
4. Russia will talk to Zelensky only if he goes to the elections and gains legitimacy.
5. Russia will negotiate only with the legitimate leadership of Ukraine.
***
Colonelcassad
— Units of the North force group in the Kharkov direction defeated the armed formations of the mechanized brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the territorial defence brigade in the areas of the settlements of Zolochiv and Volchansk in the Kharkov region. The enemy lost more than 100 servicemen, five armoured combat vehicles, 13 cars and two 122-mm howitzers D-30.
— Units of the West force group improved the tactical situation, defeated the manpower and equipment of the mechanized, ranger, assault brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the territorial defence brigade in the areas of the settlements of Monachinovka, Kutkovka, Dvurechnaya, Lozovaya in the Kharkov region, Novoegorovka in the Luhansk People's Republic and Terny in the Donetsk People's Republic. Repulsed two counterattacks of the enemy assault units.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 460 servicemen, six pickups, a 155-mm self-propelled artillery unit "Bogdana", a 122-mm self-propelled artillery unit "Gvozdika" and two 122-mm howitzers D-30. An ammunition depot was destroyed.
- Units of the "Southern" group of forces took up more advantageous positions, defeated the formations of two mechanized, airmobile, mountain assault brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and two territorial defense brigades in the areas of the settlements of Chasov Yar, Reznikovka, Zvanovka, Seversk and Fedorovka of the Donetsk People's Republic.
The enemy's losses amounted to 315 servicemen, two armored personnel carriers, including an M113 armored personnel carrier made in the USA, an armored combat vehicle, two cars, a 155-mm American M777 howitzer, a 122-mm self-propelled artillery unit "Gvozdika" and a 122-mm howitzer D-30. Two field ammunition depots were destroyed.
- Units of the "Center" group of forces continued to advance deep into the enemy's defense, defeated the manpower and equipment of three mechanized brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and two territorial defense brigades in the areas of the settlements of DZERZHINSK, PESCHANOYE, ZARYA, SHCHERBINOVKA and KATERINOVKA of the Donetsk People's Republic. Repulsed 12 counterattacks of the armed formations of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
The enemy lost up to 520 servicemen, a Cossack combat armored vehicle, seven cars, a 152 mm Msta-B howitzer, a 152 mm D-20 gun, and two 122 mm D-30 howitzers.
— Units of the Vostok group of forces, as a result of successful offensive actions, liberated the settlements of Zelenovka and Novy Komar of the Donetsk People's Republic. Formations of the mountain assault brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the territorial defense brigade, and the national guard brigade were defeated in the areas of the settlements of Bogatyr, Velyka Novosyolka, Zelenoe Pole, and Vremevka of the Donetsk People's Republic. The enemy counterattack was repelled.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 175 servicemen, an infantry fighting vehicle, three cars, a Polish-made 155-mm self-propelled artillery mount "Krab", two 152-mm self-propelled artillery mounts "Akatsiya" and a 122-mm howitzer D-30. An electronic warfare station was destroyed.
— Units of the "Dnepr" force grouping inflicted losses on the manpower and equipment of the mechanized, mountain assault brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the territorial defense brigade in the areas of the populated areas of Kamenskoye, Nesteryanka in the Zaporizhia region, Antonovka and Sadovoe in the Kherson region. They repelled a counterattack by the enemy assault group.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 60 servicemen, a car, two 152-mm D-20 guns and a launcher of the US-made HIMARS multiple launch rocket system. An electronic warfare station was destroyed.
In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the following have been destroyed: 650 aircraft, 283 helicopters, 38,064 unmanned aerial vehicles, 590 anti-aircraft missile systems, 19,844 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 1,502 multiple launch rocket system combat vehicles, 19,822 field artillery guns and mortars, and 29,326 units of special military vehicles.
https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin
Google Translator
*****
Brief report from the front on December 17, 2024
Uspenovka in semi-envelopment, while the expansion into Pokrovsk from the south continues! Report by Marat Khairullin with illustrations by Mikhail Popov.
Zinderneuf
Dec 18, 2024
In the Velikaya Novosyolka (Velyka Novosilka) area, Russian forces continue to encircle the Vremevka (Vremivka) salient. Attacks are underway on Ukrainian Armed Forces facilities in Neskuchnoe, Vremevka, and, of course, in Velikaya Novosyolka, where our units have already entered its eastern and southern outskirts. At the same time, the Russian Armed Forces began to cut through this salient in the Storozhevoe area, where, from the recently captured section of the road between Makarovka and Storozhevoe, after forcing the river, they began to move in the direction of the dominant height 178.3, Mogila Storozhevaya (now it is called Babya Gora) (Могила Сторожевая on the map, see note at the end of the article), from the southeast. Earlier, our forces had already reached the heights located west of the Mokrye Yaly River, north of this hill. These advances by our units formed a kind of pocket with a rather narrow exit from it for the Ukrainian Armed Forces located in the Makarovka and Storozhevoe area. And north of Storozhevoe, the distance between our forward positions is just over two kilometers, which allows us to keep the enemy forces here under fire control.

(Map key: ЛБС 31.10.2024=Line of Combat Contact October 31st, 2024. ЛБС 30.11.2024=Line of Combat Contact November 30th, 2024)
In the Kurakhovsky pocket area, the Russian Armed Forces continue to worsen the enemy's position in the course of developing offensive actions, creating threats to the most important nodes of its defense in this area.
The Russian Defense Ministry officially announced the liberation of another settlement - Annovka (Hannivka).
In the Zelenovka area, Russian units have expanded control both in the settlement itself and are consolidating along the river bank to the north. Establishing full control in this area will make it possible to attack in the direction of the settlements of Ulakly and Razliv, the loss of which would be catastrophic for the enemy. In the settlement of Konstantinopolskoye (Kostyantynopolske), the Russian army took control of all residential buildings and reached the farms located north of the settlement and the machine yard and agricultural enterprise in the west of the village.
In the Uspenovka area, our soldiers are finishing clearing a large stronghold located at the entrance on the southern bank of the Sukhie Yaly River. Of the entire "Uspenovka pocket," only a small area remains in the area of Trudovoe, but it is also gradually shrinking. Russian troops have occupied an enemy stronghold northwest of Trudovoe, and to the east of it, they have consolidated their positions in the forest belt in front of the village, increasing pressure on the Ukrainian Armed Forces units in the northern part of Trudovoe itself.
At the same time, Uspenovka itself has already been half-encircled: to the west of it, our troops practically control Konstantinopolskoye and have flattened the lines of combat engagement between it and Uspenovka, and to the northwest, they are advancing west of Dalnee (Dalnje) and south of it, squeezing enemy fortifications built along the river between Uspenovka and Yantarne (just north of Konstantinopolskoye, not labeled on the map) from both sides.
North of the Kurakhovskoe Reservoir, intense fighting continues in the area of the settlements of Petrovpavlovka and Shevchenko.

(Map key: ЛБС 12.9.2024=Line of Combat Contact September 12th, 2024. ЛБС 01.11.2024=Line of Combat Contact November 1st, 2024. ЛБС 01.12.2024=Line of Combat Contact December 1st, 2024)
Near Pokrovsk, despite repeated enemy counterattacks, the Russian Armed Forces have improved their positions south of Lysovka. Attacks are being undertaken both in its direction and in attempts to reach the eastern part of Dachenskoe, in the south of which our forces have already consolidated their positions.
Attacks are underway in the direction of Zelenoe. Russian forces are making efforts to align the Lysovka-Shevchenko line. The enemy does not abandon attempts to counterattack our fighters in Shevchenko in order to drive them out of the settlement.
Having repelled these counterattacks, the Russian Armed Forces expanded control in Shevchenko itself, consolidating their positions on its northern outskirts (fights continue for the very northeast of the settlement), and to the west of it. In addition, as a result of a successful attack, they reached the headquarters southwest of the settlement of Peschanoe and consolidated their positions there. From the area of the settlement of Novotroitskoye, pressure continues in the direction of the settlements of Solenoe and Novovasilevka. The encirclement of Pokrovsk from the south continues.
Translation Note (1): Ukrainian names in parenthesis *
Translation Note (2): Могила Сторожевая (Watchtower Tomb): When Russian is written by hand, the "г" (when typed) looks like a backwards "S," and the "и" looks like our "u." Also, the typed Russian "т" looks like a western "m" when it is written by hand.

Additionally, it was mentioned to me that this name is taken from old maps from the General Staff (Mikhail found it).
Here, there is a is a "курган," which is a mound that was built over the grave of someone quite noble in the old days.
The territory of these lands is extremely interesting.
The burial mounds (основном курганы) are mostly grave sites of nomadic tribes. And in those territories, settled life began only under Catherine the Second, after victories over the Ottomans, who patronized the Crimean Tatars. It was not safe to live there. The nomads raided and took people into slavery. All these lands were called the "Wild Field" (Дикое поле).
https://maratkhairullin.substack.com/p/ ... cember-64f
******
Kiev regime assassins Russian General to hide the truth about bioweapons
Lucas Leiroz
December 18, 2024
Kirillov’s death, caused by a Ukrainian terrorist attack, represents a turning point in the realm of modern geopolitics.
In a bold and lethal move, a terrorist attack carried out by Ukrainian intelligence operatives in Moscow killed Igor Kirillov, head of the Russian Federation’s Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Defense Forces, along with his main advisor. Kirillov, one of the most important figures in Russian national security, became a strategic target due to his investigations revealing the complex and shadowy ties between the West, Ukraine, and the bioweapons research laboratories. His death is not only a blow against Russia but also a critical turning point in international relations, involving the controversy surrounding biological laboratories, the pharmaceutical industry lobby, and, inevitably, Kiev’s connections to U.S. politics.
Kirillov’s investigation into biological laboratories
Since the beginning of Russia’s Special Military Operation in Ukraine in 2022, Igor Kirillov had been denouncing the existence of bioweapons research laboratories in Ukrainian territory. These laboratories, operating under the guise of “scientific research” and funded by global actors such as the Soros Foundation, Big Pharma companies, and even influential members of the Biden family, have been accused of developing biological weapons aimed at Russia.
In public statements, Kirillov warned of the growing risk posed by these biolaboratories, pointing out that their goal was to create a “universal package” of genetically modified biological pathogens to target Russian people, cattle, and crops simultaneously. The development of such weapons could potentially cause a catastrophe of epic proportions, destroying Russian food production and decimating the population. Once Russia became aware of these activities, it had no choice but to launch a military operation to dismantle these dangerous research centers.
Moscow also raised suspicions that, without early intervention, Ukraine, with U.S. support, could have launched a large-scale biological attack against Russia. This attack would target Russian public health by releasing multiple lethal viruses and bacteria simultaneously, with the aim of creating catastrophic chaos.
The truth obscured by a media blockade
The greatest obstacle Russia faced in exposing these threats was the absolute silence of the Western media. In the European Union, the United States, and even the Global South, an iron curtain was raised on the subject, with most media outlets ignoring or discrediting Kirillov’s revelations. However, Russia believed that without its military operation and the dismantling of bioweapons laboratories in the early days of the conflict, the country would have been vulnerable to a biological attack of catastrophic magnitude.
Furthermore, during the eight years following the Euromaidan coup, citizens of Russian-majority regions in Ukraine were subjected to a series of biological experiments. These included tests of new chemical and biological substances, some of which were administered under the guise of “voluntary treatments” or even by force, as in the case of prisoners or ethnic Russian low-ranking soldiers. The ultimate goal of these experiments was to understand the genetic characteristics of Russians in order to develop even more lethal and ethnically targeted pathogens, thus creating ethnically directed mass destruction biological weapons.
Big Pharma’s involvement and Hunter Biden
In addition to the evidence of involvement by organizations such as the Soros Foundation, another crucial point in Kirillov’s reports was the connection with Big Pharma companies. He spared no effort in revealing the role of pharmaceutical giants such as Pfizer and Moderna in financing bioweapons research in Ukraine. The claim that these corporations were associated with the development of biological weapons was not merely speculative, having several captured documents proved the whole truth. In the same vein, the involvement of influential members of the U.S. government and their families, including Hunter Biden, in contracts and initiatives related to Ukrainian biolabs was a central issue in his revelations. The U.S. president’s son was of the main financial supporters of the biolabs, which were part of his corruption schemes in Ukraine.
Kirillov’s death, therefore, is not only a significant loss for Russia but also a grim reflection of global corporate interests and the biological risks the Western powers were willing to take in their reckless pursuit of hegemony. The pharmaceutical lobby, with its vast networks of influence, found itself in an uncomfortable position after 2022, when several countries began questioning the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, as well as dismantling the mandatory vaccination campaigns that had been previously fervently promoted.
Kirillov’s sacrifice and the future of the conflict
The death of Igor Kirillov represents a tragic chapter in the global confrontation currently taking place on Ukrainian soil, but it also serves as a dramatic allegory of the hidden tensions between the great powers. While Russia continues to expose the West’s involvement in creating biological threats, the global mainstream media watches in silence, more interested in preserving its narratives than facing the truth about a global power struggle involving the use of biotechnology as weapons.
By revealing these threats, Kirillov had become one of the greatest obstacles to Western hidden interests. His death, caused by a Ukrainian terrorist attack, represents not only a loss for Russia’s national security but also a turning point in the realm of modern geopolitics.
https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/ ... ioweapons/
******
Russia Won’t Let The World Forget About The WMD Threat Posed By Ukraine
Andrew Korybko
Dec 18, 2024

The SBU’s cowardly assassination of Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov won’t stop his agency’s work.
Reuters cited a source in Ukraine’s SBU on Tuesday to report that they were responsible for assassinating Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, the head of Russia’s Radiological, Chemical, and Biological Defense Forces (RChBZ). RT reminded their audience that he was instrumental in informing the world about the WMD threat posed by Ukraine. This includes its American-backed bioweapons experiments, dirty bomb plans, and the use of chemical weapons against Russian servicemen in the special operation zone.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova posted on Telegram that Kirillov “has been systematically exposing the crimes of the Anglo-Saxons for many years, with facts in hand: NATO provocations with chemical weapons in Syria, Britain's manipulations with prohibited chemical substances and provocations in Salisbury and Amesbury, the deadly activities of American biolabs in Ukraine and much more. He worked fearlessly. He did not hide behind people's backs.”
Her country is correspondingly expected to continue raising maximum global awareness of these issues. They’d somewhat faded out of the media limelight over the past year as attention shifted to the scenario of conventional Western escalations in Ukraine such as the decision to authorize Kiev to use the ATACMS for carrying out strikes deep inside of Russia and the possibility of deploying troops there under the cover of peacekeepers. All the while, however, Ukraine’s WMD threats never fully went away.
A lasting peace is therefore only possible if the solution includes mechanisms for dismantling this clandestine infrastructure and monitoring compliance afterwards. Trump would have to be on board for that to happen, but since some of his surrogates have talked about this issue before, it can’t be ruled out that he’d agree to this proposal if they convince him that the problem veritably exists. He also has an axe to grind with Hunter Biden, some of whose companies have been implicated in these schemes.
His father Joe just pardoned him for all crimes that he might have committed in the decade between 1 December 2014 and 1 December 2024, which was arguably done in part to complicate any potential investigation into Hunter’s ties with Ukraine, both financial and in connection with WMDs like biolabs. Trump and his MAGA allies in Congress would thus do well to look into all these leads for the sake of historical truth even if justice is now legally impossible.
If they do so, then they’ll discover that Russia has legitimate security interests in ensuring that such clandestine infrastructure in Ukraine is dismantled and never reestablished, which could make them more amenable to whatever proposals Russia puts forth in this regard as part of a peace deal. To be sure, the US will continue conducting WMD experiments abroad, but it’s important that this no longer occurs in Ukraine otherwise Russia might not agree to end the conflict until this threat is neutralized.
All told, Kirillov’s legacy is one for the ages since he played the most prominent role in exposing the WMD threat posed by Ukraine and its Western patrons, particularly the Anglo-American Axis. The world is now much more aware of this issue and Russia won’t let them forget about it. The SBU’s cowardly assassination of this multipolar hero won’t stop his agency’s work. They’re now more determined than ever to ensure that his memory is eternal and makes a meaningful difference in international security.
https://korybko.substack.com/p/russia-w ... rld-forget