Russia today

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14412
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Wed Jun 18, 2025 5:16 pm

Ukraine and Britain are preparing sabotage in the Baltic Sea
June 16, 16:56

Image

The Russian Foreign Intelligence Service warns:

Ukraine and Britain are preparing acts of sabotage in the Baltic Sea

The Russian Foreign Intelligence Service has information about the British-Ukrainian terrorist tandem preparing new acts of sabotage. The main goals of such subversive activities are to escalate the Ukrainian conflict, disrupt the Russian-American negotiation process and convince the White House of the need to continue full-scale military assistance to Kiev.

Currently, the Ukrainians, together with the British, are preparing provocations in the Baltic Sea. One of the scenarios involves staging an alleged Russian torpedo attack on a US Navy ship. The torpedoes of Soviet/Russian manufacture have already been handed over by the Ukrainian side to the British. It is planned that some of them will explode at a "safe distance" from the American ship, and one will not work and will be presented to the public as evidence of Russia's "malicious activity". The Ukrainian security forces are ready to take on the execution of the plan.

Another Ukrainian-British scenario is to, together with accomplices from northern European countries, as if by accident, fish out Russian-made moored mines in the Baltic Sea, allegedly installed for sabotage on the international sea route.

(c) Press Bureau of the Foreign Intelligence Service of Russia

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9903003.html

The Nemtsov Foundation and the Formation of an Anti-Russian Agenda in Europe
June 17, 17:10


Image

The Nemtsov Foundation and the Formation of an Anti-Russian Agenda in Europe

Nemtsov Foundation: Dangerous Liaisons and High-Ranking Patrons of Zhanna Nemtsova

In the previous part, Underside told ( https://underside.today/2025/06/10/heritage/ ) about how the Boris Nemtsov Forum is used by Zhanna Nemtsova as an aggregator platform for an underground community of exiled oppositionists. Representatives of the Russian opposition and fugitive foreign agents looking for sources of income become guests of honor. This is how the annual Boris Nemtsov forums, the Warsaw Security Forum, the Copenhagen Democracy Summit, the Vilnius Russia Forum, and others took place. Along with panel sessions, promising participants are selected and funding for programs to support anti-Russian cells is distributed.

Zhanna Nemtsova invites speakers to them who will help find new, unconventional ideas on how not to love Russia. For example, the British ex-Prime Minister Boris "disheveled BoJo" Johnson understands the nature of the Putin regime and ways to fight it. That is why he had to tell the Berlin Forum that courage must be shown at a critical moment to ensure Ukraine’s independence and peace in Europe.

The former German Justice Minister and influential figure in the social-liberal wing of the FDP, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, was invited by Nemtsova to participate in discussions on civic initiatives, resistance to repression and ways of social change. In 2005, she spoke at PACE in defense of Mikhail Khodorkovsky in the Yukos case and supported the resolution on its political background. Sabine also called on the German government to abandon its uncritical approach to Russia and warned businesses against new investments in the country.

Zhanna Nemtsova also invited Alina Polyakova, the head of the CEPA organization banned in Russia ( https://underside.today/2024/03/05/cepa/ ), and a partner in an anti-Russian project financed by the US State Department, NATO, and defense contractors like Lockheed Martin and BAE Systems, to the Berlin Forum. They are connected by their participation in the “True Russian World” program, aimed at creating a network of experts on Russia to “redirect the Kremlin’s narratives” and develop strategies for information pressure. Through scholarships and grants, including from the Boris Nemtsov Foundation, participants loyal to these goals are promoted. CEPA publishes materials on the decolonization of Russia and the rights of national minorities, essentially promoting separatism and discrediting the Russian government. Polyakova, who positions herself as an “expert on transatlantic relations,” oversees this area. At the Forum, she was supposed to present a new project CEPA-Europe, aimed at forming an anti-Russian community in the areas of defense, democracy and digital technologies.

A new investigation begins here. ( https://underside.today/2025/06/17/nemchov-fond/ )

@underside_org - zinc

What a spirited company. Everyone is here...and even Dyusha Metelkin from London.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9904718.html

Google Translator

******

Russia, the second enemy of American intelligence

Lorenzo Maria Pacini

June 17, 2025

The picture painted by the DIA is less dark than one might think. The question now remains: who will be the next enemy?

A history of hatred spanning almost a century

Let’s move on to the second enemy identified by the DIA report. After China, Russia has been identified as the second sworn enemy of the United States of America.

America recognises that Russian President Vladimir Putin considers the war in Ukraine an existential struggle against the West, which will determine Russia’s role in the world, its continued hold on power and its historical legacy. He also remains firm in his demand that Ukraine be permanently excluded from NATO membership, insisting on the complete withdrawal of Ukrainian military forces from the Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporozhzhya and Kherson regions. Despite the West providing lethal aid to Kiev, it is highly likely, according to the report, that Russia wants to avoid a direct confrontation with NATO, as it believes it cannot win a conventional military conflict with the alliance.

Moscow still possesses extensive asymmetric capabilities against the United States and its allies, including cyber operations and information campaigns, and poses an existential threat through its strategic nuclear forces, which are capable of striking directly at U.S. territory. The SMO in Ukraine is part of a broader objective of the Russian government, which the U.S. views with a limited perspective, namely as a project aimed at regaining the prestige and global influence it lost after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, by exercising control over the former Soviet states and seeking to exert strong influence over the foreign, domestic and economic policies of these countries.global influence lost after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 by exercising control over the former Soviet states, seeking to exert strong influence over the foreign, domestic and economic policies of these countries, while limiting the advance of rival foreign powers. But the Americans ignore one fact: the world is no longer what it was in 1992, and the U.S. is no longer the centre of the world.

Putin is almost certainly determined to achieve victory in Ukraine, and his objectives have remained largely unchanged since the start of the conflict: Ukrainian neutrality, denazification and justice for the people. In the absence of a negotiated settlement or robust Western support, the situation on the ground will continue to evolve steadily in Russia’s favour.

The Kremlin’s strategy is likely to continue as a war of attrition, aimed at weakening Ukraine’s capabilities and resolve so that it can impose its own terms in any future agreement. While preferring faster progress, Moscow seems to accept the costs of its slow advances, counting on gradually wearing down Ukrainian resources and resolve and outlasting Western support for Kiev.

Military posture and strategic projections

Russia’s conventional capabilities for deterrence, combat or military competition with NATO continue to grow, and the U.S. is well aware of this and fears it greatly.

Russia must balance the modernisation of its armaments with the replenishment of its forces in the field, giving priority to the renewal of existing equipment rather than the production of new systems. The exception is submarines, for which modernisation and deployment programmes have continued almost uninterrupted. In 2025, Russia plans to allocate at least $150 billion to defence and security spending, a real increase of 19% compared to 2024, representing about 40% of the federal budget. The Russian Navy will almost certainly be Moscow’s main instrument of global power projection in the coming year. Last year, it carried out missions in Latin America, deploying a nuclear submarine in the region for the first time since the fall of the USSR. The Navy also conducted a global multi-fleet exercise, called OKEAN-2024, to demonstrate its ability to defend national interests, and commissioned new advanced ballistic submarines, cruise submarines and attack submarines in the Pacific Fleet.

The Aerospace Forces have demonstrated a range of capabilities in Ukraine, suffering significant losses of both equipment and experienced personnel, but also developing new tactics such as the use of glide bombs. Russia uses electronic warfare in both offensive and defensive operations to disrupt Ukrainian communications and guidance systems, designing these capabilities specifically to counter Western-supplied technologies. In addition, the use of drones has expanded greatly, proving to be a cost-effective and effective tool for detecting enemy movements, supporting artillery fire and conducting short- and long-range attacks.

Russia is also strengthening its nuclear forces by introducing new capabilities, including air-to-air nuclear weapons and innovative nuclear systems. The U.S. intelligence report estimates, with some concern, that Moscow has a nuclear arsenal of approximately 1,550 deployed strategic warheads and up to 2,000 non-strategic warheads. In addition, it is strengthening its nuclear presence in Belarus by deploying missiles and aircraft with nuclear capabilities, restructuring a nuclear weapons storage facility and training Belarusian crews in the use of tactical nuclear weapons. Russia considers Belarus an integral and inseparable part of its national civilisation and continues to be one of its closest partners. It intends to use the Union State Treaty to strengthen and maintain strategic depth vis-à-vis NATO. Moscow also benefits from Belarus’ strategic position along Ukraine’s northern border.

However, it is highly unlikely that Moscow will use nuclear weapons unless the Russian leadership perceives an existential threat to its survival.

Then we come to the issue of “chemical weapons”: according to the report, the U.S. believes Russia to be a hotbed of chemical weapons, but also of saboteurs and assassins, all ready to rise up against their own people in order to win the conflict. This demagogic American fixation will cost the country dearly in terms of domestic politics.

Moscow, of course, aims to strengthen its global military projection capabilities through agreements for pre-authorised naval bases or landing sites in various countries, continues to organise bilateral and multilateral military exercises, especially with countries in the Indo-Pacific, and will likely intensify defence relations with other states in the global South in the coming year. It also plans to develop new bases in the Mediterranean, the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean to facilitate transfers between its fleets.

Given all these aspects mentioned in the DIA document, it is curious that no reference is made to intelligence activities. This is a fairly common cliché that has been repeated over the decades, from before the Cold War to more recent times, but it does not appear in the report. Yet Moscow is aware that careful espionage and human intelligence are fundamental to shifting cultural and media poles towards a reshaping of the social perception of those defined as “the enemy”. It is clear that this aspect is still subject to professional secrecy that cannot be revealed. Because, to all intents and purposes, it is a problematic area of conflict, in that grey zone that is always on the border and always undefined.

All in all, the picture painted by the DIA is less dark than one might think. The question now remains: who will be the next enemy?

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

******

Head of Rostec State Corporation Sergei Chemezov & Putin Chat
Plus, a short note about the Iranian Conflict.
Karl Sanchez
Jun 17, 2025

Image

Armed with folio and notes, the Kremlin tells us this:
The head of Rostec reported on the implementation of the state defense order, the modernization of military equipment and the development of airspace control systems and electronic warfare. Separately, they discussed the increase in the production of civilian products, including medical products.
For those who don’t know, Rostec is the largest most powerful state corporate conglomerate not just in Russia but globally, whose website has an English version, allowing you to explore what it does and also its history which can be read by clicking the “about” button. Yes, I say this every time Rostec’s Director comes to chat with Putin and understand it’s 100% publicly owned. Nothing like it exists in the West. I do suggest learning about its history because its birth stands at the core of Russia’s economic recovery. The chat revealed to us is short since much of it is classified. Okay, so what did they say:
V. Putin: How are you, Sergey Viktorovich?

S. Chemezov: Dear Vladimir Vladimirovich, the year has come to an end. In 2024, we summarized the results of all our enterprises, formed a consolidated budget and report. Today, I would like to present you with some results of our financial activities and the overall performance of our enterprise corporation.

We continue to meet the challenges of strengthening the security, defense capability and industrial independence of our country. This was, is, and will continue to be a key priority. I would like to note that even in the face of sanctions and a difficult macroeconomic situation, we continue to show steady growth: revenue increased by 27 percent compared to last year and today amounts to 3 trillion 610 billion [rubles]. Net income increased by 119 percent to $ 131 billion 500 million. The output per employee has also increased by 20 percent compared to last year, reaching 5.2 million rubles per person. The investment volume has reached 676 billion, which is a record high in many years. This is primarily due to the increase in the state defence order and the need to expand the capacity of our enterprises and modernise them in order to meet the state defence order.

As for the state defense order, 80 percent of all weapons currently used in the special military operation are produced by our enterprises, and in 2024, the production of new light armored vehicles and tanks increased by 1.1 times, ammunition for barrel artillery increased by 1.3 times, ammunition for light armored vehicles and tanks increased by 2.1 times, and ammunition for multiple rocket launchers increased by 1.7 times. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that this is only for one year, and if we compare it with 2021, our production has increased tenfold. In general, the implementation of the state defense order is traditionally at a fairly high level, with a percentage of 99.5.

V. Putin: And 100 percent for critical positions?

S. Chemezov: Yes, 100 percent for critical ones.

We are constantly working to improve the equipment that we produce. We have direct contact with the military personnel who use and work with our equipment. Our repair teams are located near the front lines, so they have direct contact. We take into account all the suggestions and comments, and we constantly upgrade our equipment.

I can give you an example: the well-known Pantsir. Today, it's the Pantsir-SMD-E model. It differs from the previous model in that it has mini-missiles, and the ammunition capacity has increased fourfold. Instead of twelve missiles, it now has 48 missiles. This is crucial for providing protection against drones, as twelve missiles may not be sufficient during a massive attack. However, 48 missiles are much better, and our military is delighted with this improvement.

We've created a robotic platform that can transport cargo on the battlefield, evacuate the wounded, deliver ammunition, and even act as a kamikaze.

V. Putin: "The Dispatch"?

S. Chemezov: Yes, it's called "The Dispatch."

Now, as for electronic warfare: We have a new system, a new complex called Serp-VS13D, which is capable of detecting and suppressing FPV drones and previously invulnerable drones with a wider frequency range. Serp is currently installed at many defense enterprises, including ammunition factories, and provides adequate protection against drone attacks.

We have also developed an airspace control system, which includes our High-Precision Complexes holding company, which consists of mini-radars. These radars are designed to detect stealthy targets, such as drones. When paired with the Pantsir system, they can effectively engage and destroy these targets. Additionally, if these radars are used solely for detecting stealthy targets, the information is immediately transmitted to the air defense control center, where appropriate measures are taken to eliminate them.

As for civilian products, we are working to increase the share of civilian products. Last year, we had 35 percent, but this year, we have 30.7 percent, which is a decrease of 4.3 points. However, in absolute terms, we are still growing: the volume of civilian product sales has increased, and our revenue has increased by 11.6 percent, reaching 1 trillion 108 billion, which is a third of our total revenue.

What are some specific examples of new civilian products that we have today? First of all, of course, there is the 2000VH five-axis milling machine center. This is the first time we have produced such a center in Russia. It is designed for the aircraft engine industry and defense enterprises, and it can handle large parts weighing up to five tons with an accuracy of hundreds of millimeters.

Energy-based waste disposal: in 2019, we started building waste incineration plants, and we were supposed to build four plants in the Moscow region and one in Tatarstan. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent sanctions, the construction process was delayed, and we did not complete the first plant until December 2024. It's important to note that we did not receive any budget funds for the construction of these plants. Instead, they were built using private investments, our own resources, and primarily through loans.

V. Putin: You owe me, Sergey Viktorovich.

S. Chemezov: Unfortunately, yes. We have built it, and it is already operational. Today, we have generated 100 million kilowatt-hours of green energy and destroyed more than 200,000 tons of municipal waste, which was previously sent to landfills. This plant now processes over two thousand tons of waste per day.

We are 92 percent ready for the second plant, and we will complete it next year. Of course, we do not have enough money, but we are currently negotiating with banks to obtain some preferential loans. However, we will also use some of our own funds. I assure you that another plant will start operating next year.

The remaining three factories – two in the Moscow region and one in Kazan – will have to be frozen until better times when there will be cheaper money or some kind of government assistance, if possible.

As for medicine, we have a very modern new cancer scanner. Similar scanners are produced in Japan, Germany, and China. Our cancer scanner is much better than the Chinese one, but it is also as good as the Japanese and German ones. What is it? It is a digital platform that uses artificial intelligence to analyze glass slides containing human biopsy material and provides results within a few minutes. Previously, it took two to three weeks to diagnose cancer in patients. And not only that, unfortunately, 40 percent of errors result. Why? Because a person is still tired – I mean, a doctor who looks at a microscope – can make a mistake. And here the percentage of errors is reduced by eight times, that is, instead of 40 [percent] remains five.

V. Putin: Yes, if artificial intelligence believes...

S. Chemezov: He just compares it with the existing database. Five percent of errors remain, but it depends on the database. If an error is introduced into the database, it may manifest itself.

Our Metallist plant, together with the Bauman Moscow State Technical University, has created a knee module with microprocessor control. We have visited our CITO (Center for Innovative Technologies in Orthopedics) facility, where our doctors provide assistance to soldiers returning from the Special Military Operation with serious injuries, and this module is being used there. You have instructed us to open 25 such centers throughout Russia. We have already opened them in Kurgan, Kursk, Izhevsk, St. Petersburg, and the Moscow region, with the most recent center opening just a week ago.

Of course, we provide assistance to our students. Since 2022, our center has produced over 6,000 prosthetics, including more than 30% of bioelectric prosthetics with microprocessor control.

KAMAZ has created a truck with a manual control system, and they have also developed an elevator that can lift a person into the cab, even if they have no legs but can still drive the car. This provides an additional opportunity for people to return to normal life and find employment, even if they have suffered severe injuries.

As for our teams, of course, all these achievements were made thanks to our unique team: Today, we have about 700,000 specialists working in various fields. We are already the largest employer among industrial enterprises in Russia. Since 2022, we have added more than 100,000 people, but this is not the limit–-we still need to hire about 130,000 workers, including 30,000 engineers, by 2028.

We have quite good conditions. Now the wages have increased–-today it is about 107 thousand rubles, it is quite a decent wage. Plus we also give a social package: this is voluntary medical insurance, payment of sanatorium and resort services, housing programs, non-state pension provision and so on. The volume of social expenditures in 2024 was 23.7 [billion]–-this is 35 percent more than it was last year.

Of course, we try to attract young people by visiting schools, technical schools, and universities. With the support of our enterprises, 200 engineering classes have been opened in schools, where 5,500 students are studying robotics, programming, biotechnology, and other engineering sciences. We have also sent more than four thousand students to universities through targeted recruitment.

V. Putin: We are creating a reserve of personnel.

S.Chemezov: Yes, we are creating a personnel reserve, because otherwise it is difficult to attract young people. However, we are working on this together with the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Science, and we see a lot of support from these ministries.

Thanks to a lot of work on career guidance, today, in 2025, school graduates–-50 percent of these graduates – have chosen mathematics as a profile exam for passing the Unified State Exam, more than 21 percent–-information technology, and 16 percent–-physics. This just shows that young people have already gone from economists and lawyers to engineering universities, they like it much more.

V. Putin: From the humanities to the natural sciences.

Sergey Viktorovich, what is the state of your titanium production?

S. Chemezov: Today, of course, we have the enterprise loaded, maybe not completely, but nevertheless… Basically, we work for our aviation, helicopter enterprises.

But since the Americans have left, our joint venture with Boeing has unfortunately been frozen, so our production has decreased.

V. Putin: I understand that they suffered damage from this withdrawal?

S. Chemezov: Of course. They brought a large number of modern machines here, we have created an entire production. Not only that, we have created five of the most super-modern alloys together with them, but we own the intellectual property 50 to 50.

V. Putin: For the aviation industry?

S. Chemezov: For the aviation industry, yes.

V. Putin: Okay, good. Thank you. [My Emphasis]
A very impressive short list report. Clearly, obtaining additional financing outside the national budget presents problems. particularly with the rate have been so high, although that’s now rapidly being eased. Upgrading Pantsir’s ammo load was important. It appears Rostec has close to reached the pinnacle of its production amounts without further expansion and additional personnel. The swicth-about seen with students is clearly in response to exhortations coming from many sources. The advances happening in medicine is substantial along with the innovative thought given to providing amputees the ability to lead productive lives. Do note what’s a crucial hangover from the Soviet Era where large corporations make significant contributions to the social welfare of the people. And as you’ve already read, Rostec has its fingers into most every economic niche that exists with the waste disposal systems engineered to generate electricity being yet another example.

Did Putin and Chemezov discuss supplying Iran with Rostec products? Possibly, but that would be part of their classified discussion along with other aspects of the state defense order. As far as I’m aware, Rostec is unique; no other nation has a similar sort of conglomerate. In two years, it will be 20 years old. IMO, it outperforms all other military industrial corporations on the planet while doing so much more for Russia’s civilian economy.

As for the Iran-Zionist/Collective Western Empire conflict, there’s very little to say because there’s very little info being released by either side, although Iran’s more open. Ansarallah appears to be the only entity knowing the only way to really demilitarize the Zionists and end their genocide is to invade Occupied Palestine with ground forces; they’ve made formal requests to the Saudis and Jordanians to allow them to transit their nations to do just that. Iran could easily amass several million troops to do the same thing. What by now ought to be very clear is the Iranian nuclear program has always been a ruse to veil the real aim—Regime Change. A review of post-WW2 Outlaw US Empire history shows that to be the main aim in all its wars beginning immediately in 1945 with the political war against the Resistance Forces that helped oust the Nazi collaborator governments in France, Italy, Netherlands, and Greece as well as in Vietnam, Korea, Indonesia, and capped by Cuba. Similar policy was followed by the colonial nations in Africa. Iranians already know what it’s like to suffer regime change and aren’t about to let it happen again. I’ll admit being surprised by Pakistan’s government standing by its neighbor, while I have little faith that the two Turkic nations—Azerbaijan and Turkey—will behave similarly. A credible person has suggested looking at the Algerian experience as being a possible template for future Zionist behavior. And in closing, I’ll echo what Larry Johnson has written and said: The Old Testament opens with Genesis where all are made in god’s image—ALL—including those later deemed unworthy—Amalek. The loving, creating god at the outset suddenly morphs into a god that only favors one tribe and calls on it to destroy what god created. No, the narrative got changed to fit the situation as we’ve seen plenty in our Modern Era. Thus, the entire rationale provided by the Zionists to justify their Genocide is 100% false, and the Zionists are just as guilty as Hitler and other genocidalists that came before him using their falsely proclaimed Exceptionalism as justification for the carnage they wrought.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/head-of- ... orporation

*****

The definition of insanity – reading a neocon think tank report on Russia

Ian Proud

June 18, 2025

Let’s do what we’ve been doing for a decade and hope for a different result

Apparently, there is no evidence that Albert Einstein ever said ‘the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results’. And yet the aphorism rings true whenever a neocon think tank produces a new report with prescriptions on how to engage with Russia.

Such was my response when I recently read Russian Reality Check: how to destabilise the Kremlin, published by the UK-based Henry Jackson Society in April.

It offers no new ideas and everything it suggests has been tried before.

Specifically, it proposes that Europe redoubles its efforts to pile economic pressure on Russia, stoke internal dissent and regime change, ramp up cyber and covert warfare inside of Russia, get Russia’s neighbours onside and, somehow, get the developing world to agree that this approach will work to their benefit.

These prescriptions are made against the backdrop of a reduction in American enthusiasm for the Ukraine war under Trump.

Pausing there briefly, reduced U.S. support for Ukraine has already shaped a new reality of less money, fewer weapons, a reduction in cyber capabilities and military enablers, and credibility on the world stage as America increasingly votes with or, at least, not against Russia in the United Nations. All of these factors mean that Europe needs to spend more and work harder even to maintain the current stance towards a war in Ukraine that Russia is winning on the battlefield.

So, the real question is, having put huge effort into all five pillars of containment of Russia since 2014, what makes the author begin to believe that it will work today without American help?

What are the implications of ‘more of the same’ for Europe’s economic health at a time when the continent is deindustrialising through imposed high energy prices?

And what does this mean for European political movements at a time of an accelerating shift to the left and right as ordinary people fear the increasingly warmongering and democracy-stealing tendencies of the elites?

No consideration is given to these wider risks and political trends in the report. Like many think tank reports, grand schemes are articulated with no thought either to their cost, political sustainability or, critically, how Russia will respond. We are invited to assume an arithmetical response from Moscow in which the sum of western inputs vastly outweighs Russian resolve and its political will to resist, to the point where the Russian political system eventually collapses.

That calculus has at no point been accurate since the Ukraine conflict started in late 2013.

Dipping briefly into the five pillars of the report the first covers economic warfare and how to squeeze the Kremlin’s resources. Since 2014, western powers have imposed unprecedented sanctions against Russia. Sanctions have changed the structure of Russia’s economy, undoubtedly with the movement to a war footing and the agglomeration of production in state-run entities. This has crowded out the SME sector. Yet Russia’s economy continues to grow, despite challenges of inflation and high interest rates.

And the economic tactics that Europe has used, specifically on energy supply, have led to soaring prices, economic stagnation and deindustrialisation in Europe.

The report does not touch on the economic risks to Europe itself and no economic data is explored.

Rather, readers are invited to believe that after eleven years of pressure which has left European economies weakened, that further pressure will be enough to change Putin’s mind.

Placing sanctions on Russia’s so-called shadow fleet has not materially impacted Russian export revenues and the author provides no information about how additional measures might do so now. Secondary sanctions, i.e. imposing gigantic tariffs on countries that trade with Russia (along the lines of the U.S. Bill currently being steered by Senator Lindsey Graham) appears no more likely to work than Trump’s trade tariffs have so far, which is not at all.

Some of the economic prescriptions are fundamentally flawed. The author suggests ‘encouraging capital flight from Russia would further exacerbate economic instability’ by offering relocation incentives for business elites. And yet, many wealthy Russians resident in Europe today have had their assets frozen, even if they spoke out against the war. Any businessman who has remained in Russia will undoubtedly fall foul of UK Sanctions Legislation, by having made a profit in Putin’s war economy. Indeed, they would be more exposed than Russian businessmen already resident in Europe when war started, who have themselves been sanctioned. How many wealthy Russians will really trust the UK and EU enough to move their assets upon the vague and vain promise that this might weaken Putin? I would suggest none.

A key plank of the economic pressure is an absolute determination to expropriate the currently frozen $300bn in Russian reserves, mostly held in Belgium. There is a fear that should Russia make concessions in peace talks, the pressure might build for these assets to be returned. ‘Yet if at negotiations Russia did make concessions to get the assets back then European states would be left to foot the reconstruction bill for Ukraine.’ In other words, a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine would be expensive by pushing responsibility for reconstruction costs onto Europe.

So, rather than end the war and pay the price, seize the Russian assets now, even though this would encourage Russia to continue fighting to Ukraine’s disadvantage and at a much greater cost long-term, to Europe. And even though this would do immeasurable damage to the credibility of the European financial system.

The author recognises that if the U.S. reduces it sanctions against Russia, Europe would see a reduction in sanctions effectiveness’. It nevertheless argues for a continuance of sanctions anyway, without exploring whether current sanctions actually work.

Recognising the risk that countries such as Hungary and Slovakia may at some point break sanctions consensus and bring the house of cards down, the report argues that ‘the EU must change voting rules so Russia-aligned politicians in Hungary and Slovakia are not able to stop EU decision-making.’ Nothing cries Europe’s promoting democracy in Russia more than making decision making processes are less democratic in Europe.

Moving on to the other four pillars, the report calls for supporting the Russian opposition and stoking internal dissent. Here, the author pushes for more funding for media and opposition groups that create an alternative voice for Russian voters.

But have we not been funding NGOs and alternative media channels in Russia for over a decade without success? And with the huge cut to USAID funding to foreign NGOs bent on regime change around the world, how would European governments make up the funding gap, just to allow this activity to continue at its current rate?

The author argues among other things for building an ‘opposition in exile’. Acknowledging that ‘the opposition-in-exile lacks legitimacy in Russia’ he argues that ‘elections to a council-in-exile voted on by the Russian diaspora would bestow legitimacy on these groups’. Yet he does not explain the source of an exiled government’s legitimacy. I would venture to argue that this would be in the hearts and minds of western globalists, rather than among the rump of the Russian people.

Covert and cyber operations are called for, to take the fight to Russia. Yet, the report does not acknowledge that this type of activity is already a significant part of western governmental effort towards Russia, through organisations such as Britain’s GCHQ, America’s NSA and others.

Troublingly, and published before the Ukrainian spiders web drone attack on Russia’s strategic bombers, the author argues for European governments actively funding and supporting Ukrainian sabotage operations inside of Russia. ‘Over the past year, mysterious fires, train derailments, and unexplained industrial accidents have increasingly targeted Russian supply chains, weapons factories, and fuel depots. Many of these incidents have been attributed to Ukrainian partisans – like Atesh in the Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine – and anti-Kremlin insurgents. But their impact could be significantly amplified with direct European intelligence, funding, and logistical support.’

So, Britain and Europe should as an article of policy, fund and help to orchestrate further sabotage attacks inside of Russia. No thought is given to how Russia might respond in asymmetric ways to the knowledge that western governments were paying for acts of sabotage and terrorism inside of Russia. But having been at the British Embassy in Moscow when the 2018 Salisbury nerve agent attack happened, I’d suggest that Russia would fund and support similar activity in our countries.

The other two pillars, encouraging Russia’s neighbours to apply more pressure and trying to isolate Russia on the world stage have both been central planks, at least of UK strategy, since 2014. No thought is given to how this might work today, against the backdrop of the rapid growth of the BRICS grouping of developing countries.

The Henry Jackson Society is a neocon think tank that is closely associated with the UK Conservative Party, Boris Johnson wrote the foreword to its 2019 manifesto setting out a vision for Global Britain. And its possible to see the hand of Johnson in the idiotic prescriptions of this latest report on Russia.

Of course, if you have read one neocon think tank report on Russia you have read them all. This report might just as easily have been written by the Atlantic Council or the Institute for the Study of War. The author paints an oversimplified world in which Europe maintains a proxy war in Ukraine with money it does not have, with no thought to a Russian response which it does not predict. While claiming to reduce threat to Europe from Russia, it seeks to antagonise Russia to such an extent that was becomes self-fulfilling. That, I fear, is insanity.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... on-russia/

******

The Brits & Ukrainians Are Plotting To Manipulate Trump Into Escalating Against Russia
Andrew Korybko
Jun 18, 2025

Image

Two false flag scenarios are being cooked up in the Baltic Sea to this end according to Russian spies.

Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Agency (SVR) warned that the Brits and Ukrainians are preparing two false flag scenarios in the Baltic Sea. The first one would see Ukrainian-transferred Soviet/Russian torpedoes explode near a US ship there and a supposedly malfunctioning one will then be found to implicate Russia in the alleged attack The second, meanwhile, will involve Ukrainian-transferred Soviet/Russian mines fished out of the Baltic Sea and presented as proof of a Kremlin plot to sabotage international shipping.

These perfidious provocations are being employed to manipulate Trump into escalating against Russia after Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth announced in mid-February that the US won’t extend Article 5 mutual defense guarantees to NATO countries’ troops that might deploy to Ukraine. That scenario was the initial one that was planned for getting him to pull out of talks with Putin and then double down on support for Ukraine, but his team preemptively scuttled it through Hegseth’s announcement.

That’s why efforts are now underway to organize a false flag attack against a US ship in the Baltic and/or frame Russia as a threat to international shipping through the fishing out of its mines there. The Baltic has already been a so-called “NATO lake” since even before Finland and Sweden’s joined NATO given their prior shadow membership in the bloc, however, so it’s unrealistic that Russia could really carry out either of these two operations undetected even if it wanted to. Here are some background briefings:

* 11 March: “Russian Spies Warn That The UK Is Trying To Sabotage Trump’s Envisaged ‘New Détente’”

* 24 March: “Putin’s Senior Aide Patrushev Shared Some Updates About The Arctic & Baltic Fronts”

* 22 April: “Estonia Might Become Europe’s Next Trouble Spot”

* 1 June: “Russia’s Military Build-Up Along The Finnish Border Will Likely Be The New Normal”

* 3 June: “The Russian-Ukrainian Talks Are At An Impasse That Only The US Or Brute Force Can Break”

To summarize, they detail the contextual evolution of this scenario from SVR’s prior warnings of the UK’s intent to sabotage the Russian-US talks on Ukraine to the motives of regional actors (Estonia and Finland) in going along with this, ending with the diplomatic impasse that defines today’s state of affairs. About that, if the US doesn’t coerce Ukraine into the concessions that Russia demands for peace but also doesn’t wash its hands of this conflict, then it might very well double down on its involvement instead.

The reasonable speculation that Trump knew about Ukraine’s strategic drone strikes against Russia in advance coupled with the latest speculation that he deceived Iran with duplicitous diplomacy doesn’t do much to inspire confidence in him personally since he could possibly be in on these false flag plots too. Despite Putin’s bonhomie with Trump, which was recently expressed through their most recent call, some in Russia are beginning to suspect Trump of double-dealing.

It’s therefore imperative that he preemptively commit to not escalating against Russia if either of these two false flag scenarios transpire just like Hegseth preemptively averted the deployment of NATO countries’ troops to Ukraine (at least for now) by declaring that Article 5 won’t extend to them. It’s unclear whether Trump read SVR’s warning or if he can rely on his advisors to inform him (unless Putin told already him), however, so he might not even be aware of this and could thus be manipulated.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/the-brit ... e-plotting

******

The Deployment of the African Corps of the Russian Ministry of Defense and Its Prospects
Posted by Internationalist 360° on June 18, 2025
Mikhail Gamandiy-Egorov

Image

The activation of the African Corps of the Russian Ministry of Defense reaffirms that Russia will continue strengthening its support for African allies, at a time when Africa has been and remains one of Moscow’s top foreign policy priorities.

The end of the Wagner Group’s mission in Mali and the transition to the African Corps of the Russian Ministry of Defense is nothing more than the conclusion of a process that had been unfolding for several months. Anyone who believed there would be a temporary vacuum in Russia’s presence in the Sahel was clearly mistaken. The deployment had been ongoing in recent months, in close coordination between Wagner forces and the African Corps of the Russian Ministry of Defense.

The Work Continues

Today, one thing is certain: the people of the Alliance of Sahel States (AES), especially in Mali, where Wagner played an active role in combating terrorist groups alongside the Malian Armed Forces (FAMA), remain deeply grateful for the substantial work accomplished by Wagner’s military personnel.

Wagner specialists once again demonstrated not only what a true fight against terrorism entails, but also the spirit of brotherhood in arms between allies. In recent years, many key Malian cities that had been under terrorist occupation for a decade or more were liberated — groups against which Western forces previously stationed in the region had seen no success.

One of the most significant victories of the joint operations between Wagner and the Malian Armed Forces was the liberation of the key northeastern city of Kidal. Occupied by terrorists since 2012, the city was finally liberated in November 2023. This event, which occurred at the end of 2023, brought great joy to the majority of Mali’s population and further strengthened the Russia-Mali alliance — a victory that was shared by both nations.

The sense of military brotherhood was preserved even in the most difficult moments. For instance, during the fighting near Tinzawaten, at the border with Algeria, both Malian and Russian soldiers suffered losses. These losses were the result of extremely adverse weather conditions combined with support provided to the terrorists by certain Western regimes, their vassals, and regional actors. Yet the very presence of Russian soldiers standing alongside their Malian comrades in these battles only deepened the belief that Russia does not abandon its friends and allies — provided they are true allies who are ready to fight for their sovereignty.

From now on, operations will continue under the aegis of the African Corps of the Russian Ministry of Defense. After the excellent work done by Wagner in Mali, the African Corps is well aware of the heavy responsibility it now carries. Not to mention that many Wagner specialists remain in Mali and continue their mission.

Looking Ahead

It is worth noting that the presence of the African Corps is not limited to the Sahel region. The deployment has also proceeded actively in North Africa, particularly in Libya, while at the same time reinforcing positions in Central Africa, especially in Equatorial Guinea. Broadly speaking, this powerful new Russian military deployment across different parts of the African continent has repeatedly stirred anxiety among NATO-Western regimes, who view it as a growing Russian foothold near NATO’s so-called southern flank.

And when speaking of NATO circles, it is important to recall that the African Corps of the Russian Ministry of Defense represents, in many ways, the West’s worst nightmare. One of the leading figures behind this structure — tasked with supporting African allies — is none other than Russia’s Deputy Defense Minister, Army General Yunus-Bek Yevkurov. A Hero of the Russian Federation, Yevkurov struck a strategic blow to NATO interests in the 1990s, notably in Kosovo, Serbia, during the secret operation to seize control of Slatina airport in Pristina.

That symbolic Russian victory came at a time when the country’s post-Soviet revival had barely begun, yet it already signaled the start of new Russian triumphs on the global stage. Given these still-recent events, it should come as no surprise that Africa-related strategic developments may soon bring unpleasant surprises to the enemies not only of Russia, but also of a truly free and independent Africa — and, of course, to the multipolar world.

And this is precisely why the regimes of the Western global minority and many of their puppets are so outraged by the growing presence of Russia on the African continent — regardless of whether the primary mission is carried out by Wagner or the African Corps of the Russian Ministry of Defense.

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2025/06/ ... prospects/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14412
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Fri Jun 20, 2025 3:17 pm

THE PRESIDENTS OF RUSSIA AND CHINA ANNOUNCE THE CARDINAL POINTS OF THE OBVIOUS

Image

By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

It was just before high noon in Moscow on Thursday, June 19, when President Vladimir Putin initiated his telephone call to President Xi Jinping of China. A read-out by Putin’s foreign policy assistant, Yury Ushakov, followed almost immediately.

Xi did not authorize his summary for twenty-four hours until the Chinese official media organ, Global Times, published an editorial titled “The ‘four-point proposal’ injects stabilizing force into the crisis in the Middle East”. Another official version from Beijing, delayed for nine hours, can be read here.

In between Putin’s read-out and Xi’s editorial, the Russian General Staff leaked its assessment that the US, Israel and their allies are demonstrating in the Iran war, as they have already demonstrated in the Ukraine war, that negotiations for a ceasefire, a truce, or a peace agreement are pointless now.

Pretending this isn’t so is the Kremlin consensus for the time being. According to Xinhua, repeating the pretence in public is also the Bejing consensus.

Before he called Xi, Putin told the Xinhua press agency and other reporters: “we are ready and substantively guide the [Ukraine war] negotiations on the principles of settlement…We are in contact, our negotiation groups are in contact with each other. Only just now [Kremlin negotiator Vladimir] Medinsky asked — he says that only today he was talking to his counterparties from Kiev. In principle, they agree to meet after June 22.”

Unspoken in public for the time being is the discussion among Russian political and military leaders on what Putin’s surprise statement revoking the terms of the Russian pact with Iran means to the remaining treaty allies, China and North Korea. “With regard to the Strategic Treaty,” Putin has announced for the “Treaty on the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Russian Federation” he signed on January 17, 2025 — “there are no articles related to the defence sphere.”

Moscow knows this is false.

According to a well-informed source, “the Iranians have assured Putin through the security people that they are able to hold out. Putin is not calling out Trump’s lies because there will be no burning of bridges with Trump for as long as possible. Nothing will be gained from this. Calling Putin out on Israel is something everyone is avoiding here and might be the most sensitive nerve. So it’s best avoided.”

Putin revealed at his meeting with international news agencies after midnight on June 18 that some time earlier, he had discussed with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the Israeli plan of attack on Iran’s nuclear reactors and nuclear fuel plants. Putin did not say he had told Netanyahu not to attack. Instead, Putin told the press, “more than 200” Russians are working at the Bushehr reactor in southern Iran, and that with Netanyahu “we have agreed with the leadership of Israel which will ensure their security.”

The full Russian text of Putin’s remarks at the press conference was delayed in publication by the Kremlin for twelve hours. The official English version of what the President said has not been fully disclosed on the Kremlin website after twenty-fours.

The Xinhua news agency, which attended the presser, reported what had been said after six hours of delay. But the Chinese report has omitted to record Putin’s reactor targeting deal with Netanyahu.

Image
Source: https://english.news.cn/20250619/3c5c62 ... 463/c.html

The Reuters news agency, which also asked questions at the presser, published its report of Putin’s statements three hours after they were made.

According to the Reuters report, “asked if Russia was ready to provide Iran with modern weapons to defend itself against Israeli strikes, Putin said a strategic partnership treaty signed with Tehran in January did not envisage military cooperation and that Iran had not made any formal request for assistance.”

Image
Source: https://tass.com/politics/1975565
Putin is seated at the top centre of the table with the Tass chief on his right, the Xinhua chief on his left.

According to the Kremlin’s version of what Putin said translated unofficially into English, Putin was asked by Karim Talbi, the Agence France Presse (AFP) representative at the meeting: “There is a Strategic Partnership Agreement between Russia and Iran. It does not provide for the protection of Iran from the outside Russia, but still there is a question of weapons. Given the severity of this situation, are you ready to provide new weapons to Iran so they can defend themselves from Israeli strikes?”

Putin replied: “You know, we once offered our Iranian friends to work in the field of air defence systems. The partners did not show much interest at that time, that’s all. With regard to the Strategic Treaty, about the partnership you mentioned, there are no articles related to the defence sphere. That’s the second point. Third, our Iranian friends don’t ask for that. So there’s almost nothing to discuss.”

The official Kremlin version in English has not yet been published. In AFP’s published record, Talbi failed to report Putin’s reference to the Russia-Iran pact.

Image
Source: https://x.com/AFP/status/1935461687810756887

The Russia-Iran pact was signed on January 17, 2025 in three languages – Russian, Farsi and English. Click to read this for detailed analysis.

In the official Iranian version of the treaty in English, Articles 4, 5, and 6 set out defence provisions. “[1] In order to enhance national security and confront common threats, the intelligence and security agencies of the Contracting Parties shall exchange information and experience and increase the level of their cooperation.[2] The intelligence and security agencies of the Contracting Parties shall cooperate within the framework of separate agreements.”

Putin, who signed the pact with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, committed his officials to signing side agreements in secret. Article 5 (1) says: “In order to develop military cooperation between their relevant agencies, the Contracting Parties shall conduct the preparation and implementation of respective agreements within the Working Group on Military Cooperation.” Article 5 (4) amplifies: “The Contracting Parties shall consult and cooperate in countering common military and security threats of a bilateral and regional nature.” Article 6 (1) adds: “Within the framework of a comprehensive, long-term and strategic partnership, the Contracting Parties shall confirm their commitment to develop military-technical cooperation based on respective agreements between them taking into account mutual interests and their international obligations and shall consider such cooperation as an important component in maintaining regional and global security.”

Putin’s statement to AFP does not deny these elements of the treaty; he revokes them.

Image
Source: https://president.ir/en/156874

With Iran now under attack from Israel, the US and NATO allies, Russian sources concede that Putin’s meaning appears to the Iranians and to other Russian allies, including the Chinese, to violate Article 3 (4) which Putin had signed. “In the event that either Contracting Party is subject to aggression, the other Contracting Party shall not provide any military or other assistance to the aggressor which would contribute to the continued aggression, and shall help to ensure that the differences that have arisen are settled on the basis of the United Nations Charter and other applicable rules of international law.”

If Putin’s statements on Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu in the press conference may be interpreted as Article 3(4) “assistance to the aggressor”, Moscow sources say they wish to avoid discussing in public what Putin has said:

Asked by Reuters to reply to Netanyahu’s call for regime change in Teheran and Trump’s for Iran’s unconditional surrender, Putin replied: “As you know, Russia and I personally are in contact with the Prime Minister of Israel and on this issue in contact with President Trump. Always you need to see whether the goal is achieved or not at the beginning of something…We can see that today in Iran, with all the complexity of the domestic political processes – we know about this, and I think there is no point in going deeper. But still there is a consolidation of society around the political leadership of the country. It almost always happens everywhere, Iran is no exception. That’s the first point…I think it would be right all together to find ways to stop the fighting and find ways for all parties in this conflict to agree with each other, in order to ensure as the interests of Iran, on the one hand, its atomic activity, including a peaceful atomic activity, of course, I also mean a peaceful atomic energy, and a peaceful atom in other areas, and to ensure Israel’s interests in terms of the unconditional security of the Jewish State. This is a delicate issue, and of course, you need to be very careful here.”

Asked by AFP “if tomorrow Israel with the help of the United States or without the help of the United States, will simply kill [Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei, what will be your and Russia’s reaction, and your first actions?” Putin replied; “Mr. Talbi, if you permit, I hope that this will be the most correct answer to your question: I do not even want to discuss such an opportunity, I do not want to. K.Talbi: But they are already [saying this] themselves This is clearly being discussed – Mr. Trump, Mr. Netanyahu. Vladimir Putin: I hear it all. But I don’t even want to discuss it.”
After June 13, when Putin telephoned Pezeshkian and Netanyahu, the Russian President delayed speaking to Xi for six days; he delayed talking to Xi for five days after he had called Trump on June 14.


In the read-out of the Putin-Xi conversation, Ushakov intimates there has been friction with the Chinese causing the delay and Russian defensiveness over acknowledging this. There had been no delay, Ushakov claimed, because “the phone call took place in keeping with the mutual agreement of the two sides.” That the Chinese had been pressing to know what Putin has been deciding for a week, Ushakov said the “primary focus [was] on the escalation in the Middle East, which is quite logical in the current environment.”

If Xi had asked Putin the same questions which Reuters and AFP had asked him earlier about the US-Israeli war goal of regime change by killing the Iranian leadership, Ushakov did not want to say. Instead, he claimed the two “adopted a position of principle in their belief that the current situation and matters relating to the Iranian nuclear programme cannot be resolved by force, while a solution can only be achieved by political and diplomatic means.”

Did Xi ask Putin to clarify his understanding of the January treaty with Iran, and of the military and intelligence “cooperation” (the Treaty requirement) which Russia is providing the Iranians at the moment?

Putin isn’t acknowledging the obviousness of the issue, nor are he and Xi admitting what they told each other. Instead, according to Ushakov, Putin “informed his colleague about his latest international contacts with a focus on his telephone conversations with the key actors in the context of the confrontation between Israel and Iran. The Russian leader reaffirmed Russia’s readiness to offer its good offices, if necessary. The Chinese leader expressed support for this mediation effort, saying that he believed it could promote de-escalation amid the extreme tension we are witnessing today. In view of this increasingly challenging environment, the two leaders agreed to instruct their respective teams in the relevant agencies and services of the two countries to work closely together in the coming days by sharing insights and perspectives.”

This means Putin has delegated to the Defense Ministry, General Staff, the intelligence services, and the Foreign Ministry the job of “cooperation” with the Chinese which he also says the Iranians haven’t requested and which isn’t required by the treaty if they do.

This may be a smoke screen for the role in the fighting which the Chinese naval squadron is playing since it sailed into the Gulf last month. Coordination of battlefield intelligence between the Chinese, Russian and Iranian navies has been practiced and tested for several years. In the Sea of Oman and the Persian Gulf, the three militaries were exercising this coordination together in March. Article 4 of the January treaty requires it now – unless Putin’s press statement reveals that he has stopped it.

Image
Source: https://www.newsweek.com/china-news-nav ... ns-2068922

The destroyer Baotou and its escorts were in port in Abu Dhabi, UAE, in May. No open source has been found to locate the squadron’s location since June 13. US media are reporting that US and British warships have left port at Bahrain and are sailing south to exit the Strait of Hormuz before the Iranians close the waters by mining them.

The Ushakov summary, Moscow sources note, “reveals more by what it doesn’t say the two leaders discussed.” There is no condemnation of the Israeli decapitation attacks in Iran; no discussion of what trust Xi and Putin continue to place in Trump, if any; no answer from Putin on the terms Pezeshkian told Putin to communicate to Trump — if the Iranian leadership continues to trust Putin.

In a further sign of defensiveness with Xi, Ushakov reports that Putin has improved on his unusually cold birthday greeting to Xi — compared to the one he conveyed by telephone to Trump the day before. Ushakov now says Putin was effusive with Xi in Oriental fashion: “our President warmly congratulated his Chinese counterpart and friend on the occasion of his recent birthday. As is well known, Xi Jinping turned 72 on June 15. In keeping with Chinese tradition, our President wished his friend longevity as enduring as the Southern Mountains and happiness as immense as the East Sea…The conversation lasted approximately an hour, and the leaders bid each other farewell in a very warm and friendly manner.”

The Xi read-out turns the Sino-Russian discoordination into a “four point proposal“: “The coordination of positions between the Chinese and Russian leaders not only reflects the depth of strategic cooperation between the two countries, but also sends a clear message to the international community: a call to de-escalate tensions and safeguard regional peace…” Not quite so coordinated — Xi has criticized the US “as a major power with special influence over Israel, the US has not played a constructive role.” In Ushakov’s version, Putin says nothing at all about the US role against Iran.

“So what you see is obvious,” says a well-informed Moscow source. “This is not a Sino-Russian alignment but a US-Russian alignment with the Chinese claiming to join the troika. The message to Trump is very clear — we [Putin] want to make deal; we want sanctions lifted; we want our airline flights and Boeings back; we are ready for compromises. Look what we have done! We have been good boys, haven’t we, in Syria? We have made no new troubles in Libya. We have not made trouble in Venezuela. We are only focused on fighting in our front yard. We accept that you [Trump] are the hegemon. We’ll complain about it, but we won’t fight to make you weaker. Your strength, dear Uncle Sam, is our economic survival. It’s fine that you rape a few small boys every once in a while, but we are still being good boys, aren’t we? This is the reality. And the main media are saying this now — Beijing has abandoned Teheran. Moscow has abandoned Teheran. I add that Teheran has abandoned Iran with too little and too late, so what’s left to fight? For us, it’s Ukraine.”

Several hours after Putin and Xi plumbed what their spokesmen claim to be “the depth of [their] strategic cooperation”, the Russian General Staff leaked its version of the obvious. At 23:14 of June 19 Boris Rozhin, well-known military blogger, was authorized to issue this announcement, camouflaged by reference to the Iranian political figure and ranking general in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Mohsen Rezaee:
Image

“They said that if we negotiate, there will be no war. Negotiations were conducted, and the war began. Now, if we conclude a truce, in two months Israel will attack again – IRGC General Rezaee @parstodayrussian How familiar. It's about the Minsk Agreement and the negotiations in Istanbul.” Source: https://t.me/boris_rozhin/169511
Image

The original Iranian news agency report was posted a few minutes earlier. Mohsen, the Iranian source reported in Russian from a longer televised speech, had said: “A black day awaits Netanyahu and the Israeli army. We are gradually increasing the wave of our strikes to allow people to escape. We urge the Israeli population to leave the Territory as soon as possible and escape. We are gradually increasing the wave of our strikes to allow people to escape. We call on the Israeli population to leave as soon as possible.…We have used only 30% of our current capabilities and only 5% of the total potential. Netanyahu told the United States: either help me or declare a truce. Why don't you run away? Run away already, because we're deliberately stalling for time so that you can escape. New types of weapons will be introduced in the coming days. They said that if we negotiate, there will be no war. Negotiations were conducted, and the war began. Now, if we conclude a truce, Israel will attack again in two months. The enemy is in a weak position right now. If there is a truce, he will strengthen and attack again.”

https://johnhelmer.net/the-presidents-o ... more-91910

******

June 20, 2025 by M. K. BHADRAKUMAR
Middle East in Crisis – 4

Image
Russian President Vladimir Putin (3rd from left on top) met with heads of international news agencies, St. Petersburg, June 19, 2025

Putin in reflective mood muses on US-Iran confrontation

The US President Donald Trump who sought President Vladimir Putin’s active help a fortnight ago to mediate in the negotiations over Iran nuclear issue has abruptly changed his mind. In retrospect, Putin probably showed undue enthusiasm no sooner than Trump sought his help, and even mooted a trip to Iran shortly to meet Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, but only to realise just days later that Trump had other thoughts on his impressionable mind following the Camp David meeting with his aides and advisors and has since wandered into strange thoughts, including such tragic notions as decapitation of the Iranian leader. (here and here)

Putin’s terse remarks to a group of senior foreign journalists in St.Petersburg on Wednesday were made in a sombre mood. Putin wouldn’t answer a pointed question from Reuters as to what he thought of Trump’s shocking hint a day earlier in a Truth Social post that he might order the assassination of Khamenei.

Perhaps, it was a folly on Putin’s part to rush into playing second fiddle to Trump on the highly complicated Iran nuclear problem, blithely ignoring that this is quintessentially a geopolitical problem too, where the interests of the US and Russia do not necessarily converge.

In reality, Russian-Iranian relations are no less complex than the US-Russia tango. The two countries had a deeply troubled common history. During World War 2, Soviet forces even occupied Tehran in cahoots with Britain; earlier, imperial Russia carved out vast territories of the Persian Empire and annexed them. How could Iranians forget all that?

In an article in January when Putin and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian signed a strategic partnership treaty, I had written that the event in Moscow signified at best a breakthrough in the ties but the road ahead would be long and winding. I estimated that the treaty was “an attempt to build guardrails so as to enable a new trajectory of relationship in mutual interests.” (See Russia-Iran treaty signifies a ‘breakthrough’ in ties, Indian Punchline, January 24, 2025)

Curiously, Article 3 of the treaty painstakingly flags the maleficent activities that both sides should avoid and goes on to commit both sides not to help either side’s adversary in a conflict situation! What sort of strategic partnership can be a treaty with such caveats and mutual suspicions?

At the media event in St.Petersburg on Wednesday, Putin revealed that it was Iran who did not want a mutual defence clause to be included in the treaty (as Russia has with North Korea) — and, furthermore, that in the emergent circumstances while battling the US-Israeli juggernaut, Tehran has not so far sought any help from Moscow!

There is an abject lesson here for Trump, too. Iran is a fiercely independent country which, no doubt, is interested to have a productive relationship with the US, but the question, from the US perspective, is how to go about it. Certainly, it cannot be the John Wayne way.

Where the US failed repeatedly is also on this score — its inability or refusal to seek an equal relationship with Iran based on mutual respect. If Trump carries out a decapitation of the Iranian leader, he might as well forget about a normalisation of the US-Iran relationship for decades to come. And its debilitating consequence will be that even the US’ residual influence in the West Asian region will drain away within Trump’s presidency. In fact, any such incredibly stupid act may even lead to the emergence of a ultra-nationalistic nuclear weapon state.

Iran question needs to be handled with subtlety and sophistication. A hugely successful businessman like Trump ought to have the sense of realism (and pragmatism) to know the art of the possible.

Putin told on Wednesday, “We see that today in Iran with all the complexity of the internal political processes taking place there – we know about it, and I think there is no point in going into depth – but still there is a consolidation of society around the political leadership of the country. This happens almost always and everywhere, and Iran is no exception.” In short, Putin noted that a regime change in Iran to Washington’s satisfaction will remain a pipe dream.

Second, Putin said referring to Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities and missile manufacturing defence industry, “I will only repeat what we know and hear from all sides, these underground factories, they exist, nothing has happened to them — And in this connection, it seems to me that it would be right for all of us to seek ways to end the hostilities together …This is a delicate question, and of course you need to be very careful here. But, in my opinion, in general such a solution can be found.”

This is the best advice Trump can hope to get from any quarter today from within his circle or from foreigners. The level of trust and cooperation in the nuclear field between Russia and Iran is very high and Trump should have no difficulty to tap into it.

Putin disclosed that Moscow has given “certain signals to our Iranian friends. And in general it is possible to secure Iran’s interests in the field of peaceful nuclear energy and at the same time go out to allay concerns on the part of Israel regarding its security.

“Such options, in my opinion, there are. We have outlined them, I repeat, to all our partners: and the United States, and Israel, and even to Iran. We’re not imposing anything on anyone – just talking about how we see a possible way out of the situation. But the solution, of course, lies behind the political leadership of all these countries, above all Iran and Israel.”

Frankly, Iran is not an easy country to negotiate with. It can be stubborn as a mule while defending its national interests and preserving strategic autonomy. The collective consciousness of a civilisation state going back to circa 700 BC must be reckoned with. Putin pointed out that Russia had once offered to jointly develop an integrated air defence system for Iran but “the [Iranian] partners did not show much interest, and that’s it.” Look at the irony of it today!

Putin probably senses that a US intervention in Iran is in the cards. Of course, he is a worried man. Putin’s advice to both Netanyahu and Trump is deceptively simple: “You should always look at whether the goal is achievable or not when starting something.”

https://www.indianpunchline.com/middle- ... -crisis-4/

******

Talk of Regime Change in Iran Is Unacceptable: Kremlin

Image
Funeral of the Iranian Red Crescent members killed by Israeli bombing in Tehran, June 19, 2025. X/ @s_m_marandi

June 20, 2025 Hour: 8:09 am

The Middle East situation is already extremely tense and poses dangers not only to the region but to global stability, Peskov said.

On Friday, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said that Russia considers any discussion of regime change in Iran completely unacceptable.

“This is unimaginable. Of course, it should be unacceptable even to talk about it openly,” Peskov told British news outlet Sky News in response to Western rhetoric about potential power changes in Tehran.

During the interview, he also warned that any U.S. involvement in a direct conflict between Israel and Iran will significantly escalate the situation and further destabilize the region.

“The situation is already extremely tense and poses dangers not only to the region but to global stability. Expanding the geography of the conflict and increasing the number of participants would be even more dangerous,” he said, and cautioned that U.S. interference in the Israel-Iran conflict could “open Pandora’s box.”


His remarks followed reports that U.S. President Donald Trump said Washington is aware of the whereabouts of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei but currently does not plan to “eliminate” him.

Trump also demanded Iran’s “unconditional surrender,” though he said he would prefer to avoid deploying military force despite Washington’s patience “wearing thin” following Israeli strikes on Iranian targets.

Peskov said that Russia’s reaction to any potential assassination attempt on Iran’s supreme leader will be sharply negative. “We would strongly condemn such an act,” he said.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/talk-of- ... e-kremlin/

******

Anatol Lieven: Europe’s risky war on Russia’s ‘shadow fleet’
June 19, 2025

By Anatol Lieven, Responsible Statecraft, 6/19/25

The European Union’s latest moves (as part of its 17th package of sanctions against Russia declared in May) to target much more intensively Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” of oil tankers and other vessels illustrate the danger that, as long as the Ukraine war continues, so will the risk of an incident that will draw NATO and the EU into a direct military clash with Russia.

The EU sanctions involve bans on access to the ports, national waters and maritime economic zones of EU states. Ships that enter these waters risk seizure and confiscation. It does not appear that Washington was consulted about this decision, despite the obvious risks to the U.S.

As part of this strategy, on May 15, an Estonian patrol boat attempted to stop and inspect a tanker in the Gulf of Finland. Russia sent up a fighter jet that flew over the Estonian vessel (allegedly briefly trespassing into Estonian waters), and the Estonians backed off — this time. In January, the German navy seized a Panamanian-flagged tanker, the Eventin, in the Baltic after its engines failed and it drifted into German territorial waters.

Sweden has now announced that starting on July 1 its navy will stop, inspect and potentially seize all suspect vessels transiting its exclusive economic zone, and is deploying the Swedish air force to back up this threat. Since the combined maritime economic zones of Sweden and the three Baltic states cover the whole of the central Baltic Sea, this amounts to a virtual threat to cut off all Russian trade exiting Russia via the Baltic — which would indeed be a very serious economic blow to Moscow.

It would also threaten to cut off Russia’s exclave of Kaliningrad, which is surrounded by Poland, from access to Russia by sea.

This is the kind of action that has traditionally led to war. The Swedish assumption seems to be that the Russian navy and air force in the Baltic are now so weak — and so surrounded by NATO territory — that there is nothing Moscow can do about this. However, it is very unlikely that the Swedes would take this step unless they also believe that in the event of a clash, Washington will come to Sweden’s defense — even though the EU and Swedish decisions were made without U.S. approval and are not strictly covered by NATO’s Article 5 commitment.

And despite all the hysterical language about Russia being “at war” with NATO countries, these moves by the EU and Sweden are also based on an assumption that Russia will not in fact lose its temper and react with military force. European policymakers might however want to think about a number of things: for example, what would the U.S. do if ships carrying U.S. cargo were intercepted by foreign warships? We know perfectly well that the U.S. would blow the warships concerned out of the water and declare that it had done so in defense of the sacred rule of free navigation — in which the EU also professes to believe.

EU leaders, and admirals, should also spend some time on Russian social media, and read the incessant attacks on the Putin administration by hardliners arguing precisely that Moscow has been far too soft and restrained in its response to Western provocations, and that this restraint has encouraged the West to escalate more and more. Such hardliners (especially within the security forces) are by far the greatest internal political threat that Putin faces.

It is important to note in this regard that moves to damage Russia’s “shadow fleet” have not been restricted to sanctions. In recent months there have been a string of attacks on such vessels in the Mediterranean with limpet mines and other explosive devices — developments that have been virtually ignored by Western media.

In December 2024, the Russian cargo ship Ursa Major sank off Libya after an explosion in which two crewmembers were killed. The Reuters headline reporting these attacks was rather characteristic: “Three tankers damaged by blasts in Mediterranean in the last month, causes unknown, sources say.” Unknown, really? Who do we think were the likely perpetrators? Laotian special forces? Martians? And what are European governments doing to investigate these causes?

If the Russians do sink a Swedish or Estonian warship, the Trump administration will face a terribly difficult decision on how to respond to a crisis that is not of its own choosing: intervene and risk a direct war with Russia, or stand aside and ensure a deep crisis with Europe. The U.S. administration would therefore be both wise and entirely within its rights to state publicly that it does not endorse and will not help to enforce this decision.

Washington also needs — finally — to pay attention to what the rest of the world thinks about all this. The overwhelming majority of senators who are proposing to impose 500% tariffs on any country that buys Russian energy have apparently not realized that one of the two biggest countries in this category is India — now universally regarded in Washington as a vital U.S. partner in Asia. And now America’s European allies are relying on U.S. support to seize ships providing that energy to India.

The U.S. administration would also be wise to warn European countries that if this strategy leads to maritime clashes with Russia, they will have to deal with the consequences themselves. Especially given the new risk of war with Iran, the last thing Washington needs now is a new flare-up of tension with Moscow necessitating major U.S. military deployments to Europe. And the last thing the world economy needs are moves likely to lead to a still greater surge in world energy prices.

European governments and establishments seem to have lost any ability to analyze the possible wider consequences of their actions. So — not for the first time — America will have to do their thinking for them.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/06/ana ... dow-fleet/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14412
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Mon Jun 23, 2025 5:10 pm

IN ROPE-A-DOPE WARFIGHTING STRATEGY, NOTHING QUITE SUCCEEDS LIKE FAILURE

Image
By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

When Muhammad Ali famously demonstrated the rope-a-dope strategy in the Zaire title bout against George Forman in October 1974, he allowed Foreman to start attacking him against the ropes in Round 3. By Round 7 Foreman had exhausted his punching strength. In Round 8, Foreman dropped his guard, and Ali counterattacked with a combination of punches which knocked Foreman out.

Watch carefully how it was done in seven punches, eight seconds.

According to General Daniel Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the US has knocked out Iran’s nuclear enrichment and nuclear weapon preparation plants with “extremely severe destruction”; “completely and totally”, according to President Donald Trump.

The punches were delivered by “tactical surprise”, Caine has announced, with a “deception effort known only to an extremely small number of planners and key leaders here in Washington.” He said the “strike packages” comprised more than 125 aircraft and one submarine. They fired 16 GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bombs, more than 24 Tomahawk missiles, and a total of 75 precision-guided weapons at three land targets – Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. According to Caine’s report, no Iranian shot was fired against the US attackers as they flew on to these targets nor “on the way out.” Instead, “decoys” and “preemptive suppressing fires” were launched. “Iran’s fighters did not fly,” Caine claims, “and it appears that Iran’s surface-to-air missile systems did not see us. Throughout the mission we retained the element of surprise.”

The entire operation took 25 minutes. That’s the equivalent in the boxing ring of seven rounds. Iran reports the US had telegraphed its punches with advance notice that the bombing raid would be restricted to the three land targets.

Knocking out the Iranian leadership, including military and civilian leaders, plus Ayatollah Ali Kamenei, has been denied by Vice President JD Vance, then reasserted by Trump.

“No other military in the world,” said Caine, “could have done this.”

Iran has not acknowledged that rope-a-dope is its warfighting strategy. As Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi prepares for his meetings on Monday with Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) has issued a warning to Russia and China that they are failing to do enough to meet longstanding assistance promises and treaty obligations. “We may forget the words of our enemies, but never the silence of our friends,” the IRGC media platform Sepahi News has announced just after midnight on Monday morning (June 23). “After going through this sensitive situation, there will undoubtedly be a serious review of relations with some countries.” The text was accompanied by a picture of Putin and China’s President Xi Jinping together at a ceremony shaking hands.

The former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, spokesman for the Security Council, has issued a personal declaration supporting Iran’s war against both the US and Israel, and implying not only that Israel is losing the war, but also there is Kremlin backing for the Iranian nuclear weapons programme. “The critical infrastructure of the nuclear cycle appears not to have been damaged or even slightly affected. The enrichment of nuclear materials, and now we can say it, the future production of nuclear weapons, will continue. A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their nuclear ammunition. Israel is under attack — thundering explosions, people in panic. The United States is drawn into a new conflict with the prospect of a ground operation. The Iranian political regime has been preserved, and with a high degree of probability it has become stronger.”

“With such successes,” added Medvedev for the General Staff and intelligence services, “[we don’t see] Trump [winning] the Nobel Peace Prize, despite the utter venality of this nomination. Good start — congratulations, Mr. President!”

This is Russian for rope-a-dope.

In this ring, here is the US cornermen’s score:

Image
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtYELwdB2FQ

Here is the Iran cornermen’s score, according to an independent intelligence assessment at general rank:

Iran has fissile material ranging from 80% to 90% enrichment. They have created casing for packing the fissile material and only need to insert the ball to create the desired over-pressure. Cold testing has been done with the help of North Korea, facilitated possibly by China. Additionally, they believe that if push comes to shove, they could create low-yield weapons ranging from five to twenty kilotons. Also, the enriched uranium had been shifted before the attack, and it is not difficult to start the centrifuge process again. Consequently, it seems the US targeting may not have delivered the results desired. At best, the programme has been crippled but nowhere near obliterated as claimed by Trump. Insofar as its options are concerned, Iran is unlikely to open a front against the US just yet. It will concentrate its attacks on Israel, making it look weak and vulnerable.

Here is the ringside score:

US voter approval. Russian and Iranian commentaries claim the success announced by Trump, Caine and other Washington officials is a public relations stunt for US voters. The commentaries fail to admit that this is succeeding. In the President’s job approval polls, the inflection point which the White House sees in the average of the negative disapproval gap — when disapproval began declining and approval rising — came on April 27. At that time disapproval of Trump’s performance was 52.4% and approval 45.3%; the negative gap was 7.1 percentage points. Since then this gap has now shrunk to 4 points.

Image
Source: https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/ ... /inflation

From a closer analysis of the polls, it can be seen that the disapproval of Trump’s foreign policymaking is significantly worse than his overall rating – 10 points in negative spread. The domestic drivers of disapproval – inflation and economic policy as a whole – are also generally worse for Trump, his rating on immigration generally better. So Trump’s behaviour must be seen as playing to his strengths and diverting attention from his weaknesses. However, the military attack on Iran is not the end of MAGA nor the end of the Trump Adminstration, as the alt-media commentators have been celebrating. On the contrary, easy war success is exactly what Trump believes his MAGA slogan demonstrates. So far, he’s not wrong.

Internal Trump Administration dissent. There is none of significance. Instead, the purge which Trump has carried out at all the foreign policy, military and intelligence organs has succeeded. There are no damaging leaks this time round, like there were during the US Air Force Yemen attack operations in March. In General Caine’s briefing, he was emphatic: “I am particularly proud of our discipline related to operational security – something that was of great concern to the President, the Secretary [of Defense Peter Hegseth], General [Michael] Kurilla [CENTCOM commander], and me, and we will continue to focus on this.” – Min 8:11.

The last purportedly independent foreign policymaker in the Trump Administration, Tulsi Gabbard, the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), has proved she supports the war-with-Iran line and will accept whatever insults to her competence and character which Trump has repeated publicly.

Image
Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/shes-w ... pabilities

Defeat of the Democratic Party in the war in Los Angeles. White House and Republican Party pollsters believe the outcome of Trump’s direct clash over immigration enforcement in Los Angeles has been to boost California Governor Gavin Newsom’s support as the front-running presidential candidate for the Democratic Party. However, the confrontation has increased Trump’s support among Republican and independent voters. For more analysis of Trump’s war in Los Angeles, read this.

From the Russian point of view, following analysis of these factors, the consensus conclusion among policymakers remains that there is no Russian interest to be served in criticizing and confronting Trump publicly either in person or in policy, or by proxy. At the moment, that is.

Sources in Moscow also acknowledge that President Vladimir Putin’s recent statements in St Petersburg on Israel and Iran have triggered “special sensitivity” inside the internal policy-making apparatus and this is spilling out into public debate by the military blogs, television talk shows, social media, and mainstream editorials.

Putin himself registered his sensitivity to the question, asked at the St. Petersburg Forum on Friday afternoon (June 20): “Q: What do you say to those who say or write that Russia is an unreliable ally because it hasn’t stood up for Iran? Vladimir Putin: Those who promote such narratives about Russia’s unreliability as an ally – [they are] provocateurs. They provoke the situation. But it won’t help them, they won’t achieve their goals…Please note that almost two million people live in Israel — immigrants from the former Soviet Union and the Russian Federation, [Israel] is almost a Russian-speaking country today. In the latest Russian history we must take this factor into account. That’s the first point. Second, we have traditionally developed very kind, trusting, friendly and allied relations with the Arab and Islamic world. Because we have about 15 percent of Islamic population, we are observers at the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. You know, this is also a factor…. We have a friendly relationship with Iran….In this we always fulfill all our obligations – the same thing happens on the Russian-Iranian track. We support Iran in the fight for its legitimate interests, including in the struggle for its interests in the peaceful atom. And we have always taken this position — our principled position in this case has not changed in this conflict. Who says we should have done more — what is more? Starting some kind of combat operations, or what?”

The official English translation of Putin’s remarks has been delayed for release on the Kremlin website after more than 48 hours.

Putin’s statements, followed by Trump’s attack on Iran, have sharpened the debate behind the Kremlin wall on how much more time to give Trump to show his hand in the Ukraine war. If Trump is openly advocating regime change in Iran and using his military to achieve it — ask more than Moscow source — should we delay? The Americans have dropped their huge bomb on three targets in Iran. Why don’t we fire our Oreshnik at the Zelensky regime?

In rope-a-dope warfighting strategy, this is Russian for calling time.

https://johnhelmer.net/in-rope-a-dope-w ... e-failure/

******

Vice-Governor of Belgorod Region Detained for Theft During Fortification Construction
June 22, 14:55

Image

Vice-Governor of Belgorod Region Rustem Zainullin Detained

Preliminary, this is related to the investigation of theft during the construction of protective structures on the border. Approximate estimates of the amount of damage are 500 million rubles, obtained due to inflated prices and theft during the production of reinforced concrete products. Zainullin occupies a key position in matters of managing land and property assets of the Belgorod Region.

What do you think, if after the Kursk and Belgorod Regions, a comprehensive audit of the persons responsible for the construction of fortifications in the Bryansk Region is launched, will the same thing be discovered there?

P.S. It is also worth noting that yesterday it became known that former Deputy Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation Timur Ivanov is involved in another criminal case involving a bribe on an especially large scale - 152,000,000 rubles. The total amount of bribes and stolen goods in the Ivanov case exceeded 4,000,000,000 rubles. (Video at link.)

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9913965.html

Court closes "historical foundation Memorial"
June 23, 8:48

Image

Court closes "historical foundation Memorial"


The Tverskoy Court of Moscow has liquidated the Memorial Foundation for Assistance to Historical and Legal Education*.
This was reported by RIA Novosti with reference to the case materials.
According to the agency, the founder of the foundation himself filed a request for liquidation. The lawsuit states that the foundation does not have property to implement its goals, and does not actually carry out activities aimed at achieving the goal for which it was created.
It is noted that the foundation was established in 2013.
Earlier, a court in Russia sentenced FBK** top manager Leonid Volkov*** in absentia to 18 years in prison for several crimes, including an extremism case. He was also fined 2 million rubles.

https://russian.rt.com/russia/news/1496 ... aciya-fond - zinc

They are cleaning up the tails associated with anti-Stalinist pedophiles on the USAID payroll. All structures associated with Memorial must be liquidated.
The time will come and the news about the closure of the Yeltsin Center will also be heard routinely.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9915388.html

The prosecutor's office is asking for 14.5 years for Timur Ivanov
June 23, 18:50

Image

The prosecutor's office is asking for 14.5 years for Timur Ivanov


The prosecutor requested 14.5 years in prison for former Deputy Defense Minister Timur Ivanov.
For the second defendant in this case, Anton Filatov, the state prosecution requested 14 years in a general regime colony.

According to the investigation, at the time of the crime, Ivanov headed JSC Oboronstroy, and Filatov held the post of head of the Oboronlogistics corporation, which was directly subordinate to the former deputy defense minister.
They are accused of embezzling 216 million rubles from Interkommerts during the purchase of the Agios Lavrentius and Maria Elena ferries for the Kerch ferry crossing.

In addition, the prosecutor asked to confiscate the property of the former deputy defense minister.

https://t.me/boris_rozhin/170061 - zinc

As expected, they requested around 15. This is almost the maximum.
The total damage from Timur Ivanov's activities, if we only take into account current criminal cases, is more than 4 billion rubles, including bribes received.
In my opinion, the legislation needs to be adjusted to make punishment for such things tougher.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9916349.html

Google Translator

******

Iran and Russia strengthen coordination amid U.S. and Israeli attacks

Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow to coordinate responses to U.S. and Israeli military strikes, as Tehran expresses gratitude for Russia’s support.

Image
Tehran and Moscow align diplomatically amid a growing Western military escalation in the region. Photo: RT

June 23, 2025 Hour: 6:57 am

In response to U.S. and Israeli strikes, Iran and Russia today bolstered their alliance in Moscow.

As regional tensions mount, Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi arrived in Moscow on Sunday to discuss a unified stance with President Vladimir Putin and senior Russian officials. The visit follows U.S. airstrikes on three Iranian nuclear sites — Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. Those strikes have drawn widespread condemnation.

“Russia is a friend of Iran, and we enjoy a strategic alliance. We always consult each other and coordinate our positions,” Araghchi told reporters in Istanbul before departing. In Moscow, he reaffirmed Iran’s sovereign prerogatives to respond to what he called the “illegitimate actions” of the United States and Israel.

President Putin denounced the attacks as “a completely unprovoked aggression against Iran” that “has no foundation or justification.” He praised the longstanding, reliable bond between the two nations and said, “We are doing everything possible to support the Iranian people.” He also noted that Moscow’s position on the Iran–Israel escalation is “well known, as reflected in statements by the Russian Foreign Ministry.”

Araghchi described the agenda as covering “serious and important” topics of mutual concern. Given the recent U.S. strikes, he added, it was only natural for talks to “extend into broader dimensions.” He stressed that current conditions call for “more precise and tighter consultations” between Tehran and Moscow.

Since the early hours of June 13, when Israel launched unprovoked missile and drone attacks on Iranian territory, both sides have traded strikes. On June 21, U.S. President Donald Trump said the U.S. Air Force had carried out a “successful attack” on those facilities. He declared, “No other Army in the world could have done this. The time for peace has come!” and warned any Iranian retaliation would meet “a far greater force than what was used tonight.”

Araghchi reminded that, “in accordance with the UN Charter, Iran reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interests, and people.” Iran’s UN ambassador, Amir Saeid Iravani, added that “the timing, nature, and scale of any proportionate response will be decided by our armed forces.”

Russian UN envoy Vasily Nebenzya sharply criticized Washington, accusing it of being “willing to commit any crime and violate international law in order to preserve its global hegemony.” He stressed that “no one has authorized” these strikes.

Moscow also warned that “the risk of escalation in the Middle East — already entangled in multiple crises — has significantly increased.”

https://www.telesurenglish.net/iran-and ... i-attacks/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14412
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Tue Jun 24, 2025 3:59 pm

“CONGRATULATIONS TO EVERYONE!” IN ROPE-A-DOPE STRATEGY, THE BELL ALSO SOUNDS FOR REST PERIODS

Image

By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

According to the Unified Rules of Boxing issued by the US Association of Boxing Commissions and Combative Sports, when the bell sounds for the end of each round, there is a “rest period” before the boxers resume their fight, or one retires too hurt to continue.

The ceasefire between Israel and Iran which President Donald Trump (lead image, left, right) has congratulated himself for arranging is the bell sounding for the rest period to begin.

Iran’s rope-a-dope strategy allows rest periods. But for this strategy to succeed, the rest periods must be too short for Israel to be re-supplied by the US, Germany and other allies, compared to the re-supply arrangements which Iran is now trying to make with Russia, China, North Korea and other sources.

Since Trump’s first announcement allowed Israel and Iran to continue striking each other for six hours, his deadline was roughly 7 am Teheran time today, June 24. In reply, Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s Foreign Minister, announced “there is NO ‘agreement’ on any ceasefire or cessation of military operations. However, provided that the Israeli regime stops its illegal aggression against the Iranian people no later than 4 am Teheran time, we have no intention to continue our response afterwards.”

According to Trump, “Israel & Iran came to me, almost simultaneously, and said, ‘PEACE!’” Trump has then claimed he had forced them. “We couldn’t have made today’s ‘deal’ without the talent and courage of our great B-2 pilots, and all of those associated with that operation. In a certain and very ironic way, that perfect ‘hit’, late in the evening, brought everyone together, and the deal was made!!!”

Sources in Moscow say the terms of the Trump “deal” are quite different.

On the one hand, according to the sources, Trump understands that unless he orders a halt to US arms supplies and battlefield intelligence to the regime in Kiev, Russia will not halt its arms supplies and intelligence-sharing with Iran. The sources add that for the time being Iran is not requesting fresh Russian aid. “Several individuals have been moved under Russian protection; these are individuals and families who have been moved into Russia. North Korean deliveries have been crucial in the run-up — they are basically Chinese. So Iran has not been lacking. They have been ready. Also, they have the capacity to fire several large missiles per day for several weeks, if not months, which the Israelis and Americans cannot stop. These will get through to Israel’s water, gas, and electricity plants, other fuel supplies, and ports.”

The assessment in Moscow is that Iran has demonstrated it has escalation control for the long term, and that in the short term Israel needs US re-supply, re-financing, and recovery more urgently than Iran. In exchange for Trump’s “ceasefire” to meet the Israeli requests, President Vladimir Putin has communicated that Trump must do nothing to block the acceleration of Russia’s offensive in the Ukraine.

When Foreign Minister Araghchi met President Putin at the Kremlin on Monday, Putin was accompanied for the first time by the head of military intelligence (GRU), Admiral Igor Kostyukov. Kostyukov was also a lead figure in the Russian negotiating team for the last round of Istanbul negotiations with the Ukrainians.

Image
Front: President Putin, Foreign Minister Araghchi; back, Admiral Kostyukov, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. For the full list of participants, click here.

In the Kremlin website’s record of remarks, Putin did not mention Israel or the US as the attacker: “The completely unprovoked act of aggression against Iran is without foundation or justification. Russia has long-standing, strong, and trustworthy relations with Iran, and we are committed to supporting the Iranian people through our continued efforts.”

Araghchi’s reply was more explicit. “As you are well aware, the level of escalation continues to grow by the day. Unfortunately, we have come under attack ­– not only from Israel, but also from the United States, which has chosen to strike our facilities. These acts of aggression by Israel and the US are entirely illegitimate and in violation of international law and established norms. We are now defending our sovereignty and our country, and our defence is fully legitimate. We are grateful to our Russian colleagues and friends for their principled stance and for their resolute condemnation of these acts of aggression. Today, Russia stands on the right side of history and of international law… I hope we will have the opportunity today to discuss the full range of issues related to these developments.”

The closed-door discussion then focused on the military and diplomatic proposals which Araghchi tabled.

For Putin, spokesman Dmitry Peskov said after the meeting that the President continues to balance his approach between Israel and Iran. “Iran and Israel have completely different positions”, Peskov said, “the situation is very tense.” Yury Ushakov, foreign policy advisor to Putin who was also present, has not given a public read-out.

The semi-public debate outside the Kremlin walls is critical of the “balanced approach”. The most direct expression of this came the day before, on June 22, from Dmitry Medvedev, currently deputy secretary of the Security Council, who published on his Telegram channel a 10-point attack on both the US and Israel, and implied Russian support for Iran to develop nuclear-armed deterrence against future war threats.

How seriously the Trump Administration understood this to be was signalled when Trump himself followed with an attempt to put Medvedev in his place: “Did he really say that or, is it just a figment of my imagination? If he did say that, and, if confirmed, please let me know, IMMEDIATELY. The ‘N word’ should not be treated so casually. I guess that’s why Putin’s ‘THE BOSS.’” US presidents never address foreign officials at Medvedev’s current rank.

What US and Russian sources understand to be the pressing problem of the “rest period” is that Iran, China, North Korea, and Russia will now concert their efforts to open the railroad connection through Pakistan and Turkmenistan for military supplies. The Caspian Sea and Turkmenbashi-Sarakhs gateways for such a connection were reported here.

A well-informed source adds: “Pakistan will play the Chinese side. And it will be a reliable route of Chinese supplies notwithstanding US inducements and threats. Russians and Chinese must measure very carefully what, how, and how much is needed to prevent a collapse in Teheran. This means, not so much the preservation of the clerical order as the protection of Iran itself from partition.” Follow the US-Israeli plan for regime change and partition of Iran starting here:

Image
Source: https://x.com/bears_with/status/1934878851726741810

A Moscow source comments: “This [war] is not ending. This is not the beginning of any end either. The Iranians have been hurt and damaged; they are bleeding. No one should underestimate what’s been done to them. No one should underestimate the scale of the internal bleeding. But with that, the state, the Islamic Republic, however difficult as a partner, must remain. That’s the key. Russians and Chinese can’t do it by themselves. No amount of logistics and materiel can. ”

The problems of mutual and reciprocal distrust between Russia and Iran are centuries old, as reported here and here. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) publicly advertised this just hours before Araghchi arrived at the Kremlin.

Image
Source: https://x.com/bears_with/status/1937045785033470043

Araghchi has had next to nothing to say publicly before he left Moscow for Turkmenistan.

Later in the same evening, Teheran reported that Iran’s Defense Minister, Brigadier General Aziz Nasirzadeh, had telephoned Russian Defense Minister Andrei Belousov. These Iranian signals indicate that Putin has given a green light for what he told Araghchi are “ways we might work together to navigate the current situation.”

In parallel, also late on Monday evening, Lavrov authorized the Foreign Ministry to issue a statement explicitly naming Israel and the US together in a war for regime change in Teheran, and for “encroach[ment] on the sovereignty of the country” (diplospeak for partition):

Image
Source: https://mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/2029997/?lang=en

Yevgeny Krutikov, a former GRU field officer who writes for Vzglyad, the Moscow platform for discussion of the strategic and operational options, has commented: “Israel has unleashed a hopeless and unneeded war, from which everyone is now looking for a way out so that everyone is not ashamed to look in the mirror. If in Tel Aviv it was believed that war is a competition of ‘who has more missiles’, suddenly it has turned out that the war with Iran is a more multifaceted phenomenon which Tel Aviv cannot cope with alone. So now everyone has become morose.”

Russian sources will not go so far as to say that Iran has won escalation control from Israel, at least not yet. The sources also repeat how much punishment the rope-a-dope strategy has inflicted on the Iranians. “Russians know they are the only ones who can fight and deliver a comprehensive strategic defeat. Not even the Chinese can do as effectively what Russians are doing in the Ukraine. So now that Trump has entered the Iranian battlefield, it’s up to Putin to convince him to withdraw from both. Well, maybe not convince – persuade may be the better word. Come the NATO meeting [June 24-25], our eyes will be on whether Trump delivers Kiev’s capitulation to Russia’s terms, or we have to take it.”

https://johnhelmer.net/congratulations- ... more-91933

******

Russification of signs
June 24, 16:59

Image

Russification of signs

Putin signed a law on the protection of the Russian language, which provides, among other things, for the placement of signs and inscriptions only in Russian

. According to the document, it is also prohibited to assign foreign-sounding names to residential complexes and microdistricts. The regulations will come into force on March 1, 2026. In addition to signs, the document affects pointers, signs and information boards. They must be placed in public places only in Russian. The adoption of the law is due to the popularity of such words as "coffee", "fresh", "sale", "shop", "open" on various signs. However, foreign words will not be prohibited - however, a translation into Russian will be mandatory, while the inscription must be identical in content and equivalent in design.

The rules on mandatory translation into Russian will not affect company names, trademarks and service marks.
The law also contains a provision that applies to residential complexes and other buildings. Their names must be in Russian.


A little fight against sycophancy and aping.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9918156.html

Google Translator

The French have been taking chauvinistic measures concerning their language for a while nor though in the case of Russia the chauvinism is more political than cultural.

******

Russian Lower House Allows Non-Citizens to Enlist in the Army

Image
Russian soldiers. X/ @MamedovGyunduz

June 24, 2025 Hour: 9:16 am

The bill aims to expand the pool of individuals eligible for military contract service.
On Tuesday, the State Duma, or lower house of parliament, approved a bill allowing non-citizens to serve under contract in the ranks of the Russian Armed Forces.

The legislative change, which must still be approved by the Senate before being signed into law by President Vladimir Putin, amends the country’s military service law. The bill, as stated in its preamble, aims to “expand the pool of individuals eligible for military contract service.”

Since 2010, Russia has permitted foreigners to enlist under contract in its Armed Forces. Initially, the law stipulated that any foreigner between the ages of 18 and 30 with proficiency in Russian and no criminal record could sign a five-year contract and, after three years of service, apply for Russian citizenship.

In June 2023, Russian lawmakers passed an amendment allowing foreigners to obtain citizenship after just one year of military service in combat zones in the neighboring country.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy urged NATO members at the alliance’s annual summit in The Hague on Tuesday to allocate at least 0.25% of their gross domestic product (GDP) to military aid for Ukraine. He argued that Russia’s military operation in Ukraine also threatens the security of Europe as a whole.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/russian- ... -the-army/

******

Foreign Influence: Access Denied
June 24, 2025
Rybar

Roskomnadzor has blocked all resources of the American analytical center CEPA (Center for European Policy Analysis), and the Prosecutor General's Office has begun an investigation into the activities of Russian citizens associated with this organization.

About CEPA and its head in the Russian Federation
The center, founded in 2005 in Washington and headed by Alina Polyakova , was designated an undesirable organization back in 2023, but continued its subversive activities through Russian accomplices.

Polyakova is also a former employee of the NATO think tank The Atlantic Council and a current board member of the Free Russia Foundation (funded by the State Department) and the Institute of Modern Russia. The latter was founded by Mikhail Khodorkovsky's son Pavel .

CEPA is a typical example of Western “soft power” in action – under the guise of scientific research and analysis, the center systematically financed anti-Russian activities.

The organization receives funding from the US State Department, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), Microsoft , and major NATO defense contractors, including Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems , and FireEye . Such funding clearly demonstrates the true goals of the “think tank.”

After the start of the special military operation, CEPA significantly intensified its anti-Russian campaign, promoting narratives of “suppression of dissent,” calling for separatism and protests, and spreading ideas of “defederalization” and “decolonization” of Russia.

Particular attention was paid to the topics of “occupation of Crimea and Chechnya,” systematic demonization of Russian security forces, army and state authorities.

Among the Russian citizens who collaborated with CEPA are Irina Borogan , who systematically publishes materials aimed at discrediting the Russian special services and authorities; Andrei Soldatov , who disseminates false information about the activities of the Russian armed forces and special services; Pavel Luzin , who discredits the Russian army and disseminates fakes about the losses of the Russian Armed Forces; and other individuals.

These people participated in the center's programs, including the Democracy Fellowship Fund , created specifically to strengthen anti-Russian propaganda after the start of the NWO.

In fact, the center was a coordination headquarters for destabilizing the Russian Federation, supporting protest movements, and promoting scenarios for the collapse of the country.

Those who collaborated with the organization now face legal consequences - they face protocols, court proceedings, fines, and in some cases, real prison terms. However, this is not the first time such companies have exposed their own employees to criminal cases.

https://rybar.ru/inostrannoe-vliyanie-dostup-zakryt/

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

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14412
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Thu Jun 26, 2025 3:34 pm

Mark Curtis: Blair & Major Reassured Russia About NATO
June 25, 2025
By Mark Curtis, Declassified UK, 5/19/25

Declassified British files shed further light on the controversial question as to what assurances were made to Russia by U.K. officials about the expansion of NATO into eastern Europe.

The documents show then Prime Minister John Major telling Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov in February 1997 that “if he were Russian he too would be concerned by the possibility that NATO might move up to Russia’s borders.”

But Major added that “NATO has no intention of doing this” and was “not seeking to box in Russia.”

Briefing notes drawn up by No. 10 Downing Street [the prime minister’s office] for Major’s phone call with Primakov stated: “We are not seeking to encircle Russia with NATO members.”

Image
Primakov in 1991. (RIA Novosti archive /Prihodko / Wikimedia Commons /CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0)

The following month, Major wrote to Russian President Boris Yeltsin saying: “I am well aware of Russian concern that NATO enlargement may mean that NATO forces will effectively move nearer your own borders. I well understand the fears that may be aroused in Russia.”

However, he added:

“But let me assure you that such fears are quite without foundation.”

The reason was that

“NATO has no intention of stationing large conventional forces or nuclear weapons on the territory of new members.”

Major also reassured Yeltsin that NATO would only deploy “a modest amount of NATO infrastructure… such as storage facilities and command and control arrangements.”

The declassified files released to the National Archives covering 1996-97 are full of references by U.K. officials to Russian “concern,” “negative attitudes,” “fears,” “hostility” and “resentment” about NATO enlargement.

At the time, NATO’s expansion was being considered for only a small number of central European countries, not former states in the old Soviet Union, such as Ukraine — which was an even more sensitive issue to Moscow.

An August 1996 paper drawn up by Downing Street clearly noted Russia’s policy of “not allowing Ukraine or the Baltic States to join NATO.”

‘Enlarge NATO anyway’

Image
Major in February 1993, during a visit to the Clinton White House. (White House Photograph Office/Wikimedia Commons /Public Domain)

U.K. officials believed the Russians reluctantly “tacitly accept that enlargement will go ahead” — subject to their opposition to nuclear and conventional force deployments — “but cannot say so publicly.”

In December 1996, Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin told Major in private: “Russia could not stop NATO enlarging, but this would create a fragile situation which could explode.”

Major assured him: “We did not wish to do anything to unsettle Russia.”

[See: Tangled Tale of NATO Expansion at Heart of Ukraine Crisis]

The files show that Britain was intent on expanding NATO to include “some” central/eastern European countries.

A policy paper drawn up in September 1996 said U.K. objectives were “to enlarge NATO to the East” and “secure Russian acquiescence in enlargement … But if Russian acquiescence is not possible, for NATO to enlarge anyway.”

The paper was drawn up by Foreign Office official Matthew Rycroft, who in 2003 would be former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s private secretary during the war in Iraq.

‘Full Account of Russia’s Place’

Image
Yeltsin waving at reporters in Moscow in August 1991. (Kremlin.ru /Wikimedia Commons /CC BY 4.0)

In the month Blair succeeded Major as prime minister, May 1997, Britain’s ambassador to Russia, Andrew Wood, cabled London saying: “NATO enlargement [is] a painful issue with domestic implications.”

He added: “The Russians are virtually at one in regarding the coming enlargement of NATO as a humiliating defeat, and in supposing that the West either consciously or unconsciously intends it to be seen as such.”

However, Yeltsin also conveyed, in a phone call with Blair the same month, that he understood that “there was no turning back” on enlargement. But he again insisted that nuclear weapons should not be sited in new NATO members and that there should be “no permanent deployment of conventional forces.”

[See: Boris Yeltsin Privately Supported NATO Expansion Despite Public Stance]

A British prime minister again offered assurances to Moscow. A briefing for Blair’s meeting with Yeltsin in May 1997 stated on the subject of NATO enlargement: “We will not allow Russia’s legitimate security interests to be damaged in this process.”

It added that “an enlarged NATO will mean more security in Central Europe. This is in Russian as well as NATO interests.”

Blair told Yeltsin “he was aware of the view Russia took on NATO enlargement” and that “arrangements for the future had to take full account of Russia’s place and weight in Europe.”

Later that year, in October, Yeltsin told Blair again in a phone call that “he continued to oppose enlargement of NATO, which was a mistake. Europe should not be divided.”

At the time discussions were taking place about a comprehensive security system for Europe, replacing the old East-West divide and giving Russia a place in that system. It was clear, however, that NATO, led by the U.S., privileged expanding the organisation over bringing in Russia into a new European security architecture.

At NATO’s summit in Madrid in July 1997, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland were invited to begin accession talks, and they joined NATO in 1999. A further wave of accession occurred in 2004 when Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia all joined NATO.

Image

U.S. Secretary of Defense William Cohen giving a press statement on July 8, 1997, in Madrid, about NATO’s decision to invite Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic to begin negotiations to join NATO. National Security Advisor Samuel Burger on left, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright on right. (DoD/ R. D. Ward/Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

By 2017, NATO had established a “forward presence” policy in eastern Europe, deploying battalion-size battlegroups in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. NATO claims this was needed in response to Russia’s “aggressive actions against its neighbours,” notably its [supposed] 2014 invasion of Crimea.

Opposing Ukraine

British files from 2001 show that Defence Minister Igor Sergeyev warned NATO that any further enlargement would be “a major political error” requiring Moscow to take “appropriate steps.”

By 2002, when Britain was supporting a new wave of central/eastern European states becoming members of NATO, Blair’s government was explicitly opposed to Ukraine joining the organisation, the files show.

“We do not support Ukraine’s request to join MAP,” the Foreign Office noted in 2002, referring to NATO’s Membership Action Plan, which provided advice to countries aspiring to join NATO.

Though Kyiv was pushing strongly for an enhanced relationship with NATO, Ukraine’s bid was “premature” in the British view since the country was “far from meeting criteria expected of aspirants.”

The U.K.’s chief diplomat at NATO, Emyr Jones Parry, noted that Ukraine was “on notice that deepening relations with NATO will require more democratic and other reforms.”

But also critical for British officials was the impact on relations with Russia. U.K. strategy was “to steer Ukraine away from any suggestion of membership except in the very long term” given the “serious impact on NATO relations with Russia.”

“Ukraine membership of MAP would greatly complicate our handling of the new Nato-Russia relationship and would raise serious Russian concerns about Nato’s strategy,” reads a 2002 briefing note for the prime minister.

Barrier to Russia

Image
U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair and Russian President Vladimir Putin, 2000. (Kremlin.ru / Wikimedia Commons / CC BY 4.0)

At the time, the Labour government was seeking a “transformed relationship between Russia and the Alliance,” a process which was described as “truly historic.” Indeed Blair was courting Vladimir Putin after MI6 had helped him into power in 2000.

British officials were impressed with Moscow’s declared support for the U.S. following the 9/11 attacks in September 2001 and sought a new strategic relationship.

Though British officials opposed Ukraine joining NATO at this time, some spotted the country’s geopolitical importance.

Roger Liddle, Blair’s special adviser, wrote that Ukraine played a key role as a supply route for Russian gas. But also Ukraine could act “as a formidable barrier to any resurgence of Russian Imperialism to the West.”

At its Bucharest summit in 2008, NATO pledged that both Ukraine and Georgia would eventually become members.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/06/mar ... bout-nato/

*****

On the ban of "Starlinks" in the LPR
June 25, 20:56

Image

On the ban of "Starlinks" in the LPR

The head of the LPR Pasechnik announced a ban on the sale and use of Starlinks in the LPR.

He decided to ban the sale and use of SpaceX equipment (USA), including Starlink terminals, on the territory of the LPR. The corresponding decree has already been signed. ( https://clck.ru/3MnKNT )

In the context of a special military operation, protecting the information space and ensuring the safety of our citizens are a priority.

Starlink is a technology that can be used by the enemy to coordinate actions, transmit data and strike our territory. We cannot afford to ignore this threat.

I emphasize that this decision is aimed solely at ensuring the safety of our citizens and protecting the interests of the republic.


What can I say about this.

1. The military has used and will continue to use Starlink. The main reason is the shortage/absence of domestic analogues. Therefore, in the LPR, Starlinks could be found from platoon to army level.

2. 99% of all Starlink sales are outside the LPR. The main hub for selling Starlinks is Moscow, where they are imported in bulk from China, Central Asia and the Emirates.

3. As far as I know, the volume of Starlink deliveries to Russia is only increasing. At the same time, Starlink does not officially operate in Russia itself. But demand is growing. At the same time, there is no government ban on importing Starlinks to Russia.

4. At the same time, Starlink is certainly part of the enemy's infrastructure and, of course, poses a threat to the safety of those who use it. But Starlink is not used for the good life. As soon as there is a domestic analogue that replaces Starlink in mass use, the need for Starlink will disappear.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9920690.html

Google Translator

******

Russia confronts US betrayal in Israel–Iran war

Tel Aviv's defiance and Washington's duplicity have shattered every last bit of Moscow's illusions of diplomacy, forcing the Kremlin to reckon with the collapse of its balancing act in West Asia – and even Ukraine.

Hazal Yalin

JUN 24, 2025

Image
Photo Credit: The Cradle

From the outset, Moscow condemned Israel's aggression against Iran in sharp terms. The Russian Foreign Ministry’s first official statement left no ambiguity in assigning blame to Tel Aviv.

Until 20 June, Russia clung to the belief that a ceasefire could be brokered and that Washington would refrain from direct strikes on Iran. This optimism stemmed from a nearly hour-long phone conversation on 14 June, during which US President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, discussed the escalating Israel–Iran conflict. Trump reportedly stated during the call, “this war in Israel–Iran should end,” a message echoed later on his Truth Social feed.

Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov reported that US negotiators were open to returning to talks on Iran’s nuclear program. For Moscow, this was not merely optimism — it was interpreted as a real diplomatic overture and a potential backchannel for Trump to defuse mounting domestic and legal pressures.

From Moscow’s view: A timeline of misjudged hopes

This belief informed Moscow’s early posture. Even after Tel Aviv launched its unlawful strikes on Iran, the Russians avoided directly blaming Washington. Instead, they pinned principal responsibility on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right cabinet, denouncing Israel's leadership while keeping communication channels open.

In his 18–19 June press conference with international media agencies – deliberately scheduled late at night to be picked up by US audiences – Putin emphasized ongoing direct lines with both Trump and Netanyahu. He pointed out that the attacks had only solidified Iran’s internal political unity and noted that the bombings did little to harm Tehran’s nuclear infrastructure, saying, “These underground factories remain intact. Nothing happened to them.”

Putin also made clear that a resolution was still on the table: a framework that could ensure Iran’s peaceful nuclear rights while addressing Israeli security concerns, and confirmed that Russia had presented these options to all three sides.

At the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) – Russia's premier annual business and diplomacy gathering – Putin reiterated Moscow's diplomatic approach, noting that Russia had presented “some ideas” for a settlement to all sides. He also reaffirmed support for Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear development, referencing Russia’s ongoing construction at the Bushehr nuclear facility.

Putin stated that he had requested safety guarantees for Russian personnel there, and added, “Prime Minister Netanyahu has agreed with that, and President Trump has promised to support our legitimate demands.”

But that facade would collapse almost instantly. Shortly after Israel claimed it had targeted the Bushehr plant – only to later retract the statement, calling it a “mistake” – it bombed the city’s airport, destroying its international terminal.

The attack, less than 36 hours after public reassurances, was viewed in Moscow as a deliberate humiliation. It extinguished any remaining belief that Tel Aviv or Washington were operating in good faith.

Moscow’s tone hardened. UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia’s 20 June speech marked the last instance of diplomatic optimism:

“We are convinced that it is quite possible to forge a solution that would both respect Iran's right to peaceful nuclear activities and ensure the unconditional security of the Jewish state. We have conveyed these options to our American and Israeli colleagues, as well as to our Iranian partners.”

After 22 June: Anger and reassessment in Moscow

Everything changed on 22 June. The US bombing campaign confirmed what many in Moscow had feared: that Washington was not only unwilling to mediate, but had used Russia’s overtures as strategic cover.

Russian political elites began to speak in stark terms. Andrey Klishas, head of the constitutional committee in the Federation Council, was blunt:

“The Islamic Republic will be compelled to respond to the violation of sovereignty and aggression against its country, because a regime that cannot defend the sovereignty of its state is always doomed.”

On 23 June, the influential Telegram news-analysis channel Yoj – with over 500,000 subscribers – reported that the Kremlin had quietly advised state television to avoid portraying Trump as a peace-seeking figure.

According to Yoj, Putin was still holding off direct attacks on Trump, but that could change. “If the president sees Trump as willing to use force against Russia over Ukraine, he will abandon restraint. That scenario, despite Trump’s talk of peace, is now considered entirely plausible within the Kremlin.”

Anger echoed through official channels. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s statements were seething. UN Ambassador Nebenzia, speaking at the UN Security Council, declared, “Washington has once again demonstrated its total disregard for the position of the international community and confirmed that in defense of its Israeli ally it is prepared to wager the safety and well‑being of all humanity.”

Even Putin, typically cautious in foreign briefings, took an unusually blunt line during his 23 June meeting with Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. According to Iranian outlets Jamaran and Shabestan, Putin described the US airstrikes as “an unprovoked and unjustifiable aggression,” and emphasized that “the provocative aggression against Iran is without any basis or justification.”

The president's spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, was even more direct, hinting that Moscow would be prepared to deliver whatever Iran needed to counter this illegal and unprincipled war:

“We have offered our mediation effort, this is something concrete, we have declared our position, which is a very clear statement, a form of support for the Iranian side. From now on it all depends on what Iran needs right now.”

Asked whether Iran will be given Russian S-300 and S-400 air defense systems, Peskov suggested that Iran need only ask, stating, “It all depends on what the Iranian side and our Iranian friends say.”

Why the Iran–Russia ‘strategic pact’ falls short

The much-discussed “comprehensive strategic cooperation agreement” between Russia and Iran has turned out to be less than it appeared – particularly on military terms. While many assumed that Moscow was reluctant to deepen security ties, official Russian accounts suggest the opposite is true.

It was Iran’s parliament that delayed ratifying the agreement for nearly two months after Russia's Duma passed it in late May. On 18 June, Putin – when asked by an AFP reporter whether Russia would supply new air defense systems to Iran – clarified that not only had Moscow offered to supply them, it had proposed co-production. Iran, he said, had so far not accepted and had not made any formal request.

Two days earlier, Duma Deputy Svetlana Zhurova told Russian media that while the pact included arms sales, military training, and intelligence exchange, Iran had refused any clause allowing deployment of Russian troops. She added. “Everyone sells weapons – that’s standard. But sending personnel? That’s outside the agreement.”

On 23 June, hours before Putin’s meeting with Araghchi, Duma Defense Committee Deputy Chair Alexei Zhuravlyov confirmed, “One should not expect a Russian expeditionary corps in Iran … the relevant clauses were removed from the Russian–Iranian agreement at Tehran’s request.”

Tehran has made no effort to contradict these statements. The evidence points to Iran setting clear limits – possibly to avoid appearing overly reliant on Russia, or to maintain maneuverability in the emerging multipolar order. Furthermore, while Iran's constitution does not explicitly include a formal declaration of non-alignment, the concept of “neither east nor west” has been a central tenet of Iranian foreign policy since the 1979 revolution.

And although since the late Iranian president Ebrahim Raisi administration, Tehran has geared itself to primarily “Look east,” his successor appears to have boomeranged by opening indirect talks with the Americans. Given the colossal betrayals of trust displayed by the Trump administration since 16 June, however, current Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian's west-leaning options may have narrowed considerably.

Looking ahead: Can Moscow still build a regional axis?

An earlier analysis published in The Cradle argues that peace in West Asia would hinge on new alliances – and that even provocations by Tel Aviv might be tempered in the short term by mutual caution. That assumption has now collapsed. Washington’s actions, paired with Israel’s targeted escalation, have pushed the region into a far more volatile phase.

The only viable option now may lie in Moscow and Beijing pressing harder – with Persian Gulf states, and especially Saudi Arabia – to develop an alternative regional security framework.

While fragile, a few openings remain: Riyadh’s sharp condemnation of the Israeli attack on Iran, its public objection to Iran’s retaliatory strike aimed at US-linked bases in Qatar, its reluctance to align against Russia on Ukraine, and broader hedging behavior in West Asia may offer a narrow path forward.

That said, the ruins of Syria still cast a long shadow. There is little certainty that Moscow can convert tactical understandings into strategic alliances. However, without such a shift, the path forward leads not to de-escalation, but to an even broader regional war.

https://thecradle.co/articles/russia-co ... l-iran-war

******

New Medvedev Note
Karl Sanchez
Jun 25, 2025

Image

The SPIEF has concluded and now Medvedev can speak his mind, his thoughts being shared by millions of Russians. Yes, there are many other things to write about, but Medvedev has already done that task so I can forward it onto the rest of the world:
On Changing Approaches, or Why Ukraine Should Not Become a Member of the EU

15-20 years ago, no one in our country really objected to Kiev's plans to join the European Union. Like, if you want, go ahead and sing a song. Only then will you bite your elbows when you lose the EAEU market. It seemed that such economic cooperation between Kiev could pose to our country? Moreover, it had almost zero chances of joining the EU. Our principled position was to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO. Its expansion to our borders was and remains a direct threat to Russia's national security.

But today, the former European Union, which was once created on the basis of the European Coal and Steel Community, in fact, no longer exists.

This is a politicized globalist, and for some time now - a fiercely Russophobic organization. An organization that dreams of revenge directed against Russia. Stupid European politicians of recent years have made every effort to do this. They have completely destroyed the idea of the EU as an economic giant that does not want wars and discord between European powers. And whose trade turnover with Russia reached almost € 500 billion. Now its main ideology is bestial Russophobia, generated by the imaginary "Russian threat", which they pumped up for themselves to solve their petty tasks. Slowly but surely, the European Union is turning into a self-sufficient military bloc that should gradually begin to compete with NATO, especially in the period of Trumpism. Brussels cockroaches and narrow-minded leaders of the EU countries are proclaiming their own defense strategy, declaring that they have entered the "era of rearmament".

Such an ugly metamorphosis of the European Union pursues a separate goal: to arm the neo-Nazi Kiev regime to such an extent that it becomes invulnerable to Russia. It was the EU that signed an agreement with the illegitimate leader of dying Ukraine on long-term obligations to ensure its so-called security. It is the EU that supplies the Bandera freaks with weapons and military equipment, promoting the power of its defense industry, and building defense factories on their territory. It is the EU that sends its instructors to train Ukrainian militants to kill our citizens and commit terrorist attacks in our country. And the same EU brazenly finances its disgusting actions at the expense of income from Russia's frozen assets.

Brussels today is a real enemy of Russia.

In this perverted form, the European Union is no less a threat to us than the North Atlantic Alliance.

Therefore, the complacent slogan "Join anywhere but NATO" must be adjusted. The EU, stuffed with weapons, rainbow freaks and Brussels' loud bitches, is a direct threat to Russia. This is exactly how it should be treated. At least until it changes its approach to us. This, of course, should not interfere with bilateral cooperation with individual European countries.

Thus, the so-called Ukraine in the EU is a danger to our country. The mitigation of this danger can be twofold: a) either the EU itself must realize that it does not need a Kyiv quasi-state in principle; b) or, which is certainly preferable, if there is simply no one to join the EU... [Emphasis Original]
Of course, what Medvedev doesn’t say is the EU is the Outlaw US Empire’s colony and does what it desires done, just as the Zionists are the Empire’s proxy. This is a truism that mustn’t be forgotten. That unsaid portion is very important in the light of recent events. I highly suggest watching today’s Alastair Crooke’s chat with Nima which prompted me to write the following comment at MoA:
Hi Don. Yes, the Crooke/Nima chat was very informative and confirmed my Big Picture hypothesis and further confirmed that Team Trump is continuing the policy set by Team Biden and those that came before going back to the 1990s. It's really rather simple: The Outlaw US Empire is trying to preserve its primacy despite it now being a second-rate conventional military power incapable of winning against a peer adversary. So, it's now using proxies and has greatly modified and modernized its Terrorist Foreign Legion. All the recent decapitation events were planned and commenced during Biden's term and only activated now once they were ready. The negotiation events used as traps to relax the opposite side were the last components to be cemented by Team Trump going back to Witkoff's "lecture" to Netanyahu for the Gaza ceasefire prior to Trump's inauguration. Yes, hindsight here is very helpful.

Crooke mentioned the double-crossing of the MAGA Populists by Trump, but that was easy to see coming based on his first term--despite supposedly loathing Obama, he continued most of Obama's policies using Russiagate as an excuse for the lack of change. People talk of Kabuki and manufactured narratives to project one thing while doing the opposite at the same time mostly out-of-sight. Well, that's what's been happening since 1996. Trump's MAGA differs in no manner from the goal of the Empire retaining its primacy--they are one and the same.

The mutual cessation of hostilities isn't a ceasefire as Crooke explained very well as there're no guidelines or agreements of any sort between the two/three sides, and the nuclear issue remains a pretense, although affecting regime change will now be impossible without the help of an invading army.

The final point is what affect the conflict will have on the current Iranian government; will it continue to seek some sort of accommodation with the West? IMO, that will be unwise politically unless I'm misjudging the internal Iranian sentiment. IMO, there's no way to remove the nuclear issue as a pretext since Iran demands its rights be respected--the West demands Iran forfeit its rights and will not compromise. Why? Because the West sees Iran as the weak underbelly of the Russia/China/Eurasian Alliance that's the core of BRICS and much more. BRICS must announce their new international trade mechanisms at the upcoming Rio Summit on July 6-7. Trump's tariff pause ends on 9 July and BRICS has an opportunity to preempt whatever Trump has planned.
Someone mentioned the Zionists being used as the Empire’s “Fall Guy” in its West Asian failures, and the same could be said about the EU and how it’s being shaped to take the fall for the Empire’s loss to Russia in Ukraine. There’s really only one major conflict and that’s the one filling the Big Picture: The resistance being offered to the attempt by the Outlaw US Empire to retain its primacy and attain full spectrum dominance over the planet. Some are calling that a Civilizational War, but IMO the Empire isn’t a civilization. What’s more exact is a conflict between different political-economic philosophies as during the Cold War: Neoliberal Financialized Capitalism versus an Industrialized Social Sustainable Capitalism, which could be distilled further to Rentier Capitalism versus Industrialized Socialism.

Next month as the Gym nears its second anniversary, I hope to have published some items and commentary that expands the basis for the above.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/new-medvedev-note

*****

State secrets are expanding
June 26, 17:13

Image

Putin signed a decree on new restrictions in the area of ​​posting information in open sources about mobilization activities, state policy in this area, the location and security of important administrative facilities and structures.

Image

In total, the list of information related to state secrets includes 119 items, four of which have sub-items. Of these, 28 relate to military information, 40 to economics, science and technology, 15 to foreign policy and economics, and another 36 to intelligence, counterintelligence and operational-search activities.

Now you can go to jail for this. Given the ongoing military-political escalation in the world, the adoption of such laws is not surprising.
So comments touching on these topics will now be deleted so that the blog does not violate current legislation.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9922065.html

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

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14412
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sat Jun 28, 2025 3:29 pm

UNDERSTANDING THE WAR ON THE SOUTHERN FRONT AGAINST RUSSIA

Image

By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

In warfighting against Russia’s enemies, President Vladimir Putin makes mistakes. He admits as much. Unequalled among the current leaders of the enemy states, he has the capability to correct his mistakes quickly. That’s one of the reasons for his unequalled domestic voter support.

Also, Putin is an attentive listener; he brooks criticism on condition it is not intended in a plan for regime change. Every ten years or so, Putin knows that Russia’s main enemies – the US, Germany, the UK – have come up with, will always come up with regime-changing schemes employing Trojan horses, Fifth Columns and quislings inside Russia.

These started for Putin with the Chechen secession. After he had defeated that, they were followed by the plotting of the oligarchs around Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Boris Berezovsky and ended with Alexei Navalny. Putin is well enough educated in the methods of analysis of Marxism-Leninism to understand that for Russia, regime change and warfighting, also class struggle, race war and imperialism, are constant and inevitable.

Because of what the Germans did to the Russian people at the time of his father, mother, brother, and uncles, Putin knows there is only the deterrence of superior force to stop the Germans repeating themselves; killing Germans is a generational necessity for Russia’s survival. Putin wishes better but knows – especially now – that the good Germans are outnumbered and outgunned, and the bad Germans are planning for worse with US encouragement and armament, as before.

With the British and the Americans, Putin has tried a combination of traditional economic inducements, regular espionage, and manipulation in the manner of Felix Dzerzhinsky’s Trust.* In the calculus of the force required for divide-and-rule and warfighting against the Anglo-American empires, Putin has also understood that time is needed to rebuild Russia’s capacities, economic and military, from the level of destruction which Washington inflicted through the time of the Gorbachev and Yeltsin capitulations. In correcting his predecessors’ mistakes and their misjudgements of the Americans, Putin has been a quick study but a slow learner.

Then there is Putin’s philosemitism in dealing with the Jewish state. Joseph Stalin believed Israel to be an anti-imperial ally, but it has turned into a battleship for the empire in destroying all of Russia’s traditional Arab allies, and now Iran — the last holdout before Putin must fight a war on the southern front.

There, Putin’s policy towards Iran combines two hundred years of Russian trial-and-error, some of the errors fatal ones.

In the tradition of male loyalties in the Russian tusovka – mishpocha is the Jewish concept – Putin is both comfortable with and dutiful towards the Jewish men he shared his Leningrad boyhood with. Such loyalty is lifelong. No Russian can forget – even if Americans, Germans and British make a point and policy of forgetting – that they survived the war but not their grandparents, fathers, brothers and womenfolk. Putin has been persuaded that the 15% of Israel’s population who are Russian by language, history, and habit are an extension of the tusovka to which he should show the loyalty which survivors must show each other.

There has been nothing comparable towards the Iranian side; towards the Arab world, genuine Russian sympathy and cultural orientalism died with Yevgeny Primakov (1929-2015). Ties of trade, investment, and military cooperation are a poor substitute, as unpredictable and as fraudulent as the spot and future markets in commodities, including money itself.

In this podcast recorded yesterday, Dimitri Lascaris discusses the lessons Putin and the Russian General Staff are learning from the Iran war, both to guide their next steps for the security of the southern front, and also for negotiating and fighting the war in the Ukrainian sector of the western front.

Click for the hour-long discussion on Reason2Resist. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSXZ28xlAxc&t=4496s
Image

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

References in the podcast for readers to follow up:

President Donald Trump’s press conference at the NATO Summit on June 25; click to read. “Question: He [Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Dan Cain] has said that Mr. Putin has territorial ambitions beyond Ukraine. Do you view that in the same way? Donald Trump: That’s possible. I mean, it’s possible. I know one thing he’d like to settle. He’d like to get out of this thing. It’s a mess for him. He called the other day. He said, can I help you with Iran? I said, no, you can help me with Russia. Because you know, in the last few weeks, we took care of India and Pakistan, Kosovo, Serbia. I think on Friday [June 26] we have coming in — the Congo is coming in and Rwanda is coming. And that was a vicious war that went on — a machete war, heads chopped off all over Africa. They’re coming in. We did uh, two others in addition to that. Nobody’s ever done anything like this. Uh, no. I consider him [Putin] a person that’s uh, I think, been misguided. I’m very surprised actually. I thought we would have had that settled easy. I’ve settled four of them in the meantime. But he did call up and he said uh, you know, he’s close to Iran. He’d like to help us get a settlement. I said no, no, you help me get a settlement with you, with Russia. And I think we’re going to be doing that too… I think it’s a great time to end it. I’m going to speak to Vladimir Putin and see if we can get it ended.”

Question: Why have you not been able to end the Ukraine war? Donald Trump: Because it’s more difficult than people would have any idea. Vladimir Putin has been more difficult. Frankly, I had some problems with Zelensky. You may have read about them. And it’s been more difficult than other wars. I mean, look, we just ended a war in 12 days that was simmering for 30 years, frankly.”
NATO’s 2025 communiqué, released on June 25, is unusually brief at 427 words; there are 3 Ukraine mentions, 3 Russia mentions. “United in the face of profound security threats and challenges,” the communiqué reads, “in particular the long- term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security and the persistent threat of terrorism, Allies commit to invest 5% of GDP annually on core defence requirements as well as defence-and security-related spending by 2035 to ensure our individual and collective obligations.”

Image

The corresponding NATO communiqué drafted by the Biden Administration and issued in Washington on July 10, 2024, is almost thirteen times longer at 5340 words with 61 mentions of Ukraine, 45 mentions of Russia; That is defined as NATO’s main enemy: “Russia remains the most significant and direct threat to Allies’ security. “
Assessment of the lessons of the US-Israel-Iran war to date by Moscow military blogger, Boris Rozhin: “The Middle East War. 1. It is worth noting that the Middle East war has not stopped; for instance, the genocide in the Gaza Strip which is Israel’s war against Hamas. The Houthi war against Israel is also ongoing. Today, the Houthis have promised to continue to hit Israel while the genocide in the Gaza Strip continues. So the talk about peace in the Middle East is far from the eality. The main problem for the world in the region is the Nazi regime in Israel.

2. The withdrawal to the negotiations was carried out through demonstrative strikes of dubious efficiency. The United States struck with anti-bunker bombs and cruise missiles at Iran’s nuclear facilities but there is no credible evidence of their disablement. The Iranians explicitly insist that they have not been critically damaged and will continue to develop their nuclear program. Iran, in turn, attacked the Al-Udeid base in Qatar with ballistic missiles. At the same time, there is also no reliable evidence of critical damage at the base. Both sides knew in advance about the attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities and Iran’s strikes on al-Udeid. Both sides took valuable assets from the attacked facilities in advance. Both sides announced the success of their strikes and the failure of the strikes of their opponents.
3. Nevertheless, such a scheme has allowed both sides to announce victory and agree to a truce. This was evidence that all participants in the war are not ready to go to the end and wage a total war of destruction, which would be the consequence of the heavy damage that Iran and Israel have caused to each other, with full understanding that there will only be many more impacts on both sides due to the weakening of the air defence. Therefore, as in 2020, Qatar was used as an intermediary – except that on this occasion it has had to accept the shelling of its territory, which [Iran’s attack on al-Udeid] demonstratively was, though the Qataris are falsely offended… Iran has run this war out of its missile arsenals while preserving the internal stability of the society. Without nuclear weapons. And without a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. The role of Russia, China and Pakistan, as well as the hypothetical assistance that could be provided to Iran, has remained behind the scenes. It is still unknown what Chinese military transport aircraft have been transporting to Iran and what agreements there may have been between the Iranians with Pakistan. Russia has traditionally and publicly held the position of a peacemaker, providing active diplomatic support to Iran.

4. If we consider the situation from the point of view of the outcomes, it is obvious that Iran has resisted effectively, particularly against the hysterical calls at the beginning of the war for the imminent collapse of Iran. It was able to restore the chain of command, to establish some working air defence (which had just began to swing into action at the truce), and ensure the possibility of turning Israel painfully over up to the last minutes of the war. At the same time, the plans of the United States and Israel to overthrow the ayatollahs collapsed. Instead of overthrowing the regime, Iran’s opponents got instead a rallying of the Iranians around their flag, which in the end rather strengthened the Iranian authorities, at least for the near future. The son of the Shah in a kippe, the Iranians clearly do not need.

Image
Reza Pahlavi kowtowing to Israel at the Wailing Wall in April 2023, and quoting Cyrus, the ancient Persian king, for precedent. Pahlavi announces his regime-change message to restore himself wrapped in the US flag on June 13, 2025.

At the same time, Iran has suffered tangible losses in air defence and radar systems, in the personnel of the army and the IRGC;, lost a number of important heads of law enforcement agencies, a number of important scientists, a number of industrial facilities, including nuclear ones. Material damage to Iran is significant and it will take more than one year to eliminate all the consequences. The main failure of Iran in this war is the complete failure of the Iranian special services; there have been problems there with ensuring the protection of the leadership and vital personnel, as well as of the performance of the unified air defence system. Too, it is worth noting the naivety of Iranian diplomats who were responsible in going along with Trump’s manipulation, which led to a misunderstanding of the timing of the outbreak of war.
5. On the other hand, Israel has also suffered serious material damage, which is clearly visible even from the footage which has leaked through censorship. By the end of the war, Israel’s air defence was operating with effect and Iran was launching fewer missiles to achieve more hits. Modern ballistics and hypersonics have proved to be no less formidable weapons than the high-cost American models. Israel has also lost several expensive air defence systems, several important scientific facilities, and suffered serious damage in military, industrial, and civilian infrastructure. The total economic damage is also very significant. At the same time, it was impossible to achieve regime change in Iran. It was not assured that Iran would not have nuclear weapons. It was not possible to start a ‘new stage in the development of the Middle East’ with the redrawing of borders. An Israeli lion has jumped on the victim and tried to gnaw her neck, but the victim has broken free, and begun to poke the lion with a missile knife in its back. As a result, the situation began to turn from a blitzkrieg into a war of attrition, which threatened Israel with uncontrollable scenarios, so the owner of the Western zoo simulated a ‘crushing blow’ after which it turned the aggression against Iran.

Image

6. That’s certainly not the end. It’s a pause. None of the fundamental contradictions in the Middle East has been eliminated in this war. The existential nature of the conflict has not gone away. Within the wheels of this war, they will immediately begin to prepare for the next one. Israel will draw conclusions from the failures of its air defence, as well as restore its thinned-out agent network inside the country for future operations for regime change in Tehran, followed by its break-up. Iran, in turn, in addition to general restoration, will restore its air defence system (there will be attempts to buy air defence systems and radar from China and Russia), reform the special services and approaches to security, prepare even more drones and missiles. And so, in the future the topic of Iran’s nuclear program will not disappear anywhere. The Iranians have also drawn the appropriate conclusions from this attack for the role of the IAEA…
8. The questions that remain up in the air: How much did Iran have left of launchers and missiles to strike Israel at the end of the war? How much has Israel left of anti-air missiles and air defence systems? What and where did the Iranians take from their nuclear facilities? What is the real situation at the sites in Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow? What losses did Israel suffer during the strikes which did not get into the photo/video media? What are the real losses of Iran and Israel among the military? In general, there are more questions than answers. So a more detailed analysis will follow later, when the fog of war and military propaganda will subside.”

[*] To interpret the war from Iran’s perspective, listen to the Iranians directly. There are MI6 agents and pensioners proposing to interpret the Iranians, also the Arabs and the Russians, with seeming sympathy and expertise. Some of them are also engaged on the Kremlin tab. Russians understand that MI6 has a long and uninterrupted history of deception operations in the war against Russia, and they never stop trying new ones. Their most recent one has been the fabrication of Novichok in the 2018 attacks on Sergei and Yulia Skripal. Their most successful operation was John Le Carré’s books about fighting the KGB. They were fiction; MI6 is the codename for English fiction. Dzerzhinsky made no mistake about that.

https://johnhelmer.net/understanding-th ... more-91961

******

Moscow Times: Russia’s Richest Have Gained $22.5Bln Since Start of 2025
June 27, 2025
Moscow Times, 6/2/25

Moscow Times is a western owned media outlet.

Russian billionaires have collectively gained $22.5 billion since the start of the year, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index.

The ranking of the world’s top 500 richest people includes 22 Russians whose combined wealth stood at $317.7 billion as of Monday.

Metals tycoon Vladimir Potanin remained Russia’s richest person, with his net worth rising by $3.82 billion since January to $31.7 billion.

He was followed by Lukoil founder Vagit Alekperov, whose net worth rose by $561 million to $25.9 billion, and mining magnate Vladimir Lisin, who retained third place with $24.2 billion despite losing $1.62 billion in five months.

The only Russian billionaire to lose more than Lisin was fertilizer tycoon and AS Monaco football club owner Dmitry Rybolovlev, whose wealth dropped by $1.77 billion to $9.21 billion, placing him in the bottom five.opinionRussia’s Potato Dilemma Risks Causing a Health CrisisRead more

Russia’s wealthiest woman Tatiana Kim lost $597 million and ranked 21st with a net worth of $6.77 billion, just ahead of metals tycoon Iskander Makhmudov, who rounded out the list at $6.74 billion.

Makhmudov, whose fortune rose by $3.61 billion, was among the top gainers after Potanin and Alisher Usmanov, whose wealth grew by $3.7 billion to $16.9 billion, making him the seventh-richest Russian.

Senator Suleiman Kerimov added $3 billion to reach $10 billion in 15th place. Industrialist Viktor Vekselberg earned $2.25 billion to reach $9.54 billion, while tech entrepreneur Pavel Durov earned $2.03 billion and ranked 10th with a net worth of $13 billion.

After Potanin, Alekperov and Lisin, the top five wealthiest Russians also included Novatek gas major chairman Leonid Mikhelson, whose fortune rose by $860 million to $23.2 billion, and industrialist Alexei Mordashov, who lost $598 million and was valued at $22.6 billion.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/06/mos ... t-of-2025/

And pray tell how much have US oligarchs made supplying two wars with the most expensive yet mediocre weapons on the planet?

******

The problem of the "domestic superhero"
June 27, 19:04

Image

The problem of the "domestic superhero"

Where does this empty talk about the possibility of the existence of a "Domestic superhero" come from again?
Understand, friends, it is pointless in its essence!
To begin with, let's say that "superhero" is a concept of a very broad spectrum. Where on one end is "a character from a work of art, with some kind of superpower", and on the other "a character from an American comic book in tights and a cape".

And if you want to go, and not checkers, you will consider a superhero as something closer to the first definition. And then the list will include everyone, both heroes of fantasy fiction and characters of folk epics and fairy tales. And naturally, there is a fuckton of this stuff among our aspen trees. "During the day he is an ordinary village guy Emelya, and at night he is the avenger Pikeman, who rushes about his heroic deeds on his trusty Pechkomobil" (just don't show this to Sarik)
. But I'm joking now, in everything except Sarik. In fact, this is just an example of narrowing the scope of the definition of a superhero, from the first indicator to the last with capes and underpants over tights. A question right away. Do you need it?

The culture of American avengers in capes has spread throughout the world during the expansion of the United States. Somewhere remaining within the framework of caricatures or vulgar epigonism, and somewhere acquiring a national flavor, as in the case of Japanese tokusatsu. And in the United States itself, superheroics, naturally, did not stand still. Over 100 years of its existence, quantity could not but flow into some new quality. Superheroics were developed and rethought, seriously and ironically, as a work of art and as a national phenomenon, by underground hippie comics artists and authors of the Big Two and even Alan Moore.)

And now someone here decides to run after this whole carnival to which they forgot to invite him a hundred years ago, with the idea of ​​​​a "domestic superhero". To speculate on the possibility-impossibility of such. Yeah, now, when the fundamental idea of ​​American comic book superheroics, if not yet dead, is in all serious crises, from the crisis of overproduction to the general cultural one. A fucking relevant topic, yeah. And why do you need it? What the fuck?

If you want, create a comic book and give its main character superpowers. You don't have to call him a superhero. You can settle him on Mars, not in Saratov. Who cares. The main thing is that in this way you will get an example of that very "domestic superhero". And then you can speculate on whether he is good or bad. First of all, as a hero of a work of art. Well, and if time remains, then also as a "domestic superhero".
Everything else is idle and pointless chatter, boring even for snooping.
Dixie.
P.S.: A picture from my old test on "domestic superheroes" is attached here to distract attention.

(c) Dania Kuzmichev

https://t.me/dahrodd/5628 - zinc

In its modern form, "domestic superheroics" is a common ape-like attempt to reproduce the form without understanding the goals and essences (we do not take into account the question of banal thirst for profit). In the old days, this was called groveling before the West in the cultural sphere.
Therefore, it is not surprising that as a result of this painful epigonism, nothing culturally significant has been produced in this direction. And the matter here is certainly not only and not so much in Sarika. I would like to think that this burp of "a march on the high road of civilization" in the West will also ingloriously tear off, like many other accompanying "bonuses" of the desire to get into the "golden billion".

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9924291.html

Google Translator

******

About the scandalous program with a member of SVO
June 26, 2025
Rybar

" A hotter story instead of focusing on the current issue "

A fragment of the Channel One program with SVO participant Timur Gromov, who spoke about the difficulties of finding a job, has been widely distributed on the Internet . The approximate message of the video: veterans are denied employment, and the authorities do not help.

In reality, the situation is a little different: the story shown is real, but for some reason the authors and editors of the program omitted several details, due to which the problem appears in a completely different light.

The employment center of the Voronezh region sent Gromov job offers three times, but he refused because his salary expectations did not match (this is an absolutely legal right, there is no reproach here).

The "Defenders of the Fatherland" Foundation also contacted him. Moreover, Gromov himself did not deny the feedback from the authorities and public organizations, but they decided not to cover the moment in the program.

Where did the claims about the alleged refusal to hire SVO participants come from then? It turned out that he made this conclusion based on a conversation with a private individual who recommended removing information about participation in SVO from his resume.

That is, it all comes down to the difficulty of finding a veteran a position with a salary higher than the regional average (and even remotely resembling the allowance in the SVO zone). And not at all to "veterans are not hired, no one needs them."

Let us repeat: the problem with salaries "in civilian life" exists, that is why the SVO participants go to work as couriers. But what was the difficulty for the authors of the program in telling it as it is, and not covering the story selectively in order to make it hotter - is an open question.

By the way, all this looks great in the context of discussions of "how to keep people in the army after the Second World War." Paying the rank and file at least 100 thousand will already solve a lot of problems.

https://rybar.ru/o-skandalnoj-peredache ... nikom-svo/

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

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14412
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sun Jun 29, 2025 5:49 pm

Putin's Talk at Eurasian Economic Forum's Plenary Session
Karl Sanchez
Jun 28, 2025

Image

Being held in Minsk, Lukashenko was host.

Putin spoke at the plenary session of the Eurasian Economic Forum, which was held at the National Exhibition Center "BelExpo" in Minsk. The topic of the discussion is "Strategy of the Eurasian Economic Integration: Results and Prospects". There’re a number of events that occurred over the last ten days that were subordinated by the Iran Conflict I’ll be working on to try and get back to current happenings, this being one that was held on 27 June. By the time the BRICS Summit begins in Rio, I hope to be all caught up, so expect many (2-4) articles on a daily basis until then, some of which will be very long. This one isn’t as Putin’s remarks only last a dozen minutes:
President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Dear Alexander Grigorievich! Dear friends, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen!

Of course, before answering the questions addressed, I would also like to welcome all the participants of the plenary session of the Eurasian Economic Forum.

I would like to note that several hundred representatives came to Minsk from large, medium and small Russian businesses, that is, those who are directly involved in the development of business ties with the EAEU countries and understand from their own experience what advantages integration provides and what else is needed to improve the conditions for mutual trade and investment exchanges.

I know that today–-at least, this is what our colleagues said–-seminars were held within the framework of the forum, and various issues were discussed, including those I have just mentioned. I would like to emphasise that all useful ideas, recommendations and proposals by our Russian colleagues will be taken into account in our further work to strengthen the Eurasian Economic Union.

Now, as for the role of the EAEU in the formation of a new multipolar architecture of international relations. Let me remind you that... You will have to do some things To repeat, Mr Lukashenko gave certain figures, but I think this is important, and some things will be heard, perhaps, for the second time, but I ask your forgiveness; I think it matters.

Let me remind you that on January 1, the Eurasian Union celebrated its tenth anniversary. During this time, it has certainly grown stronger and established itself as a successful integration. The overall economic potential of the five countries [Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia] has been significantly strengthened, and the EAEU has rightfully established itself as one of the key centers of global development.

To reiterate, the aggregate GDP of the Eurasian Union members increased from 1.6 to $2.6 trillion. Trade turnover with third countries added 38 percent and is 800 billion dollars. This is quite a comparable volume trade turnover between the leading economic powers of the world. This is a solid trade turnover, 800 billion. And the total volume of mutual trade within doubled to $97 billion, with 93 percent of settlements between our states are held in national currencies.

Industrial production in the EAEU countries has also grown by 30 percent, the manufacturing industry by 46 percent, including agriculture by 26 percent. Investment in fixed assets has increased by more than 40 percent. These are very good indicators, colleagues. What does it mean to "invested 40 percent in fixed capital"? This means that, at least in the medium term, growth is ensured, guaranteed, and the money has already been invested.

On the unemployment rate—Mr Lukashenko spoke about this—has fallen to 2.8 percent in the Eurasian Union. In Russia, it is 2.3 percent. This is one of the best indicators in the world today. Of course, the five countries are not going to stop there. Continuous work on strengthening integration mechanisms, increasing the authority and influence of the EAEU in the international arena is ongoing.

Our association is always open for cooperation with all interested foreign partners. Mutually beneficial ties with the countries of Eurasia, Africa, and Latin America are actively developing. Contacts with multilateral structures are being strengthened. You mentioned that these are BRICS, the CIS, the SCO, ASEAN, the African Union and others.

The Eurasian Union has concluded a number of preferential agreements with major trading partners: Vietnam, Singapore, Serbia. In May, the agreement on free trade with Iran. God willing, now the situation in the Middle East is calming down, the conflict between Israel and Iran. Also, thank God, let's consider everything in the past. This is means that it will be possible to develop relations with all countries in the region, including Iran. Like me, he said that we had concluded a corresponding agreement with them.

And tomorrow, at a meeting of the Supreme Eurasian Council, it is planned to sign agreements on economic cooperation with the United Arab Emirates and Mongolia. At the stage of discussion are issues liberalizing trade with Indonesia, Egypt and India. Our integration association is making a real contribution to the creation of a large space of partnership, cooperation and economic growth on our common Eurasian continent, a space where the right of each state to its own development model is respected and the interests of all participants are taken into account.

Convinced it is on such a fair and equal interaction that the new multipolar world should be built and be the basis of the new multipolar world. Therefore, I think that here we are on the right track and are moving forward relations with our partners.

On the EAEU's interaction with global and regional financial institutions, I would like to note that the five countries are working together to integrate the financial Infrastructure. The concept of forming a common financial market of the Union has been approved, the Eurasian Development Bank and the Eurasian Fund have been established for stabilization and development. These structures lend and provide expert support for projects with a high integration effect and contribute to ensuring financial stability throughout the vast EAEU space. As of the beginning of this year, the Eurasian Stabilization Fund has accumulated about $9 billion. If necessary, they can be used to support the budgets of the five countries.

In turn, Eurasian Bank has accumulated investment portfolio in the amount of 16.5 billion dollars. It financed, in particular, the construction and modernization of electric power facilities in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, the creation of agricultural production in Armenia. In Russia, the Eurasian Bank allocated funds for the construction of the Western High-Speed Diameter in St. Petersburg, the construction of a ring road, and helped in the development of the Pulkovo airport, also in St. Petersburg, and the implementation of other infrastructure initiatives.

Naturally, the Eurasian Union and its member states maintain extensive contacts with such key regional financial organizations as the BRICS New Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and others.

I remember that at one time even the World Bank helped the Eurasian Commission to prepare recommendations on the implementation of the EAEU digital agenda. These recommendations were used to ensure technological compatibility and harmonisation of the legislation of the five countries in the digital sphere.

However, if we talk directly about Russia, then due to well-known circumstances, our dialogue with the World Bank and other Western-centric financial institutions at this stage is kaput, to put it mildly. The reason is their political engagement. Moreover, we are trying in every possible way to reduce dependence on Western financial institutions, minimize the use of foreign payment tools and services.

Our transition to direct correspondent contacts with banks of the five countries, many of them are connected to the system for the transfer of financial messages of the Central Bank of Russia, is smooth and ongoing. The EAEU countries have managed to achieve significant success in the cojoining of national payment systems and bank cards.

A what I would also like to note? We mentioned BRICS, and our host has just mentioned this. Within the framework of BRICS, we are now working on creating a digital investment platform. And, of course, such ideas in general could be implemented the EAEU as well. The same also applies to other national payment instruments, national electronic settlements, electronic money, and so on.

Without a doubt, regional financial institutions that are emerging from this soil, of course, will multiply (territorial, regional), and will acquire a global character.

By the way speaking as we all well know, it is not a secret, significant the volume of our Russian gold and foreign exchange reserves are frozen in Western banks. And they constantly say that they are going to steal our money. As soon as this happens, the movement towards the regionalization of payment systems, will undoubtedly accelerate and become irreversible. And this is generally good for the global economy. Maybe it's worth paying for.

By the way, I just thought that from my basic education legal, I said "theft of our gold and foreign exchange reserves." Theft is a secret theft of property. And this is open. This is robbery.

And therefore, of course, we aim to further strengthen our own financial settlement instruments in this regard. We will do it. This is in cooperation with the EAEU members and others friendly states–-our like-minded people.

Thank you for your attention. [My Emphasis]
IMO, it’s somewhat surprising that given EAEU’s success that other CIS nations haven’t applied to join. I also thought that the EAEU might become integrated into Union State expansion, but that doesn’t appear to be happening at this time. The other post-Soviet space organizations—CIS, CSTO—along with BRICS and SCO all offer some degree of joint political and economic action that perhaps by 2050 or so will be combined into one all-encompasing Eurasian organization. Of course, there are a number of problems that must be solved before that day arrives. IMO, it’s unrealistic to expect Western European nations joining any of these organizations, even Serbia has shown its inability to be trusted, while problems within related to Armenia continue to gestate despite the boon EAEU is to its economy—the end of Pashinyan’s reign might provide the needed improvement. And then there’s the need to reincorporate Georgia into the regional dynamic. Some economic interactions are happening that’re helping the political situation. The biggest boon will be the bankruptcy of the EU and its disintegration, which will come sooner than later now that its death warrant was signed at the recent NATO Summit—5% of GDP for military crap to fuel a conflict the majority of Europeans don’t want. The EU’s propaganda system will attempt to suppress news of EAEU’s economic success, but the word will leak through, and people will vote with their feet. The meeting of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council Putin mentioned was held in a restricted format and no readout is available. There was an expanded meeting that involved the five core nations, observer and guest nations:

Image

On the sidelines, Putin met with Chairman of the Executive Council of Abu Dhabi Sheikh Khaled bin Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan. Other meetings likely occurred at lower levels of officials that weren’t reported by the Kremlin. Putin held a press conference after the event which will be reported separately.

Image

Minsk’s Palace of Independence where the meetings were held. There are two photo albums of the event: The one including the above, and the second from the plenary session’s venue which is where the one below is from

Image

There’s another photo showing that massive truck.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/putins-t ... n-economic

Putin's Post EAEU Summit Presser
Karl Sanchez
Jun 28, 2025

President Putin held a thirty-minute press conference at the Summit’s conclusion where curiosity focused on the closed session and geopolitical issues:
Question: Anton Vernitsky, Channel One.

Vladimir Vladimirovich, please summarize the results of today's meeting. What happened behind closed doors, especially during the private meeting with your EAEU colleagues? What bilateral meetings did you have, perhaps ones that we don't know about yet? The word "sanctions" was mentioned multiple times during the speeches. How do sanctions affect the activities of the Eurasian Economic Union? Thank you.

V. Putin: As for bilateral meetings, the meeting with the President of Uzbekistan [Shavkat Mirziyoyev] has just ended. We discussed our current affairs, the prospects for the near future, and synchronised our plans for possible major joint investment projects. In my opinion, and in the opinion of Shavkat Mirziyoyev, these are all feasible projects. We are talking about energy, including, perhaps, the nuclear energy sector, infrastructure projects, and the metallurgical industry. In general, there are serious issues that have been discussed by our governments for some time, and we are gradually moving towards their implementation.

The second meeting was with the Crown Prince of the United Arab Emirates, and we also discussed our current bilateral relations. We are expecting the President of the United Arab Emirates to visit Russia.

Naturally, we discussed both the situation in Ukraine and the situation in the Middle East.

As for the results of our today's meeting, the Eurasian summit, we are satisfied with the results and have drawn certain conclusions.

The President of Belarus has already said that our development strategy, which was designed to last until this year, is coming to an end. We are thinking about how to continue our joint work. However, overall, the results of our work are satisfactory. They satisfy everyone. Why? Because the main indicator of economic efficiency is the rate of economic growth.

In Eurasia, it is higher than the global average. The global growth rate is 3.3 percent, as you know. Eurasia is higher than 4 percent, much higher. In some countries, it is significantly higher. In some countries, it is closer to 5 percent or even 6 percent. This is partly the result of our joint efforts, as the goal is to remove trade and other economic barriers to cooperation. This, without exaggeration, multiplies the potential for economic growth.

And the social indicator of economic development is, of course, the unemployment rate, and the growth rate of real wages, and it's about the same in other countries. I'll tell you about Russia, where we have a 2.3% unemployment rate. This is one of the key indicators of what's happening in the economy, and it's about the same in our other countries.

And the second very important indicator is the level of investment, which is increasing. And in Russia, despite all our well-known difficulties, this process is still ongoing.

And of course, we can't be dissatisfied with this work, but there are always issues that require additional attention. We have discussed issues related to removing barriers in the service sector in a private meeting. Well, there are issues that require additional research.

There are things related to electronic signatures, which is a very important area. This is not a formal thing, but if it is introduced at the international level, it will also create good conditions for expanding cooperation. There are also issues that we have discussed in general today, such as ensuring that the information is reliable, how we will regulate sanctions in case of violations, and so on, so that participants in economic activities do not move from one jurisdiction to another but operate within a single economic space.

There is nothing here that would pose any political difficulties. We all believe that this is the right path to take. It is primarily a legal and technical issue. It is necessary to regulate and finalize these matters at the government level. We have agreed to do so in the coming months.

And the next meeting is informal, as a rule, but it is still related to the business part. So, the next meeting will traditionally take place on the eve of the New Year in St. Petersburg.

And the sanctions? Yes. To be honest, we've already mentioned this formally, but no one has delved into it seriously.

Question: Hello, RIA Novosti. If I may, I have a question on a different topic, but it is also very important. You have already mentioned that the Ukrainian issue was discussed during the recent bilateral contacts.

Tell me, how is the process of the Ukrainian settlement going now? In particular, when will the third round of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine take place? Two rounds have already been held in Istanbul. It is also known that the parties have exchanged their draft memoranda on the settlement. How do you rate the Ukrainian side's project, the project of Kiev? How do you assess it? And has there been any reaction from Kiev to the Russian draft memorandum?

V. Putin: As for the memoranda, as expected, nothing unexpected happened. I won't tell you anything unexpected. These are two completely opposite memoranda, but negotiations are organized and held in order to find ways to come closer together. I don't think there's anything surprising about the fact that they were completely opposite. I don't want to go into details, as I believe it's inappropriate and even harmful to preempt the negotiations themselves.

As for what was done as a result of the negotiations. I think you can see for yourself. Today, in my opinion, another exchange took place, yesterday or today, in my opinion, yes? Still, it's important. This humanitarian component is important, because it creates conditions, as diplomats say, for a substantive discussion of the essence of the problem. We agreed that we would continue further contacts after the exchanges were completed and after the humanitarian action that we proposed, namely, the transfer of the bodies of dead servicemen. We have already handed over over 6,000 bodies, and we are ready to hand over almost 3,000 more, but it is up to the Ukrainian side to accept the bodies of their fallen soldiers.

We agreed that after this stage is completed, we will hold a third round of negotiations. In general, we are ready for this. We need to agree on a location and time. I hope that President Erdogan of the Republic of Turkey will continue to support this process. We are very grateful to him for this. We are ready to hold this meeting in Istanbul. And when exactly, it is the heads of the negotiating groups on both sides–-and they, by the way, are in constant contact, in operational [contact] with each other, constantly on the phone, and, in my opinion, this is already not bad—are now negotiating the time of the next meeting. And what will be the subject? The subject, in my opinion, should be the discussion of the memoranda from both sides.

You are welcome.

Question: Good afternoon! Pavel Zarubin, Russia TV channel.

You and your colleagues have just completed the summit of the Eurasian Union. And the former partners have recently completed the NATO summit, and there has been a decision to increase defense spending to 5 percent of GDP. In general, there is a flurry of voices from Europe calling for militarization, and Europe's aggressive stance is something new in modern history. How do you assess what is happening?

V.Putin: First of all, the so-called Western community, the collective West, if it can be called a collective at all today, but nevertheless, is turning everything upside down. Why? Because both the increase in military spending and the militaristic frenzy that you mentioned are based on the same thesis: Russia's aggressiveness. However, the situation is exactly the opposite.

After all, the cutoff point for all these discussions is 2022, the beginning of the special military operation. And no one is talking about how we came to this special military operation. And what did it all start with? It all started with us being deceived, being crudely lied to, as we say in our country, being "scammed" about NATO's non-expansion to the east. After all, everyone knows that Russia was promised that NATO would not move an inch to the East. And then one wave of expansion after another.

After all, what have we been talking about all this time? That the security of one country or a group of countries cannot be ensured at the expense of the security of another, and this is stated in international documents that have been agreed upon by all. What has happened in practice? One expansion after another. And we have been told: "You should not be afraid of this, it does not threaten you."

And when we said that we thought it was a threat, what did they say? Nothing at all. They just told us to go away with our opinion, and no one wanted to listen to it.

But we know better what is a threat and what is not. It is our right to determine the degree of our security and the level of threats that may approach us from one side or the other. But no one listened to us, and everyone was moving in this direction.

Isn't this aggressive behavior? This is the aggressive behavior that the West doesn't want to acknowledge.

It was the same in our country, when the collective West supported both separatism in our country and such a tool for fighting Russia as terrorism, no one wanted to pay attention to some kind of ISIS if it was functioning in Russia, or the bombings in Moscow, or anything else that has been happening recently. And no one wants to pay attention to it. It's all fine as long as it's against Russia. Well, haven't we seen it?

And they all see and understand this perfectly well, but they're talking about something else; they're talking about our aggressiveness. Look at yourselves. We have a good saying: they notice a speck in someone else's eye, but they don't want to see a log in their own. And what happens? Against the backdrop of this rhetoric about Russia's alleged aggressiveness, they start talking about the need to arm themselves. Let them arm themselves.

Let's take a look at the structure of these expenditures and the structure of these weapons. As I said in the first part, we consider the reference to Russia's aggressiveness to be completely unfounded. It is not us who are aggressive, but rather this so-called collective West.

By the way, the same thing happened in Ukraine. And what about it? What can we call the result of the coup d'état supported by the collective West?

First, they came, signed guarantees between the President, the presidential government, and the opposition, then a few days later, they staged a coup d'état, supported it, paid for it, and publicly admitted to it. And then they started talking about Russia's aggressive behavior. What is this? Are they idiots, or do they think we're fools?

Then, we all know what happened in Donbas for eight years. Eight years of a bloody war against the civilian population. And we spent eight years trying to negotiate a peaceful solution to this issue.

We were deceived, and they publicly admitted it again. Both the former German Chancellor and the former French President publicly stated that they had no intention of fulfilling the Minsk agreements, and they had only signed them in order to provide weapons to the Ukrainian regime. They had been waging an undeclared war for eight years. In order to end this war, we were forced to use our armed forces and recognize the independence of both republics in strict accordance with the UN Charter. However, no one is paying attention to this. It's all about this moment: why, what happened, how it happened, what's their fault? It's like they're babies who just came into the world yesterday. This isn't going to work.

This one-sided game is over. If they want to increase their military spending, let them. But this also shows their aggressiveness. Let me explain why.

Yes, we have quite a lot of expenses today. It's 6.3 percent of GDP. Is that a lot or a little? I think it's a lot. This is certainly one of the problems, including for the budget, that we need to address, and we are addressing it in a decent way.

By the way, I don't want to make political analogies right now, because the causes of the conflict are completely different. However, from a financial and economic perspective, during the Korean War, which the United States fought, they spent 14% of their budget on it. During the Vietnam War, they spent 10%. However, they solved these problems primarily by increasing taxes on high-income individuals. In the first case, they did not pay attention to macroeconomics, but in the second case, they approached it more responsibly. But we are fighting for a healthy macroeconomy.

Now, let's talk about the spending itself. Is 6.3 percent a lot or a little? 6.3 percent of Russia's GDP for defense purposes is equivalent to 13.5 trillion rubles. Our entire GDP is 223 trillion rubles. Is 13.5 of 223 a lot or a little? It's not a small amount. We paid for it with inflation. However, we are currently combating this inflation. Yes, we are purposefully working towards a "soft landing" for the economy. However, we are still taking a very sensible approach to this.

By the way, I have already mentioned this, but the level of wages is increasing in all the EAEU countries and in Russia. Last year, it increased by 9.7 percent, and in the first four or five months of this year, it increased by 4 percent in real terms. This is a satisfactory indicator, at least.

What's going on in the Western countries? They're burying us all the time. They're going to die there soon. And they're burying us constantly, without stopping.

Last year, our economy grew by 4.3 percent, and the year before that, it grew by 4.1 percent. This year, the growth will be much more modest in order to combat inflation. However, we are doing this on purpose. In the Eurozone, the growth rate is 0.9 percent. In the leading economies and industrial centers of development in Europe, such as Germany and France, everyone is on the verge of recession.

As for the Armed Forces, they keep saying that we have problems and that Russia will soon suffer a strategic defeat. This rhetoric continues to this day. At the same time, they are saying that we are going to attack NATO countries. Where is the logic? If we are in disarray, why would we attack NATO? They're talking nonsense, and they don't really believe it themselves, but they're trying to convince their own population in order to extract more money from them and make them agree to bear the heavy burden of social spending.

By the way, we spend a lot of these trillions on what? On maintaining our military-industrial complex, on ourselves, on our loved ones and relatives. And what will they spend their 5 percent on? On purchasing from the United States and on supporting their military-industrial complex. This is not our issue, it is theirs. If they want to do it, let them.

But now the most important thing. We are planning to reduce our defense spending, both next year and in the next three years. While there is no final agreement between the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Finance, and the Ministry of Economic Development, everyone is thinking in this direction. Meanwhile, Europe is considering how to increase its defense spending. So, who is preparing for aggressive actions, us or them?

Yes, of course, we want to complete the special military operation with the result we need. This is what we are counting on, not aggressive plans against Europe and NATO countries. We plan to reduce our expenses, while they plan to increase them. So who is being aggressive? This is the basis of our defense and security policy.

Therefore, all their arguments about what they are going to raise–-let them raise it. But this will not improve the security situation for them, and it will consistently worsen the economic and social situation.

Question: Interfax Agency, Ksenia Chernyaeva.

Vladimir Vladimirovich, just recently, the President of France announced the need to introduce another package of sanctions against Russia, and according to statements by European officials, this package of sanctions may include measures such as reducing the price cap on Russian oil to as low as $45 and imposing secondary sanctions on its buyers.

How do you feel about such measures and the French President's rhetoric, and what are the potential consequences of such decisions?

V. Putin: I have already partially answered this question. The more sanctions there are, the worse it is for those who impose them. This applies to France, and it applies to the European economy as a whole. If you look at the statistics, the volume of gas purchased has increased due to LNG: Europe has started buying more.

Today, what's the price, more than 400 euros per thousand cubic meters? The price of oil has dropped slightly, but not just a little, from 75 to 65 or 66, and it's fluctuating all the time.

And if something else happens in the same Middle East, what will happen? And our oil will be "covered," at least in some way. Although they won't be able to do this, it's simply not possible at the moment.

The volume of oil and petroleum products consumed in the world is growing due to the growth of the economy itself, and there is no way around it. The volume is growing, but production is only increasing to the extent that we have agreed upon as part of OPEC Plus, and it is designed to meet the increasing demand, especially during the summer. You see, I don't see anything here that would benefit the European economy.

Will there be any harm to us? We will look at it based on the realities that will develop. But I don't think it will have a significant impact on us, given that hundreds, thousands of sanctions have already been imposed, and we are where we are, as I said. Our economy grew by 4.3 percent last year, while the Euro area grew by 0.9–0.8 [percent].

Please, Andrey.

Question: Good afternoon!

Andrey Kolesnikov, Kommersant newspaper.

Vladimir Vladimirovich, do you feel that it's time for you to meet Donald Trump in person? It seems that you are distancing yourself from each other. A phone is a phone, but face-to-face is face-to-face. What do you think?

V.Putin: I have great respect for the current President of the United States. He has gone through a very difficult, complicated and unsafe way of returning to power and to the White House, we all know this well, up to the point that he survived an assassination attempt, and not one attempt on his life. He is a courageous man, this is clear.

What he is doing at home, what he is doing in the Middle East, and his efforts to resolve the Ukrainian crisis, we certainly appreciate all of this. I have already mentioned this, and I want to say it publicly now: I believe that President Trump is genuinely committed to resolving the issue on the Ukrainian track.

Recently, I think he said that it was more complicated than it seemed from the outside. And it is. And there is nothing special about it. It is one thing when you look from the outside, and another thing is to get involved in the problem. It is the same, as I think, in the Middle East. Although he may have had more experience there, was more involved in the events in the Middle East, but it is complicated there too. Real life is always more complicated than the idea of it.

I am always open to contacts and meetings. I know that Mr. Trump has also spoken about the possibility of a meeting. I believe, as he does, that such meetings should be prepared, and we should be able to reach new levels of cooperation as a result. Overall, thanks to President Trump, relations between Russia and the United States are beginning to improve. While there are still unresolved issues in diplomatic relations, the first steps have been taken, and we are moving forward.

We have established working contacts between the main agencies and between the State Department, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the special services, which is also very important. This is because, for example, the fight against terrorism is important to us in any situation, as well as through some other services.

We have very good prospects for economic cooperation. And we know that American businesses are willing and eager to return to our market. We will welcome this. However, it needs to be properly prepared. Overall, this meeting is possible, and we are looking forward to preparing it.

Thank you very much. Good luck. [My Emphasis]
A few more economic stats were provided real wage growth being the most important. Putin’s understanding of how the Outlaw US Empire’s two Cold War wars of choice affected its finances is curious. IMO, few are aware that Korea cost as much as it did, but the relative GDP sizes are where the difference lies. As I noted in my comments to the plenary session, the need to attain a single economic space is a key policy direction for Putin and Russia, which is how I see a new soviet-type space that’s economic in its essence. Further expansion of the Union State IMO will eventually follow in some cases, although that will take decades.

Ukraine and the situation with Europe will be married until the European peoples divorce those having power over them. Putin essentially says Let them screw themselves with their nonsensical unreality, their lives within the BigLie they concocted. Forcing critical social support onto people who’ve never had to perform such duties while curtailing other benefits that are seen as foundational to the social contract will cause social revolt. Russia had collected 10,000 Ukrainian dead, likely just 1% of the total number. How well that reality’s understood by those residing within Zelenskystan is unknown, but more protests are being generated by what’s already transpired. Ukraine’s negotiating position will only change once the Nazis are removed from power.

Putin’s remarks about Trump remain curious when you put them all together. Putin seems to be saying to Trump: Reality’s a Bitch and can only be properly dealt with by those who comprehend its accurately. I think it’s important to note that both Xi and Putin will attend the BRICS Rio Summit on 6-7 July via video with Lavrov being Russia’s #1 representative and presumably Wang Yi being China’s. IMO, there’s foreshadowing in Putin’s remarks about greater sharing of the new financial architecture between Global South nations that will be announced at Rio. Trump is now saying his 9 July tariff deadline will likely be extended but is vague on further info. IMO, there’s far more political solidarity within EAEU than within the Outlaw US Empire and EU, and the difference is based on who their economies are aimed at benefiting.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/putins-p ... it-presser

******

The Key ...
... for this rather thoughtful video:



Are these:
1. Serially produced (6 hulls), apart from single project 661 (NATO's--Papa), project 705 SSNs of the Soviet Navy:

Image

Fully titanium hull which made them the largest titanium made objects on the planet. It also made them due to slick hydrodynamics and bismuth reactor second fastest (after already mentioned single Papa sub) submarines in history. They have been also the most automated subs in history--with crew consisting primarily of 27 officers and a few NCOs. As you may have guessed it--technologies which went into such hulls, from purest of metallurgy to welding titanium elements in the vacuum chambers (some of them huge)--this was and still is the cutting edge technology which only Russia possesses.

2. This:

Image

A reborn, brand new TU-160M2 strategic bomber which consists of a huge number of titanium parts, including the most crucial--central load-bearing boom which is titanium and requires a state-of-the-art electronic-ray welding. As you may have guessed it--West's "experts" thought that it was impossible to restart the production--as always, they were wrong.

These are just but a few examples (not to mention titanium elements, including blades, of Russian PD-8, PD-14 and PD-35 jet engines) of Russia holding a premier position in a full spectrum of titanium expertise. Yes, it is so unglamorous, as you have guessed it, compared to "hi-tech" (/sarcasm) Teslas or Louis Vuitton overpriced junk for cultural riff-raff. But that is the REAL world and if you ask me, I can only speculate (wink, wink) on a dramatic role of titanium (together with advanced composites) playing role in Russia's missilery ranging from ICBMs to hypersonic systems. So, enjoy a thoughtful video.

https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/06/the-key.html

OTOH, those M777 155mm howitzer which the US sent to the Nazis have considerable titanium components which proved to be a problem as they wore out faster than the usual steel. Strong and light but welds are relatively brittle.

******

Black Hundred Mummies
June 29, 16:17

Image
Black Hundred Mummies

The Spas TV channel has created a vile documentary film, The Mummy, and is actively showing it all over Russia, including, ironically, the Moscow Oktyabr movie theater.

This opus of a film is not only and not so much against Lenin or for the removal of his body from the Mausoleum, as some annotations write. It is a blow from within against Russia, on behalf of the ordered spirituality of those in power, against the real, popular, genuine spirituality. At a time when our country is confronting the forces that were defeated under Lenin's banners 80 years ago, the eunuchs guarding capitalism are scurrying and fidgeting in fear of the inevitable birth of a new world ideology of human brotherhood.

The authors of The Mummy appeared long before its script was written, they are in the squares of all the Ukraines of the world, tearing down with laughter the statues of figures inaccessible to them in their grandeur. Or does anyone else not understand that those who destroyed Lenin monuments soon became destroyers and invaders of the temples of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. The film takes us back to the murky perestroika tales of "the Russia we lost" and in search of it, the same storytellers sent us into the arms of the "great Western civilization", where hypocrites and instigators of wars always swear on the Bible and the dollar bill for some reason reminds us that "we believe in God".

Christian and communist ideas of Russia have gone through many terrible trials, crimes and injustices in order to today shoulder to shoulder defend the true spirituality of all mankind. And at this moment it is very important for someone to split Russian society with an idiotic film, the very title of which is blasphemy, and who else but true believers understand this.

We will not repeat that Lenin's body is the relics of our history, and that his name has long ceased to belong to Russia alone, which would not have become what it became without him in the 20th century.

I am absolutely convinced that the faith of each of us is the deepest and most intimate part of us and deserves unconditional respect and protection from the abuse of boors. And only those who respect the feelings of others can demand respect for their feelings. This conflict is not "between Orthodox culture and godless communism", as some are trying to dissemble, it is between spirituality and boorishness.


(c) Oleg Yasinsky

The domestic alter-egos of the Banderites will not calm down. They are very jealous of the Banderites with their decommunization. They want to arrange Ukraine in Russia.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9927421.html

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

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14412
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Mon Jun 30, 2025 2:54 pm

RUSSIA SAVES FACE — THE BOTOX REVOLUTION

Image

By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

When Russia’s master icon painters depicted the male and female faces which are sacred in the Russian Orthodox Church, the noses were always columnar — a long, narrow bridge without curvature – ending in a pointed tip; the lips were exactly as wide as the nostrils on either side of the nose, and the lower lip was full. The cheeks were flat without the prominence of either zygomatic (cheek) bones or flesh. The eyes were always almond-shaped, open without hood (dermatochalasis). The lacrimal caruncle, the tiny circle of flesh in the corner of the eye, did not appear in icons until the seventeenth century.*

The forehead is usually wrinkle-free except that the Mother of God of Kazan displays a vertical line between and above the eyebrows. That glabellar or frown line isn’t from nature; it symbolizes different things, depending on the school of icon painters who painted her.

Realism in icons changes with time just as the secular standard of beauty does in the face. Rank and class, with the money to make plastic change and cosmetic repair, are eternal. Today, with more cash in their pockets, time to expose their skins to the sun on holiday, and the aspiration to rise in social class and display their mobility, Russian men and women are buying more botulinum toxin drugs than ever before. In the latest report this month, consumer spending and unit sales for these drugs are currently jumping by more than a third over the levels recorded a year ago; they have more than doubled since the war began in 2022.

Popularly known by the Botox brand name, these drugs are injected in time series to erase wrinkles in the muscular movement of the face, cause lips to pout, and lift hoods over the eyes. Botox is also used to stop excessive sweating, twitching, and drooling. These can be symptoms of post-traumatic stress syndrome among soldiers returning from the war fronts, but they aren’t the drivers of the Russian Botox boom.

This is not only a boom in consumption of the drugs on the faces of men and women. It is a boom for Russian pharmaceutical companies to replace French, South Korean, Chinese and other imports of Botox-type pharmaceutical drugs which have been blocked by sanctions: growth in sales for these Russian Botox makers has been jumping – over the past year, 46% and 63% for the two leading Botox substitutes, Relatox and Miotox. Also, these products pack three to four times more punch in every shot, or so the Russian marketers, experts and clinics selling cosmetic treatments and plastic surgery are claiming.

The Russian Botox comes to the people from the people; that’s to say the state. Relatox, first started in the market in 2014, is manufactured by Microgen, a subsidiary of the state conglomerate, Rostec. Miotox is produced by the Chumakov Scientific Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, a national leader for research in medical virology, manufacturer and marketer.

When Rostec’s chief executive, Sergei Chemezov, met President Vladimir Putin this month for their annual review of Rostec’s operations, Chemezov mentioned his group’s medical technology contributions to the war, including a new histological data scanner, bioelectric prosthetic devices, and “sponsored trips to health resorts”. The Kremlin communiqué doesn’t report whether they discussed the boom in Relatox. .

The face-saving claims, not to mention the adverse side effects and the spread of counterfeit drugs, are sensitive subjects which the experts are willing to discuss in the press. There are greater sensitivities, however. Nikolai Bespalov, an author of the latest Botox market report by RNC Pharma in Moscow, and Natalia Goltyakova, chief executive of the GMT Clinic, were asked what are the social class dynamics of the Botox boom, and what oligarch groups are active in the market in combination or competition with Rostec and Chumakov, but they refused to answer.

Image
Source: http://rncph.com/news/26_09_2024 In the aggregate, here is RNC’s tabulation of sales of the top-15 Russian brand-name drugs, based on data collected by Roszdravnadzor, the state regulator for health care. Note that Botox volume and value don’t qualify for the Top-15.

In the three years since the war began, overall Russian pharmaceutical production in volume (red line) has been stable, while ruble sales revenues (blue line) have varied up and down with a modest overall increase. In this context, the Botox growth rates are exceptional.

It seems the Botox boom had started before the war, along with other pharmaceuticals in the broader market segment of cosmetic fillers and anti-aging treatments.

Image
Source: http://rncph.com/news/11_09_2024_2

Pharmacologically, Botox is neither a filler (black column) although it can be used to generate fuller lips by relaxing the lip muscles; nor is it a biorevitalizer (orange) which works by stimulating the skin to produce substances like collagen and elastin, and improve hydration. Botox works neurologically by relaxing the facial muscles.

According to an RNC report of September 2024, “in the first half of 2024, the Russian retail market of beauty fillers and biorevitalization products was 10.9 billion rubles (retail prices, VAT included [equivalent to $117 million]), up 21% from January–June 2023. In physical terms, it was 2.2 million minimum dosage units (MDU), up 12% from the same period last year. At the same time, the total sales in 2023 were 18.5 billion rubles [$215 million], or 3.9 million MDUs, up 20% in monetary and up 27% in physical terms.”

“Fillers accounted for 62.6% of the sales in monetary terms, and biorevitalization and polylactic acid products accounted for the remaining 37.4%. In physical terms, it was slightly different; due to their high cost, fillers accounted for only 37% of the sales. The average price for a filler in the analyzed period was over 8,000 rubles [$86], three times that of a biorevitalization product, 2,600 rubles [$30]. The most expensive products are polylactic acid injections, with over 25,000 rubles [$2,690].”

Botox works differently on the face from dermal fillers and it is not a polylactic acid. So it is unclear whether the market for these other cosmetic products has boomed with the same growth acceleration as Botox. Sales volume in units and value in rubles for Botox and equivalent botulinum toxin drugs are incomplete: for the 10-month period sales doubled from Rb1.7 billion ($23 million) in 2021 to Rb3.4 billion rubles ($49 million] in 2022; in just the first three months of 2024 the sales totaled Rb2.2 billion ($24 million); in the same period of this year, the total was just over Rb3 billion ($36 million).

The concentration of the market in the wealthiest cities, Moscow and St Petersburg, is the same. “The sales differed greatly from region to region. For example, Moscow accounted for 35.8% of the sales of fillers and biorevitalization products, which is 3.8 billion rubles, or nearly 745,000 MDUs (33.6%). St. Petersburg ranked second with 9.4% (over 1 billion rubles in sales). Other regions were far behind; even Krasnodar Krai, which ranked third, accounted for only 4.2% of the sales (452.5 million rubles). In Moscow Oblast [excluding the city] the sales were 412.7 million rubles (3.8%). However, the sales in this region grew the fastest among the other top-10 regions; they went up 67% in monetary terms, while the sales in physical terms grew five times against January–June 2023.”

The principal supplier of Botox to the Russian market has been the Irish company Allergan which was taken over by AbbVie of the US in May 2020. Two years later, the American management announced it was pulling AbbVie out of Russia because of the war. In its annual report for 2022, AbbVie reported that its “operations in Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine are not significant.” This was not quite accurate.

The company’s financial reports indicate that its sales of cosmetic Botox to the international markets, including Europe and Asia, amount to 36% of its total sales. No breakdown for the international sales figure by country is reported. In 2021 sales of Botox (cosmetic) to the international market came to $808 million; in 2021, $961 million; in 2023, $1,012 million; and in 2024, $1,038 million. Inside these Europe-wide aggregates sales to Russia amounted to between 3% and 5%.

Image
March 19, 2022 -- source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia-ukr ... perations/

Image
Source: https://investors.abbvie.com/static-fil ... e4fa991768

After initial development at the Ufa branch of the Microgen company in 2001, and trials over the next decade, commercial marketing of Relatox began in 2014. By 2015 its Russian market share was 6%. Chumakov’s Miotox followed into the market in 2019. By 2020 nine competing brand-name botulinum toxin type A-hemagglutinin (BTA) products had been certified by Russian regulators for sale. By then Miotox had lost a $600 million patent licensing dispute with Allergan over medical application of Botox.

A survey of cosmetologists across the country in 2020-21 reported Russian consumers were already opting for the domestic brand-names in preference to imported Botox. The survey also confirmed the efficacy and safety of the homemade products. “The maximum effect of Miotox® administration in participants with interbrow wrinkles was observed after 14–21 days for all parameters (total size, depth and width); the total size of wrinkles in the interbrow decreased by 65%, on the forehead – by 79%, wrinkle depth – by 58% and 69%, respectively. Despite the decrease in the effect after 150 days after the drug application, the effect of the drug administration remained: the total size of wrinkles in the interbrow decreased by 25%, on the forehead – by 19%, wrinkle depth – by 25% and 26%, respectively, wrinkle width – by 3% and 1%, respectively. Conclusion. The findings confirm the good tolerability, efficacy, and a high safety profile of Miotox® in patients with hyperkinetic (facial) wrinkles.”

Allergan (AbbVie) held on to its Russian market share for Botox until its March 2022 announcement of war sanctions pull-out. “Naturally, consumers started looking for alternatives, and fortunately there were enough such alternatives on the market, including Russian–made ones,” explained a Moscow newspaper report. “This led to a gradual shift of consumers to domestic products. Although the French drug Dysport is still the leader of the Russian market in terms of sales, its peculiarity must be taken into account: to achieve an effect comparable to Botox, it requires the introduction of more units of the drug (3-4 units of Dysport versus one unit of Botox), which makes its use less convenient and more expensive. Russian pharmaceutical companies are developing this area by investing not only in the marketing promotion of their products, but also in conducting full-fledged clinical trials confirming the claimed characteristics of the drugs. The combination of these factors – competitive prices, guaranteed quality and a comprehensive marketing strategy – contributes to a steady increase in demand for domestic BTA drugs.”

Image

A US cosmetic surgeon discusses the evidence for Botox use by President Putin in March 2022. Analysis of the faces of many heads of state and of government have reported Botox use by US House Speaker Pelosi, Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi, Brazilian President Rousseff, Argentine President Kirchner, and North Korean head of state Kim Jong Un. In President Trump’s circle, here is a list of Mar-a-Lago faces.

Until the war, the dominant Botox-type drugs in the Russian market were Dysport of France, Botox of the US, and Xeomin of Germany. China then introduced its Lantox and South Korea, Novacutan. Domestic Russian pharmaceutical groups promoted these foreign brands through patent-licensing and distribution agreements until these were halted by sanctions.

“Traditionally, foreign drugs – Botox, Dysport, and Xeomin – have been considered the standard of quality and safety which has been facilitated by numerous clinical trials,” Vedomosti reported industry sources saying earlier this month. “The Chinese Lantox and Russian analogues Relatox and Miotox are more affordable with constantly improving quality. The choice of a specialist depends on personal experience with a particular drug, data on its effectiveness and safety, the cost of treatment, as well as the availability of the necessary certificates and licenses…Patients are more often guided by the price factor and the recommendations of a cosmetologist. Recently, domestic drugs have become increasingly in demand, but foreign drugs retain the status of the ‘gold standard’ due to their long-standing reputation and extensive evidence base.”

THE MAIN BOTOX-TYPE BRANDS IN THE RUSSIAN COSMETIC MARKET
Image

“Lantox has long been known on the Russian market, but it has never occupied a significant market share due to ‘a number of shortcomings,’ reports Yulia Frangulova, co-founder of the National Association of Aesthetic Medicine Clinics self-regulatory organization and chief executive of the Linline clinic network. She has not specified what disadvantages she was talking about. According to Frangulova, the drug can take a significant share in Russia ‘only through dumping.’” This research report by Chinese researchers covering most trials of the drug was published in 2021.

As they undercut the foreign imports for price and match them for quality and safety, the profitability of Relatox and Miotox has also spawned a grey market in counterfeit foreign imports and domestic knock-offs. “The grey market is in ecstasy”, reported a health industry publication already in 2022. “The growth of the illegal cosmetology market was there before, but in the new economic conditions it has literally got a ‘second wind’. While the professional clinics have had to raise prices, and the solvency of the population has decreased, self-taught cosmetologists get cheap (and non-certified) drugs and they work from home, and therefore save on rent.”

[*] On July 13, it will be two years since the sudden death of Tatiana Vasilievna Turitsyna, my beloved wife. Her face was perfect. Born and raised under the Siberian sun, she survived the darkness of the Yeltsin time, and then the sun which has burned since then. Her face refused to grow old.

Image

https://johnhelmer.net/russia-saves-fac ... more-91984

******

Grayzone: BBC’s ‘independent’ Russian partner begged UK govt for funds, files show
June 29, 2025
By Kit Klarenberg & Wyatt Reed, The Grayzone, 5/25/25

Leaked documents show the supposedly self-reliant anti-Kremlin outlet Mediazona asked the UK gov’t for £300,000. With foreign funding drying up, the “independent” news site now faces financial crisis.


Mediazona, the self-styled “independent” Russian outlet which partners with the BBC to track the deaths of Russian troops, requested hundreds of thousands of pounds directly from the British government, according to a tranche of leaked official documents.

Having mainly targeted Russians since its founding in 2014 by members of the Western-backed troupe of provocateurs known as Pussy Riot, Mediazona has largely remained off the radar of news consumers in the West. But that changed with the outbreak of full-scale war in Ukraine. Since the first day of the conflict, Mediazona has collaborated with the BBC Russian Service on a project tracking the deaths of Russian servicemen through open source methods. Mediazona describes “the work [as] meticulous and time-consuming,” requiring “relentless efforts of journalists.”

Who or what was footing the bill was left unmentioned in the description of the initiative, which was clearly designed to foment dissent and opposition to the proxy war among Russian citizens. Now, leaked documents reviewed by The Grayzone indicate that between 2020 and 2023, Mediazona was in line for vast, secret grants for anti-Kremlin agitation from the British Foreign Office, under the official auspices of London’s opaque “Global Britain Fund.”

From Pussy Riot to Mediazona
Leaked files related to the information warfare effort show London earmarked a myriad of NGOs, rights groups, and news outlets in Russia were earmarked for receiving hundreds of thousands in order to undermine the Kremlin with propaganda and supposed civil society initiatives. Among the most prominent proposed repeat recipients was Mediazona.

One prospective grant from the Foreign Office would have transferred a whopping £300,000 between 2020 – 2023 to the outlet, which describes itself in the application as “Russia’s leading independent and socially focused media company.”

Image

Boasting that “Mediazona contributes to the discussion of many legal and structural problems haunting Russian society and state, and also reports on foreign events (including in the UK) that have implications for Russians,” the proposal laid out the “key objectives set for Mediazona,” which included “[challenging] the official version of events by providing audiences with high-quality investigative journalism, compelling eye witness accounts and live feeds from the ground.” If approved, Mediazona would also “develop critical thinking amongst young Russians through the proactive use of social media networks and interactive content.”

Image

The applicants bragged that Mediazona’s “prominent status on the Russian-language internet” meant “issues raised through its publications” would “have measurable resonance, stimulating constructive engagement between multiple stakeholder groups including public officials.”

Mediazona would be expected to produce “around 120 news articles per week, at least 18 investigative reports per month and a series of online feeds delivered from crucial events across Russia.” The Foreign Office pledged, “this programming will serve to expose corruption and the abuse of power whilst bringing credible and authentic voices into the public domain.” In addition, the editorial team hoped to “forge new partnerships with key players in the Russian and international media landscape, thereby ensuring powerful multiplier effects.”

Image

Elsewhere, the British Foreign Office received a petition for £150,000 over two years on behalf of Zona Prava, an NGO which was also founded by Pussy Riot. The organization would expose alleged human rights abuses in Russian prisons, via “public events” such as “hot lines, round tables, seminars, information events with the invitation of public figures and government representatives.” Meanwhile, in “close cooperation” with Mediazona, Zona Prava would produce “at least 800 materials in federal and regional media… at least 10 videos” and potentially one or two documentaries.

Image

British intel circumvents ‘foreign agent’ law
The leaked documents make clear that the British were aware that their activities were illegal under Moscow’s Foreign Agent law. A funding application for Equal Rights Trust, a Global Britain Fund recipient charged with lawfare operations referred to cryptically as “targeted strategic litigation” explicitly describes a British government-funded effort to evade the new law. “As part of our current project” being financed by the UK Foreign Office, ERT wrote that it “has undertaken an extensive risk assessment of the Russian context, including commissioning an independent consultant to produce a report on the Foreign Agent Law.” As a result, “ERT is now well-versed” in various “procedures to mitigate the risks of transferring funds to Russia,” which “allowed for the ongoing successful implementation of activities despite the Foreign Agent law.”

These procedures included “diversifying means of transferring of funds, on-going assessment on methods of transfer, clear lines of communication with the recipient on when and how transfers are made, neutral codes and payment reference for bank records, and maximum amounts per transfer and numbers of transfers using the same method.”

Image

ERT concluded that “it is simpler and safer for all concerned to work without a formal partner to distribute funds to project beneficiaries,” and instead “work with a series of informal partners through consultancy agreements.” ERT was said to have “utilised this approach to great success in similar environments.”

It is unknown if the Global Britain projects involving Mediazona went ahead, and, if so, whether they used such “procedures” to launder the money. But the outlet’s long standing public alliance with the British state, via the project mapping Russian war casualties with the BBC’s Russian Service, highlights the outlet’s perceived utility as a conduit for anti-Kremlin agitprop.

Mediazona lashes out at damaging leaks with libelous allegations
If financing did flow to Mediazona under “Global Britain,” it would not have been the first time London covertly supported the group’s activities. In February 2021, leaks reported by The Grayzone revealed how Mediazona had, alongside Meduza, received covert backing from British intelligence in the form of “audience segmentation and targeting support” some years prior. The assistance formed part of a wider clandestine effort to “weaken the Russian state’s influence.” While Mediazona’s top brass issued no official statement or response to the disclosures, a retort of sorts was promptly forthcoming.

Days after this outlet’s reporting appeared, Mediazona published a sensational exclusive, claiming Amnesty International’s decision to rescind Western-backed, imprisoned Russian opposition activist Alexei Navalny’s “prisoner of conscience” status resulted from a sinister Kremlin-orchestrated “campaign,” led by “individuals tied” to Russian state broadcaster RT. The supposed culprits were The Grayzone’s Aaron Maté, and a freelance writer and translator known as Katya Kazbek – neither of whom were tied to RT in any way.

Maté’s apparent sin was revealing how Amnesty had revoked Navalny’s status “given the fact that he advocated violence and discrimination and he has not retracted such statements.” For her part, Kazbek stood accused of posting a viral Twitter thread documenting Navalny’s lengthy history of racism, xenophobia, and association with and promotion of Neo-Nazi figures and groups, which he consistently refused to repudiate. She was subsequently doxxed by Bellingcat editor Natalia Antonova, who revealed sensitive private details, including her home address.

Amnesty International issued a statement explicitly denying “external pressure” from any source influenced its decision to remove Navalny from its list of “prisoners of conscience.” Nevertheless, Mediazona’s hatchet job was promptly translated into English by Meduza, where its charges were seized upon by mainstream Navalny endorsers and Western news outlets, including the BBC.

Meduza’s then-investigative editor, Alexey Kovalev, appeared to acknowledge the bogus story was revenge for articles exposing Britain’s clandestine support of both Mediazona and Kovalev’s employer, Meduza. In a 2021 tweet, Kovalev accused the author of this article of having “unleashed a careless conspiracy theory,” insisting that the leaked documents exposing those ties were “fake.” In closing, he sneered: “consider us square.”

Image

But the documents, and recent announcement by both Mediazona and Meduza, indicate that claims of secret Western sponsorship for the supposedly-independent outlets were anything but “fake.”

In a lengthy plea posted across their social media accounts entitled “Mediazona on the brink,” the group groaned that they were “running out of money” and urgently needed 5,000 monthly subscribers just “to stay afloat.” After Western sanctions forced Visa and Mastercard out of Russia, “funding from our readers” dried up, they wrote, explaining that the Ukraine proxy war’s outbreak “collapsed” the outlet’s business model “overnight.”

Mediazona claimed they’d already begun laying off staff as a result of budget cuts, warning if their subscriber target was not reached, layoffs “will have to continue.” Before the war, they claimed, the outlet was funded “almost [emphasis added] entirely” by reader donations. This glaring caveat strongly suggests they had been at least partially backed by government funding – a notion seemingly confirmed in a February 28 Euractiv interview with Nikita Dulnev, director of Mediazona’s Central Asia branch, who directly linked his outlet’s financial woes to the Trump administration’s shutdown of USAID.

Dulnev was described by Euractiv as one of many “media professionals in Eastern European countries” who fear Washington’s “abrupt funding cut” to local propaganda projects “could inflict lasting damage on the region’s media infrastructure.” In the article, Dulnev lamented, “for years, we had some support and didn’t diversify much. That’s why we had to pause our work.” Dulnev’s LinkedIn profile lists him as formerly employed by the “Khodorkovsky network.”

That international anti-Kremlin propaganda group was formed by London-residing exiled Russian oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who was released with members of Pussy Riot in December 2013 as a “magnanimous gesture” by Moscow towards the Russian opposition. Since then, Khodorkovsky has openly plotted Vladimir Putin’s downfall, though the full extent of this agitation is unknown.

Pussy Riot cofounders Maria Alyokhina and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova launched Mediazona almost immediately after their release alongside Khodorkovsky. A 2014 press release announcing their outlet’s founding explicitly linked Mediazona’s creation to the lack of “space for anything in [Russian] media that criticizes Putin’s policies.”

It was thus evident from day one that Mediazona was intended to serve as an extension of Pussy Riot’s political activism in Russia, which previously included Tolokonnikova’s participation in a public orgy at a Moscow museum in 2008, and other incendiary, criminal acts that would get perpetrators jailed almost anywhere in the world. The outlet quickly became a dependable megaphone for Western-sponsored opposition figure Alexei Navalny until his February 2024 death.

A February 2025 New York Times report confirmed Meduza had been in receipt of unacknowledged funds from USAID, a traditional US intelligence cutout, amounting to 15% of its annual income. This budgetary shortfall, they claimed, was sufficient to put the outlet’s entire future in jeopardy, and inflict more damage on its operations than previous alleged “cyberattacks, legal threats and even poisonings of its reporters.” The New York Times noted that financing for opposition media outlets from other foreign governments was “tiny in comparison with American funding” cut by the Trump administration.

Moreover, “traditional media supporters” such as the CIA-connected Ford Foundation and George Soros’ Open Society Foundations have “abandoned much of [their] media funding” outright. This abrupt lack of overseas bankrolling for anti-Kremlin propaganda operations was parenthetically acknowledged in Mediazona’s desperate March 31 plea for reader donations, which lamented that “grants from various foundations” are no longer forthcoming “in the current situation.” It appears Mediazona is also a victim of the US-led cessation of foreign funding for ‘independent’ media projects targeting enemy states.

As funding from Western governments dries up, Pussy Riot has launched a page on OnlyFans. The group’s “fetish/kink friendly” official profile on the website, widely used by sex workers, promises paying subscribers “daily exclusive photos and videos,” “one on one chatting,” “custom content and items,” and “exceptional service for all your personal requests.”

At the time of publication, promotional offers on three and six-month subscriptions are offered. It is unknown how many NATO member states, if any, have availed themselves of the opportunity.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/06/gra ... iles-show/

******

The Outcome Of Armenia’s Latest Round Of Unrest Will Be Pivotal For The Region’s Future
Andrew Korybko
Jun 30, 2025

Image

If Armenia becomes a joint Azeri-Turkish protectorate like Pashinyan’s opponents fear that he agreed to, then Turkiye could become a force to be reckoned with in the Eurasian Heartland, but that scenario could be derailed if it becomes Russian-friendly once again and averts an Azeri(-Turkish?) invasion.

Armenia is experiencing yet another round of unrest, the background of which RT explained here, which can be summarized as growing opposition against Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan from civil society and the church over his foreign policy, increasingly authoritarian tendencies, and economic mismanagement. The arrest of Russian-Armenian businessman Samvel Karapetyan and two archbishops over their alleged involvement in a coup plot catalyzed the latest protests but their roots stem from the Karabakh Conflict.

Azerbaijan’s victory led to the dissolution of the unrecognized separatist entity known as “Artsakh”, which occupied universally recognized Azerbaijani territory for several decades that Armenians nonetheless considered ancestral to them. That outcome was therefore very painful for many, who initially blamed Russia per Pashinyan’s insinuation but eventually realized that his disastrous foreign policy was to blame, after which their protests against him were forcefully put down.

His cession of disputed mountainous border villages to Azerbaijan then made many wonder whether he might also cede southern Syunik Province. The November 2020 ceasefire called for the creation of a Russian-controlled corridor, which Baku calls the “Zangezur Corridor”, across that province but Pashinyan thus far refused. His warming ties with Azerbaijan and historic visit to Turkiye in late June sparked speculation that he might soon comply, however, and even cede Syunik in the interests of “peace”.

The earlier mentioned arrests right around the time of his visit prompted RT chief Margarita Simonyan to tweet the following: “Since returning from Turkey, Mr Pashinyan - or is it Effendi Pashinyan now - has unleashed a campaign of smears, searches and threats against the Armenian Apostolic Church and its head Catholicos Karekin II. To Armenians living in their homeland: what are you waiting for? For your sons to be beheaded, and your daughters to be enslaved into harems - again?”

Her assessment of what’s at stake reflects what many of her co-ethnics are also worried about but shouldn’t be spun as evidence of “Russian meddling” since the unrest is purely organic and entirely local. Even so, if the protests succeed in toppling Pashinyan, then Armenia might flip from becoming a joint Azeri-Turkish protectorate (prior to which he envisaged it becoming a joint American-French one) to a Russian-friendly ally once again, which could have profound reverberations for the region.

So long as his successors don’t revive revanchist fantasies that could be exploited to justify a “special operation” by Azerbaijan (with Turkiye’s possible participation), and such a conflict is averted regardless of the pretext, then the restoration of Russian influence in Armenia could stymie Turkiye’s regional plans. Given that Georgia is nowadays Russian-friendly while Iran is very suspicious of Azerbaijan, Turkiye’s most reliable route to Azerbaijan and the Central Asian Republics beyond is through Armenia.

None of them would likely cut off Turkish-Central Asian trade, but all three could ensure that their corridors aren’t exploited to expand Turkish military influence in the South Caucasus and Central Asia. If Armenia becomes a joint Azeri-Turkish protectorate like Pashinyan’s opponents fear that he agreed to, then Turkiye could become a force to be reckoned with in the Eurasian Heartland, but that scenario could be derailed if it becomes Russian-friendly once again and averts an Azeri(-Turkish?) invasion.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/the-outc ... test-round

******

The masks are off
June 29, 2025
Rybar

Image

" Azerbaijan has shown its true attitude towards Russia "

The Azerbaijani media joined the Baku diplomats, who raised their voices sharply after the arrest of members of an ethnic organized crime group for a murder committed 20 years ago. The rhetoric can be assessed from the publication of the local newspaper Vesti:

"Today, Russia is a prison of nations, an empire that is devouring itself. The Caucasus, southerners, migrants - everyone who does not fit the stereotype of a "Russian Orthodox man with an icon and a machine gun" are becoming a target. But history shows that chauvinism is the path to destruction. Empires that stop respecting their own people are doomed to collapse. And Russia, unfortunately, will not be an exception.
Azerbaijan occupies a special place in this context. The Kremlin not only does not try to establish constructive relations, but also openly challenges its neighbor - a downed civilian plane, cyber attacks on Azerbaijani resources, deputies not allowed in."


The point is not only that what is said is no different from the theses of Ukrainian propaganda and the resources of various foreign agents-decolonizers. Such articles are an excellent indicator of the true attitude of the Azerbaijani authorities towards Russia.

Its manifestation was strictly a matter of time. In recent months, the leadership in Baku has taken a host of unfriendly steps - from arresting activists to closing the "Russian House" or providing shelter to fugitive corrupt officials.

However, there was no reaction, just as there was no reaction to the shooting down of a Russian helicopter or the killing of Russian peacekeepers in Artsakh in 2020-2023. Is anyone surprised that Baku considered all this a call to action?

The fact that politicians and media of foreign countries have started to stand up for the organized crime group makes them foreign agents, fully confirming the correctness of the course to combat ethnic crime. The work must continue.

If we turn away from it now and try to "resolve all the issues with the diasporas", it will be much worse. Because such behavior of a country claiming the status of a great power is perceived as weakness and an indulgence for any lawlessness.

https://rybar.ru/maski-snyaty/

Azerbaijan does not abandon its organized crime groups
June 29, 2025
Rybar

A scandal is gaining momentum on the Internet related to a major operation by the FSB and the Ministry of Internal Affairs in Yekaterinburg in the case of an Azerbaijani ethnic organized crime group involved in murders in the early 2000s.

The defendants were detained, many confessed. One of the suspects died during detention, presumably from cardiac arrest.

Against this background, the reaction of Azerbaijani politicians , who openly stood up for the murderers , and on ethnic grounds, is quite indicative.

Against this background, calls to burn down the Russian embassy from an Azerbaijani human rights activist clearly show what Baku really thinks about relations with Russia and how they really perceive our country.

https://rybar.ru/azerbajdzhan-svoi-opg-ne-brosaet/

Google TRanslator

So, the Azerbaijanis would piss off the Russians and Iranians...are they Polish or something?
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14412
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Tue Jul 01, 2025 2:37 pm

Brian McDonald: What happened to Moscow? A dispatch from behind the sanctions
June 30, 2025
By Brian McDonald, Substack, 6/3/25

It’s now June 2025, more than three years since the West imposed what was billed as the harshest sanctions regime in modern memory. And yet, strolling through Moscow today, you’d struggle to find much evidence of siege. The metro still glides under the city, smooth, spotless, and absurdly cheap.

Cranes peck away at the skyline. Cafes are busy even on a Monday night.

None of which is to say Moscow hasn’t changed. It has—in small ways, and some not so small. It still feels unmistakably European. But it’s a Europe outside the EU, orbiting on its own track.

A lot of famous names are gone. No McDonald’s, no IKEA, no Zara. In their place, Russian versions, Chinese entrants, and homegrown upstarts that mimic the aesthetic, if not the price point. Yet Burger King still grills away, and KFC has become Rostic’s again. Starbucks lives on in everything but name as Stars Coffee. Capitalism didn’t leave. It changed its clothes.

On the high street, Turkish and Chinese brands have filled the gaps. Many Western luxury names still linger—Lacoste, Armani, Saint Laurent—but these days they share space with labels few outsiders would recognise. Luxury perfumes are easy to find. iPhones too. In fact, they’re sometimes cheaper here than in the EU.

Nightlife, once among the continent’s most electric, has changed. The once visible LGBT scene has largely vanished. Even the legendary Propaganda nightclub has shut. But the lights are still on––Simach still rocks and rapper Timati’s Flava is the place to be seen. With suitably absurd prices to boot.

The pubs are busy. Guinness is a luxury at 950 rubles ($12), so people drink local stouts like Black Sheep instead, at less than half the price. Barmen report take home earnings of around 150,000 rubles a month with tips. That’s about $1,800, and in Moscow, it goes surprisingly far. Rent is still modest, and a single metro ticket costs $0.85. Unlimited monthly travel is $40. Three times cheaper than in Berlin.

Restaurants remain lively. But signs of strain are there. Birds, once a flashy Moscow City skyscraper favourite, has closed. So too has the legendary Williams in Patriki. Chefs grumble about inflation, but the kitchen staff still show up, and wages are rising. Unlike in much of Europe, pay here hasn’t stood still in recent years.

The real shift is human. The migrants and tourists are different. The Americans have gone. So have the Germans. Irish pubs that once echoed with the English language now host mostly Russians. On the streets you now hear Arabic, Persian, and Chinese. Moscow feels more Global South than Global West.

Cuisine tells the same story. A decade ago, decent Indian food was a rarity. Now it’s everywhere—upmarket on Tverskaya, or downmarket in the suburbs. Not just for expats. Russians eat there too, curious and increasingly cosmopolitan in their tastes.

Politics? Hardly a whisper. Summers used to bring protests around Trubnaya. Often attended by more Western journalists than actual Russians. Now, silence. The liberal opposition is either muted, abroad, or fearful to show its head. The political void isn’t heavy with menace. It just feels absent. Moscow keeps moving, with or without the drama.

Football, once a cultural anchor, has drifted too. This year’s Champions League final came and went with barely a murmur. Match TV no longer shows it. You can find a stream online, but it’s no longer an event. Hard to believe the World Cup final was played here just seven years ago.

The Ukraine conflict is present, but not prominent. You see the uniforms, the occasional poster. And sometimes, a stranger leans in and asks what you think of the “special military operation.” But there’s no rationing. No gloom. Construction crews keep pouring concrete. Shops stay stocked. Streets stay swept.

The cars have changed. The Hyundais and Toyotas are thinning out. Mercedes and BMWs still pass by, though they’re harder to come by. Now, it’s BYD, Geely, Hongqi—badges of status from a different place.

The digital world reflects the city’s new orientation. While Western media like CNN and The Guardian are not blocked and can still be accessed directly, others require a VPN. The same applies to Instagram, X and Youtube. This, however, comes with a shrug from most Muscovites. After all, it was the EU that first blocked Russian media for its own citizens, they remind you. In this new bifurcated world, reciprocal restrictions are just part of the game.

The departure of many liberals, both native and foreign—the journalists, artists, and tech workers—has also left a cultural mark. Once fixtures of Moscow’s cosmopolitan energy, many left for Berlin, Tbilisi, Istanbul and further afield. In their absence, the city recalibrated. Few mourn the ‘relocants,” as they’re derisively known. Among many who stayed, they’re seen as quitters—self-important chumps who abandoned the ship and now jeer from the shore.

Tourism patterns have shifted too. Paris weekends and London shopping sprees are out. Now it’s Dubai, Antalya, Bangkok. The destinations may be different, but the appetite to travel hasn’t dimmed.

Moscow’s mood, if it can be captured, is one of motion without anxiety. No triumph. No collapse. Just a city learning to walk a new path. A couple dances to a busker on Arbat. A policeman eats a shawarma near Leningrad Station. A barista at Stars Coffee hands you a cappuccino with the faintest shrug.

Life ticks on. The sanctions were meant to isolate. Instead, they’ve underlined a truth: this city, with all its contradictions and churn, is going its own way. There is no fanfare. Just a shrug and another step forward.

To walk Moscow today is to encounter a capital that no longer seeks the West’s approval—and may not miss its presence either.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/06/bri ... sanctions/

******

Timur Ivanov received 13 years in prison
July 1, 16:45

Image

Timur Ivanov received 13 years in prison. The prosecution asked for 14.5 years. Ivanov's accomplice Filatov received 12 years in prison.
All real estate, property, assets, etc., belonging to Timur Ivanov were confiscated in favor of the state. The claims amount to approximately 2.5 billion rubles.

Ivanov has been stripped of his Order of Merit for the Fatherland and the title of Honored Builder.
After serving his sentence, he is prohibited from holding any leadership positions for 4 years. If he is not released on parole, Ivanov will be released from prison at 62 and theoretically can still try to return to the public administration system.
Ivanov has also been fined 100 million rubles. Filatov will have to pay a fine of 25 million rubles.
The total damage from Timur Ivanov's activities + bribes amounted to more than 4 billion rubles.

Overall, one of the most high-profile corruption cases ended with a verdict.
Of course, it is good that the state decided to open this abscess and those involved in theft and corruption got their big epaulets.
But still, the sentences for the guilty seem somewhat insufficient. In the absence of the death penalty (under Stalin, Ivanov and Shamarin would almost certainly have been shot for undermining the country's defense capability through theft), one would like to see sentences of 25 years or more for such acts of art.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9931325.html

Google Translator

******

Transcript of NewsX interview, 30 June
Transcript submitted by a reader

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdLwjoRuonU

NewsX: 0:02
For our top story, we start in Europe, where Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has warned that NATO’s push to increase defence spending could backfire. Speaking in Moscow, Lavrov says the move may lead to the catastrophic collapse of the alliance. He added that NATO should be guided by common sense rather than escalating spending. NATO leaders recently agreed to raise defence spending to five percent of GDP over the next decade, a target driven by US President Donald Trump’s demands for increased burden sharing. Meanwhile, Russia says it plans to cut military spending next year despite a current defense budget that makes up 6.3 percent of GDP, its highest since the Cold War.

Lavrov’s comments came in response to Polish foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikowski, who warned an arms race could trigger Putin’s fall. Russia continues to dismiss claims that it would attack a NATO member, but the tensions reflected deep divisions over security and spending priorities across Europe.

1:07
We’re now joined by Gilbert Doctorow, who is a Russian affairs expert, and he joins us live from Brussels. Gilbert, thank you for joining us on the program. Putin has reiterated his ambition for peace over and over again. However, if Russia does really want peace, why does it spend over six percent on GDP on its military, the highest since the Cold War, while telling NATO to use common sense and spend less?

Gilbert Doctorow, PhD: 1:35
Well I think during the Cold War, Russia, particularly at the end of the Cold War, Russia wasn’t at war with anyone. So it’s understandable that its military budget would have been lower than today. If a country is in the middle of a fierce war for its own existence, as Russia says it is today, it’s understandable they would spend a large amount of their GDP on a war. So that isn’t the issue.

The promise to bring it down, well, that assumes, I suppose, that Russia will win the war with Ukraine in this time period, and so can afford to scale back its military budget. So long as the war is going on, as fiercely as it is today, I think it is improbable that any cut in the Russian budget would be realistic.

NewsX: 2:25
It’s evident this hike in defence spending is because of fears of aggression. And how can Moscow dismiss these fears when much of the international community claims that Russia has invaded or intervened in countries like Georgia and also regions of Crimea and Ukraine all of which used to be in Moscow’s sphere. What are your thoughts on that, Gilbert?

Doctorow:
I think that the current Information War offensive by Russia– And I say that because Mr. Lavrov’s remarks are in sync with what President Putin was saying yesterday. And I can tell you that on major talk shows like Vladimir Solovyov’s talk show last night panelists were almost hysterical about the dangers being posed to Russia by the increased military spend projected for NATO. The Russians are engaging in an information war, you can call it propaganda, which is the old word we use for this sort of thing.

3:24
And that’s a mistake, because they are very poor at propaganda. They don’t do it very well, not nearly as well as the United States and the West does. So they’re talking themselves blue, but I don’t think they will have any real impact on what’s going on in Europe, which is faced with its own internal contradictions and really does not react to anything that Moscow says. The agreed-upon increase in spending in Europe, in NATO last week was an empty exercise as anybody who seriously looks at it knows. The European countries cannot raise their military budgets, and that includes Germany, where the government will fall if Mr. Merz proceeds with his ambitious plans to introduce a draft, which is what his defense minister was calling for a week ago. Therefore, the threat coming from Europe is by no means as real as the Russians are now pretending it is. And it would be better if they just shut up.

NewsX: 4:30
Okay. Lavrov calls NATO’s collapse possibly catastrophic. One of the reasons why this conflict started was, of Ukraine, the possibility that it would join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Is this a threat, or does Moscow actively hope for NATO to fall apart?

Doctorow:
Well, of course it hopes that it will fall apart. There was a peculiar choice of words by Lavrov, “catastrophic”. Catastrophic for whom? Certainly not for the Russians. And it is a hyperbolic statement. It’s an exaggerated statement. In the worst-case scenario, NATO will not collapse catastrophically. It will downsize, it will break up into pieces that become part of the European Union’s defence.

But the different forces and equipment that NATO now has will not disappear. They will be integrated or reintegrated in the European defense, in the worst-case scenario. So Mr. Lavrov’s choice of words was very peculiar.

NewsX: 5:41
Yes indeed. He also claimed that Russia will cut its military spending down from the 6.3 percent it’s currently at. Why should anyone believe Russia’s claim while, [on] spending the next year, while still fighting this costly war in Ukraine?

Doctorow:
Well, as I said a moment ago, the hidden assumption of that statement that was made by President Putin and is repeated by his foreign Minister, the hidden assumption, is that the war will end because Russia will win, because Ukraine will capitulate. Now, that is the assumption. Nobody, he isn’t saying that.

But if it is true, if that happens, then of course Russia will scale back its military expenditures. If it does not happen and the war goes on, then of course Russia will continue to spend it at its present level, if not even more.

NewsX: 6:40
Gilbert Doctorow, thank you very much for joining us on the programme and for your insights.

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2025/07/01/ ... w-30-june/

******

The Latest Trouble In Russian-Azerbaijani Relations Might Be Part Of A Turkish-US Powerplay
Andrew Korybko
Jul 01, 2025

Image

Turkiye sees an opportunity to turbocharge its rise as a Eurasian Great Power along Russia’s entire southern periphery in ways that autonomously align with American grand strategic interests.

Russian-Azerbaijani relations are in trouble as a result of two scandals. The first concerns the recent police raid against suspected ethnic Azeri criminals in Yekaterinburg, during which time two of them died in circumstances that are now being investigated. That prompted Baku to officially complain to Moscow, after which a vicious infowar campaign was launched on social media and even among some publicly financed outlets as well alleging that Russia is “Islamophobic”, “imperialist”, and “persecuting Azeris”.

This was shortly thereafter followed by a police raid on Sputnik’s office in Baku, which had been operating in a legal gray zone after the authorities moved to effectively shut it down in February, thus resulting in the detainment of several Russians. That earlier decision was suspected to be connected to Azerbaijan’s displeasure with Russia’s response to late December’s airline tragedy in the North Caucasus that was caused by a Ukrainian drone attack at the time. Readers can learn more about it here and here.

Before determining who’s responsible for the latest trouble in bilateral ties, it’s important to recall the larger context within which all of this is unfolding. Prior to late December’s incident, Russian-Azerbaijani relations were proceeding along a very positive trajectory in accordance with the strategic partnership pact that President Ilham Aliyev agreed to with Putin on the eve of the special operation in late February 2022. That built upon Russia’s role in mediating an end to the Second Karabakh War in November 2020.

More recently, Putin visited Baku last August, the significance of which was analyzed here and here. This was followed by Aliyev visiting Moscow in October in connection with the CIS Heads of State Summit. Shortly before late December’s airline tragedy, Aliyev then gave an extended interview to Rossiya Segodnya head Dmitry Kiselyov in Baku, where he elaborated on Azerbaijan’s multi-aligned foreign policy and newfound suspicions of the West’s regional intentions towards the South Caucasus.

On that topic, the Biden Administration sought to exploit Armenia’s loss in the Second Karabakh War to more radically turn it against Russia and thus transform the country into a joint French-US protectorate for dividing-and-ruling the region, which worsened relations with Azerbaijan. The Trump Administration appears to be reconsidering that, however, and might have even agreed to let Armenia become a joint Azeri-Turkish protectorate instead. It’s this perception that’s driving the latest unrest in Armenia.

From Russia’s perspective, the French-US protectorate scenario could spark another regional war that might spiral out of control with unpredictable consequences for Moscow if they weaponize the revival of Armenian revanchism. Similarly, the Azeri-Turkish protectorate scenario could turbocharge Turkiye’s rise as a Eurasian Great Power if it leads to an expansion of its influence (especially military) in Central Asia. The ideal scenario is therefore for Armenia to return to its traditional status as a Russian ally.

Having explained the context within which the latest trouble is unfolding, it’s now time to determine who’s responsible. Objectively speaking, the Azerbaijani authorities overreacted to the recent police raid in Yekaterinburg, which signaled to civil society that it’s acceptable (at least for now) to wage a vicious infowar campaign against Russia. Some officials with an unclear connection to Aliyev then authorized the raid on Sputnik’s office as an escalation under the implied pretext of an asymmetrical response.

Given the ambiguity about Aliyev’s role in Azerbaijan’s overreactions, it’s premature to conclude that he decided to jeopardize the strategic ties with Russia that he himself cultivated, though he must still take responsibility even if mid-level officials did this on their own. That’s because Baku’s official complaint to Moscow and its raid on Sputnik’s office are state actions, unlike the recent police raid in Yekaterinburg, which is a local action. He’ll thus likely have to talk to Putin sometime soon to resolve everything.

The abovementioned observation doesn’t explain why mid-level officials might have overreacted to the Yekaterinburg police raid, which can be attributed to the deep-seated resentment that some have against Russia and speculative foreign influence. Regarding the first, some Azerbaijanis (but importantly not all and seemingly not the majority) harbor such sentiments, while the second might be linked to the scenario of the US letting Armenia becoming a joint Azeri-Turkish protectorate.

To elaborate, the US and France would struggle to turn Armenia into their own joint protectorate due to Georgia successfully repelling several rounds of Biden-era Color Revolution unrest, which aimed to pressure the government into opening up a “second front” against Russia and toppling it if it refused. The military logistics required for turning Armenia into a bastion from which they could then divide-and-rule the region therefore are no longer reliable since they could only realistically run through Georgia.

Accordingly, the Trump Administration might have decided to cut their predecessor’s strategic losses by “giving” Armenia to Turkiye and Azerbaijan, which would repair the troubled ties that he inherited with both. In exchange, the US might have requested that they take a harder line towards Russia if the opportunity emerges, knowing that neither will sanction it since that would harm their own economies but hoping that a future situation would develop to serve as the pretext for escalating political tensions.

Mid-level officials wouldn’t be privy to such talks, but the aforesaid speculative request could have trickled down to them from their superiors, some of whom might have implied state approval for overreacting to any forthcoming “opportunity”. This sequence of events could bestow Aliyev with the ability to “plausibly deny” his role in events as part of a de-escalation deal with Putin. The whole purpose of this charade might be to signal to Russia that a new order is forming in the broader region.

As was earlier explained, that order could be a Turkish-led one upon Ankara and Baku subordinating Armenia as their joint protectorate, after which they’d streamline military logistics across its territory to turn the “Organization of Turkic States” (OTS) into a major force along Russia’s entire southern periphery. To be clear, the OTS isn’t controlled by the West, but its Turkish leader and increasingly equal Azerbaijani partner could still autonomously advance the West’s strategic agenda vis-à-vis Russia in that scenario.

Just like the US and France have unreliable military logistics to Armenia, so too does Russia, so it could struggle to deter an Azerbaijani(-Turkish?) invasion of its nominal but wayward CSTO ally if Baku (and Ankara?) exploits its latest unrest (such as if Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan falls). Moreover, the most optimal branch of the North-South Transport Corridor (NSTC) runs through Azerbaijan, which could block it if Russia takes decisive action in defense of Armenia (however limited due to the special operation).

To be clear, Russia has no intention to fight Azerbaijan, but Azerbaijan’s overreaction to the recent police raid in Yekaterinburg might be a ploy to preemptively craft the perception that Russia “backed down” as a result if Moscow doesn’t take decisive action to deter Baku if regional tensions over Armenia worsen. Had it not been for that raid, then perhaps some other pretext would have been exploited or concocted, but the point is that Russia and Azerbaijan have polar opposite visions of Armenia’s geopolitical future.

That same future is pivotal for the future of the broader region as was written, but Russia has limited means for shaping the course of events due to its complex strategic interdependence with Azerbaijan vis-à-vis the NSTC and its understandable military prioritization of the special operation. The preceding constraints are self-evident, and Aliyev (and Erdogan?) might be preparing to take advantage of them, emboldened as he(/they?) might be by Russia’s perceived setback in Syria after Assad’s downfall.

Azerbaijan is aware of its irreplaceable role in turbocharging allied Turkiye’s rise as Eurasian Great Power, which is dependent on subordinating Armenia in order to then streamline the OTS’ military logistics between Asia Minor and Central Asia via the South Caucasus. If Aliyev came to believe that his country has a brighter future as part of a Turkish-led regional order instead of a Russian-led one, especially if the US signaled approval of this as speculated, then Baku’s overreaction to recent events makes more sense.

The Moscow-mediated Armenian-Azerbaijani ceasefire of November 2020 calls for the creation of a Russian-controlled corridor across Armenia’s southern Syunik Province, which Baku calls the “Zangezur Corridor”, for connecting both parts of Azerbaijan. Pashinyan hitherto refused to implement this due to pressure from the West and the Armenian diaspora therein, but if Trump decided to “give” Armenia to Azerbaijan and Turkiye instead, then he might do it but only after squeezing Russia out of this route.

Russian control would prevent Turkiye from streamlining its military logistics to Central Asia through this corridor for the purpose of replacing Russia’s influence there with its own as part of a grand strategic powerplay that autonomously aligns with the Western agenda in the pivotal Eurasian Heartland. Azerbaijan (and Turkiye?) might therefore invade Syunik if their envisaged client Pashinyan either flip-flops on squeezing Russia out or before Russia is invited into there by a new government if he falls.

The consequences of Turkiye obtaining unhindered military access to Central Asia through either sequence of events could be disastrous for Russia since its influence there is already being challenged by Turkiye, the EU, and even the UK, which just signed a two-year military agreement with Kazakhstan. That country, with whom Russia shares the longest land border in the world, has been pivoting towards the West as was assessed here in summer 2023 and this troubling trend could easily accelerate in that event.

Reflecting on all this insight, the latest trouble in Russian-Azerbaijani relations might therefore be part of a Turkish-US powerplay, one which Trump could have agreed to with Erdogan and Aliyev later jumped on board but might still have his doubts. That would account for his “plausibly deniable” role in Azerbaijan’s overreaction to recent events. If taken to its conclusion, this powerplay could risk Azerbaijan becoming Turkiye’s junior partner with time, which he’s thus far sought to avoid through his multi-alignment policy.

If that’s the case, then it might not be too late for Putin to avert this scenario so long as he can convince Aliyev that Azerbaijan has a brighter future as part of a different regional order, one that would center on Azerbaijan continuing its Russo-Turkish balancing act instead of turbocharging Turkiye’s rise. The NSTC could figure prominently in this paradigm, but the problem is that Azerbaijan’s ties with Iran and India are very strained right now, so he’d have to prospectively mediate a rapprochement for this to happen.

Anyhow, the point is that it’s premature to assume that the latest trouble in Russian-Azerbaijani relations is the new normal or that it might even precede a seemingly inevitable crisis, though both possibilities are nonetheless credible and should be taken seriously by the Kremlin just in case. The best-case scenario is that Aliyev and Putin soon hold a call to amicably resolve the issues that have abruptly toxified their ties otherwise the worst might be yet to come and it could be disadvantageous for both.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/the-late ... zerbaijani
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14412
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Wed Jul 02, 2025 3:32 pm

OPERATIONS ROUGH RIDER, SPIDERWEB, MIDNIGHT HAMMER – RUSSIA GAUGES TRUMP’S RATIONALITY IN WARFIGHTING AT THE NUCLEAR EDGE

Image

By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

President Donald Trump has said he believes he can use nuclear weapons to destroy his enemy’s forces for defending itself, including the enemy’s capacity for deterrence by nuclear counter-attack. This is Trump’s new doctrine of “total obliteration”. It is US shock and awe tipped over the nuclear threshold; it is American first-strike nuclear attack.

“It was so bad that they ended the war,” Trump told the press at the NATO summit in The Hague last Thursday (June 26). Speaking of the US bombing attack on Iran’s nuclear enrichment and weaponization plants on June 22, Trump said: “It ended the war. Somebody said in a certain way that it was so devastating, actually, if you look at Hiroshima, if you look at Nagasaki, you know, that ended a war, too. This ended a war in a different way, but it was so devastating.”

The enemy Iranians, claimed Trump, were taken by surprise and had no defence. “They didn’t get to see it. It was dark. That’s the amazing thing about the shots. They hit the shots perfectly and yet it was dead dark. There was no moon. There was no light. It was virtually a moonless. It was very dark and they hit — the shots were hit perfectly.”

“It was called obliteration,” Trump said. “It’s been obliterated. Totally obliterated.” He kept repeating the word obliteration eleven times in forty-seven minutes. “No other military on earth could have done it. And now this incredible exercise of American strength has paved the way for peace with a historic ceasefire agreement late Monday.”

President Vladimir Putin has not responded to Trump’s claims. Instead, he told reporters on June 27 that he “hold[s] the incumbent President of the United States in the highest regard. His path to returning to power and to the White House has been exceptionally arduous, complex, and hazardous – a fact of which we are all cognisant, particularly given the assassination attempts he has survived, indeed multiple attempts on his life. He is a courageous man, that much is evident.”

Putin was showing no more respect and courtesy towards Trump than he had shown President Joseph Biden, despite the onset of Biden’s dementia which was too obvious to ignore in private, if not in public. After meeting with Biden in Geneva in 2021, Putin had said: “I want to say that the image of President Biden that our press and even the American press paints has nothing in common with reality. He was on a long trip, had flown across the ocean, and had to contend with jet lag and the time difference. When I fly it takes its toll. But he looked cheerful, we spoke face-to-face for two or maybe more hours. He’s completely across his brief. He himself does not miss anything, I assure you. It was completely obvious to me.”

These are not personal compliments; Putin is not ingratiating the US presidents. He is expressing the fundamental assumption in Russian warfighting strategy that whatever their personal eccentricities, medical handicaps, or psychiatric symptoms, the US president will always act rationally in the escalation towards nuclear war; and that he will be advised, persuaded and deterred against a first-strike nuclear attack against Russia.

This rationality assumption is being tested now by the Kremlin, Security Council, General Staff and the intelligence agencies as they review Trump’s record of bombing Yemen in March, Operation Rough Rider; his involvement in the attack with Ukrainian proxies on Russia’s nuclear bombers on June 1, Operation Spiderweb; and finally the US-Israeli war against Iran beginning on June 13 and ending with Operation Midnight Hammer on June 24, the US Air Force attack on Iran as reported publicly by General Daniel Caine, the spetsnaz officer whom Trump has appointed Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The clearest recent statement of the rationality standard applying in an escalating war between nuclear-armed militaries, was spelled out on May 31 by Indian Army General Anil Chauhan, Chief of the Defence Staff. He was explaining India’s conduct of the war with Pakistan which began with Pakistan’s attack in Kashmir on April 22, and concluded with the destruction of Pakistan’s air defences, including its nuclear weapons base, and the ceasefire which took effect on May 10-11.

“There is a lot of space before the nuclear threshold is crossed,” Chauhan said. “There is a lot of signalling before that…The most rational people are people in uniform when conflict takes place. That’s because they understand that conflict can swing either way. In every step which happened…I found both sides displaying a lot of rationality in their thoughts as well as their actions. Why should we assume that in the nuclear domain there will be irrationality on someone else’s part?”

This is the question being discussed behind closed doors in Moscow now — whether the assumption of Trump’s rationality continues to be justified, and if his conduct is creating fresh doubt, what to do about it.

It had been three days after Trump had bombed Iran and after he had proclaimed his obliteration doctrine that Putin said: “we highly value both his domestic policies and his endeavours regarding the Middle East situation, as well as his efforts toward resolving the Ukrainian crisis. I have previously articulated this position and wish to reaffirm it publicly: I am convinced that President Trump is genuinely committed to resolving the issue on the Ukrainian track. Recently, I believe he observed that the matter has proven more intricate than external appearances suggested. That is indeed the case. Such complexity is unsurprising – there exists a substantial difference between distant observation and direct engagement with the issue. The same is true of the Middle East crisis. Although he may have greater experience there, having been more deeply involved in Middle Eastern affairs, complexities persist there as well. Real life is always more complex than any notion of it.”

Putin was restating the strategic assumption that Trump is rational. The evidence of the joint US-Israeli war against Iran, including Operation Midnight Hammer, and the failure, as the Russians understand it, of Trump’s war aims – regime change in Tehran, partition of the country, elimination of the Iranian military’s nuclear-armed missile capabilities against Israel – is far from conclusive.

“Iran is now central in the Russian discourse,” comments a Moscow source in a position to know. “Putin will not deviate from the pure diplomacy. There’s a two-track approach. It is part of Russia’s warfighting strategy. We now know that Trump is refusing to come to any of the terms we have tabled in Istanbul for a peace settlement. He keeps threatening to escalate. His record is showing the US won’t withdraw from the Middle East war and he is refusing to stop running the Ukraine war. So we draw the obvious conclusions. What’s the point of Putin announcing those if Trump shows he isn’t listening, won’t agree, maybe can’t understand?”

Listen to General Chauhan’s May 31 discussion of rational calculation on the two sides of war between nuclear-armed powers, India and Pakistan.


Reuters interview, May 31, source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnFz5KHxCTY
The Bloomberg interview can be viewed here.

Here is Russia’s 33-point memorandum, tabled in Istanbul on June 2, for the end-of-war settlement with the US, its allies and the regime in Kiev.
https://johnhelmer.net/when-the-strateg ... s-the-war/

Listen to today’s discussion of the lessons Russia is now drawing in the Gunners Shot podcast with Lieutenant-General P.R. Shankar.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eYxNap6cBY
Image
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eYxNap6cBY

Shankar retired from the Indian Army as Chief of Artillery in 2016, and is now a professor at the Aerospace Department of the Indian Institute of Technology Madras. Follow earlier discussions with Shankar here. Gunners Shot is the leading Indian source of military and intelligence assessment of strategy and operations. Click to view the archive.

https://johnhelmer.net/operations-rough ... more-91995

Trump' 'rationality' is limited to what affects him personally, which includes his business interests. A great example of that is his declining to lead his dupes in their riot at the Capital. While he obviously incited the riot weasel words allowed him to escape legal consequences. Such would not have be the case had he physically led the mob, that would have been impossible to ignore and he knew it.

It is always about HIM, his ego and wallet. The whole world knows the attack on Iran failed to provide promised results but woe to those who express that fact to his face. Just as he did lose the 2020 election but is psychologically incapable of having lost at anything, ever. Russia knows this and act accordingly.

&

Despite his protestations Gen Shankar's estimations concerning China are highly colored by India's uneasy relationship with that country and their growing competition in various spheres.

******

It Is Not Just In Yekaterinburg.

Russia is (finally) finishing off ethnic (this time Azeri) "diaspora" which is a euphemism for organized crime groups. Here is the arrest of the "boss" of Ural "diaspora" who, naturally, controls free farmers' markets in the area and is accused of a series of homicides going back as far as 1990s.
(Video at link.)

But that is not just Yekaterinburg, Voronezh also joined the chat and it begins to look as a massive operation across Russia where ethnic mafias are beginning to live in a new paradigm. This has nothing to do with hundreds of thousands of regular Azerbaijanis, many of who are law abiding Russia's citizens, but the signal to ethnic organized crime groups is clear.
Official Baku decided to go, for now, head to head with Russia, including jailing Russian citizens, correspondents of Baku bureau of Sputnik.

According to Azerbaijani media, a total of seven suspects have been detained in the case involving the Russian journalists. However, only the senior editors ended up in pre-trial custody. The case reportedly involves multiple offenses, including fraud, illegal business dealings and money laundering. Shortly after the raid on the Sputnik office, Russia’s Foreign Ministry summoned Azerbaijani Ambassador Rakhman Mustafaev, citing “Baku’s hostile actions and the unlawful detention of Russian journalists.”

Well, wrong move. Russia is completely independent in every single respect from Azerbaijan, while the same cannot be stated for official Baku. Especially, when suddenly some "rumors" (wink, wink) begin to circulate that some drones, both against Iran and Russia, could have been launched from the territory of Azerbaijan. So, we know how it will go if things do not change in official Baku attitude. If Baku thinks that its close relations with Turkey are somehow any kind of assurances--wrong assessment. And pissing off Iran, boy ... well Azerbaijani political top can call on whatever they want, but the weight categories are so incomparable that I would rather get myself a bucket of pop-corn.

Meanwhile, bank teller boy called Putin.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has spoken with his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron by telephone, the Kremlin press service said on Tuesday. It is the first phone contact between the leaders since September 2022. The conversation revolved around the situation in the Middle East, as well as the Ukraine conflict. During the call, Putin told Macron that the Ukraine conflict was “a direct consequence of the policies pursued by Western states, which for many years ignored Russia’s security interests,” and had established an “anti-Russian bridgehead” in the country, the press service stated. The Russian leader reiterated Moscow’s approach to any settlement, stating that it must “be comprehensive and long-term, address the root causes of the Ukrainian crisis and be based on new territorial realities.”

Allegedly France did land some contingent to Odessa. Doesn't matter, I hope those hapless servicemen wrote parting letters to their families, because they will be found out and killed. I don't even know what else did Macron expect to hear from Putin, because Russia's conditions re: 404 are the same. But this loser will now parade in a front of the same EU losers like him his phone call as if France matters in any serious geopolitical matters. She does not.

https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/0 ... nburg.html

******

Many grant-eaters went bankrupt...
July 2, 10:51

Image

USAID programs in Ukraine under the State Department may be terminated this year, Kyiv Post writes.

Rubio announced the day before that USAID was officially ceasing to administer foreign aid programs, with some of them being transferred to the State Department.
According to the publication, the State Department has no legal mechanisms to manage programs related to Ukraine, nor a plan for their legal implementation. We are talking about programs in the areas of healthcare, energy, and cybersecurity.
"Many implementers of these programs have gone bankrupt... I will be very surprised if these contracts survive until the end of the year."

The problem is currently being solved by switching to Europe, which is ready to finance some grant-eaters, but not all. Therefore, the fight at the trough for reduced funding will be fierce.

This also applies to the so-called "Russian opposition," where funding from the United States has already been partially cut, resulting in complaints of "How can we live?!" and "How can we now fight the Putin regime?!" with the aggravation of intra-species struggle in the "Don't gape at someone else's grant money" mode.

The "Belarusian zmagars with the cutlet fairy" have similar problems, the volume of grants has decreased, but they want to fight the "bloody Lukashenko regime" with American money.

P.S. In Ukraine, almost 85% of the media and NGOs were financed by the USA, of which more than 80% through USAID.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9932601.html
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply