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

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

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

Post by blindpig » Mon Apr 28, 2025 11:48 am

Plans that depend on third parties
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 04/28/2025

Image

“We all know how unpleasant the next agreement will be for those who have been deceived about the outcome all these years. That's why the packaging is of utmost importance. Rutte is doing everything possible,” Russian opposition journalist Leonid Ragozin wrote yesterday on social media. He was referring to the NATO Secretary General's smiling remarks during an appearance on Fox News , the favorite channel of Donald Trump and his political entourage, who stated that “President Trump's leadership has broken the deadlock,” adding that “any deal on Ukraine must be lasting,” and stating that “acknowledging the occupation of Crimea does not mean legally recognizing it, like the Baltic countries did in the 1950s.” Rutte also insisted on the need to increase military spending to 3% of NATO member countries' GDP, linking it to Russian “weakness,” a case in point, in the strange Atlantist logic of the recent Russian missile attack on Kiev.

In Rutte's words, one can see how his discourse is adapting to the circumstances, in this case to the possibility—or risk—of an agreement between Russia and Ukraine, which under current conditions will entail a loss of territory that is being presented as temporary. An example with a happy ending for the West is provided: that of the Baltic countries and their independence from the Soviet Union. For the NATO Secretary General, the main objectives appear to be to ensure that there is no US recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea and to guarantee a sharp increase in military spending on the continent, undoubtedly aimed at the future armed peace in which the fight against Russia will continue through a military presence in Ukraine, which implies a certain arms race, and through economic means. Hence, from the perspective of NATO, which has always had its raison d'être in the political confrontation with Moscow, a peace agreement that perpetuates the political conflict cannot be considered a tragedy.

The conditions under which this cold war phase between two heavily armed blocs will occur depend in part on what the lobbying work being carried out by Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron, and the pressure from Volodymyr Zelensky and the more radical representatives of the European Union, can achieve with Donald Trump. Particularly important in this effort is the response that Ukraine and its European allies—the United Kingdom, France, and Germany—have given to Washington after receiving the final offer from the United States. It is clear from reading this document that the objectives are threefold: to ensure that Ukraine receives control of strategic positions and that it does not have to assume the loss of other territories in advance; to avoid the commitment to lift European sanctions against Russia; and to receive the support and assistance of the United States for the control and monitoring of a possible ceasefire and for the subsequent militarization of Ukraine, camouflaged by the oft-repeated security guarantees .

For months, especially since Donald Trump announced his intention to move quickly toward resolving the war and clearly distanced himself from US participation in post-ceasefire security guarantees, European countries have struggled to find a way to balance an increased continental role with maintaining Washington's support, necessary to launch the peace mission initially envisioned. In this effort, Sir Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron, currently to the right of NATO in terms of their belligerence and rejection of a negotiated peace agreement with the Russian Federation, have taken the lead in European leadership in seeking tougher measures against Russia.

In this endeavor, France and Germany are aligning themselves with the continent's most radical countries, as demonstrated by the fact that the chairs of the Foreign Affairs Committees of the French and German parliaments have signed, along with Ukraine, the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, a letter stating that "negotiating with the war criminal Putin is useless; his main objective is to undermine or humiliate our ally, the United States." The letter, which calls Russia a "terrorist regime," demands accelerated Ukraine's accession to the European Union, and calls "on the United States and other NATO members to admit Ukraine to NATO without delay." It insists that "there can be no compromise or external pressure on Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity," a recipe for eternal war that, for certain sectors of the European establishment , is preferable to a negotiated ceasefire. Appealing to a simile as incomparable as it is overused, the text declares that "we cannot repeat the mistakes of Munich in 1938." Amid all this belligerent rhetoric, the main message may be the one that emerges from the statement that "strong leadership in European countries is also needed, along with strengthened transatlantic solidarity."

That seemingly innocent phrase in a markedly exalted text reflects a stubborn reality: European countries may aspire to show leadership at the public and media levels, but they depend on the United States to carry out their political and military plans. Until the Paris meeting and the subsequent failed London summit, European countries had not even been invited to the negotiation of a peace agreement whose post-war situation they will have to address politically, militarily, and economically. The attempt by the United Kingdom, France, and Germany to significantly improve the terms of the agreement that the United States will present to Moscow is not only a response to defending Ukraine, but also has a component of self-interest. Despite periodic references to European strategic autonomy , even the most basic military deterrence mission that Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer have been preparing for months depends directly on the participation of the United States.

“Britain is likely to abandon its plans to send thousands of troops to protect Ukraine because the risks are deemed ‘too high,’” The Times states . After months of European countries boasting about their strength and insisting that the mission depended solely on their own will and Ukrainian permission, Russian opinion and US participation ultimately proved to be the most important factors. “In an apparent softening of the plans, Britain and Europe would no longer have a ground force guarding key cities, ports, and nuclear power plants to ensure peace,” the article insists, seeking to present the initial abandonment of the flagship measure of the Starmer-Macron plan, which was “in the operational phase” of preparations, as a gesture of peace rather than a lack of autonomy. “It is hoped that this shift in military support for Ukraine could push Moscow to move its red lines toward a peace agreement,” the article continues, reporting that the operation will be limited, for now, to sending troops to instruct and train the Ukrainian army in western Ukraine, the safest and most remote area from the front lines. “Much of what we hear from Brussels, Paris, and London these days is just damage control,” commented Leonid Ragozin.

Rather than a peacekeeping, peacekeeping, or even deterrence mission—the lowest level of a foreign military presence—“the security commitment to Ukraine would focus on rebuilding and rearmament of Kiev’s military, with protection from the air and sea,” The Times clarifies . This is consistent with the position of European countries, which have opted for the continuation of the proxy war, in which they provided the weapons and ammunition and the funding to keep the state afloat while Ukraine provided the troops and assumed all the risk.

“Arms from the UK and Europe would continue to flow, so Ukraine would be in a strong position should Russia break the terms of any agreement. Nothing has yet been ruled out, and the Ministry of Defense is clear that Britain would not be prepared to abandon plans to send troops to the country in some capacity,” The Times continues . Under current conditions, without the security guarantee of US involvement, the European objective is to militarize Ukraine while remaining a safe haven, though without completely withdrawing the option of a military presence, which is always linked to US readiness.

“A source involved in discussions about a ‘coalition of the willing’ referred to plans for a force of tens of thousands of ground troops: ‘The risks are too high and the forces inadequate for such a task,’” The Times adds . When things don’t go as planned, it’s always useful to look for a scapegoat. “This has always been the UK’s idea,” the outlet quotes one of its sources as saying, “it was France that wanted a more muscular approach .”

European countries, including the United Kingdom and France, want to continue fighting for Ukraine's territorial integrity and sovereignty, but they don't want to risk having to confront Russia without the essential help of their American partner.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/04/28/plane ... -terceros/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Putin declared a truce on May 9 to mark the 80th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War.

The enemy will certainly try to break it, as it did the Easter truce.

During the days of the 80th anniversary of Victory – from midnight on May 7-8 to midnight on May 10-11 – the Russian side declares a truce. All military actions cease during this period.
Russia believes that the Ukrainian side should follow this example.
In the event of a violation of the truce by the Ukrainian side, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation will give an adequate and effective response – Putin

***
Colonelcassad
The enemy admitted that a Su-27 fighter was lost in an air battle with the Geraniums.
Most likely, either he tried to shoot it down too close and was cut by shrapnel, or the PPO Titans shot down their own, as is tradition.

It is worth noting that this is not the first episode of a Geranium's victory over an enemy fighter. In 2022, an exploding Geranium shot down an enemy MiG-29 fighter.
Thus, the Geraniums have already shot down at least 2 enemy fighters in air battles.

***

Colonelcassad
The President of Congo announced that he would also attend the Victory Parade in Moscow on May 9.
According to him, he is going to meet with Putin in a situation where his country is choosing a multipolar world. Congo is still grateful to the USSR for its assistance.
Congo wants to join BRICS and develop joint projects with Russia.
Of course, we need to work there within the framework of our general strategy for the decolonization of Africa, which enables African countries to free themselves from the colonial yoke and become more independent, while Russia gets the opportunity to expand its influence in Africa, obtain new military bases and conclude favorable agreements on the joint extraction of natural resources. The rich history of the USSR's participation in the decolonization of Africa plays an important role in restoring our positions on the African continent. The investments that we refused under Gorbachev and Yeltsin were not in vain. Thanks to them, among other things, the French neocolonial empire was crushed.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Russian General Staff Confirms: North Korean Troops Fought Valiantly in Kursk
Simplicius
Apr 26, 2025

Today Putin announced the complete liberation of the Kursk region: (Video at link.)

In reality, it seems the Kremlin has made a habit out of reporting slightly premature victories, as they famously did in Khrynki last year. Ukrainian troops have been driven back to nearly the border, but top map makers on both sides still maintain a tiny sliver of Kursk land held by dogged AFU units. To be fair, Gerasimov did indicate in the report that the last few Ukrainian stragglers hiding in abandoned sheds and woods near the border were being hunted down.

But the biggest ‘shock’ came when Gerasimov made official confirmation of the active participation of North Korean troops in the Kursk theater: (Video at link.)

And it wasn’t mere presence—Gerasimov reports they fought shoulder to shoulder with Russian troops. And now that the cat’s out of the bag, there are more details trickling out from Russian frontline journos who had previously been sworn to OPSEC about the DPRK forces.

One channel published this photo of what is claimed to be real DPRK troops:

Image

Famed journo Alexander Kots filled in the following:

How Koreans Helped Us Liberate Kursk Region

Until now, Russia has neither confirmed nor denied the presence of DPRK troops on the front line. We are not obliged to inform anyone, in fact. This is a matter of bilateral relations and agreements. Meanwhile, Korean units gradually began to arrive in Russia during the Kursk epic.

At first, they were trained at training grounds, familiarized themselves with modern combat tactics, mastered drone control skills, and became familiar with field realities. Then the "combat Buryats," as our military jokingly and for the sake of secrecy called them, were transferred to the Kursk region. They lived in field conditions so as not to "show off." At first, they held the third line, then the second, then they were tested in fortifications and, finally, in assaults.

The Korean soldiers distinguished themselves with their coherence, discipline, fatal disregard for death and remarkable endurance. It is understandable - they are mostly young guys, strong, pumped up and well trained in their homeland. Especially their units of the Special Operations Forces. The allies made a great contribution to the liberation of the Korenevsky district, and in the battles near Staraya and Novaya Sorochiny, and in the breakthrough to Kurilovka... They had a strict rule - not to be captured alive. And not to surrender voluntarily.

By the way, the enemy tried to persuade them to do this by throwing around imitation DPRK banknotes (pictured) with the following text written in hieroglyphs: "Surrender! Kim Jong-un has brought you to death and starved your families. Place a yellow flag in front of you, raise your hands and shout "Freedom!" Slowly walk towards the Ukrainian soldiers and fulfill their demands."

Image

Not a single Korean soldier violated either his oath or allied obligations. It was important for Pyongyang to gain experience in modern combat operations, to study the tactics and technologies of a potential enemy (the "collective West") and to acquire knowledge that was inaccessible due to the sanctions regime. And these tasks were accomplished. But the Koreans also made a significant contribution to the defeat of the Ukrainian group on our soil within the framework of a comprehensive bilateral agreement.

Their arrival allowed us not to ease the pressure on other sections of the front, to continue the offensive in Donbass and to inflict enormous damage on the invasion group, which consisted of 95 (!) battalions.

Full column https://www.kp.ru/daily/27691.5/5080840/

sashakots


His comments about the un-surprising efficiency of the DPRK troops had long been confirmed by Western sources, like this Newsweek article:

Image
https://www.politico.eu/article/north-k ... diers-say/

Meanwhile, Ukrainian soldiers fighting in Kursk describe North Koreans — previously dubbed “cannon fodder” that will “defect as soon as they get to fight” — as highly skilled, fearless and motivated infantry.

“They have been blowing themselves up when they see capture is in sight,” Lieutenant Colonel Yaroslav Chepurnyi, a spokesman of the Ukrainian army, told POLITICO on Monday.


In fact, read below as the Ukrainian Colonel repeats virtually word for word what Alexander Kots wrote earlier:

Ukrainian soldiers describe the North Korean soldiers as being very far from inexperienced cannon fodder.

“They are young, motivated, physically fit, brave, and good at using small arms. They are also disciplined. They have everything you need for a good infantryman,” Chepurnyi said.

Yuriy Bondar, a Ukrainian soldier with the 80th separate airborne assault brigade, said North Korean soldiers have extremely good physical training and have stable morale.


The Ukrainians uncharacteristically spared no praise:

“They demonstrate psychological resilience. Imagine, one runs and attracts attention and the other from an ambush shoots down a drone with aimed fire,” Bondar said, claiming that underestimation of the enemy will always lead to a defeat.

They even said Wagner are like “children” compared to the DPRK super soldiers:

“As one commander said, compared to the soldiers of the DPRK, Wagner mercenaries circa 2022 are just children. And I believe him,” Bondar said.

Surely such reports will serve to deflate South Korea’s over-confidence a skosh or two.

But! “Doesn’t this news suggest Russian weakness, such that Putin desperately needed to beg Kim for troops to save Kursk?” I hear you ask.

Well, actually US intel agencies already confirmed to NYT that the DPRK troops to Russia pipeline came at North Korea’s initiative, not Russia’s:

Image
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/23/us/p ... korea.html

When North Korean troops began arriving in Russia this fall, some Western officials believed it was a sign that the Kremlin had reached out in a desperate need for more soldiers.

But U.S. intelligence agencies have now assessed that the deployment was North Korea’s idea and not Russia’s, though President Vladimir V. Putin quickly embraced it, American officials say.

The reason is obvious: any intelligent and forward-thinking leader would jump at the priceless opportunity to test and hone his troops in modern combat, particularly one undergoing rapid evolutionary changes. It is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to imbibe real-world lessons to pass them down through the domestic military structure. Of course, NYT adds another plausible explanation to the mix: Kim was hoping to curry favor for future support from Russia.

It may not be until the end of the war that we discover the true extent to which North Korea supported Russia, but many Western sources claim that support has been much vaster than is commonly suspected:

Image

(More at link.)

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/rus ... irms-north

******

Russia Not To Comment on Trump’s Ukraine Peace Plan

Image
X/ @AlternatNews

April 23, 2025 Hour: 10:09 am

Drafts of agreement options cannot be made public so that they do not lose their effectiveness, Peskov explained.

On Wednesday, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said that Russia will not publicly discuss the details of U.S. President Donald Trump’s peace plan for the Ukrainian conflict.

“There are many leaks in the media. Any draft of the agreement options cannot be made public. As soon as they are made public, they lose their effectiveness,” he said in response to questions about the plan. More specifically, journalists asked Peskov whether Russia expects Ukraine to drop any territorial claims over the Crimean Peninsula—something President Volodymyr Zelensky has rejected so far.

“The specific elements of the agreement will not be discussed publicly, so we will not comment on any particular issue,” the Kremlin spokesperson emphasized, reiterating that Russia opposes the presence of European peacekeepers in Ukraine once the conflict ends.

“In effect, those would be forces and equipment from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO),” Peskov explained.


On Wednesday, Axios reported that the “final offer” Trump has made to achieve peace in Ukraine includes official U.S. recognition of Crimea as part of Russia and unofficial recognition of Russian control over nearly all areas occupied since the beginning of the Russian military operation in February 2022.

Citing sources familiar with the proposal, the U.S. outlet stated that the Trump administration expects a response from Ukraine to this offer as early as Wednesday.

The one-page document presented by the United States to Ukrainian officials in Paris last week describes it as Trump’s “final offer.” Zelensky rejected any territorial concessions, after which U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio canceled his trip to London, where he was scheduled to hold consultations with his Ukrainian counterpart and European allies. The White House also insisted that it is prepared to withdraw from the process if the parties do not reach an agreement soon.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/russia-n ... eace-plan/

******

The Looming Threat: On the Plans for the Ukrainian Armed Forces to Invade the Bryansk Region
April 27, 2025
Rybar
In recent months, there has been increasing enemy activity in areas adjacent to the Bryansk region . In addition to the increasing number of attacks and increased reconnaissance activities, Ukrainian formations are also moving combat units to the state border, concentrating in the border areas of the Chernihiv and Sumy regions.

On the activity of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Bryansk border area
By the end of February , the number of the Ukrainian Armed Forces group ready to attack the Bryansk region amounted to several thousand personnel and a large amount of equipment.

In addition to increasing reconnaissance activity, Ukrainian forces have increased the intensity of their attacks on Russian territory.

During one of the attacks, debris from a downed HIMARS missile fell on the territory of the Silicon El plant in Bryansk and a chemical plant in the city of Seltso .

There are also some very demonstrative provocations : on February 19, in Novi Yurkovichi, the only point for exchanging prisoners and bodies of the dead, located at a customs point, was fired upon from a Grad MLRS , which resulted in three customs officers being injured .

Even after the start of the Easter truce and the general news background about the possible end of hostilities, the enemy maintains a presence in the regions bordering Russia .

This, like the multiple strikes on Russian energy facilities during the moratorium, only confirms the aggressive attitude of the authorities of the so-called Ukraine.

Now, in no case should we underestimate the activities at the border of the Bryansk region , which are being carried out by Ukrainian formations. The enemy has repeatedly demonstrated its readiness for suicidal attacks on Russian territory and disdain for peace initiatives. Therefore, regardless of the "negotiation background", new attempts to violate the State border are possible.

https://rybar.ru/navisshaya-ugroza-o-pl ... yu-oblast/

Google Translator

*****

How the US waged war on Russia in Ukraine
April 25, 2025 , 5:00 pm .

Image
The CIA is part of the Ukrainian enclave (Photo: Babel)

Geopolitical researcher and analyst Brian Berletic published a wide-ranging analysis for New Eastern Outlook entitled "The US Acts as a 'Mediator' in Its Own War Against Russia , " which is a comprehensive compilation of documents on that country's role in the conflict in Ukraine. In this work, he debunks the narrative promoted by the West that presents Washington as a mediator between Moscow and Kiev.

On the contrary, the author argues that Washington has been a central, belligerent, and decisive player in the confrontation from the outset, using Ukraine as a pawn to wage a proxy war against Russia.

An escalation provoked and directed by the United States
Berletic, a geopolitical specialist, argues that since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and with increasing intensity following the end of the Cold War, the United States has played an active role in the domestic politics of the post-Soviet space, particularly in Ukraine.

By funding political movements and supporting regime change processes— such as the 2004 Color Revolution and the 2014 coup — it has sought to reconfigure the power structure in Kiev to turn the country into a military and political bastion against Moscow.

One of the most relevant elements of the analysis is the demonstration that US involvement in this confrontation did not begin with the military operation launched by the Kremlin in 2022, but rather has deep and sustained roots.

For nearly two decades, the White House has operated on the Ukrainian chessboard with a strategy of geopolitical containment, which ultimately transformed this former Soviet republic into a forward base of Western military influence right on Russia's security threshold.

To support his thesis, Berletic draws on an exhaustive review of Western sources, including articles in the New York Times , which reveal US involvement in covert operations, logistical support, military advice, and a process of functional integration of Ukraine into NATO.

In 2024, the US newspaper headlined "Spy Wars: How the CIA Is Secretly Helping Ukraine Fight Putin," which admitted the existence of "a network of CIA-backed spy bases, built over the past eight years, including 12 secret locations along the Russian border."

These maneuvers, combined with the progressive expansion of the Atlantic alliance toward its eastern borders, constitute what Moscow has described as an existential threat .

Under this logic, the launch of the Special Military Operation (SMO) in 2022 would be a predictable defensive response to the Western siege on its immediate periphery.

Institutional and military control over Ukraine
U.S. intelligence services penetrated the Ukrainian enclave through training, logistics, intelligence gathering, and strategic planning programs. U.S. involvement has gone far beyond simple support: it has directly conducted offensive operations .

The author indicates that since 2016 the CIA began to form a Ukrainian special forces unit (Unit 2245 ) in charge of intercepting Russian drones and equipment, which were sent for technical analysis and decoding by experts of that American platform .

One of the key officers in this unit was Kyrylo Budanov, the current head of Ukrainian military intelligence, who was trained by the agency and treated at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Maryland after being wounded in combat in the Donbas.

According to the previously mentioned article , Budanov conducted covert operations behind enemy lines, including night raids into Crimea disguised in Russian uniform.

Although the New York Times , Berletic explains , initially attempted to disassociate the CIA from the lethal offensive maneuvers, it ended up acknowledging that units trained by the agency not only carried them out but did so within the Russian Federation long before the start of the Special Military Operation in 2022.

Following the escalation, the CIA strengthened its presence in Ukraine by deploying dozens of new officers. Some of them were directly integrated into Ukrainian bases, where they reviewed attack targets and cross-referenced data with US intelligence to ensure accuracy.

In fact, in March 2025 , that American newspaper published "The Alliance: The Secret History of the War in Ukraine," in which it revealed that the United States' role was not limited to the massive supply of weapons but involved a leading role in the selection and coordination of military attacks, even on Russian territory, such as the Crimean port of Sevastopol.

These actions were largely directed from a Pentagon-installed command center in Wiesbaden, Germany, where U.S. and NATO officials monitored and coordinated operations publicly attributed to Ukraine.

This level of involvement confirms that the confrontation did not unfold between two autonomous actors but rather under a structure of control and direction in which the United States played a leading role in its new enclave well before 2022.

False mediation and the strategic use of peace
One of the central criticisms of Berletic's article is the feigned neutrality by the United States, which has attempted to act as a mediator in a conflict it not only helped provoke but has actively prolonged.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio's recent statements , threatening to suspend "peace efforts" if progress toward an agreement isn't made, are being presented as a cynical maneuver to cover up what is actually a tactical retreat in the face of the military collapse of his indirect commitment in Ukraine.

Even more revealing is the speech by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who does not advocate a peaceful resolution but rather prolongs the confrontation by strengthening the military industry and deploying European troops.

Their stated goal is not peace, but rather to "freeze" the conflict, as was the case with the Minsk Agreements, in order to rearm and reorganize the Ukrainian army for a future offensive when the balance of power favors Washington.

The mention of the Minsk Agreements takes on new meaning in light of former German Chancellor Angela Merkel's 2022 statements , which admitted that the agreements—supposedly aimed at a diplomatic solution — actually served to buy time and strengthen Ukraine militarily.

"The Ukraine of 2014/15 is not the Ukraine of today," Merkel said, noting that if a Russian offensive had taken place then, Kiev would have had no defensive capability and NATO would not have been able to intervene as it does today.

This confirms the plan of covert militarization of the conflict .

In this context, the author explains, Rubio's apparent "fatigue" with the negotiations reveals a strategy of tactical disengagement on the part of Washington, which seeks to shift the burden of the conflict to Europe, while preparing for an even more dangerous confrontation with China, Russia's ally.

Both the Trump and Biden administrations have avoided confronting the true structural cause of the conflict: NATO's continued expansion to Russia's borders and the undisguised aspiration to geostrategically encircle Moscow.

Under these conditions, any peace proposals have been superficial, lacking real will. Verbal support for NATO has not been accompanied by real diplomatic efforts, beyond demanding that member countries increase their financial contributions.

For its part, Russia has reiterated its willingness to negotiate honestly, even opening avenues for de-escalation. But the United States' lack of interest has been evident.

Berletic emphasizes that during the so-called "peace talks," Moscow continued its strategy of attrition of Ukrainian forces, a process that the New York Times itself identifies as one of the main factors in the failure of the proxy war led by Washington.

Final objective: a war against multipolarism
The article concludes with a broader geopolitical interpretation: the war in Ukraine is not just a confrontation between two states but an episode in the United States ' resistance to the rise of a multipolar world.

According to the author, Washington's true objective is to prevent factors such as Russia, China, and Iran from consolidating an international order alternative to US hegemony.

In this sense, the conflict in Ukraine, the flashpoints of tension in West Asia, and the imposition of selective economic pressures do not reflect a rational or constructive policy but are part of a desperate and chaotic strategy to restore Washington's global supremacy.

This is a disorganized reaction to a changing international landscape, where geopolitical balances are being reshaped in favor of Eurasia and threaten to dismantle the unipolar order that the US is trying to preserve at all costs, even at the price of war and destabilization.

https://misionverdad.com/globalistan/co ... en-ucrania

Google Translator

******

Five Significant Disagreements Account For Trump’s Newfound Anger With Putin
Andrew Korybko
Apr 28, 2025

Image

The peace process might go kaput if they can’t resolve these issues.

Trump speculated that Russia’s bombing of civilian areas might signal that “maybe [Putin] doesn’t want to stop the war, he’s just tapping me along”, and then reiterated his earlier threat to impose “secondary sanctions” against those who violate the US’ primary ones, which was analyzed here. This followed Trump’s latest meeting with Zelensky, who might have negatively influenced over his hitherto largely positive perceptions of Putin, and comes after reports that the US has finalized its peace plan.

Five significant disagreements that have emerged throughout the course of negotiations account for Trump’s volte-face toward Putin. The first was referenced by Trump in his post where he condemned Russia’s bombing of civilian areas. Putin argued earlier in April that Russia is targeting Ukrainian troops there, but the optics of continued Russian strikes against civilian areas amidst peace talks with the US evidently left a very negative impression on Trump, who now doubts Putin’s commitment to peace.

The second concerns European peacekeepers in Ukraine, which the US’ reportedly finalized peace plan suggests despite Russia opposing it. Although Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth already declared that the US won’t extend Article 5 mutual defense guarantees to NATO countries’ troops in Ukraine, Russia fears that the US could be manipulated by the Europeans into mission creep if the latter deploy there. Putin therefore prefers for there to be no ambiguity about this and for Trump to scrub it from his plan.

Third, it’s unclear whether Ukraine will be obligated to at least partially demilitarize like Kiev provisionally agreed to do during spring 2022’s ultimately failed peace talks, which is one of Russia’s explicitly declared goals in the conflict. Trump is reluctant to support this since he seems to believe that it could embolden Putin to recommence hostilities in the future, especially in the absence of European peacekeepers, but this demand isn’t something that Putin could easily walk away from.

The fourth disagreement is over the US’ refusal to accede to Russia’s demand for coercing Ukraine into withdrawing from the disputed territories that are still under Kiev’s control. The New York Times cited a source who described this as “unreasonable and unachievable”, but it’s imperative for Russia after the Kremlin recognized the entirety of these regions as Russian following September 2022’s referenda. Just like with demilitarization, Putin also can’t easily walk away from this either, hence the disagreement.

And finally, the US’ reportedly finalized peace plan also requests that Russia hand over the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant and Kakhovka Dam to the US, which is as unacceptable for Putin as the preceding points of accepting European peacekeepers, dropping demilitarization, and curbing his territorial claims. All five disagreements, including the first-mentioned one about Russia’s continued strikes against military targets in civilian areas, collectively contributed to this impasse right before the diplomatic finish line.

If Putin and Trump can’t resolve these issues, after which Trump would then also have to get Zelensky to agree to their new deal, then the peace process will probably go kaput. Putin and Trump are incentivized to resolve their disputes due to how mutually beneficial the nascent Russian-US “New Détente” is while Zelensky would struggle to continue fighting if the US once again cuts off military aid as punishment for rejecting whatever those two agree to. Be that as it may, it’ll still be very difficult to break this deadlock.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/five-sig ... ts-account
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

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

Post by blindpig » Tue Apr 29, 2025 11:31 am

Between optimism and realism
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 04/29/2025

Image

As he had demanded and as Emmanuel Marcon and Keir Starmer forced, Zelensky managed to hold a conversation with Donald Trump on Saturday. In line with the usual tone, the Ukrainian side raised the level and results of the Vatican meeting to unprecedented levels and, in addition to being constructive, described the conversation as "potentially historic." However, the Ukrainian assessment can be considered moderate compared to the words of Cardinal Zuppi, at one time Pope Francis's envoy to mediate between Russia and Ukraine, who in Kiev received only rebukes. "Pope Francis performed a miracle, because he brought Trump and Zelensky together, talking, on the day of his funeral," he stated. It was not the late pope but the French president who had arranged the photogenic meeting in St. Peter's Basilica.

In the age of hyperbole, nothing can be justified, and any adjective is valid, even if contradicted by events. Contributing to the exaggerated assessment of Ukraine were some of Donald Trump's statements. In his habit of repeating the ideas of the last person he met, he stated that he is beginning to think Vladimir Putin is "running the show" and raised the possibility of introducing banking and secondary sanctions, which generated headlines and raised hopes for a change in the US president's attitude toward the war and, above all, toward Russia. Upon his return to the United States, Donald Trump once again praised Volodymyr Zelensky, whom he claims to appreciate despite what could be seen live on February 28 in the Oval Office. Asked if the relationship between the two leaders has improved, the US president insisted that "it's never been bad. We had a minor argument because I didn't agree with something he said, and the cameras were rolling, and I didn't care," he said, adding that he now feels "calmer."

Quickly taking advantage of Trump's apparent pro-Ukrainian moment, the ever-belligerent Senator Lindsey Graham reminded the White House leader of his recent legislative initiative against Russia. “I greatly appreciate United States President Donald Trump and his team for working diligently to end the war in Ukraine—created by Putin's barbaric invasion—in an honorable and just manner. Regarding additional sanctions against Putin's Russia, I have bipartisan legislation with nearly 60 cosponsors that would impose secondary tariffs on any country that purchases Russian oil, gas, uranium, or other products. The Senate is ready to move in that direction and will do so overwhelmingly if Russia does not agree to an honorable, just, and lasting peace.”

In addition to the sanctioning urges of the hawkish Graham, this measure responds to a desire to punish the United States' true opponent, China, the Russian Federation's main trading partner and the target of the current economic war that Trumpism is trying to ignite. Fox News , also reviving the rhetoric of its longed-for Cold War, has demanded that Trump act by pressuring Moscow in the manner Ronald Reagan used with Mikhail Gorbachev. The US president's favorite network advocates for more economic sanctions and the withdrawal of economic incentives—that is, the only real incentive Washington has offered Russia to initiate the talks currently underway, which are not only negotiating the Ukrainian issue, but also the Middle East, arms issues of international importance, a reduction in the tensions that have soared over the last decade and a half, and the reintroduction of the Russian Federation into the Western market.

The hopes of the most radically pro-Ukrainian sectors, such as Lindsey Graham, depend on a selective reading of Donald Trump's messages. In the same text in which he harshly criticized Vladimir Putin, he once again insisted on the impossibility of Ukraine recovering Crimea, which is currently the center of the Ukrainian and European narrative regarding the territorial issue. In the same message in which Trump criticized the position of the Russian Federation, which publicly has not shown concern about the reproaches although it has sought to present a more constructive position by insisting that it is willing to engage in dialogue with Ukraine, the President of the United States insisted on the issue of Crimea and defended himself—in his own way, attacking Barack Obama for "giving up Crimea" and Joe Biden for causing the current war, always forgetting that, between them, there was an intermediate term whose policy was exactly the same—from accusations of preparing an unacceptable deal for Ukraine made by liberal media such as The New York Times . According to Donald Trump, the outlet insists that “Ukraine must take back territory, including, I suppose, Crimea, and other ridiculous demands to stop a slaughter that is worse than anything since World War II.”

Beyond the ever-present Eurocentrism - numerous wars, some of them very recent, if not current, have resulted in massacres comparable to or greater than the number of casualties (especially civilians) left by the Russian-Ukrainian conflict - the commentary indicates that, despite the moderation of the rhetoric against Ukraine and the hardening towards Russia and the swings of Donald Trump, the President of the United States maintains a constancy regarding the pragmatism with which he observes the territorial issue, which Washington hopes the rest of its allies will join.

Speaking on Meet the Press , Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated, when asked whether an agreement is close, that "it's closer than it's been in three years," given that a dialogue process is underway. The firmness with which the Biden administration and its European NATO partners had ruled out any non-military solution to the conflict makes it possible for Trumpism, from his team without experience or special knowledge of Russia or Ukraine, to present itself as a constructive step. "There are reasons for optimism," Rubio affirmed, "but also for realism." The United States insists that it will only continue the dialogue process if there are prospects for progress. Asked if he can trust Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump replied that he will be able to answer in a couple of weeks, implying that Washington believes it is taking the final steps in this phase of negotiations.

In these negotiations, two issues have always stood out above all others: security and territory, which will determine whether or not an agreement can be reached between the parties in these moments of virtual paralysis of the front line. Yesterday, Sergey Lavrov publicly outlined Russia's demands, beginning with the lifting of Ukraine's ban on negotiations with Vladimir Putin. Despite Trump's fine words and his insistence that Zelensky wants to reach an agreement, kyiv has not revoked the decree that makes negotiations impossible. The Russian Foreign Minister added to this basic demand the withdrawal of the measures with which Ukraine has sought to eliminate the Russian language and culture and the acceptance of both neutrality and international recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea and the four Ukrainian territories currently under Russian control. This is something that not only Ukraine will not do, but neither will the United States, whose only offer of recognition is limited to Crimea.

Focused on the details rather than the big picture, as an agreement is made impossible not only by the Russian maximum proposal announced yesterday by Lavrov but also by the one presented by Ukraine and its European partners last week, which is a response to the current Russian hardening, the press and the political establishment continue to focus on the issue of Crimea, the clearest of all demands. To everyone's surprise, possibly even Volodymyr Zelensky's, Trump answered with "Oh, I think so" to the question of whether the Ukrainian president is willing to "give up Crimea." In reality, Ukraine cannot be required to give up a territory whose control and population it lost eleven years ago; it is only asked to accept that loss, a nuance that does not change Ukraine's position of completely rejecting any possibility.

This Ukrainian position is shared by its European partners, for whom war remains more comfortable than a peace in which it would have to bear the cost and management of a de facto border as militarized as, or even more so than, the Korean border, and in which its US ally has recognized its enemy's sovereignty over the territory it considers most important. "Similar to capitulation," for example, was the qualifier used by German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius in an interview with ARD . According to The Guardian , Pistorius noted that "Kyiv is aware that a peace agreement may involve territorial concessions. But these will certainly not go as far as the US president's latest proposal." The minister insisted that "on its own, Ukraine could have achieved what is included in this proposal a year ago."

The German representative's words reflect a truth, that Ukraine could achieve a more favorable deal in certain ways—it would not be exploited by its ally with the mineral extraction agreement—by negotiating directly with Russia, but also some lies. In territorial terms, the most favorable agreement for Ukraine is and always will be the one signed in Minsk in 2015, a deal Germany never pressured Kyiv to implement. Compared to the Russian offer in Istanbul, what is currently being considered is the representation of forces on the ground, since Russia cannot be required to return territory after three years of fighting during which Ukraine has been unable to expel Russian troops. The downside, which neither Pistorius nor his European counterparts want to see, is that the current US offer gives kyiv and the continental capitals the opportunity to implement their plan for rearmament and general militarization of a border along which they would build a new Iron Curtain dividing Europe in two—something that Ukraine obviously could not achieve by engaging directly with Russia (which would perhaps also mean losing its allies and part of its military supplies).

Direct dialogue with Moscow is not a viable option, as Ukraine insists on holding any negotiations once the terms have been agreed upon with its allies and under its presence. Europe's position means that continental capitals are also unwilling to offer a constructive stance, leaving everything in the hands of the Trump administration, the only one willing, at least temporarily, to mediate between the conflicting parties. Diplomacy does not advance through miracles or unrealistic declarations that portray the situation as desired rather than as it is, but rather through work that requires time and political will, the presence of which is not guaranteed for all actors.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/04/29/entre ... -realismo/

Google Translator

***

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Units of the North group of forces defeated concentrations of manpower and equipment of five mechanized brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and two territorial defense brigades. The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 220 servicemen, an armored combat vehicle, 16 vehicles, and six artillery pieces. Two ammunition depots were destroyed.

As a result of active actions, units of the West group of forces liberated the village of Kamenka in the Kharkiv region.

Defeat was inflicted on formations of three mechanized, an assault brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, and two territorial defense brigades. The enemy lost over 240 servicemen, eight vehicles, and three field artillery pieces, including two produced by NATO countries.

Units of the Southern group of forces occupied more advantageous lines and positions. They defeated the manpower and equipment of three mechanized, and an airmobile brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The losses of the Ukrainian armed formations amounted to 230 servicemen, two combat armored vehicles, including an M113 armored personnel carrier made in the USA

. Units of the Center group of forces improved their tactical position. They defeated the formations of two heavy mechanized, three mechanized, a Jaeger brigades, and an assault regiment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The enemy lost over 375 servicemen, two combat armored vehicles, two cars, and an Israeli-made RADA radar station.

Units of the East group of forces continued to advance deep into the enemy's defense. They defeated the manpower and equipment of two Jaeger brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The enemy's losses amounted to 170 servicemen, two combat armored vehicles, four cars, and three artillery pieces.

Units of the Dnepr group of forces defeated the formations of two coastal defense brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and three territorial defense brigades. The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 75 servicemen, three vehicles, a field artillery gun, and an electronic warfare station.

Air defense systems destroyed three US-made JDAM guided air bombs and 234 aircraft-type unmanned aerial vehicles.

In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the following have been destroyed:

— 661 aircraft,
— 283 helicopters,
— 54,179 unmanned aerial vehicles,
— 605 anti-aircraft missile systems,
— 23,071 tanks and other armored combat vehicles,
— 1,553 multiple launch rocket system combat vehicles,
— 24,224 field artillery guns and mortars,
— 34,689 units of special military automotive equipment.

***

Colonelcassad
0:17
Air raid sirens have been lifted in Sevastopol!
Transport is resuming movement.
There were no arrivals.

The Ministry of Defense reports that at about 12:40 Moscow time, air defense systems on duty destroyed a Ukrainian unmanned aircraft of an airplane type over the territory of the Republic of Crimea.

***

Colonelcassad
Boris Dzhonsonyuk (Johnson) is indignant😀

“ The Ukrainians are going to win. This is their country. And they are not going to let Putin take it away. And what is being discussed now is a terribly bitter pill for the Ukrainian people to swallow,” Johnson said.

“Anyone who thinks that Ukraine can simply be sold for a piece of territory with no real guarantees and no prospect of integration into the West is very much mistaken. It won’t happen. We have to put ourselves in the Ukrainians’ shoes. And stop thinking about bloody Vladimir Putin.”

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

THE COMEDY OF THE THREE CHAIRS – TRUMP THE PEACEMAKER AT THE VATICAN ISN’T SURE WHAT TO DO NEXT


Image
by John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

This is not the comedy of the two Odessa conmen who travel across the Soviet Union trying to find a cache of jewellery hidden in twelve chairs, written in 1928. In the end, one murders the other, and then when he discovers the treasure has already been found and spent, he goes mad.

This is President Donald Trump’s comedy of the three chairs which were reduced to two so that, in St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, Trump could sit on one and Vladimir Zelensky on the other. Trump’s plan, however, was that no one should laugh at his con. Murder and madness may still materialize.

Yesterday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio was sent to explain that at the funeral of Pope Francis, Trump wanted the cameras to record him as the peacemaker of the world. “We want the war to end,” Rubio told a Sunday television show. “You saw yesterday at the Pope’s mass there was talk about war and how it needed to stop. The Pope – the late Pope was celebrated for being a peacemaker and trying to talk about these things. We should all be happy that we have a president of the United States in Donald J. Trump who wants to end and prevent wars, and that’s what we’re trying to do here.”

The comedy of four men – Trump, Zelensky, President Emmanuel Macron, Prime Minister Keir Starmer — competing for just two chairs in front of dozens of cameras for millions of viewers says otherwise. It reveals that between end-of-war on Russia’s terms and peace on their terms, they don’t know what President Vladimir Putin will agree to.

Follow what happened on Saturday between the ceremony of respects at the Pope’s catafalque inside St. Peter’s Basilica and the funeral ceremony outside in St. Peter’s Square in this video analysis by Jesús Enrique Rosas, the “body language guy”. Ignore his analysis of the body language, and follow the movements of Trump and Zelensky who enter together. They are approached from different directions by Macron and Starmer, but are brushed aside by Trump who directs that the third chair should be removed. The entire sequence took just over fifteen minutes.

Image
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWddiYK8_uc

For a contrasting interpretation by a body language expert quoted by a London newspaper, read this.

Trump’s media staff began their tweet transmission of the obsequies with their priority, the two-chair sit-down, at 12:13 local time. There was no time for Trump himself to add a text. The staff then followed with six more pictures at St. Peter’s, two at the funeral, three at the catafalque, and one new picture of Trump with Zelensky. This was published after fifteen minutes at 12:28. It was a White House correction because the first picture had shown Trump from behind, his head and Zelensky’s at the same level, and Zelensky doing the talking. In the new picture, Trump was in full profile looking down at Zelensky, Trump on his toes, Zelensky flat-footed.

Dominance was the theme; most US and international media published this photograph. After he had left the funeral and was flying back to Washington, Trump issued a string of personal text tweets with the same theme, starting with a threat to take over both the Suez and Panama Canals unless Egypt and Panama allow US-flag vessels to make the transit without paying the tolls. “American Ships, both Military and Commercial, should be allowed to travel, free of charge, through the Panama and Suez Canals! Those Canals would not exist without the United States of America.” (For the truth of the Suez history, read this. )

In retrospect, the evidence of the US, French and British state media is that the conversation inside St. Peter’s was contrived by the four men as a photo opportunity to display their importance in “peace negotiations” and their “accord”. The third chair, and then its hasty removal, reveal there was no intention on Trump’s part for Starmer and Macron to sit down with Zelensky.

Starmer corrected Trump’s ploy by adding a picture in which he is the centre of the St. Peter’s group, and then arranging his own 35 minutes with Zelensky after the funeral — and after Trump was in his aeroplane, enroute home.

Image
Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cddep0j45zno

“Before the service, Sir Keir, US President Donald Trump, Ukraine’s Zelensky and French President Emmanuel Macron were pictured speaking in a huddle [sic] inside St Peter’s Basilica,” the state propaganda agency BBC reported. “Sir Keir and Zelensky ‘discussed positive progress made in recent days to secure a just and lasting peace in Ukraine’, a Downing Street spokesperson said. ‘They agreed to maintain momentum and continue working intensively with international partners to drive forward the next stages of planning.’ It is understood [sic] they had a 15-minute one-to-one meeting as they walked around the gardens of the Ambassador’s residence after the Pope’s funeral. Their delegations then had a further meeting lasting around 20 mins.”

Image
Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cddep0j45zno

In Paris, the staff on duty at the Elysée published a single tweet photograph, ignoring Trump’s display. The French state media repeated the “huddle” picture in coverage which emphasized the funeral over the politics. The Elysée press office added a three-word caption: “Pour la paix.”

Image
Source: https://x.com/Elysee/status/1916130383323926726

In Rome, however, Macron’s personal staff published a walk-in-the-garden tweet aping Starmer.

Image
Source: https://x.com/

The compilation of these video records shows it was Trump’s staff which had controlled the setting of the chairs in the Basilica, the timing of the conversation, and the resulting photo images. Starmer and Macron have followed, playing catch-up.

A NATO veteran comments: “Trump is doing two things here. He’s showing first that he has no peer among the Europeans — Macron using Trump as a preening tool at every opportunity gets on the latter’s nerves. Second, he’s appearing to be attentive to Zelensky before taking the position vis-à-vis Russia he’s already made up his mind to take. His legs are locked sideways against the chair legs because he’s impatient with the show he has to put on. He was not interested in interacting with Zelensky, and he didn’t.”

A pro-Starmer body language expert, engaged by the London Daily Mail, claimed: “‘When [Trump and Zelensky] fell out in the Oval Office there was a physical response of aggressive arousal with Trump in particular looking keen to register physical dominance,’ James assessed. But today, she said, ‘both men here seem more intent in looking like physical and status equals. Trump’s feet are pushed under his chair, and he is on his toes, suggesting a desire to move and keep flexible in his discussion. His hands are clasped and his lips pursed to suggest a desire to listen. But Zelensky’s feet are pushed out and planted flat on the floor, hinting at a more stubborn approach. However, his cupped hands suggest a desire to persuade, with his raised brows suggesting he’s keen to make a point.’ ”

Two hours earlier in the Roman morning, Trump had composed and released a tweet which was hostile towards President Vladimir Putin who did not attend the funeral; Russia’s representative was the Culture Minister, Olga Lyubimova.

Image
Source: https://x.com/

Lyubimova maintained media silence during her stay in Rome and on her return.

Trump’s intention to magnify his personal supremacy began with the release of a text he had composed and tweeted in Rome several hours before the papal ceremonies began.

In his display, Trump was signaling a tilt against Putin in words and threats, in person, a tilt towards Zelensky.

Image
Source: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrum ... 4335638236

Trump’s combination is a signal that he is unsure what terms Putin has agreed to – and that the report Trump had received from Steven Witkoff after his Friday meeting at the Kremlin was either unclear or unacceptable.

Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov had warned the Americans not to jump to conclusions in his interview on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on April 24.

“MARGARET BRENNAN: Will Russia continue targeting Kyiv despite President Trump saying, ‘Vladimir, STOP!’

MINISTER LAVROV: You’re not listening to me. We will continue to target the sites used by the military of Ukraine, by some mercenaries from foreign countries and by instructors whom the Europeans officially sent to help target Russian civilian sites.”

In the extended 44-minute interview which CBS delayed for release until April 27, Lavrov repeatedly said there has been no Russian agreement yet on the points presented in the US term sheet delivered by Witkoff to Macron, Starmer and Zelensky, and then to Putin. Read the details as published by Reuters and the New York Times on April 25 by clicking here.

“MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah. You mentioned that the US and Russia need to work on some of these fine points of a deal have you—
MINISTER LAVROV: — Yeah, do you want this to be spelled out?
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, of course, I’d love that. But my question was–
MINISTER LAVROV: This is not the way we—
MARGARET BRENNAN: –European sources say that the US proposal is really just kind of a list of bullet points. Does Russia have details, the details you need at this point in terms of a formal proposal?
MINISTER LAVROV: We are really polite people, and unlike some others, we never discuss in public what is being discussed in negotiations. Otherwise, negotiations are not serious. To ask for somebody’s opinion regarding the substance, go to Zelensky. He is happy to talk to anybody through media, even to President Trump. He presents his- his claims. We are–
MARGARET BRENNAN:– Well, he said he hasn’t received a formal proposal, so I was wondering if you had–
MINISTER LAVROV: — We are- we are serious people and we consider serious proposals. We make serious proposals, and this is a process which is not supposed to be public until the end of it.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay, so no deal is imminent?
MINISTER LAVROV: I didn’t say this. Now- now I understand, by the way, why you wanted to get the brief answers to your questions. You want some slogans to be- to be-
MARGARET BRENNAN: — No, the president of the United States said there was a deal with Russia. So I wanted to ask Russia if there is a deal with the United States. So, I just want to be clear.
MINISTER LAVROV: So, we made our comments on this statement. The- the negotiations continue, and until the end of the negotiations. We cannot disclose what it is about.”

In the full interview Lavrov was repeatedly asked to disclose what the US term sheet has proposed, and what the Russian side has agreed. He repeatedly refused. “How do you expect a participant of negotiations which are still to reach some kind of specific understanding to disclose details in public. It is not serious…I read- I read- I read President Trump’s book, the art to make a deal, and he does not advise to disclose information before- before it’s time.”

Lavrov did rule out Russian agreement on the US proposals to take control of the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant and negotiate quid pro quo for recognition of Crimea.

“No, we- we never received such an offer and if we do, we will explain that the power station — Zaporozhye nuclear power station is run by the Russian Federation state corporation called Rosatom. It is under monitoring of the IAEA personnel permanently located on the site. And if not for the regular Ukrainian attempts to attack the station and to create a nuclear disaster for Europe and for Ukraine as well, the safety requirements are fully implemented and it is in very good hands.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So that’s a no?
MINISTER LAVROV: No, I don’t think- I don’t think any change is conceivable

MARGARET BRENNAN: Zaporozhye is not being negotiated right now?
MINISTER LAVROV: Shall I say it for the third time?

MARGARET BRENNAN: President Trump said Crimea is not even being discussed right now.
MINISTER LAVROV: Yes, because this is a done deal.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You mean Russia occupies and controls and will not negotiate the future of Crimea? Is that what you’re saying?
MINISTER LAVROV: Russia- Russia does not negotiate its own territory.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, there have been very clear, specific things said by the Trump Administration, such as the vice president saying that the current lines of contact in Ukraine would freeze and end up fairly close to where troops are right now. Do you actually consider that a concession?
MINISTER LAVROV: I don’t discuss publicly the details of what is being subject of negotiations. I understand that you love rumours, because rumours–
MARGARET BRENNAN: The Vice President of the United States said it on camera.
MINISTER LAVROV: Was it a question?
MARGARET BRENNAN: Oh, well, rumour- rumour. You said it was a rumour. The Vice President said it. Perhaps you missed it.
MINISTER LAVROV: No, I said about us, we are not discussing things which are subject to negotiations.”

There are factions in Moscow urging Putin to accept some of the terms on the US term sheet, including a Ukraine-wide ceasefire and an armistice of forces on the current line of contact east of the Dnieper River. This would require Putin to give up Russian sovereignty of areas of the four regions of Novorossiya which became part of the Russian Federation in September 2022.

Image
Vice President Vance departing India on April 24: source -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAJifneC598 For analysis, go to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTP7v4BB-Bo

According to these faction sources, some officials acknowledge privately it’s a “bad deal”.

Dmitry Medvedev, the former president now deputy secretary of the Security Council, has publicly advocated a Russian military campaign to reduce Ukraine to a rump between Poland and Russia.

Image
Source: https://x.com/maxseddon/status/1764598144497512613

This month so far Medvedev has been uncharacteristically silent except for the traditional Orthodox Easter message, and confirmation of the liquidation of the last Ukrainian forces in Kursk region. “On the eve of the Great Victory holiday [May 9], our heroic warriors continue to smash the enemy in other directions. The Nazi scum must disappear from our land forever!” Medvedev has not commented on the Witkoff negotiations or Trump’s statements.

Oleg Tsarev, a Ukrainian opposition leader now based in Crimea, has been
non-committal on the terms in negotiation, except to emphasize the gains to Russia if Trump halts financial, military, and intelligence support of Kiev. “It is difficult to accuse Trump of lobbying for a ‘pro-Russian’ peace plan. His plan is far from ‘pro-Russian’, the plan simply corresponds to the position of the winner and the defeated. If Russia had lost, Trump’s terms would probably be different…Trump does not have much time for the presidency, and he tries to spend it as effectively as possible – peace for 100 days, and then joint, US-profitable projects with Russia. As for the next threat of sanctions, my feeling that this is just a familiar repeat from the script, “Keep them nervous’; and that Trump feels he needs to show impartiality in his peacekeeping mission.”

Tsarev hints that Russia may accept a bad deal if the terms are much worse for the Zelensky regime.

Dmitry Rogozin, Senator for Zaporozhye, leading a combat unit on the front, and a national presidential figure, has not commented on the US proposals affecting his region. On April 24 he was explicit that Russian forces should not stop their westward advance. “Ukraine [is] an extreme form of ethnic nationalism. The only questions for us about all these ‘Ukrainians’ with Hungarian, Jewish, Russian, Little Russian surnames are how, when, and at what cost we will be able to destroy them. We can’t live with them next door. Reconcile? After everything that has happened? No, of course not. We have no right to leave on [Russia’s] western borders such a powerful, organized criminal state corporation looking for a reason and a way to kill our children. We can only calm down when our neighbours are the Poles. [That is] also not the best prospect, but they are understandable to us and historically predictable.”

Image
Oleg Tsarev (left), Dmitry Rogozin (right). Both have been wounded in Ukrainian assassination attempts.

A Moscow source for current Kremlin thinking acknowledges that accepting Trump’s terms “is the best bad deal Russia can hope for. From the perspective of the Europeans and US war fighters, this is an awful deal. So Russians win this round. Putin knows it will be a matter of time before the terms will be violated by the Americans. All Russians know this. There should be a lot of grumbling and it will get louder and clearer with political jockeying once the war pauses. We will see the gloves come off then.”

The signals from Trump, and in the last twenty-four hours from Rubio, indicate they are far from confident that the terms they have proposed to Putin through Witkoff last Friday are likely to be accepted. “The last week has really been about figuring out how close are these sides really,” Rubio conceded in an NBC Meet the Press interview on April 27, “and are they close enough that this merits a continued investment of our time as a mediator in this regard.”

Rubio isn’t positive he knows. “We think we’ve brought the sides closer than they’ve been in a very long time. But we’re not there yet, and it needs to start happening…There are reasons to be optimistic, but there are reasons to be realistic, of course, as well. We’re close but we’re not close enough.”

“Look, if it doesn’t happen, [if] it doesn’t come to fruition, then as a nation-state there are options that we have for those who we hold responsible for not wanting the peace. But we prefer not to get to that stage yet because we think it closes the door to diplomacy…in order for this war to end, there are things Russia wants that it will not get, and there are things Ukraine wants that it will not get. If it wasn’t the case, that would have been done a long time ago. No one here is claiming that one side is going to unconditionally surrender to the other and bring this to an end, but that’s why diplomacy can be difficult and time-consuming, but it is the only way to end this conflict. There is no military solution to this war. The only solution to this war is a negotiated settlement where both sides are going to have to give up something they claim to want and are going to have to give the other side something they wish they didn’t.”

Image
Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/
Transcript: https://www.state.gov/

According to Rubio, right now it’s not the time to discuss the threat of new sanctions which Trump and others in Washington have made, including China and India for buying Russian oil and gas. “We’re trying to bring two sides together. The last thing you want to do is give some side – one of the two sides an excuse to walk away from this effort… we have multiple options, frankly, to address this and to deal with all of this, but we don’t want to get to that point. This is still not the time. I think what the President is saying, and has been saying for some time now, is he is aware that he has these options – people ask him about it all the time – but what he really wants is a peace deal.”

Asked for how much time Trump and his officials are willing to give for the negotiations, Rubio said this hasn’t been decided. “I always think it’s silly to set a specific date or whatever…we think we’ve brought the sides closer than they’ve been in a very long time. But we’re not there yet, and it needs to start happening. We need to start – I think this is going to be a very critical week. This week is going to be a really important week in which we have to make a determination about whether this is an endeavor that we want to continue to be involved in, or if it’s time to sort of focus on some other issues that are equally if not more important in some cases.”

https://johnhelmer.net/the-comedy-of-th ... more-91483

******

Russia Rejects Trump's Freeze Of The War In Ukraine

The details of the ceasefire negotiations between the U.S., Europe and Ukraine continue to make headlines despite being largely irrelevant for an end of the conflict in Ukraine.

In an interview with Brazilian paper O Globo (in Portuguese) Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov again repeated the Russian demands for peace in Ukraine.

It requires:

an end of Ukraine's ban on negotiations with Russia,
for Ukraine to go back to the status of a neutral and non-aligned country in accordance with the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine in the 1990's,
an end of the policies of legally and physically destroy everything Russian: the language, media, culture, traditions, and Russian orthodoxy
the international recognition of Russia's ownership of Crimea, the DPR, LPR and the Kherson and Zaporizhia regions.
There must also be measures to legal fix those positions, to make them permanent and to have enforcement mechanisms.

Also required is, says Lavrov, (edited machine translation):

.. a schedule for the task of de-and desnazifiction in Ukraine, and the lifting of the sanctions, actions, lawsuits and arrest warrants, and the transfer of assets to Russia which are 'frozen' in the West. Also, we will look for reliable warranties for the security of the Russian Federation, and against the threats created by the hostile activity of Nato, the European Union and its individual member states on the country's borders in the west.
There is then no change in the Russian position since its President Vladimir Putin explained it at length on June 14 2024.

Meanwhile the U.S. is very publicly negotiating with Ukraine and Europe about some ceasefire conditions along the lines the pro-Ukrainian (and neo-conservative?) General Kellogg has long promoted (also here):

Kellogg’s implicit assumptions were that Russia is highly vulnerable to a sanctions threat (its economy perceived as being fragile); that it had suffered unsustainably high casualties; and that the war was at a stalemate.
Thus, Kellogg persuaded Trump that Russia would readily agree to the ceasefire terms proposed – albeit terms that were constructed around patently flawed underlying assumptions about Russia and its presumed weaknesses.
...
All of Kellogg’s underlying assumptions lacked any basis in reality. Yet Trump seemingly took them on trust. And despite Steve Witkoff’s subsequent three lengthy personal meetings with President Putin, in which Putin repeatedly stated that he would not accept any ceasefire until a political framework had been first agreed, the Kellogg contingent continued to blandly assume that Russia would be forced to accept Kellogg’s détente because of the claimed serious ‘setbacks’ Russia had suffered in Ukraine.

Given this history, unsurprisingly, the ceasefire framework terms outlined by Rubio this week in Paris reflected those more suited to a party at the point of capitulation, rather than that of a state anticipating achieving its objectives – by military means.

In essence, the Kellogg Plan looked to bring a U.S. ‘win’ on terms aligned to a desire to keep open the option for continuing attritional war on Russia.


In his O Globo interview Lavrov again made it known that Russia can not and will not commit to a temporary freeze of the conflict without having a clear path towards the larger peace agreement.

In sight of this it is funny how Russia has managed to hand the tar-baby of blocking a ceasefire to the (former) Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenski.

Despite U.S. pressure for a fast deal Russia does not expect any quick resolution of the conflict. It just announced a new unilateral ceasefire from May 8 to May 10, i.e. around the 80th anniversary of its victory in World War II on May 9.

It is another public sign that Russia is willing to adhere to a ceasefire agreement IF the conditions are right.

Trump still tries to behave like a neutral mediator in a conflict between Kiev and Moscow. He wants to impose a peace deal that projects his personal 'greatness'.

But the U.S. has been and continues to be the main party of the war with Russia while Ukraine is the mere proxy force that does the bleeding. Trump can not impose a fast solution to end the war because he still can not accept that he is a main party in it.

Russia is winning the war. A solution can only be found when the U.S. is ready to (silently) acceptance its defeat.

Trump can still end the war and declare it a "win". But only if he agrees to the conditions that Russia laid out.

Posted by b on April 28, 2025 at 15:41 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/04/r ... .html#more

******

The Kellogg framework is a disaster for Trump

Alastair Crooke

April 28, 2025

All of Kellogg’s underlying assumptions lacked any basis in reality. Yet Trump seemingly took them on trust.

Political warfare in Washington is endemic. But the body count at the Pentagon has started to rise precipitously. Three of Secretary of Defence Hegseth’s top advisors were placed on leave, and then fired. The war continues, with the Secretary now in the firing line.

Why this matters is that the Hegseth attrition comes amid fierce internal debates in the Trump administration about Iran policy. Hawks want an definitive elimination of all Iran’s nuclear and weapons capabilities, whilst many ‘restrainers’ warn against military escalation; Hegseth reportedly was amongst those warning against an intervention in Iran.

The recent Pentagon dismissals have all been identified as restrainers. One of the latter, Dan Caldwell, formerly Hegseth’s Top Adviser and an army veteran, wrote a post slamming the ‘Iran Hawks’ – and subsequently was fired. He was later interviewed by Tucker Carlson. Notably, Caldwell describes in scathing terms America’s wars in Iraq and Syria (“criminal”). This adverse sentiment concerning America’s earlier wars is a rising theme, it seems, amongst U.S. Vets today.

The three Pentagon staffers essentially were fired, not as ‘leakers’, but for talking Hegseth out of supporting war on Iran, it would appear; the Israeli-Firsters, have not given up on that war.

The inflamed fault lines between hawks and traditionalist ‘Republicans’ bleed across into the Ukraine issue, even if the faction membership may alter a tad. Israeli-Firsters and U.S. hawks more generally, are behind both the war on Russia and the maximalist demands on Iran.

Conservative commentator Fred Bauer observes that when it comes to Trump’s own war impulses, they are conflicted:

“Influenced by the Vietnam War of his youth … Trump seems deeply averse to long-term military conflicts, yet, at the same time, Trump admires a politics of strength and swagger. That means taking out Iranian generals, launching airstrikes on the Houthis, and boosting the defence budget to $1 trillion”.

Hegseth’s potential exit – should the campaign for his removal succeed – could cause the struggle to grow fiercer. Its first casualty is already apparent – Trump’s hope to bring a quick end to the Ukraine conflict is over.

This week, the Trump team (including both warring factions, Rubio, Witkoff and General Kellogg) met in Paris with various European and Ukrainian representatives. At the meeting, a Russian-Ukrainian unilateral ceasefire proposal was mooted by the U.S. delegation.

After the meeting, at the airport, Rubio plainly said that the ceasefire plan was ‘a take-it-or-leave-it’ U.S. initiative. The various sides – Russia, Kiev and the European members of the ‘coalition of the willing’ – had only days to accept it, or else the U.S. was ‘out’, and would wash its hands of the conflict.

The framework presented, as reported, is almost (maybe 95%) unadulteratedly that previously proposed by General Kellogg: i.e. it is his plan, first aired in April 2024. It appears that the ‘Kellogg formula’ was adopted then as the Trump platform (Trump was at the time in mid-campaign, and unlikely to have been following the complicated minutiae of the Ukraine war too closely).

General Kellogg is also the likely source for Trump’s optimism that the ending to the Ukraine war could come with a click of Trump’s fingers – through the limited application of asymmetric pressures and threats on both belligerents by Trump – and with the timing decided in Washington.

In short, the plan represented a Beltway consensus that the U.S. could implement a negotiated end-state with terms aligned to U.S. and Ukrainian interests.

Kellogg’s implicit assumptions were that Russia is highly vulnerable to a sanctions threat (its economy perceived as being fragile); that it had suffered unsustainably high casualties; and that the war was at a stalemate.

Thus, Kellogg persuaded Trump that Russia would readily agree to the ceasefire terms proposed – albeit terms that were constructed around patently flawed underlying assumptions about Russia and its presumed weaknesses.

Kellogg’s influence and false premises were all too evident when Trump, in January, having stated that Russia had lost one million men (in the war) then went on to say that “Putin is destroying Russia by not making a deal, adding (seemingly as an aside), that Putin may have already made up his mind ‘not to make a deal’”. He further claimed that Russia’s economy is in ‘ruins’, and most notably said that he would consider sanctioning or tariffing Russia. In a subsequent Truth Social post, Trump writes, “I’m going to do Russia – whose Economy is failing – and President Putin, a very big FAVOR”.

All of Kellogg’s underlying assumptions lacked any basis in reality. Yet Trump seemingly took them on trust. And despite Steve Witkoff’s subsequent three lengthy personal meetings with President Putin, in which Putin repeatedly stated that he would not accept any ceasefire until a political framework had been first agreed, the Kellogg contingent continued to blandly assume that Russia would be forced to accept Kellogg’s détente because of the claimed serious ‘setbacks’ Russia had suffered in Ukraine.

Given this history, unsurprisingly, the ceasefire framework terms outlined by Rubio this week in Paris reflected those more suited to a party at the point of capitulation, rather than that of a state anticipating achieving its objectives – by military means.

In essence, the Kellogg Plan looked to bring a U.S. ‘win’ on terms aligned to a desire to keep open the option for continuing attritional war on Russia.

So, what is the Kellogg Plan? At base, it seeks to establish a ‘frozen conflict’ – frozen along the ‘Line of Conflict’; with no definitive ban on NATO membership for Ukraine, (but rather, envisaging a NATO membership that is deferred well into the future); it places no limits on the size of a future Ukrainian army and no restrictions on the type or quantity of armaments held by the Ukrainian forces. (It foresees, contrarily, that after the ceasefire, the U.S. might re-arm, train and militarily support a future force) – i.e. back to the post-Maidan era of 2014.

In addition, no territory would be ceded by Ukraine to Russia, save for Crimea which alone would be recognised by the U.S. as Russian (the unique sop to Witkoff?), and Russia would only ‘exercise control’ over the four Oblasts that it currently claims, yet only up to the Line of Conflict; territory beyond this line would remain under Ukrainian control (see here for the ‘Kellogg map’). The Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant would be neutral territory to be held, and managed, by the U.S. There is no mention made of the cities of Zaporozhye and Kherson that have been constitutionally incorporated into Russia, but lie beyond the contact line.

Nothing about a political solution apparently was outlined in the plan, and the plan leaves Ukraine free to pursue its claim to all Ukraine’s former territories – save for only Crimea.

Ukrainian territory west of the Dnieper River however, would be divided into three zones of responsibility: British, French and German zones (i.e. which NATO forces would manage). Finally, no American security guarantees were offered.

Rubio subsequently passed details of the plan to Russian FM Lavrov, who calmly stated that any ceasefire plan should resolve the underlying causes to the conflict in Ukraine as its first task.

Witkoff flies to Moscow this week to present this ‘pig’s ear’ of a plan to Putin – seeking his consent. The Europeans and Ukrainians are set to meet next Wednesday in London to give their riposte to Trump.

What’s next? Most obviously, the Kellogg Plan will not ‘fly’. Russia will not accept it, and likely Zelensky will not either, (though the Europeans will work to persuade him – hoping to ‘wrong-foot Moscow’ by presenting Russia as the essential ‘spoiler’). Reportedly, Zelensky already has rejected the Crimea provision.

For the Europeans, the lack of security guarantees or backstop by the U.S. may prove to be a killer for their aspiration to deploy a tripwire troop deployment to Ukraine, in the context of a ceasefire.

Is Trump really going to wash his hands of Ukraine? Doubtful, given that the U.S. neo-conservative institutional leadership will tell Trump that to do so, would weaken America’s ‘peace through strength’ narrative. Trump may adopt supporting Ukraine ‘on a low flame’ posture, whilst declaring the ‘war was never his’ – as he seeks a ‘win’ on the business front with Russia.

The bottom line is that Kellogg has not well-served his patron. The U.S. needs effective working relations with Russia. The Kellogg contingent has contributed to Trump’s egregious misreading of Russia. Putin is a serious actor, who says what he means, and means what he says.

Colonel Macgregor sums it up thus:
“Trump tends to view the world through the lens of dealmaking. [Ending the Ukraine war] is not about dealmaking. This is about the life and death of nations and peoples. There’s no interest in some sort of short-fused deal that is going to elevate Trump or his administration to greatness. There will be no win for Donald Trump personally in any of this. That was never going to be the case”.
https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... for-trump/

******

Russia Intensifies Eastern Ukraine Offensive: Strategic Gains in Donetsk and Kursk Amid Ukrainian Command Crisis

Image
Russian troops advance near Donetsk (Sputnik Novosti). Moscow’s combined arms tactics exploit Ukraine’s ammunition shortages and command breakdowns.Photo:EFE.

April 27, 2025 Hour: 6:49 pm

Russian forces consolidate territorial gains in Donetsk and Kursk as Ukraine faces critical shortages and command breakdowns. Reports detail collapsing brigades and NATO depot strikes.

On April 27, 2025 , Russian military forces have escalated operations across eastern Ukraine, securing strategic villages in Donetsk and claiming full control of Kursk Oblast after months of heavy fighting. Ukrainian commanders acknowledge severe ammunition shortages and collapsing unit cohesion, raising questions about the West’s commitment to sustained military support.

Russian troops captured Valentinovka, a southern Donetsk stronghold, and advanced toward Romanovka, bypassing Ukrainian fortifications near Toretsk. Moscow’s lightning push southwest of Toretsk threatens to encircle Ukrainian brigades in Shcherbinovka, a maneuver that could force Kyiv into a costly retreat. Su-34 bombers and Geran-2 drones have targeted retreating units, destroying armored vehicles and artillery.


The text reads: Geranium drone flights targeting objectives in Ukraine

Russia’s Defense Ministry declared the “complete elimination” of Ukrainian resistance in Oleshnya and Gornal, areas contested since Ukraine’s August 2024 incursion. The 95th Airborne Brigade reportedly suffered command defections, with soldiers citing ammunition shortages and abandoned equipment. While Kyiv denies full withdrawal, independent analysts confirm Russian advances backed by North Korean personnel.

Strategic Strikes: Kharkiv Drone Plants and NATO Depots Hit

Russian missiles targeted Kharkiv’s drone production facilities and a Zaporizhzhia ammunition depot linked to NATO supplies. Satellite imagery purportedly shows destroyed infrastructure critical to Ukraine’s Crimea operations. Moscow claims Ukrainian air defenses failed to intercept advanced Geran-2 missiles.

General Oleksandr Syrskyi admitted Russia’s “numerical and technical superiority” is overwhelming in frontline units. At least three brigades have lost contact with commanders, mirroring the 95th Airborne’s collapse. Social media footage shows abandoned Western-supplied equipment, underscoring Kyiv’s logistical strain.

The U.S. has abandoned deadlines for resolving the conflict, signaling potential disengagement. Ukrainian soldiers report artillery ratios as low as 1:5 against Russian forces, with European munitions shipments delayed. The strikes on NATO-linked depots highlight vulnerabilities in Western supply chains.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/russia-i ... nd-crisis/

******

Armistice of May 9
April 28, 14:55

Image

Putin declared a truce on May 9 to mark the 80th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War. The enemy will certainly try to break it, as it did the Easter truce.

During the days of the 80th anniversary of Victory – from midnight on May 7-8 to midnight on May 10-11 – the Russian side declares a truce. All military actions cease during this period.
Russia believes that the Ukrainian side should follow this example.
In the event of a violation of the truce by the Ukrainian side, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation will give an adequate and effective response – Putin


https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9807702.html

Google Translator

******

Operation in Crimea – preparations are in full swing
April 28, 2025
Rybar

Image

Speaking about the inglorious operation of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in Krynki , initiated by the British, one very interesting fact was also noted: in the context of Crimea, some points from Britain’s original plan in the Black Sea direction are currently being implemented .

What are we talking about?
The Ukrainian side has been acting differently in the last six months, if we compare the activity of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the period 2023 – the first half of 2024. Then the enemy had one goal – to drive the Black Sea Fleet into the bays of the Krasnodar Territory.

And, unfortunately, we are forced to state that they have achieved these goals, since our large warships have moved away from the Crimean coast to a safer distance. More maneuverable watercraft are now operating in Crimea.

After this, Ukrainian formations began trying to break into the bays themselves and strike at existing boats and the infrastructure of the bases, using kamikaze BEKs filled with a large charge of explosives.

In this way, they managed to create problems at some sites several times, after which the peninsula's defense was strengthened. Boom barriers were installed, rifle groups were posted along the coast, and helicopters and fighters patrolled the air non-stop.

This reduced the effectiveness of Ukrainian unmanned boats to almost zero, since the BEKs were destroyed at sea, and it became increasingly difficult for them to reach the shores of Crimea. Because of this, the enemy again changed the drones themselves and the tactics of their use.
After this, the Ukrainian Armed Forces began to acquire sea drones with anti-aircraft guided missiles, which hit a helicopter and a fighter, which increased the threat to our aviation and again opened the way for the enemy to the Crimean shores.

We analyzed the combat tactics of such BEK groups some time ago, and now the Ukrainian Armed Forces have begun to implement our assumptions about how they will attack in Crimea, especially with FPV drones.

Firstly, the decrease in activity of our aviation due to threats from unmanned aerial vehicles carrying SAMs has secured the approaches of Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles with FPV, which are now trying to approach Crimea as close as possible.

Secondly, the Ukrainian Armed Forces focus on the least populated areas of Crimea. That is, BEKs are not particularly noted near Sevastopol or Yevpatoriya, but along the northwestern coast and near Cape Tarkhankut they are very frequent guests.

Thirdly, the Ukrainian Armed Forces are now trying to destroy the air defense potential in this part of Crimea. Radars, SAM and SAM-PKK launchers are hit by FPV strikes from BEKs, which are coordinated with UAV strikes. They are not striking Simferopol or Kirovskoye or Kerch, but are concentrating their efforts in the northwest .

This situation is dangerous because the enemy is preparing a bridgehead for a possible landing operation in Crimea . The shores in the west and northwest are flat and convenient for landing. Add to this the reduction in air defense capabilities, and the picture is not very pleasant.

According to our information, a group for landing is currently being formed in the Odessa and Nikolaev regions, which are being prepared in Ochakov , Yuzhny , Odessa and Ilyichevsk (in total - up to 550 people, not counting the special detachments of the GUR) , as well as over 80 boats and 60 unmanned combat vehicles.

According to preliminary data, the plan is to strike twice - in the direction of the Mezhvodnoye-Kotovskoye line as an auxiliary strike, and Novozernoye-Yevpatoriya as the main strike. The small number is not worth paying attention to. For the enemy, the main goal will be to demonstrate its capabilities and create chaos in Crimea, and this does not require many resources.

https://rybar.ru/operacziya-v-krymu-pod ... nym-hodom/

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

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

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

Post by blindpig » Wed Apr 30, 2025 12:01 pm

Militarization of society
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 04/30/2025

Image

"Nationalists Camp in Ukraine Teaches Children to Kill” headlined an AP report in the fall of 2018, more than three years before the Russian invasion and when the focus was not on the Russian threat, but on the war in Donbass, where hatred was concentrated. Since 2014, when the population of the eastern mining and working-class region took up arms against what was perceived as an irregular change of government in Kyiv, the dehumanization of the population or the clearly racist comparisons with African countries (the term “Donbabue” and “Luganda” in reference to Zimbabwe, and Uganda to “Donetsk” and “Lugansk”) has been a constant feature of Ukrainian nationalism. The mistreatment was not limited to the bombing and blockade of the area, but also to the discrimination suffered by the people of Donbass who had chosen to seek refuge in Ukraine. The phenomenon of contempt for the eastern population was not new either, and historian Tarick Cyril Amar already denounced it in his monograph on the city of Lviv, in his chapter on the Second World War, in which he quotes the western Ukrainian politician and writer Osyp Nazariuk, who describes the eastern population as "creoles," "African savages," or "a zoo." Even then, the approach was framed in terms of European Ukraine, then Galicia, and the "Asian" population coming from the east, then the Soviet population.

From this tradition of claiming Ukraine's unity but despising the eastern population as Asian, Soviet, and inferior, indoctrination was not limited to the adult population during the Donbass war years, but the seed was also sown among minors. Long before Russian tanks crossed the border, the implantation of nationalist discourse as the national discourse was a fact, reflected in politics, culture, and education. In parallel, the militarization of society sought by far-right sectors—marginal at the time in terms of political representation, but armed and highly organized—was carried out through actions such as continuous recruitment for the fight against Russia or the juvenile camps where children were taught and indoctrinated. “Never aim at people. Never. But we don't consider separatists, little men in green , or Moscow occupiers to be people,” stated one of the instructors, a veteran of the Donbass war and member of Svoboda, in the video shown by AP . “That's how you can aim at them,” he concluded. The best-known summer military camps for minors organized by the Azov Regiment were never the only ones.

The Russian invasion of 2022 marked a turning point in the war, which ceased to be a low-intensity conflict limited to a small area and became a modern, high-intensity war between two heavily armed armies, perceived as fighting an existential battle. In the weeks preceding the Russian attack, when the Western press assumed a Russian incursion was only a matter of time, even though Volodymyr Zelensky and his team still denied this possibility, the nationalist mobilization that had erupted in 2014 with the creation of volunteer battalions, much less reticent than the regular army to fire on the civilian population of Donbass, was repeated. During those weeks, the image of an elderly woman learning to fire a gun could be seen on television around the world, but few media outlets added that this "instruction," which showed a certain desperation and little confidence in the army, was carried out by the Azov Brigade. Since then, the resilience of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, spurred by sustained multimillion-dollar international support, has allowed for the stabilization of the front at times and even the hope of victory at others.

To the social militarization implied by mobilization, which reduces men of military age to entries on a list of people susceptible to voluntary or involuntary recruitment, sometimes by force, must be added the far right's general insistence on demanding even broader recruitment and the implementation of militarism at the social level. The argument of general mobilization, training for the entire population, and considering war a social obligation has been recurrent in the discourse of people like Maksym Zhorin, deputy commander of Andriy Biletsky's Third Assault Brigade, now an army corps. This perspective is not new either and harks back to the weeks before the Russian invasion, when media outlets such as The Daily Mail wrote that “schoolchildren as young as four were put through their paces today at a military training camp near Kiev, as Ukraine’s defensive efforts to repel a Russian invasion intensified. At an intensive training camp for volunteers in a snowy forest outside the capital, young and old learned the rudiments of military techniques. Four-year-old twin brothers Taras and Bohdan played with wooden assault rifles as men and women prepared for real war against Russia.”

Exposing children to exercises simulating military action was already a common occurrence, although, at least on that occasion, it involved toy weapons. This week, however, a report published by Deutsche Welle raised eyebrows , in which the German media outlet presents a military training camp for minors without the slightest criticism or questioning. “In Ukraine, even 10-year-old children are being prepared for combat in secret military-style training camps in case the war with Russia drags on for years,” the outlet writes, showing images of very young boys and girls learning how to handle weapons and shoot. “If the Ukrainian state has anything to do with these training camps, it is violating its international obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Even if it doesn't organize them, it should put an end to them. But who cares about the current regulations anymore?” feminist activist Almut Rochowanski commented on Thursday. The comment points to something important: such initiatives can only occur under the initiative, or at least with the connivance of the state, for which the war against Russia has become its raison d'être and which it is willing to perpetuate as an eternal struggle that goes beyond the moment in which some kind of peace agreement or truce is reached.

In the video, a minor states, “They will kill me for my country, they will hurt me for my country.” “But surely the liberals will also justify this drastic violation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and international humanitarian law,” German analyst Ingar Solty wrote on social media. The comment, coupled with the preparation for the use of weapons, recalls the words spoken this past week by Valery Zaluzhny, Ukraine’s current ambassador to the United Kingdom, referring to what he considers “the true face of war.” “We are once again talking about freedom and choice. So, war is a choice to make two important decisions. The first decision is not to be afraid. Not to be afraid of dying. And that means being willing to sacrifice oneself. … But dying for Ukraine, for your people, is not enough. You need to make a second decision, also a very difficult one. You must be ready to kill.” For Ukraine, for your land, for the people, for your own family." This Nietzschean discourse exalting war as an element of purification and the fundamental basis of the state is not unique to the military establishment, but extends to the social level, even to minors.

References to the Volkssturm , with which Hitler hoped his ordinary citizens would resist the Soviet offensive when the war was already lost, are not limited to images of boys and girls learning to use weapons and wearing patches with eagles similar to those of Germany. A few days ago, Volodymyr Zelensky announced the creation of “national resistance training centers” throughout the country. “Preparing civilians to resist the enemy is an integral component of our defense capability and one of the factors that deter them. It is also a driver of resilience and social unity,” stated Irina Vereshchuk, taking a further step toward social militarization and the vision of war against Russia as the central axis of state ideology.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/04/30/milit ... -sociedad/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
⚡ The Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation as of April 30, 2025.

Units of the North group of forces defeated concentrations of manpower and equipment of four mechanized, infantry, two airborne assault brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and a territorial defence brigade in the areas of the populated areas of Miropolske, Prokhody, Mogritsa, Yunakovka, Sadki and Ryasne in Sumy Oblast.

- The losses of the Armed Forces of Ukraine amounted to 155 servicemen, 3 combat armoured vehicles, 9 cars, a RAK-SA-12 multiple launch rocket system and 7 artillery pieces, including a 105-mm M119 gun. An electronic warfare station and an ammunition depot were destroyed.

As a result of active offensive actions, units of the West group of forces liberated the settlement of Novoye in the Donetsk People's Republic. The formations of two mechanized, tank, assault brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and two territorial defense brigades were defeated in the areas of the settlements of Dvurechnaya, Kupyansk, Kupyansk-Uzlovaya, Osinovo, Nechvolodovka, Kamenka in the Kharkov region and Kirovsk in the Donetsk People's Republic. - The enemy lost over 220 servicemen, two combat armored vehicles, 10 cars and 5 field artillery guns of Western manufacture. An ammunition depot was destroyed.

Units of the "Southern" group of forces improved their tactical position. They defeated the manpower and equipment of three mechanized, motorized infantry, airmobile and two assault brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the areas of the settlements of Zvanovka, Dronovka, Seversk, Podolskoye, Verolyubovka and Konstantinovka in the Donetsk People's Republic.

- The losses of the Ukrainian armed formations amounted to 270 servicemen, two combat armored vehicles, four cars and three field artillery guns. Three ammunition depots were destroyed.

Units of the "Center" force group improved their tactical position. They defeated the formations of the heavy mechanized, mechanized, infantry brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the special forces brigade and the national guard brigade in the areas of the settlements of Novaya Poltavka, Novoekonomicheskoe, Krasnoarmeysk, Ulyanovka, Yablonovka, Vladimirovka and Oktyabrskoye of the Donetsk People's Republic.

- The enemy lost up to 525 servicemen, 5 combat armored vehicles, 10 cars and 7 artillery pieces.

Units of the "East" force group continued their offensive deep into the enemy's defense. They defeated the manpower and equipment of three mechanized, assault, airmobile brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the territorial defense brigade in the areas of the settlements of Poddubnoye, Zelenoe Pole, Bogatyr, Komar, Otradnoye and Volnoye Pole of the Donetsk People's Republic.

- The enemy's losses amounted to 175 servicemen, 17 vehicles and two field artillery guns.

Units of the Dnepr group of forcesdefeated the formations of the mountain assault brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and two territorial defense brigades in the areas of the settlements of Pavlivka in the Zaporizhia region, Tokarevka and Sadovoe in the Kherson region. - The Armed Forces of

Ukraine lost up to 85 servicemen, a tank, 5 vehicles and a field artillery gun. An ammunition depot was destroyed. The operational-tactical aviation, strike unmanned aerial vehicles, missile troops and artillery of the groups of troops of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation hit enterprises of the military-industrial complex of Ukraine, ammunition depots, as well as temporary deployment points of Ukrainian armed formations and foreign mercenaries in 156 districts. Air defense systems destroyed four JDAM guided aerial bombs and a HIMARS multiple launch rocket system rocket made in the USA, as well as 125 aircraft-type unmanned aerial vehicles.

***

Colonelcassad
The main points from Dmitry Peskov's speech to the press at the educational marathon "Knowledge.First":

- Vladimir Putin's main goal remains unchanged - it is necessary to achieve the objectives that the president set when starting the special operation;

- Putin did what he had to do in the situation with Ukraine, Peskov said;

- The Russian Federation could not help but react to the revival of Nazism that occurred in Ukraine;

- The West turns a blind eye to the fact that "Nazis are walking around Ukraine with lit torches";

- All of Putin's decisions regarding the special operation are correct, and it is the duty of Russians to win;

- Caring for border residents is a priority in the work of the Russian president. These people are showing heroism and deserve the highest praise and admiration;

- Putin's statement about Russia's readiness for negotiations on Ukraine without preconditions is relevant;

- A settlement must be reached with Ukraine, not with the United States;

- It is impossible not to take into account the situation that has developed between the Russian Federation and Ukraine on the ground;

- Russia still prefers to achieve the goals of the special operation peacefully;

- Zelensky makes many different statements, but for the most part they are unsuccessful;

- Russia confirms its readiness for direct negotiations with Ukraine, but there is no response from Kiev yet;

- Russia is grateful to the United States for its efforts to peacefully resolve the situation in Ukraine;

- The Ukrainian crisis is too complex to be resolved immediately;

- There will be a Victory Parade in Moscow, and we will watch it with pride;

- Russia will be able to mobilize, if necessary, as during the Great Patriotic War.
"If a huge country needs to stand up, it will stand up at any moment. No one can have any doubts," Peskov emphasized;

- Information wars can be victorious, but real victory is forged on the battlefield;

- Direct contact between Putin and Trump will be established if necessary.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

SITREP 4/28/25: Russian Vise Tightens as West Dawdles and Dallies with "Ceasefire" Sham
Apr 28, 2025

Trump and Rubio continue to claim that a ceasefire deal is “very close” to happening, with Reuters having published the full Trump “plan”, after a week or two of teasing ‘leaked’ versions of it:

⚡️Reuters has published the final terms of the US peace proposal.

The plan was presented to European officials by Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff at talks in Paris on April 17. It is the final US offer to both sides:

▪️ Both sides shall immediately enter into negotiations on the technical implementation of a permanent ceasefire.

▪️ Ukraine refuses to join NATO, but may become a member of the EU.

▪️ Security guarantees for Ukraine are provided by a military contingent of European states, which non-European countries can voluntarily join.

▪️ The United States de jure recognizes Crimea as Russian, and de facto recognizes Russia’s control over Luhansk region and the “occupied” parts of Donbass, Zaporozhye, and Kherson regions.

▪️ Ukraine regains control over the "occupied" areas of the Kharkiv region.

▪️ Ukraine regains control over Kakhovka Dam and Zaporizhzhya NPP. The station will be managed by Americans, electricity will be distributed to "both sides".

▪️ Ukraine will gain unimpeded passage along the Dnieper and control over the Kinburn Spit

▪️ The United States and Ukraine are implementing an agreement on economic cooperation and development of mineral resources.

▪️ Ukraine will receive full restoration and financial compensation.

▪️ Sanctions against Russia, imposed since 2014, will be lifted.

▪️ The United States will cooperate with Russia in energy and other industrial sectors.


In the meantime, the message being sent by Russian officials is the opposite.

In an interview with Face the Nation, Lavrov categorically rejected the ZNPP plant being transferred over to the US, while again reiterating Russia’s main demands:

Sergey Lavrov once again approved Russia's demands for ending military operations in Ukraine:

▪️Ukraine must refuse to join NATO and remain neutral.

▪️Kiev is obliged to stop legislatively and physically destroying everything Russian in Ukraine - language, media, culture, traditions and Orthodoxy.

▪️Crimea, Sevastopol, DPR, LPR, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions must be internationally recognized as Russian territory .

▪️All sanctions against Russia must be lifted , lawsuits and arrest warrants cancelled and frozen assets returned.

▪️Moscow must receive reliable security guarantees against the threats created by the hostile activities of NATO, the European Union and their individual member states on our western borders.

▪️The task of demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine is not removed from the agenda .

▪️All of Kyiv’s obligations under the peace agreement must be legally enshrined, have enforcement mechanisms, and be permanent.

In fact, this even sounds like a toughening of the negotiating position, since previously a ceasefire required only the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from new regions of Russia. Now, Kyiv is required to internationally recognize their Russian affiliation.

Military Informant
(Video at link.)


Unfortunately, Ukraine and US both continue to hold that Ukraine should be able to maintain a military force, which is a non-starter for Russia:
(Video at link.)

Image

Peskov likewise interestingly noted that “if Ukraine were to withdraw from the four regions of Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson” then Russia would stop the war immediately. As always, consider that the chances of Ukraine withdrawing from Kherson and Zaporozhye cities, the latter being nearly one million in population, are slim to none.

Ex-foreign minister Kuleba, having floated down in his ‘golden parachute’ somewhere in the West, insists “we are not even close to real negotiations”:(Video at link.)

And what kind of ceasefire could Russia have with people like this? Secretary of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on National Security Roman Kostenko stated in a new interview that: “In the event of a freeze in hostilities, Ukraine must intensify the activities in Russia and carry out a whole series of political assassinations.” (Video at link.)

So, one of the highest ranking Ukrainian officials openly admits that were the war to come to an end, Ukraine has as its duty the right to continue assassinating everyone in Russia who was even remotely connected to the hostilities. Knowing this, why would Russia ever sign a ceasefire without first fulfilling the mandate of “demilitarization” and “deNazification” of Ukraine? The latter I view more as a de-radicalization: removing the ‘extremist’ segment from the Ukrainian ranks.

But even so, Putin has now offered a new three-day ceasefire for Victory Day, from May 8th to May 11th. It’s difficult to say if it’s another deliberate ploy meant to ‘trap’ Zelensky in a kind of zugzwang—but if that’s the case, Zelensky immediately took the bait as he publicly rejected the ceasefire, to the detriment of his image:(Video at link.)

Zelensky effectively rejected Putin's proposal for a three-day truce in May, writes the publication "Strana".

He called the proposal manipulation and called for a 30-day truce, not a three-day one.

"Now here is another attempt at manipulation: for some reason everyone should wait until May 8 and only then cease fire to ensure Putin's silence during the parade. There is no reason to wait until May 8. The fire should be stopped not for a few days. An immediate, complete and unconditional ceasefire - and for at least 30 days," he said.


Of course, he counter-offered for an immediate permanent ceasefire in order to inject European troops and freeze the conflict long-term against Russia’s will.

On this account, a Russian commentator had the following stirring take:

"Opinion of the subscriber, Russian officer O:

"Negotiations, negotiations, negotiations.

Trump this, Zeleboba that.

This whole circus is about nothing. We have not achieved our goals. The Ukrops do not consider themselves defeated yet. Neither they nor we are ready to "trade" their territories.

Besides, if we don't bring the matter to its logical conclusion, the Ukrps will modernise, staff up (including the youth. Or rather, first of all) and continue the war. Except that our losses at this stage will be much higher among both military personnel and civilians, and there will be orders of magnitude more destruction of populated areas and industrial/infrastructure facilities. Don't be under any illusions.

Apart from everything else, Geo-Europeans, most likely, who will also have rebuilt their economies on "military rails" by that time, will come to attack us. And I doubt the Pindos will be on the sidelines.

So we have no choice but, now and to the end.

Now we are at war directly with the Ukrops. The others, although they have put their stinking paws, mostly indirectly. Under the new arrangement it will be different.

Ready or not ready... We're already at war. And the initiative is on our side. Mobilisation, too. Mobilisation, at worst. They are also not ready as they will be in a couple of years when they are prepared and stockpile, introduce conscription, etc.

The Ukes have a shortage of personnel right now, b/c of that. Gotta get to the bottom of it. Take off the rose coloured glasses! We are tired too, but they are more tired. All the more reason for us to squeeze.

Otherwise, the guys who are dead won't forgive us. Neither will those who stood up for the country in 1941-1945. We weren't ready then either, and we were also dead tired, but we stood to the end. And walked to the end. Had we not made it then, what next? Something like "The Unthinkable", including the Wehrmacht, which had regained its fighting capacity? And what would have been our losses then? Especially if the British and Germans, etc. from Europe, and the Pindos from the Far East....

...Let the Koreans get involved. And not only. We must finish this hydra. Otherwise, instead of one head, several new ones will grow.

Russia and anti-Russia will not exist in parallel. This stage has already passed. It's either them or us. There is no place for us in this world at the same time. The youth of b/Ukraine are being prepared for war from childhood. Our destruction is on the Ukrops' banners now. They will use everything in case of a truce. Including the fifth column, and the sixth (migrants), and, as in the Soviet Union, they will divide the peoples and nationalities of our country by provocations, etc. There can be no way back and 'jumping in place'."


Well said. Unfortunately, as is almost always the case in history, ‘clean victories’ rarely come. The forces pushing against Russia to capitulate to some kind of early ‘compromise’ are growing each day. In his latest presser, Trump again tabled hard sanctions against Russia, venting his frustrations at Putin’s refusal to make an easy peace.

Image

Image

Meanwhile, NATO continues to build up and prepare provocations, as Patrushev reports:

Image
https://inosmi.ru/20250423/baltika_pols ... 26235.html

In light of these latest provocation tips, Russia’s Naryshkin said that Russian special services should begin acting proactively against these measures:

The special services of Russia and Belarus are ready to act preemptively in the face of NATO activity and increasing escalation from Europe around Ukraine, said Sergei Naryshkin, director of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service. We see an increase in military activity by NATO countries near our borders, we feel and see that European countries, especially France, Great Britain and Germany, are increasing the level of escalation around the Ukrainian conflict, so we need to act preemptively. We are ready for this.

We can guess what that alludes to.

When just days ago Estonia suggested to start sinking Russian ships accused of ‘violating’ their arbitrary rules, Patrushev likewise remarked that Russia needs to start thinking of ways to respond:(Video at link.)

Hopefully Russia has already long begun contemplating this, contrary to Patrushev’s suggestion.

One last important thing to mention, is that Trump continues to admit that Russia’s biggest concession to Ukraine is not taking the whole country:
(Video at link.)

Image

This means the US administration clearly understands that a “ceasefire” would be an arbitrary decision for Russia, not an exigent one based on urgent need. In fact, Trump continued to remark that if the peace deal falls through, Russia will capture the entire country “in a matter of years”:

Image

So then, what is Russia’s real incentive to stop? Trump is in effect asking for a ‘favor’, and Russia will need much more than what is being offered to consider making such an unfavorable ‘concession’.


A quick update on the frontline situation. The past day has again seen a surge of Russian advances in key areas.

On the cross-Oskil river ‘beachhead’ Russian troops were geo-confirmed as having planted their flag in Kamyanka:

Geoloc of the flag. Ru mappers show the rest of the town in the grey zone but Ru MoD announced full control over Kamenka.

Maps

Coordinates 49.98043, 37.83959

It sits on the other side of the Oskol/Oskil river.


Image

Image

For reference, this is here, with Kupyansk at the very south of the map:

Image

Circled in yellow is an area where Russian troops also slightly expanded their territorial control.

The largest gains happened just south of there on the Kreminna-Lyman line:

Situation north of Donetsk: During this week Russian Army made new advances along the border with Donetsk & Luhansk in the direction of Hrekivka.

Image

Russian troops expanded control in several directions at once in the direction of Izyum, still far away for now.

There were many other small advances, such as from Belgorovka toward the Seversk direction, with Russian troops entering the outskirts of Gregorovka.

In the front between Toretsk and Pokrovsk, Russian troops continue making advances toward Konstantinovka in the north. The 150th Division for instance broke through past northwestern Toretsk to cut and capture a railway line circled in yellow below:

Image

In fact, Ukraine’s top TG analyst Myroshnykov notes that the above section is now by far the most difficult of the front for the AFU, claiming that Russia has recently been bringing up new reserves here:

The most difficult section of the front now is, without a doubt, the junction of the Pokrov and Torets directions.

The enemy prepared a lot of forces and resources before the start of the operation.

When it seemed that we managed to extinguish the fire in our defense, an "armistice" came for Easter, and the enemy took advantage of this 1000%.

Having regrouped and replenished their losses over those 30 hours, they rushed with renewed vigor to the Rusyn Yar - Oleksandro-Kalinove line.

Currently, the situation is not stabilized, the enemy is pressing on Tarasivka, pressing on Sukhaya Balka, and is rushing towards Romanivka and Nova Poltavka with Novoolenivka.

It is about 7 km to Oleksandro-Kalynovoy. And from Toretsk to Ivano-Pol - 8 km. Both villages are the closest approaches to Kostyantynivka.

And the enemy's task by May 8-9 is to occupy these lines so that after the hypothetical "truce" (after May 10) they can begin their operational-tactical offensive on Kostyantynivka itself.

But I feel that they will be able to reach comfortable positions near Konstaha from the south and west throughout May, if not longer.


Here are the directions he’s referring to:

Image

Many of the areas above at the tip of the spear were just captured recently, from Sukha Balka just south of Romanovka, to the areas east of Vodyane at the western part of the map. For instance, here’s the small advance toward Berezovka from today, courtesy of Suriyak maps:

Image

On this front Russian forces have been accelerating inexorably toward Konstantinovka, which itself is the final major barbican protecting the Kramatorsk-Slavyansk agglomerate.

The only other thing of intrigue was a claimed report that Russian forces had landed across the Dnieper and captured territory on the opposite side in the Kherson region:

In ukrokanaly they write that the Russian army attempted to force the Dnieper in one of the sections of the Kherson direction. It is likely that this is one of the intelligence or special forces raids. There have been such cases more than once, but they were not attempts to create a foothold. The enemy command is trying to keep the group on the outskirts of Kherson, but every month it becomes more difficult.

Image

It was claimed to have been here opposite Khrynky.

Other reports described it as the capture of the island group between the shores, which is much more realistic:

Image

We’ll have to wait for confirmation and see.

(More at link.)

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/sit ... e-tightens

******

Putin’s Victory Day Truce Is Meant To Reassure Trump Of His Peaceful Intentions
Andrew Korybko
Apr 29, 2025

Image

Putin might be concerned that Zelensky manipulated Trump against him after their latest meeting given Trump’s subsequent angry post about Putin.

The Kremlin announced on Monday that Russia will temporarily suspend military action against Ukraine from midnight on May 7-8 to midnight on May 10-11 for humanitarian reasons in honor of Victory Day. Just like with the recent Easter truce, however, Russia also warned that there’ll be an “adequate and effective response” if Ukraine violates it. The larger context in which this second Russian-initiated truce in recent weeks is taking place concerns Trump’s increasing irritation with Putin.

It was earlier explained how “Five Significant Disagreements Account For Trump’s Newfound Anger With Putin” that manifested itself over the weekend by Trump speculating in a post that “maybe [Putin] doesn’t want to stop the war, he’s just tapping me along”. Trump also threatened banking and secondary sanctions. At the same time, however, Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned that new sanctions would prolong the conflict by promptly ending the peace process so Trump might just be bluffing for now.

Be that as it may, Putin might have interpreted Trump’s post as proof of him having been negatively influenced by Zelensky following their latest meeting at the Vatican the day prior during Pope Francis’ funeral, which could explain why he decided upon a Victory Day truce and then announced it so early. Regardless of whatever observers might think about Russia’s terms for ending the conflict, not to mention their feasibility, Putin’s move is arguably meant to reassure Trump of his peaceful intentions.

Putin isn’t “tapping Trump along”, he’s just reluctant to agree to what Reuters reported to be the terms of the US’ finalized peace plan, which entail major concessions that would basically freeze the conflict in exchange for sanctions relief without addressing some of Russia’s core demands. These include Ukraine’s demilitarization and restoring its minorities’ socio-religious rights, especially those of ethnic Russians and Russian Orthodox Christians, though Ukraine’s path to NATO would be blocked if this deal is reached.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov recently confirmed that Russia isn’t seeking Zelensky’s removal and is ready to resume bilateral negotiations without any preconditions, but neither should be interpreted as capitulation, just as attempts to get Ukraine to comply with more of Russia’s demands. Lavrov repeated these selfsame demands in his latest interview with Brazil’s O Globo newspaper, though at the same time, he also just told CBS’ Margaret Brennan that Russia is seeking a “balance of interests”.

This should be interpreted as a sincere willingness to compromise in some creative way that meets more of Russia’s demands, but the Kremlin claimed on Monday that Ukraine has shown no interest in this. Even so, while Russia hopes that the newly announced Victory Day truce might get Ukraine to reconsider, Putin’s primary objective right now is to convince Trump that he’s serious about peace. To that end, once again temporarily ceasing hostilities can help, though it can only do so much.

If tangible progress towards peace isn’t soon achieved, then the US might abandon its mediation efforts, the consequences of which were analyzed here. In that scenario, it can’t be ruled out that the US might double down on its armed aid to Ukraine in parallel with imposing secondary sanctions against Russia, which Putin doesn’t want to risk. That’s why he just announced another truce, and so early at that, in order to show Trump that he still wants to attain more of his goals through diplomacy instead of force.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/putins-v ... e-is-meant

******

Covering up Ukrainian Nazis is nothing new – the Canadians have been doing it for almost eighty years

Ian Proud

April 29, 2025

The western governments are turning a blind eye once more to activity that they would never tolerate in their own countries.

A number of topics remain taboo in discussing the war in Ukraine. Busification, Zelensky’s democratic mandate, Ukraine’s casualty numbers and anything suggesting that Ukraine cannot win are all off limits. Likewise the problem of alleged neo-Nazis in Ukraine.

One of the most embarrassing episodes since the Ukraine war started in 2022, was when Yaroslav Hunka, was given two standing ovations in the Canadian House of Commons public gallery by MPs during the visit of President Zelensky in 2023. Hunka has been accused by Russia of genocide, because of his alleged involvement in the Huta Pieniacka massacre of February 28 1944 in which more than 500 ethnic Poles were murdered in a village, in what is now western Ukraine. Hunka was a member of the SS Galicia Division, a mostly Ukrainian unit of the Waffen SS, which Commissions in Germany and Poland later found guilty of war crimes.

This was shocking because it opened the lid on a topic of conversation that has been largely silenced by the western mainstream media since the beginning of the war: Ukraine’s contemporary challenge of far-right ultranationalism. But the Hunka case also illustrates how western authorities airbrushed discussion of nazis in Ukraine after World War II too.

On 13 July 1948 the British Commonwealth Relations Office, what is now part of the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office, sent a telegram to Commonwealth governments, proposing an end to Nazi war crimes trials in the British zone of Germany. “Punishment of war crimes is more a matter of discouraging future generations than of meting out retribution to every guilty individual… it is now necessary to dispose of the past as soon as possible.”

After the conclusion of the Nuremberg War Trials in 1946 the western world faced a new enemy in the Soviet Union. Limited security resources in cash-strapped Albion and its colonies were re-deployed to uncover suspected Soviet agents and Communists, rather than to identify and track down lower-order Nazi war criminals.

Around this time, many Ukrainians fled the Soviet Union to settle in Canada. In the thirty-year period after the start of Operation Barbarossa, the Ukrainian population in Canada almost doubled, from 300,000 to almost 600,000 people. While most of them, I am sure, would not have been Nazi collaborators, some, undoubtedly, were. They were joined by lesser numbers of Latvians, Hungarians, Slovaks and others.

Within that exodus would have been so-called “lesser” war criminals; persons who had organised the transportation of Jews, Slavs, gypsies and homosexuals to death camps, acted as informers, committed murders, or become involved in war crimes as other ranks and non-commissioned officers in death squads. They were the lower echelon collaborators, acting as the instruments of the genocide initiated by the Nazis.

Yet, following the British instruction, Canada progressively relaxed its immigration policy between 1950 and 1962, steadily removing restrictions against the entry of German nazis and non-German members of German military units like the SS Galicia Division.

However, in 1984 the Simon Wiesenthal Center wrote a letter to the Canadian government claiming to have obtained evidence that the ‘Angel of Death’ Josef Mengele had applied for a landed immigrant visa to Canada in 1962. Though this proved to be incorrect, it caused such outrage among Canada’s Jewish community that a Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals in Canada was established in 1985.

Known as the Deschênes Commission, it uncovered a list of 774 persons who had allegedly entered Canada and who required further investigation. Of that list, only 28 underwent serious investigation and trial.

Michael Pawlowski, accused of murdering 410 Jews and 80 non-Jewish Poles in Belarus in 1942, was acquitted as judges blocked the prosecution from gathering evidence in the Soviet Union.

Stephen Reistetter of Slovakia was not tried for allegations that he kidnapped 3000 Jews to have them sent to Nazi death camps while serving in the Hlinka party, a far right clerical-fascist movement with Nazi leanings. His case fell apart because a witness died.

Erich Tobias, was accused of involvement in the execution of Latvian Jews but died before his case went to court.

By 1995, with no convictions for war crimes having been secured, the Canadian Justice Department cut the size of its war crimes unit from 24 to 11 people. In the absence of criminal prosecutions, the Canadian Government tried civil proceedings to revoke citizenship from alleged war criminals.

Wasily Bogutin collaborated with the Nazi occupation forces in the town of Selidovo, in Donetsk, and was personally and directly involved in effecting the roundup of young persons for forced labour in Germany. In February 1998, Judge McKeown, of the Trial Division of the Federal Court, found that Bogutin had concealed his role in war crimes, but he died before he could be extradited.

Joseph Nemsila, who commanded a Slovak unit that sent civilians to Auschwitz died in 1997 after a decision not to revoke citizenship was overturned, but death prevented exportation.

In only 7 cases was order made for the suspect to be extradited or exported. This included Ladislaus Csizsik-Csatary, accused of involvement in the confinement of thousands of Hungarian Jews and their subsequent deportation to death camps. In July 1997, just before his trial was to begin, he decided not to oppose the loss of his citizenship and voluntarily left the country.

Vladimir Katriuk was accused of having taken part in the Khatyn Massacre in Belarus and Wasyl Odnynsky, a guard at SS labour camps at Trawniki and Poniaka. Moves were made to revoke their citizenship, but they were allowed to remain in Canada until all court proceedings were lifted in 2007.

Progress in prosecuting alleged war criminals in Canada was always slow, often held up by foot-dragging by often reluctant judges, and a refusal to allow for the gathering of evidence in the Soviet Union.

Today, the media and Jewish groups still pressure the Canadian government to reveal the names of all of the 774 persons considered by the 1985 Deschênes Commission with so far little success.

An American academic recently discovered what is believed to be a similar list of 700 suspects which included Volodymyr Kubiovych, a Ukrainian Nazi collaborator who helped organize the SS Galicia division and who was editor in chief of the Encyclopedia of Ukraine compiled at the University of Alberta. A photograph of a parade in Lviv, Ukraine, in July, 1943, shows Mr. Kubiovych making a Nazi salute alongside Otto Wächter, a senior member of the SS who also served as governor of Galicia and Krakow.

Yaroslav Hunka was not on that list, raising questions about how many Nazi collaborators in Canada were never discovered.

I don’t think that Ukraine today is a Nazi society and, even at its high watermark, the Svoboda party only garnered 10% of the national vote. But ultranationalism is a major problem, particularly in the west of Ukraine, in that area known as Galicia during World War II. And the refusal of western governments to acknowledge the issue of ultranationalism in Ukraine or speak out means that we are turning a blind eye once more to activity that we would never tolerate in our own countries.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... hty-years/

******

About fighters from the DPRK in the Kursk region
April 29, 21:04

Image

Opinion from the Kursk direction on the participation of North Korean soldiers in the Kursk operation of the Russian Armed Forces.

About fighters from the DPRK

After the President and the Chief of General Staff officially acknowledged the participation of the KPA SSN in the CTO in the Kursk region, we will make our contribution: Yes, we knew, yes, there were nuances in the interaction, but we did not advertise it to the entire district, while the package openers with foam at the mouth proved the opposite, playing into the hands of the enemy, because everything has its time.

The Korean fighters had two features: high physical training and high marksmanship training. It is no secret that the North Koreans, due to the peculiarities of life in their country, are physically developed and accustomed to living in harsh conditions, which cannot be said about their southern counterparts. As for marksmanship training, in the KPA a huge amount of time is devoted to it and for almost any private Kim, the "Kalash" is almost native. So, the Korean comrades, having understood what was going on, began to shoot down almost all the drones in the area - both the Ukrainian Armed Forces and, let's face it, ours were also getting it. At one point, the guys even tried to change their flight routes in order not to fall under the watchful eye of the Korean soldier, because the number of drones shot down had already begun to go off the scale.

As for the participation of the KPA SSN fighters in the attacks - no one immediately sent them to assault work. At first, the guys sat on the third line, delved into the situation, then, having gotten used to what was happening, began to pull up to the supplies and fortifications. And only after that, the Korean comrades asked for assault work - by trial and error, they determined the tactics of action taking into account what was happening "on the ground". Yes, the acquired skills of the KPA turned out to be not quite in demand in the conditions of the counter-terrorist operation in the Kursk region, but the Korean friends quickly reorganized and managed to carry out a number of operations, inflicting good damage on the Ukrainian terrorists.

To sum it up, we can say the following: The guys from the Korean special forces are certainly heroes who decided to support the Russian army in the fight against the Ukrainian Nazis in the Kursk region. With their fortitude, bravery and dedication, high level of training and ruthlessness towards the enemy, the KPA SSN wrote their name into military history, gained invaluable combat experience, which will certainly be useful in training the DPRK army, taking into account the changed nature of military operations in general. We thank the Korean people and personally comrade Kim Jong-un for the assistance provided. Our cause is just, the enemy will be defeated, victory will be ours!

http://t.me/avcgroup - zinc

Image

Image

Image

In Pyongyang, they announced that a memorial dedicated to the heroes of the battles in the Kursk region will be opened there.
We should open one here too. In Moscow, Kursk or Sudzha. Well, and open a Kim Jong-un Street somewhere.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9810441.html

Google Translator

******

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

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

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

Post by blindpig » Thu May 01, 2025 11:40 am

Demands and threats
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 01/05/2025

Image

Yesterday, the Financial Times reported that the final details of the now-famous economic agreement between the United States and Ukraine, better known as the minerals deal, were being finalized. Despite the fact that, largely due to the Oval Office standoff and Zelensky's attempt to renegotiate terms that Washington considered finalized, it now includes more than just rare earths and minerals, the paper reported. According to the paper, last-minute problems had arisen again, with Kiev trying to rewrite aspects that had theoretically been agreed upon last weekend, when Trump hinted after his brief meeting with the Ukrainian president that the pact was about to finally be ratified. Although everything indicates that this is merely rhetoric and does not entail any binding economic support—let alone military support, as Ukraine has been assuming for months and subsequently demanding—the fact that the document's text mentions the strategic partnership between the two countries helps Ukraine regain its lost confidence, which in recent hours has translated into a renewed arrogance that Kiev had lost since being surprised by Donald Trump's peacemaking turn and the subsequent public ridicule to which its president was subjected. The image of the two presidents in St. Peter's Basilica and the US leader's toned-down rhetoric against Zelensky also contributed to this. As a result, Ukraine seems to feel stronger, even though the conditions on the front line are not particularly conducive to Kiev boasting about its successes.

“After surviving the fire of war, Ukrainians have discovered the most important secret of the Russian Federation: the strength of the empire turned out to be a propaganda myth. Today, Ukraine successfully conducts an active defense and even controls part of Russian territory. Nothing forces us to surrender, even four years after the invasion,” Mikhail Podolyak wrote yesterday, after twelve days away from social media. The advisor to the head of the President's Office seems to have overlooked the loss of the Ukrainian presence in each and every one of the Kursk settlements that Kyiv's troops had captured last August, the fact that Ukraine is still barely holding on to the Donetsk front, and that Russia is actively defending itself in the Sumi region to prevent another possible Ukrainian suicidal adventure in Kursk, and perhaps in part as punishment for an operation that has yielded no tangible results.

In his eagerness for prominence, Podolyak has even dared to conflate the Russian-Ukrainian war with the escalation taking place along the Line of Control, the de facto border between the parts of Kashmir controlled by India and Pakistan. The Ukrainian official assumed that a "full-scale war" would not occur, but added that "the war that threatens this region today will accelerate attempts to properly resolve"—in Kiev's terms, "the problem of the war in Ukraine." Although there is no real connection between the war in Ukraine and the situation on the Indian subcontinent, Podolyak's attempt to equate the two situations is not unique. Kiev also tried to take advantage of the consequences of October 7 and the Israeli reaction to identify itself with the side that believed it had "the right to defend itself." Even now, in explaining the Ukrainian and European counterproposal to the final US offer, Zelensky's entourage has described the demand for binding US security guarantees, which the document describes as "equivalent to NATO's Article 5," as "similar to those received by Israel."

Yet, despite constant pleas for assistance and more weapons, as Donald Trump claimed Zelensky had demanded at their Vatican summit , Ukraine still believes itself to be the perfect buffer against a Russian wave of attack. The attack is both halted and defeated—even invaded—but it is an existential danger impossible to resolve without Ukraine, which in turn remains eternally dependent on the weapons its allies must supply, since the continuation of the war is preferable to a settlement that isn't exactly on Ukraine's terms. "Yes, a brutal and protracted conflict is far from an ideal scenario. But an even worse outcome would be a settlement that formalized the loss of territory and the rejection of international alliances. If only because such a settlement would lay the groundwork for populist divisions in our wounded society and promises of revenge. It would also encourage Russia to launch even broader aggression and pursue a deliberate, large-scale genocide of Ukrainians," Podolyak wrote. Their constant accusations of genocide are contradicted by the data. The number of children killed by Israel in Gaza, a population of around 2 million people, in a year and a half exceeds the number of civilians killed in Ukraine on both sides of the front lines during the three years of war, among a population that, according to kyiv, exceeds 40 million.

Ukraine is also Europe's salvation. "Our capacity for action is most valued in times when treaties and memoranda are losing their meaning. It is worth noting that Ukraine defends NATO territory more effectively than its own NATO membership, where confidence in the article on collective defense is waning," Podolyak added, with apparent disdain for the NATO membership that Ukraine continues to demand in the document presented to the United States last week. Fearing that the common defense will not be activated, the best defense remains: Ukraine's existence and the continuation of the war. "Our experience resisting the Russian military machine is unique and is transforming European security doctrine. It is now clear to everyone that the best guarantee of security for Ukraine and for Europe is the Ukrainians themselves. That is why the Ukrainian voice is heard more loudly in every negotiation, and imposing unfair agreements on us is neither possible nor rational," he concluded.

Despite the triumphalist rhetoric of active defense in Russia and the bulwark that Ukraine represents in protecting Europe and NATO, Ukraine is relentless in its attempt to secure direct involvement from its allies, primarily its exceptional partner , the United States, in the common fight against Moscow. A reading of Podolyak's text suggests that Ukraine finds itself in a position of strength on the front lines, with a cornered and frightened opponent who will soon have no choice but to submit to Kiev's dictates. Analysts and defenders of the pro-Ukrainian rhetoric are following this same line of thought, insisting on seeing ulterior motives in Vladimir Putin's proposal for a three-day truce between May 8 and 10, coinciding with Victory Day week, arguably the most important holiday in Russia—and until 2014 also in Ukraine—and a time when a ceasefire has not been offered for the first time. Moreover, the offer is not unlike the one made by Vladimir Putin on Easter Sunday, although it has caused a different reaction in the Ukrainian media and discourse.

“Putin is terrified that Ukraine will sabotage VE Day,” wrote Mark Galeotti, a regular columnist for The Times , yesterday to promote his latest column “on Putin’s latest cynical ceasefire offer,” published by The Spectator . “For some reason, everyone is supposed to wait until May 8 for a ceasefire, just so Putin can be silent during his parade,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said with a defiant look, giving fuel to those using the media and social media to insist that the VE Day parade, attended by hundreds of thousands of people, is a legitimate military target that Ukraine should consider attacking to “force Russia into diplomacy.” Russia's rhetoric and actions show beyond any doubt that any threat to this act, considered practically sacred by current Russian culture—not only among its elites but also at the popular level—would represent a reaffirmation of Russia's sense of external aggression and, far from encouraging Russia to sit at the negotiating table, as Ukraine demands, to accept an "unconditional" ceasefire that would pave the way for the next steps in its unworkable plan, would push Moscow closer to rejecting any agreement with kyiv.

The main objective now is not to achieve a ceasefire or a peace agreement, but to make the opponent appear as an obstacle to peace. Hence, there is no rush in Ukraine, a country whose population, infrastructure, and economy are suffering the most from the war, but rather triumphalism based on imaginary successes and demands. "Putin doesn't want peace," wrote Andriy Ermak, an expert in reading other people's minds, yesterday. Disregarding the fact that pauses in war fundamentally favor the side struggling to defend itself, he added that "he just wants a break. Calls for a ceasefire in Ukraine now play only in the Kremlin's favor." Any scenario is better than a negotiated settlement or a negotiated truce—even though it is Ukraine that, despite not wanting it and having been imposed on it, demands it daily—even a three-day one to commemorate the defeat of fascism.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/01/exige ... -amenazas/

Google Translator

If Ukraine attacks the Parade there will truly be hell to pay. Putin will let the General Staff off the leash, he'll have to.

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Summary of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation as of 1 May 2025 ㅤ

– Units of the North group of forces defeated concentrations of manpower and equipment of a tank, three mechanized, two airborne assault brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, a marine brigade and two territorial defence brigades in the areas of the settlements of Yunakovka, Sadki, Mogritsa, Malaya Rybitsa, Miropolskoye, Ugroedy in the Sumy region and Izbitskoye in the Kharkiv region. The Armed Forces of Ukraine lost up to 170 servicemen, two combat armoured vehicles, 12 cars and 10 field artillery guns. Two ammunition depots were destroyed.

– Units of the West group of forces improved the tactical situation. Defeated formations of four mechanized, ranger, assault and airmobile brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the areas of the settlements of Kolodeznoye, Kupyansk, Shiykovka, Kovsharovka in the Kharkiv region and Karpovka in the Donetsk People's Republic. The enemy lost over 225 servicemen, an armored personnel carrier, nine vehicles and four field artillery guns, two of which were of Western manufacture. Two Kvertus electronic warfare stations, a RADA radar station made in Israel and two ammunition depots were destroyed.

- Units of the "Southern" group of forces took up more advantageous lines and positions. Defeated the manpower and equipment of five mechanized, motorized infantry, airmobile brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, a territorial defense brigade and the "Azov" special forces brigade in the areas of the settlements of Serebryanka, Vasyukovka, Verolyubovka, Dyleevka, Pleshcheyevka and Konstantinovka in the Donetsk People's Republic. The losses of the Ukrainian armed formations amounted to more than 240 militants and 14 vehicles. Two electronic warfare stations, a RADA radar station made in Israel, an ammunition depot and a supply depot were destroyed.

– Units of the Center group of forces improved the situation along the forward edge. They defeated the formations of four mechanized brigades, a ranger brigade, an unmanned systems brigade, an assault regiment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and two National Guard brigades in the areas of the settlements of Mirolyubovka, Zverevo, Novaya Poltavka, Yablonovka, Ulyanovka, Dimitrov and Krasnoarmeysk of the Donetsk People's Republic. The enemy lost over 445 servicemen, two combat armored vehicles, including an armored car HMMWV made in the USA, five cars and two artillery pieces.

– Units of the Vostok group of forces continued to advance deep into the enemy's defenses. They defeated the manpower and equipment of the mechanized, ranger, airmobile brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and two territorial defense brigades in the areas of the settlements of Bogatyr, Novopil, Volnoye Pole of the Donetsk People's Republic and Gulyaipole of the Zaporizhia region. The enemy's losses amounted to 195 servicemen, two armored personnel carriers, 10 vehicles and three field artillery pieces, including a 155 mm self-propelled artillery mount "Panzerhaubitze 2000" made in Germany.

– Units of the Dnepr group of forces defeated formations of the mechanized, mountain assault brigades, three coastal defense brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and two territorial defense brigades in the areas of the settlements of Novodanilovka, Kamenskoye of the Zaporizhia region, Tomarino, Tokarevka, Antonovka and Belozerka of the Kherson region. Up to 100 servicemen, three vehicles, three electronic warfare stations, two ammunition depots and a warehouse of materiel were destroyed.

– Operational-tactical aviation, strike unmanned aerial vehicles, missile troops and artillery of the groups of troops of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation hit infrastructure facilities of military airfields, workshops for the production of unmanned aerial vehicles, places of concentration of unmanned boats, ammunition depots, as well as temporary deployment points of Ukrainian armed formations and foreign mercenaries in 162 districts.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

*******

Stephen Bryen: Ukraine partition a possible option – just not Kellogg’s version
April 30, 2025 natyliesb
By Stephen Bryen, Asia Times, 4/15/25

Is a partition plan a realistic outcome for ending the Ukraine war. General Keith Kellogg’s proposal appears to have already encountered difficulties. However, that does not mean that some type of partition is out of the question.

Kellogg’s “plan” would carve up Ukraine into four zones

-British, French, and Ukrainian troops, with the potential for others to join, would make up the first zone, western Ukraine. That zone would stretch from the Polish border to the Dnieper river.

-The second zone. East of the Dnieper would be under Ukrainian control, defended by Ukraine’s army.

-A third zone would be a buffer area with a depth of 18 miles.

-A fourth zone would include the Russian “occupied areas” including Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaphorize, Kherson and Crimea. The Kellogg plan does not address the actual boundaries.

The Russians have already said, referring to Kellogg’s plan, that putting NATO or NATO-state soldiers in Ukraine is unacceptable.

The Kellogg plan leaves the juridical status of the areas with Russian troops unclear and it leaves Ukraine’s army at full strength. One implication of the plan is that the war could re-start at any time.

Taking a step back, it is worth asking what the Russians’ end game may be and the likelihood they will achieve it.

The first and clearly the most important point is that the Russians are attempting to restore their relationship with Washington and want to persuade President Trump to support the immediate Russian goal of legitimizing those territories Kellogg puts into the fourth zone.

Were Trump to accede to Russia’s territorial objectives, essentially granting de jure legitimacy status to the Russian territorial gains in the war, it would be highly controversial in Congress. Trump would face censure for acquiescing in an illegal invasion of Ukraine.

This is more problematic than Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, where the US simply left by pulling out its forces. While the Taliban took over as the pro-US Afghan government disintegrated, the US did not recognize the new government or offer any overt concessions to it. Today, the US maintains an Afghan affairs office in Doha, Qatar, but has no diplomatic relations with Afghanistan.

The Kellogg plan is not, despite his statements, like the Berlin agreement. People remember that at the end of World War II, the Allies divided Germany into four zones – the US, UK, France and Russia. Similarly, the Allies split Berlin, Germany’s capital within the Soviet zone, into four sectors (though the US, British, and French sectors later merged).

The background of the German partitioning came about because of serious disagreements among the allies over Germany’s future and a shift in the outlook of the US and UK, who saw Germany as a geopolitical asset and the USSR as a threat.

For Ukraine, officially the conflict is between Ukraine and Russia, with third parties (especially NATO) supporting Ukraine with arms, advisers, technical support, training, supplies, financial aid and intelligence. Unlike Ukraine, the Russians have been mostly on their own, although China has helped them under the table – as has North Korea, even supplying a few thousand soldiers.

Russia’s major advantage is a significant military-industrial base and a large recruitment pool for soldiers. Ukraine, on its own, would have long since disappeared: It is entirely a creature of NATO from a support and resources point of view.

Those differences aside, some kind of partitioning of Ukrainian territory is not out of the question in the future. It could be an outcome under some circumstances that are by no means far-fetched.

Looked at along a timeline where the negotiations either fail or drag out without resolution – which may be convenient for the United States and for the Russians, especially if Trump and Putin can’t find a mutually acceptable formula and the Zelensky government continues to act in the mode of enfant terrible – the Russians may be successful in defeating Ukraine’s army on the battlefield.

Short of that dramatic result, they may destroy a significant part of the Ukrainian army in the field – precipitating a real crisis in Kyiv. Zelensky, who cannot really negotiate with Russia (assuming he actually wanted to do so), would face an enormous risk keeping his government in Kyiv.

Facing the prospect of either being captured by the Russians or being replaced by extreme nationalists in the army and intelligence services, Zelensky may find it convenient to retreat to the west, potentially establishing a Ukrainian government in Lvov, which is far enough away from Russia to be considered more or less secure.

With a new government in Kyiv, likely pro-Russian, Ukraine would be practically partitioned. Essentially, Kellogg’s Zone 1 would become the Zelensky-led Ukraine headquartered in Lvov, and Russia would control everything east of the Dnieper, even possibly Odesa, a city founded by Catherine the Great and which Russia considers Russian.

If this scenario plays out, then some sort of European rescue army could plant itself in Zone 1, avoiding a total defeat for Europe, the EU and NATO.

There are many downsides and upsides to this scenario. NATO will probably remain in a part of Ukraine, and Russia will not get international recognition for its military conquests. This would reduce the US and NATO burden of militarily, economically and politically supporting Ukraine.

The US would be free to focus its attention elsewhere, mainly Asia and China, and rebuild stockpiles of weapons depleted during the Ukraine war. Europe could boast it stood by Ukraine, but without the consequence of the war spreading outside Ukraine’s borders. NATO would not lose face, nor would Washington.

There is already talk in Europe about reopening Europe (especially Germany and France) to “cheap” Russian energy. That’s a signal that the endgame is in sight. Europe cannot afford an economic collapse that would create upheaval on the continent, stimulate social revolution and purge the ruling elites responsible for the mess.

Even Europe, despite all the war talk, will have to face the necessity of adjusting its vision or face chaos.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/04/ste ... s-version/

******

The RDK and the O9A IV. And PMC Wagner?

No winners, only losers. Degrelle and Dugin. Michael Aquino and Savitri Devi. Transnational Nazi Satanist networks. Strategic Rocket Bases.
Events in Ukraine
Apr 30, 2025

Over the course of the past three articles, I’ve analyzed the connections between the Order of the Nine Angles (O9A), a FBI-sponsored nazi-satanist cult dating back from the 1980s, and the Russian Volunteer Corps (RDK), a military unit composed of hardcore Russian neo-nazis organized by Ukraine’s Main Intelligence Directorate (GUR) in 2022.

In the first article, we looked at how one of the top figures in the RDK, Alexey Kanakhin, has openly discussed his years spent in the Russian ‘nexion’ (cell) of the O9A. This led us onto a look at some of his literary output, like his poem ‘Crusade of the Children’, calling for a bloody uprising, or ‘Krystallnacht’ by fanatical children ‘Against the vile adult world’.

Image

This drew us into a more detailed analysis of various cases of school shootings in Russia by youth of neo-nazi persuasions. We found that head of the GUR Kyryllo Budanov was quite keen on covert operations that ‘traumatized’ the Russian public. Besides, he is also in need of fanatics willing to carry out more banal operations, such as assassinations or launching drone attacks. His employees at the RDK come quite in handy in these tasks. Alexey Levkin, one of the leaders of the RDK, has been the lead singer of national socialist black metal group M8l8th (‘Hitler’s Hammer’) and the esoteric hitlerist online community ‘Wotanjugend’ since the 2000s. These networks provide him with a pool of tens of thousands of deranged youth across Russia.

Last week I put out an article on the Misanthropic Division (MD) in the context of the recent would-be Trump assassin. The MD, which openly praises school shooters in both the US and Russia on its social media pages, is also praised alongside the O9A by child predators and general psychopaths in Russia, as we saw in RDK and O9A I. The MD and Wotanjugend also go way back, both being hardcore neo-nazis from Russia that declared Ukraine and the Azov movement their new home.

Whenever you start digging into strange networks of spooked-up militants, everything starts to converge, no matter how seemingly heterogenous or even opposed said networks might be. And this is exactly the topic of today’s article - our RDK/O9A investigation has bumped up against the articles I wrote several months ago about the mysteries of Russia’s now-extinct PMC Wagner and Russia’s supposedly anti-western ‘Orthodox oligarch’ Konstantin Malofeev.

In other words, today we will be looking at the ongoing links between Russia’s O9A ecosystem and certain Russian ethnonationalists who claim to support the Russian government and its war with the Ukrainian state.

The nexion never died

Now, it shouldn’t be that easy to be a Satanist neo-nazi in modern Russia. Hardly a month or even week goes by without Russian law enforcement raiding members of pro-Ukrainian cells with such ideological persuasions. These ideologies are also often discussed on Russian television. However, Russia is a very big country, filled with many people…

In my RDK I article, we learned about the not so charming Semen Chulkov, a satanist neo-nazi convicted in Moscow in 2024 for rape of a 14-year-old. Besides supporting the Misanthropic Division and the O9A, Chulkov’s social media showed he was subscribed to a certain publisher in Russia called Ex Nord Lux.

Image
Сhulkov in custody.

Now, publishers play a serious role in the O9A community. It isn’t always easy to openly call for child abuse, mass rape and genocide for its own sake. However, writing ‘novels’ about said topics is relatively legal in a range of countries. This is precisely what Joshua Sutter’s publisher Martinet Press has done for decades, sponsored by the FBI as an ‘informant’ to the tune of $140,000 USD.

As we saw in part I of our O9A/RDK series, Martinet Press also published a book called Kiss of Marina: Temple of the Black Sun about a Russian ‘nexion. Future RDK member Kirill Kanakhin was involved in both the book and the nexion.

Now, back to the currently-existing O9A publisher in Russia. Ex Nord Lux describes itself as follows:

We specialize in publishing foreign nonfiction and philosophical prose. Our goal is to introduce Russian-speaking readers to lesser-known authors, uncovering new dimensions, perspectives, and horizons of alternative worldviews.

Image
A translated version of the site

What ‘lesser-known authors’ might that be? An online bookstore selling Ex Nord Lux products told a Russian journalist who inquired that Semen Chulkov was interested in works by the fascist mystic Julius Evola and SS member Leon Degrelle.

(Paywall with free option.)

https://eventsinukraine.substack.com/p/ ... pmc-wagner

******

Brief Frontline Summary – April 29, 2025

Advanced Units of the Russian Armed Forces Operate Near the Kleban-Byk Reservoir. Report by Marat Khairullin with illustrations by Mikhail Popov.
Zinderneuf
Apr 30, 2025

Image
Map Archived from April 26th.

In the Kursk direction, units of the Russian Armed Forces advanced into the settlement of Belovody, gaining control over approximately half of the area. Simultaneously, control is being expanded in the fields surrounding the village. Pressure is also increasing on the settlement of Vodolaga, which is stretching enemy forces thin.

The advance in this sector and the subsequent push toward the Yablonovka area represent a move into the rear of the Armed Forces of Ukraine garrison in Yunakovka, which is also being targeted from the direction of Basovka. After securing the latter, our forces are conducting assault operations in the northern part of Loknya.

Image

In the Kupyansk direction, following the consolidation of bridgeheads on the right bank of the Oskol River after the liberation of Kamennka, combat operations continue to expand our zone of control. This aims to establish a land supply corridor for our troops on the western bank, significantly enhancing the potential for further offensive operations.

Image
ЛБС 10.11.24=Line of Combat Contact November 10th, 2024. ЛБС 01.01.25=Line of Combat Contact January 1st, 2025. ЛБС 01.02.2025=Line of Combat Contact February 2nd, 2025. Участок Продвижения=Area of Advancement.

The Russian Ministry of Defense announced the liberation of the settlement of Doroshovka (Doroshevka). It can be assumed that pressure will soon intensify toward Monachinovka, a critical logistics hub for the AFU, which supplies the Kupyansk sector from two directions.

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

In the Chasov Yar direction, despite fierce enemy resistance—including the use of tanks to repel our attacks—the Russian Armed Forces managed to enter the settlement of Stupochki, securing control over its northern part.

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

In the Toretsk sector, Russian troops are advancing toward Dyleevka, expanding control north of Krymskoe. West of Toretsk, our units are attacking the northern part of Shcherbinovka from positions near the Matrona of Moscow Mine, making logistics for the enemy’s fortified area increasingly difficult via the "short arm."

Reports indicate that our army’s forward detachments are already operating near the Kleban-Byk Reservoir. Advances are being made from both sides toward the line of ponds stretching from the reservoir to the settlement of Dachnoe, creating growing logistical challenges for AFU units operating in Toretsk. Stable control has been restored over most of the city, with fighting ongoing on the outskirts.

West of Petrovka (Novospasske), our forces are conducting attacks to outflank the fortified area and reduce the AFU’s ability to develop maneuvers in the settlements of Petrovka and Shcherbinovka.

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

On the eastern Pokrovsk direction, the zone of control is expanding around Tarasovka and Zelenoe Pole. Intense fighting continues near Yelizavetovka and on the outskirts of Mirolyubovka.

South of Pokrovsk, our troops are advancing, improving their positions east of Shevchenko.

After completing the clearance of the Nadezhdinka area, our units expanded the zone of control near Kotlyarovka and are increasing pressure on the settlement.

Our fighters have also advanced toward Bogatyr, securing positions in several tree lines north of Rozdolne. Additionally, according to operational data, they have reached and taken control of the road between Konstantinopol and Bogatyr.

https://maratkhairullin.substack.com/p/ ... y-april-29

******

About enemy UAV tactics
April 30, 21:04

Image

About enemy UAV tactics

The formation of separate battalions, regiments and brigades of unmanned systems (UPS) in the structure of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in 2024 allowed the enemy to bring the use of UAVs to a systemic level. In those areas where the configuration of the UAS has not changed significantly during the year, the enemy equips positions for round-the-clock surveillance using video cameras, optical-electronic means, thermal imagers, tied to forward command posts. The enemy transmits incoming information to the duty crews of reconnaissance and strike UAVs. Using the terrain, cell towers, urban development (for example, as in Toretsk) and the infrastructure of industrial zones (for example, as in Kupyansk), the enemy places transmitters and amplifiers that increase the flight range. The use of "Baba Yaga" for retransmitting a control signal and carrying FPV has long been part of the practice of using UAVs. In the Bryansk direction, FPV approaches to a depth of more than 30 km were recorded.

The enemy's UAV activity is associated not only with the growth of FPV production volumes, but also with the increase in the number of units that are created as part of the development of UAV forces. Many enemy units are pretty battered, have not been withdrawn for rearmament for a long time and are experiencing a shortage of personnel. The enemy compensates for the lack of the ability to conduct large-scale counter-offensive operations by increasing UAV activity, with a bias towards the strike component. Perhaps, up to 80% of fire damage today is inflicted by the enemy using UAVs: not only FPV, but also "Baba Yaga", conducting remote mining, using ammunition drops. If a year ago the priority for an attack by FPV forces was transport or infantry group shelters, today operators do not spare the drone to hit single targets. Recently, we analyzed an episode when in Toretsk the enemy, in order to disrupt the roll of our assaults in the urban development, sent 18 FPVs at two soldiers who had entrenched themselves in a panel house.

Analyzing the situation in the areas of the most active military operations, we see that the enemy has developed a special tactic. Where LBS conditions allow for maneuverable defense, he practically does not engage in fire contact. The emphasis is on detecting personnel by means of observation, identifying equipment on rotation routes, evacuation, delivery and fire damage. For example, in Kupyansk, the enemy clearly built up operational posts on the left bank of the Oskol in the area of ​​the Kupyansk-Uzlovaya station and in the industrial zone, placing UAV duty crews and command posts on the higher right bank in high-rise buildings with remote antennas and amplifiers on the roofs.


@Multi_XAM - zinc (the author works at the front as part of a UAV detachment)

In 2025 and 2026, the role and number of drones of all types in combat operations will continue to steadily increase.
There will be a scaling up of the use of new types of drones, especially drones with machine vision and fiber optic drones.
The tactics of their use will also be improved, and at the organizational level, there will be active creation of regular companies/battalions/regiments of UAVs. A little more slowly, this same process will occur in the segment of ground drones, which are still lagging behind their flying counterparts.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9812695.html

Ukraine has given the US access to its mineral resources
May 1, 12:06

Image

Trump on his intention to pump $350 billion out of Ukraine:

The reason I did it is because we put $350 billion or so into it, while Europe only put $100 billion into it. So we have to get some money back. I felt stupid. You know, they loaned it out, and Biden gave them $350 billion in cash and military hardware.

$350 billion, and we got nothing. And I felt bad being the leader of a country where Europe was getting its money back, and a lot less, and we were getting nothing. So I went to them and I said, look, we need access to rare earths. They have great rare earth resources, certain minerals, materials that are not available everywhere. They have a big asset.

And today we made a deal that, theoretically, we'll get a lot more than that $350 billion. I just wanted to protect our interests. I didn't want to be stupid again.

Actually, it was quite obvious that despite all the fussing, the US would get long-term access to Ukrainian mineral resources. The US also untied the issue of providing Ukraine with any security guarantees from the deal.

P.S. A significant part of the rare earth metal deposits in Ukraine is de facto controlled by Russia, which of course is not going to give them to anyone.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9813186.html

That is what we call 'a pig in a poke'. It is a common flaw of your 'salesman types' that they believe their own bullshit.

Google Translator

******

The Peace Agreement Should Be Signed With Ukraine, Not the United States: Peskov

Image
Dmitri Peskov (L) and President Vladimir Putin (R). X/ @MarioNawfal

April 30, 2025 Hour: 8:14 am

The primary causes of the Ukrainian crisis are too complex to be resolved overnight, he said.

On Tuesday, in response to Washington’s calls for an immediate halt to the Ukrainian conflict, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said that “the peace agreement must be signed with Ukraine, not with the United States.”

Peskov recalled that Russian President Vladimir Putin had recently expressed his willingness to hold direct talks with the Ukrainians without preconditions.

“That willingness remains. Unfortunately, we have not yet heard any statements or comments from Kiev, so we do not know whether they are willing or not. Kiev is setting many preconditions, such as a long-term ceasefire. This contradicts Putin’s stance,” Peskov noted, describing most of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s reactions as “misguided.”

Regarding the U.S., the Kremlin spokesperson stated that Russia values “the tireless efforts” of President Donald Trump’s administration, although he emphasized the need to address the conflict’s root causes.


“We understand that Washington wants quick success in this process. At the same time, we understand that the primary causes of the Ukrainian crisis are too complex to be resolved overnight. There are many nuances that must be taken into account,” Peskov said.

As for a possible meeting between Putin and Trump, Peskov also stressed that direct contacts at the highest level are always effective and help to “smooth over differences.” Therefore, “if necessary,” such contact will be initiated, as communication channels between Moscow and Washington have been reestablished.

“We still trust that the U.S. efforts will succeed, and President Putin is willing to support that process,” Peskov affirmed, reiterating that Putin supports a ceasefire and a political-diplomatic resolution.

However, before that can happen, issues such as the establishment of guarantees to uphold the truce must be resolved, and steps must be taken to prevent Ukraine from using the time to regroup and rearm.

Meanwhile, in a phone conversation, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio reaffirmed to Russian Foreign Affairs Minister Sergey Lavrov the urgent need to end the war in Ukraine “now.”

https://www.telesurenglish.net/the-peac ... es-peskov/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

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

Post by blindpig » Fri May 02, 2025 11:15 am

Minerals, economic interests and security guarantees
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 02/05/2025

Image

On Wednesday night, more than two months late and without the ceremony that was supposed to take place in the presence of the two presidents, Ukraine and the United States announced the signing of the famous Economic Partnership Agreement , better known as the Mineral Extraction Agreement or the Rare Earth Agreement (although this element, the one that first caught Donald Trump's attention at Lindsey Graham's insistence, has lost rhetorical weight, possibly due to the scarcity of these minerals in the country). The announcement and a photo published later by Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko are the only details that have emerged of the act of ratification of the agreement, or of a part of it, since it is not even known for certain whether the first part was signed, a document between the governments as demanded by Ukraine, or the three parts, which Kiev claims must be signed once the Rada approves the first text. Until yesterday, when the document was published by various media outlets, including Fox News , little was known about its contents except that it was far less detailed than the one leaked a few weeks ago by the Financial Times and even harsher than the one initially proposed. Compared to the more than 50 pages of that second attempt at an agreement, the one signed Wednesday is less than ten, with much of the document focused on preliminary issues and preliminary explanations that really only present the situation, without committing to anything binding.

For now, only the Ukrainian version is known, which will likely be very similar to Donald Trump's, as the President's Office is working hard to present the agreement as a clear victory for both Ukraine and the US president, who is in dire need of some tangible results now that his first 100 days in office have passed without any major successes to boast about. According to the Ukrainian version, the strategic partnership , which involves the creation of a common fund—in which Kiev assures that the United States has no veto power, something that will have to be verified over time—to which Kiev will contribute a significant portion of its revenues, will be applicable to future extractions, not including current ones, as specified in the second version of the agreement, which was even more punitive than the first.

Ukraine considers it a great success that the United States no longer mentions the $350 billion that Donald Trump falsely claims Washington contributed to the war, so the Ukrainian contributions will no longer be in the form of reparations . Media outlets such as the BBC yesterday presented as a great victory for Ukraine the fact that the document expresses the need to ensure that mineral resources do not remain in the hands of enemy countries but rather in the hands of those states that have supported Kiev in fighting the Russian invasion. However, this aspect was also expressed in the previous version of the agreement. The only real change is the explicit mention of the United States and other countries that have supported Ukraine, a change in wording intended to make the document compatible with Kiev's European aspirations.

Minister Svyrydenko also expressed pride in having ensured that Ukraine was not listed as a debtor in the document and insisted that the text opens the door for the United States to continue providing military assistance to Ukraine. In fact, one of Washington's first statements was to insist that "in theory, with this agreement, the United States could obtain $350 billion in revenue." In other words, despite the terms being removed from the document, the White House's objective remains the same: to profit from other people's resources, which are no longer limited to rare earths and other purely mining extractions, but also include oil, gas, and other aspects of the economy. Ukraine is no longer presented as a state in debt to the country that has supplied it with weapons for three years, but it remains the country that puts its natural resources on the table to offer its main supplier a share of the natural resources that should contribute to the post-war economic recovery. However, that aspect was never a problem for kyiv, which always saw the US presence in the country as a guarantee that its cause would not be abandoned as Afghanistan's was during the twenty-year US occupation.

However, although this was Zelensky's approach since 2022, when forums began to be held in which Ukraine presented its model of public-private cooperation , offering the country to vulture funds and large Western capital to link the economic interests of large American and British companies to the fate of his country - and in many cases, his government -, the economic umbrella offered by the first versions of this agreement was the reason why Zelensky showed up at the Oval Office meeting with the intention of renegotiating the terms.

“The new natural resources agreement signals to Russia that the Trump administration is committed to a peace process centered on a free, sovereign, and prosperous Ukraine,” said Scott Bessent, who was responsible for signing the agreement with Yulia Svyrydenko yesterday. This was as Zelensky hoped, without specifying how an economic agreement with one of the parties demonstrates commitment to the peace process. “This partnership demonstrates the dedication of both nations to Ukraine’s long-term recovery and security. No country or individual that supported the Russian military machine will benefit from Ukraine’s reconstruction,” he added. It is clear that the US approach is driven by economic gain and profit. Following the Treasury Secretary’s logic, no country that Washington decides supported Russia—it is clear that, at some point, the White House will decide, based on Ukrainian intelligence reports, that China has collaborated with Moscow—will be able to profit from Ukraine’s reconstruction. This privilege is limited to European allies and the United States as an exceptional country and main supplier, which provides security guarantees that have little to do with those that Zelensky and Svyrydenko want to imply are possible thanks to this agreement.

The document signed on Wednesday still does not include the security guarantees that Ukraine demanded be part of the agreement. Naively, the Ukrainian president hoped that his negotiating skills would convince the White House to relent and include a military component in an agreement that is purely economic. Now, after its failure to explicitly incorporate the military issue into the document, Ukraine is trying to convince itself that the fact that the text does mention that any future US military contribution would be considered a capital investment—that is, an expense that Washington would expect to recover—could be the beginning of Trump's change of heart. kyiv has not lost hope that the US president will choose to prolong the massive arms supply to Ukraine, that is, to continue financing the war. However, as the letter and spirit of the wording make clear, there is no binding US commitment in the document. kyiv's hopes are based solely on its wishes and not on the reality or the wording of the already signed text.

“We have an agreement in which our money is protected,” Donald Trump stated yesterday, making clear the main objective of the agreement. “We can start mining and do what we need to do. It’s also good for the Ukrainians because there will be an American presence there. And the American presence, I think, will deter a lot of bad actors from attacking the country, or at least the area where we’re mining,” he declared. The priorities are clear, and Ukraine’s defense is limited to areas where the United States has an economic presence. However, this should not be considered a surprise either. Several months ago, when Donald Trump had already made it clear that European countries would have to provide the bulk of the weapons Ukraine needed, NBC published an article stating that the United States was willing to send troops to protect its mining interests in Ukraine. The country’s defense is secondary and always subject to American economic gain.

The revenue the United States can derive from war is not limited to natural resources. For several months, a conservative sector has been lobbying to make Ukraine a client of the US military-industrial sector rather than a recipient of aid. According to The Kiev Post , following the signing of the economic agreement, Washington approved the first arms export contract to Ukraine. A very modest initial shipment, barely $50 million, but perhaps the beginning of a commercial relationship in which Kiev uses European Union funding to acquire US weapons and ensure that this war—or the subsequent armed peace—will never be without weapons.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/02/miner ... seguridad/

Google Translator

******

From cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
In the Black Sea, a US-made Willard high-speed boat and three unmanned boats were destroyed, one boat was damaged, the Russian Defense Ministry said

UPD: During the past night and this morning, the Black Sea Fleet's duty fire weapons destroyed 10 Ukrainian unmanned boats and one US-made Willard high-speed boat in the Black Sea, and two unmanned boats were damaged.

Also, from 09:00 to 10:00, air defense duty weapons destroyed two Ukrainian aircraft-type unmanned aerial vehicles over the territory of the Republic of Crimea.

***

Colonelcassad
The US Vice President said that the Trump administration will negotiate for another 100 days.
In general, at least until the end of the summer campaign of 2025.

Moreover, the enemy expects major offensive operations of the Russian Armed Forces in a number of areas in the summer. This means that by the end of the summer, the enemy will lose a lot of territory without any agreements

***

Colonelcassad
Russia will not allow Ukraine to be restored to its 1991 borders (c) Russian Foreign Ministry.

Ukraine is not needed in its 1991 borders.
And Ukraine is not needed in its 2014 borders either.
And there is no need for its 2022 borders either.

And anyway...

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

GORILLA RADIO EXPOSES THE US DECEPTION, EXPLAINS THE TRUMP-MERZ PLAN TO REARM GERMANY TO ATTACK RUSSIA AGAIN

Image
by John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

Retired US Army General Keith Kellogg, the White House negotiator with the Ukrainian-European alliance, announced yesterday that for the terms of peacemaking on the Ukrainian battlefield, “the president has this one right on the money, and that’s where we want to go to.”

Right on the money is exactly where President Donald Trump aims to be – the money of the NATO allies into his pockets and into those of his family, friends, their social clubs and think tanks, and Trump’s largest campaign contributors.

Listen to the full hour discussion with Chris Cook by clicking here. https://gradio.substack.com/p/gorilla-r ... with-chris

Image
Left, Germany’s Chancellor-designate Friedrich Merz; right, Foreign Minister Johann Wadephuhl.

Image
Listen to the broadcast: https://gradio.substack.com/p/gorilla-r ... with-chris

For the introduction to this broadcast, for access to the 20-year Gorilla Radio archive, and for Chris Cook’s blog, click here and here.
https://gradio.substack.com/
https://gorillaradioblog.blogspot.com/

https://johnhelmer.net/gorilla-radio-ex ... more-91535

******

Ukrainian Drone Strike Kills Seven Civilians at a Market in Kherson

Image
Market bombed by Ukraine in Oleshky, Kherson, May 1, 2025. X/ @roemerwolf33

May 1, 2025 Hour: 8:24 am

The terrorist attack occurred in waves with the intent to finish off the survivors.

On Thursday morning, the governor of the Kherson region, Vladimir Saldo, confirmed that seven people were killed and around twenty civilians were injured as a result of a Ukrainian drone attack on a market in Oleshky, located eight kilometers from the regional capital.

Russian authorities claimed that the attack occurred in waves with the intent to “finish off the survivors,” and that previously, Ukrainians had destroyed ambulances in the region to hinder the transport of the wounded.

“The greatest bloodthirstiness is demonstrated by the fact that, over the past few months, the enemy has systematically destroyed ambulances, so now, when people need to be evacuated, there are not enough vehicles available,” the Kherson governor stated.

The Russian Investigative Committee has opened a terrorism case against those responsible for the attack on the market in Oleshky. This terrorist action was carried out by using First Person View drones, which are a type of unmanned aerial vehicle that uses a camera to transmit a live video feed to the pilot’s goggles or monitor, giving them a first-person perspective of the drone’s surroundings.


On Thursday, the Russian Ministry of Defense reported the downing of eight Ukrainian drones over Russian territory during the early hours of the day.

Two drones were shot down over the border region of Kursk, another two over Voronezh, two more over Belgorod, and two others over the Vladimir region, whose capital is located less than 200 kilometers east of Moscow.

The Russian Investigative Committee also opened a criminal case to investigate the April 29 Ukrainian bombing of a residential building in the town of Rylsk, in the Kursk region, about 25 kilometers from the Ukrainian border.

“As a result of the crime, three civilians were injured, in addition to damage to several residential buildings and a kindergarten,” said Svetlana Petrenko, spokesperson for the Investigative Committee.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/ukrainia ... n-kherson/

******

Radio Liberty Let The Cat Out Of The Bag Regarding The EU’s Game Plan For Ukraine
Andrew Korybko
May 01, 2025

Image

Russia can expect nothing in return from the EU if Putin concedes to allow their troops and aircraft to deploy in and patrol over Western Ukraine.

Russia has long warned that any unconditional ceasefire in Ukraine of the 30-day sort that Zelensky has proposed could create an opening for NATO to expand its military influence in that country. Hitherto dismissed as a conspiracy theory by the West, Radio Liberty just let the cat out of the bag. The unnamed officials who they cited in their recent article confirmed that they envisage this “buy[ing] the Europeans time to assemble a ‘reassurance force’ in the Western part of Ukraine” and organize “air patrols” there.

Their reported game plan is “keeping the Americans onboard” the peace process, “sequencing” the conflict by clinching a ceasefire that’ll later lead to a lasting peace, and using the aforesaid interim period to carry out the abovementioned military moves for pressuring Russia into more concessions. What’s omitted from Radio Liberty’s article is that Russia has threatened to target Western troops in Ukraine, who Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth earlier said wouldn’t enjoy Article 5 guarantees from the US.

Even if Putin agrees to this concession that’s assessed to be among one of the five significant differences between him and Trump that prompted Trump’s angry post against Putin, Radio Liberty reported that this still wouldn’t lead to de jure European recognition of Russia’s territorial gains. The same goes for them lifting sanctions or returning any of its €200 billion of seized assets. More sanctions might even soon be imposed and the windfall profits from those assets will “bankroll Ukraine’s military needs”.

Given what Radio Liberty revealed, Russia can therefore expect nothing in return from the EU if Putin concedes to allow their troops and aircraft to deploy in and patrol over Western Ukraine. Any hopes of restoring Ukraine’s antebellum buffer state status would be crushed, and it can’t be ruled out that the EU’s zone of military activity could later expand to the Dnieper or beyond. One of the special operation’s goals was to prevent the West’s eastward military expansion so that would be another major concession.

Putin’s decades-long close friend and influential senior aide Nikolay Patrushev just told TASS earlier this week that “For the second year in a row, NATO is holding the largest exercises in decades near our borders, where it is practicing scenarios of offensive actions over a large area - from Vilnius to Odessa, the seizure of the Kaliningrad region, the blocking of shipping in the Baltic and Black Seas, and preventive strikes on the permanent bases of Russian nuclear deterrent forces.”

Secretary of the Security Council Sergey Shoigu told the same outlet several days prior that “Over the past year, the number of military contingents of NATO countries deployed near the western borders of the Russian Federation has increased almost 2.5 times…NATO is moving to a new combat readiness system, which provides for the possibility of deploying a 100,000-strong group of troops near the borders of Russia within 10 days, 300,000 by the end of 30 days, and 800,000 by the end of 180 days.”

When the EU’s prioritization of the Baltic Defence Line and Poland’s complementary East Shield are added to the equation, coupled with plans for expanding the “military Schengen” to speed up the eastward deployment of troops and equipment, the trappings of Operation Barbarossa 2.0 are apparent. Putin can’t influence what NATO does within the bloc’s borders, but he has the power to stop its de facto expansion into Western Ukraine during a ceasefire, which could partially hinder its speculative plans.

Conceding to them, which he might agree to do for the five reasons mentioned in the second half of this analysis here from early March, would lead to Russia’s mutual defense ally Belarus being surrounded by NATO along its northern, western, and then southern flanks. That could make it a tempting future target, but Western aggression might be deterred by the continued deployment of Russia’s Oreshniks and tactical nuclear weapons, the latter of which Belarus has already been authorized to use at its discretion.

Conceding to Western troops in Ukraine in exchange for the economic and strategic benefits that Russia hopes to reap from the US if their nascent “New Détente” takes off after a peace deal would therefore entail conventional security costs that could be managed through the means that were just described. At the same time, however, hardliners like Patrushev, Shoigu, and honorary chairman of Russia’s influential Council on Foreign and Defense Policy Sergey Karaganov could dissuade him from such a deal.

Putin must therefore decide whether this is an acceptable trade-off or if Russia should risk losing its post-conflict strategic partnership with the US by continuing to oppose NATO’s de facto expansion into Western Ukraine, including via military means if EU forces move into there without Russian approval. His decision will determine not only the future of this conflict, but also Russia’s contingency planning vis-à-vis a possible hot war with NATO, thus making this the defining moment of his quarter-century rule.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/radio-li ... cat-out-of

'Partnership' with the US would be foolish and likely not go well with China.

******

Report: Putin Maintains Demand for Full Control of Ukrainian Oblasts Claimed by Russia for Peace Deal
April 30, 2025
By Dave DeCamp, Antiwar.com, 4/29/25

Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to demand full control of four Ukrainian oblasts claimed by Russia as a condition for a potential peace deal, Bloomberg reported on Tuesday.

The report said that President Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, sought to convince Putin to drop the demand and agree to a ceasefire that froze the current battle lines, but the Russian leader declined and maintained his demand for complete control of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia.

The Financial Times reported last week that Putin was willing to freeze the current battle lines for a peace deal, but the Kremlin quickly signaled that this wasn’t the case.

Image
Military situation on April 29, 2025 (SouthFront.press)
Ukraine has also appeared to reject the conditions of a US proposal for a potential peace deal. The Bloomberg report said that negotiations are now at an impasse as an agreement seems less and less likely.

When Russian and Ukrainian officials held peace talks in the early days of Russia’s invasion in 2022, Russia’s main demand was for Ukrainian neutrality. Those efforts were discouraged by the US, and later that year, Russia declared its annexation of the four Ukrainian oblasts and added the recognition of that territory as Russia to its demands to end the war.

Since Russia has the momentum on the battlefield, it’s unlikely that it would accept a peace deal with terms dictated by the US. If the negotiations fall apart, it remains unclear if the Trump administration would continue fueling the war by arming Ukraine. As time goes on, the terms of a settlement will likely get less favorable for Ukraine.

On Monday, Russia declared a three-day ceasefire starting on May 8, but Ukraine rejected the idea and proposed a 30-day truce. Russia has dismissed the Ukrainian counteroffer and is casting doubt on whether the three-day ceasefire will hold.

***

Moscow ready to seek ‘balance of interests’ with Ukraine and US – Lavrov

RT, 4/27/25

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has rebuked CBS host in an interview on Sunday repeating that Moscow is ready to seek a “balance of interests” both with Ukraine and with the US. The network’s journalist Margaret Brennan has said that she haven’t heard from the top diplomat that Moscow “is willing to make any concession on anything to date.”

“No, my brief answer is you are wrong,” Lavrov told Brennan.

“I have been emphasizing repeatedly, in relation to Ukraine, in relation to strategic relations with the United States, I have been emphasizing our readiness to seek balance of interests. If- if this is not what your station considers readiness for negotiations, then I don’t know how to be even less eloquent in trying to be brief in my answers,” he added.

Lavrov confirmed that Russia is continuing contacts with Washington regarding Ukraine and welcomed US President Donald Trump’s efforts to mediate.

“There are several signs that we are moving in the right direction,” Lavrov said. He emphasized that Russia demands guarantees that any ceasefire “would not be used again to beef up Ukrainian military” and that arms supplies to Ukraine should stop.

Russian President Vladimir Putin held lengthy talks on Friday with US special envoy Steve Witkoff at the Kremlin. Presidential adviser Yury Ushakov described the meeting as “constructive and very useful,” adding that the discussion touched on the idea of resuming direct negotiations between Moscow and Kiev.

Trump, commenting on the state of the negotiations, said Ukraine and Russia “should now meet, at very high levels, to ‘finish it off.’ Most of the major points are agreed to.”

In the interview, Lavrov reiterated Russia’s position on Crimea, stating, “Russia does not negotiate [over] its own territory,” and praised President Trump for acknowledging the peninsula’s status.

Crimea “will stay with Russia” in any peace deal, Trump told Time Magazine in an article published on Friday. He said that even Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky understands this. “It’s been with them [Russia] for a long time,” the US president stated, noting that Russia had its submarines there “long before any period that we’re talking about” and that the majority of Crimeans speak Russian.

Russian officials have repeatedly said that Moscow is open to a negotiated solution, but have emphasized that any agreement must reflect the territorial realities on the ground and address the root causes of the conflict.

Zelensky insisted on Wednesday that Kiev would never officially recognize Crimea as Russian. Trump sharply rebuked that statement as “very harmful to the Peace Negotiations with Russia in that Crimea was lost years ago.”

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/04/rep ... eace-deal/

******

Cocaine Fuhrer imposes sanctions against Arestovich
May 1, 21:05

Image

Arestovich fell under the sanctions of the cocaine Fuhrer.
However, we should not forget that despite all of Arestovich's attempts to distance himself from the cocaine Fuhrer after 2023, he bears direct responsibility for the unleashed carnage in Ukraine. Since in 2022 he was one of the main propagandists of the total war in Ukraine, as long as it was profitable for him. Then he changed his tune and began to pretend that he had nothing to do with it. But we remember.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9814387.html

Google Translator

******

Europe has not found troops for the so-called Ukraine
May 1, 2025
Rybar

According to The Times, European countries are faced with the inability to form even a 25,000-strong contingent for a hypothetical mission in the so-called Ukraine. Although initially the talk was about 64,000, the figure quickly became nominal.

It turned out that it was not enough to send troops - they needed to be rotated, which required at least 256 thousand servicemen for two years. For Europe, such figures are fantastic, as we wrote about back in March in an analysis of the state of the British Armed Forces.

The problem was planned to be solved at the expense of the Poles, who were to form the basis of the land contingent under the command of the British, French and Germans. However, in Poland the role of potential "cannon fodder" was not received with enthusiasm.

The rest of the EU countries – from Spain and Italy to Finland and Estonia – also carefully stepped aside, despite the bellicose statements from their politicians regarding Russia and calls for direct military aid to the so-called Ukraine.

All this once again underlines that, given the current state of the EU armies, talk of such “multinational land missions” is just populism. And the further we go, the more obvious the gap between the desires and capabilities of the European bureaucrats becomes.

https://rybar.ru/evropa-ne-nashla-vojsk ... n-ukrainy/

Google Translator

******

Brief report from the front, April 30, 2025
Report by Marat Khairullin with illustrations by Mikhail Popov.
Zinderneuf
Apr 30, 2025

Image
ЛБС 01.11.2024=Line of Combat Contact November 1st, 2024. ЛБС 01.01.2025=Line of Combat Contact January 1st, 2025. Зона Активности=Zone of Activity.

In the Liman direction, the Russian Army continues to advance successfully. In the area of Novomikhailovka, a major enemy stronghold was captured, which practically leveled the bulge south of Makeevka. Operations to eliminate this bulge are being conducted simultaneously from two sides: from Novomikhailovka and west of Makeevka, where our attack vectors are moving south into the pocket and west toward the settlement of Grekovka (Hrekovka on the map).

The Russian Ministry of Defense has officially announced the liberation of the settlement of Novoe. After entering this settlement and conducting assault operations directly on its territory, Russian Armed Forces units simultaneously flanked it, creating a pincer movement. As a result, the enemy could not hold their positions and was driven out. Remnants of the Ukrainian Armed Forces withdrew in the direction of the settlements of Redkodub and Zelenaya Dolina.

Building on this success, our troops approached the settlement of Lipovoe and also reached the eastern outskirts of Zelenaya Dolina.

Further south, Russian Army units advanced in the area of the settlement of Kolodezi, reaching the northern outskirts.


ЛБС 09.4.2025=Line of Combat Contact April 9th, 2025. Зона Активности=Area of Activity.
Translation of the map note:

For the line Kupyansk-Liman, goals of the parties:

Image
- Armed Forces of Ukraine (Blue Arrows): strike from the south Boguslavka-Kolesnikovka (Богуславка-Колесниковка) to cut off the Senkovo (Сеньково) salient

- Armed Forces of the Russian Federation (Red Arrows): on the right flank, develop an offensive on Senkovo ​​(crossing to the right bank of the Oskol)

On the left flank - a cutting strike (on the weakly echeloned defense of the enemy) in the direction Novoe-Rubtsy (Новое-Рубцы) to cut off the Liman-Senkovo ​​rocade and form an envelopment of the Borovaya (Боровая) group of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

https://maratkhairullin.substack.com/p/ ... -april-e97
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

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

Post by blindpig » Sat May 03, 2025 11:47 am

Pressure tools, contradictory messages and threats
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 03/05/2025

Image

It's time for concrete proposals from Moscow and Kyiv to end the war in Ukraine. That's the message delivered this week by Marco Rubio, US Secretary of State and, since Thursday, acting national security adviser (while a successor is sought for the dismissed Mike Waltz, nominated for the post of US representative to the UN). These words raise the question of what the Trump administration means by a concrete proposal . The Russian response to the final US offer to Russia and Ukraine has not been leaked, but the European and Ukrainian counterproposal is known, so concrete that it follows the blocks and order of the US text to the letter, adding the nuances that London, Paris, Berlin, and Kyiv deem necessary. Marco Rubio's version isn't even consistent with that of other sectors of the US administration. In an interview with Fox News this week, JD Vance presented a very different scenario in which, according to the US Vice President, Donald Trump has achieved a major breakthrough, having made the parties aware of his opponent's demands. Vance, who explicitly stated that he is aware that the war will not end imminently or even quickly, stated that now that kyiv and Moscow have submitted their proposals, it is up to the two countries to reach an agreement.

Vance's version is more similar to that of the Secretary of State to that presented Thursday by State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce, who stated that "we are not going to be mediators. We are not going to fly halfway around the world at the drop of a hat to moderate meetings. Now, the work must be done between both sides." According to this position, the work of the United States, opening the diplomatic channel and ensuring that the parties have access to their opponent's proposal, is the beginning of what JD Vance claims could be "one of the most important peace agreements of the 21st century." But this is where the United States has become blocked and, faced with the realization that this war does not have a quick and easy resolution, as Donald Trump seemed to hope, it vacillates between whether to move forward, establish itself as a mediating country, reduce the profile of its representation while maintaining a presence in the event of an agreement (in which case Washington would take all the credit), or withdraw.

While one sector of the administration considers the mediation task over, another, including Rubio, insists that "we are not going to give up," although he clarifies that "there comes a point where the president has to decide how much more time he is going to dedicate to this at the highest level of government," since "there are even more important issues in the world, although that is not to say that the war in Ukraine is not important, but I would say that what is happening in China is more important in the long term." What is happening in China is the escalation of the economic confrontation provoked by Donald Trump with his tariff war, in which he attempts to force all countries in the world to choose between trading with Washington or with Beijing and undermine the Chinese economy as much as possible.

China, the only real opponent capable of eclipsing US hegemony, is the real concern of the US government. The secondary sanctions against Iran announced by Donald Trump on Thursday are primarily aimed at Beijing, which aim to force third countries to give up purchasing Iranian oil, whose main customer is precisely China. This is also the measure that Trumpism has up its sleeve to apply against the Russian Federation should it believe that, as demanded, it fails to reach a quick agreement with Ukraine to end the war. “Right now, Russia has a great opportunity to achieve a lasting peace,” said diplomat John Kelley, who has blamed Moscow for the continued bloodshed, referring to “the unfortunate” cases “that have caused human losses, including innocent civilians.” The United States may also have been bothered by cases in which Ukrainian drones have caused civilian casualties in Russian-controlled territory, such as the bombing that killed eight civilians at a market in the Kherson region on Thursday, although the spectacular nature of the missiles makes Russian attacks more media-intensive than the numerous drone bombings that daily threaten civilian lives on both sides of the front lines. “It’s up to the leaders of those two countries,” Kelley said, referring to Russia and Ukraine, “to decide whether peace is possible. If both sides are willing to end the war, the United States will fully support their path to a lasting peace.”

Although sending contradictory signals, Trumpism has not changed its objective—to achieve peace between Russia and Ukraine—nor the method to achieve it. The examples of pressure on Ukraine have been notorious and have even included halting the supply of weapons and intelligence. However, the threats are not limited to Kyiv, but have also extended to Moscow since the moment the US administration realized that the negotiation process was not going to be the easy ride the White House seemed naively to expect. "If they don't make a deal, we'll give them a lot," Donald Trump declared in an interview, addressing Vladimir Putin and referring to military aid for Zelensky. "More than he's ever had," he insisted. This logic is exactly what one would expect given the strategy of inducements and threats that was always the Kellogg-Fleitz plan, which envisaged linking military aid to Ukraine to the acceptance of negotiations, but threatened Moscow with increasing that flow if Russia rejected the opening to diplomacy.

Although the warnings are currently directed more at Moscow than at Kiev, especially given that Ukraine has finally agreed to sign the mineral extraction agreement with the United States, European countries insist they see in the White House signs of a willingness to abandon the Ukrainian cause to Russian hands. The only proof of this is the plan presented by Washington as a final offer , which European ministers have described as "tantamount to capitulation" despite containing aspects favorable to Ukraine and leaving the door open to a military presence by NATO countries in Ukraine.

European concern about the risk of a negotiated deal with Russia is such in European capitals, which favor continuing to fight until Kiev can impose its terms on Moscow, that authorities are already looking for a backup plan in case of a US withdrawal, especially with regard to sanctions, the most powerful tool at the disposal of European allies. "The European Union is preparing a backup plan on how to maintain sanctions against Russia should the Trump administration abandon peace talks and seek accommodation with Moscow," Reuters wrote this week , quoting Kaja Kallas, who stated that "we see signs that they are considering the possibility of abandoning Ukraine and not trying to reach an agreement because it is very difficult." This plan, about which the head of continental diplomacy does not provide any details, seeks a way to preserve—and possibly further increase—the sanctions in case, after the United States withdraws, countries like Hungary threaten to block the extension of the current economic measures against Russia.

The economic weapon is the main blocking tool at the disposal of Ukraine's European allies to prevent the signing of an agreement that is not to their liking and that is achieved through negotiations in which they continue to fail to play the key role to which they aspire. "There is a Plan B, but we must also work towards Plan A," Kallas insisted, referring to the current European action, which involves increasing military contributions to Ukraine to compensate for any reduction in US military supplies or its complete withdrawal, and further increasing the pressure of sanctions, despite having proven that they have never achieved their objective of destroying the Russian economy or preventing its industry from producing the necessary materials to continue fighting. But just as important as achieving the militarization of Ukraine while the war continues and in the subsequent armed peace, is maintaining the continental fracture that the war has caused, also in economic terms. While Trumpism seeks to reach an agreement with Russia precisely to take advantage of the economic opening that a negotiated peace would bring, European countries are fighting with every weapon at their disposal to prevent that moment from arriving. It is therefore not surprising that the European counterproposal to the final US offer not only includes military aspects that make any agreement unviable, but also pays special attention to the issue of sanctions, specifying that the lifting of coercive economic measures can only occur gradually and under Ukrainian control and that it must be limited to US sanctions, which are much more limited than the European ones, which are here to stay and which the EU and the United Kingdom intend to preserve beyond a possible peace.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/03/herra ... -amenazas/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Zelensky rejected Moscow's proposal for a truce on the days of the 80th anniversary of the Victory.

He also stated that the Kyiv regime cannot guarantee the safety of foreign guests of the May 9 parade in Moscow.

***

Colonelcassad
The liberal hope of Russia null commented on the fuhrer's cocaine threat.

The unshaven Green Party said it rejected Putin's proposal for a three-day truce on May 9 and could not ensure the safety of world leaders in Moscow.

And who is looking for ego guarantees? Just a verbal provocation. No more than that.

Hnyda understands that in the event of a real provocation on Victory Day, no one guarantees that May 10 will come to Kyiv (c) Medvedev


***

Colonelcassad
Yesterday, in the Novorossiysk region, in the course of repelling enemy attacks, one of the aircraft participating in the destruction of enemy naval drones was lost.
Presumably, he was hit by a missile from BEK.
They were able to evacuate the pilots from the water. They write that the pilots were picked up by the crew of a civil cargo ship.

One of the problems of the situation on the Black Sea is our serious lag in the development of marine drones (there are both objective and subjective reasons for this). It is self-evident that in the medium term the Black Sea and Baltic fleets should have a significant number of naval drones.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Ukraine Update
The Relative Calm Before The Spring Offensive Storm

Roger Boyd
May 02, 2025

As the European oligarchs and their courtiers desperately try to keep the Ukraine war going, while making delusional statements about the region’s ability to take on Russia directly, the Russians continue to grind down the Ukrainian forces and the Ukrainian economy.

President Trump utterly misunderstood the Russian determination to have their overall security needs met before any cease fire and instead repeatedly attempted to get the Russians to act against their own interests. There was also no seeming understanding of the Russian position given the repeated Western violations of agreements and the lack of negotiating in good faith:

The advancement of NATO eastwards against the explicit commitments made to Gorbachev during the talks on the unification of Germany

The Western 2014 coup against the elected president of Ukraine

The use of Minsk 1 to save the Ukrainian Army from defeat and rebuild it

The use of Minsk 2 to save the Ukrainian Army from defeat and rebuild it

The rejection of the Ankara peace agreement once the Russian troops around Kiev had been removed as a good will gesture

The use of the “grain deal” to ship arms to Ukraine, while not honouring the Western side of the agreement

All proposals put forward by Trump would have constituted a loss relative to the Russian position gained in the field, and any ceasefire as simply a time for rest and reconstitution for the Ukrainian Army. Also, it has been obvious that the internal dynamics of Ukraine will not allow Zelensky to deliver even on the terms put forward by Trump. So the Russians have continued with “war war” while entertaining Trump’s “jaw jaw”. We are now close to the point of Trump either walking away from the Ukraine conflict and leaving it to the Ukrainians and Europeans (who in no way can replace the US as a supplier of arms, financial assistance, and intelligence), or escalating and “owning” the conflict himself.

The position of the Russians is plain. They will gain what they need on the battlefield or on the negotiating room, but the latter will only bring a ceasefire once all of their needs have been met AND the West has displayed some level of trustworthiness. As this is utterly unacceptable to major parts of the US oligarchy and its courtiers, Trump’s best move is most probably to simply walk away and claim it to be Obama’s/Biden’s war. Only time will tell if he will choose this path.

The Kursk Collapse
Ukraine produced its own killing fields through its invasion of Russia south of Kursk. Understanding this very well, the Russians have slowly but surely shrunk the area under Ukrainian control while destroying legions of Ukrainian soldiers, equipment and munitions. Up to a few weeks ago, the count of losses in this “Kursk Salient” was as below; greater than the forces of the whole British Army.

64,705 casualties

382 tanks, 295 infantry fighting vehicles, 248 armoured personnel carriers

2,084 lightly armoured vehicles, 2,251 motor vehicles

495 artillery pieces, 52 multiple rocket launch systems

133 electronic warfare and counter battery radar systems

With the collapse, at least 10,000 other casualties will be inflicted together with yet more equipment and munition losses. This operation cost the Ukrainian army large amounts of the very resources that they could have used further south to stop Russian advances; with many elite units involved. The collapse may be partially due to the removal of some units in a desperate attempt to stop the loss of Pokrovsk. This shows a Ukrainian army operating like the little Dutch boy, desperately attempting to stop the leaks in the dyke but unlike the Dutch boy running out of fingers (reserves) as one leak after another needs blocking.

With the closure of the Kursk salient and the large losses imposed on the Ukrainians with relatively small losses for the Russians, the latter is now in a position to drive toward the city of Sumy which is the transport hub for the whole region bearing its name. This would open up yet another hole for the Ukrainians to plug; especially with Kiev only 130km to the west and the possibility of a Russian drive south to separate Kharkov from Kiev. In recent weeks it has become obvious that the Kiev regime are throwing yet more troops into the killing fields, this time in a desperate attempt to stop a Russian advance on Sumy. The widespread murder and mistreatment of Russian citizens has also only stiffened the resolve of the Russian people, as have the continuing Ukrainian attacks on Russian civilian targets.

Ukrainian Recruitment Desperation
The desperation for yet more bodies to replace the losses at the front has already lead to a de facto reduction in the draft age to 18 and a general ignoring of rules about who can be forcibly conscripted by the press-gangs. In recent months, Ukrainian losses have dropped to between 40,000 and 50,000 per month quite possibly due to the weather conditions; but nowhere near those numbers are being conscripted. Once the ground hardens in early May, Ukrainian losses may rapidly accelerate back to between 60,000 and 90,000 a month. In the past few weeks activity at the front has increased, with many desperate Ukrainian counter-attacks resulting in Ukrainian losses rising to a rate of 45,000 to 60,000 per month.







Of course, such recruitment methods do not create heavily motivated soldiers. With the desperation to replace losses such press-ganged individuals may end up at the front within a few weeks at most with very little real training. They are simply cannon fodder, which hopefully finds a way out through surrendering or desertion. All while the Ukrainian elite buy themselves houses abroad and luxury goods with the money they have stolen from Western aid payments, and their military-age children party in foreign countries.

The fascist regime has now had eleven years in which to indoctrinate those now in their twenties and teens from a young age with techniques that come right out of the Nazi playbook. Instilling a hatred of everything Russian and creating a Russian “monster” that must be defeated within their minds, while making a hero out of the mass murderer Bandera. This article details the extensive indoctrination that starts from a very young age. Camps across the country are training children as young as ten to fight the Russians, with of course a huge amount of indoctrination thrown in.



Before the war, Western media was much more open about such far-right indoctrination - as with the Guardian piece below (which itself mischaracterizes the 2014 coup as a people’s uprising). Now any google search for “fascist indoctrination of Ukrainian children” throws up one propaganda story after another about supposed Russian indoctrination of Ukrainian children. The censorship in the West on such things is very obvious and widespread.



Even in 2019, the Western media were ready to report on the fascistic nature of the regime and indoctrination of the young through far-right militia groups; especially the Azov. The report below even touches on the risk of such groups fuelling terrorism outside Ukraine, a reality which may become very much in play once Ukraine is defeated. Let’s remember that the Banderites had no problem killing Jews, Poles and Soviet citizens; anyone they deemed to be against their fascist cause.



Ever since the war started all such reporting has disappeared and the fascist thugs have become celebrated as heroes.

That so many families have sent their young adults abroad shows that this decade of indoctrination has been severely blunted by three years of massive losses and widespread corruption. But we should expect that much of the non-ethnic Russian Ukrainian population, especially in the northwest of the country, will be heavily indoctrinated and serve to provide a continuing but shrinking stream of committed anti-Russian fascists. Including those in their teens.

While The Ukrainian Elite Prosper Through Corruption
Once upon a time the Western media used to report on the widespread corruption of Ukraine, but that disappeared once the proxy war against Russia started. Below the details of CBS censoring its own report on the corruption a couple of years ago.



At one time even Ukrainian television reported on some of the corruption.



The Trump administration is now raising the issue of widespread and systemic Ukrainian corruption. Any true audit would provide massive support for Trump simply to walk away from this utterly corrupt nation, with some of the money flows perhaps providing reasons for the internationalist part of the US oligarchy, and its Democratic Party (and Republican In Name Only: RINO) operatives, being so much in support of the conflict.



The money and equipment spigot from the US was only turned off for a short period by Trump; without it the deeply corrupt Ukrainian state will start to degrade, as the elite fight over a declining pie, within months.

Spring Offensive?
Trump wished to quickly tie up a cease fire with the Russians to forestall any more territorial losses, to stop yet more Ukrainian casualties, and give time for the Ukrainian forces to regroup and recover. Unfortunately for him, the Russians have been here before and very much understand that continuing the conflict until a wide ranging agreement is signed is beneficial to them.

The Russians seem to spending the time before early May positioning themselves well for larger attacks. In the north, after expelling the Ukrainians from the Kursk salient, they have pushed forward into the Sumy oblast to threaten its capital of the the same name.

Image

The Russians have also established a large bridgehead across the Oskil river north of Kupyansk, which allows for a number of vectors of attack:

Toward Vovchansk and Chuhiv, to take control of everything between Vovchansk, Chihiv and Kupyansk and threaten Kharkov while also cutting the M03 major road between Kharkov and Izyum. This is all land that the Russians lost at the end of 2022.

Southward to envelope Kupyansk from the north, cutting off the large Ukrainian pocket on the east side of the Oskil. Again, taking back land lost in 2022.

Image

There has also been a major bridgehead established across Zherebets river, stretching from Makiivka to Ivanivka, providing for multiple vectors of attack.

Westwards to Lozove, cutting of all southern supply routes to the Ukrainians east of the Oskil. This would then threaten a further drive westwards to Izyum to cut of Solvyansk/Kramatorsk from the north, to add to the cutting of the southern supply routes - creating a cut-off pocket of all Ukrainian positions east of them.

South to Lyman, cutting off the supply route to the Siversk salient

Both vectors would be retaking the land lost in 2022, but would now be in combination with the cutting off of the southern supply routes to Slovyansk/Kramatorsk,

Image

The Russians are also finishing off Chasov Yar, and driving northwards from Toretsk, both of which will provide a strong base for an attack upon Kostyantynivka from the south and east.

This will create a pocket between Chasov Yar, Kostyantynivka and Toretsk with all supply routes cut off.

It will also cut the H20 that supplies the Ukrainian positions west of Niu York and Toretsk, which the Russians are already in the process of rolling up.

Image

Image

The Russians are also driving forward on the west flank of Pokrovsk, opening up a bridgehead that can be used to flank Pokrovsk by driving north westwards, bypassing Myrnograd, toward Rodyns’ke. Such a move would cut off the T0515 between Pokrovsk and Kramatorsk.

Image

The Russians are also expanding the front south west of Pokrovsk to outflank the Ukrainian positions in Pokrovsk and the Ukrainian southern front.

By taking Novopavlivka, the Russians would cut the T0428 that connects the Ukranian forces to the west of Pokrovsk to the forces west of Andriivka; cutting the front in two.

A drive from Novopavlivka northwards to Mezhova would then greatly expand the front to the west of Pokrovsk and threaten a further northern advance to Slov’yanka to completely cut off Pokrovsk.

A drive south from Novopavlivka and north from Vesele would then threaten to encircle all Ukrainian troops to the east. This would then provide the base for an attack on the major Ukrainian logistics hub of Pokrovske, cutting both the N15 west and the T0401 south to Hulyaipole and creating a major supply disaster for the Ukrainian southern front.

Image

On the southern front, the Russians are slowly advancing toward both Orikhiv and Kamyanske. This threatens to cut off all remaining supply routes to the southern front.

Orikhiv is a very major Ukrainian supply hub, and its capture would cause serious issues for the Ukrainians while being a boon for the Russians. A further advance to take Omelnyk to the northwest would sever the T0814 to Hulyaipole, which combined with the taking of Pokrovske would cut off the whole Ukrainian southern front (excluding Kamyanske).

The taking of Kamyanske would overcome the biggest fortifications south of Zaproizhzhia.

The way would then be made ready for an attack toward Zaporizhzhia from the south (Kamyanske), southeast (Orikhiv/Omelnyk) and west (Porkrovske)

Image

Of course, the moves described above will take perhaps the Spring, Summer and Autumn campaigning seasons to complete, but would utterly destroy any delusional Western fantasies while also forcing the Ukrainians to fight across an extremely broad front while taking huge losses which would probably be at or greater than the 90,000 per month experienced last Autumn. It is highly questionable whether the Ukrainian military would be able to survive into the Autumn in the face of such a widespread offensive. Ukrainian society would also then be facing a fourth winter at war, with the reality of eventual defeat overwhelming the regime’s propaganda efforts.

The Trump administration will then be faced with three possible lines of action (i) agree a peace treaty that properly answers all of Russia’s security needs; (ii) walk away from Ukraine; (iii) escalate by supporting the move of Western forces into Ukraine west of the Dniepr and increase financial and military aid to Ukraine. The latter choice will be very fully supported by the European warmongers and the neocons in his own party, but would both wreck the rest of his agenda and risk direct war between Russia and the West. It would also remove any possibility of pivoting toward China. At the same time, both the fiscal and military reserves are threadbare. The first choice would require Trump to overcome massive resistance from both Europe and within his own party as it would correctly be seen as a total defeat of the West, and place the European warmongers at great political risk. The second option is one that can be carried out by simply not doing anything; not providing new financial aid, not providing new military aid, not supporting a Western military move into Western Ukraine. At the same time he may be able to lay the blame upon Zelensky and Biden, but the window of opportunity for that approach is fast closing.

The latest noises from the Trump administration were pointing to option 2 being chosen.

(Image/video unavailable: weather)

But the signing of the US economic and financial rape of Ukraine “economic partnership” agreement, and the removal of some limits on the supply of weapons to Ukraine points to a prevaricating US President who does not understand that more delay will simply become a decision to own the Ukraine War.

(Image/video unavailable: weather)

The Trump administration’s policies and announcements are like the British weather, wait not that long and you will get a change. Lindsey Graham is pushing for “bone-crushing” secondary sanctions on countries that trade with Russia, which will of course fail just as all the previous sanctions have while further separating the US from the rest of the world.

https://rogerboyd.substack.com/p/ukraine-update

******

The Amended Minerals Deal Will Likely Lead To More American Weapons Packages For Ukraine
Andrew Korybko
May 02, 2025

Image

That would greatly complicate Russia’s goal of demilitarizing Ukraine and thus imperil the peace talks.

The US and Ukraine finally signed their minerals deal after amending the draft agreement to remove a proposal for Ukraine to pay back past US military aid. A clause was added though whereby future US military aid, including technology and training, is considered part of the US’ contribution to their joint fund. More weapons packages will likely be in the cards since the US now has economic stakes in Ukraine and the value of the aid that it sends to defend them can be counted toward their joint fund.

Such an arrangement imbues the US with more policymaking flexibility than if it had conceded to Ukraine’s demand for concrete security guarantees. Authorizing another weapons package at this diplomatically delicate moment in the peace process could spook Russia and thus lead to the talks’ collapse. At the same time, however, this deal will likely lead to such packages being authorized after a ceasefire on the pretext of defending US investments and contributing to their joint fund.

What this means in practice is that Russia shouldn’t expect the US to fully dump Ukraine in any realistic scenario from here on out. Trump just rewarded Zelensky for this agreement by “inform[ing] Congress of [his] intention to green-light the export of defense-related products to Ukraine through direct commercial sales (DCS) of $50 million or more” according to the Kyiv Post citing unnamed diplomatic sources. This signals his newfound interest in resuming DCS in lieu of large-scale weapons packages.

Although this sum is insignificant compared to the over $1.6 billion in DCS authorized between 2015-2023 that the Kyiv Post reminded their audience about, and nowhere near what the US Government directly provided since 2022, it still importantly hints at his calculations. If Trump comes to believe that Zelensky is responsible for the peace talks’ collapse, then he might continue to withhold weapons packages as punishment, but he could still green-light more DCS deals.

Likewise, if he comes to believe that Putin is responsible for this, then he might authorize large-scale weapons packages as punishment. Either way, US arms will likely continue flowing into Ukraine due to their amended minerals deal, with the only variables being the quality, scale, pace, and terms of these weapons shipments. This greatly complicates Russia’s goal of demilitarizing Ukraine, especially seeing as how the US will struggle to stop Europe from arming Ukraine no matter how hard the US might try.

Accordingly, Russia might calculate that it’s better to concede to Ukraine’s partial demilitarization given the difficulty of achieving its full demilitarization, but the threat that this poses could be managed by demanding a demilitarized “Trans-Dnieper” region controlled by non-Western peacekeepers. Even if that proposal isn’t agreed to, Russia might still push for geographic limits on Ukraine’s deployment of certain weapons, which would require a UNSC-approved monitoring and enforcement mechanism to work.

So long as Trump is sincere about reaching a deal with Putin, then he should agree to this compromise or a variation thereof to keep the peace process alive, otherwise Putin might find it politically impossible to approve of any agreement that entails abandoning his goal to demilitarize Ukraine. That’s essentially what’s at stake now given that the amended terms of the US’ minerals deal with Ukraine greatly complicate Russia’s attainment of this objective that’s among the reasons for its special operation.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/the-amen ... ill-likely

******

Combined attack on Crimea
colonelcassad
May 2, 19:38

Image

Combined attack on Crimea

Last night, Ukrainian formations carried out a large-scale launch of unmanned aerial vehicles and unmanned boats in Crimea.

What is known about the attack?

▪️Since midday last day, a group of more than 30 unmanned boats left the mouth of the Danube River, specifically from the Ukrainian Vilkovo, for Zmeiny Island.

▪️Most of them took up a wait-and-see position at three points near Zmeiny, a transit point in almost the majority of Ukrainian attacks in the Black Sea.

▪️As a result, by evening, several unmanned boats headed towards Cape Tarkhankut, several more - to Lake Donuzlav and Sevastopol, and most remained east of the Romanian coast.

▪️As Dva Mayora reported, two unmanned combat aircraft carried out an attack with ATGMs on a gas production rig in the areas of the Shmidta and Golitsynskoye fields, which was recorded on the camera of the reconnaissance UAV of the Espanyola naval detachment.

▪️It was reported that two unmanned combat aircraft were hit by the Black Sea Fleet aviation, but there are certain doubts that this actually happened. Previous experience in fighting unmanned combat aircraft showed that strikes with cluster RBK missiles are not always accurate and the destruction of naval drones remains questionable.

▪️After several strikes by unmanned combat aircraft on the rig, the Ukrainian drones retreated, and most of the unmanned boats that were waiting headed to the eastern part of the Black Sea, apparently to Kerch or the shores of the Krasnodar Territory.

🖍At present, the threat of repeated attacks remains, since the unmanned combat aircraft can remain in autonomous mode for several days. They simply take up a position and wait in energy-saving mode. In this case, their detection is difficult.

🚩The enemy's tactics, which have created a full-fledged combat formation of BEKs, once again draw attention to themselves. The drones that have left the station operate several groups of 6-10 BEKs, including reconnaissance drones, SAM carriers, FPVs, and ATGMs.

We discussed the development of such a scenario ( https://t.me/rybar/67213 ) at the beginning of this year, saying that sooner or later we will have to look for more effective ways to counter this threat. And now, against the backdrop of talk of a truce, this moment has actually arrived.

High resolution map ( https://rybar.ru/piwigo/upload/2025/05/ ... 6d2d25.jpg )

@rybar - zinc

The Russian Defense Ministry reported 10 enemy BECs and 1 Willard high-speed boat destroyed. Another 2 BECs were damaged.

P.S. It was also previously reported that 113 enemy drones were shot down during the night attack on Crimea (over the territory of Crimea and the Black Sea)

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9816001.html

Combined attack on Novorossiysk. 03.05.2025
May 3, 8:18

Image

The Russian Defense Ministry reported that a total of 170 enemy drones were shot down over Russian regions last night. Of these, 95 were shot down over Crimea.

At the moment, it is known about 4 people injured in Novorossiysk (all civilians), damage to a house in Novorossiysk and houses in Anapa, as well as damage to grain tanks in Novorossiysk.

Also, 8 Storm Shadow cruise missiles and 3 Neptune anti-ship missiles were shot down over the Black Sea at night.
In addition, 14 unmanned combat aircraft were sunk.

In April, the enemy was obviously accumulating drones, missiles and unmanned combat aircraft for these attacks (yesterday and today) and will probably try to attack in this way a couple more times in the coming days. So far, he has not managed to achieve anything significant, especially against the background of daily massive arrivals of Geraniums (Kharkov got it bad yesterday).

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9816603.html

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

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

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

Post by blindpig » Sun May 04, 2025 12:10 pm

War and Citizenship

Image

Friday, forgotten amid the military news of a country that never wanted to know anything about the victims it doesn't consider its own, marked the eleventh anniversary of the Odessa massacre. In this massacre, 42 people were killed in a fire started by a nationalist mob brought in from abroad to do the work the authorities were officially unable to do: destroy a camp collecting signatures for a referendum on the country's federalization. The fact that they did so in an open, pedestrian space, where they didn't disrupt traffic or normal neighborhood life, and in a peaceful manner, made the nationalist participation necessary, carefully prepared days before by Andriy Parubiy, one of the leaders of the Maidan self-defense forces , later acting chairman of the National Security and Defense Council and finally speaker of the Rada, the country's second-largest authority.

Just a few weeks ago, the European Court of Human Rights made official what had always been known: the Ukrainian state was negligent in preparing measures to prevent clashes that were possible—even foreseeable—; it failed to act as it should have to avoid the catastrophe once the fire started; and it failed to investigate the events to find the guilty parties. However, no ruling has ever judged who started the fire or the intentionality of the nationalist actions that day. As the most mobilized sector of society, ideologized in its hatred of all things Russian—understood in the broadest sense, including not only Russian nationalism in political terms but also any connection to the cultural, social, linguistic, or historical past with Russia or the Soviet Union—nationalism was the resource to which post-Maidan Ukraine clung, with a government that lacked legitimacy in a significant part of the country. For these sectors, May 2, which coincided with the start of the first battles of the Donbass conflict in Slavyansk three weeks after Ukraine declared its anti-terrorist operation , was always just another battle in a war against Russia that they consider centuries or even millennia old, despite the fact that reality and majority social sentiment do not support this imaginary story.

As every year, the anniversary of the House of Trade Unions massacre was commemorated as a tragedy in Donbass, which saw May 2 as the turning point between a version of Ukraine with which negotiations could be negotiated and one marked by hatred. To the already usual celebrations by people linked to Azov, such as Maksym Zhoryn, or the Praviy Sektor, including its former leader in Odessa, Serhiy Sternenko, we must add the message published on Saturday by DeepState , the resource for monitoring the day-to-day events of the war linked to the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense. “May 2. The Day of the Odessa-Style Fried Rooster,” wrote DeepState , “thanks to everyone who participated in saving the city.” That idea, that on May 2nd, with a nationalist mob cornering hundreds of people in a building with blocked entrances and Molotov cocktails being thrown, was the right way to save Odessa , has been the argument of nationalism since 2014, which has gradually succeeded in imposing it as the official state ideology. If in the early years the objective was fundamentally to forget what happened, to offend and marginalize the victims as much as possible, but not to insist on nationalist celebration, over the years the view of the Odessa massacre has become widespread as just another battle in the war between the two countries, one in which civilian casualties are not even considered collateral damage but scapegoats to be continually humiliated and used as an example of the steadfastness that war demands.

The fight against Russia, the raison d'être of nationalist sectors long before the Russian invasion or the war in Donbass, has been elevated to the central cause of the Ukrainian state, a process that also precedes February 24, 2022, but in which high-intensity warfare has facilitated the elimination of any filter or subtlety that had been necessary in the past. Now that they have succeeded in making the nationalist vision of culture and history the only acceptable discourse for society and institutions, nationalist sectors are attempting to make social militarization the origin of a refoundation of the country in an even more anti-Russian and even more belligerent manner. The promotion of war as a social obligation for the entire society and the militarization of all aspects of life has been reiterated by the leaders of the various nationalist groups that have gained increasing power thanks to the war and the political and media acclaim of recent years.

The introduction of a truly war economy, the mandatory enlistment of people of military age without excluding the youngest—although in many cases women are also excluded, as a traditionalist sentiment with a strong macho component prevails in these sectors—and the exemplary punishment of men who refuse to enlist have been recurring themes throughout the war years, especially at times when personnel shortages have been perceived as the main problem. Representatives of a vision of war in which the most decisive factor is the warrior's vision, a central part of the war effort, the lack of weapons, so insisted upon by the government, has been presented as a secondary problem compared to society's lack of will to fight. Even when defending the possibility of a ceasefire, something Andriy Biletsky did long before Volodymyr Zelensky, forced by the United States, jumped on the bandwagon of false pacifism, the argument has always been to preserve the unity of the struggle.

In this context, it is no surprise that the opinion of the troops, among which the influence of nationalist groups stands out above all other tendencies, is one of the key factors in preparing for the future reintegration of that male population that has actively chosen to avoid fighting in the war. This issue is back on the agenda now that there is a possibility—or danger—that the diplomatic process could lead to a ceasefire at some point in the medium-term future. “One of the most vexing challenges the Ukrainian government has faced in recent years has been how to deal with draft-aged men who have avoided compulsory military service, whether by paying bribes, using forged documents, illegally crossing into neighboring countries on foot, or even swimming across border rivers,” The Kyiv Post writes this week , adding that “this issue has also fueled resentment among front-line soldiers, who have spent years in the trenches only to log on to social media and see former comrades or friends living comfortably abroad, untouched by war. But what will happen to these draft dodgers if they decide to return, or after the war is over?”

“Ukrainian soldiers have held the front lines since the start of the full-scale invasion, many of them without rotation. Even leaving aside the issue of the men who fled the country illegally, the frustration is palpable,” insists The Kyiv Independent , whose article lacks the slightest criticism of the war or of those who have condemned the country to the continuation of a proxy war in which the supplier countries did not want to participate with their own soldiers and were aware that Ukraine could not win.

“There has been talk of the return of men who fled abroad. During a meeting on January 11, 2023, in Tallinn with Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky urged Ukrainian men of draft age who fled abroad to return, either to fight or to support the economy by working and paying taxes. Highlighting the ethical and financial burden on those who remain in Ukraine, Zelensky said the country needs all citizens to contribute in some way, noting that it takes six taxpayers to support one soldier,” the article continues, which only needs to introduce the issue of birth rates in search of a future generation to continue the eternal struggle against Russia.

Throughout this time, Ukraine has demanded that countries hosting refugees in 2022 deport men and stop paying social benefits. It has also eliminated consular services for men of military age, further alienating a population that had fled the war. As the article notes, quoting Anastasia Kharitonova-Gomez, who studies the Ukrainian diaspora in North America, “On the one hand, Ukraine simply needs Ukrainians to defend itself. The stakes for the entire country are high, higher than most people realize. If the men leave, the country's survival is literally in jeopardy. On the other hand, individuals have a very human, very fundamental desire to survive.” Her comments are the only hint of compassion for those who have rejected the trench warfare as a form of civic patriotism.

The nationalist interpretation is the basis of the article, as it is of the country's ideology. “Taras Kuzio, a political science professor at Kyiv National University-Mohyla Academy, did not hold back when speaking about Ukrainians who fled military service: ‘One of my students in Germany housed a guy who bribed his way out of Ukraine. I told her he was a traitor and she was an idiot for helping him,’ he stated. ‘These kinds of people are spreading corruption in the army, the border guard, and the SBU,’” writes The Kyiv Independent , quoting one of the most cited academics in the Western media, which prefers to forget his nationalist drive, which predates the war, in order to present him as a great exponent of Ukrainian voices .

The article concludes with a few words from Kirilo Budanov, which should be added to the recent statements by Valery Zaluzhny, who has added the duty to lose the fear of dying for Ukraine to the duty to kill for it. “If a person is neither on the front lines nor helping in the rear, they have no right to call themselves a citizen of Ukraine. And society should perceive it that way,” Budanov stated, echoing the idea Zelensky has used in the past of linking citizenship to a person's actions in the face of war.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/04/guerra-y-ciudadania/

Google Translator

Odessa or bust.

*******

From Cassad's telegram account:


Colonelcassad
📍Summary of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation as of 4 May 2025 ㅤ

Units of the North group of forces defeated concentrations of manpower and equipment of three mechanized, tank and airborne assault brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost up to 190 servicemen, three armoured combat vehicles, 13 vehicles and five field artillery pieces. Two ammunition depots were destroyed.

Units of the West group of forces occupied more advantageous lines and positions , and defeated formations of three mechanized, assault and mountain assault brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The enemy lost over 255 servicemen, a tank, an infantry fighting vehicle, 11 vehicles, a Grad multiple launch rocket system combat vehicle and three artillery pieces, two of which were of Western manufacture.

Units of the South group of forces improved their tactical position. The manpower and equipment of three mechanized and airmobile brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces were defeated. The losses of the Ukrainian armed formations amounted to over 275 servicemen, 18 vehicles, a Grad multiple launch rocket system combat vehicle, and six field artillery guns.

Units of the Center group of forces improved their position along the forward edge. Defeat was inflicted on the formations of three mechanized, a Jaeger, and an assault brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The enemy lost up to 520 servicemen, two tanks, including an AMX tank made in France, two combat armored vehicles, and nine cars.

Units of the Vostok group of forces continued to advance deep into the enemy's defenses , defeating the manpower and equipment of the mechanized and airmobile brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The enemy's losses amounted to 185 servicemen, two combat armored vehicles, eight cars, and four field artillery guns.

Units of the Dnepr group of forces defeated formations of a mechanized brigade and two coastal defense brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The enemy lost up to 60 servicemen, four cars, a Western-made field artillery gun, and an electronic warfare station. Five ammunition depots were destroyed.

Air defense systems destroyed two JDAM guided aerial bombs and a HIMARS multiple launch rocket system made in the United States, as well as 146 aircraft-type unmanned aerial vehicles.

In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the following have been destroyed:

- 662 aircraft,
- 283 helicopters,
- 55,329 unmanned aerial vehicles,
- 605 anti-aircraft missile systems,
- 23,139tanks and other combat armored vehicles,
- 1,557 combat vehicles of multiple launch rocket systems,
- 24,415 field artillery guns and mortars,
- 34,977 units of special military automotive equipment.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

SITREP 5/2/25: Major Frontline Breakthrough Signals Start of Russian Spring Offensives
Simplicius
May 02, 2025

There is a lot of news buzzing about today regarding the so-called ‘mineral deal’ and the tiresome retreads of US ‘pulling out of mediations’ in Ukraine. At this point, it’s safe to say most of this chaff is nothing but that—a red herring meant to propagate the image of US as ‘in charge’ and taking ‘initiative’ in leading the world. It’s nothing but smoke and mirrors and noise at this point, clatter meant to distract from mounting Russian military successes.

The real consequential news as always came from the front, where Russian forces made a series of shock breakthroughs in the Pokrovsk direction, signaling a true start of wider Spring offensives. The most notable of which came by way of an instructive video showcasing some of the tactics oft-discussed here.

First the description:

Exemplary storming of Novoolenivka caught on video

First, the drones knocked out the armored vehicles: you can see how the drones burn the BMP-1TS, the Bogdana self-propelled guns and a mortar. When the Russian Armed Forces attack troops appear, the [AFU] try to gain a foothold, but the drones destroy the houses where they are hiding one after another. Abandoning the dead and wounded, the enemy ran from house to house until they found themselves on the outskirts of Novoolenivka and ran away.


Note specifically the 0:34 mark of the video, wherein a large cluster of Russian moto-troops storms the enemy positions in a daring rendition of Mad Maksim: (Video at link.)

The breakthrough was quite significant—this is what the DeepState map looked like just four short days ago:

Image
DeepState map as of 4/29/25

Now a huge jump of 6km+ is recorded with this advance into Novoolenovka:

Image

And that is not the only one on this front—check the yellow circles above notating Stara Mykolaivka’s breach.

Nearby on the right flank of Mirnograd, Russian forces of the 255th Regiment of the 20th Motor Rifle Division were likewise filmed successfully storming Ukrainian positions:

🇷🇺🔥🇺🇦A fearless assault troops from the 255th regiment breaks into a Ukrainian Armed Forces dugout near Pokrovsk and clears it out!

▪️During the attack on the Mirnograd right, our soldier throws a grenade and then breaks into the enemy's fortified position, firing from a machine gun.

▪️Fighters of the Volgograd 255th Regiment attack and capture positions of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, moving forward.

RVvoenkor


(Video at link.)

In the same Konstantinovka direction, but further east near Chasov Yar, Russian forces stormed Stupochky, capturing most of the village:

Image

One analyst writes:

Early in the war Ukraine could actively counter any Russian advances, as well as perform an impressive counter-offensive that took the Russians by surprise.

We’re currently at the stage where Ukraine no longer has this ability, they are in the stage I like to call the ‘plug’ stage. You see it with small Russian advances, 2-3km deep into Ukraine lines, forcing Ukraine to react by moving manpower, therefore plugging the gap and halting the Russians.

As a result of this the reserves that Ukraine has available is depleting, not being replaced at a fast enough rate. Obviously this is not being seen on the frontline as it is not an issue at the frontline. Only when the Reserve numbers are low enough to force Ukraine to decide which ‘plugs’ are worth doing will we start to see a collapse.

Ukraine themselves are fast tracking this with the Kursk offensive, Belgorod debacle, and likely future poor decisions.


These advances are facilitating the creation of a large cauldron between Pokrovsk and Toretsk, with several mini-boilers inside of it:

Image

Russian troops will likely march along the main T-0504 highway just north of Novoolenovka above, slowly shutting the lid on the giant cauldron below, forcing a collapse of Ukrainian defenses around the yellow circles.

North of Donetsk, the Russian Armed Forces are collapsing two “pockets” along the Chasov Yar–Pokrovsk line across a wide front. At the same time, east of Pokrovsk, Russian assault units have cut off the logistics route from Konstantinovka to Pokrovsk and are now consolidating their positions by storming the settlements of Alexandropol and Novoolenovka.

There were many other smaller advances, too many to count and list here, including in the Velyka Novosilka direction, where Russian forces began to storm the village of Bagatyr:

Image

Likewise, yesterday the village of Nove was fully captured in the north, on the Krasno-Liman line:

Image

You’ll recall that in one of the last sitreps it was reported troops had only just begun storming the outskirts of this town, which is now entirely captured mere days later.

AMK_Mapping has published the territorial changes for the month of April, and they are significant for a month’s work, especially since Russian advancement seems to be accelerating only now. This is the Pokrovsk-Toretsk line:

Image

And this is the northern theater:

Image

An analysis of the increase in Russia’s territorial captures:

Image

<snip>

To come back around to the front, a last more speculative development. I’ve reported for a while about claimed Russian buildups on the Dnieper in the Kherson region. Rumors had claimed since last year that Russia would attempt some kind of cross-border raid, particularly now that Russia has successfully established the bridgehead over the Oskil river in the Kharkov region. Granted, the Oskil is no Dnieper—measuring a mere 130-250ft across in sections. The Dnieper in the more hotly-contested zones is upwards of 2,000ft+ wide.

Even so, new rumors like the following persist:

I have received information about Russian accumulation in the red area (Kinburn Spit). Their objective is a serious landing operation somewhere in the Odessa Oblast' and the Ochakiv district. This is in accord with numerous reports of renewed Russian attacks on Tyahynka, Buhaz Island, and Kizomys. According to my contacts, the Ukrainians are currently closing some of the beaches in the area. I am not aware of any further information, but I'll wait and keep an eye on this. For now, don't panic around and spread doom posts, this is just my and my contacts' information.

Image

Normally I would shy away from reposting such more speculative offerings, but if it weren’t for the fact that several independent accounts disseminated similar tips. For instance from top Russian military account RVvoenkor, which quotes a Ukrainian colonel:

🇷🇺⚔️🇺🇦The Russian army seeks to land on the islands of Bugaz and Kozulyisky opposite Kherson to force the Dnieper, - Armed Forces of Ukraine

▪️ Russian troops are trying to create a bridgehead near Kherson, Russians are trying to land on the islands, said the spokesman for the Southern Defense Forces, Colonel Voloshin.

▪️In the Kherson region, the Russian Armed Forces have become active in the south of the Dnieper Islands and are trying to seize a bridgehead near the village of Kizomis.

RVvoenkor


Image

A wider shot of the indicated area, with Kherson at the center of the map:

Image

If I had to make an educated guess about the play, I would say Russia is likely pressuring this area to fix Ukrainian units, keep them under constant threat, but no real immediate operation is planned. Russian Marines have been practicing river crossing here since last year and there is most likely a potential planned operation much deeper in the future.

Russian command would logically wait for such time when Ukrainian reserves have thinned, and the Russian ‘death by a thousand cuts’ strategy has begun overwhelming Ukrainian lines all across the front, forcing Ukraine into a desperate defensive strategy of ‘plugging gaps’ like never before. It is only then, with Kherson’s defenses thinned out, that Russia could attempt a mass storming across many different points of the Dnieper—which is the only way such an operation could feasibly work. Both the lower and upper Dnieper would likely be crossed in the same fashion as the Oskil has been in the north.

As a reference, here’s a timelapse of the growing Russian ‘bridgehead’ across the Oskil north of Kupyansk from about January 2025 to present. Note in particular how it starts with one bridgehead near Dvorichna, then expands to other independent ones further north, until even a third and fourth form at the very top of the map near the Russian border: (Video at link.)

Some reports indicate the lower Dnieper is fairly shallow ever since the Khakovka dam destruction, while the further north you go the deeper it gets. It’s possible that if—and that’s a big if—the AFU is ever ground down to the point of truly thinned out lines, Russia could attempt crossings along several major points in conjunction with special operations and VDV air assault landings in key areas to scramble the rears of theater echelons of the AFU. Ultimately though, performing a cross river operation is the easy part—it’s supplying such a bridgehead long term that’s usually untenable; Ukraine learned that the hard way in Khrynki last year.

(Much more at link.)

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/sit ... eakthrough

******

War In Ukraine - The Mineral Deal Pulls Trump Back In

This week the U.S. and Ukraine signed a 'mineral deal'. It will allow the U.S. to profit from all future explorations of minerals and hydrocarbons in the grounds controlled by the Kiev regime.

The deal grew out of a scheme the (former) President Zelenski had peddled within the framework of his 'victory plan' last year. He had hopped to entice further support in form of weapons and even direct military intervention against Russia in exchange for some access to rare earth minerals in Ukraine. With the current deal Trump took the second part without offering any guarantee for providing the first.

What the now signed deal really entails is still unknown. The text of the framework agreement was published (in Russian) by the Ukrainian government. There are however two additional agreements which define the all important details.

The Ukrainian government claims that only the first part has been signed. The other two will follow only after the Ukrainian parliament, the Rada, has ratified the main one. Several 'western' media have contradicted that claim. All three parts of the agreement were signed. But the Ukrainian government is keeping the details of the second and third part secret because the conditions imposed by them are extremely bad for Ukraine.

As Strana has summarized (machine translation):

The document published by the Ukrainian government and signed yesterday does not contain any specifics on the fundamental aspects of the fund's activities.
In particular, the details of the fund's management and the decision-making mechanism for disposing of funds received by the fund are not specified.
...
There is only a reference to the fact that the distribution of shares in the fund, its management principles and other specific issues will be regulated by an additional limited partnership agreement, which, according to the Ukrainian authorities, has yet to be signed (recall, the American media write that it has already been approved).
...
In the published text of the agreement, the goal of the fund (Partnership) is extremely vague: "to become a flagship mechanism for encouraging transparent, accountable and future-oriented investments in critical sectors of the Ukrainian economy in support of the country's recovery strategy."

At the same time, the text of the agreement contains clear commitments on contributions to the fund from Ukraine (50% of the cost of new mineral development licenses), but does not contain specific commitments on contributions from the United States. There is also no commitment from Washington to continue military assistance. It is only written that if there are still arms deliveries, they will be counted as an American contribution to the fund.


The agreement will without doubt be used by the U.S. to rob Ukraine of whatever valuables it has left.

At the same time it does not commit the U.S. to do anything.

With this capitulation Zelenski has fulfilled everything the Trump administration had demanded from him for a ceasefire. The U.S. has, however, no means to press Russia into a ceasefire. President Putin and other Russian officials have made it clear that they have no interest in just stopping the fighting but want a long lasting peace agreement.

The Trump administration has neither the will nor the capabilities to negotiate and enter into long term peace agreement with Russia.

That is why it is now, on one side, washing its hands over the whole issue:

Secretary of State Marco Rubio indicated Thursday that a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine is still on the horizon but noted the eastern European nations are still very much at odds with “no military solution.”
“I think we know where Ukraine is, and we know where Russia is right now and where [Russian President Vladimir] Putin is. They’re still far apart,” he told Fox News’s Sean Hannity. “They’re closer, but they’re still far apart.”


Rubio essentially says: 'We got what we wanted. Now lets get out of here':

“There does come a point where the president has to decide how much more time at the highest levels of our government do you dedicate it, when maybe one of the two sides or both aren’t really close enough, when we have got so many, I would argue, even more important issues going on around the world, not that a war in Ukraine is not important,” the secretary of State said Thursday.

Vice President Vance confirmed that take:

U.S. Vice President JD Vance said Thursday evening that the Kremlin’s war in Ukraine is far from over and that it’s now up to Russia and Ukraine to end the fighting with Washington mulling a step back from peace talks.
“It’s going to be up to them [Russia and Ukraine] to come to an agreement and stop this brutal, brutal conflict,” Vance said during an interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier.

“It’s not going anywhere, Bret. It’s not going to end anytime soon,” he added.


Now, as the mineral deal is signed, the U.S. says it has no more responsibility for what happens in Ukraine.

But the mineral deal is also, on the other side, a trap to keep the U.S. committed to the war. As Yves Smith explains:

[O]ur prediction that this deal would be a spoiler as far as normalization of US-Russia relations look every bit as operative as we predicted from the get-go.
We had warned from the outset that the so-called Ukraine “raw earths” deal conflicted with the US agreeing to a settlement of the Ukraine conflict by creating an economic incentive for the US to support Ukraine in retaining as much territory as possible.
... To put it another way, the minerals pact was certain to be a source of conflict with Russia were it ever to get done. The fact that the Administration pursued the deal so aggressively said it valued a splashy but low to no value win over normalizing relations with Russia.


The U.S. may already be back to be fully committed to the war. As soon as the mineral deal was signed the State Department gave notice to Congress about a $50+ million weapon sale to Ukraine.

During the night from Thursday to Friday a large scale drone attack from Ukraine took place in Crimea. Last night another, ever larger attack took place. During the attack Ukraine used Storm Shadow cruise missiles which need U.S. intelligence based coordinates to reach their targets (machine translation):

For the first time since January, Russia announced a strike by British Storm Shadow missiles.
This is reported by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.

The ministry announced the downing of eight such missiles over the Black Sea.
...
The last time the Russian Federation officially reported on the Storm Shadow strike was almost three months ago-on January 15.

Also in Russia, a mass drone raid was reported on the Crimea (96 were shot down) and the Krasnodar Territory (47 UAVs were shot down). In addition, it is stated that 14 Ukrainian unmanned boats were destroyed in the Black Sea.

Recall that on the night of May 2 , the Crimea was also under a massive drone attack . Explosions were, in particular, in the areas of military airfields.


Without U.S. (and British) intelligence support the recent attacks by Ukraine would not have been possible.

This points to not yet public Trump decision to continue the war even though the U.S. has no chance to win.

Michael Brenner explains how Trump's 'malignant narcissism' has led to this outcome.

When Russia will launch its big Summer offensive after Victory Day on May 9, it will become very obvious that making peace with Russia would have been the more difficult but also more promising way to proceed.

Posted by b on May 3, 2025 at 13:01 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/05/w ... .html#more

******

Five Benefits That The US Would Reap From Coercing Ukraine Into More Concessions To Russia
Andrew Korybko
May 03, 2025

Image

Failure to do so risks another “forever war”, an Afghan-like debacle for the US, or World War III.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s recent reaffirmation of his country’s goals in the Ukrainian Conflict signal that the Kremlin regards the US’ reportedly finalized peace plan as unacceptable. Ukraine must withdraw from the entirety of the disputed territories, at least partially demilitarize and denazify, and Western troops mustn’t deploy there afterwards for Russia to agree to a ceasefire. Here are the five benefits that the US would reap from coercing Ukraine into these and other concessions to Russia:

----------

1. Swiftly & Sustainably End The Ukrainian Conflict

Another “forever war” or Afghan-like debacle would be averted upon swiftly ending the conflict via these means, which would lead to a sustainable peace since Russia’s security interests would be ensured. The Trump Administration thus wouldn’t have to worry about getting dragged into another quagmire via mission creep if peace talks collapse or having its reputation tarnished by a defeat. Coercing Ukraine into the required compromises for ending the conflict would be an effective and face-saving way to move on.

2. Shock NATO Into Spending 5% Of GDP On Defense

NATO’s Western European members are expected to procrastinate on Trump’s demand that they spend 5% of GDP on defense unless they’re shocked by the proposed US-coerced Ukrainian concessions. They’d jolt them into prioritizing this without further delay due to their paranoid fear of a Russian invasion. This would in turn lead to Western Europe finally shouldering more burdens for its own security and correspondingly complementing its Central European members’ existing efforts in this regard.

3. Turn Central Europe Into The EU’s Center Of Gravity

In that scenario, the Central European countries’ role as NATO’s frontline states would be reinforced, which could lead to them becoming the EU’s center of gravity if the US helps the Polish-led “Three Seas Initiative” implement its dual military-economic integration projects. These anti-Russian countries are expected to cling even closer to the US after the Ukrainian Conflict ends, thus enabling the US to drive a wedge between Western Europe and Russia afterwards, thereby perpetuating US influence over the EU.

4. Enter Into A “No-Limits” Resource Partnership With Russia

Expanding the nascent Russian-US “New Détente” into a “no-limits” resource partnership in the post-conflict era would lead to them jointly managing the global oil and gas industries while also unlocking valuable rare earth opportunities. Potential US ownership of Russia’s Nord Stream and trans-Ukrainian gas pipelines to Europe could further perpetuate US influence over the bloc as well as deter Russia from violating the Ukrainian peace deal. The economic and strategic benefits would truly be unprecedented.

5. Accelerate The “Pivot (Back) To Asia” For Containing China

Quickly extricating the US from the financial and military commitments that the Ukrainian Conflict entails would accelerate its “Pivot (back) to Asia” for containing China and comprehensively add to the pressure being put upon the People’s Republic by Trump’s global trade war/“economic revolution”. This outcome would advance the US’ grand strategic goal of reshaping the emerging Multipolar World Order more to its liking within the realistic limits posed by the global systemic transition.

----------

These five benefits would be lost if the US doesn’t soon coerce Ukraine into more concessions to Russia. The conflict could continue indefinitely in that event, during which time the US might either largely abandon Ukraine and thus cede its influence over the EU while accepting an historic defeat or punish Russia by “escalating to de-escalate” at the risk of World War III, neither of which is preferable. The best way to end what Trump rightly described as “Biden’s war” is therefore through the proposed means.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/five-ben ... would-reap

******

Self-immolation, assassinations, exhumations

Child beatings for Russian rap, extraterritorial onlyfans tax evasion, embezzled Mediterranean islands, political repressions and FSB killers after Dmitry Gordon
Events in Ukraine
May 02, 2025

First of all, some much-needed humor. One of Ukraine’s most beloved idiots is Dmitry Gordon.

Image

This Russian-speaking Kievan made his fortune in the 2000s through multi-level marketing schemes promising to cure cancer, and by organizing ‘seances’ with mystical healers such as Anatoly Kashpirovsky. As you can see in the video below from 2001, naive Soviet citizens fainted by the dozens when touched by the great Kaspirovsky. Turn on the sound for the full experience. Gordon warns the audience: In no circumstances stand up. Make way in the middle.

[youtube]https://youtu.be/rl-QM1z8PWs[/youtube]

Here you can see a music video by the great musician Yura Bardash parodying Kaspirovsky. Bardash, now living in Russia (born in the Donbass, he built his career in Kyiv in the post-2014 period) was sanctioned in April by Zelensky for his critical views towards contemporary Ukraine:



Anyway, back to the great Gordon. Nowadays, he is most well-known for his endless interviews with politicians and celebrities, filled with Gordon’s strange humor and Cheshire smile.

Image

It seems that these activities, along with Gordon’s daily announcements since 2022 that the Russian economy is about to collapse and Putin will die of cancer, have earned him the Kremlin’s ire. Here’s what he had to say on May 1:

I don't go shopping. The SBU [Ukrainian security services] doesn't allow me to go shopping. Actually, they don't allow me to go anywhere. Because of the danger from Putin's Russia. Several groups have already been caught—elite FSB assassins sent to Ukraine on Putin's orders to kill me. That's why I don't live at home. I'm constantly traveling across Ukraine. I don't go to stores or markets. I don't go anywhere at all. I don't drive—I don't even have a car. I'm chauffeured. I'm under state protection. I don't have a bank card. Where would I even use it?

But as you can see from the following fan montages, I think Gordon should be more confident in his own abilities. Or perhaps, his fear is simply a feint to draw unwitting FSB agents into range of his karate kicks:





(Paywall with free option.)

https://eventsinukraine.substack.com/p/ ... xhumations

******

Fighting for a place at the negotiating table
May 3, 15:17

Image

Fighting for a place at the negotiating table

The statement by the EU representative that Europe does not want to play the role of a mediator ( https://t.me/rt_russian/239209 ) in the negotiations, but wants to supply weapons to Kiev, says a lot. First of all, it says that Europe does not understand what to do with Ukraine if the US finally moves away from solving this problem.

The essence of the problem is that discussions of negotiations between Russia and the US on the prospects for ending the war in Ukraine have created a new strategic reality for the EU, in which following the Washington course of 2022-2024 under the Biden administration has led Europe into a diplomatic dead end.

The EU expected to wage war on Russia at the hands of Ukraine - in the name of Europe and at the expense of Europe - and to suffer financial costs for years, which has already dealt a serious blow to the European economy, as EU officials themselves openly state. At the same time, the possibility of a real end to the war through diplomatic means was denied in the EU and everything was reduced to a ritual demonstration of threats and ultimatums, especially since a number of EU countries are already effectively participating in the conflict.

The abrupt change in US course caught Europe by surprise, since the stake was clearly on Kamala Harris's victory. But then Trump happened - and, based on his priorities, he decided to restart the negotiating track with Russia. Washington began direct, effectively separate negotiations with the Kremlin, ignoring the interests of its European satellites. It is no coincidence that immediately after the start of these contacts, Europe and Ukraine began to publicly demand a place at the negotiating table: after all, if under Biden the mantra was "no negotiations on Ukraine without Ukraine", then under Trump everything has become the opposite - the US and Russia are discussing the fate of Ukraine without Ukraine and without Europe.

Hence the diplomatic breakdowns, the rattling of nuclear weapons, hysterics about "introducing troops" and other radically marginal statements, with the help of which the EU tried to attract attention to itself and wrest for itself at least some place in the future process. However, the negotiations in Paris between the US, EU and Ukraine, as well as the disrupted meeting in London, only confirmed that Washington has chosen its own course: to inform those gathered about the preliminary agreements reached with Russia and simply offer to accept them. Plus, to do Trump's "homework": increase defense spending from 2 to 5% of GDP and agree to new duties on European goods.

At the moment, the EU is still dominated by the line on the maximum extension of the proxy war with Russia. This requires colossal funds - just to maintain the current volume of supplies. The problem will become even more acute if the US curtails or at least significantly reduces military aid. Nevertheless, Europe is demonstrating a willingness to maintain the supply of ammunition, equipment, and ammunition for the Armed Forces of Ukraine for a long time. Some EU leaders openly state that this is necessary ( https://t.me/rt_russian/227382) to prepare Europe for a full-scale war with Russia in 2029-2030.

This suggests that Europe, like three years ago, has not abandoned the idea of ​​inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia and is ready to continue pumping Ukraine with weapons, enduring economic losses and increasing social tension within the EU for this purpose.

If the US cannot force the EU to reconsider this line as part of its own deals with Russia, then Europe still has enough resources to prolong the agony of the Kiev regime for years. The regime in Kiev itself, as before, will remain an expendable proxy tool of the West in the war against Russia. The losses of people, equipment and territories are considered by the conflict operators as acceptable costs for the sake of implementing the “great ideas” about building a “new world order” — even at the cost of the risk of a full-scale world war with a nuclear ending.

(c) specially for RT

https://t.me/c/1686844692/7597 - zinc

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9817556.html

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

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

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

Post by blindpig » Mon May 05, 2025 12:01 pm

Tests in the service of the story
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 05/05/2025

Image

“Russia is producing more weapons in three months than all NATO members produce in a year. If that doesn't change, Putin will be tempted to test us, because he believes he can be stronger than all of NATO combined,” said Andrius Kublius, European Commissioner for Defense, this week. In this European Union, which has left diplomacy and defense policy in the hands of representatives of two of the continent's most belligerent countries, Estonia and Lithuania respectively, it is no surprise that policies and media strategy are always centralized around war, making the EU the political arm of a military alliance, NATO, that dictates the discourse. In their ability to read other people's minds, European representatives, who with a few harshly criticized exceptions have not communicated with their Russian counterparts in three years, can guess Vladimir Putin's deepest thoughts, which, coincidentally, tend to coincide with what the European authorities need to justify their policy of rearmament, continuation of the war and preparation of a post-war period of armed peace in which there is more force than peace.

In this task of justifying to the electorate the path already being followed by the United Kingdom, which, for its current budget, has presented significant cuts to the social protection system while announcing a sharp increase in military investment, which must be the foundation of future economic growth, it is not only the words or thoughts attributed to the Russian leadership that matter, but also their actions. While political authorities focus on searching for the hidden meaning in every word and proposal of Vladimir Putin and his team or the most belligerent voices on Russian television, the secret services and the media strive to present every step taken by the military-industrial complex or the Russian army as an imminent threat.

“With President Trump and many other world leaders preoccupied with the war in Ukraine, some Europeans are increasingly alarmed by what the Russian military has been doing much more quietly along other stretches of its border with Europe,” wrote The Wall Street Journal last week , drawing a clear line between Europe and what, despite geographically belonging to the continent, apparently does not. The article presents a series of Russian military movements, always offensive and to emphasize the danger that Russia poses to Europe . The sources for the analysis, as usual, are Finnish and Baltic, without any need for qualification or questioning any of the aspects highlighted by representatives of some of the countries that are most vehemently insisting on remilitarization and, above all, on increasing the NATO presence, always the solution and never the source of the problem.

“Trump, who has been pressuring Ukraine to accept a ceasefire agreement while trying to rebuild US ties with the Kremlin, has said that concerns that Russia has ambitions beyond Ukraine are overblown. Asked in February about Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's warning that Russia could declare war on NATO if the US reduces its support for the alliance, Trump said, 'I don't agree with that, not even a little bit,'” the article states. This statement by Donald Trump is the only one that contradicts the text's thesis and its objective of defending the need for European rearmament. Moreover, the US president's words are used to represent a position considered naive and detached from reality. Because those words are contrasted with certain actions that both the media outlet and its sources present as undeniable and undeniable signs of the Russian Federation's offensive intentions against NATO.

The article uses three main arguments: the creation of military bases and infrastructure in locations close to European borders , increased production, and the preparation of covert hybrid warfare actions, all without any mention of the possibility that tensions beyond Ukraine could have a different origin than the apparent European certainty that Russia intends to attack a NATO state. Simplifying the situation and, above all, the process that has led Europe to war and a future recreation of Cold War conditions, the origin of all the problems of recent decades lies in Russian actions, and any current move is seen as clear evidence of future aggression.

“About 100 miles east of its border with Finland, in the Russian city of Petrozavodsk, military engineers are expanding army bases where the Kremlin plans to create a new headquarters to oversee tens of thousands of troops in the coming years. Those soldiers, many of whom are now serving on the front lines in Ukraine, are destined to form the backbone of a Russian army preparing to take on the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, according to Western military and intelligence officials. The Kremlin is expanding military recruitment, bolstering arms production, and modernizing rail lines in the border areas,” The Wall Street Journal states , without explaining that Russia has already warned that Finland’s entry into NATO would necessarily entail the militarization of that border. The substantial change that Russia represents in abandoning Finnish neutrality—which gave the country the opportunity to act as a bridge between East and West throughout the Cold War—in favor of joining a military alliance whose raison d'être is to confront Moscow is a detail that hardly merits mention.

“The Russian military is rebuilding and growing at a faster pace than most analysts had anticipated,” General Christopher Cavoli, commander of US forces in Europe, told a Senate committee this month. “In fact, the Russian military, which has borne the brunt of the fighting, is larger today than it was at the beginning of the war.” In a February report, the Danish intelligence agency warned that Russia could launch a full-scale war in Europe within five years if it perceived NATO to be weak. “A ceasefire in Ukraine would allow the Russian military to be ready even faster, Western military officials warn,” the article continues, highlighting the expansion and reinforcement of the Russian military and once again using it as a sign of offensive intent. Again, there is no mention of the increase in NATO troops on what is already being called the Alliance’s eastern flank or the immense €800 billion plan for massive rearmament of EU member states.

“Western officials have cited covert operations believed to have been carried out by Russia in Europe in recent years as evidence of Moscow’s determination to destabilize the West and retaliate for its support for Ukraine. Russian military intelligence is believed to be behind plots to plant incendiary devices on planes operated by the shipping giant DHL and to assassinate the CEO of a German arms manufacturer,” The Wall Street Journal continues in its list of cases of hybrid warfare or covert operations attributed to Moscow. Of course, there is no mention of the most successful episode of covert warfare in recent years, the attack on the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines, which, despite initial hopes, could not be attributed to Moscow, but all available evidence points to Ukraine.

“For centuries, the Russian military made Russia one of the great European powers. It defeated both Napoleon and Hitler after both dared to invade Russian territory. The Soviet Union's entry into World War II changed the course of the conflict and laid the foundations for the Cold War that followed,” the article insists, seemingly forgetting that the Warsaw Pact was the response to NATO, not the other way around. “Putin has relied on that military legacy to justify the war in Ukraine and Russia's efforts to regain influence in Europe, where former allies like Ukraine have shifted toward the West. Russia appears to be betting that a military expansion along NATO's borders will force the West to reengage with a stronger Moscow,” it adds, along the same lines as the rest of the article, with the idea that Russia is seeking to strengthen itself for a confrontation with the West and NATO.

The possibility that Russia's construction of military bases near the border of a country that has just abandoned neutrality to join NATO is not a sign of offensive intentions but rather the preparation of a future scenario for a new version of the Iron Curtain , that the increase in military personnel and production is a response to the European rearmament policy openly directed against Moscow, or that covert actions are in no way unique to Russia, is not even considered. The need to justify rearmament measures and the pursuit of continued political, economic, and military confrontation with Russia requires a strong enemy, willing to act and with a credible capacity to inflict damage on NATO, an innocent victim of any escalation of tension. Depending on the needs of the moment, the war in Ukraine has served the press, experts, and authorities to justify both Russia's immense weakness as a state or military power and the enormous and practically imminent danger it poses to a bloc of more than twenty countries, three of them nuclear powers. At a time when political authorities are seeking a rapid increase in military investment, any evidence, even that which might reasonably be assumed to indicate defensive action on their own territory, is unequivocal evidence of the future attack, the possibility of which several European intelligence services are warning. It doesn't matter that headlines must be manipulated to claim that these reports warn of an already planned attack when in fact they claim that, in a few years, Russia would be in a position to carry out such attacks. Russian intent is implicit in the strength now being highlighted to justify its own actions.

“The strategy of appeasement with Russia has been tried. It doesn't work. Russia must be forced to stop its war. We need peace through strength,” Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen said in an interview with an American media outlet. Three decades of NATO expansion toward Russia's borders despite the demise of the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union and Russia's weakness in the 1990s are apparently signs of the policy of appeasement , one in which Moscow was never given the opportunity to participate in the continental security architecture that would have significantly reduced the risk of a war like the one currently unfolding in Ukraine.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/05/prueb ... el-relato/

Google Translator

Cold War 2.0...it's like 'Groundhog Day'.

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Kursk region, Glushkovsky district

The enemy is attempting to enter Russian territory. Opposite the settlement of Tetkino in Glushkovsky district, the enemy is concentrating manpower and equipment. To date, a demining unit, several ATVs and two IMRs have been destroyed. Ten Ukrainian infantrymen tried to penetrate, but our soldiers inflicted fire damage, and the enemy retreated back to the settlement of Ryzhevka in Sumy region. Artillery, mortars and FPV drones, as well as reconnaissance UAVs, are operating on both sides.
The enemy's manpower is advancing from the settlement of Ryzhevka, and equipment from the settlement of Bessalovka in Sumy region.

There are also reports that the enemy attempted to break through on a section of the state border near the settlement of Tetkino in Kursk region. The northerners are actively hitting the enemy, destroying:
- IMR (2 units)
- UR-77 (1 unit)
- ATV (2 units)

***

Colonelcassad
Kursk region, situation opposite the settlement of Novy Put'.

Reports from fighters on the ground:
"The Ukrainian Armed Forces' obstacle clearance vehicle made a passage through the dragon's teeth and drove back despite multiple hits, landing troops. A firefight is underway on the line of the dragon's teeth, our artillery, FPV and airdrops are working on the enemy. All the people are combat-ready, there is enough ammunition, there is no reason to panic. There is no equipment from the Ukrainians yet "

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Odessa Massacre: Point of No Return That Marked Ukraine’s Slide Into Nazism
May 3, 2025

Image
The House of Trade Unions building in Odessa on May 2, 2014. Photo: Odessa Media Agency.

By Svetlana Ekimenko – May 2, 2025

On May 2, 2014, a pro-Maidan crowd outnumbering anti-Maidan protesters trapped dozens inside the Trade Union building and set it on fire with petrol bombs. At least 42 anti-Maidan activists died—either burned, asphyxiated, or killed by gunfire.

The mass murder of innocent people in Odessa’s Trade Union house marked a “point of no return” for Ukraine, Ukrainian politics expert Alexander Dudchak told Sputnik.
Those behind the West-backed coup that year were driven by Nazi-fueled “hatred for humanity.” Their goal was to build an “anti-Russia,” with Russophobia stoked from abroad.
After the tragedy, “it became clear to those who disagreed with the [pro-Western Ukrainian] government that there was no way to defend their rights except through force.”
Thus, the Odessa massacre can be seen as the turning point for all subsequent events.
“It became obvious what these forces represented – human-hating, pure Nazism, which came to power in Ukraine,” said Dudchak.


What Led to the Tragedy?
Long before the Soviet Union’s collapse, NGOs and foreign funds, like the notorious Soros foundation, began distorting history to ideologically target the younger generation.

Ukraine’s drive to join Europe involved denying its heroic past, glorifying criminals and Nazi collaborators, and promoting the “Banderization” of society.

Image
U.S. Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland and Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt, offering cookies and (behind the scenes) political advice to Ukraine’s Maidan activists and their leaders. Photo: Andrew Kravchenko/AP Photo.

2014 Coup
Despite the public’s strong preference for ties with former Soviet countries, a West-inspired coup took place, reshaping public consciousness.

History was rewritten, dissent silenced through brutal methods, and media control imposed.
On May 2, 2014, Ukrainian nationalists locked anti-Maidan protesters, who opposed Euromaidan and Ukraine’s rapprochement with the European Union, in the Odessa Trade Union House and set the building on fire. Almost 50 people died, and some 250 protesters were injured in clashes with the radicals, according to the United Nations.

Image
Police in Maidan square in Kiev, Ukraine, Feb 19, 2014. Photo: Andrei Stenin/Sputnik.

Why is the West Silent?
The massacre was executed by the West’s protégés and under their control.

“I don’t rule out that the West may have even written the script for this event. They needed to show the population what happens to those who try to oppose them. And that is what they did – with an animalistic cruelty,” concluded Dudchak.

https://orinocotribune.com/odessa-massa ... to-nazism/

******

How Bob Parry Covered Odessa Fire That Sparked a War
May 4, 2025

This weekend marks the 11th anniversary of 48 ethnic Russians burnt alive by far-right thugs in Odessa, a massacre that spurred independence declarations in Donbass, leading to civil war in Ukraine and eventually Russia’s intervention.

On May 2, 2014, Neo-Nazi gangs massacred 48 people who had rejected the U.S.-backed overthrow of a democratically-elected government in Kiev earlier that year. The deliberately-set fire in the Trade Unions Building in Odessa has never been satisfactorily investigated by Ukrainian authorities.

Eight days later two ethnic Russian majority oblasts in the east declared independence from Ukraine, leading to the U.S.-backed war against them by the unconstitutional government. Eight years later Russia intervened in the civil war.

This is how Robert Parry, founder of Consortium News, reported the story on May 10, 2014. He emphasized the effort by the U.S. government and media to bury the U.S. role in the 2014 unconstitutional change of government and the part played by Neo-Nazis in Ukraine, which government, corporate media and their “anti-disinformation” allies are still trying to hide. ‘

“The key to all these unsavory alliances is for the American people not to know about the real nature of these U.S. clients,” he wrote.


Exclusive: For the second time in a week, Ukrainian anti-regime protesters holed up in a building were killed by fires set by pro-regime attackers with ties to newly formed neo-Nazi security forces, reports Robert Parry.



By Robert Parry
Special to Consortium News
First published May 10, 2014

In Ukraine, a grisly new strategy bringing in neo-Nazi paramilitary forces to set fire to occupied buildings in the country’s rebellious southeast appears to be emerging as a favored tactic as the coup-installed regime in Kiev seeks to put down resistance from ethnic Russians and other opponents.

The technique first emerged on May 2 [2014] in the port city of Odessa when pro-regime militants chased dissidents into the Trade Unions Building and then set it on fire.

As some 40 or more ethnic Russians were burned alive or died of smoke inhalation, the crowd outside mocked them as red-and-black Colorado potato beetles, with the chant of “Burn, Colorado, burn.”

Afterwards, reporters spotted graffiti on the building’s walls containing Swastika-like symbols and honoring the “Galician SS,” the Ukrainian adjunct to the German SS in World War II.

This tactic of torching an occupied building occurred again on May 9 in Mariupol, another port city, as neo-Nazi paramilitaries organized now as the regime’s “National Guard” were dispatched to a police station that had been seized by dissidents, possibly including police officers who rejected a new Kiev-appointed chief.

Again, the deployment of the “National Guard” was followed by burning the building and killing a significant but still-undetermined number of people inside. (Early estimates of the dead range from seven to 20.)

In the U.S. press, Ukraine’s “National Guard” is usually described as a new force derived from the Maidan’s “self-defense” units that spearheaded the Feb. 22 revolt in Kiev overthrowing elected President Viktor Yanukovych.

But the Maidan’s “self-defense” units were drawn primarily from well-organized bands of neo-Nazi extremists from western Ukraine who hurled firebombs at police and fired weapons as the anti-Yanukovych protests turned increasingly violent.

But the mainstream U.S. press in line with State Department guidance has sought to minimize or dismiss the key role played by neo-Nazis in these “self-defense” forces as well as in the new government. At most, you’ll see references to these neo-Nazis as “Ukrainian nationalists.”

Turning to the Neo-Nazis

Image
Odessa Trade Union Building on fire, May 2, 2014. (Screenshot from Roses Have Thorns, Part 6, The Odessa Massacre)

However, as resistance to Kiev’s right-wing regime expanded in the ethnic Russian east and south, the coup regime found itself unable to count on regular Ukrainian troops to fire on civilians. Thus, its national security chief Andriy Parubiy, himself a neo-Nazi, turned to the intensely motivated neo-Nazi shock troops who had been battle-tested during the coup.

These extremists were reorganized as special units of the National Guard and dispatched to the east and south to do the dirty work that the regular Ukrainian military was unwilling to do.

Many of these extreme Ukrainian nationalists lionize World War II Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera and like Bandera dream of a racially pure Ukraine, free of Jews, ethnic Russians and other “inferior” beings.

The slur of calling the Odessa protesters Colorado beetles — as they were being burned alive — was a reference to the black-and-red colors used by the ethnic Russian resistance in the east.

Though the mainstream U.S. press either describes Parubiy simply as the interim government’s chief of national security (with no further context) or possibly as a “nationalist,” his fuller background includes his founding of the Social-National Party of Ukraine in 1991, blending radical Ukrainian nationalism with neo-Nazi symbols. Last year, he became commandant of the Maidan’s “self-defense forces.”

[See: Curfew for Anniversary of Odessa Massacre That Sparked Rebellion]

Then, on April 15, [2014] after becoming the Kiev regime’s chief of national security and finding Ukrainian troops unwilling to fire on fellow Ukrainians in the east, Parubiy went on Twitter to announce, “Reserve unit of National Guard formed #Maidan Self-defense volunteers was sent to the front line this morning.”



Those National Guard forces also were reported on the ground in Odessa when the trade unions building was torched on May 2 and they showed up again in Mariupol as the police station was burned on May 9, according to a report in The New York Times on Saturday.

The Times mentioned the appearance and then disappearance of the National Guard without providing any useful background about this newly organized force.

In the language used by the mainstream U.S. press and the Kiev regime, the neo-Nazi brigades are “volunteers” and “self-defense” units while the rebels resisting the post-coup regime are “pro-Russian militants” or “terrorists.”

The Times reported the May 9 attack in Mariupol this way:

“Ukraine’s interior minister, Arsen Avakov, wrote on Facebook that about 60 pro-Russian militants had tried to seize the city’s police headquarters. The police called for support from the Ukrainian national guard, a newly formed force of quickly trained volunteers drawn from participants in last winter’s street protests in the capital.

Mr. Avakov wrote that 20 ‘terrorists’ had died in the fighting, while those who survived dispersed and hid in a residential neighborhood.”


The Times added:

“The national guard, though, pulled out of the city soon afterward. Residents who had gathered around the police station offered an account that differed from the interior minister’s. The city police, they said, were sympathetic to the pro-Russian side and had mutinied against an out-of-town chief newly installed by the interim government in Kiev.

Armored vehicles had driven into the city to confront the rebellious police, not the militants, residents said. Holes in the brick wall suggested heavy weaponry. Gunfire echoed downtown.”


After the deaths inside Mariupol’s police station, the Kiev regime rejoiced at the extermination of a large number of “terrorists.”

As the U.K.’s Independent reported, “The military action is accompanied by stridently aggressive rhetoric from politicians in Kiev who are crowing about the numbers of ‘terrorists’ killed and threatening further lethal punishment.”

The Kiev’s regime’s concern that some local police forces have at best mixed loyalties has led it again to turn to the Maidan “self-defense” forces to serve as a special “Kiev-1” police force, which was dispatched to Odessa amid that city’s recent violence.

Deniable Forces

Image
A group of Nicaraguan Contras rest after a firefight, Jan. 1, 1987. (Tiomono, CC BY-SA 3.0, Wikimedia Commons)

Though many Americans don’t want to believe that their government would collaborate with neo-Nazis or other extremist elements, there actually has been a long history of just that.

In conflicts as diverse as the revolutions in Central America and the anti-Soviet Afghan war in the 1980s to the current civil conflicts in Syria and Ukraine, it has not been uncommon for the side favored by the United States to rely on extremist paramilitary forces to engage in the most brutal fighting.

In Central American conflicts that I covered for the Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s, some of the “death squads” associated with pro-U.S. regimes were drawn from neo-fascist movements allied with the far-right World Anti-Communist League.

In Afghanistan, the C.I.A. relied on Islamist extremists, including Saudi jihadist Osama bin Laden, to kill Russians and their Afghan government allies.

Today, in Syria, many of the most aggressive fighters against Bashar al-Assad’s government are Arab jihadists recruited from across the region and armed by Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf oil sheikdoms.

So, it fits with a pattern for the U.S. government to hold its nose and rely on neo-Nazis from western Ukraine to take the fight to rebellious ethnic Russians in the east and south.

The key to all these unsavory alliances is for the American people not to know about the real nature of these U.S. clients.

In the 1980s, the Reagan administration advanced the concept of “public diplomacy” to intimidate journalists and human rights activists who dared report on the brutality of U.S.-backed forces in El Salvador and Guatemala and the C.I.A.-trained Contra rebels in Nicaragua.

Thus, most Americans weren’t sure what to make of recurring reports about right-wing “death squads” killing priests and nuns and committing other massacres across Central America.

Regarding Afghanistan, it took the American people until Sept. 11, 2001, to fully comprehend whom the Reagan administration had been working with in the 1980s.

Similarly, the Obama administration has tried to maintain the fiction that the Syrian opposition is dominated by well-meaning “moderates.”

However, as the brutal civil war has ground on, it gradually has become apparent that the most effective anti-Assad fighters are the Sunni extremists allied with al-Qaeda and determined to kill Shiites, Alawites and Christians.

So, it should come as no surprise that the Kiev regime would turn to its Maidan “self-defense” forces formed around neo-Nazi militias to go into southern and eastern Ukraine with the purpose of burning to death ethnic Russian “insects” occupying buildings.

The key is not to let the American people in on the secret.

https://consortiumnews.com/2025/05/04/h ... ked-a-war/

******

Trump’s Silence In The Face Of Zelensky’s Victory Day Threat Is Incredibly Disappointing
Andrew Korybko
May 04, 2025

Image

It hints at tacit approval of Ukraine targeting the Red Square parade this Friday.

Zelensky recently followed up his rejection of Putin’s Victory Day truce by warning that the foreign leaders who attend the parade on Red Square are putting themselves in danger. Although he claimed that this is supposedly because Russia might orchestrate a false flag attack against them to blame on Ukraine, Russia interpreted his words as implying that Ukraine might target its prestigious guests. That would be an unprecedented escalation if it happens and thus risk abruptly ending the peace process.

About that, US officials have held several rounds of meetings with their Russian and Ukrainian counterparts, but no tangible progress has been achieved so far. Ukraine repeatedly violated the 30-day “energy ceasefire” and the Easter truce but the US didn’t publicly chastise it for this. Worse still, Trump then speculated that Putin might be “tapping [him] along”, which preceded the US clinching its long-awaited minerals deal with Ukraine that was predicted would lead to more American weapons packages.

Right after it was signed, Trump green-lighted the export of $50 million of defense-related products to Ukraine through direct commercial sales, which preceded a $310.5 million F-16 support package. Around the same time, Secretary of State Marco Rubio reminded everyone that the US is considering moving on from the peace process due to nothing having been achieved by this point, which coincided with reports that the US is preparing more sanctions against Russia to pressure it into concessions to Ukraine.

These developments set the backdrop for Trump’s incredibly disappointing silence in the face of Zelensky’s Victory Day threat. He’s known for sounding off about all manner of things, from fringe issues to global events, yet he’s conspicuously silent about this. Zelensky’s claim that Trump “see[s] things a bit differently” after their latest meeting at the Vatican adds more context to his silence. It therefore appears as though Trump is falling under Zelensky’s spell despite February’s fight at the White House.

That’s not to suggest that Trump will soon start parroting Zelensky’s rhetoric against Putin, but just that it does indeed seem that Zelensky at the very least made Trump suspect that Putin is manipulating him. In response, the US and Ukraine clinched their long-awaited minerals deal, which contains a clause that forthcoming US aid to Ukraine can count towards the US’ contribution to their joint fund. Then the US green-lighted the aforementioned military aid packages and began drafting more anti-Russian sanctions.

The unmistakable message sent by these interconnected moves is that the US is preparing to resume its leading involvement in the conflict if Russia doesn’t soon agree to more concessions to Ukraine. Simultaneously, Russia’s official acknowledgement of North Korea’s military assistance in Kursk signals that its troops might participate in any potentially expanded ground offensive if peace talks collapse, which altogether shows that both are preparing for the possibility of an intensified proxy war in Ukraine.

That scenario could unfold as soon as next weekend if Zelensky makes good on his Victory Day threat that Trump didn’t even feel bothered to make a pretense of condemning, with his incredibly disappointing silence hinting at tacit approval of Ukraine targeting the Red Square parade this Friday. He might still mutter a half-hearted condemnation before then if prompted and/or post about it, but his conspicuous silence thus far might make Putin distrust him, which bodes ill for the future of their talks.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/trumps-s ... -zelenskys

I am thinking about how GHW Bush suckered Sadam Hussein into attacking Kuwait...

******

This Morning ....

... Army Group "Dnepr" of Russian Armed Forces, using drones, dropped thousands of booklets over Kherson. (Video at link.)

Booklets, which look like this:

Image

Give clear instructions to residents of Kherson on how to behave themselves when encountering Russian soldiers. I wonder why all this. Hm, does it mean that Washington Capitals have a shot at Stanley Cup this year? Or maybe it is because Betelgeuse is about to go supernova? Yes, that's it. It is because of Betelgeuse. Whew, it took a couple of hours of hard analytical work to figure this out.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/05 ... rning.html

Hmm, hmm, hmm...

*****

Ukraine ignores Russia’s truce request and prepares to sabotage Victory Day

Lucas Leiroz

May 4, 2025

The Kiev regime once again reveals its terrorist nature.

Behind its “democratic” rhetoric and constant appeals for Western support, the Kiev regime continues to display its true nature: belligerent, provocative, and increasingly engaged in terrorist practices. The most recent demonstration of this is Ukraine’s plan to sabotage the Victory Day celebrations in Moscow, scheduled for May 9, 2025—a date that symbolizes the Soviet Union’s triumph over Nazism and thus holds profound historical and civilizational significance for Russia and the world.

Despite ongoing international tensions, leaders from more than 20 countries have confirmed their attendance at the event. Among them are high-profile figures such as Presidents Lula da Silva (Brazil), Ibrahim Traoré (Burkina Faso), Nicolás Maduro (Venezuela), To Lam (Vietnam), Miguel Díaz-Canel (Cuba), and Aleksandar Vučić (Serbia), along with Chinese President Xi Jinping and Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico. The diversity of the guest list highlights that the event goes far beyond Russia’s national interest—it stands as a global tribute to the defeat of fascism and a reaffirmation of our shared historical memory.

However, on the other side of the border, in Kiev, President Vladimir Zelensky’s government is taking a radically different path. According to diplomatic and intelligence sources, Ukrainian authorities have openly discussed the possibility of launching provocations and terrorist attacks to disrupt the Moscow event. The presence of foreign dignitaries does not appear to deter such plans, revealing a flagrant disregard for basic norms of international law and diplomatic conduct.

Zelensky himself, in recent statements, advised world leaders not to attend the May 9 parade, a clear attempt to sow fear and discourage participation. His suggestion that the event may be targeted echoes earlier remarks in which he stated that “they are worried their parade is under threat—and they should be,” signaling awareness of or complicity in potential sabotage operations.

These threats are not vague or speculative. Influential figures within Ukrainian nationalist circles, such as Dmitry Korchinsky—the leader of the radical “Bratstvo” party—have used social media to call on followers to prepare terrorist attacks on Russian soil. In public messages, Korchinsky even recommended planting improvised explosive devices in Moscow’s Red Square ahead of the celebration and proposed using fiber-optically guided drones.

The range of potential attacks is wide and deeply concerning: from direct terrorist acts in Moscow and other Russian cities to infrastructure sabotage, targeted assassinations, disinformation campaigns, and psychological operations. There is also evidence suggesting the possible deployment of foreign mercenaries and nationalist militant groups such as the “Freedom of Russia Legion” or the “Sheikh Mansur Battalion” to destabilize Russian border regions like Belgorod, Bryansk, and Kursk. A full-scale incursion by the Ukrainian regular army into these regions to spread panic and terror cannot be ruled out.

In contrast, Russia has formally called for a ceasefire during the Victory Day period—a humanitarian gesture that any state truly committed to international law and human rights should respect. However, all indications suggest that Kiev will not only ignore this appeal but will deliberately violate it. This reinforces the growing perception that the Ukrainian regime acts as a perpetual agent of destabilization, supported—either tacitly or explicitly—by the West.

By aligning themselves with a government that threatens to sabotage a historic and internationally respected commemoration of the defeat of Nazism, Western countries are, whether knowingly or not, siding with reckless historical revisionism and disorder. This raises a serious question: how far are NATO allies willing to go in tolerating the increasingly extreme methods of the Kiev regime?

As the world prepares to honor those who gave their lives in the fight against fascism, Kiev prepares to attack those who once defeated Ukraine’s infamous so-called “heroes.” The West and its institutions may absolve the Maidan junta—but History will judge it differently.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... ctory-day/

*****

Putin on the Minsk agreements
colonelcassad
May 4, 3:10 PM

Image

Putin on the Minsk agreements.
It was emphasized once again that the Russian Federation was deceived in its best expectations regarding the agreements, which the West was not going to implement.
In fact, Putin had already raised the issue that the SVO should have been started earlier, so this is simply a position fixation.

The question of what year from 2014 to 2021 the SVO should have started is now left to the discretion of alternative history lovers.

(Video at link.)

Old readers of the blog will of course remember that back in 2014 I wrote that the agreements on Ukraine would certainly be disrupted and Russia would be left with a choice between war and capitulation. Now it has become a generally accepted point of view that the Minsk agreements were a mistake and Russia was deceived.

And of course, any agreements with the West without a clear record of the results of the war will be disrupted and used to prepare for a new war.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9819629.html

Google Translator

I'm sometimes not happy with Boris's pov but on some prognostication he's not to be denied.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

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

Post by blindpig » Tue May 06, 2025 12:07 pm

The RDK and the GUR
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 06/05/2025

Image

On May 27, 2023, on the Telegram channel of the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, better known as GUR, its main media representative, Andriy Yusov, made for the first time public reference, within the sphere of Ukrainian intelligence, to the Russian Volunteer Corps (RDK).

Known for his direct involvement in the tragic events in Odessa in May 2014, Yusov linked the Russian volunteer group led by neo-Nazi Denis Kapustin (Nikitin, White Rex, or White Powder) to the then-unfolding intrusion into the Russian Belgorod Oblast. According to Yusov, the " Russian resistance " forces were operating within Russian territory, both in border villages and in the capital, Belgorod. The incursion, mentioned by the GUR publicist, had begun on the night of May 22-23. The RDK had previously carried out incursions into Russia in early March, in the Bryansk region .

Yusov's statements indicated several links between the GUR and the RDK. One of them was the operation's direct relevance to the GUR. Thus, on the one hand, he mentioned that, as a result of the operation in Belgorod, " information important for Ukrainian intelligence was gathered ." On the other, Yusov seemed to be fully aware of the mission assigned to the Russian "partisans." " Their current task, in the case of the Belgorod region, is to liberate these lands from Putin's regime ," he stated.

Clearly in line with the language commonly used by ideologues of the Ukrainian far-right directly linked to the GUR, such as Dmytro Korchinsky, Yusov theorized that Putin's regime " for the inhabitants of these territories—representatives of different peoples and nationalities—evidently constitutes a regime of internal occupation. And if we're talking about several peoples with a higher level of political consciousness, then it's not even an internal occupation, but a direct external occupation; for example, if we're talking about the peoples of the Caucasus or Tatarstan ," Yusov explained. The goal of disintegrating the Russian Federation also echoed Korchinsky's ideology: " The territory currently called the 'Russian Federation' includes several historical lands that received different names at different stages... today this name is just like that; we'll see what will happen in the future ," the GUR representative stated.

By the spring of 2023, it was already clear that the RDK's actions, then shared by the Free Russian Legion (FRL) in Belgorod, functionally responded to the interests of the GUR and Zaluzhny's military establishment. According to Yusov, the Belgorod action was " an inevitable consequence of the large-scale invasion of the Russian Federation into Ukraine " and linked it to the goal of having Russia regroup its troops in response to the events. His perspective also reflected two other "intelligence" aspects, some more imagined than others: " the exhaustion of Putin's power apparatus and Russia's vulnerability to internal attacks ."

At the time, in a BBC article on May 24, Frank Gardner and James FitzGerald referred to the links between the raiders in the Belgorod region and the Ukrainian establishment . They noted that, despite Kiev's official denials, " it is difficult to believe that this incursion was launched without the assistance of Ukrainian military intelligence ," also citing a fact that would later prove decisive in the political and military positions of the United States: that the United States " does not encourage or enable attacks inside Russia ."

Meanwhile, through Mikhailo Podolyak, the Ukrainian administration described the Belgorod action as both a Kremlin false flag and a heroic act by Russian underground groups opposed to the Russian authorities. " Ukraine is watching the situation in the Belgorod region with interest and is studying it, but it has nothing to do with it ," he stated bluntly. " The underground guerrilla groups are made up of Russian citizens ."

In June 2023, following a new incursion in Belgorod at the end of May, in which the presence of Polish PKO soldiers alongside the RDK was detected for the first time, Yusov deepened his discourse on the crisis of the Russian state by pointing out, in parallel with the alleged self-defense role played by the RDK and the Russian Legion in the area: “ The so-called 'Russian Federation' is today a failed state, on whose territory numerous conflicts are taking place. The central government is inadequate, and the events in the Belgorod region demonstrate this. Everything that is minimally prepared for combat is concentrated in Ukrainian territories, while on Russian territory disorder, chaos, anarchy, and lawlessness reign. This means that these conflicts can spread and gain greater importance in different corners of the country called the Russian Federation, including the capital region .” Korchinsky's thesis of Russia's fall through its own internal dynamics thus reappeared in Yusov's words, although not in reality, where the internal destabilization that Ukraine dreamed of existed only in Ukrainian discourse.

In July, Yusov became an active promoter of these groups, stating that the RDK and the Free Russian Legion “ are quite autonomous and have an active media presence. Therefore, anyone who wants to join can contact these units directly. Hundreds of Russians who came from the EU to fight against Putin’s regime have already done so. As for the dangers to Ukraine and certain counterintelligence measures [relating to recruits] , of course, they are being carried out ,” he told Kanal 24 at the time .

Despite this, Yusov still felt compelled to formally distance himself from the KDR and the LSR. He said, " Our state supports all people of good will... but Ukraine does not participate in hostilities on Russian territory. Ukrainian security and defense forces are focused on the liberation of their own territories. What happens 'behind the scenes' is a matter for the Russians ," Andriy Yusov emphasized at the time.

The large-scale Kursk raid seemed still far off in terms of long-term operational planning. However, it was Budanov himself, the leader of the GUR, who mentioned further intrusions by the RDK , in this case in the Kursk region. Thus, on the night of August 30, with the support of SBU intelligence, the RDK entered the region to attack a military airfield with drones, and at the end of September, it carried out another rapid-fire raid against a border post. According to Budanov, several FSB officers, border guards, and soldiers were killed in the observed battle, a claim that was not supported by evidence.

These were not large-scale actions, but the facts led Budanov to anticipate that RDK fighters would continue to carry out raids into the border regions of the Russian Federation and that the scale of these attacks would only increase. " The activities of the RDK and other units will continue, as will the scale of the events related to these activities ," Budanov stated.

In early March 2024, the KDR and other "Russian" units serving in Ukraine would re-enter the Russian Kursk and Belgorod oblasts (in the town of Tyotkino, north of the Ukrainian city of Sumy, and in the Belgorod area north of Kharkiv). Probably due to the limited results achieved during this operation, Andriy Yusov simply stated that "the Kremlin is once again no longer in control of the situation in Russia." He accompanied this with a rather implausible denial that the KDR soldiers were not acting under Ukrainian orders.

By then, just months before the large-scale Ukrainian ground incursion into Russian territory, the so-called “Kursk Offensive” of August 6, 2023, it was becoming clear that the actions of the RDK, and other linked groups, were merely a way for the GUR to test Russian defenses in the border areas in anticipation of an operation with much broader military objectives.

The first claim made by Budanov's Intelligence Directorate to the GUR's internal unity is the RDK's participation in the recapture of the Volchansk aggregate plant in September 2024. The operation, in the development of which the GUR's supreme leader directly participated, was carried out by a series of units linked to the organization's Timur group. In addition to Stugna, Paragon, and Junger, the participation of both the RDK and the Belarusian BDK and Terror is notable. The strong, even dominant, presence of neo-Nazi-oriented militants in the aforementioned groups explains the small detail that the family photo of the victorious attackers released by the GUR included some of the soldiers making the Nazi-fascist salute.

Image
Various reports from the GUR later confirmed the RDK's participation within the Timur special operations group.

In fact, there are many indications that the RDK is, at least in its consolidation phase, an initiative of the GUR, within a model of action marked from its origins by collaboration with Dmytro Korchinsky's Bratstvo Battalion, also affiliated with the Timur group. Thus, after being established in August 2022, the first reference to belonging to the GUR by the RDK itself is made in a January 26, 2023, publication mentioning the joint action carried out a few days earlier with the BDK in the Novaya Kakhovka area. On its Telegram channel, the RDK notes that the attack was carried out " as part of a special unit of the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense ." According to sources within the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense itself, this action was attributed to special forces of the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, supported by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The actions in the June 2023 operations in the Belgorod region include the participation of personnel from the Bratstvo Battalion, the Russian Volunteer Corps (RBK), and the Belarusian Volunteer Corps (BDK). The participation of the RDK, the BDK, and the Polish PKO, along with Bratstvo and Stugna, is confirmed.

In fact, collaboration with Bratstvo in late 2022 and early 2023 would constitute, as in the case of the Korchinsky Battalion itself, the main way for the RDK to engage in the process of final integration into the GUR through the Timur group.

On March 23, 2025, at the farewell ceremony for Anton Zyryanov (Turist) and other members of the RDK, friends and comrades from other units came to say goodbye to the fighters, including members of the BDK, PKO/PDK, Revansh, Bratstvo, the 3rd Azov Brigade, Junger, SSO and the "Centuria" organization, in whose ranks " Turist " served before the war. Showing his clear connection to Bratstvo, Oleksiy Serediuk, Borgeze , the battalion commander , spoke about the deceased members of the RDK, noting that they fought " side by side for three years ." He also mentioned their parallel development, for most of the time within the forces of the Timur group of the GUR, an affiliation that is now clearly reflected on websites such as MilitaryLand . It can be seen that the RDK currently includes the remnants of the Polish Volunteer Corps (PDK or PKO).

Serediuk had previously expressed his admiration for the radical militants of the RDK, a group that echoes the ideas of the main Russian ideologues of neo-Nazism in Ukraine, led by Alexey Levkin. Levkin, an equally influential figure in the Azov movement, was also present at the farewell ceremony for the fallen RDK militants.

The history of the RDK's association with the GUR shows that what was initially easily dismissed, with the help of the media, gradually becomes a "natural" part of the public sphere, with almost no one asking any questions. And not only in Ukraine. An example of this is the RDK's unveiling in Germany in March 2025, despite the fact that its main leader, Nikitin, is still banned from entering the Schengen area due to his "efforts against the free and democratic order."

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/06/el-rdk-y-el-gur/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
1:10
SITUATION IN THE SOUTH DONETSK DIRECTION OVER THE PAST NIGHT

Warriors from Transbaikalia worked with artillery and FPV drones:

- Minus 2 Ukrainian Air Force air defense systems in the Bogatyr area
- 2 armored fighting vehicles destroyed in Alekseyevka and Zeleny Kut,
- A truck in Alekseyevka,
- MLRS in the Dachnoye area
- "Baba Yaga" - 3 units. shot down in the sky over Ulakly and Alekseyevka
— Minus 7 Ukrainian militants in Bogatyr and Alekseyevka

Soldiers from the banks of the Amur carried out drone strikes in the Komsomolskoye area:

— In Zaliznichny — a UAV was destroyed by an FPV-"Molniya-2" with a TM-62
— In Malinovka — 2 UAV launchers + 1 UAV
— During rotation in Zeleny Gai — minus a car and 4 tufted ones
— A "Grad" strike was carried out on a warehouse with materiel — destruction confirmed

Soldiers from Primorye report the following results:

— Minus 2 pickups
— 9 Ukrainian fascists eliminated
— 14 UAVs: 4 "Baba Yaga" + 10 reconnaissance drones — shot down
— Enemy counterattack thwarted in the area of ​​the settlement Rivnepol

By the soldiers from Buryatia over the past night:

— In Otradnoye: 2 UAVs with personnel were destroyed
— West of Bogatyr — an FPV repeater antenna was destroyed
— At night, “free hunting” in the Komar area — minus a Kozak armored fighting vehicle with a crew
— In Otradnoye — 2 UAV launchers + rotation of the Ukrainian Armed Forces was stopped


The Ukrainian Armed Forces confirmed the advance of our forces:
— In the areas of Svobodnoye Pole, Zelenoe Pole, south of Novosyolka,
— In the direction of Novopol.

East of Novodarovka — tactical success:
— Forest belts were captured
— During the crossing of the Voronaya River, our guys secured positions along the highway.

Forwarded from
Radio Sputnik
1:26
May is a fork in the road for agreements on the Ukrainian conflict, says Boris Rozhin

According to him, if a ceasefire is not reached in the near future, the conflict will drag on for 2-3 years and become even more violent.

Rozhin also noted that London and Kiev are seeking to continue the war, counting on the participation of the United States. At the same time, the United States has an ambiguous position, and its primary interest is in confronting China. Therefore, Trump is planning a "reverse Nixon maneuver", the essence of which is to appease Russia in order to destroy the Russian-Chinese partnership.

Forwarded from
Readovka
What happened this morning in the Kursk border area — footage of the destruction of enemy equipment that was trying to crawl into a breakthrough

Today in the first half of the day, there were reports of a new attempt by the enemy to break through from the Sumy region to our territory. This time, the Glushkovsky district became the hotbed — at the same time, there were attempts by small mobile groups to enter the settlement of Novy Put, located literally on the border, and the settlement of Tetkino itself. The Voice of Kurska got hold of footage from the vicinity of Novy Put, where a drone worked on a crawling engineering vehicle trying to thin out the installed barriers.

Both attacks were repelled — for the enemy, this is already an old-new way, the Armed Forces of Ukraine climbed into the territory of the Glushkovsky district back when Sudzha was occupied. So, it is not new for us to give them back and drive them out. However, we should be wary — as the story with Demidovka showed, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are not tired of hitting the border area, especially since we are talking about covering Sumy. Tetkino has a difficult position on the ground, and if it is captured, liberation will be difficult precisely because of these features of the terrain. It is possible that the enemy is again looking for a weak spot in the border area in order to create at least a "new Sudzha" on some scale. But these are only assumptions, especially since a new attack in this direction will no longer be a surprise.

***

Ukraine’s Demographic Decline

Ukraine’s ongoing population decline has been accelerated by the war. By 2025, the population had almost halved from 52 million in 1991. Official estimates put the population in Ukrainian-controlled areas at around 28-29 million, but alternative methods such as mobile phone and electricity data suggest the number may be as low as 33-34 million. Analysts, however, believe the true number of permanent residents may be lower than 24 million.

This uncertainty is due to wartime unrest, a massive refugee exodus, internal displacement, and falling birth rates. Ukraine’s last census was conducted in 2001, forcing it to resort to unconventional methods. The population is older, has a higher proportion of women, and has shrunk significantly, posing serious challenges to the economy, the military, and national stability.

The war has made it difficult to keep traditional population counts through censuses or registries because millions of people have moved, making it difficult for governments to keep track. Key questions about the population of major cities remain unanswered.
https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin


Google Translator

******

Portrait of the Joker as a young man: Zelensky 1978-1998

Zelensky's cyber-socialist father. Life in Krivoy Rog. Comedy as corrosive anti-soviet force. The origins of Kvartal 95
Events in Ukraine
May 05, 2025

Image

If the concept of the State has been described as the great metaphysical abstraction of modernity, then the statesman is an even more mysterious figure.

Gone is the medieval superstition of the king as the all-powerful earthly embodiment of God. Today, the pretense of voluntarism surrounding a political leader gives rise to innumerable suspicions. The subjectivity of any heads of government is automatically doubted. It is much more appealing to speculate about the hidden economic, political, or foreign interests manipulating the puppets in state livery.


There is surely no one shrouded in as many contradictory abstractions as Volodymyr Zelensky. Western puppet, or possessed patriot with as little respect for the White House as the Kremlin? Earnest warrior against corruption, or populist controlled by oligarchs in cahoots with the Kremlin (the latter accusation a favorite of Ukraine’s pro-western nationalists)? Statesman or comic? Beacon of democracy or drug-addicted dictator?

A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, as Churchill once said about Russia.

A Joker, as the recent biography of Zelensky recently released by Ukrainian political analyst Konstantin Bondarenko is called. Bondarenko, currently living in Austria, is a ‘polit-technolog’ – that delightful term of the post-soviet space, describing something between a political analyst, consultant or demiurge. Just a few days ago, Bondarenko was officially sanctioned by Zelensky, which the polittechnolog took as a sign of work well done.

Image
Bondarenko, left, and Vladimir Fesenko, right. Though the two polit-technologists worked closely in the 2000s, Fesenko, unlike Bondarenko, remains in Ukraine and has much more enthusiastically adopted a pro-government, militaristic position
Since today’s article is in large part based on Bondarenko’s book (which can be purchased here), I thought I’d begin with a brief extract on our hero’s epochal significance:

Image

Zelensky has become the embodiment of both postmodernity and the rethinking of our role and place in the new geopolitical reality, as well as a leader who had to guide the country through its most difficult times. He is the Joker in the grand political game - the most valuable card that bears the image of a jester yet possesses extraordinary power and weight. At the same time, in contemporary culture, the Joker is an evil clown from comics and later from the Batman series. Isn't it telling that in 2019, just three months after Zelensky's inauguration, Todd Phillips' film "Joker" was released worldwide - a sharp social thriller that in many ways proved prophetic for Zelensky?

….

I don't claim to know the absolute truth. I'm merely presenting my perspective on the processes that have taken place in Ukraine and the world in recent years. As fate would have it, at the center of these events was the protagonist of our story - Volodymyr Zelensky. A talented actor. A statesman with controversial political qualities. The President of Ukraine. A diagnosis of Ukrainian society in the first quarter of the 21st century.


If Zelensky is the symptom, what is the disease?

Zelensky’s discourse is itself so two-dimensional, so sickly sweet in its sincerity, that it is difficult not to dismiss this ridiculous mirage in favor of some hidden interests, both his own and those standing behind him. But notwithstanding the existence of those interests, Zelensky remains a question that must be answered.

In Ukraine, one of the most common discursive motifs, apart from blaming all ills on ‘corruption’, is to bemoan the ‘elites’, inevitably specifying that ‘ours are not true elites’. But in fact, any country has elites – a comprador elite is still that fraction of society with the most power over the country’s resources, even if this elite is essentially a sub-contractor for foreign powers. And furthermore, any elite is to some extent a reflection of that society. While it may not always do what the people wants, it is at any rate forced to appeal that people’s abstract desires.

The rot goes deep, so to speak. Bondarenko points to the startling results a Ukrainian sociologist presented on the eve of war:

These studies yielded unexpected results: the behavioral, cognitive, and perceptual level of Ukrainian society corresponds to that of a 12.5-year-old adolescent! With unformed life principles, where "want" dominates over "should," with rebellion against parental oversight, with no clear understanding of life's path ahead, with tendencies toward paternalism, and with anxieties about independent life. This explains the irrational choices consistently demonstrated by Ukrainians. This also accounts for the regularly staged "festivals of disobedience," like the Maidan protests - ultimately fruitless and futile, yet crucially important for an adolescent's formation of an identity. Hence the widespread obsession with passing trends, superficial worldviews, and casual attitudes toward traditions - for genuine faith and authentic values only come with maturity, which is a prolonged and painstaking process.

Generation P

Even if Zelensky were merely a PR hologram, the need to create just such an image illustrates something not only about Ukrainian, but post-soviet society as whole.

And Zelensky is certainly not a hologram, since he was a noticeable fixture of Ukrainian and Russian cultural, political and business life for decades before he even thought about the presidency (note that fixing the date when ‘he’ decided on such a path is a question of symptomatic controversy, to be explored in future articles). Reflecting upon his life is hence quite fruitful in understanding these societies.

Separating sincerity from subterfuge is always misguided. Especially so for the post-soviet world, where the most cold-blooded cynicism calmly coexists with fanatical idealism. In this, Zelensky is a perfect cypher for his generation, those born in the 1970s and 1980s. It is this group that dominates activist politics in both Russia and Ukraine, generally setting itself against the ‘stale soviet bureaucracy’.

Since this group dominates political discourse to such an extent, a brief characterization is necessary. These are people born at the economic peak of the Soviet Union, but whose childhood experiences of it were limited to Gorbachev’s destructive reforms, set to the beat of addictive western media content and consumer goods.

With no pre-soviet experience to measure things by, they were sure that the alternative their country had was either present realities or those of the west. And in the west, as everyone knew, the sun was always shining and people were always smiling.

Bondarenko points out that the Ukrainian-American novelist Chuck Palahniuk called this the snowflake generation. The popular Russian novelist Vladimir Pelevin described this generation in a popular 1999 book called ‘Generation P’:

Once upon a time, Russia truly had a carefree young generation that smiled at summer, the sea, and the sun—and chose Pepsi.
Now, it’s hard to say exactly why that happened.

Image

Having matured in the Darwinist capitalism of the 1990s, representatives of this generation disdain the state and find expectations for ‘paternalism’ quaint and deplorable. If they have a political ideology, it is libertarianism. Generally, their radical individualism and disdain for any forms of collectivism makes them markedly antipolitical – Zelensky’s party famously described itself as ‘radical centrists’ in 2021.

Not only are they anti-political, but also anti-historical. Conceptions of responsibility before society or the weight of history are very cumbersome for the snowflake’s individuum. For them, there are no authorities, and hence the only authority is the individual. No wonder such libertarians can easily morph into dictators. Only emotions can be trusted.

Zelensky’s election in 2019 can be seen as the final victory of the snowflake generation over the old guard. His predecessor, Petro Poroshenko, assumed the pose of the radical euro-nationalist, but he has always been a true veteran of Ukraine’s court intrigues and economic squabbles. Zelensky, though he also inhabited that world, did so more as a wandering jester than a player. As we will see in the course of Zelensky’s comedic career, though he constantly gave private shows to both Russia and Ukraine’s heads of states, he clearly had a secret disdain for his audience.

He never took the game seriously, hence Poroshenko’s constant accusations that Zelensky was a populist dilettante that would bring the country to ruin. By the way, I know not a few Ukrainians who voted for Zelensky in 2019 hoping for peace, but now ruefully reflect that the ‘ultranationalist’ Poroshenko might have saved the country from war, precisely because of his cynical experience in navigating post-soviet politics. Perhaps, though that isn’t today’s topic.

Raising a Joker
Zelensky was born in 1978, 78 kilometers from the village where Leon Trotsky was born. Fitting, perhaps, for a man whose presidency would be characterized by such voluntarism and boundless impulsiveness that top Ukrainian businessman Vadym Novinsky called Zelensky and his party ‘new Bolsheviks, but without Marx’. Bondarenko recalls that another Ukrainian writer once told him the following:

Mark my words: Zelensky is Trotsky minus the education. Trotsky represented intellect multiplied by willpower and adventurism. Zelensky is willpower and adventurism with the intellect subtracted.

Zelensky was also born in the same year as Emmanuel Macron. A figure very close to Zelensky, and someone also quite representative of the global ‘Generation P’ in his erraticism, personalism, and shape-shifting nature.

The future president was born in the city of Krivoy Rog (Krivyi Rih in Ukrainian, but I’ll use the Russian spelling for this Russophone city). It is both quite peculiar but also an archetypal soviet city. It is peculiar geographically, often called the longest city on earth (or at least Europe) - over 70 kilometers long, and 5-7 kilometers wide.

Image

This is because it is a city built around iron deposits. It is about as proletarian a city as one can imagine, with its 650,000 inhabitants mainly depending in one way or another on the massive Krivorozhstal steel factory, the largest such factory in Ukraine.

Image

In this sense, Krivoy Rog is an archetypal Soviet industrial city. Such cities are also often called ‘monocities’, because they depend on the economic activities of one ‘city-forming’ factory. In Russia, such cities, like the famous Magnitogorsk, are known as mainstays of support for Putin’s government. They felt the effects of liberal deindustrialization worse than anyone.

Liberals despise such cities as ‘useless, subsidized soviet industry’, and their voters as ‘bydlo’, that term of insult for the working classes which means ‘cattle’, subservient to their autocratic, communist leader. Krivoy Rog is largely Russian speaking, though there is also a current of those from neighbouring villages who speak ‘surzhik’, a mix of Russian with Ukrainian.

Image

It is a city that barely existed as something beyond a mine until Stalin, with a population of 20,000 in the 1920s. It was in large part built by the Soviet industrialization of the 1930s, rising to to 200,000 inhabitants by the eve of the Second World War. When I used to visit the city, I was impressed by all the buildings and locations named after Sergo Orjonikidze, Stalin’s industry tsar, who played a major role in building the city.

Image
The Ordzhonokidze Mine. It was renamed to a more patriotic version in 2022. Strangely, this was deemed to be Sergei Kolachevsky, the Russian mining magnate who founded the site in 1906. I don’t see how a Russian capitalist is more pro-Ukrainian than an internationalist Georgian communist, but so be it

The first thing you notice when your train enters city is the reddish haze suffusing everything – iron ore. The city itself is a strange mixture of small houses that wouldn’t be out of place in a rural village, three-storey worker’s residential buildings built in the Stalin period, rusting mines, larger apartment blocks, and the hulking presence of Krivorozhstal. One of the city’s attractions is its strange public transport – it has one of the world’s longest tram lines, stretching alongside the elongated city both above and below ground.

Image

It's an interesting place for a president to come from. A characteristic conversation I remember overhearing from my visit in early 2021 took place in one of the city’s sprawling outdoor markets. I’d made my way through second-hand knockoffs and an array of sturdy shovels to find a sector of outdoors food stalls. I sat down to eat some deep-fried chebureki, a Georgian bread filled with meat. Without much to do, I listened to a man at my table tell his not entirely credulous companion about a youtube video he’d just watched that demonstrated how the government was using covid vaccinations to implant chips into people’s brains.

But Krivoy Rog was always, at very least, close to very important locations. It was in the same oblast as the slightly larger city of Dnepropetrovsk, the so-called ‘workshop of cadres’ I wrote about here. From that city came leader of the USSR Leonid Brezhnev, leader of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic Vladimir Scherbitsky, head of the Soviet-wide KGB (1982-1988) Viktor Chebrikov, and minister of foreign affairs of the USSR Nikolai Schelokov.

Despite its proximity to the crucial city of Dnepropetrovsk, Krivoy Rog was still its poorer sibling. Where Dnepropetrovsk was a closed city due to its production of ballistic missiles, Krivoy Rog stuck to iron and coal. Salaries were higher than in the countryside, but life was – and is – quite harsh.

In the 1980s, drug addiction and production started blossoming in Krivoy Rog. It was at the avant-garde of this phenomenon both in Ukraine and across the entire Soviet Union. The city also experienced a wave of youth crime, which was also quite characteristic of Soviet industrial cities of the perestroika period. This is from Bondarenko’s book:

In the mid-1980s to early 1990s, Kryvyi Rih was swept by a wave of "runners" - teenagers who formed rival gangs and raided opponents' territories. Over 10 years of gang activity, 28 children and one police officer were killed. More than two thousand teenagers were injured, with medics documenting hundreds of mutilations. Under the laws of that time, preventing such crimes was nearly impossible: children under 16, even caught with weapons or explosives, were difficult to prosecute.

Kryvyi Rih hooligans were nicknamed "runners" due to their combat tactics: teenagers would charge together through rivals' territories, throw homemade grenades, use firearms, and destroy everything in their path - even overturning cars and police vehicles. Runners united into neighborhood-based squads - by district, block, avenue, or boulevard. Other groups had names like "bulls," "horses," "station gang," "cabbage rolls."

By the way, I highly recommend watching the 2023 TV show ‘Word of a Lad’. This Russian series depicts the turbulent lives of members of such gangs in 1980s Kazan, a city in provincial Russia. Notwithstanding nationalist furor, the show and its soundtrack dominated Ukrainian spotify for months. It marvelously depicts the violent emergence of market relations in 1980s Russia, and serves just as well for understanding Ukrainian society. I am told that versions can be found online with English subtitles.

Image

Many of the men who would later become Ukraine’s oligarchs grew out of just such youth street gangs. There is much to be said for the formative effect such groups had on broader society, on Generation P. A lack of moral principles other than personal honor, the need for retribution in response to insult.

In any case, there is no reason to suspect that the young Zelensky had anything to do with such activities. Zelensky, who would become the great hero of the post-soviet ‘creative class’, was born into a typical family of Soviet technical intelligentsia.

All evidence points to the conclusion that Zelensky’s family was highly loyal to the Soviet authorities. Zelensky’s paternal grandfather, Semen Ivanovich Zelensky (1924-1993), fought bravely in the ranks of the Red Army - commander of a mortar platoon and later a company commander in the 174th Regiment of the 57th Guards Rifle Division, part of the 8th Guards Army, itself under the Third Ukrainian Front and later the First Belorussian Front. He received two Orders of the Red Banner and became deputy head of the criminal investigation department of Krivoy Rog after the end of the war. Two of his brothers had died fighting the Wehmacht.

Image
Zelensky visits his grandfather’s tomb

Zelensky’s father, Alexandr Zelensky, was born in 1947. He represented the great technological advances of post-war Soviet society, the hope that new information technologies could perfect economic planning.

Alexandr Zelensky also had quite the impressive list of titles. In 1983, he defended his Candidate of Sciences dissertation on the topic "Automated Calculation of Iron Ore Reserves in a Quarry Management System" in nowhere other than the specialized academic council of the Moscow Mining Institute, specializing in Mine Surveying. Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor, Head of the Department of Computer Science and Information Technologies at the Krivoy Rog Economic Institute from 1995 onwards.

Image
In 2003, he earned his doctorate at Ukraine’s National Mining University. The topic was once again mine surveying, with his dissertation titled ‘Methodological Foundations of Mine Surveying for Planning and Production Accounting in an Ore Quarry Management Information System’.

In short, Alexandr Zelensky was a fixture of the Soviet industrial economy. Interestingly, in the 1980s and 1990s Zelensky senior often collaborated with Nikolai Azarov, who was then head of the Ukrainian State Research and Design Institute of Mining Geology, Geomechanics, and Mine Surveying in the Donbass city of Donetsk. Azarov would become prime minister under Yanukovych and was hated by Ukrainian liberals and nationalists for his social democratic, even socialist views.

Image
Putin and Azarov

Azarov is highly active in Russian talk shows to this day, and there are plenty of rumours that he may make a return to Ukrainian politics, if Russia manages to neuter Ukraine’s nationalist right. While I don’t know how possible that is, it is quite strange to contemplate Azarov, the scientific and industrial colleague of Zelensky’s father, coming back to face off with the son.

Zelensky’s father must have been a model soviet citizen. Such a conclusion can be reached based on the fact that he was able to travel abroad – he lived and worked in Mongolia for twenty years. This was notable, since the KGB was highly – and rightfully – suspicious of intellectuals of Jewish descent for their western and Zionist sympathies. In contrast to many of his colleagues, Alexandr Zelensky remained steadfast in his loyalties –his son, the hero of our story, received a grant for free study in Israel when he was 16, but his father refused to let him go.

In Mongolia, the older Zelensky also set about perfecting socialism. At the Erdenet Mining and Processing Plant, in the computer department of the copper-molybdenum complex, he co-founded Mongolia’s first school of cybernetics and computer technology alongside his Mongolian colleague Burenbayar.

Image
Mongolia’s largest ore processing plant

He also enjoyed close ties with the Soviet deep state. According to Bondarenko, Alexandr Zelensky became close friends with Sergei Nechaev, the Second Secretary of the General Consulate of the USSR in Erdenet. Then responsible for the unofficial surveillance of all Soviet citizens and their families stationed in Mongolia, he is today the Russian Federation’s ambassador to Germany.

Those who remember Alexandr Zelensky speak highly of him. Nowadays, just about every Ukrainian university has a well-oiled system of bribery to get top marks in exams – Dr Zelensky apparently never accepted such money.

Bondarenko relates an interesting story of father-son relations in the Zelensky family. The future president, at this point a wealthy comedian, gave his academic father a car on his birthday. However, Dr Zelensky turned it down. While he thanks his son, he pointed out he could afford the present one his own salary.

However, I’ve found other statements by Zelensky’s father. In 2021, Zelensky made the fateful decision to sanction a number of TV channels in Ukraine that criticized him and pro-NATO militarism. As I’ve written, this has been widely interpreted as a major reason for Putin’s decision to go to war - pro-Russian, or at the very least non-aligned sentiment was now banned in Ukraine, and Russia could not hope to influence Ukraine through allied political parties.

Zelensky father supported the decision when asked about it by strana.ua. Amusingly, he also admitted that until some months back, he too had watched these ‘pro-Russian’ channels. But he complained that they criticized his son far too much.

“Maybe I don't understand democracy... Well, I don't like it. It's not like I have any influence over it. I mind my own business. Sometimes it's all presented so crudely on TV, well, it's just not right."

Image

He declined to comment on how this would affect freedom of speech in the country. In the same interview, he flew into a profane rage when asked about rumors that he and his wife had left Ukraine amidst the rumors of imminent Russian invasion:

What 'going abroad' are you talking about? I live and work here! Why would we leave? That's all nonsense. We'd rather die for Ukraine. All around they're just spouting rubbish - they'd be better off grabbing a shovel and going to the trenches to defend Ukraine. Apparently those who write about this have nothing fucking better to do!

In any case, the era of Dr Zelensky was over with the end of the Soviet Union. With post-soviet deindustrialization and the fragmentation of Union-wide production chains, men like Alexandr Zelensky would be less and less necessary. Graduates of information technology found work in transnational cybercrime instead of solving the problems of socialist planning. The new era needed showmen rather than leaders of industry.

(Much more at link.)

https://eventsinukraine.substack.com/p/ ... as-a-young

******

Zelensky Threatens World Leaders Ahead of Victory Day Celebrations in Moscow
May 4, 2025

Image
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Photo: AP/Kin Cheung.

Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky has warned that Kiev cannot guarantee the safety of world leaders attending the May 9 celebrations in Moscow. He also dismissed Russia’s proposal for a Victory Day ceasefire as a “theatrical production.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin earlier announced a unilateral three-day pause in military operations starting May 8 and continuing through the World War II Victory Day celebrations, citing humanitarian reasons. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov described the move as a potential “start of direct negotiations with Kiev without preconditions.” Kiev, however, has demanded a 30-day unconditional ceasefire instead.

Speaking at a press briefing on Saturday, Zelensky reiterated this position.

“It is impossible to build any plan for the next steps to end the war in two or three days. And so it just does not look very serious… It is more of a theatrical production on his part,” he said, referring to Putin, as cited by Interfax-Ukraine.

“No one is going to help Putin play this in order to give him a soft atmosphere of escape from isolation on May 9, and to make everyone feel comfortable and safe – those leaders, friends, or partners of Putin who will come to Kremlin Square… We are either at war, or Putin is showing that he is ready for a ceasefire,” Zelensky added.

He claimed that Kiev is ready to declare a ceasefire at any time, provided both sides agree that it will last for at least 30 days.

In March, Russia and Ukraine both agreed to a 30-day partial ceasefire with US mediation, focused on halting strikes on energy infrastructure. Ukraine, however, violated the truce on multiple occasions, according to the Russian Defense Ministry.

Moscow has said it is prepared for peace talks but has repeatedly warned that any short-term pause without an official deal would be used by Kiev’s Western allies to rearm the Ukrainian military. Commenting on Kiev’s demand for a longer truce, Lavrov said last week it reflected Ukraine’s worsening position on the battlefield.



The Russian government extended invitations to a number of world leaders to attend the Victory Day celebrations in Moscow, including the leaders of China, India, Brazil, Venezuela, Vietnam, Slovakia, and Serbia.

Russian response
Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova claimed that Zelensky “has hit rock bottom,” in response to his desperate threats to the security of world leaders.

In a post on her Telegram channel, Zakharova condemned Zelensky’s comments as “classic threats from a terrorist of international proportions.” She asserted, “everything Zelensky said during his press interactions reaffirms the neo-Nazi essence of the Kiev regime, which has devolved into a terrorist entity.”

Zakharova further said, “We have long known Volodymyr Zelensky is no saint. First, he betrayed the legacy of his own veteran grandfather and deceived his people. Now, to erase witnesses to his disgrace, he is systematically destroying Ukrainians themselves.”

https://orinocotribune.com/zelensky-thr ... in-moscow/

******

Great achievement
May 5, 21:33

Image

Great achievement

"As you know, President Putin just announced a three-day ceasefire. At first glance, this does not seem like a very significant period of time, but in fact, it is a great achievement if you remember how it all began. After all, the situation was completely different before: we had a president who did not even talk to Putin for three years. And all this could have been avoided" (c) Trump

Actually, for now, Washington is satisfied with this and attempts to bend Russia to a 30-day truce without conditions did not work, which is what other NATO countries wanted.

But these are just words. It is much more interesting how the declared three-day truce for the May holidays will not be observed. It seems obvious that the enemy will disrupt it. And it is not even about empty threats to strike Moscow.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9821720.html

EW donkey
May 5, 23:20

Image

- Generals always prepare for the last war.
- Meanwhile, in a modern war...

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9821967.html

In liberated Goncharovka
May 6, 1:05 p.m.

Image

Video from the liberated village of Goncharovka in the Kursk region.
The scale of destruction, traces of battles, abandoned enemy equipment that has not yet been removed are visible. The battles for Goncharovka ended in March 2025 during the successful achievement of the goals of Operation Potok

(Video at link.)

Now the fighting has shifted to the Sumy region, where the Russian Armed Forces have achieved success. The main battles are taking place in the area of ​​Loknya, Belovody and Vodolaga. The intermediate goal of the Russian Armed Forces is to reach Yunakovka, from where the enemy launched an offensive on Sudzha in August 2024. The creation of a full-fledged security zone on the border of the Kursk region is still far away.

The Ukrainian Armed Forces tried to attack the border of the Kursk region again yesterday in the area of ​​Tetkino, but lost more than 10 units of equipment and several dozen people killed and wounded. They had no success.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9822915.html

Google Translator

******

Unmanned aircraft vs. unmanned aircraft: How to ensure coastal protection
May 3, 2025
Rybar

Image

Against the backdrop of yesterday's attack on Novorossiysk and the loss of the Su-30SM, questions are being asked about how to solve the problem of coastal defense without having to send planes to fire cannons at the BEKs like in World War II.

The answer is simple: look at the land theater of operations and the revolution in UAVs, which we wrote about back in early January. Unmanned aircraft are capable of solving the same problems at sea, and in conditions of lesser opposition.

What are the means?
FPV drones can operate at a distance of up to 30 km from the coast . Yes, there may be problems with orientation in the absence of reference points, but they can be solved. And the surface is flat, there are no folds in the terrain or changes in relief, and the target is in the palm of your hand.

At longer ranges, the long-established combination of the ZALA reconnaissance UAV and the Lancet loitering munition can operate. Unlike the front lines, where they are hunted by interceptors and RADA radars, there is nothing like that over the Black Sea.

To detect the enemy at even more distant frontiers, reconnaissance "wings" in the form of Supercam, SKATs or Albatrosses, as well as Orlans can be used. At the front, they flew deep into the rear in Poltava and Dnepropetrovsk even in conditions of counteraction by electronic warfare and air defense systems, incomparable with MANPADS and R-73 on the BEK.

Finally, there are the medium-altitude reconnaissance and strike UAVs with long flight duration, “Inohodets”, which have previously been successfully used to strike at BEKs.

In simple terms: despite all the objective technological problems, the Russian Armed Forces have long had serial, proven products for coastal defense using unmanned aircraft. They are much cheaper and more effective than driving Su-30SMs to drop bombs on unmanned aircraft carriers.

Moreover, in other units, branches and types of troops, the above-described means are already being used for such purposes - literally yesterday, with the help of UAVs, a massive combined attack on Crimea was repelled , which the crews successfully coped with.

And the fact that the Navy still does not take ready-made solutions can only be explained by the unwillingness to seriously deal with the issue organizationally. Or are there more important matters there, and there have been few resignations due to the loss of ships and aircraft over the past three years?

https://rybar.ru/bespilotnaya-aviacziya ... oberezhya/

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

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 14417
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

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

Post by blindpig » Wed May 07, 2025 11:35 am

The RDK is presented in Germany
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 07/05/2025

Image

On March 1, 2025, under the slogan "Russian Opposition Rally," the RDK, a group linked to the Ukrainian military intelligence (GUR), held its first street demonstration in Germany. The rally was held at Berlin's famous Potsdamer Platz station.

In its call for action, the RDK expressed its ambition to become the leader of the Russian military-political opposition to the Kremlin: “ During the three years of war, the Russian Volunteer Corps first became a military unit, then a national liberation movement and a Russian political organization .” In addition to highlighting its commitment to Ukraine by “ holding back the onslaught of the multinational horde ,” the RDK referred to its growing presence in Europe, participating “ in political and cultural events in Ukraine and EU countries .”

In this regard, participation in the Berlin event was intended, according to the RDK, to " establish a dialogue with the Russian emigration ," mobilized that day in a broader mobilization of opposition to Putin, in order to incorporate them into the armed struggle against the current authorities of the Russian Federation. In its call to attend the rally, the RDK's political-military leadership declared that " our fighters and supporters will participate in the demonstration taking place on March 1 in Berlin. And we call on all those who support the armed struggle of the Russian people against the Kremlin regime to attend this event, to stand under our banners, and together show the world what a genuine Russian opposition is ."

The part of the rally attributed to the RDK brought together several dozen people, most of them carrying banners and flags belonging to the group, some of which identified themselves as " Defenders of Europe ." A banner bearing the emblems of Ukrainian far-right collaborators of the RDK, such as Azov and Praviy Sektor, was also visible. Among the leaders present were well-known members of the Russian neo-Nazi far-right, such as Vladimir Ratnikov and Ilya Bogdanov, although Vasily Kiryushchenko, known as Kardinal , received the most media attention .

Dressed in a “Whoever Falls” style, Kiryushchenko, son of the director of the television series that brought Volodymir Zelensky fame as “Servant of the People,” took over as the public spokesman for the RDK in Berlin. Considered one of the RDK’s main ideologues, Kardinal was mentioned in an article by Rémy Ourdan in Le Monde (published here ) in which he appeared as the RDK leader in the GUR-sponsored incursion in Bryansk in early March 2023. In the article, Kardinal mentioned that “ it is no secret that the unit is politically very far to the right ,” to the point of leading the group to oppose any collaboration with the “leftist” Ilya Ponomarev (so leftist that the media under his control instigated a pogrom against passengers on a flight returning from Israel in Dagestan in 2023). The RDK's ties to the most radical bases in Azov are well known. Thus, before being welcomed by Bratstvo and the GUR, the RDK initially entered combat alongside the 98th Battalion of the Azov-Dnipro Territorial Defense, later being incorporated into the Third Assault Brigade, with which the Russian volunteer unit still maintains close ties.

As is common at far-right events, anti-communist slogans were also prominent at the Berlin demonstration, especially among German supporters. They reflect the political values ​​of some of the RDK's political allies, such as the neo-Nazi Der III.Weg (Third Way), one of the groups represented at the rally, in this case through its youth wing, the National Revolutionary Youth.

The news story about the demonstration published on March 3 by Der III.Weg on its website is prefaced with the slogan: “ True Russians are committed to Europe and oppose Putin! ” Noting that “ we national revolutionaries are repeatedly and falsely accused of inciting hatred against Russians ,” the German extremist group states bluntly, “ Nothing could be more wrong than that!” And the argument is unequivocally “ White Power ”: “ As visionaries of a European Confederation, we also include Russians of European descent in the community of struggle and destiny of white Europeans who are related by blood and culture .”

Quite consciously and purely racistly, the Der III.Weg columnist points out that this role is “ not played by the Russian Federation, a prison of nations ruled dictatorially from the Kremlin, but by the true Russian nationalists who are committed to Europe and have fled the ethnic chaos of Inner Asia .”

The neo-Nazi spirit was certainly present on the streets of Potsdamer Platz on March 1st, as the editors of Der III.Weg attest: “ European national revolutionaries are defending not only their own national borders, but also our entire European living space across national borders against the imperialist enemy powers of Washington and Moscow .” In short, European white power on the march against all its internal and external enemies.

For the neo-Nazis of the German Third Way, the embodiment of this white Europe in the fight against the Russian Federation is today the RDK. The III.Weg thus recalls that this group of Russian neo-Nazis fights " in the trenches of the Eastern Front, in the spirit of Andrei Vlasov's Russian Liberation Army, side by side with Ukrainian comrades and those from other European countries against the neo-Bolshevik invasion of Europe by Putin's soldiers ." This neo-Nazi alliance is not new, as revealed by the continued presence of the III.Weg in joint events with the RDK and Ukrainian far-right groups. However, it is new that it manifests itself through the public appearance of the RDK on the streets of a European country as important as Germany.

In a post after the event, the RDK expressed its gratitude for the participation in the demonstration, noting: “ This is an important step for the Corps: to begin representing the Russian people in the political arena and defending their interests not only with weapons in hand. Today we have taken this step! And there will be more! ”

In his assessment of the events, Kardinal mentions in his Telegram that for the RDK, “ the march in Berlin was an unequivocal success. Finally, Russians in exile saw our banners in person, and those present came to take photos with the symbols and expressed their support for our struggle .” He and other RDK members were “ in high demand by journalists, who barely provoked us .” In this way, according to Kardinal , the RDK “ initiated dialogue with the emigration quite successfully and, in my opinion, at the right time .” The evident failure of the turnout, which can hardly be described as massive, is apparently not so much compared to contacts with the Western press and with the current version of White Russia, the Russian emigration in Berlin, which seems to emulate those who fled after the October Revolution a century ago.

It doesn't seem entirely out of the question that White Rex was present at the event and was part of the activists who marched through Berlin with their faces partially covered. In fact, on his Telegram channel, White Powder , he writes in detail about the events, particularly about the confrontation with a Russian opposition group carrying Russian flags. Referring to them, he notes: “ Unfortunately, the degenerate, perverted Svetovites [Russian oppositionists whom the RDK places on the left] didn't give us a fair fight: as soon as Kardinal approached their group, the organizer with his head on fire [referring to a young red-haired man leading the Svetovite group] began calling the Berlin police, who intervened as soon as they heard this pitiful wail and separated the currents, then escorted our column to the hotel. I never cease to be amazed at the cowardice of our political opponents, and my comrades never cease to be amazed at my own naiveté: when did the mongrel, leftist, perverted moans with multi-colored bangs ever give the right a fair fight?” After all, when it comes to considering the traits of the neo-Nazi RDK, deep reflections are not necessary. It is enough to read or listen a little. And to a good listener, a few words are enough.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/07/el-rd ... -alemania/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
The situation in the Kursk direction on May 6 - analysis by @Multi_XAM

The enemy has once again attempted to break through to the territory of the Kursk region in the direction of Glushkovo . In this area , the Ukrainian Armed Forces are represented by separate units from the 21st mechanized and 107th territorial defense brigades ( 92nd battalion ). The breakthrough was traditionally undertaken by armored groups and motorized infantry ( 29th separate rifle battalion ), covered by reconnaissance and attack UAV groups (RUBPLA): "Vedmaki", the "Wings to Hell" detachment ( our opponents - we remember them from the first weeks of the breakthrough to the Kursk region ), the "SOTeam" group, and the "Chorniy Strizh" company. The breakthrough forces are operating with the support of artillery from the 1st self-propelled artillery division of the 21st separate mechanized brigade. Traditionally, in this area we observe special groups of the separate center of special operations "West-1" ( also opponents in Kurilovka, Plekhovo ).

The command of the operational-tactical group "Sumy" pursues two goals:
- purely military - to stretch our forces, creating a threat of consolidation on the right flank of the formations of the Russian Armed Forces advancing in the Yunakovskoye tactical direction in the Basovka - Belovody - Vladimirovka strip;
- political and media - in the run-up to May 9, to discredit our efforts to clear the territory of the Kursk region and compensate for their reputational losses in the eyes of the West.

Despite the fact that in the Belgorod region the enemy was unable to advance deeply in the Krasnoyarsk direction, he does not ease the pressure, forcing our command to hold large forces on the border. Kiev, naturally, fears the stabilization of the situation in the area of ​​responsibility of the "North" group of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, since the strengthening of the units advancing in the Pokrovsk - Mirnograd - Novaya Poltavka - Toretsk zone will lead to the collapse of the Ukrainian Armed Forces front, in the rear of which the enemy does not have an effective defense system. With the exception of the Slavyansk-Kramatorsk agglomeration.

In the above-mentioned areas, despite all the difficulties of the offensive, we have really seen success. It is premature to talk about a fundamental breach of the defense, but there is no positional deadlock, as in the Seversky direction. The enemy remains active in the Pokrovsk - Toretsk zone due to the concentration of large forces from the unmanned systems troops in the area of ​​our offensive actions.

So, we predict an increase in the activity of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the Tetkinsky bridgehead area, at the junction of the Bryansk and Kursk regions, in the Glushkovsky area and the Krasnoyarsk direction ( Belgorod region)..). The enemy's actions will be more in the nature of exhausting blows, which gives him a reason for resonant statements. Nevertheless, the enemy cannot repeat the scenario of creating a serious tactically significant bridgehead here at the moment.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Ukraine war – approaching the end game

Starmer and Macron may dream of a new ‘coalition of the willing’, but they cannot dream away the huge blow that has been dealt to imperialism in Ukraine.
Lalkar writers

Thursday 1 May 2025

Image
It is the military victory of the Russian anti-imperialist forces on the field of battle that alone has cracked open the diplomatic logjam, not the ‘transactional’, ‘deal breaking’ bluster of the temporary inhabitant of the White House.
The crushing defeat of the west’s proxy forces in Ukraine has kicked the door open to an eventual possible diplomatic solution to the immediate conflict, one that addresses Russia’s legitimate security concerns (namely the aggressive expansion of Nato up to Russia’s borders), advances the denazification of Ukrainian society, and guarantees measures to prevent any future imperialist meddling in the region.

No such positive outcome is guaranteed, or is even likely, but at the least the unceremonious dumping of both Brussels and Kiev from the talks draws a clear line dividing the current negotiations from the mendacious travesty of the Minsk process, whose sole purpose was to string Russia along whilst Kiev replenished its forces – as was freely attested to by Angela Merkel in retrospect.

Whatever else may come out of Riyadh, it is unlikely to be Minsk Three.

It is the military victory of the Russian anti-imperialist forces on the field of battle that alone has cracked open the diplomatic logjam, not the ‘transactional’, ‘deal breaking’ bluster of the temporary inhabitant of the White House. Sooner or later, the rifts between the European Union and the US/UK, and those within the EU itself, would have continued growing incrementally, driven on by the overproduction crisis.

But it must be admitted that the sheer brutal vulgarity with which Donald Trump slammed the door on Volodymyr Zelensky, chucking him out of the Oval office in full public view, and then proceeding to ban both Zelensky and the EU from the Riyadh talks, leaving it to the hapless General Kellogg to break the news to the Europeans, made of Trump a peculiarly effective tool of history.

Little of substance has so far been agreed to in Riyadh, at least in public. America floated the idea of a partial temporary ceasefire as regards energy infrastructure (something similar to this had been broached on three earlier occasions by Moscow, without effect). The Russians were happy to work with a limited ceasefire extending over 30 days, signed on 18 March. However within hours of this agreement coming into force, Kiev forces acted to sabotage its implementation.

“On the night of 19 March 2025, several hours after the high-level Russian-American talks were completed and after the president of the Russian Federation accepted the US president’s offer to temporarily cease strikes at the Ukrainian power infrastructure, the Kiev regime launched a deliberate attack by three fixed-wing UAVs at a power infrastructure facility in Stanitsa Kavkazkaya.” (Ukraine still rejects temporary, energy related ceasefire deal, Moon of Alabama, 19 March 2025)

Further violations followed thick and fast, making it clear that Kiev had no intention of accepting in good faith agreements made between the USA and Russia.

On 25 March, the White House announced that in principle Kiev and Moscow were both ready to sign up to a deal to restore safe passage to commercial shipping in the Black Sea. Moscow made it clear, however, that such an agreement could work only if the west first lifts sanctions on Russian banks and reconnects them to the Swift international payments system.

President Trump responded by throwing his toys out of the pram, blathering that President Putin was a liar and was “pissing him off”. His hopes of winning through diplomacy what he cannot secure by the agency of his proxies on the battlefield are clearly not prospering. Meanwhile, until Washington shows itself ready to seriously discuss the terms of Kiev’s surrender (for that is what is really at issue in these ‘peace talks’), the war continues to grind on.

Kiev’s ill thought-out incursion into the Kursk region, driven by the vain hope that these stunts will play well on the media and strengthen Kiev’s hand in talks, in practice result only in the encirclement of thousands of Kiev’s troops, trapped in ‘cauldrons’, and the weakening of the Donbass front line as troops were transferred to shore up the flagging Kursk adventure.

Macron and Starmer want to play at soldiers, at their peril
The Minsk school of pretend talks is now dead and buried, buried for good by the victorious Russian liberation forces. There is no turning the clock back to a world in which Russia could be lied to with impunity, where Russia’s insistence on security guarantees can be written off as so much flannel. This new reality needs to be understood by leaders like President Emmanuel Macron in France and Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Britain, who talk airily about sending boots on the ground to Ukraine, supposedly to act as ‘peacekeepers’.

The USA is more concerned about making the US ‘great again’ than sorting out the shambles in Europe. So entrenched is the postwar axiom that, in the last resort, the USA will always be there to come to the rescue, there are still clowns who believe that, so long as they call themselves peacekeepers, they will have a charmed life.

But according to The Telegraph on 23 March, the British army is already sending out distress signals: “Senior British military officials have firmly rejected Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s proposal to deploy British troops to Ukraine as part of a so-called ‘coalition of the willing.’

“According to reporting by the Telegraph, top defence sources have dismissed the idea as ‘political theatre’, claiming it lacks strategic clarity and fails to consider the operational realities on the ground. One senior source accused the prime minister of speaking prematurely, stating, ‘Starmer got ahead of himself with talk of troops on the ground without knowing what he was talking about.’

“Another senior figure within the military questioned the practicality of sending a peacekeeping force without a clearly defined purpose. Talks of deploying an international contingent of 10,000 troops to western Ukraine have reportedly stalled, not least because of confusion about what such a force would actually be tasked with. ‘What can a 10,000-strong international force based in the west of the country, more than 400km from the front line, do? They can’t even defend themselves,’ the official said.” (Starmer’s Ukraine peacekeeping plan dismissed as ‘political theatre’ by Danielle Sheridan, 23 March 2025)

It remains to be seen what headway President Macron is able to achieve in his grandiose scheme to get EU members to line up behind the so-called ‘coalition of the willing’. He has convened a series of meetings in Paris of European and Nato leaders to discuss Ukraine and security in Europe. Anticipating the third such conclave, booked for 27 March, Macron said: “We will finalise our work on short-term support for the Ukrainian army, on defending a sustainable and durable Ukrainian army model to prevent Russian invasions, and then on the security guarantees that European armies can provide.”

So with a wave of the hand, the French president wipes the slate clean and ignores the experience of three years’ worth of fruitless efforts to forge just such a Ukrainian army model, culminating in the said army’s comprehensive thrashing at the hands of the liberation forces.

Refusal to learn from history brings with it real perils. President Putin has repeatedly made it clear that any deployment of foreign troops in Ukraine, with or without blue helmets, will be understood as a hostile act of war and will be crushed by the liberation forces accordingly.

Starmer and Macron may dream about a new ‘coalition of the willing’ ready to take over from Washington and resume the push against Russia and China as if nothing of note had occurred. But they cannot dream away the huge blow that has been dealt against imperialism, and particularly against European imperialism, by the crushing defeat of the proxy forces in Ukraine.

Sabotage of the German economy
Signally absent from the Macron/Starmer dream team is Germany, which has more pressing problems to tackle – namely, the implosion of the national economy.

When German workers survey the wreck of Germany’s once-powerful industrial economy, with factories closing or mothballed, millions out of work and landmark German companies fleeing the country, they are right to blame the ruling elites which have caused this by a policy of subordinating Germany’s national interests to America’s ill-starred adventure in Ukraine.

The recent elections, which effectively returned those same elites to power, have nothing to offer workers other than more of the same, and only owe their temporary stay of execution to the current divisions between ‘left’ and ‘right’ wings of the anti-EU and antiwar populist revolt. A similar electoral pattern obtains in French politics, reflecting the growing revolt against EU/Nato domination.

Hungary carves for herself
Hungary’s Viktor Orbán has long been a thorn in the side of the bureaucrats in both Nato and the EU, resisting attempts from both to erode Hungary’s sovereignty and pressurise it into bankrolling Project Ukraine.

In contrast to Germany bankrupting herself to pay for Project Ukraine, Hungary is carving for herself and broadening her commercial and diplomatic relations. Whilst BMW reported that net profits slumped more than a third last year, the Chinese electric car manufacturer Build Your Dream (BYD) has announced plans to begin production of its cars in the Hungarian town of Szeged.

“When it came to the final decision for BYD’s new factory site, the choice was between Hungary and Germany, with the EV company finally settling on Hungary after 224 rounds of negotiations with the Hungarian Investment Promotion Agency,” according to the official blog of the cabinet office of the prime minister.” (BYD Szeged promises ecosystem development and a significant economic boost for the area by Luca Albert, Budapest Business Journal, 6 April 2025)

To add spice to the mix, China’s BYD is in hot competition with Elon Musk’s Tesla, whose stock has shrunk by 25 percent on the year to date. Comically Musk, a vocal champion of Trump’s tariff wars, is now suddenly assailed by doubts.

“Elon Musk’s Tesla has warned that Donald Trump’s trade war could expose the electric carmaker to retaliatory tariffs that would also affect other automotive manufacturers in the USA. In an unsigned letter to Jamieson Greer, the US trade representative, Tesla said it ‘supports fair trade’ but that the US administration should ensure it did not ‘inadvertently harm US companies’.” (Tesla tells US government Trump trade war could ‘harm’ EV companies by Mark Sweney, The Guardian, 14 March 2025)

No such tender concerns prevented the criminal gutting of the one-time economic powerhouse of Germany.

Whilst Starmer and Macron run about trying to lash together a coalition of the willing – willing, that is, to send thousands of young men to a certain death in Ukraine – others may look to the future in a multipolar world in which the likes of Hungary, Russia, China, Iran and Brics are recognised, not as public enemies, but as brother nations, trading partners and peaceful cohabitants of a common earth.

https://thecommunists.org/2025/05/01/ne ... -end-game/

******

Now About "Swedish" Case.

I mentioned it in my today's video. Yes, this is 100% confirmed info by people who command the Russian formation which did this. How do I know? Well, I know many things which sometimes are not for public disclosure until they are mentioned by "holders of information". So, on one operational axis Russians took this Swedish Commander (an equivalent of Lieutenant-Colonel) POW. He was guarded by one of the Baltic states security detail--easy-peasy for the level of Russian guys who disposed of them. So, this officer, staff officer for VSU (AFU) exhibited a level of tactical and operational "ability" which, for the lack of a better word, is not even rudimentary--it is fairy taleish. He really believed that if his formation attacked in a designated sector Russians were supposed to retreat, nay, run and that this guy's troops would reach objective no problem. Ooops, but for some unknown, incomprehensible reasons, not only Russians defended their objective, but, damn, they unloaded a firestorm and then, would you believe it, they counterattacked. This is not what they teach them in NATO's military academies.

When I say that NATO officer corps is utterly unprepared for modern war, I mean it. Remarkably, you can sort of address this on a tactical level in a sense that you can teach them to maneuver and consider the opponent--and even that is useless under modern conditions. But the problem is both on tactical and operational level is that Russians outrange and outfire ANYTHING NATO can bring to bear. I am on record--Iraq War experience counts for nothing and, in fact, is a huge obstacle. This also explains a bunch of the American loser generals (like Ben Hodges) suffering form an acute case of butthurt and professional envy. It is now a confirmed fact--NATO doesn't understand the role of air defense in modern war. In their mind it was supposed to to be always this:

When comparing our ability to find the enemy against a near-peer threat such as Russia (or an increasingly capable China), significant friendly capability disadvantages immediately become apparent and must be offset. FM 3-0 defines reconnaissance as “a mission undertaken to obtain, by visual observation or other detection methods, information about the activities and resources of an enemy or adversary, or to secure data concerning the meteorological, hydrographic, or geographic characteristics of a particular area.”4 By this definition, we must look at every capability, across all domains, to understand the existing disparities in our ability to collect information against current threats.

Image

This middle segment "Conduct large-scale ground combat" disappears. Technically, the US could (not will) "find the enemy", but that's about it, the doctrinal pivot of the US Armed Forces of bringing the long-range fires to bear disappears also. No, the US still has the lead in terms of satellite-based ISR (Russia is catching up), per pure signal recon--well, that's complicated. Russians jam better than anyone in the world and then there is this teeny-weeny detail of pre-positioning. So, you see-this Swedish commander was thinking that he would be facing those peasant Ivans with pitch-forks and hiding behind piles of Russian corpses and running away at the first glance of NATO equipment guided to battle with NATO (his) tactical and operational brilliance. But, but ... well, you know the story now. Doctrinal catastrophe is not visible to the average Joe, but it is the most profound catastrophe NATO faces when they have to understand how amateurish and militarily impotent they are. The cognitive dissonance is a bitch.

So, somebody in the US Army (not Ben Hodges let alone Kellog) was thinking in the right direction in 2019.

Russian integrated air defense systems (IADS) make sustained air superiority questionable, especially at the beginning of operations when geographical proximity to positioned Russian forces enables their deliberate emplacement. With our current systems, we will only be able to create temporary windows of superiority with great effort. The Russians employ IADS at every tactical level, from battalion to division, with a focus on finding and destroying U.S. fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft. They are also steadily working toward overmatch in the field of counterfire radar, fielding a variety of systems across the depths of their formations and with varying levels of capability. This might enable the Russian fires complex to “out attrite” our own counterfire capabilities, leaving them with the only systems on the battlefield.

Too bad, they didn't recognize the scale of the NATO tactical and operational rut which prevents the most important thing--internalization of the issue--guiding you to correct decisions. They wanted to try, they did. Somebody tell Trump--the US Army didn't produce a general the scale of Erich von Manstein or Georgi Zhukov, or Konstantin Rokossovsky in the last 80 years. Russia did, and that's what makes the world of difference.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/05 ... -case.html

******

Russia announced the beginning of a ceasefire from May 7 to 11
May 6, 9:00 PM

Image

Russia announced the beginning of a ceasefire from May 7 to 11

The Kremlin and the Russian Foreign Ministry confirmed that the previously announced ceasefire will come into effect on May 7.
Troops have been instructed to cease fire, but will have the ability to respond in the event of enemy fire.
The ceasefire will last from May 7 to May 11.
The enemy has not demonstrated in any way that it intends to comply with it, showering hysterical threats.

The forecast is that the fire will not cease, a decrease in the intensity of hostilities in certain sections of the front is possible, as during the "Easter Truce".

If agreements on ending the war are not reached in the coming weeks (this is still possible), then we can expect the start of offensive operations by the Russian Armed Forces in a number of areas in the second half/end of May, preparations for which were underway throughout the spring. Ultimately, no one has cancelled the task of liberating our territories from Nazi occupation.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9823941.html

The Ukrainian Armed Forces' offensive on the Glushkovsky district. 07.05.2025
May 7, 11:57

Image

The Ukrainian Armed Forces' offensive on the Glushkovsky district. 07.05.202

The enemy continued attacks in the area of ​​the settlements of Novy Put and Tetkino. Since the beginning of the attacks, it has already lost about 16-18 units of equipment (including about 4 engineering vehicles) + a significant number of infantry. Nevertheless, it continues to pound our defenses and is ready to throw in reserves to maintain the intensity of the attacks. In general, so far events are developing according to the scenario of the battles in the Krasnoyarsk region and with approximately the same result for the enemy.

The attacks on Tetkino and the previous attacks on the Krasnoyarsk region are aimed at drawing off part of the forces of the Russian Armed Forces from the Sumy direction, where we are putting pressure on Yunakovka. In the event of the capture of at least one settlement, the enemy was also going to get some PR, saying that we are again advancing in the Kursk region. For now, costly attacks, where a large amount of equipment is lost, are extinguished at the border. As soon as the equipment begins to run out, the infantry is sent to the slaughter through the forest plantations on foot or on ATVs.
At some point, the costs begin to outweigh and such attacks are curtailed. For our troops, this is also an opportunity to destroy valuable enemy engineering equipment, which Tom is forced to use to overcome engineering barriers and minefields.

Online broadcast of military operations in Ukraine, as usual, here https://t.me/boris_rozhin (if anyone is interested, subscribe)

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9824609.html

Google Translator

******

U.S.-Ukraine agreement signed: How will it be implemented and what awaits Kiev?

Erkin Oncan

May 7, 2025

The agreement shows that the U.S. continues to use economic tools as part of its geopolitical influence strategy.

The long-anticipated agreement between the United States and Ukraine was signed in Washington, D.C., opening Ukraine’s lithium, rare earth elements, and other critical mineral resources to U.S. capital. The deal also includes the creation of a fund named the United States–Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, expected to finance the rebuilding of Ukraine.

From Washington’s perspective, the agreement allows the U.S. to gain access to Ukraine’s strategic natural resources under the umbrella of an investment fund, effectively compensating for the military and financial support already provided to Kiev. From Ukraine’s side, although it came to the table seeking economic recovery and military backing in the war against Russia, it does not appear to have fully achieved those aims.

No concrete security guarantees

The partnership envisions a joint administrative body in which both the U.S. Treasury Department and the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) have equal voting rights, with profits to be split 50/50 and tax exemptions in place. However, the text omits the binding security guarantees that Ukraine has persistently requested, offering instead vague promises.

The agreement was signed at the U.S. Treasury Department by U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Ukraine’s First Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko. The joint statement emphasized collaboration to “accelerate Ukraine’s economic recovery,” and the previously provided $72 billion in military and economic aid is considered part of the fund, not an additional debt—an incentive likely used to bring Ukraine to the table despite the absence of security clauses.

Despite repeated calls from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and top officials for firm guarantees against the Russian threat, the final text only includes “support” rather than any binding commitments. It does not offer NATO membership or any explicit defense obligations—meaning the U.S. did not take on direct responsibility for additional arms shipments or military interventions. This cautious approach likely reflects Washington’s ongoing diplomatic engagement with Moscow.

Carrot-and-stick strategy toward Kiev

By leaving open the possibility of future military aid and the inclusion of air defense systems under the fund, the U.S. appears to be maintaining a carrot-and-stick strategy with the Ukrainian leadership.

Certain provisions—such as the recognition of Ukraine’s ownership of all natural resources, shared management rights, and the continued state ownership of companies like Energoatom and Ukrnafta—are viewed as “partial gains” for Kiev.

How will the agreement be implemented?

According to the agreement, Ukraine’s Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources will oversee the opening of mining fields to international investors in coordination with the fund. Geological data will be shared with the DFC and other institutions to help investors assess potential sites more quickly.

The U.S. will deploy mining technology directly to the field to reduce production costs—one of the key barriers that previously prevented Ukraine from fully utilizing its mineral wealth. The technology will come from the U.S., while the labor force will be Ukrainian.

Another critical requirement for resource extraction is an uninterrupted supply chain and the necessary infrastructure. Hence, the agreement prioritizes transportation and energy infrastructure projects to ensure continuous delivery to ports and refineries.

When will it take effect?

The agreement will enter into force within 30 days after it is ratified by the Ukrainian Parliament. The first board meeting of the joint management committee is expected between May 13–15. Initial investment projects are set to launch in the summer.

To proceed, Ukraine must transfer revenues from its state resources into the fund in a timely manner—these transfers will be closely monitored and audited by the U.S. In other words, Ukraine’s compliance with the agreement will determine whether it receives further promised defense support.

How did Ukrainian politicians react?

The agreement has sparked controversy within Ukraine’s political circles. Lawmakers from former President Petro Poroshenko’s European Solidarity party criticized President Zelensky for not involving Parliament in the discussions prior to signing. They demanded a special session with full parliamentary participation to review the text.

Borislav Bereza, former MP and ex-spokesperson for the far-right Right Sector, criticized the lack of security guarantees, stating:

“Zelensky claimed the deal would secure concrete guarantees from the U.S. in exchange for access to Ukraine’s natural resources. But none of that is in the final text. It’s a strange situation. The agreement is signed, but the guarantees are missing. So we didn’t get the main thing Zelensky went to the White House for on February 28. And remember how tough he sounded back then?”

Yaroslav Zhelezniak, an MP from the liberal opposition Holos party, also pointed out the removal of security clauses from the draft:

“I don’t see any major victory here. It seems we heroically escaped from a crisis of our own making—created by hasty promises and uncoordinated statements.”

Serhiy Sydorenko, Editor-in-Chief of European Pravda, offered a more moderate view:

“This is definitely not a betrayal. It’s a reasonable agreement that needed to be signed. Some parts were surprisingly positive. But it’s not a victory either. Further negotiations are still ahead, and political elements have been wrapped into technical ones. We’ve learned not to celebrate too early.”

Where are Ukraine’s critical minerals?

Ukraine holds an estimated $15 trillion in mineral wealth, making it one of Europe’s richest in natural resources. It contains:

Europe’s largest reserves of lithium, titanium, and uranium.
23 of the 50 critical minerals defined by the U.S. government.
Graphite, used in EV batteries, in regions like Berdychivskyi, Pobuzkyi, Kryvorizhkyi, and Pryazovskyi—placing Ukraine among the world’s top five in reserves.
Titanium, essential for aerospace and construction.
One-third of Europe’s lithium, especially in the Polokhivske, Shevchenkivske, Dobra, and Kruta Balka regions—some currently under Russian control.
Vast reserves of beryllium, uranium, copper, lead, zinc, silver, nickel, cobalt, manganese, and 17 rare earth elements.
Kryvyi Rih, which hosts one of the world’s largest iron ore reserves, key to Ukraine’s steel industry.
Western Ukraine and the Carpathians, rich in gold and other precious metals.
Around 40% of key mining regions in Donetsk, Lugansk, and Zaporizhzhia are already Russian territories..

What Does the agreement signify?

Above all, this agreement shows that the U.S. continues to use economic tools as part of its geopolitical influence strategy. The targeted minerals are essential to the growing electric vehicle sector and advanced defense technologies—making this agreement a crucial step in America’s preparations for the emerging era of strategic competition.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... aits-kiev/

The claims of these vast mineral reserves do not jibe with the US Geological Survey. Who ya gonna trust? Trump, with his salesman mentality, will naturally gravitate to the most advantageous possibility, the smell of profit always his primary motivation. I think he's bought a pig in a poke.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply