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 » Thu May 08, 2025 11:58 am

Drones, threats and revisionism
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 08/05/2025

Image

The war in Ukraine is currently in a strange limbo between Donald Trump's claims that an agreement is closer and that he will be the man who made it possible, and the day-to-day reality, always with the appearance of perpetually rising tensions. On the one hand, VE Day is an opportune moment to reduce tensions, to claim, each country in its own way—often explicitly denouncing the actions of the other side—the victory of World War II, which, despite the current rhetoric, was shared. But the week is also conducive to political confrontation. Curiously, unlike other years, Ukraine has chosen this time to claim its role in that war, whose symbols it has banned by law. “Ukraine paid a devastating price in World War II: 5 million civilians died and 3 million soldiers gave their lives fighting. The role of Ukrainians in defeating Nazism was crucial, yet often overlooked. Let us remember the true history of World War II and honor those who fought for freedom,” the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs wrote yesterday, accompanying a wartime image with the new symbol used to celebrate victory, the British-style poppy, in front of the Victory Banner, which will dominate the Moscow parade on Friday, but which is banned in Ukraine for being too communist and for its ties to the Soviet Union.

That parade has been a source of controversy these days between the most radical sectors of the European Union and those unwilling to completely break with the past. Kaja Kallas had already warned of "consequences" for European leaders who attend the May 9 commemorations in Moscow, a threat especially directed at Alexander Vučić, the president of Serbia, who, despite his attempts to advance European integration, is trying to balance that agenda with the friendly relations Belgrade has traditionally maintained with Moscow. "I'm going even if the sky falls on my shoulders," he stated last week, after receiving a veiled threat that Serbia's accession to the EU could be jeopardized by the trip to Moscow. Yesterday, the Baltic countries announced that they would close their airspace to aircraft bound for the Russian capital, citing the political—or politically incorrect—purpose of the trip. The veto affected not only the Serbian president, who was forced to make an emergency landing in Azerbaijan, but also Robert Fico, who had confirmed his attendance despite threats from the head of European Union diplomacy .

To these political warnings and logistical threats must be added the saber-rattling from Ukraine, which has been joined not only by nationalist battalions but also by Zelensky himself, who seized on the idea of ​​the three-day truce announced by Vladimir Putin to claim that the Russian president is terrified of the possibility of Kiev attacking what he considers a legitimate military target. Last week, the Ukrainian president insisted he could not "guarantee the safety" of the parade guests, an obvious threat that Zelensky camouflaged by suggesting the possibility of a Kremlin false flag . The strategy of tension is clear, although hopefully it will not extend to the dream of bombing the Kremlin during the Victory Day parade. No one in their right mind would attack an event in which the head of state of the world's second-largest power, Xi Jinping, is participating.

However, Ukraine is taking advantage of the hours leading up to a day that much of the Russian population considers one of the most important of the year and is making a special effort to attack the vicinity of Moscow with drones in the hours leading up to the ceasefire announced by Vladimir Putin, which was scheduled to begin tomorrow. Yesterday, hundreds of Ukrainian drones attacked several Russian regions, including Moscow, as they had done 24 hours earlier, always without major military targets and with the aim of intimidating. kyiv also attempted to attack the Russian Black Sea Fleet using at least five Neptune missiles launched from Odessa towards Novorossiysk. All of them were shot down near Crimea.

Frightening the population, attempting to reduce the presence of foreign political authorities, and delegitimizing the May 9 parade is Ukraine's primary mission this week. "In two days, they will celebrate their imaginary 'lone victory' in World War II, forgetting that nearly 7 million Ukrainians gave their lives fighting against Nazism. In Red Square, troops and pieces of Russian military equipment will parade, only to be sent after the spectacle to kill Ukrainians, seize our land, and steal our resources. Just as the Nazis did in 1941," wrote Mikhail Podolyak, one of the leading exponents of the movement to mark a complete break with Russia, renounce all common symbols, deny the role of the Soviet Union, and claim Ukraine's role above all else. In his aggressive and arrogant line, the advisor to Andriy Ermak, Zelensky's right-hand man, called the parade on the "blood-red square" a "shitshow." In the past, units of the Ukrainian Armed Forces have marched in Red Square alongside Russian troops and those from other former Soviet republics, and on Friday, units from kyiv's main trading partner, China, will do so, among others.

Unlike the rest of the year, when Soviet symbols are avoided, the decoration of Red Square will bear, as on previous occasions, the coat of arms of the Soviet Union and will celebrate a victory so unique that even the films sponsored by the Russian Ministry of Culture in recent years make an effort to show the valor and role of soldiers and units from European and Central Asian republics. As Russian opposition journalist Leonid Ragozin wrote yesterday on social media, referring to Ukraine's insistence that its role in the victory is being overlooked, "It is truly overlooked when World War II monuments are being removed en masse while streets are named after Nazi collaborators." It is not Russia that has erased the role of Ukrainians in the common victory against fascism, but Ukraine that has chosen to erase the symbols of that struggle and promote the glorification of those who fought until final defeat protecting the troops of Nazi Germany.

In this European Union, still searching for its place, generally unaware that its privileged position is a thing of the past, the Ukrainian government plays the role of a star pupil who has quickly understood that claiming its role in the Soviet victory can be achieved by praising those who collaborated with Nazism throughout the year and using the first week of May to blame Russia for having appropriated a success that is not its own. The countries that surrendered barely without a fight, those that stayed on the sidelines, surrendered practically voluntarily, or waited for the two great military powers—first the Soviet Union and then the United States, with the belated opening of a second front—to turn the war around before truly joining the resistance, have for years opted for Europe Day, which explicitly excludes Russia, to make the day a more European commemoration , that is, with fewer red flags. Led by the Baltic countries and Ukraine, this view of the war is not far from that of Donald Trump, who this week wrote on his personal social media account that the United States won that war and that "without the United States, the war would have been won by other countries." Specifically, the Soviet Union. Obscuring that role, and not Ukraine's role as an integral part of the Soviet Union, is the goal of historical revisionism, which for a decade now has not been unique to the Baltic countries but has spread to the entire European Union.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/08/drone ... isionismo/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
SITUATION IN THE SOUTH DONETSK DIRECTION BEFORE THE DECLARED CEASEFIRE

Soldiers from Primorye before the ceasefire:
Artillery crews and FPV drone operators carried out pinpoint strikes on Ukrainian Armed Forces positions.
Destroyed:

3 dugouts;
5 Baba Yaga-type UAVs;
11 quadcopters;

Managed to thwart an attempt by the Ukrainian Armed Forces to reinforce their positions.

Soldiers from Transbaikalia:
Before 23:59 07.05, artillery and FPV drones struck enemy targets in a number of areas:
Destroyed:

1 shelter in the Bogatyr area;
3 temporary deployment points (TDPs) in the Alekseyevka area;
Destroyed 1 pickup truck in the Bogatyr area;

Disabled 2 UAV ground control station antennas in the Alekseyevka area.

By soldiers from the banks of the Amur before midnight:
Destroyed:

Starlink terminal by pinpoint drop from UAV in the Gulyaipole area;
2 UAV control points in the Gulyaipole and Dorozhnyanka areas;
Bunker in the Mirnoye area.

Artillery crews with D-30 mounts suppressed:

2 mortar crews of the Armed Forces of Ukraine north of Dorozhnyanka.

Units of the "Vostok" group, in accordance with the order of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, have been observing the terms of the temporary ceasefire since 00:00 on May 8. At the moment, it is reported from the scene that the Ukrainian fascists are attempting to provoke. We continue to monitor the situation!

@voin_dv


***

Colonelcassad
The Russian Defense Ministry reported that even before the ceasefire, our attack aircraft managed to liberate Troitskoye on the territory of the DPR as part of the ongoing offensive.
After the ceasefire, relying on Troitskoye, we can continue to advance towards the borders of the DPR. And the next couple of days can be used for rotations and the delivery of ammunition.

The Russian Defense Ministry also reported that despite the declared ceasefire, the enemy attempted to attack on the border of the Kursk region (in the Tetkino area) and in the Dzerzhinsk area. The attacks were repelled. Let me remind you that the declared ceasefire does not prohibit Russian troops from responding to shelling and offensive activity of the enemy. And this activity is being recorded.

Along the entire line of combat contact, Ukrainian units carried out 173 shelling attacks from barrel artillery, tanks and mortars on positions of our troops, as well as 4 using multiple launch rocket systems. In addition, 300 strikes and drops of ammunition from unmanned aerial vehicles were carried out. A total of 488 ceasefire violations have been recorded.

At the same time, in some areas the ceasefire is either still in effect or has reduced the intensity of military action. In fact, the new ceasefire is working in much the same way as the "Easter" one - it works here, it doesn't work there. Mostly, it doesn't work. Of course, no sustainable ceasefire is possible in such a regime. That's why Russia does not agree to a 30-day ceasefire and will continue its offensive operation from the night of May 11. Because Moscow has no illusions about Ukraine. Such "ceasefires" are a tool in negotiations with the Americans.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

WHO IS WINKING, WHO IS CAPITULATING – THE NEW PODCAST ON TRUMP’S WARS ON THE FRONT, INSIDE THE PENTAGON, CANADA TOO

Image

By John Helmer @bears_with

As if it wasn’t already clear, the mainstream media led by Reuters, a Russia warfighting propaganda platform based in New York, have just announced that when President Donald Trump says he is for peace with Russia, he is either winking at his Defense Secretary Peter Hegseth or blinking at President Vladimir Putin.

Or else the coordination between the President’s mouth and his eyes fails from time to time and he cannot control his officials, staff, and advisors because they can’t follow when he contradicts himself.

Reporting on a Trump and Pentagon order for the US to halt arms deliveries to Ukraine, through the Polish hub at Rzeszow, and then retraction of the order and resumption of the delivery flights, Reuters says infighting is rife within the White House and the Pentagon, and that either Trump is unaware or he is unable to control it.

“The cancelations,” according to Reuters, “came after Trump wrapped up a January 30 Oval Office meeting about Ukraine that included Hegseth and other top national security officials, according to three sources familiar with the situation. During the meeting, the idea of stopping Ukraine aid came up, said two people with knowledge of the meeting, but the president issued no instruction to stop aid to Ukraine. The president was unaware of Hegseth’s order, as were other top national security officials in the meeting, according to two sources briefed on the private White House discussions and another with direct knowledge of the matter. Asked to comment on this report, the White House told Reuters that Hegseth had followed a directive from Trump to pause aid to Ukraine, which it said was the administration’s position at the time. It did not explain why, according to those who spoke to Reuters, top national security officials in the normal decision making process didn’t know about the order or why it was so swiftly reversed.”

The January 30 Oval Office meeting was secret. The official White House schedule for that day reveals only that Trump held a press briefing in the morning on the fatal helicopter and airliner crash over Washington the night before; lunched with Vice President JD Vance; and then signed executive orders for the rest of the afternoon.

What Vance decided that day with Trump isn’t revealed by Reuters’s sources, some of whom have been fired from their Pentagon and National Security Council posts.

According to the news agency, “three sources familiar with the situation said Hegseth misinterpreted discussions with the president about Ukraine policy and aid shipments without elaborating further. Four other people briefed on the situation said a small cadre of staffers inside the Pentagon, many of whom have never held a government job and who have for years spoken out against U.S. aid to Ukraine, advised Hegseth to consider pausing aid to the country. Two people familiar with the matter denied there was a true cutoff in aid. One of them described it as a logistical pause…It’s unclear if Trump subsequently questioned or reprimanded Hegseth. One source with direct knowledge of the matter said National Security Adviser [Michael] Waltz ultimately intervened to reverse the cancelations. Waltz was forced out on Thursday and is expected to be nominated as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations…At least one of the staffers who had previously pushed for the administration to pull back its support for Kyiv, Dan Caldwell, was escorted out of the Pentagon for a leak he claims never happened. Caldwell, a veteran, served as one of Hegseth’s chief advisers, including on Ukraine.”

For more on Trump’s peace-is-war inside his own administration, the Caldwell sacking, and the Ozymandias strategy for outcome, read this.

The Reuters story has been amplified by the Russia warfighters in Washington, London, and Kiev to persuade Trump to escalate against Russia, not withdraw. “Despite the brief pause in February and the longer one that began in early March,” Reuters reports, “the Trump administration has resumed sending the last of the aid approved under U.S. President Joe Biden. No new policy has been announced.”

“This expose[s] a chaotic decision-making process and an unclear chain of command within former US President Donald Trump’s administration,” concludes Euromaidan Press, a Kiev propaganda outlet.

In this podcast with Nima Alkhorshid and Graham Fuller, we discuss how this is now playing out on all fronts – Russia and Ukraine, Iran, Yemen, and even Canada.

With the last of these, Trump has forced newly elected Prime Minister Mark Carney to make a public capitulation. Twitching with nerves in the Oval Office on Tuesday (May 6), Carney did not challenge Trump as he repeated his threat to annex Canada, insult Carney’s predecessor prime minister, Justin Trudeau; claim personal credit for the outcome of the Canadian election; and falsify the resource and goods trade between the US and Canada. Trump also arranged a diplomatic snub for Carney when his aircraft landed.

Click to view the hour-long podcast here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Znzs2-QFYc8

The first report of the agreement on a Russia-US summit meeting next week, when Trump is in the Middle East, appeared last Saturday (May 3); click. The report also described the Russian reasons and conditions, which included testing whether Trump can control the Ukrainian campaign of drone and missile attacks on the Russian hinterland, and attempts by Ukrainian ground forces to break across the border into Belgorod. “The planned meeting may be derailed at the last minute if the Ukrainians violate the Victory Day ceasefire [between May 8 and 11], and if Trump is either shown to be incapable of controlling the Kiev regime, or duplicitous in aiding the violations. If the Ukrainians do not observe it, the Russians will hit back hard, very hard, and then ask Trump if he still wants to meet. It might go to the wire.”

This uncertainty is the reason that when Trump said he was planning “a very, very big announcement, as big as it gets,” he qualified this by adding that he would not make his disclosure until Thursday or Friday, or possibly not until next Monday. Watch Trump at Min 16, Min 29.

Image
Source: https://johnhelmer.net/

Trump was almost upstaging Putin who will be holding summit-level meetings with China’s President Xi Jinping and other leaders who are attending the Victory Day celebration on May 9. To make sure the Americans did not betray their preliminary agreement on the summit, Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov announced earlier on May 6 that the US had been invited to send its Moscow ambassador, Lynne Tracy, to the ceremony.

Russia front
For the opening of the Russian army’s spring offensive, click to watch this operations map analysis by Major (retired) Mark Takacs.

Image
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-z-JrJjdJM

There is a correlation between the General Staff’s electric war campaign – once Kremlin restrictions have been lifted – and Russian advances on the battlefield.

This can be visualized in this charting of army gains of territory over time. Omitted is the start of the campaign and the first intensive raids of October 2022. The peaks on the chart from 2023 to the present show there is a time lag between the electric war raids, damage assessment by the General Staff, and advances on the battlefield. This corroborates what Takacs is calling the pattern of the strict timetable.

The dates of the major electric war raids have been October 10-12 and 16-20, 2022; October 22-27, 2023; March 29-30, 2024; June 1, 2024; and November 7, 2024. President Putin accepted Trump’s proposal for a 30-day halt to electric war raids which began after their telephone call on February 12. Click to follow each stage of the electric war.

Image

A NATO veteran and military engineer comments: “looking at the graph and the data spreadsheet on which it’s based, I’m thinking the Russians would not have made even the progress they have to date without the electric war. In fact, we may be able to argue that the electric war has been so successful that it outstripped Russian political capacity to keep up with it. The not-so-secret is that the Special Military Operation could be over at the flick of a switch, literally.”

2. Yemen front

At his Oval Office presser on May 6, Trump used the same word as his negotiator Steven Witkoff has used against Hamas – capitulation. Trump’s reference, however, is to a ceasefire limited by Ansar Allah to Houthi action against US vessels, not against all other shipping travelling to and from Israel or in the Red Sea. Oman has confirmed its officials have mediated this ceasefire arrangement.

Image
Source https://x.com/badralbusaidi/status/1919823059256533103

Image
Source: https://x.com/badralbusaidi/status/1919842287426928793

However, the Ansar Allah response intimates that Trump was motivated to seek the ceasefire for the time he is in the Middle East, within range of Houthi missiles. The Houthi military chief, Field Marshal Mahdi al-Mashat, issued a statement on May 9 declaring that “we indirectly informed the Americans that the continued escalation will affect the visit of the criminal Trump to the region, and we informed them of nothing else…if the criminal Trump wants to stop his aggression and compensate for what he has left behind, this is up to him.”

Image
Source: https://www.saba.ye/ar/news3477282.htm

On May 6, it was reported in Washington that a second F-18 aircraft from the USS Harry Truman had been lost during operations against the Houthis. In this latest incident, the aircraft crashed as it was landing on the deck of the aircraft carrier. On April 29 an F-18 had rolled off the vessel as it was being prepared for takeoff, during evasive manoeuvres by the Truman under Houthi fire.

3. The Kashmir front

For the background to the Pahalgam attack on April 22 and the subsequent Indian, Pakistani, Russian, and other international responses, read this.

A day later, on May 5, Putin telephoned Prime Minister Narendra Modi to convey his “condolences over the death of Indian citizens killed in a barbaric terrorist attack committed on April 20 in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir. Both leaders emphasised the need to uncompromisingly fight terrorism in all its forms. During the conversation, an emphasis was made on the strategic nature of the Russian-Indian relations based on the special and privileged partnership. Resistant to any external influence, they continue to develop rapidly across all areas.”

This was not the full Russian support which some Indian media have reported.

Putin’s coolness, an Indian political source said, was the reciprocal of Indian statements following the start of the Russian Special Military Operation (SVO). Then, says the source, the Indians not only did not support Russia publicly, but they also scolded Putin. And yet there was unreserved support at all levels. [In the present situation] Russia will do the same — suggest peace and aid in any way it can. If Modi were to ask — we doubt he will — the Putin advice will be not to repeat any of the mistakes of the SVO; to have very clear goals for a military operation; to prepare well and start the fight when you are prepared for the worst, the unthinkable scenario and can’t stop till you have your goal, no matter what the cost. Calculate that cost. ”

Today (Wednesday May 7) the Indian military launched air attacks against nine targets in Pakistan. Here is the Ministry of Defense bulletin: “A little while ago, the Indian Armed Forces launched OPERATION SINDOOR, hitting terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir from where terrorist attacks against India have been planned and directed. Altogether, nine (9) sites have been targeted. Our actions have been focused, measured and non-escalatory in nature. No Pakistani military facilities have been targeted. India has dernonstrated considerable restraint in selection of targets and method of execution.”

“These steps come in the wake of the barbaric Pahalgam terrorist attack in which 25 Indians and one Nepali citizen were murdered. We are living up to the commitment that those responsible for this attack will he held accountable. There will be detailed briefing on OPERATION SINDOOR, later today.”

Image

“No Pakistani civilian, economic or military targets have been hit. Only known terrorist camps have been hit.” Source: https://www.ndtv.com/
Sindoor, literally, is a vermilion red or orange cosmetic powder primarily used in India and Nepal. In Hindu culture, it symbolizes a woman's marital status, and is typically applied along the hairline by married women; its removal often indicates widowhood. It is also associated with fertility and power.

The Delhi source comments: “Modi’s response has been very measured and it satisfies public opinion. It demonstrates Indians can hit any target inside Pakistan at will. In anticipation of Pakistani retaliation, the government has announced blackouts and safety drills for today. If Pakistan hits back, the second strike will be massive, and hopefully that will be that.”

4. Canada front

On his arrival in Washington, Prime Minister Carney was met by an official US welcoming party of two – Abigail Jones, the acting White House protocol chief and Colonel Randall Heusser; he is head of the refuelling unit at Joint Base Andrews which will fuelled Carney’s aircraft for its return flight to Ottawa. Heusser ranks below the airbase chief. His and Jones’s rank were a calculated snub to the head of the Canadian Government.

Image
Left: Airport ceremony: https://x.com/dimitrilascaris/status/19 ... 4382623028

Right: Oval Office press conference -- https://www.youtube.com/live/9t5W_pqiw_8 The transcript of remarks can be read here. Note that Carney spoke only in English, and omitted to speak also in French, as he did while campaigning in Canada where French is the second official language. When France’s President Emmanual Macron was in the Oval Office to meet Trump in February, he spoke in French and in English.

https://johnhelmer.net/who-is-winking-w ... more-91561

******

Another "truce" has begun
May 8, 10:59

Image

Another "truce" has begun

Another "ceasefire" started at night, which should last from the night of May 8 to May 11.
The enemy did not officially accept it, but in fact the Ukrainian Armed Forces at the front received orders to cease fire.
De facto, it is being carried out in much the same way as the previous "Easter truce".
In some areas of the front, everything has practically died down, in others the shelling has continued, but its intensity has decreased, and in some places the fighting has not stopped, like the same Tetkino area and the border of the Kursk and Sumy regions.

In the next 24 hours it will become clear how long this situation will last in the following days, since the desire to somehow screw up May 9 is inescapable among the Kiev Nazis.
I would not expect a complete ceasefire, rather there will be a regime - we fight here, we don't fight there, and after May 10 everything will continue as usual.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9826464.html

Google Translator

******

Russian Soldiers Die Too.

Nowhere near VSU numbers, but they do and their bodies are evacuated as soon as humanly possible and are given proper identification, send-off by relatives and are provided honorable funeral. I am not a cold hard animal, albeit I understand clearly the issue of physical annihilation of VSU and the remnants of 404 mobilizational potential. I also know the degree to which Ukrainians have been brainwashed and conditioned for this slaughter. But here is a sister of one of the VSU militants (I cannot call them soldiers anymore) who was called to identify the body of her KIAed brother--this is not neural network or propaganda, it is genuine--and she was is shock when she recognized that her brother's body was a ... stitched up collection of body parts of other 200s of VSU. You don't need to know Ukrainian language. (Video at link.)

This is NATO war and NATO generals' frustration, envy, fear and lies manifest themselves in atrocities, and sheer inhumanity. Losers behave like this.
Meanwhile, here is VSU's strongpoint after the work of Russian artillery and aviation. (Video at link.)

I want to reiterate--there is NO a single NATO officer from battalion up to command of army and army group who has any experience fighting while undergoing the rates of attrition West's armies simply incapable to grasp. Russians quantify the morale (combat spirit) as: (Video at link.)

Does NATO want to find out what kind of Alpha will it have when fighting Russian Army defending her Motherland? I can tell you--it will not be good.

Putin's voice: did they forget who took Berlin? British, French, Americans? The Red Army took it (c). Meanwhile Chinese girls are, yes, hitting on Russian boys)) (Video at link.)

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/05 ... e-too.html
"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 09, 2025 11:49 am

Contradictions and memories of the past
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 09/05/2025

Image

As evidenced by the attitude toward the Victory Day celebrations, the three-day truce announced by Vladimir Putin has been limited to the military sphere, where, despite places where fighting has continued, reports from the front point to greater calm. Although willing to describe the situation as a "farcical truce," even the Ukrainian Armed Forces—though not its minister, whose war report suggested the normal continuation of the war—admitted on the night of May 7-8 that there had been no missile or even drone attacks, a clear sign of a reduction in Russian military activity. Tension continues in the exchange of statements, mutual accusations of obstructing peace, and unbridled demands that threaten to repeat the Istanbul rupture scenario in 2022 and condemn the war to its continuation.

However, even under these conditions, the parties are still capable of negotiating some aspects, generally with the mediation of third countries, usually the United Arab Emirates. As a result of these backroom negotiations, a major prisoner exchange took place on Tuesday, with 205 soldiers returning to Russia and another 205 to Ukraine. This equality does not overshadow the total figures: there is no official census of POWs, but the major operations of 2022 left a much higher number of Ukrainian POWs in Russian captivity, giving rise to the Ukrainian demands for an "all for all" exchange. This seemingly humanitarian proposal is also reminiscent of the war in Donbas, where the situation was similar (albeit with a lesser disparity between the soldiers captured in the DPR/LPR and Ukraine) and was repeatedly manipulated by the Ukrainian side, which self-servingly removed names from the lists of prisoners to be exchanged. In a context where trust between the parties is nonexistent and based not only on current circumstances but also on the fear of a repeat of recent scenarios, the future of proposals put forward in the media rather than at the negotiating table is limited.

The same can be said of Ukraine's latest invention, a proposal that Moscow claims not to have received from Kyiv, but which has already reached the press. On Tuesday, Ukrainian media reported that General Kellogg emphasized that Ukraine had raised the idea of ​​a demilitarized zone to be monitored by third countries. According to The Kyiv Independent, Donald Trump's envoy for Ukraine "described the proposal as a buffer zone in which both sides would withdraw 15 kilometers, creating a 30-kilometer area monitored by third-country observers." This proposal also has something reminiscent of Minsk, an agreement in which the ceasefire was based on withdrawal from the front and the creation of a buffer zone between the parties it was supposed to separate. Monitoring was carried out by a joint control and monitoring center involving Russia, Ukraine, the People's Republics, and the OSCE, which never functioned. The withdrawal never actually took place; the weapons were only demobilized in the quietest areas of the front, and the OSCE's role was constantly questioned by the population of Donbass, whose complaints ranged from accusations of complete disinterest in the shelling of front-line villages to questions about the integrity of the monitoring mission's personnel and their collaboration with Ukraine.

Ukraine, increasingly confident in its position since Donald Trump's hostility toward Volodymyr Zelensky has dissipated, is returning to this idea, trying to rewrite the terms of the possible peace process to its advantage. Evidently, Kiev is starting from the basis of the peace plan prepared with its allies the United Kingdom, France, and Germany and delivered to the United States in response to the Trump administration's theoretically final proposal. To this roadmap, which includes points that make an agreement unfeasible and, above all, would not resolve the causes of the conflict but would ignore them to impose a false closure in the form of a ceasefire that would likely be only temporary, Ukraine is now adding the first outline of the foreign military intervention it expects from its allies.

Considering that the proposal speaks of European and non-European countries willing to participate in providing security guarantees to Ukraine, it is clear that kyiv expects the presence of its main continental allies, all of them NATO members. Contrary to what has been suggested in recent months—a mission with limited personnel and primarily assigned to the rear, where it would act as a deterrent—Kyiv seems to expect direct participation in maintaining the ceasefire. Even during the war in Donbas, the OSCE was never sufficient, despite the fact that at its height of the war the mission was headed by a Canadian representative, a member of the Ukrainian nationalist diaspora in the country. For years, the Ukrainian government struggled to secure an armed mission with a presence on the front lines. The logic remains the same now, as Ukraine has made no secret of its hopes that its allies will pressure Russia to regain some of its lost territories.

Although the territorial issue is not currently the first priority for any of the conflicting parties, Kiev and its European allies want to impose a peace agreement that leaves the door open to continuing the struggle to regain Ukraine's territorial integrity through political, diplomatic, economic, and, perhaps in the future, military pressure. A reading of the Ukrainian counterproposal to the US approach makes it clear that Zelensky's team wants to ensure the recovery of infrastructure it considers key, while aspiring to negotiate the de facto border that would result from the treaty. In other words, Ukraine wants to secure the part of the front that most interests it, but it aspires to demand territorial concessions from Russia that do not correspond to the situation on the ground, a practice also reminiscent of Minsk. During those negotiations, in which Kiev tried to rewrite the terms of the roadmap signed from the outset, Ukraine did not hesitate to take advantage of the existence of the so-called gray zone , the buffer zone that was supposed to separate the parties and make a ceasefire feasible, to advance its positions and capture part of the territories it had lost. This tactic, described by Arsen Avakov as a " strategy of small steps ," was carried out despite the presence of the OSCE observation mission, which watched impassively as Kiev destroyed the neutral zone, one of the bases of the military component of Minsk. This experience makes this latest proposal from Ukraine practically unviable. On this occasion, Ukraine does not expect to have at its disposal a neutral interposition force, as the OSCE was supposed to be, but rather European countries, that is, like-minded and probably even less reluctant to favor such movements.

Yesterday, in the public appearances of Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, the president of the People's Republic of China, who was visiting Moscow to attend the commemoration of the 80th anniversary of the victory over fascism, the two presidents insisted on the need to address the causes of the war when seeking a resolution. From the Russian perspective, with an argument that has been partially accepted by Donald Trump and his foreign policy team, the essence of the war lies in the security issue, that is, in NATO's advance toward Russia's borders. In recent hours, the President of the United States has urged China to act to close the gap between the proposals of the two countries in conflict, which propose completely contradictory measures to resolve the issue of security guarantees that both states need. "Russia is demanding too much," said JD Vance on Wednesday, who is generally much more critical of Russia than of Ukraine. Although the US vice president is likely to refer to the territorial issue and the theoretical Russian demand to obtain the entire territories of Donetsk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye (in addition to Crimea and Lugansk, already under its control), it is not the territorial issue but the security sphere that will determine Russia's position.

“I think we're close. The man who can do it, I think, is President Trump, provided Putin agrees. And that's certainly one of our impediments to progress, that the president of Russia right now doesn't agree,” Keith Kellogg stated on Tuesday, like the rest of Trumpism, determined to believe that the hitherto insurmountable obstacle could be resolved by a single man, Donald Trump, who, despite his evident inconsistency and scant understanding of the reality in Russia and Ukraine, would quickly get the parties to accept his proposals. Much more conditioned by the need to maintain US military and intelligence assistance, Ukraine accepted under pressure the idea of ​​a 30-day ceasefire that was too reminiscent of the countless truces of the Minsk process, an unworkable agreement lacking a political framework to support it. Openly, Kiev and its European allies are offering a similar approach in this regard, a series of vague proposals that would halt the war at the front lines and continue Ukraine's path toward NATO, the main cause of the current war. Uninterested in the future of Ukraine or Russia and solely desiring the image of signing an agreement bearing Donald Trump's name, the United States seems willing to accept this idea, possibly assuming that a possible resumption of hostilities would not occur until the parties regained their strength, that is, beyond the current president's term. This is the only way to interpret the admission, reported by The New York Times , that even Trump-supporting officials recall that the veto on Ukraine's NATO membership would not be binding and that a new US president could reverse Donald Trump's personal decision. It is there, and not on the territorial issue, that Russia will continue to demand guarantees, even at the risk of completely alienating the current leader of the White House, who has made the mistake of presenting himself as someone capable of resolving a stupid war without realizing the difficulty of resolving it.

Trump simply wants an image to boast about; Zelensky wants a temporary pause that will allow him to obtain assistance from his partners to continue advancing toward the objectives that led to the war; and Russia seeks a definitive resolution, which makes its position appear the most ironclad, belligerent, and intransigent. And none of the mediating actors seems capable of resolving these contradictions. Perhaps that is why Trump has appealed in recent days to both Beijing and Ankara to play a mediating role. Whatever it takes to achieve what he seeks and be able to focus on the real objective: containing China.

https://slavyangrad.es/wp-content/uploa ... kraine.jpg


Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Changes on the map over the past day:

- advance north of Verkhnekamenskoye
- expanded control zone in the Troitskoye area
- advance north of Makeyevka
- expanded control zone in the Otradnoye area
- Troitskoye liberated
- advance into Bogatyr
- expanded control zone west of Makeyevka
- advance into Leontovichi

inserts: @divgen

In fact, the enemy is not observing the ceasefire, so hostilities continue.

Ukraine has violated the ceasefire 5,026 times since the beginning of the ceasefire , the Russian Ministry of Defense said. Along the entire line of combat contact, the Ukrainian Armed Forces carried out 1,455 shelling attacks from barrel artillery, tanks and mortars on positions of our troops.

In addition, 3,502 strikes and drone drops of ammunition were carried out.

In these conditions, the Russian Armed Forces are mirroring the violations of the ceasefire by the Ukrainian Armed Forces and will continue to act adequately to the evolving situation , responding to all criminal encroachments of the Kiev regime, the department emphasized.


***

Colonelcassad
In commemoration of the 80th anniversary of the Victory of the Soviet people in the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945, I ORDER:

on May 9, 2025, at 22:00 local time, to carry out festive fireworks with the involvement of military units of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation in the capital of our Motherland, the hero city of Moscow, in the hero cities of Volgograd, Murmansk, Novorossiysk, St. Petersburg (the hero city of Leningrad), Smolensk, Tula, as well as in the cities where the headquarters of military districts, fleets, combined arms armies and the Caspian Flotilla are stationed, with thirty volleys of blank shots from artillery guns and launches of fireworks from fireworks installations in accordance with the existing standards for the consumption of ammunition and fireworks for one artillery salute.

MINISTER OF DEFENSE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
A. Belousov

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

SITREP 5/7/25: Ukraine Launches New Kursk Attempt to Spoil May 9th 'Victory Day'
Simplicius
May 07, 2025

Yesterday Ukrainian forces again tried to attack the Kursk region, this time in the Glushkovo area near the border town of Tetkino, further northwest from their previous entry attempts.

At 7: 00, the enemy made another attempt to attack in the area of the Novy Put farm in the direction of Glushkovo. IMR, two M113s, Bradley, Kozak went on the attack. Earlier, 2 days ago, only one T-64BV with a mine trawl was seen and destroyed in this area.

Units of the 21st mechanized and 107th TRO-one brigade of the 92nd BAT operate in this area from the AFU side. Specifically, a separate 29th battalion went on the offensive. UAV units are represented by: "Witchers", the "Wings to Hell" squad, the "S. O. Team" group, the "Chorny Strizh" company. Art. support is provided by the self-propelled guns division from the 21st brigade. As usual, the special forces of the special operations forces "West-1", noted in Kurilovka and Plekhovo in 2024, also operates.


The goal of the strike on Glushkovo and practical is to cut off our forces advancing on Basovka-Belovody with a call to Yunakovka. And a purely media goal is to ruin May 9.

Under Tetkino, an armored group of one tank and an armored vehicle went on the offensive from Iskriskovshchina and Budka to cut off Tetkino from the north. The enemy is met by our airborne forces, the armored group is on fire, but the enemy continues to bring infantry on ATVs. Suicidal attacks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine can last for a long time - the enemy infantry on the ground does not have an operational situation and it is taken to the "nearest landing" with a simple task to hold.

The objective appears to be to “spoil Putin’s May 9th glory”, or add an edge of embarrassment to the festivities—coupled with the planned drone terror campaign across the Moscow region.

One Russian analyst’s write-up describing the strategic impulse of the operation:

About Tyotkino and the plan of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

The principle of the Ukrainian Armed Forces' strikes in the border area has not changed. A small section of the border is selected, geographically advantageous for invasion. In the case of Tyotkino, this is a village surrounded by Ukrainian territory on almost all sides. There are approaches, logistics are simple, fire cover can be deployed deep in one's own territory. But all this works until the first fire pocket.


He means that Tetkino juts outward into Ukrainian territory and makes it favorable for fire control from all sides:

Image

He continues:

This happened a couple of years ago. Light groups, attacking forward posts, trying to "pick through" the front line, enter a village and show up, stick flags. The main thing is not the result, but the fact of a breakthrough. They don't come back alive, but they are not expected. The task is to distract, create noise, test the defense line.

The Russian side also draws its own conclusions. The area is zeroed in, the enemy's maneuver is read in advance, and they react to it.

Why Tyotkino? Because it is a potential bridgehead and from here there is a convenient route to Rylsk, which was not taken last year. Not the only, but the most logical option. If they enter, they will have to build on their success. And for this, reserves are needed. And here the most interesting part begins.

Developing success requires meat. Those who have gone now are not assault units, but rather expendable material. For a real expansion of the wedge, we need not groups of 20-30 people, but full-fledged battalions with cover and armor. And this is already a different scale, different losses, different risks.

The main question is what will happen next. There are two possibilities: either these attacks are a prelude to a larger attack (including with reserves from the depths, including in another area), or this is a dead end into which they are being deliberately driven in order to wear out the Russian troops.

But they still climb. They climb and drag everything they have.


The assault was fairly large-scale, compared to anything Ukraine has been able to muster of late. But Russian units report massacring the Ukrainian columns, which consisted of everything from engineering vehicles, armor, light attack scout forces, etc.: (Video at link.)

More, showing AFU units destroyed at the dragon’s teeth passage on the border: (Video at link.)

Ukrainian forces also attacked Russian positions in the village of Bilovodi, Sumy region, where Russian forces hold Ukrainian territory across the border as a buffer zone. Here’s an informative video from Russia’s 83rd Air Assault Brigade holding that zone, which destroyed the attempted Ukrainian incursion: (Video at link.)

Russian paratroopers repelled a counterattack of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in Raiden village of Belovody, Sumy region. 6 enemy armored vehicles were destroyed: M113, HMMWV, "Stryker", Kirpi and two BTR-80

And another good video from the same 83rd showing the tactics used to stop the AFU assault. Note the revealing tactics they describe: Ukraine builds net tunnels on their supply routes—as we just discussed in the last premium article—but when Russian forces identify these tunnels, they pepper them with artillery, breaking up the netting and creating large gaps. Fiber-optic drones covered in camouflage leaves settle in these gaps and lay in ambush for Ukrainian vehicles to appear down the road. Note that the AI translator incorrectly calls them Syrian troops—meant to be Ussuriysk, the unit’s hometown. (Video at link.)

Prisoners were captured in the new Kursk assault, here a batch of ~10 reportedly taken on the border by Akhmat forces: (Video at link.)



Then we turn to Russia’s own ongoing assaults, particularly around the critical Pokrovsk-Toretsk axis. Russian forces consolidated the gains around Novoolenovka, fully capturing the town as well as most of nearby Oleksandropol:

Image

Some of these assaults were filmed, giving us another front row seat to Russian assault tactics in action. You can see positions stormed with the aid of drones, with AFU prisoners subsequently taken: (Video at link.)

At the end you see the flag raising over Novoolenovka.

On the southwest end of Pokrovsk, Russian forces are pushing toward the Dnipropetrovsk region border. A top Ukrainian military channel wailed about Russia’s increasing progress here:

Image

The Kotlyarivka he’s referring to is seen in the green circle below—with Novoserhiivka, which he mentions, seen just north of there, below Udachne:

Image

Another Ukrainian analyst writes:

The enemy continues to develop successes at the junction of the Torets and Pokrov directions.

The defense along the Pokrovsk-Kostyantynovka highway is collapsing both in the direction of Konstakha and in the direction of Myrnograd.

In the latter case, the defense there held out for months without enemy advances.

But due to poor interaction between those responsible for these two areas, the enemy is succeeding.

And how long this will last and when coordination will finally be fixed is now unknown.

The success of the occupiers' breakthrough was also influenced by the fact that our attention was mainly focused on the other flank of Pokrovsk. And, accordingly, our forces and means.

But I can't say that our fighters missed the accumulation of the occupying forces. It was obvious. It's just that management decisions were not made in a timely manner.


The above corroborates that Ukraine is juggling forces in the area via the ‘plug the gap’ strategy. Russia pressed on one flank of Pokrovsk, causing AFU to accumulate there, then attacked on a different axis which was consequently poorly defended.

Another longer but detailed analysis from AMK_Mapping, which gives good info on the actual unit dispositions of the Russian forces on the Toretsk front:

Image

With these new Russian advances, it's becoming clear that Russia aims to repeat a strategy that worked incredibly well for them twice before, that being moving parallel to Ukraine's well-constructed line of defences, completely undermining its potential effects.

I have overlayed my control map with x.com/Playfra0's map of fortifications to show how this recent advance indicates that this strategy is about to be employed once more.

These maneuvers were previously conducted in two other places. The first was northwest of Avdiivka at the Vovcha River, where Russian forces broke through at Ocheretyne and Prohress to the north of Ukraine's defensive line, eliminating the possibility of a sound defence in their line along the eastern bank of the Vovcha River. The second was in and around Selydove and Kurkahove where, as a result of pushes around Krasnohorivka, the fall of Vuhledar and that whole southern Donetsk area, and that maneuver at the Vovcha River, Russia was able to move parallel to the defensive lines which were aimed at containing an assault from the south, southeast and east.

In fact, that's the problem for Ukraine here. This line is aimed at containing an offensive from Toretsk and Avdiivka, which would explain why Russia has been pushing so hard to break Ukrainian lines from Vozdyvzhenka and the Pokrovsk - Kostyantynivka highway. However, after months of efforts and preparatory measures, the localised breakthrough they needed has finally been achieved at Novoolenivka, while supporting advances secured various areas around Malynivka, Nova Poltavka and Yelyzavetivka.

Additionally, Russia has its own tactical strike group for this sector of the frontline, and in early 2025, completely reorganised the structure of their forces in Group of Forces "South" which directly affects the Toretsk-Kostyantynivka front. This involved three Army corps and Combined Arms Armies being united into one group, under a single command, as a part Guards south.

Currently, the 51st Combined Arms Army with forces from the 132nd, 5th and 9th Separate Motorised Rifle Brigades, each of which varies from having one battalion (e.g. the 60th separate motorised rifle battalion of the 9th brigade), to several rifle and motorised rifle regiments (e.g. the 98th and 109th separate rifle regiments). Additionally, most of the units and subdivisions of the "mobilisation reserve" of the 51st combined Arms Army (as many as 6 separate rifle regiments), operate in this area from the Siversky Donets Canal north of Toretsk, to the overpass at the Pokrovsk - Kostyantynivka Highway.

Further forces, this time from the 8th Combined Arms Army, were deployed from the former Kurakhove direction to this area, including the 20th and 150th Motorised Rifle Divisions, which together add up to 5 motorised rifle regiments. In fact, this isn't all. Even more forces from various units and subdivisions which aren't a formal part of either the 8th or 51st Combined Arms Armies also operate here, including the 348th Motorised Rifle Regiment from the 41st Combined Arms Army, and the battalion of the 2nd Volunteer Reconnaissance and Assault Brigade Veterans from the Volunteer Assault Corps, among others.

As for how much manpower and equipment this means is concentrated in the general Toretsk-Kostyantynivka direction, Ukrainian military observer Mashovets provided a generalised estimate:

45,000-50,000 personnel

120-210 tanks

240-330 Armoured combat vehicles of all types

350-360 "Barrel" artillery, including 120mm mortars

85-90 Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (MLRS) of all types.

Overall, it appears Russia's goal here is to envelop Ukrainian groupings in the villages and fields west of Toretsk, collapsing the frontline north to the chain of reservoirs, therefore allowing for the next stage of the offensive on Kostyantynivka to begin.[/i]



We’ve been covering the growing story about Russian plans on the Dnieper river across from Kherson. There have been major new developments there. A Ukrainian channel interviewed an officer who revealed Russia has prepared over 300+ boats for a river crossing in the area—both AI-dubbed and subtitled versions below: (Video at link.)

‼️Kyiv media in panic: Russia has prepared 300 boats to transport troops across the Dnieper

▪️"The Russian Armed Forces are preparing a landing in the Kherson region - 300 enemy boats have been spotted" - complains an officer of the Ukrainian National Guard.

▪️In his opinion, Russia’s goal is to take control over the Kherson and Nikolaev regions.

RVvoenkor


Another report:

Ukrainian media and officials report that the Russia is allegedly preparing a large-scale landing operation in the Kherson region. An officer of the National Guard of Ukraine said that at least 300 Russian boats have been recorded that could be used to force the Dnieper.

📝 “Russia is preparing a landing operation. About 300 boats have already been prepared. The goal is to establish control over the Kherson and Nikolaev regions,” the Ukrainian military said.

✖️ Recently, on May 1, The Guardian, citing Ukrainian sources, wrote that the Russian army is amassing forces in four key points - in the area of ​​​​the marshy islands at the mouth of the Dnieper, near the Antonovsky bridges, as well as in the villages of Lvovo and Zmeyevka.


The listed areas correspond to those below:

Image

The plan appears to be in line with one I recently outlined, wherein Russia would have to seize at least 4-5 independent bridgeheads to gain a potential foothold, so as to not allow AFU to concentrate all its forces on one crossing, which would immediately imperil it.

Oddly enough there was even a report of Russian units—presumably DRGs or scouts of some kind—already fighting on the right bank yesterday:

⚡️AFU related accounts reported a fight at Dneprovskoe (on the Ukr side of the Dnieper River) at night. They report that a 🇷🇺sabotage and reconnaissance group was at work.

Image

This appears to be here just east of the Antonovsky bridge, at 46°40'46.6"N 32°47'37.1"E:

Image

At the same time, certain AFU units in the region did release a few videos over the past few days of drone grenade drops onto Russian ‘frogmen’ who appeared to be wearing dive suits. This confirms that Russian units are getting increasingly brazen here in crossing the river, but it’s too early to tell whether it’s just distraction, a fixing strategy of tension, or the actual preliminary work of a broader operation.



A few last noteworthy items:

Ukraine launched a major 500+ drone attack on Moscow last night, which was entirely rebuffed. It’s said it was the largest of the war, meant obviously to disrupt May 9th preparations and fill the capital with an aura of dread. Here is one of the drones being destroyed by Russian AD:
(Video at link.)

A top Ukrainian analyst bemoaned the success of Russian defenses:

"Looking at how 500+ good UAVs flew into the swamps in almost 2 days, one remembers how in the last 2-2.5 years some people said that we should "launch 500 of our Shaheeds into the swamps and blow everything up there."

As you can see, they didn't blow everything up. Because that's unrealistic. For this, hundreds of thousands of drones are probably needed. And thousands of cruise and ballistic missiles.

As you can see, the swamps have strong air defenses that are difficult to bypass.

As you can see, the swamps are learning to counter our massive UAV raids.

We used to take quality, now we take quantity. The efficiency is +/- the same, but the number of drones launched is many times greater.

This is what I already talked about - as the number of UAVs launched increases, quality is lost. Because to maintain such infrastructure, a lot of money needs to be invested in it, and not just in "long" UAVs.

A definite positive - the swamps mainly shoot down our drones with anti-aircraft missiles, depleting their reserves. If we continue in the same spirit, short-term shortages of ZKR will increasingly occur in certain areas of the swamps, which we will take full advantage of.


(Much more at link.)

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/sit ... unches-new

******

Terminal Trajectories

Traced atop faded outlines of past wars, this cartography of collapse maps four endgames for Ukraine: unravelling alliances, imposed peace, grinding attrition or destabilizing technological shock.
Kevin Batcho
May 08, 2025

Image
Palimpsest—from the Greek palimpsēstos, "scraped again"—is a manuscript page, a tablet, a canvas that has been written upon, scrubbed away, and written over, yet still bears the ghostly traces of its past.

Wars do not travel straight paths, nor do they die clean deaths. They fracture, they echo, they mutate—but within their chaos, history whispers patterns. Structures of collapse, uneasy settlements, and pyrrhic victories recur like motifs in a dark epic. As Ukraine’s war enters its third year, its possible endings blur: Will it dissolve into frozen stalemate? Shatter in sudden revolution? Be resolved at the negotiating table or by the arithmetic of attrition?

Today’s discourse drowns in advocacy. Pundits and partisans plead like prosecutors, their narratives polished for persuasion rather than understanding. But war is not a courtroom; it is an archaeological site. The task is not to argue, but to excavate—to trace the stratigraphy of past conflicts that lie beneath this one. Like a city’s subconscious footpaths worn between buildings, wars leave cognitive trails: compressed logics of exhaustion, political rupture, or negotiated surrender. These are not prophecies, but footprints in ash.

Policy, too, moves by such ghosts. Decisions are made with the tremor of half-remembered traumas—Vietnam’s quagmire, Munich’s appeasement, Versailles’ vindictive peace—their lessons misread but indelible. Ukraine’s war now inscribes itself onto history’s palimpsest, where every line is written over older scars. No conflict begins on blank parchment. Beneath the headlines of Bakhmut and Kherson lie the erased texts of Stalingrad, Verdun, and Gettysburg—their ink bleeding through the vellum of the present.

To read this war is to decipher layered script. In its jumbled margins, four recurring patterns emerge—each a possible terminus. Three trace variations of Russian success: the unspooling of Ukraine’s coalition, a politically imposed false peace, or the slow draining of resistance by attrition. The fourth, a jagged outlier: Russia’s own collapse, triggered by some as yet unforeseen technological spell, conjured in the West.

This is not prediction. It is cartography in negative space—a map drawn not by what remains, but by what has been burned away. The future takes shape in silhouette, its contours defined by the voids history leaves behind.

Scenario 1: WW1’s Western Front

Image

By the summer of 1918, the Western Front had devolved into a desolate expanse of trenches, barbed wire, and unrelenting attrition. For four years, the Allies and Central Powers had engaged in a gruelling stalemate, with massive offensives yielding minimal territorial gains and staggering casualties. Then came the Hundred Days Offensive—a coordinated Allied assault that finally broke the deadlock.

A pivotal factor was the arrival of over two million fresh American troops, whose presence bolstered Allied morale and manpower. The German army, exhausted from years of warfare and their failed Spring Offensive, began to falter. However, the unravelling of the Central Powers was not solely due to battlefield defeats. The political and logistical underpinnings of their alliance started to crumble.

On September 29, 1918, Bulgaria signed the Armistice of Salonica, effectively exiting the war. This development threatened Germany's access to vital resources, including Romanian oil, which had been secured through the Treaty of Bucharest earlier that year. The loss of Bulgaria as an ally compromised supply lines and exposed the vulnerabilities of the Central Powers' interconnected war efforts.

Subsequently, the Ottoman Empire and Austro-Hungarian Empire sought armistices, leaving Germany isolated. Internal dissent grew, culminating in the Kiel mutiny on November 3, where German sailors refused orders, sparking widespread unrest. Facing revolution at home and collapse abroad, conservative German military leaders transferred power to liberal civilian authorities, who signed the Armistice of Compiègne on November 11, ending the war.

The Ukrainian Parallel: A Modern Hundred Days?
As in 1918, the war of 2025 may not end with a clean battlefield victory, but through the slow erosion of alliances, morale, and internal cohesion. In Ukraine, the conflict has settled into a grinding war of position—entrenched lines, fortified by attrition, with Russia advancing steadily, if unspectacularly. But beneath the hardened frontlines, deeper fractures are beginning to spread.

Since returning to office, President Trump has pushed consistently for an end to the war, engaging in back-channel negotiations with Moscow and signalling a desire to reduce America’s military footprint in Europe. With the U.S. stretched thin across multiple global flashpoints, a recent ceasefire deal with the Houthis underscores Washington’s intent to shed strategic burdens. The appetite to sustain the Ukrainian war effort is visibly waning.

This shift has exposed widening rifts within the Western coalition. In Europe, the prolonged costs of the war—economic, political, and social—are fuelling populist uprisings and scepticism toward continued aid. Some European leaders, unwilling to relent in their confrontation with Moscow, have escalated tensions in hopes the U.S. will once again intervene decisively—as it did in 1918. But Trump’s reluctance to deploy American forces has exposed Europe’s militaries as underfunded, overstretched, and ill-prepared to bear the burden in Ukraine alone.

Much like Germany’s weakening position as the Central Powers began to disintegrate, Ukraine now finds itself increasingly isolated within a fraying alliance. The transatlantic consensus is eroding under the weight of trade disputes, conflicting interests, and widening cultural rifts.

On the battlefield, Ukraine’s recent defeat in Kursk—reportedly involving 10,000 North Korean troops supporting Russian operations—recalls the failure of Germany’s 1918 Spring Offensive and the arrival of Pyongyang’s own version of the Doughboys. Russia has since launched its long-anticipated Spring 2025 offensive, making early territorial gains. In a surprising counterstroke, Ukraine has once again attempted to re-enter Kursk, echoing the desperate final thrusts of a coalition on the brink.

Meanwhile, political pressures mount in Kiev. Nationalist factions, already critical of President Zelensky’s leadership, grow increasingly hostile to any prospect of compromise. His 2022 decree banning negotiations with Putin remains legally binding, but should Western pressure force a reversal, nationalist militias—such as Azov, Aidar, and C14—may not tolerate any concessions. The threat of armed insurrection looms, recalling the Kiel Mutiny of 1918, when German sailors' revolt triggered broader collapse. The image of nationalist fighters marching on Kiev would mirror the final unraveling of Germany’s wartime order.

In this scenario, the war ends not with negotiated settlement or battlefield triumph, but with the disintegration of the coalition supporting Ukraine—externally and internally. As Western resolve crumbles and Kiev’s political consensus fractures, the front could give way suddenly. Russian forces, facing little coordinated resistance, could drive to the Dnieper in a modern reprise of the Allies’ Hundred Days triumphs.

Just as Germany's conservative elites handed power to liberals to absorb the blame for defeat, Ukraine’s international backers may prefer to see arch-nationalists in power when the armistice finally comes—allowing blame to fall on others while the Ukraine’s globalist political elite withdraws from a war it can no longer sustain.

Scenario 2: WW2’s Winter War in Finland
In the winter of 1939, the Soviet Union launched what it believed would be a brief and calculated campaign against Finland. The aim, as articulated by Stalin, was not conquest but security: to push the Finnish border back from Leningrad and secure a buffer against the growing threat of Nazi Germany. As British military historian Basil Liddell Hart explains in The History of the Second World War, Stalin’s initial demands were rational and limited—focused on securing the Gulf of Finland, adjusting borders near Murmansk, and pushing the frontier on the Karelian Isthmus beyond artillery range of Leningrad. In exchange, the Soviets offered Finland over twice the amount of land they were requesting, much of it designed to widen Finland’s strategic "waistline." Yet Finnish leaders, guided by national sentiment and a strict interpretation of neutrality, refused.

The war that followed—105 days of frostbitten brutality—saw the Red Army suffer staggering casualties against a vastly outnumbered but tactically nimble Finnish defense. Though the Soviets ultimately prevailed, forcing Finland to cede roughly 9% of its territory under the March 1940 Moscow Peace Treaty, they settled for far less than total victory. Drawing again from Liddell Hart, we see that the new Soviet demands—though harsher than those initially offered—remained relatively moderate, especially considering that the Red Army had broken through the Mannerheim Line and could have pushed further, easily able to conquer the entire nation. Stalin, facing the approach of a decisive spring in Europe and the heavy toll on his forces, opted for a strategic compromise rather than full occupation.

The Ukrainian Parallel: The Perils of a Premature Peace
Stalin’s softness towards the Finns demonstrates that limited victories can be illusions and peace can be short-sighted. Within a year, Finland aligned itself with Nazi Germany and took part in Operation Barbarossa and the siege of Leningrad—where, according to biographical accounts, Vladimir Putin’s infant brother died and his parents nearly perished. What had been a pragmatic Soviet peace in 1940 became, in retrospect, a grave strategic miscalculation.

Image
Finland’s Field Marshal Mannerheim and Adolf Hitler confer in 1942, during one of their rare meetings to coordinate aspects of Operation Barbarossa—their joint invasion of the Soviet Union.

Should Russia today accept a superficially generous peace—especially under President Trump’s pressure—it risks echoing the Soviet misjudgement of 1940. A deal brokered under Trump’s proposed terms, with Ukraine maintaining statehood and potentially rearming under the Western umbrella, could prove an unstable settlement. If Russia cedes the field too early, it may find, like Stalin did, that today’s peace breeds tomorrow’s peril.

A future Ukraine, embittered and heavily militarized, could align even more closely with NATO in the aftermath, just as Finland did with Nazi Germany. The territories that Russia might spare in the interest of diplomacy could become forward operating bases in a renewed confrontation. As in the Winter War, the challenge is not simply how a war ends—but whether the end prevents the next one.

Scenario Three: The U.S. Civil War
At the outset of the American Civil War, the Confederacy appeared resilient—even ascendant. Its generals—Lee, Jackson, and others—secured early victories against a larger but poorly organized Union force. With foreign arms—in particular Britain’s Enfield rifles—high morale, strong battlefield leadership, and effective internal propaganda, it managed to hold back the North far longer than many expected. Despite a smaller population and weaker industrial base, the South fought with intensity, betting that military prowess and political divisions in the North would force a negotiated settlement.

But as the war dragged on, the Union gradually mobilized its immense demographic and industrial advantages. It transitioned from seeking quick victories to a grinding war of attrition. Grant’s brutal campaigns in Virginia and Sherman’s devastating march through Georgia were not just tactical offensives—they aimed to break the Confederacy’s ability to sustain war. A tightening naval blockade strangled arms shipments and Southern trade. Inflation surged, morale withered, and by 1865 the Confederacy collapsed—undone by frontline losses, internal dissent, and the overwhelming weight of a larger, better-resourced adversary. The fire of secession gave way to fatigue and surrender.

The Ukrainian Parallel: Tactical Overperformance, Strategic Fatigue
Ukraine, like the Confederacy, has repeatedly outperformed expectations on the battlefield. With a flow of foreign arms—particularly German and American precision systems—high morale, strong military leadership, and flamboyant information warfare, it has held off a larger adversary far longer than many anticipated. Its early successes in Kiev, Kherson, and Kharkov recall the South’s victories at Bull Run and Chancellorsville: bold, morale-boosting, but ultimately insufficient to change the long-term balance of power.

Even Ukraine’s failed incursion into Kursk bears comparison to the Confederacy’s ill-fated Gettysburg campaign—an ambitious offensive across enemy lines that resulted in heavy casualties, depleted reserves, and little strategic gain.

If Russia maintains sustained military, economic, and diplomatic pressure, it will gradually erode Ukraine’s ability to resist. Once attrition dissolves the Ukrainian means to resist, a second phase, a knockout blow akin to Sherman’s March to the Sea, would focus on Ukraine's Black Sea coast, with Odessa as the strategic jewel. This would cripple Ukraine’s economy and logistics, delivering a devastating blow much like Sherman’s march severed the Confederacy’s heartland. Western enthusiasm for Ukraine is already fading as economic strains and political instability take their toll. With European publics growing sceptical of prolonged support, and a second Trump administration signalling increasing impatience to end what they view as a lost cause, the West’s resolve is sinking.

Image
Will Russia eventually achieve a March to the Black Sea and capture Odessa?

In this US Civil War scenario, following Ukraine's crushing defeat, Moscow would likely initiate a cultural and ideological "reconstruction" effort in Ukraine, aimed at reabsorbing the country into the broader "Russian World." This would involve dismantling what Russia views as the ideological infrastructure of anti-Russian nationalism. In a manner similar to the U.S. post-Civil War Reconstruction, which sought to integrate freed slaves into a reformed South, a Russian version would focus on empowering Ukraine’s long-marginalized Russian-speaking populations, ensuring their greater influence in shaping the country’s future.

The ideological parallel is striking. Just as the Confederacy was driven by an exclusionary and revanchist vision, Russia frames Ukraine’s resistance as propelled by ultra-nationalism, anti-Russian hatred, and a Western-backed campaign of geopolitical encroachment. From Moscow’s perspective, this is a slow-motion form of Lebensraum: a creeping NATO-led advance designed to encircle and destabilize Russia, ultimately aiming at regime change in Moscow and the installation of a compliant, pro-Western, anti-Chinese leadership.

Scenario Four: The Soviets in Afghanistan
The Soviet-Afghan War (1979–1989) began as a confident assertion of Soviet power. The Red Army entered Afghanistan with overwhelming force, and for several years maintained total air dominance. Their arsenal included the feared Mi-24 “Hind” helicopter gunship—essentially a flying tank—that patrolled the mountains with impunity, devastating mujahideen positions and convoys. Supported by SU-25 ground attack aircraft and MiG-23 fighter jets, Soviet forces could strike anywhere, anytime. Resistance fighters were pinned down not just by ground pressure, but by a sky they did not control.

Image

That changed in 1986 with the introduction of the FIM-92 Stinger missile. Supplied by the United States and funnelled through a broad anti-Soviet coalition that included Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and even China, the Stinger was a shoulder-fired, heat-seeking missile that gave guerrillas the power to shoot Soviet helicopters out of the sky. Within months, over 250 aircraft had been downed. Soviet pilots began flying higher and with less aggression. The sky was no longer theirs.

Image
Mujahedeen in Afghanistan searching for Soviet airborne targets.

The psychological and operational shift was profound. What had been a slow-burning counterinsurgency suddenly became untenable. Though the Soviets would linger for a few more years, the strategic die was cast. By 1989, under pressure at home and abroad, the Red Army withdrew. It was the beginning of the end for the Soviet empire.

The Ukrainian Parallel: A New Game-Changer?
The Soviet defeat in Afghanistan and the resulting regime change in the Kremlin are no doubt the historical etchings that Western hardliners are focussed on and drives their insatiable desire to continue the war.

Could Ukraine experience a repeat of the asymmetric turning point of the 1980s? Perhaps. Since 2022, the Ukrainian military has impressed with its resilience and adaptability. Yet, despite tactical innovations, the frontlines continue to shift in Russia’s favour. Russia’s overwhelming superiority in manpower, firepower, and drone capabilities—including advanced fibre-optic cable drones that are immune to electronic warfare—have blunted Ukraine’s offensives and forced Kiev onto the defensive.

However, we are living in an era of rapid technological transformation. What if a truly disruptive breakthrough emerged? A "wonder weapon" capable of reshaping the combat zone as dramatically as the Stinger did in the 1980s?

This could take many forms. Some speculate that artificial intelligence might radically optimize targeting, logistics, or reconnaissance. Others point to firms like Palantir, now actively assisting Ukraine, whose AI-enabled battlefield tools could unlock powerful synergies. Such systems might significantly enhance the kill chain efficiency—linking sensors to shooters within seconds, autonomously detecting Russian troop movements, and orchestrating drone swarms in real time. If successful, this could transform combat into something resembling a software-directed kill web, where code dictates the action.

Moreover, hard-line Ukrainian militias are attempting to emulate the anti-Soviet mujahideen's strategy by recruiting foreign volunteers. Ideologically motivated brigades like the Azov Battalion are tapping into a global network of supporters. Their efforts to enlist “Nordic” and “white” foreign fighters mirror the foreign Islamist influx into Afghanistan—both driven by ideological fervour and a willingness to die for their cause.

That said, this scenario remains highly unlikely. Many observers argue that Palantir’s impact is more hype than reality. In fact, it is Russia that has outpaced the West in technological innovation, with dominance in electronic warfare, drones, and hypersonic missiles, not to mention their cutting-edge Oreshnik missile system.

Reading What Remains
We live atop layers we cannot read. A highway follows the path of a Roman road. A church is built where a temple once stood. A nation’s borders trace the graves of kingdoms it no longer remembers. The past is not dead; it waits just beneath the surface, pressing upward like ink bleeding through parchment.

In medieval churchyards, weathered markers were often repurposed, the old epitaphs faintly visible beneath newly carved names. War cemeteries bear the same palimpsest. In Flanders, some gravestones mark two deaths—one from 1914, another from 1940—as if the earth, exhausted by slaughter, had ceased to distinguish between its victims.

South of Brussels, the ring road runs straight for miles—calm, unbending—diverted from its natural arc by affluent suburbs, making a beeline toward ground with less power to resist its passage. But when it finally curves, it is not to seize an opportunity to traverse the margins, but to accommodate memory. It bends to skirt the preserved battlefields of Waterloo, where the Lion’s Mound rises from the plain to mark the place where empires cracked and Europe held its breath. Here, Napoleon’s terminal trajectory met the immovable terrain of history. Even the motorway yields to memory—its concrete arc bending around scarred ground, as if not to wake the ghosts still pacing beneath the soil.

Image

Wars do not end; they are rewritten. Layer upon layer, old violence seeps into the parchment of the present, staining each new conflict with the residue of the past.

History does not repeat, but it maps. Yesterday’s wars are not prophecies—they are cognitive shortcuts, half-erased trails scribbled in the margins of time. No one can read these overwritten manuscripts in full; we glimpse only fragments, like scholars squinting at a vellum page scraped thin and inscribed anew—its older lines still faintly visible beneath the fresh. Yet from these fragments, we trace the contours of what may come—not to predict, but to recognize.

The future will surprise us. It always does. But by studying the scars of the past—the hollows where empires collapsed, the fissures where revolutions began—we begin to see the terrain ahead. Not the destination, but the path. Not the ending, but the echoes that will one day lead us there.

https://www.beyondwasteland.net/p/terminal-trajectories

******

Ukraine's point goes to the audience
May 8, 19:09

Image

And your point goes to the audience.

The Verkhovna Rada has rubber-stamped the agreement on transferring access to Ukrainian mineral resources to the United States.
The agreement is so wonderful that it was not even shown to the "deputies". 2 of the 3 signed documents are still being hidden, which hints at the presence of "miraculous" conditions. The United States is thus further formalizing the colonial governance of the remaining part of Ukraine. Remember the alien - the Ukrainian is the ruler here!

Russia is gaining access to the natural resources of the former Ukraine simply by the fact of controlling the territory.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9827536.html

Google Translator

*****

Ukraine - Rada Blocks Detail Agreements Of Mineral Deal

The 'mineral deal' between the Trump administration and Ukraine continues to be a contentious issue.

The deal, which was signed last week, consists of (at least) three documents only one of which, the framework agreement, was made public:

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 reported (machine translation):

[T]he opposition already accuses the authorities of concealing the main points about the deal. The fact is that the agreement on the creation of the fund, signed last week and already made public, is being submitted for ratification, and there are very few specifics in it. This is essentially a framework agreement. For all the main points in the text of the agreement, there are references to another document - the Limited Partnership Agreement. There is also a third document - the Foundation's charter.

A number of deputies claim that all three documents have actually been signed (or agreed upon). But they showed only one-the least important and most abstract of them, from which it is not even clear what the Foundation will do in general.

The government denies this, saying that only one document has been signed, and the rest will still be discussed.

Ukraine's parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, is supposed to ratify the framework agreement today. It will likely do so but with a surprise.

Yesterday the Rada Committee for Foreign Policy passed the relevant language but added an amendment to it (machine translation):

"The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine notes that the ratification of the agreement ... does not mean the ratification or automatic approval by the Parliament of the limited partnership agreement or any other agreements that will be concluded by the parties authorized to do so in order to implement this agreement.
The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine declares that any additional agreements necessary for the implementation of the agreement ... cannot go beyond the provisions of this agreement and establish international legal obligations for Ukraine that are not provided for by it and are not agreed upon in accordance with the established procedure."


The additional text was supported by all members of the committee.

The two side agreements of the mineral deal, which the Zelesnki regime has signed and which include all the gory details of the deal, will be null and void without further ratification:

If the resource agreement is ratified with this amendment, it will mean that either Volodymyr Zelensky will have to submit the limited partnership agreement to the Parliament for ratification, or there will be an opportunity to challenge the deal at any time and recognize it as worthless, since it was not fully ratified by the parliament.

If the ratification of the framework agreement takes place with the additional language the Trump administration may find that, for lack of detailed agreements, it has gained absolutely nothing from it.

It is not known if Zelenski had planned or even supported the parliament move. That all committee members, including those from his party, voted for the amendment may be a hint.

The question then is what Trump is going to do about it?

Posted by b on May 8, 2025 at 11:05 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/05/u ... .html#more
"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 10, 2025 11:58 am

War of narratives
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 10/05/2025

Image

“More than 25 million Soviet people died during World War II. Yet many Russian families still commemorate the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany on May 9,” Deutsche Welle wrote yesterday on social media, sharing one of its articles in what could be considered the strangest message on a day of contrasts, manipulation of reality, and widespread propaganda. The German outlet saw no need to explain why it considers it a contradiction that families in a former Soviet republic like Russia celebrate victory in a conflict that destroyed their country, caused millions of victims, and provoked a total mobilization against a war of annihilation in which Germany’s ambition was to hold territory, enslave the portion of the population needed to act as a slave working class, and expel or exterminate the rest.

The demonization of May 9 celebrations, an active policy in the European Union and Ukraine since 2014, despite the fact that those countries had participated in the commemorations in previous years, predates the Russian invasion in 2022. But the effort to counteract Victory Day with Europe Day saw its clearest example yesterday of the political use of images and the attempt to keep open a political divide that Brussels hopes to maintain beyond the war. "War criminal putler," read a huge sign hanging in the museum in Narva, Estonia, so that it could be seen from the Russian side. Days earlier, Russia had placed several giant screens on its side of the river so that the Russian population of the Estonian city could follow the May 9 parade. To the chagrin of the authorities, hundreds of people gathered on the riverbank to watch the Victory Day concert broadcast from the Russian side.

From the celebration of the common victory—where a troop parade in Moscow was even seen, with the Ukrainian flag taking equal prominence with the Russian one—the event has shifted to proclaiming Russia's failure in organizing the event by mocking the supposedly low-profile of those attending. However, the images that emerged yesterday from Moscow and Lviv, where Ukraine had counter-scheduled the Victory Parade with a tribute to itself attended by European Union leaders, told a very different story.

Without even bothering to show a minimally aesthetic photograph in a monumental city, Kaja Kallas published her message of European unity in the form of a line of representatives from the member states and a wreath-laying ceremony in a cemetery littered with red and black flags, used today by the Praviy Sektor and in the past by its ideological ancestors, the OUN and UPA. Meanwhile, in Moscow, Vladimir Putin appeared accompanied by Xi Jinping, leader of the world's second-largest power, and surrounded by leaders from countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and Europe. This clear geopolitical message of a diversity currently lacking in European Union diplomacy, withdrawn inward and surrounded by the fanaticism of its representatives, was also sent by the Russian media. The presence of choirs from Indonesia, India, China, South Africa, Tanzania, and Zambia in the version of "Sacred War," one of the anthems commemorating the Second World War, sends a similar message, one more in keeping with the existing multipolar world, in which the EU, the United States, and Canada continue to pretend they can mock other countries and leaders from the moral high ground.

Yesterday showed a Russia that has lost virtually all of its European allies, with the exception of Slovakia and Serbia, whose leaders defied Kaja Kallas's order not to go to Moscow, but which maintains diplomatic appeal in the Global South. The relative success of the meeting—and not the failure predicted by people like Anton Gerashchenko, who camouflaged what were simply their wishes in their analysis—is what has sparked the wave of demonization of the event. “Creating a fatal problem for themselves—suffering massive losses—and then declaring themselves ‘victors.’ This is the usual and inescapable cycle of Russian history. In the mid-20th century, they supplied the Nazis with resources, helped them rebuild their army, colluded to divide Europe, and lost more than 20 million lives. Today they celebrate. And they have voluntarily taken the place of those same Nazis, now in the 21st century,” Mikhail Podolyak wrote yesterday. The deliberate distortion of history is blatant.

However, in a propaganda struggle, reality is less important than rhetoric, and the fact that media outlets and citizens continued to post messages on social media during the military parade is of little importance to those seeking only to impose a narrative. Suddenly, the country that has legally banned symbols of victory over fascism and has exalted as heroes for the freedom of the homeland the small minority—millions of Ukrainians fought in the Red Army and partisan units whose monuments have been vandalized and demolished first by the far right and then by the state—who fought side by side with Nazi Germany in groups like the OUN-UPA or the SS Galizien Division, has become the ultimate authority denouncing Russian revisionism. By banning symbols of victory and the army that caused the greatest number of casualties in the invading German army, Ukraine chose in 2015 to exclude itself from the celebration that had until then been common. Now, while much of the former Soviet republics participate in the May 9 celebrations in Moscow (whether with the presence of their political leaders, the parade of their troops, or both), kyiv demands recognition of the immense role that the Ukrainian people truly played in the victory.

It does so by demonizing initiatives such as the Immortal Regiment , a parade to vindicate family members or friends who fought in the war, which has been exported to other countries and which Ukraine has sought to denounce as Russian interference or the propaganda use of a victory to which it apparently has no right. Ukraine celebrated Victory Day yesterday by arresting an elderly woman who came, carrying a portrait of her father, a war veteran, to pay tribute to those who gave their lives in the war. Unlike the handful of people who did the same in cities like Odessa, who carried only flowers and no flags or symbols, the detainee in Kiev was wearing a partisan cap from which she had not removed a banned symbol, the hammer and sickle, which since 2015 has been equivalent in Ukraine to the Nazi swastika.

In the same social media post, Mikhail Podolyak, an advisor to Andriy Yermak, falsely claimed that Russia had disrupted communications across European Russia to prevent the thinly veiled attacks Volodymyr Zelensky had threatened. Anton Gerashchenko, an advisor to the Interior Ministry under Arsen Avakov and one of the men who introduced Azov as a police battalion into the National Guard, echoed the same sentiment. “During the parade, there are snipers on every rooftop in Moscow. There have been jokes that Putin is using Xi Jinping as a kind of air defense, and that is why he was so anxious about Xi's arrival,” he wrote on social media, deliberately confusing the protection of high-profile guests and the responsibility to take an obvious threat seriously with irrational fear. Xi Jinping's visit was never in doubt, despite Ukraine's obvious attempt to frighten potential parade guests by creating the impression that Russia would be unable to maintain security in the heart of its capital. Only Viktor Orban and Ilham Aliyev succumbed to fear and canceled their visits—a poor example of a threat that shouldn't have gone unnoticed.

Several media outlets reported yesterday that Vladimir Putin had been accompanied by four Great Patriotic War veterans who are over 100 years old, a fact that serves as a reminder that the Second World War is gradually ceasing to be a living memory and becoming the memory held by generations who were not there to fight in it. The loss of these voices with the moral authority that comes with having participated in the events places a greater responsibility on those charged with safeguarding that memory, from the families who each year parade through Russian city centers with portraits of their parents, grandparents, or great-grandparents, to the historians and politicians, whose temptation to manipulate memory for political ends is evident. The struggle over discourse that took place yesterday, the European Union's attempt to redefine May 9 as "Europe Day"—also changing the definition of Europe from a continent to a political bloc with the right to admission—and the demonization of the collective celebration of the victory over fascism were just another episode in the continental rupture, the Western attempt to maintain power and the narrative, and the prelude to a political and geopolitical confrontation that will continue no matter what happens in the coming months on the Ukrainian front.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/10/guerra-de-narrativas/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Ukraine violated the ceasefire 9,318 times, the Ukrainian Armed Forces made four attempts to break through the Russian state border in the Kursk and Belgorod regions , the Defense Ministry reported.

Along the entire line of combat contact, Ukrainian units carried out 2,669 attacks from barrel artillery, tanks and mortars on positions of our troops, as well as 46 using multiple launch rocket systems. In addition, 6,562 strikes and drops of ammunition from unmanned aerial vehicles were carried out.

The Russian Armed Forces are mirroring the violations of the ceasefire by the Ukrainian Armed Forces and will continue to act adequately to the evolving situation, responding to all criminal encroachments of the Kiev regime.

***

Colonelcassad
Comrade Kim Jong-un said that he would not hesitate to send troops to Russia again to help the Russian army if Western countries dare to attack Russia.

The DPRK has the right to do so under the defense treaty between the DPRK and Russia, which gives the parties the right to send troops to each other's territory to help in defensive wars against external aggressors. So Russia can also send its contingents to the DPRK to protect Pyongyang from the US, South Korea and Japan. This treaty clearly shows what a direct military alliance is, unlike, say, our complex of relations with China and Iran, which is not so mandatory in military terms. The DPRK is undoubtedly our direct military ally.

Of course, Comrade Kim Jong-un's statements concern not only the war with the US and NATO. This warning also concerns Ukraine - if Ukraine tries to invade the territory of the Russian Federation in the old regions, the DPRK will again participate in these operations, as a result of which the Russian Armed Forces will have the option of using 10-20 thousand North Koreans in border battles. There is no talk yet about using North Korean troops in Donbass or in the southern direction. But in the Belgorod, Bryansk and Kursk regions, their participation in battles on the border is more than possible. The go-ahead

has already been given to perpetuate the memory of the fallen DPRK soldiers in the Kursk region. Monuments and memorials will be created, plus several streets in the Kursk region will be named in honor of the North Koreans who helped us beat the enemy. Of course, North Korea has already received various bonuses for its assistance, in addition to the most valuable combat experience in the war against the NATO proxy army. We can expect serious progress in the DPRK army in the field of drones, electronic warfare, air defense systems.

***

Colonelcassad
Russia needs to see “certain dynamics” on the battlefield before agreeing to a long-term ceasefire, Peskov told ABC.

He also stressed that arms supplies from Ukraine’s backers must cease before there can be a pause in the fighting.

“Otherwise, it will be to Ukraine’s advantage. Ukraine will continue its total mobilization, transferring new troops to the front lines. Ukraine will use this period to train new troops and give those already in place a rest,” Peskov said.

“Putin is doing everything possible to solve the problem, to achieve a settlement by peaceful and diplomatic means. But without peaceful and democratic means at hand, we are forced to continue the military operation,” he added.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Washington abandons "peace talks" on Ukraine
Brian Berletic

May 7, 2025 , 2:32 pm .

Image
Donald Trump, President of the United States, in the Oval Office of the White House (Photo: Alex Brandon / AP Photo)

Despite running for office promising to resolve the conflict in Ukraine "within 24 hours," US President Donald Trump and the special interests he serves had intended—even before taking office—to continue the war in Ukraine while pivoting eastward to pursue a similar conflict with China in the Asia-Pacific region.

This was summarized in the policy documents of the Heritage Foundation's " 2025 Project ," sponsored by financial corporations and published in 2023. Chapter 4 , "Department of Defense," written by former Trump administration official Christopher Miller, noted:

"America's allies must assume a much greater responsibility for their conventional defense. America's allies must play their part not only against China but also against threats from Russia, Iran, and North Korea.";

And that was important:

Transform NATO so that U.S. allies are able to deploy the vast majority of conventional forces needed to deter Russia, relying on the United States primarily for our nuclear deterrent, and select other capabilities, while reducing the United States' force posture in Europe.

"The United States will continue to exert pressure not only in Ukraine but throughout the Russian periphery, hoping to create new dilemmas and difficult choices for Moscow, ultimately hoping to precipitate a Soviet-style collapse of the Russian Federation."


Just weeks after taking office, and despite the Trump administration's insistence that it was seeking an end to the conflict in Ukraine, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth would deliver a contradictory directive to Washington's European partners in Brussels, explaining that:

"The United States is prioritizing deterrence of war with China in the Pacific, recognizing the reality of scarcity and making resource concessions to ensure it does not fail."

He also noted:

"As the United States prioritizes its attention to these threats, European allies must lead from the front.

"Together we can establish a division of labor that maximizes our comparative advantages in Europe and the Pacific, respectively."


To "lead from the front," Secretary Hegseth urged Europe to spend more on defense, including allocating up to 5 percent of each nation's GDP to NATO, as well as for Europe to "redouble its efforts and reengage" with "Ukraine's immediate security needs," and to expand its defense industrial base.

Even more alarming, Secretary Hegseth called for European troops to serve as "peacekeepers" in Ukraine as part of a non-NATO security guarantee.

Although Secretary Hegseth specifically stated during his remarks in Brussels that "this must not be Minsk 3.0," what he was describing could not be called anything else.

The obvious intention was to freeze what was and remains a failed US proxy war against Russia by sending European troops into Ukraine to deter further Russian advances. With the conflict frozen, the United States and Europe could rearm, expand their respective military-industrial bases, and also reequip and reorganize Ukraine's armed forces until a future time when factors on the ground tilted more in Washington's favor and hostilities could resume.

A similar strategy paid off for Washington last December in Syria, where a US-sponsored proxy war had been raging since 2011. After failing to overthrow the Syrian government in the early years of the conflict, US and Turkish forces invaded and occupied Syrian territory, freezing the conflict and giving the Hegemon time to rebuild and rearm its proxy forces, allowing it to make a final, successful push toward Damascus in 2024.

Following Secretary Hegseth's remarks in mid-February, European countries immediately moved to implement Washington's directive, with nations including Germany , the United Kingdom , and France pledging to dramatically increase military spending, expand military industrial production, and prepare European troops as part of a " coalition of the willing " to move into Ukraine and create a Syria-style buffer zone.

The foreseeable failure of Trump's peace talks
Despite Washington's obvious intentions to salvage and ultimately continue its own proxy war with Russia, the Trump administration posed as a "mediator" around it, seeking to lure it into a temporary ceasefire that would be useful to European troops, as a window of opportunity to deploy in Ukraine.

Washington's diplomatic efforts were also used to portray the United States as a country seeking "peace," while all other parties—including Russia, Ukraine, and even Europe—were blamed for undermining a potential agreement.

Russia remained open to negotiations but refused to make any concessions that would allow the United States to implement plans to freeze the conflict, rearm Ukraine, and continue the confrontation at a later date.

As expected, with Washington's empty negotiations having run their course, the Trump administration finally and openly picked up where its predecessor Biden left off, arranging tens of millions of dollars in arms deals with Ukraine, in addition to the sale of weapons from US-based manufacturers to Europe for subsequent shipment to Ukraine.

The pause in large-scale Ukrainian drone and missile attacks using Western weapons, enabled by US military assets and directed by US military commanders—as reported by the New York Times —has ended, with a wave of attacks targeting Russia, including the use of several British Storm Shadow cruise missiles. This is likely to continue in the coming weeks and months, along with continued attempts to pressure the Russian economy through additional sanctions, as well as pressure on nations that continue to trade with it.

Russia's slow and steady war of attrition
Russia, for its part, continues its strategy of attrition. The Wall Street Journal admits that the Russian military-industrial base continues to expand, with more than 300 T-90 main battle tanks produced each year, up from just 40 in 2021. Artillery pieces and shells are also being produced in greater numbers, along with at least as many drones as Western sources claim Ukraine is producing or acquiring.

Although the Wall Street Journal doesn't mention missiles, attacks in Ukraine have been steadily increasing, indicating that dozens of cruise and ground-launched ballistic missiles, like the Iskander, are likely being manufactured each month.

The same article admits that the Russian armed forces are recruiting between 30,000 and 40,000 soldiers each month. The Wall Street Journal admits that this additional manpower allows troops to rotate in and out of the battlefield, a luxury their Ukrainian counterparts do not enjoy. These troop rotations and a large reserve allow for longer and better training. The country's inability to recruit or field sufficient numbers of troops is a factor contributing to the decline in the quantity and quality of Ukrainian soldiers, which in turn leads to the steady and progressive collapse of its ranks.

The current trajectory of the conflict appears to be leading to an eventual collapse of Ukraine's combat capability, which would allow Russian forces to move relatively unhindered through what remains of Ukrainian-controlled territory. It is difficult to know exactly if and when this will happen; however, the urgency in Washington and Brussels for the introduction of Western troops into Ukrainian territory to freeze the conflict may indicate that it will happen sooner rather than later.

Among the determining factors is Russia's ability to continue evading US and European attempts to undermine its economy, including the prospect of Western warships attempting to intercept or block ships carrying Russian hydrocarbons. It also includes Russia's ability to continue surpassing the collective West in terms of military industrial production. And while the country appears to be succeeding in the ongoing proxy war in Ukraine, the US continues to pressure it throughout its geographic, political, and economic periphery.

The 2019 RAND Corporation document , "Russia's Enlargement," lays out a long list of "measures" intended to "stress Russia's military and economy and the regime's political standing at home and abroad." These include "providing lethal aid to Ukraine." The document acknowledges that it could force Russia to "counter-escalate," as it did in 2022, precipitating a war that the document warned could "produce disproportionately large Ukrainian casualties, territorial losses, and refugee flows," and that "could even push Ukraine into a disadvantageous peace."

The document also suggested "increasing support for the Syrian rebels." Because the United States has implemented these two measures and many others suggested in the document, Russia has in fact been "enlarged." The conflict ravaging Ukraine was prioritized by Moscow over the conflict that the United States also deliberately escalated in Syria, forcing Russia to make the difficult decision of sacrificing one for the other.

In the coming days, weeks, and months, the United States will continue to exert pressure not only in Ukraine but throughout Russia's periphery, hoping to create new dilemmas and difficult choices for Moscow with the last hope of precipitating a Soviet-style collapse of the Russian Federation. The outcome of this strategy will be determined not only by Russia's ability to counter these provocations but also by its ability to cooperate with other target nations of the Hegemon—including Iran and China—to stabilize and strengthen the emerging multipolar world faster than the United States can undermine and destroy it.

https://misionverdad.com/traducciones/w ... re-ucrania

Google Translator

I don't believe that the administration is playing a false game but rather an incredibly inept one crippled by Trump's need for coming out of this a hero, at least in his own mind. But the possibility of meeting that criteria and meeting Russia's demands is slim to none.

******

Mobilizing the mobilizers, a Finnish finish, GUR-SBU clashes

"I talk young people out of it. I tell them straight: 'Boys, you’ll end up in meat brigades—the survival rate there is catastrophically low,”

Events in Ukraine
May 09, 2025

Plenty of events over the past week.

A mobilization officer sent to the frontlines after criticizing the ‘meat brigade’ tactics of the Ukrainian army and stating he would never send his son to fight.

New photos, justified by the mobilization authorities, of fresh meat strapped to heaters and beds with zip ties.

Cunning mobilization catfishing tactics.

A Kyiv city official threatens a journalist after uncovering his father’s corruption, a mobilization officer. ‘I’ll smash your fucking face in’.

A double murder over an arms deal dispute.

And most tantalizingly, rumors emerge of a clash in April between Ukraine’s two largest secret services, involving armored vehicles on the streets of Kyiv. Yermak may be out for Budanov’s head…

But first, the death of the True Finn, as reported by Finnish publication yle.


Leo Aland, 20, died on April 13, four days after he received a message from his father asking him to come home.

Aland’s father, Jyrki Aland, is the head of the Finns Party's southwest Finland district. Formerly known as the True Finns party, it is the second-most powerful party in the country’s parliament. The Finns Party is considered a rightwing populist party. Originally opposed to NATO membership and favoring neutrality, it changed its policy after 2022.

Jyrki and the rest of the family didn’t support their son’s January decision to volunteer in the Ukrainian army. The father had this to say:

"It may seem noble to go and fight against the Russians, but I see no sense in young men fighting the battles of old men,"

Image
Leo became interested in the idea of fighting in Ukraine while completing military service in Finland, pictured here (centre)

Jyrki didn’t hear from his son for several weeks after he left to Ukraine. When he came back in contact, it turned out that young Leo had missed the Finnish government’s warning that Ukrainian military contracts cannot be terminated. The son sent this to his father in early February:

It was a harsh collision with reality. It's really tough here. I definitely don't want to stay here for long. It was probably a mistake to come here



I know this experience will help me grow as a person, but it's still really difficult. I'm doing my best to cope. Sometimes I just don't know what I'm doing here.

He began asking his father to help him escape Ukraine. Despite the combined efforts of Jyrki Aland and the Finnish foreign ministry, Leo could not be brought home. The Ukrainian military confiscated his passport and restricted his phone use.

His training finished in mid-February, and he became more optimistic about the war. He was also thinking about the future, signing up for a Finnish university course.

Image

But Jyrki was worried:

I warned him that it might be time to seriously consider coming home, as the Russians were beginning their spring offensive. He replied that he didn't think his unit would be sent to the front line

That isn’t what happened:

He died somewhere in eastern Ukraine, in exactly the kind of attack he feared most — a drone strike directed by a human

Little space for heroism when killed by a lump of plastic bought on aliexpress and operated by a glorified gamer.

In Ukraine around early January. Training over by mid-February. Dead after what seems like several days at the frontlines in eastern Ukraine in mid-April. Four months out of a six month contract.

The body, however, is missing. Aland was registered as missing in action, with those serving alongside him claiming nothing remains of him.

Other, more gruesome details exist.

(Paywall with free option.)

https://eventsinukraine.substack.com/p/ ... -a-finnish

******

Russia will not agree to a ceasefire without stopping arms supplies to Ukraine
May 10, 11:18

Image

Russia will not agree to a ceasefire without stopping arms supplies to Ukraine

Russia needs to see “certain dynamics” on the battlefield before agreeing to a long-term ceasefire, Peskov told ABC.

He also stressed that arms supplies from Ukraine’s backers must cease before there can be a pause in the fighting.

“Otherwise, it will be to Ukraine’s advantage. Ukraine will continue its total mobilization, transferring new troops to the front lines. Ukraine will use this period to train new troops and give those it already has a rest,” Peskov stressed. “

Putin is doing everything possible to solve the problem, to achieve a settlement by peaceful and diplomatic means. But without peaceful and democratic means at hand, we are forced to continue the military operation,” he added.


Quite logical. A ceasefire with continued mobilization and arms supplies is simply another version of Minsk-2 with a predetermined outcome. So, of course, such a ceasefire is not beneficial to Russia. And those who propose it, of course, know this. That is why they are proposing it.

P.S. Today, on the night of May 11, the "festive" truce ends and the fighting will continue as usual. In fact, it has not stopped in most areas. The enemy claims that Russia is going to launch a powerful missile strike on Kiev in the near future

PS2. The "coalition of the willing" (Macron, Merz, Tusk and Starmer) showed up in Kiev today on the last day of the "truce" to discuss a strategy for putting pressure on Russia. Of course, they will not stop arms supplies.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9830182.html

Google Translator

******

Slim pickins' today...
"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 11, 2025 12:44 pm

The language of the ultimatum
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 11/05/2025

Image

“On the way to kyiv. For Ukraine, for Europe,” wrote Emmanuel Macron yesterday morning (in several languages). Upon his arrival in Ukraine, greeted by an impeccably dressed Andriy Ermak, who has definitively abandoned his war attire every time he meets with Western representatives, the French president was accompanied by the Polish president, the German chancellor, and the British prime minister. Of those four countries, only Starmer represents a state that was not present at the signing of the power-sharing agreement signed between the opposition and then-President Yanukovych on February 22, 2014, and immediately reneged on by Western proxies, who preferred to seize power quickly rather than wait for elections. The way in which the representatives of the European Union watched impassively as the first of many agreements signed since then was breached was a harbinger of what Europe's response would be in its unconditional support for kyiv no matter what it did. Over these eleven years, European countries and the United States have participated directly or indirectly in the Geneva talks, which led to an inclusive dialogue agreement that kyiv chose not to pursue, and in the Minsk process, where Ukraine immediately began rewriting the signed document to adapt it to its demands, chronicling the war in Donbass at the risk of provoking the wider war that began with the Russian invasion.

Since then, even though Ukraine has repeatedly admitted that it never intended to implement the agreements, the idea that it was Russia that deliberately sabotaged the implementation of the peace accords has taken root in the media and political establishment . In recent years, European countries have sought to look on the bright side, with people like Angela Merkel emphasizing that the seven years of Minsk gave Ukraine time to strengthen itself. Other participants in the negotiation process, such as then-French President François Hollande, have gone a step further to suggest that this was always the objective of the agreements: to diplomatically halt the Russian advance—actually, the advance of the Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics—without any possibility of Kiev complying with the conditions it had signed. This stance is the one that has best defined the performance of the last decade and is one of the causes of the extreme distrust with which Moscow views every step taken by European countries, which have significantly contributed to Ukraine's main success this decade: instilling in the collective consciousness that it is useless to negotiate with the Russian Federation, which is incapable of negotiating in good faith.

Yesterday's visit is part of the events that have taken place in recent days, in which a direct line has been drawn between the European victory against fascism—which has included Ukraine, but expressly excluded Russia as the successor to the Soviet Union and Belarus due to its ties to Moscow despite the heroic partisan struggle of its population against Nazism—and the current European Union, of which Ukraine must be a fundamental part. The creation of a European identity against everything related to Russia is evident in the European Union of rearmament and the attempt to keep the war going until Kiev is in a position of strength with which to negotiate and impose on Moscow terms that Brussels considers acceptable. As the belligerent revision of Washington's final offer shows , these are not the terms outlined in the roadmap that the United States expected Ukraine to accept last month at the failed London summit. However, Ukraine's signing of the mineral extraction agreement and Russia's firm stance in defense of its interests, something the White House apparently did not expect, have reduced tensions with kyiv while increasing them with Moscow.

On Friday, after several days of harsh statements from US officials, especially JD Vance, who is considered more favorable to Russia than Ukraine, Bloomberg stated that "Europe"—meaning the European Union and the United Kingdom—"is negotiating with the United States on an ultimatum to end the war in Ukraine. According to sources familiar with the matter, European officials are in talks with the Trump administration to finalize an agreement on a 30-day ceasefire in Ukraine that would impose new sanctions on Russia if President Vladimir Putin does not budge." After the nervousness caused by the White House's change of heart last February, its shift toward peace and the opening of diplomacy with direct talks with Vladimir Putin and meetings with Sergey Lavrov, and a tension that even led to the cutting off of arms and intelligence supplies to Ukraine, European countries seem to be finding their feet again, trying to reinsert themselves into the decision-making circle.

From the concern of the first months of the year, we have moved on to the smiles shown yesterday in Kiev, partly thanks to the confidence that, little by little, Donald Trump seems to have moved closer to the European vision of the diplomatic process , in which it is the Western powers that must decide what the resolution will be, that is, offer Russia a fait accompli to which it must submit or risk a punishment that is announced as something not yet seen. In reality, as Bloomberg admits , European hopes may not materialize, since "the plans are not yet final, and their progress still depends on the United States, which has called for an unconditional one-month truce and that both Russia and Ukraine are held accountable for respecting the sanctity of direct negotiations."

Kiev, which never desired the 30-day truce that the United States forced it to accept, has always relied on the certainty that Moscow would not unconditionally accept a temporary ceasefire plan without any guarantee of progress toward a resolution to the conflict. This very weekend, in an interview with ABC , Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov insisted that Vladimir Putin is not opposed to the famous 30-day ceasefire, currently the main argument of European countries, which are even more reticent than Kiev regarding the truce and diplomacy, but rather demands to know how its compliance would be monitored and, above all, conditions that guarantee that it will become the first step toward a definitive resolution. This resolution scenario, with a series of clear and definitive postulates, among which Ukraine's withdrawal from NATO stands out, is radically contrary to what is sought by Ukraine and the coalition of volunteers that visited Kiev yesterday, whose intention is to halt the Russian advance and maintain the status quo until the lost territory can be recovered, whether by military or political means.

Pressure on Russia to unconditionally accept the ceasefire offered by Ukraine—and in which it would undoubtedly be accused of non-compliance, as has already occurred during the two truces declared by Russia at Easter and these past three days—and which the United States has joined, would be the first hope for kyiv and its European allies of being able to implement the most favorable scenario for their interests. "If the ceasefire is not respected, the United States and its partners will impose more sanctions," Donald Trump wrote on his personal social network, even before the truce was accepted and the predictable political accusations of non-compliance began. With seven years of experience violating the terms but convincing the press and its allies that it is the opponent who does not follow the required principles, kyiv is confident that it can continue to apply pressure in pursuit of its objectives, especially the dream of having a NATO military presence on its territory "as long as," as its ceasefire proposal states, "there is no consensus" for its accession to the military alliance.

Far from meeting the conditions Russia seeks to accept the ceasefire—among which is a halt to arms supplies to kyiv, since otherwise it would be clear that Ukraine is using the truce to strengthen itself, as it did in Minsk—European countries need threats, which for more than a decade have been the only language they have used in their dialogue with Moscow. "There will be a massive tightening of sanctions and massive assistance to Ukraine will continue" if Russia rejects the 30-day truce, threatened Foreign Minister Merz, who intends to use foreign policy to demonstrate a strength it lacks domestically, as demonstrated by his investiture vote. Although the threat of sanctions is relative—after more than fifteen sanctions packages and the virtually complete severance of relations with the Russian Federation—it is effective for European self-confidence. As until now, the hardening of the Western stance against Russia depends on the United States. But to the delight of European capitals, the Trump administration's frustration at resolving a conflict it doesn't understand, and in which it can now only order the parties to stop fighting this "stupid war," makes it more likely that Washington will join European plans to reach a temporary agreement, accepting part of the terms of London and Paris so it can boast of an apparent resolution and move on to something else. This is the desire of Kiev and its European allies, who hope to get Trump to force Vladimir Putin to accept terms on which he has no say: a freeze on the conflict, a military presence of NATO countries on Ukrainian territory, perhaps even on the de facto border , and a veto on Ukraine's accession to the Alliance that will possibly expire with the arrival of a new president.

Taking the reins of a process they want to lead and in which they are aware that the United States wants to get away, European leaders have opted to be the ones to issue the ultimatum, giving Russia two days to accept the terms presented or be seen as the only obstacle to peace. “A complete and unconditional ceasefire must begin on Monday, May 12, for at least 30 days, and we demand this from Russia. Attempts to impose any conditions will be evidence of prolonging the war and attempts to disrupt diplomacy. It is quite possible to monitor the ceasefire in coordination with the United States. It should last 30 days to give diplomacy a real chance. During this time, work will focus on defining the political, security, humanitarian, and peace foundations. The demand for a ceasefire is welcomed not only by European partners, but also by the United States, which was the first to propose such an idea,” Zelensky stated, flanked by his European allies, none of whom wanted the truce they are now demanding, which does not seek to avoid greater harm to Ukraine, but rather to put on track a process that plays the same role as the Minsk process.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/11/el-le ... timatum-2/

Google Translator

Fuck 'em

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
11 years ago, referendums on independence from Ukraine were held in the DPR and LPR.

Based on the results of the referendums, the DPR and LPR have already officially seceded from Ukraine and proclaimed a course on joining Russia. For the implementation of this course, the DPR and LPR have been fighting the Nazi regime in Ukraine since April 2014.

In 2022, the results of the referendums allowed them to first receive official recognition from Russia, and then join Russia as subjects of the Russian Federation. Thus, the referendums were an important step in the return of Donbass to Russia.

Of course, we can also recall Moscow's calls not to rush with the referendum. And the fact that the de facto unrecognized states in Donbass began to be built only in October-November after the first Minsk. And further attempts to shove Donbass back into Ukraine under Minsk-2. Which was later officially recognized as a mistake. But it was not possible to shove the toothpaste back into the tube. Donbass survived the war, the times of "Surkovshchina", the crime spree of 2014-2016 and much more. The Donbass character survived all of this.

I congratulate the residents of the DPR and LPR on the 11th anniversary of the referendums. On this day, you took an important step towards our reunification. Despite all the ifs and buts. And despite the threat of Kiev Nazism and various difficulties of state building - Donbass survived. The result will remain in history one way or another. And now we all together have to finish the necessary work at the front and in the rear so that the SVO completes the processes that began in Donbass after the Nazi coup in Kiev.

Happy holiday, Donbass!

***

Colonelcassad
Frontline report as of the morning of May 11, 2025 (data from @SouthernRepublic )

Kursk border area. The enemy is trying to break through and capture Tyotkino in small groups with virtually no armor. So far, unsuccessfully.

Zaporizhzhya direction. The Ukrainian Armed Forces, against the backdrop of the ceasefire declared by the Russian Federation, have decided to lay down their arms and surrender. More and more Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers are choosing life.

Bogatyr direction. The enemy has recognized our successes in the Volnoye Pole area.

Konstantinovskoye direction. As a result of the counterattack, our guys advanced in the Romanovka area.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

*****

Victory Day, Defeat, & Deceit: Russia Advances, US Cashes in, the Orchestrator Plays Peacemaker
Posted by Internationalist 360° on May 9, 2025
Fiorella Isabel

Image

Russia tightens its grip on victory, while Washington-the architect of the war-exerts full control of Kiev, aiming to salvage a crushing military defeat into a business deal. But stakes are rising.

On August 6, 2024, Ukraine, fully supported by US weapons including precision-guided HIMARS systems and various armored vehicles, launched a massive attack into Russia’s Kursk region, ending in one of the only incursions they can claim as mildly successful this entire war. The aim was for Russia to divert its resources away from the Donbass front line and into Kursk, its weak area. Instead Moscow’s troops retreated to focus on advancing in the front line, increasing their numbers, unleashing a devastating push in the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR), capturing multiple settlements—many with minimal resistance—and seizing over 400 square kilometers. These events which Western media positioned as a failure for Russia and the beginning of Ukraine’s victory, was off-set by the staggering territorial loss Ukraine faced at the front, plunging them into an operational crisis, as Russia claimed it would return to recapture Kursk anyway. Less than a year later Moscow has not only regained full hold of the region, it’s taken everything Kiev has in artillery, troops, and political power, while advancing deeper into Ukraine. Now, Russia’s pursuing a resolution to the conflict—one welcomed by some in Washington who wish to extricate themselves from the mess, seeking to turn a loss into a win by repositioning pieces on the Grand Chessboard to their advantage.

While mainstream media and Western pundits fell for the delusion that Ukraine had a chance, the majority of level-headed independent media saw the truth a year ago—and now the reality that this war is already lost on the battlefield is crashing down on Ukraine, including its puppet leader Zelensky. What remains isn’t strategy but politics, which has been at the core of this entire journey: the slow, stubborn theater of denial, bargaining, and finally acceptance. In all of the back and forth between Washington and Russia on a coming end to the saga, lies the geopolitical chess game unfolding silently in the shadows of back channels and closed-door meetings, and this is where observers must focus to discern what comes next.

I’ve stated from the beginning to the disappointment and disagreement of many, that regardless of Zelensky’s latest outbursts, Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s antics, Trump’s threats to walk away, and the latest millions sent to Kiev, both the White House and the Kremlin want this war to end for now—that’s evidenced by backchannel signals from both sides. But don’t mistake this for Western goodwill or permanence, but rather a cold, tactical task at hand. While Russia readies in celebrating the 80th Anniversary of Victory Day festivities, it feels no urgency to end this, holding all the key cards in the deck, but Washington desperately needs resolution—at least for the time being.

Trump Needs A “Win”: Washington’s Calculated Pivot Toward Momentary Peace in Eurasia, Signals Trouble With China, West Asia and Global South

At the funeral of the late Pope Francis at the Vatican, which gathered many world leaders except from Israel, Trump and Zelensky exploited the event to perform a theatrical production of Peace Talks. Inside St. Peter’s Basilica, seated side by side on ornate red-and-gold chairs, the U.S. and Ukrainian presidents met for the first time since their fiery Oval Office dramatics in February, with Trump downplaying their past dispute and calling the Vatican meeting “beautiful” multiple times, joking about their televised former spat: “We had a little disagreement—cameras were rolling.” National security adviser, Mike Waltz, went further, declaring the moment “iconic” and praising Trump’s push for peace “in the heart of the Vatican.” Zelensky agreed, calling the talks “symbolic” with a potential to become historic if results were delivered. European leaders Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer also attended the conversations, a bone thrown to all by Trump who’s largely kept them at bay. The U.S. President who recently praised Putin, expressed disappointment over the Western narrative of alleged Russian attacks on civilians, “I want him to stop shooting, sit down and sign a deal,” adding that he sought a resolution in two weeks time. Trump also claimed Zelensky was “ready to give up Crimea,”something we’ve never heard from Kiev, but for Russia isn’t even part of the conversation as this was decided over ten years ago. Marco Rubio said the coming days were critical, admitting, “We’re close, but not close enough,” to a resolution. State Department spokesperson, Tammy Bruce, told Fox News that that while the U.S. hasn’t yet reached the point of abandoning its mediator role in Moscow-Kiev negotiations, a lack of progress could force a shift—a decision ultimately resting with Trump and Rubio.

Beyond the diplomatic dancing, the reality is Trump envoy Steve Witkoff has been coming to Moscow for months, meeting with Putin a verified minimum of 4 times, and most recently Kremlin spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, confirmed that Witkoff came to Moscow with messages from Trump to Putin and would leave with messages for the U.S. president from the Russian leader, calling this “shuttle diplomacy” as part of the Washington’s mediation efforts to settle the situation in Ukraine. The latest meeting between Putin and Witkoff lasted 3 hours and was according to both parties, “constructive,” with the two statesmen discussing the possibility of resuming direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine among other things. The meeting coincided with the 80th anniversary of the meeting of the Elbe, the day Soviet and American troops met at the Elbe River, near Torgau in Germany, marking an important step toward the end of WWII.

While Witkoff met with Putin, Lt. General Yaroslav Moskalik, staff deputy chief of operations, was assassinated via a placed car bomb in the Moscow suburb of Balashikha. Russia’s Investigative Committee said the device was packed with metal fragments and 300 grams of TNT. A suspect was caught and admitted to having been recruited by Ukraine’s SBU, but while Moscow condemned the terror act, this has not deterred their intent toward a resolution to the conflict. Trump was recently asked what concessions Russia offered up thus far to get to the point of being closer to peace and comically answered that the point was Russia ending the war, and stopping short of taking the whole country, which was big concession. In spite of the latest military aid, including a $310.5 million contract for F-16 maintenance for Ukraine, Washington is continuing talks with Moscow, just days before May 9th celebrations. Trump admitted he was in talks with Putin but refused to provide details to the Wall Street Journal reporter asking him, because he disliked the outlet: “I wouldn’t tell the Wall Street Journal because I’d be wasting my time. There are talks going on, but I don’t want to talk to the Wall Street Journal.” While this brutal honesty is what makes Trump a more cunning leader than Biden, the truth is Trump is simply tasked with getting out of the mess.

Trump ran on ending the Ukraine war in “24 hours,” a claim later dismissed as a joke in a Time interview. Yet he now needs the conflict to subside if only temporarily, so Washington can spin it as a success rather than the strategic disaster it truly is for the U.S. and NATO. Additionally, Washington is ramping up tensions with Iran, seeking regime change and threatening attacks, while simultaneously bombing Yemen and engaging in a tariff war with China. There’s simply no bandwidth left for Eurasia, the solution is to simply kick the can to the next Democrat-backed administration, because U.S. foreign policy thrives on continuity, not change. Trump isn’t pivoting because he’s “different” or “anti-war”—he’s tasked with winding down Ukraine to refocus on Iran, China, and Latin America. We’re also witnessing the most Zionist administration to date focus on expanding Greater Israel, which has fully admitted they will not stop attacking Gaza and that it will be “entirely destroyed”—all with Washington’s approval. In fact, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth affirmed this aim back in February, alluding to a focus away from Ukraine and onto US borders and China. The illusion is that Trump’s “cleaning up Biden’s mess,” when in reality is he’s pushing war onto another theater and the money pipeline never stops—not under Obama, Trump, Biden, or whoever comes next; interchangeable actors with some minor superficial vestiges, executing a different chapter of the same military-intelligence playbook.

Russia Wants to End on Their Terms But They Are Keen To Move On

No Matter what anyone says, wars are costly for both the victors and losers, be this economically, militarily, humanely, mentally and morally. Three years of war have brought thousands of dead Russian soldiers, crippling sanctions, travel bans, civilian bombings and relentless censorship. Yet despite the onslaught, Russia has demonstrated remarkable resilience by circumventing the sanctions, developing domestic industries, and forging critical partnerships in energy, trade and transport with China, India, Iran, North Korea and across the Global South. Still, this endurance has its limits in logic and exhaustion. Russia now faces the dual challenge of sustaining while expanding its economic influence, carefully cultivating new alliances and investing in key relationships to cement its position as a formidable global powerhouse, especially as Moscow now ranks second in economic size, behind New York and right before Shanghai.

According to Kremlin Speaker Peskov, the conflict in Ukraine would end instantly if Kiev withdrew its troops from the four regions enshrined in the Russian constitution: Donetsk, Kherson, Lugansk and Zaporozhye. This was echoed by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s comments at a BRICS meeting among Foreign Ministers in Rio, Brazil, ahead of the BRICS Summit this summer. Lavrov outlined Russia’s Conditions for a Ukraine Peace Agreement, saying the ball is not in Russia’s court, meaning Ukraine and its allies need to come to a fair agreement with Russia, not with delusional demands from positions they lack. As Russia has been repeating since the start, they seek a removal of Ukraine’s ban on negotiations with Moscow, which is common sense, a formal rejection of NATO membership by Ukraine, international recognition of Russia’s newly incorporated territories, measures to eliminate anti-Russian activities by the Neo-Nazi regime, and security assurances to protect against threats from NATO and the EU.

At another speaking event Lavrov expressed that Russia will develop relations with the United States without harming its partners, adding that everyone will soon see that Russia and the United States have a mutual interest in constructive dialogue. The diplomat also told CBS in an interview that Donald Trump has been the only world leader who has acknowledged the need to address the root causes of the Ukrainian crisis and that Russia maintains contacts with Washington on the issue. In a recent interview with French publication Le Point, Peskov addressed the potential for economic cooperation with Washington, emphasizing that if the US takes control of the gas network linking Russia with Europe, Gazprom is ready to discuss a gas supply contract with the new owner. Moscow recognizes that a number of European countries are ready to buy Russian gas, and Russia is ready to negotiate based on market conditions. Very recently, Russia’s First Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, Dmitry Polyanskiy, revealed to Ria Novosti, that Russia and U.S. talks on normalizing relations are much broader than on resolving the Ukrainian conflict, and this normalization would be “in the interest of the entire world”.

Attending an exhibition at the Victory Museum on Poklonnaya Hill, Putin spoke at the educational marathon “Knowledge First,” and outlined his belief that there are people in the West who share Russian values, with some fighting in the special operation on Russia’s side. He noted that many others privately support Moscow’s stance in the conflict but don’t express their point of view. The Russian leader even proclaimed that sooner or later relations between Moscow and Europe will be restored. Going even deeper in an interview for the documentary, Russia. Kremlin. Putin. 25 Years Old, Vladimir Putin told reporter Pavel Zarubin that reconciliation with the Ukrainian part of the Russian people is “inevitable” and a “matter of time.” These remarks, straight from the source should dispel any doubts on Russia’s willingness to normalize relations with the West—especially Washington.

Of course Moscow would be foolish to trust Washington and doing so would betray every lesson of history about who truly pulls the strings in the Swamp. Yet many of America’s adversaries—in West Asia, the East, Global South and even Eurasia—still cling to naive illusions. They ignore the unbroken continuity of U.S. foreign policy, a machine that chews up presidents and spits out the same agenda. Nations that value sovereignty must grasp this: As the American empire declines like Rome before it, its collapsing gravity threatens to pull the entire world down.

Deconstructing The Significance of Moscow’s Military Partnership With North Korea & Why It’s Not The Same with Iran

After months of silence, Moscow’s finally disclosed that North Korean troops have been on the ground in Kursk, helping Russia defeat Ukraine, which is not surprising after they signed the Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership. Footage obtained by TASS depicts North Korean soldiers undergoing combat training, before participating in Kursk’s liberation.

According to Kim Jong Un this was necessary as the situation required the enactment of Article 4 of the Treaty, with the Central Military Commission of the Workers’ Party of Korea revealing in a statement that this was “a sacred mission” aimed at strengthening friendship with Moscow. Reminder that this treaty was signed June 18, 2024 in Pyongyang and implemented protocols that enabled the Russian military to intervene in a crisis on the Korean Peninsula. In turn, the treaty would enable North Korea to provide military support or intervene if the Russia-Ukraine war were to escalate.

Article 3 of the treaty, which contains 23 articles and covers political, trade, investment, and security cooperation, states “in case a direct threat of armed invasion is created”, the two nations “shall immediately operate the channel of bilateral negotiations for the purpose of adjusting their stands” and “discussing feasible practical measures”. Article 4 of the treaty states that should either nation “put in a state of war by an armed invasion,” the other “provide military and other assistance with all means in its possession without delay” in accordance,” with Article 51 of the UN Charter” and the laws of the DPRK and the Russian Federation. As I’ve outlined before, Russia always follows the UN Charter when it comes to its diplomacy. This sets it apart from the automatic intervention provision in the 1961 treaty between the DPRK and the USSR, but the Soviet Union was a more ideologically driven entity that existed in a different geopolitical climate.

Image

While both the 1961 and 2024 treaties establish grounds for military intervention, key differences exist in carefully crafted limitations that redefine the Russia-DPRK partnership. The 1961 pact mandated immediate, unconditional assistance, whereas the 2024 agreement relies on Article 4’s conditional framework, which tethers intervention to both UN Charter provisions and domestic legal processes. By invoking Article 51’s self-defense clause – which remains subject to Security Council oversight – and incorporating constitutional safeguards mirroring those in NATO-U.S. agreements, the treaty creates deliberate ambiguity where its predecessor demanded automaticity. Cleverly this set-up serves dual purposes: providing Moscow with influence over DPRK decision-making while maintaining plausible deniability, allowing Moscow a get out of jail free card. Still, the treaty acts as a functional counterweight to Western alliances, complete with its own version of Article 5-style commitments and fundamentally undermines and mirrors Seoul’s strategic posturing with Washington.

In this way as I’ve stated before, contrary to the ideological fantasy of a “Communist alliance against the West” peddled by YouTube pundits dreaming of an inaccurate version of a “multipolar world” through hopium-clouded lenses, Moscow’s calculus is purely logical. Capitalist Russia is acting pragmatically to secure its interests, hedging its bets that if things go really sour with the West it has a strong, reliable partner, uninvolved in West Asia, while retaining deniability via Article 51 if it sees no urgent need to involve itself should Pyongyang’s tensions with the West escalate. The treaty’s true innovation lies not in its military promises but in its institutionalized crisis management, offering Moscow both influence and insulation as Northeast Asia’s security landscape grows increasingly volatile.

Back in February, I outlined, to the dismay of many, how Russia’s partnership Treaty with North Korea was very different from the one with Iran. Moscow’s Iranian–Russian Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with Tehran, explicitly excludes military intervention and dictates that if a power attacks it, Russia will not respond but only go along the UN charter. This was confirmed by Russian deputy foreign Minister Andrei Rudenko in April, who reiterated that a US attack on Iran would bring dire consequences for the region and while Moscow would offer help in negotiations between Tehran and Washington, they would not be obligated to aid Tehran in the event of an attack. While some Russian media highlighted Russia’s 20-year-partnership with Tehran as the closest ever military ties, the fine print reveals no actual defense commitments—proving the military partnership to be more rhetorical than strategic.

Image

All of these developments further signal to Russia’s incoming role in West Asia. Russia will remain “neutral” when it comes to Israel, therefore not fighting the U.S. in terms of their full intent to expand Greater Israel, and as I’ve pointed out in other podcasts, interviews and former articles, this can be seen by the current survival of their bases in Syria as well as their current relationship with the Jolani regime. Even if we do see a Palestinian state it won’t ever be anything of power or equity alongside an Israeli state, and as we’ve seen Israel eradicate Rafah, the supposed refugee area for Gazans, we see that being neutral on Israel is essentially allowing it to continue its ethnic cleansing. In truth, beyond the momentary doomed ceasefire the plan has been this all along, to the point where even the Israeli minister proclaimed that Gaza WILL BE destroyed and outright stated that Palestinians will be forced into other countries.

Image

Russia appears to seek a stable, diplomatic region and relationships with as many sovereign nations as possible for its own advancement not for an ideological fight against the West. The problem for Moscow is Israel has an incestuous relationship with the West and has consistently supported them over Russia, especially when it comes to the Ukraine war, not fully but enough. This makes clear that Iran cannot depend on Russian military intervention against a U.S. attack- Tehran must either stand alone or find new allies but it does not mean their economic or geopolitical alliance is gone, as it still sees Moscow as a vital partner. The Resistance as a whole has been monitoring these developments and has increasingly turned its attention toward Yemen.

Recent reports in both Russian and U.S. media reveal Putin and Trump share an understanding: Iran must never gain the capability to destroy Israel. This unsurprising alignment reflects Russia’s historical ties with Israel and their shared ethnic connections. More vitally, it explains Moscow’s reluctance to forge full military cooperation with Tehran—being caught between sworn enemies, Israel and Iran, creates an untenable geopolitical position for Russia. The fourth round of US-Iran talks on Tehran’s nuclear program is set to take place between May 10-11, according to Steve Witkoff, who is also handling those talks apart from Ukraine-Moscow. Iran is not coming to the festivities though the President Masoud Pezeshkian had a telephone conversation with Putin on May 6th, while Israel’s ambassador, Simona Halperin, is said to attend the Victory Day events.

North Korea on the other hand remains detached from these tensions. Once the Ukraine conflict concludes, Russia will be positioned to rebuild relations with the United States while simultaneously making it very clear that its partnerships with China and North Korea will continue without interruption. The U.S. State Department has hypocritically demanded an end to North Korea’s military presence in Russia and cessation of Moscow’s support for Pyongyang – as if Washington holds any authority over sovereign nations’ strategic partnerships. Moscow’s wisdom in also putting Washington in a uncomfortable position with its troops in North Korea speaks volumes of its calculated moves. After all, European and U.S. troops have long been on the ground in Ukraine, so Washington’s flustered feathers do nothing but expose their duplicity. By forming a strong alliance with North Korea, Russia demonstrates its strategic autonomy in choosing its Asian alliances while carefully avoiding pressure on Israel, and maintaining a pragmatic, economically-motivated openness to Western relations.

The U.S. Now Owns More of Ukraine’s Carcass with Timely Minerals Deal

Washington and Ukraine just signed a long-awaited agreement on mineral resources via the establishment of a United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, for which the U.S. could receive more than 350 billion dollars. While Washington frames this as “rebuilding Ukraine,” and proclaims that Kiev as a sovereign state has full autonomy over its economic zones and natural resources, the truth is Ukraine’s not only losing land to Russia, but has long lost control of its economy, politics and management to the West—this deal merely formalizes that surrender. The first $50 million military aid package for Ukraine (of Trump’s second term), while presented as assistance, is actually another high-interest loan Ukraine must repay. This isn’t about prolonging the war’s financial drain but a strategic morsel thrown at Kiev as the conflict winds down. Now, many analysts argue that this is proof the U.S. isn’t serious about negotiations and has abandoned diplomacy with Moscow. But I’d argue the opposite: these moves signal desperation, not strength.

According to the White House itself, the deal with Ukraine is designed to make Kiev compensate the U.S. for its assistance. This undeniably strengthens Ukraine’s dependence on American military and economic aid, securing short-term survival while realistically jeopardizing its long-term sovereignty—Washington’s strategic interests will inevitably overshadow Kiev’s own. At the same time, the U.S. solidifies Ukraine as a geopolitical proxy, expanding its influence in Europe. Having orchestrated this war from the onset, Washington’s role as a mediator is deeply disingenuous as it now seeks to exploit the situation after Ukraine has served its purpose. Those of us who labeled this a U.S.-NATO proxy war have been vindicated as “peace talks” are firstly being held between Russia and the U.S., not Ukraine.

On Thursday, former President and senior Russian security official, Dmitry Medvedev, claimed the newly signed U.S.-Ukraine minerals deal proves President Trump is finally forcing Kiev to pay for future military aid. Little else says this is really over more than this treaty, because the U.S. isn’t about to allow Russia to destroy its newly acquired resources and surely Russia, who’s also gained much more of these resources from the Donbass acquisition, seeks to protect their own assets from devastation.

Ukraine will never be the same nor recuperate even if the war ends tomorrow. Under U.S. stewardship, the private international corporate sector including giants like BlackRock, are now leading Ukraine’s reconstruction via an investment initiative, which has carved out a pound of flesh off Ukraine, garnering more external foreign control over Kiev via its alleged recovery. This is classic “disaster capitalism” in action, as BlackRock’s “advisory” role is less about rebuilding Ukraine and more about positioning Western finance capital to profit from its destruction.

The firm’s reconstruction plans prioritize the privatization of the country’s assets—energy grids, farmland, infrastructure—under the guise of “efficiency,” giving the country off to vulture investors. Meanwhile, proposed financial instruments like war bonds, insurance schemes and more aren’t charity, but predatory financial instruments that will likely burden Ukraine with long-term debt obligations as it’s already drowning in IMF loans and may face more austerity measures shackling it to decades of debt.

All of these so-called recovery efforts for Ukraine would not be necessary had the U.S. not interfered in Ukraine’s affairs in 2014 and pushed them into a war they’d never win against Russia—but Washington knows this very well. These actions could be compared to Afghanistan or to post-2003 Iraq, where foreign-led reconstruction fueled corruption and inequality, clearly in a purposeful way to mandate more western control. The US-BlackRock plan is largely a classic example of the cheap mergers and acquisitions of devalued war assets— resource extraction disguised as “development”. In actuality, BlackRock is operating for US/EU dominance over Ukraine, excluding BRICS members and the Global South, aligning with NATO, in spite Ukraine not being a member. Essentially Ukraine is now more than ever, nothing more than a colony of NATO, neither getting the full benefits of being a part of the club nor the sovereignty of being free of it—and ordinary Ukrainians will foot the bill.

Ukraine Truly Has No Cards, It’s Finished, But Russia Isn’t Off the Hook—Deal or No Deal…

Westernized minds have begun pushing the narrative that everything has shifted because of this mineral deal, as if Kiev now holds the upper hand. It’s both laughable and tragic how they deceive themselves—Ukraine remains chained to the West, as nothing more than a proxy, colony, and pawn used as a means to an end—one we’ve nearly reached. No paltry $50 million nor this thinly veiled financial and political coup of Ukraine masked as a mineral deal, is going to restore Ukraine to 2014. This even echoed by Marco Rubio who said Ukraine will be unable to push Russia back to these borders.

Washington, the architect, active participant and continuous catalyst of the war cannot truly be a mediator or the peacemaker its masquerading as, and that should be understood by everyone pretending otherwise. Because while many cling to the illusion that Zelensky holds power or that Europe’s antics have any hold, the puppeteer here is Washington. Vice President JD Vance asserted that both countries have presented their peace proposals and are looking for common ground, and that the United States is ready to allow Ukraine and Russia to have one on one direct negotiations.

The U.S. and NATO lost and now they’ve seen Russia’s capabilities but they’ll never admit defeat—merely quietly move onto the next. The EU’s been the scapegoat, left to drown alongside Ukraine’s corpse, as Victoria Nuland accurately stated, “F**k the EU!”. Europe’s rage therefore is not directed at Washington—the hand that feeds—but at Moscow, puffing its chest as if theres any life left to salvage, waving the mineral deal in glee. But as the guns eventually fall silent for a moment, America will shelve Ukraine only temporarily— not fully abandon its ambitions. The groundwork is already laid against Russia: Moldova, the Balkans, Poland, Germany—all primed for the next act. This is also supported by the U.S.’s emerging increased presence in Ukraine not just via its money and weapons but now resources it has rights to via the mineral deal, lying right next to the Russian Federation.

The State Department and White House have both stated that Ukraine and Russia are closer but not there yet when it comes to reaching a deal, with many in D.C. urging Trump to place more “pressure” on Putin. Ukraine for its part has continued its drone campaigns most recently around Crimea, as well as Moscow and the Donbass. Just hours away from the proposed ceasefire period by Putin, Russia thwarted the largest Ukrainian drone attack in history with a total of 524 Ukrainian drones, 5 Neptune missiles, 6 JDAM bombs and 2 HIMARS rockets intercepted in 24 hours. Ukraine’s Zelensky has said they do not plan to respect the short truce.

And while like Europe, the U.S. congress threatens it is readying new economic sanctions, including banking and energy measures on Russia, both Trump and the “deep state” aka the military-intel apparatus in Washington, know full well that sanctions have not worked in manipulating Moscow. Putin shows no concern about prolonging the war because they have already won and stands only to gain more territory, which benefits neither Ukraine nor Washington.

Washington will permanently stop acting against Russia if it can conquer it from within via regime change, otherwise, this will be resolved at a later time. The goal remains unchanged: Russia’s Balkanization, to extract untapped rich resources, and empower itself against the ultimate goal, China. This conflict isn’t avoidable if like may nations who’ve faced confrontation with the West, China or Russia wish to stay sovereign. It’s merely delayed. True peace won’t come until Washington’s uniparty controlled by the military intelligence apparatus collapses and is replaced by leaders who don’t see the world as a chessboard of vassals. We may get a ceasefire soon—but anyone thinking this is over hasn’t been paying attention. Trump’s desire to end the war is not in good faith but a cop out for the U.S. and a way to force Ukraine into perpetual repayment under subordination, while refocusing on China and Iran among other “adversaries” and leaving the door open for the next administrations to build up power-holds in the region to later use against Moscow.

Image

As Russia prepares for its 80th Victory Day this May 9th, commemorating the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany in World War II, the “Great Patriotic War,” the peril ahead for Moscow lies on failing to comprehend that the very nature of Washington’s imperial ambitions. Those who hailed Trump as the peace President are eating crow. The White House revealed Friday that President Trump is demanding a staggering $1.01 trillion for the Pentagon’s (FY2026) defense spending—a 13% surge to bankroll his national security agenda, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s Pentagon transformation. The bombshell numbers sharply contrast with his push to gut domestic programs. Message clear: firepower over welfare and many in America are less than trilled, especially since this means more war is to come. All it takes is looking at Trump’s latest outburst days away from May 9th, saying that the U.S. did the most to win WWII, to see that the problem was never just Trump or Biden, but rather the deceptive, narcissistic, core military-intelligence apparatus that thinks of itself as the sole dominant player, the winner, the one and only, and this doesn’t change no matter who’s president—and worse it’s further ingrained into the psyche of the American civilian.

In many ways Russia’s better off continuing to win military battles and staying far and clear from any economic ties to the West, especially Washington. Still, based on what’s happening it seems that Moscow is hopeful that some peace can be achieve via the U.S. with both Trump and Putin signaling as much, stating that progress has been made but that Russia and Ukraine need to start talking to each other. Truthfully, genuine peace will be difficult when the same puppeteers remain. The same patterns will repeat at a later time. Until we break the cycle, history will keep rhyming—with blood.

A Tribute to Memory & A Warning Against Empire

This week, I attended a concert that will be live for people to see on May 9th, honoring the Great Patriotic War alongside my partner’s family—Russians who, like so many, lost loved ones in the USSR’s 27 million sacrifices. The tribute was deeply moving with known classic songs and talented performances, as well as interviews of veterans and descendants of all affected. Watching the beautiful but elegiac production, I recalled the recent moment when Trump claimed the U.S. “did far more than any other nation,” and arrogantly later added that World War II was won because of the United States. Reflecting on this, it’s more than an insult—it’s a revealing glimpse of a failing empire built on deceit, rewriting history to mask its decline.

America’s mythos of heroic saviors is an outright lie, build on more lies, snowballing into the avalanche of rotten mendacity. We build and arm the very terrorists we claim to fight, destabilizing nations and our own people to feed the predator elite’s endless wars. But change is possible—if we accept and then confront the truth from within our own borders, not looking at the outside for blame.

Image

Russia today isn’t the Soviet Union, yet its people remember. The elite, workers, and youth differ, but one thing unites them: resilience. They’ve faced empires before, they’ve faced war and adversity that many in the West cannot begin to fathom but which others in much of the Global South and West Asia are enduring at this very instance.

Still, some in power underestimate U.S. duplicity—a dangerous blind spot. History now rhymes: Neo-Nazis in Ukraine, Zionist fascists in West Asia still committing genocide on Gaza. Fascism adapts but has never truly died. I believe it’s the duty of those on the side of humanity to fight it in every form—whether empire, Zionism, or the arrogance of supremacy. Zionism is fascism, incompatible with peace.

As a journalist in Moscow I reject the expat only bubble, so pervasive in many who come abroad, pompously rejecting the culture, language and truth of actually living like the people here, knowing they have red-carpets laid out before them for merely being Western. You will never truly understand a people until you follow them into the crevices of history, arguments, family meals, dachas, confusion and immerse yourself in it all, despite discomfort. Russians, workers, elders, veterans, many have shared their stories of the USSR’s triumphs—dignified truths erased in the West. Europe, as Zhukov said, “will never forgive the Soviet Union for liberating them.” The battle continues, only the actors change. Unlike many from the Monroe Indoctrinated U.S., I have no intention of dictating Russia’s path. But as an American far too aware of the realities existing in the halls of D.C, distrusting every word from Washington is the bare minimum.

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2025/05/ ... eacemaker/

******

Putin’s ONLY Option To End The War Is TOTAL TAKEOVER Of Ukraine: Kim Iversen Interviews Scott Horton
May 10, 2025



https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/05/put ... tt-horton/

******

Post 9th Talk.

There is, however, some interesting news, indeed. Russian Ministry of Defense issued NOTAM for ... Kapustin Yar range. US Embassy in Kiev also warned to expect massive attack shortly.

Image

Meanwhile, the West continues with its 30-day ceasefire BS. Peskov says Moscow will "consider" it.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/05 ... -talk.html

******

The ceasefire in Ukraine has ended
May 11, 12:58

Image

The "festive truce" officially ended in Ukraine last night.

The fighting officially resumed, although in fact it did not stop, since the enemy did not observe the "holiday truce", and the Russian Armed Forces had instructions to respond to violations of the "holiday truce", so the fighting went on as usual during the "truce".
As expected, the enemy did not comply with it, just as it did not comply with the "Easter truce", and before that did not comply with the "energy truce".

Actually, the current proposals for a new 30-day truce are, of course, aimed at giving the Ukrainian Armed Forces a break, stopping the offensive of the Russian Armed Forces, while continuing shelling and attacks, and in conclusion accusing Russia of breaking the truce and resuming active actions and strikes.
Actually, that is why there is exactly zero sense in a 30-day truce for Russia.

That is why massive strikes by "Geraniya" (multiple flights in 7 regions of Ukraine) + strikes by UMPK resumed at night. The enemy expects that in the coming days there may be a massive missile strike as a salute to the drones' May encroachments in the direction of Moscow. This is, frankly speaking, a given.

Regarding the situation on Earth, the Russian Armed Forces continue to advance in a number of directions, and the enemy's encroachments in the area of ​​Dzerzhinsk and Tetkino have been largely suppressed.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9832238.html

Putin proposed direct talks with Ukraine on May 15
May 11, 10:46

Image

Putin proposed direct talks with Ukraine on May 15

At night, Putin fought off the globalists who issued Russia another ultimatum - "agree to a 30-day truce on our terms, otherwise there will be sanctions and all that."
Putin effectively ignored this ultimatum, proposing to return to negotiations in Istanbul, without Europe, without preconditions and without a truce. It was proposed to start negotiations on May 15 in Istanbul with the mediation of Turkey. At the same time, the war will continue. And hypothetical truces can be discussed during the negotiations.

Macron immediately stated that "this is not it, and this is not enough," and Trump limited himself to a rubber statement about "moving towards peace." For Ukraine, there are a number of problems here - direct negotiations with the Russian Federation are officially banned and the ban must be lifted. The negotiations in Istanbul themselves are actually a reference to Putin's demands last year, which were a worsened Istanbul 2.0 for Ukraine. The first Istanbul was disrupted in March 2022 by Britain and the United States. Of course, the resumption of negotiations in Istanbul raises a simple question, especially for ordinary Ukrainians - what was the war for 3 years, if in the same Istanbul the worst conditions for Ukraine are being discussed, if everything could have ended in March 2022 and where the conditions were much worse for Russia.

It can be assumed that in the coming days we will see how the globalists and Kiev Nazis will maneuver to disrupt the negotiations in Istanbul and blame Putin for this, continuing to fidget with the idea of ​​a 30-day truce, which they obviously need to strengthen the Ukrainian Armed Forces and stop the negative dynamics at the front. This scenario for Russia would be a pure remake of Minsk-2 and this time they decided not to fall into this trap.

For now, we are witnessing a kind of diplomatic ping-pong, where the ball has again been thrown to Trump and the globalists. We are waiting for a return serve. Well, the war continues.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9832090.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 12, 2025 11:51 am

Return to Istanbul
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 12/05/2025

Image

“A potentially huge day for Russia and Ukraine,” proclaimed Donald Trump in a message posted on his personal social media platform to celebrate the latest steps taken by kyiv and Moscow in recent hours. In his euphoria after 24 hours in which he claimed success with the ceasefire between India and Pakistan—India claims it was the result of bilateral negotiations, while Pakistan equates the mediation of the United States and that of some thirty other countries—and assumed a decisive step toward peace in Europe, the President of the United States appealed to think “of the hundreds of thousands of lives that will be saved when, hopefully, this endless ‘carnage’ comes to an end. It will be a whole new and much better WORLD.” Trump also insisted that he will personally work “with both sides to ensure that it happens. The United States, which, as its president claims, “wants to focus instead on Reconstruction and Trade,” is looking forward to “a GREAT week.”

Trump's message follows Saturday's European ultimatum, in which Zelensky, Starmer, Macron, Merz, and Duda, who announced they had the approval of the US president, demanded that Russia comply with a truce of at least 30 days, which was to begin today and in which they gave Moscow no say, simply the obligation to follow orders. In exchange, and after the truce was fulfilled, they offered future promises of direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, an approach excessively similar to the Minsk approach, which Ukraine used for seven years to delay the process with the intention of ensuring that it would go nowhere. “There is no negotiation when weapons speak. There is no discussion about whether populations are being bombed at the same time. A ceasefire is now necessary so that talks can begin. For peace,” wrote Emmanuel Macron, ignoring, for example, the negotiations in which France participated in 2014 and 2015 to end the war in Donbass or Ukraine's participation in the diplomatic process that led to the Istanbul summit, which could have halted the bloodshed had it received even a modicum of support from Western powers.

Neither the 2015-2022 period nor the spring of that year was a time for diplomacy for Western countries, focused on waging a proxy war against the Russian enemy, which had to be exhausted as much as possible through military and economic means until Ukraine could impose the terms dictated by Washington, London, or Paris. The current situation, in which kyiv's strength lies in its allies, who keep the state afloat and supply its army so it can continue fighting, is not, as European powers insisted for weeks, the result of a change in stance by the United States, which they warned was preparing to abandon Kiev to Moscow, but rather the development of the war. The hope of Ukraine and Western capitals lay in the success of the economic war and the 2023 counteroffensive, which should put the Russian army and state on the ropes and force the Kremlin to accept a much more unfavorable agreement than what it offered in Istanbul.

The failure of both offensives, the sanctions offensive and the Zaporozhye camps offensive, consolidated a war in which a conclusive outcome in which one side can impose its dictates is increasingly unlikely. Since Donald Trump came to power, who has seen this as a bad war he fails to understand, the goal of achieving peace has been placed on the international agenda, often against the wishes of both Ukraine and European capitals, whose priority has always been to continue the fight until they are closer to achieving their objectives.

On this peace agenda—the United States has skillfully introduced the economic issue, with the connivance of Volodymyr Zelensky—Washington has already secured half of the revenue from future oil extraction and is negotiating with the Russian Federation to bring American companies back into the lucrative Russian oil market. In addition to placing itself in a position of economic strength vis-à-vis both Ukraine and Russia, Washington has also secured commitments from European countries to increase their military spending, which will unequivocally entail a sharp increase in arms purchases from the US military-industrial complex. Washington also promises to take over the management of the security guarantees Ukraine will obtain after the war. In other words, Donald Trump's pressure, with his veiled threats to abandon Kiev to its fate, has quickly led the European Union and the United Kingdom to willingly accept the cost of any armed mission installed in the country or the practically inevitable rearmament they intend to carry out in Ukraine, following the porcupine strategy . Having achieved its domestic objectives, the United States is now focused on forcing the parties to reach a quick agreement, after which Donald Trump will receive his praise and awards and can focus on the region that truly concerns him: the Asia-Pacific, and the only country capable of economically rivaling the world's leading power, China.

Despite its lack of interest in the reality of the war in Ukraine, which has led to astronomical casualty figures that do not correspond to the facts and has presented a picture of the damage suffered that better describes what happened in Gaza than the state of many Ukrainian cities, the importance of the United States remains paramount. At this point, all parties are aware that, although erratic and often guided by personal feelings and relationships, the policy being pursued by Donald Trump corresponds point by point with the Kellogg-Fleitz plan published by the America First Policy Institute a year ago. According to that proposal, assistance to Ukraine would be contingent on kyiv agreeing to negotiate with Russia, but would increase if Moscow rejected this openness to diplomacy. Hence, all current speeches by the parties directly or indirectly involved seek to present themselves as open to peace and insist that it is the other side that is hindering the process. That's why Kyiv and its European allies—whose shift to accidental pacifism came even later than Ukraine's and who continue to insist on territorial integrity when even Zelensky has given up demanding the recovery of his lost territories as part of the agreement—have accepted the 30-day truce proposed by the United States, but have made any negotiations conditional on it. Avoiding Trump's wrath is also why Russia had to react quickly and respond to the ultimatum its European opponents had issued hours earlier in Kyiv.

At night, after a long day of meetings with international leaders, the Russian president appeared to respond to the proposal put forward by Zelensky, Starmer, Macron, Merz, and Duda. As in March, when the idea of ​​a 30-day truce was first raised, Vladimir Putin did not reject the proposal but instead presented his own. In reality, Russia's actions do not differ much from the modus operandi of European countries, which, instead of responding yes or no to the final US offer, presented a counterproposal that invalidated the US text and made an agreement with Russia unviable. However, in the current case, as demonstrated by the favorable words it has received from Donald Trump, the Kremlin's additions do not contradict the aims of the 30-day truce, but rather seek to advance the US president's objective: the signing of an agreement.

In line with the commemorations held in recent days and the visits he has received, the Russian president began his speech by thanking all those countries, groups, and individuals who participated in the fight against various forms of fascism—Western countries in the anti-Hitler coalition, China, European partisans, national liberation movements in Africa and Asia, and volunteers from Latin American countries—during World War II, before turning to the current situation. After criticizing Ukraine's failure to comply with the partial truce at sea and on infrastructure, the Easter ceasefire, and the Victory Day ceasefire, Vladimir Putin did not rule out extending the ceasefire, but instead focused on the Russian proposal, which is very different from that offered by European countries, whose proposal is an ultimatum and a threat of sanctions and increased military supplies to Ukraine.

On this last point, it should also be added that increasing military assistance to Kiev is the European aspiration, regardless of whether a ceasefire is accepted, a task that European countries have already initiated and in which they appear to have the collaboration of the United States. “On Friday, a congressional official declared that the United States had approved Germany's transfer of 125 long-range missiles and 100 Patriot air defense missiles to Ukraine. These critically needed weapons are manufactured in the United States and cannot be exported—even if another country possesses them—without the approval of the American government,” wrote The New York Times on Saturday , assuming the delivery of more ammunition for Patriot air defense systems and a significant quantity of ATACMS missiles (to which the mention of “125 long-range missiles” presumably refers).

“As I have already said, the authorities in Kyiv not only rejected our ceasefire proposal, but, as we have all seen, tried to intimidate the leaders of the states gathered for the celebrations in Moscow,” Vladimir Putin insisted. “I will repeat it once again: we have repeatedly proposed steps towards a ceasefire. We have never refused to engage in dialogue with the Ukrainian side. Let me remind you once again: we did not interrupt the negotiations in 2022, but the Ukrainian side did. In this regard, despite everything, we suggest that the authorities in Kyiv resume the negotiations they interrupted at the end of 2022 and resume direct negotiations. And, I emphasize, without preconditions,” he added, introducing several key concepts, such as recalling that it was Ukraine, not Russia, that closed the door to diplomacy three years ago and that it was the Western side that has since then opted for war until the very end.

Faced with a ceasefire without any guarantee of negotiations toward a definitive resolution to the conflict, Russia proposes resuming direct negotiations "without delay next Thursday, May 15, in Istanbul, where they were previously held and where they were interrupted." Vladimir Putin highlighted the role of Turkey and its president in organizing those negotiations, recalling that "a draft joint document was prepared, signed by the head of the kyiv negotiating group, but at the insistence of the West, it was simply thrown in the trash." The Russian president exaggerates the Western role in the breakdown of the negotiations, which, as David Arajamia, the head of the Ukrainian delegation in Istanbul, explained, was a factor, but not the only one. In any case, the mention of that draft reiterates what both Russia and Western experts have suggested in recent years: that the Istanbul preliminary agreement could be the starting point for future negotiations. The reference also indicates that Russia is aware that it cannot present maximalist demands. The Russian and Turkish presidents spoke by telephone yesterday to prepare for the diplomatic proposal, in which Russia has sought to take the initiative following the European ultimatum.

The goal of these negotiations, according to Russia's position, should be "to eliminate the root causes of the conflict and achieve the establishment of a long-term, lasting peace in a historical perspective." In this context, Moscow does not rule out "that during these negotiations we could agree on new truces, a new ceasefire. Moreover, a real truce, which would be observed not only by Russia but also by the Ukrainian side, would be the first step, I repeat, toward a long-term, lasting peace, and not a prologue to the continuation of the armed conflict after the rearmament, resupply of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, and the feverish digging of trenches and new bastions. Who wants a peace like that?"

“Our offer is, as they say, on the table. The decision now rests with the Ukrainian authorities and their commissars, who, apparently guided by their personal political ambitions and not the interests of their people, want to continue the war with Russia at the hands of Ukrainian nationalists,” the Russian president declared, not forgetting to thank those who have tried to mediate in search of peace over the past three years, in chronological order: China, Brazil, African countries, Middle Eastern countries, and “recently, the new US administration.” The clear objective of the list was to highlight, by their absence, the European countries, for which peace has been, as the Danish prime minister admitted, more dangerous than war.

“It is a positive sign that the Russians have finally begun to consider ending the war,” Volodymyr Zelensky wrote yesterday. The Ukrainian president cannot afford to publicly disavow a peace negotiation initiative, although his rhetoric remains the same. “The whole world has been waiting for this for a long time. And the first step to ending any war is a ceasefire,” he added, emphasizing the idea of ​​a 30-day truce and negotiations beyond that timeframe. His right-hand man, Andriy Ermak, has spoken out on the same lines, but more harshly. “First, a 30-day ceasefire, then everything else. Russia [written expressly in lowercase] must not disguise its desire to continue the war with verbal constructions.” This is perhaps the clearest evidence that the rejection of direct negotiations with Russia, which broke off the 2022 negotiations and made the 2014-2022 negotiations impossible, has not changed. And it's unlikely to change in 30 days.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/12/volver-a-estambul/

Google Translator

*****

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Germany is again threatening Russia to introduce new sanctions if Russia does not agree to a ceasefire by the end of May 12. Of course, this is being done in such a way that Russia has deliberately sent or ignored these threats. In fact, they regularly introduced sanctions during the war and without any truces, which did not affect the position of the Russian Federation in achieving the goals of the SVO. So in this case, the Russian Federation will follow its course regardless of threats from Germany or from somewhere else in the EU

***

Colonelcassad
📍 Summary of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation on the progress of the special military operation as of 12 May 2025.

Units of the North group of forces defeated concentrations of manpower and equipment of a mechanized brigade and two assault regiments of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost over 190 servicemen, a tank, three armoured combat vehicles, 12 cars, a US-made HIMARS multiple launch rocket system launcher and five field artillery guns.

Units of the West group of forces improved their tactical position. They defeated formations of four mechanized, an airmobile and two assault brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost over 230 servicemen, a tank, seven cars and three artillery pieces.

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 enemy lost over 200 servicemen, three combat armored vehicles, and nine automobiles. Formations of five mechanized, a Jaeger, two assault brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, a marine brigade, and two National Guard brigades were defeated. The enemy's losses amounted to over 440 servicemen, three combat armored vehicles, 14 automobiles, and two artillery pieces.

Units of the "East" force group continued to advance deep into the enemy's defenses. They defeated the manpower and equipment of two mechanized, and an airborne assault brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The Ukrainian Armed Forces lost over 170 servicemen, two combat armored vehicles, nine automobiles, and eight field artillery pieces.

Units of the "Dnepr" force group defeated formations of two mechanized, a mountain assault, and three coastal defense brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Up to 55 servicemen, six automobiles, an artillery piece, and two electronic warfare stations were destroyed.

Air defense systems shot down nine JDAM guided aerial bombs and two HIMARS multiple launch rockets made in the United States, as well as 135 aircraft-type unmanned aerial vehicles.

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

— 662 aircraft,
— 283 helicopters,
— 56,870 unmanned aerial vehicles,
— 605 anti-aircraft missile systems,
— 23,289 tanks and other armored combat vehicles,
— 1,562 multiple launch rocket system combat vehicles,
— 24,724 field artillery pieces and mortars,
— 35,329units of special military vehicles.

***

Colonelcassad
Latest space news from Ukraine😀

Ukraine will fulfill the greatest task of humanity - colonization of other planets. We are already heading to Mars, - says the Nazi of the organization "C14" Evgeniy Karas with a straight face

"I can't talk now, I am partially involved with those people and those organizations that are working on the colonization of Space."

***

Colonelcassad
The memory of those who always tried to help people should be immortalized. We will posthumously award volunteer Alexander Kelendzheridze, who died tragically in the Kursk border area on May 9.

In the Korenevsky district, he was known as "Uncle Sasha" and "Georgian". In civilian life, he worked as a truck driver, and when August 2024 came, he quit his job to help evacuate people from under fire. Taking risks, but not retreating, he saved about 400 Kursk residents, helped remove the bodies of the dead.

Alexander Dzheranich was also in the border area. He stepped on a tripwire near the village of Cherkasskaya Konopelka in the Sudzhansky district. An anti-personnel fragmentation mine with directional damage detonated. Alexander did not survive. He was 60 years old.

It hurts when people who always tried to help others pass away, forgetting about themselves. I express my sincere condolences to all relatives, friends and those who knew Alexander Kelendzheridze. Eternal memory to him!

(c) Acting Governor of Kursk Region Alexander Khinshtein

Peace to the ashes.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

11 years ago, a referendum on the independence of the LPR and DPR took place
May 11, 17:02

Image

For 11 years, referendums on independence from Ukraine have been held in the DPR and LPR.

Based on the referendum results, the DPR and LPR have already officially seceded from Ukraine and proclaimed a course to join Russia. For the implementation of this course, the DPR and LPR have been fighting the Nazi regime in Ukraine since April 2014.

In 2022, the results of the referendums allowed them to first receive official recognition from Russia, and then join Russia as subjects of the Russian Federation. Thus, the referendums were an important step in the return of Donbass to Russia.

Of course, we can also recall Moscow's calls not to rush with the referendum. And the fact that the de facto unrecognized states in Donbass began to be built only in October-November after the first Minsk. And further attempts to shove Donbass back into Ukraine under Minsk-2. Which was later officially recognized as a mistake. But it was not possible to shove the toothpaste back into the tube. Donbass has survived the war, the times of "Surkovshchina", the crime spree of 2014-2016 and much more. The Donbass character has survived all of this.

I congratulate the residents of the DPR and LPR on the 11th anniversary of the referendums. On this day, you took an important step towards our reunification. Despite all the ifs and buts. And despite the threat of Kiev Nazism and the various difficulties of state building. The result will remain in history one way or another.

P.S. The photo shows a mural in Donetsk.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9832752.html

Cocaine Coalition Ultimatum Turns into a Pumpkin
May 12, 1:58 PM

Image

May 12 has arrived.
As expected, the Russian Federation ignored the ultimatums demanding a ceasefire in Ukraine from May 12. The war is going on as usual. The terrible threats, end the war on May 12, or else... - turned into another puff.

The process has again switched to the Istanbul register (a worse version of Istanbul for Ukraine), and Europe has again been kept from the negotiating table, although it really wants to.

We are expecting attempts to disrupt the talks in Istanbul. Putin is unlikely to go there.
Of interest is the composition and level of the Russian delegation and the development of events after the junta delegation (if it goes there) refuses Russian demands to withdraw troops from Russian regions.

One way or another, this week the war will pass a certain diplomatic bifurcation point.

P.S. The Macron administration has been making excuses for a day now, trying to convince the public that the famous video in Kiev showed not a bag of cocaine, but a handkerchief. Without drug tests, we probably won’t believe Jean-Michel’s partner.



Google Translator

******

Transcript of News X interview of 10 May
Transcript submitted by a reader

NewsX: 0:02
Now let’s move over to Europe, where a major show of European unity in Kiev today has occurred. The leaders of France, Germany, Britain and Poland arrived together for talks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The four EU leaders and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer are calling for an immediate 30-day ceasefire in Ukraine and have vowed to ramp up the pressure on Russia if it refuses. German Chancellor Friederich Merz warned that if Moscow rejects a proposed 30-day ceasefire, Western sanctions will intensify and military aid to Ukraine will continue. French President Emmanuel Macron called for direct talks between Ukraine and Russia if a truce is reached, saying Paris is ready to help mediate.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk joined the German and French leaders in meetings with Zelensky and his wife Olena. They paid tribute to fallen soldiers at Kiev’s Independence Square. Ukrainian officials welcomed the delegation ahead of this critical summit discussing the US-led ceasefire proposal. This diplomatic push comes just a day after Russian President Vladimir Putin hailed his troops at a massive military parade marking 80 years since World War Two.

Meanwhile, North Korea has justified its involvement in the war. Leader Kim Jong-un claims it is a defensive move to support a brother nation. And here’s what he had to say. Let’s take a listen.

Kim: 1:44 [from English-language subtitles]
Our participation in the conflict was just, and it falls within the sovereign rights of our Republic. If (the United States and the West) attempt another assault on the Russian Federation, our brother nation, instead of giving up their attempt for military invasion, I will not hesitate to order the use of military force of Democratic People Republic of Korea (DPRK) to repel enemy’s invasion, in accordance with the corresponding article of the DPRK-Russia treaty and its spirit.

NewsX: 2:13
We are now joined by Gilbert Doctorow, Russian affairs expert located in Brussels, Belgium to discuss this further. Gilbert, thank you very much for joining us. How does Moscow interpret the visit directly to Kiev by these four major European leaders? And this obviously coincides with yesterday’s parade in the Red Square in Moscow. How does Russia view these four United alliances standing with Zelensky?

Gilbert Doctorow, PhD:
I don’t think they take this very seriously. This is nothing new. The four countries we’re talking about have been backers of Zelensky for a long time. They have been prominent, first in calling for no negotiations to deal with Russia. And now on watching Donald Trump proceed with talks with the aim of finding a peace, they have jumped on that bandwagon in the hope of derailing it, in the hope of sabotaging it. Their visit to Kiev is simply a display of plumage for their home electorates. It has no influence on the course of the war, certainly no influence on what Russia is doing or may do in the future.

3:37
These are the countries that will be left holding the bag when the United States, if the United States washes its hands of the Ukraine war, as Mr. Trump has threatened to do.

NewsX: 3:49
Yes, and Gilbert, President Macron has offered to facilitate talks between Russia and Ukraine. Do you think Moscow would accept this invitation from the French, or is France too aligned with NATO?

Doctorow:
Mr Macron is aligned with himself. Everything that he does is self-promotional, and he flip-flops at least as often as Donald Trump does, to always be at the head of the march. If the band changes its direction, you can be sure that Mr. Macron runs around the side to get to the head of the band in its new direction. And that is what’s going on now. He has no ability to influence Mr. Putin, whom he hasn’t spoken to for a good long time. And I don’t think that Mr. Putin is terribly keen to take a phone call from him, because he has– he’s a windbag. He has no electoral support within France. He has no solid government in France. And so why should the Russians take him seriously?

NewsX: 4:51
Yes, we’ve just seen the statement from North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. How does Moscow view North Korea’s open declaration of support? Do you think this endorsement is helpful diplomatically or is it potentially problematic?

Doctorow:
Look, going back to before the, or at the very start of the special military operation which has become a full-blown proxy war between Russia and NATO, Russia was very careful to observe the restrictions set by the United Nations on which it itself had voted to approve sanctions on North Korea.

5:26
But as the war moved on, as I say, after it became a Russian-Ukraine war, a Russia-NATO war, that is, the Russians understood it was folly to continue their sanctions on North Korea. And they took up what the Koreans had in large supply and was very useful to Russia, which was the artillery shells, which are of the same standard as the Russians have had for decades. The additional element which was celebrated, which was remarked by Mr. Putin when he shook the hands of military leaders from North Korea who were present in Moscow for the celebration of the 80th anniversary of Victory Day. He gave a special hug and showed his particular gratitude for the participation of North Korean troops in the military operations in Kursk.

6:25
Let us remember, although in the West this is fudged, this is not brought out and defined clearly, let’s do that right here. The North Koreans were not fighting the Ukrainians for extension of Russian territory. They were fighting alongside the Russians to free an invaded Russian province. That’s a very different story. And so the importance of the presence of North Korean troops to take part in the celebrations yesterday was a message to the West, and a message to the United States in particular, that this agreement, military agreement between North Korea and Russia, which was evidenced by the participation of these troops in the war, is two-way.

That is to say that North Korea will be defended militarily by Russia in case any country– and let’s be honest which country we’re talking about, it’s the United States– even thinks about causing harm to North Korea, as Mr. Trump did in his first administration.

NewsX: 7:31
Obviously, Gilbert, these ceasefire talks have been going on for, well, since Trump took office on January 20th of this year. If this ceasefire proposal fails, what is Russia’s next objective? More territory, or simply sustaining this war of attrition?

Doctorow:
Let’s recall what the extension of Russian territory in Ukraine is all about. This takes us back to the first year of the war. When the war was strictly between Russia and Ukraine, the objectives were regime change. That is, the Russian objectives, were to remove from office the, what they considered to be neo-Nazis controlling Ukraine, and not to take any territory. The whole game changed, however, when it became clear to the Russians that the United States and its allies were supplying long-range missiles and other armaments which could reach into the Russian Federation and would certainly reach into all of the territory that they had acquired on the battlefield in Ukraine.

8:51
What this meant was: they had to push back the Ukrainian forces a sufficient distance to compensate for the new long-range missiles that the United States, England, and France supplied to Ukraine. And that, creating a buffer and assuring that they could not be attacked by Ukrainian artillery and missiles supplied by the West, was what the territorial expansion was all about.

Here we are today, and the Russians continue to move back, to push back the Ukrainians on the front line with that very same intent: to ensure that they are not vulnerable to Ukrainian attack.

9:31
Gilbert, finally, German Chancellor Merz has warned of intensified sanctions and increased arms to Ukraine if Russia rejects this ceasefire proposal. How do you think Russia would be preparing to respond both economically and militarily?

Doctorow:
The sanctions on Russia are so vast right now, greater in number and more damaging potentially to the Russian economy, than had been applied to any country on earth.

Therefore, Mr. Merz’s statements are strictly posturing to appear tough and brave in front of his electorate. And he needs to do that, because he has been basically weakened on the day that he was supposed to become and did eventually become the chancellor of Germany. He didn’t have on the first vote the number of votes cast sufficient to ensure his becoming chancellor. So he is off to a weak start, and he would like to bolster his position and appear to be a real national leader by threatening the Russians.

10:42
However, he has very little ability to do anything that would damage the Russians, except if he would authorize the delivery of the Taurus missiles, the German missiles that Mr. Scholz, his predecessor, refused to give to Kiev because it makes Germany a co-belligerent. If Mr. Merz does that, then the Russians have an answer. And I believe the answer will be to use their Oreshnik and other precision, unstoppable hypersonic missiles to destroy the factories producing these weapons in Germany.

NewsX: 11:21
Gilbert Doctorow, thank you very much for joining us, Let’s move over now to the Middle East, where Washington’s envoy to Israel had–

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2025/05/11/ ... of-10-may/

******

Russia Matters: US, Europe Finalizing 30-Day Ukraine Ceasefire Proposal; Putin Describes Russia-China Relations as ‘Unbreakable Friendship’
May 11, 2025
Russia Matters, 5/9/25

1.The U.S. and Europe are finalizing a proposal for a 30-day ceasefire in Ukraine. If Russia refuses the proposal, it will trigger new jointly imposed sanctions on Russia, according to Reuters. “What could happen in the coming hours and days, there could be an announcement of a ceasefire either of 30 days or compartmentalized, which is still being discussed,” a French diplomatic source said May 9. A meeting of Ukraine’s closest allies is due to take place on May 10, where the U.S.-European proposal will be discussed. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Finnish President Alexander Stubb have both expressed optimism that a ceasefire agreement could be reached as soon as “this weekend,” according to RBC.ua. Russia supports the implementation of a 30-day ceasefire in the Ukraine conflict, but only with due consideration of “nuances” in the more than three-year-old war, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov was quoted as saying on May 9, Reuters reports.

2.Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping met in the Kremlin on May 8 for bilateral meetings, after which Putin said that Russia-China cooperation had reached its “highest level,” describing the relationship as an “unbreakable friendship,” according to the Washington Post. In a joint statement on “global strategic stability” published on the Kremlin website, they warned that “a critical mass of problems and challenges has accumulated in the strategic sphere, and the risk of nuclear conflict has increased.” Nuclear powers should maintain “constructive” relations to ensure international security, according to the document, which made no mention of Russia’s war in Ukraine, according to Bloomberg; however, the Chinese Foreign Ministry reported that Putin said Russia is ready to begin peace talks on Ukraine without preconditions and hopes for a just and lasting peace agreement. The joint statement also pledged to strengthen military cooperation and criticized Donald Trump’s proposal to develop an Iron Dome-like missile defense system, MT/AFP reports. “Both countries are conducting an independent and autonomous foreign policy, and are interested in forming a more just and democratic, multipolar world order,” Putin said after the talks concluded, Bloomberg reports. The Kremlin also announced that Putin will travel to China at the end of August and beginning of September.

3.Military aid to Ukraine from the U.S. and EU is reportedly set to increase in the coming months. On May 4, The New York Times reported that a Patriot air-defense system previously based in Israel will be sent to Ukraine after it is refurbished, and Western allies are also discussing the logistics of Germany or Greece giving another one. Meanwhile, according to Bloomberg, the U.S. State Department approved F-16 fighter-jet training and services for Ukraine worth up to $350 million, “signaling that the White House will keep supporting Kyiv in the fight against Russia,” Bloomberg reports. Additionally, on May 9, the EU pledged to allocate 1 billion euros ($1.1 billion) from the proceeds of frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine’s defense industry, MT/AFP reports.

4.Despite the reverence for Ukraine’s war dead, they, too, have become an income stream for corrupt officials, the Wall Street Journal reports. Some funeral homes pay officials to win large contracts for transporting or burying dead troops, according to officials with knowledge of the transactions. Funeral homes overcharge councils for soldiers’ headstones and coffins and split the difference with officials, police say.

5.Two South American states this week sought closer ties with Russia, as Putin and his Venezuelan counterpart Nicolás Maduro signed a strategic partnership treaty and Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva offered Putin wide-ranging cooperation on a variety of areas, MT/AFP reports. The strategic partnership with Venezuela is the latest in a series of alliances Russia has forged since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, according to MT/AFP, while Brazil’s Lula told Putin: “My visit today is aimed at strengthening the building of our strategic partnership,” according to a Russian-language readout. The closer ties between Venezuela, Brazil and Russia threaten a longstanding acknowledgment of South America as a U.S. sphere of interest.1 Since taking office in January 2025, Trump has appeared to endorse a U.S. foreign policy that reanimates spheres of influence as a legitimate interest of great powers, of which he also counts Russia and China. Russia’s strengthened connections to these South American states may increase the friction between a Trump administration newly interested in acquiring, for example, Greenland, and a Russia potentially bent on re-establishing Ukraine and central Europe as its own sphere of influence.*

6.Putin on May 9 celebrated the 80th anniversary of the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany “with a Red Square military parade designed to place Moscow at the vanguard of a rising, non-Western world order,” the New York Times reports. Putin was joined by more than 20 foreign leaders from countries that largely position themselves as neutral or hostile to the West, including the leaders of China and Brazil and North Korean generals. Servicemen from “friendly nations” also took part in the event, though no North Korean soldiers marched in the parade, according to MT/AFP. No senior American officials were known to be in attendance.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/05/rus ... riendship/

******

Trump Played Europe and Kiev, But Putin May Be Playing Them All — UPDATE: Zelenskiy One-Ups Putin?
byGordonhahn
May 12, 2025

Zelenskiy may very well have one-upped Putin by countering that he is prepared to fly to Istanbul personally on Putin’s designated Thursday this coming and talk with the Russian president (https://t.me/stranaua/195511). The Kremlin has yet to respond.

ORIGINAL:

Recent statements, tweets, and ‚truths‘ as of May 11th by the leading players in the diplomatic great game surrounding a possible ceasefire and/or peace talks to end the NATO-Russia Ukrainian War concluded with the upper hand belonging to US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. The newest volley of proposals, offers, signals, and countermoves began with the sudden visit to Kiev and Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelenskiy by the new German Chancellor Freidrich Merz, British Prime Minister Kier Starmer, and French President Immanuel Macron. There the four parties „demanded“ that Putin agree to a 30-day unconditional ceasefire. The insincerity of this move – other than as another earnest endeavor to gain the upper hand in the overrated propaganda war – is given away by the proposal‘s failure to take into account in any way whatsoever the Russians‘ previous rejections of any ceaefire that is not well-prepared and well-monitored and does not include a halt to Western military and intelligence assistance to Kiev during the proposed ceasefire’s duration.


The proposal was another PR gambit designed to contrast Europe’s and Kiev’s supposed willingness to end the war to Putin’s alleged unwillingness to do so. The four parties simply repackaged by way of a new venue an offer Moscow had already rejected numerous times. Yet there have been no recent changes in the correlation of forces in the NATO-Russia Ukrainian War that would prompt any rethinking in the consistent, steadfast, and confident Kremlin.

Putin’s limited willingness to engage a ceasefire accords naturally with the unavoidable reality on the ground that is Russia’s military superiority and slowly accelerating battlefield gains territorialy and especially in terms oft he comparative attition of both sides, as Russian forces slowly but surely attrit and advance against Ukraine’s beleaguered, less well-armed, less- well-trained, less well-equipped, and slowly retrteating army. Putin is winning the war and so is less incentivized to negotiate when he can strengthen his future negotiating hand by accruing more gains for Russian and inflicting greater losses on Ukraine, especially given Kiev’s unreasonable demands for a peace settlement that amounts to Moscow’s capitulation. Winners don’t capitulate, losers do.

Nevertheless, literally from day one of his ‚special military operation‘, Putin ha seither proposed negoiations, negotiated, or declared his readiness to negotiate, depending on what time period one is talking about. Negotiating with a continuously strengthening hand is quite an advantage; one to be eschewed only in response to very generous offers, and neither Brusslels nor Kiev are making anything resembling such offers.

So it is quite logical and smart on Putin’s part to have responded to the four party offer made from Kiev by offering to meet for negotiations without a ceasefire immediately this week without conditions in Istanbul, the cite of the Western-scuttled April 22 Russo-Ukrainian agreement. In this way, he has put the Kievan parties on their back foot, having to explain why should not Zelenskiy begin talks with Putin to end the war, if he wants to end the war. Ending the war on a permanent, well-negotiated basis is surely the ultimate end, one can argue, and not some poorly prepared, possibly temporary ceasefire that in days or hours can be violated at will (and the Ukrainians have proven to repeat ceasefire violators over the last decade) and end in resumption of the bloodbath. Thus, Putin threw the ball of demonstrating one’s distaste for the NATO-Russia Ukrainian war and desire for peace right back in Brussels‘ and Kiev’s court. The cite for the talks suggested by Putin – Istanbul – was a clear invocation of the April 2022 talks abandoned by Kiev at the West’s insistence with ist now breaking promise of assistance ‚for as long as it takes‘.

Curiously, Trump chimed right in, writing on his ‚Truth‘ social media site that Kiev should „immediately“ take up Putin’s offer. In this way, Trump abandoned his own approach of focusing to a considerable degree on securing a ceasefire and backed the Russian approach; one he had also supported in comments just two weeks ago, pushing for direct talks between Moscow and Kiev. Even more curious is that Trump was reported to have agreed to the four parties‘ offer of an unconditional 30-day ceaesefire when they telephoned the White House after formulating their own joint proposal or ‚ultimatum‘ to Putin. Thus, Trump appears to have played Kiev, Paris, London and Berlin and indeed betrayed his words of support for their offer made from Kiev. But Trump’s quest for a Ukrainian peace has already expanded the ‘Overton window’ of the four parties, who still support a prolonged war in the hope some cardinal change (Putin’s death, some Russian crisis) shifts the balance in Kiev’s favor. It was but a few short months ago that the Kievan Quartet outright rejected any talk of a ceasefire. Now they are playing by Trump’s rules, even if they feign complying with them. This expands the number of Europeans, who are willing to entertain the idea of negotiations and compromises with the dreaded Putin, and since in many EU countries a plurality already supports peace over war, this is a pivotal adjustment of attitude. In the process, European leaders’ hypocrisy and disregard for human life, especially those of their beloved Kievan ally, whose flag adorns government buildings all over the EU as they do the coffins and graves of Ukraine’s fallen soldiers.

Meanwhile, Putin seems to have played them all by throwing the peace ball back in the four parties‘ court and somehow maneuvering Trump to jump on the Russian bandwagon for immediate talks without a ceasefire and to abandon Trump’s own focus on a ceasefire. Unfortunately, Moscow’s limited need for either a ceasefire or peace at this point, the Trump administration’s lack of a strategy, and the Europeans‘ and Ukrainians‘ insincerity and political speculation on the war bodes ill for an agreement on either a ceasefire or direct Russian-Ukrainian talks any time soon. Moscow will be forced to intensify the pressure on Kiev. Trump will continue to thrash here and there. Europe will insist on discrediting itself further, becoming even more irrelevant — a ‘coalition of the willing’ to do something different and of limited purpose. And poor Ukraine will be subjected to more suffering, bringing the collapse of its defense lines, army, regime, and state even closer than it is now.

https://gordonhahn.com/2025/05/12/trump ... ups-putin/
"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 13, 2025 11:43 am

Ceasefire vs. negotiations
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 05/13/2025

Image

Given the conditions under which it is unfolding and the conflicting interests of the three main actors involved—European countries and Ukraine on the one hand, Russia on the other, and the United States arbitrating and determining its course and the manner in which it is carried out—the negotiation process to achieve a diplomatic opening in search of a resolution to the war in Ukraine risks becoming a spectacle in which the battles are more media-driven than political. Judging by the latest images and statements, this appears to be the objective of the European countries, aware that Volodymyr Zelensky moves in this environment like a fish in water.

Currently riding high after taking credit for bringing India and Pakistan back from the brink of war, securing the release of an American hostage held by Hamas in Gaza, easing economic tensions with China, and on the path to reaching an agreement with Iran, Donald Trump was euphoric last Sunday after learning of Vladimir Putin's proposal to immediately begin contacts to end the war in Ukraine. Without adding any nuances, and without mentioning the 30-day ceasefire that European countries and Zelensky's inner circle continue to insist on, the US president appealed to his Ukrainian counterpart to immediately accept the Kremlin's invitation to return to Istanbul. A preliminary agreement was forged there in April 2022, but ultimately failed to materialize due to the feeling among Ukraine and its Western allies, including the United Kingdom led by Boris Johnson, that they could wear down Russia and achieve a more favorable outcome on the front lines than in the offices.

Part of the spectacle surrounding the current diplomatic game is, of course, the role of the media, seemingly incapable of remembering what happened three years ago and uninterested in conducting a minimally rigorous analysis. “Putin insists on ‘resuming’ the negotiations where the Russians and Ukrainians left off in 2022, but much has happened since then. For starters, the Russian army is no longer north of Kyiv. If Russian negotiators again demand, as they did then, that Ukraine disarm—to have fewer than 100,000 soldiers—include neutrality in its Constitution, renounce the deployment of foreign troops, and place the Russian language on the same level as the Ukrainian language, then the talks will fail,” wrote the EFE news agency yesterday in an article titled “Winning the War or the Postwar Period: Putin's Dilemma.” Much has changed on the front lines and in the rear in the three years since the breakdown of the diplomatic process, not only in the White House, but also in the conditions under which the war is being fought. EFE highlights Russia's territorial losses in northern Kiev, but prefers to overlook the fact that in these three years of massive military deployments to Ukraine, Kiev has not achieved what it hoped to achieve: breaking through the front lines, getting closer to Crimea, and forcing Russia to negotiate from a position of weakness.

“According to some analysts, Putin's offer of direct negotiations was not a counterproposal, but an improvised reaction in which the Kremlin did not even consult with Turkish leader Recep Tayyip Erdoğan beforehand,” wrote the EFE news agency yesterday , which, like the rest of the Western media, adheres to the idea that Russia does not want to negotiate and that it is Zelensky who is pulling the diplomatic wagon and has a planned and sophisticated strategy. In reality, there is no more tactical action in the actions of European capitals and Kiev than trying to prevent reaching a negotiating table based on the White House's final offer and before an agreement has been reached on the future rearmament of Ukraine, which will require US weapons, and security guarantees, which also require Washington's participation. Improvised or not, the Kremlin's swift response to the European ultimatum pleased Donald Trump. “President Putin of Russia does not want a Ceasefire Agreement with Ukraine, but instead wants to meet in Turkey on Thursday to negotiate a possible end to the BLOODSHED.” Perhaps coincidentally, the US president is pointing out something important: while Ukraine seeks a temporary pause, Russia aspires to a resolution. In this game, Russia on the one hand and Ukraine and the European countries on the other are struggling to impose their vision: a ceasefire with vague promises of future negotiations or a negotiation in which important decisions must be made. Who prevails in form may also depend on which proposal serves as the starting point: the US one, more favorable to Russia but with aspects that clearly benefit Ukraine, or the European one, with serious reminiscences of the Minsk agreement.

Although its vision of the negotiation process, always subject to a prior ceasefire, is the one proposed by the United Kingdom, France, and Germany, kyiv is aware that Washington remains the one setting the pace, which has forced Zelensky to respond positively to Donald Trump's implicit order. The Ukrainian president did so on Sunday night with a message in which he raised the stakes after the backlash caused by the Russian response to the European ultimatum. "We expect a comprehensive and lasting ceasefire, starting tomorrow, to lay the necessary foundations for diplomacy. There's no point in prolonging the killings. And I will wait for Putin in Turkey on Thursday. Personally, I hope that this time the Russians won't look for excuses," he wrote, his words much more improvised than the Russian president's speech the day before. Before the publication of Zelensky's message, Russia had already announced that Yuri Ushakov would lead the Russian negotiating team, which in its initial stages will not include the president, as was not the case in Istanbul in 2022 and never happens before. Zelensky's move, more media-oriented than political, is a bluff not intended to force Vladimir Putin to meet with him—the Ukrainian president has not repealed the decree prohibiting negotiations with him—but rather to be able to claim that it is the Russian president who does not wish to negotiate. Despite the obviousness of the maneuver, a demand echoed by Kaja Kallas and other European authorities, the possible presence of the Ukrainian president in Turkey has also received positive praise from Donald Trump, who did not rule out his own presence if it could facilitate the negotiations and "something can be achieved."

Beyond the propaganda game surrounding the presidents' presence in a round of negotiations that, if it takes place, will be preliminary, the message from kyiv and its European allies is clear and unchanged. Everything revolves around the famous 30-day ceasefire, in which they claim that Russian willingness to ceasefire will be measured (and not, of course, Ukrainian willingness, despite the precedent of the seven years of Minsk). "Today in London to meet with the Foreign Ministers of the Weimar+ format. Together, we emphasize that Russia must immediately agree to a 30-day ceasefire with Ukraine to pave the way for talks on a lasting peace," wrote Kaja Kallas yesterday, once again insisting on the only idea currently emanating from Brussels, adding, less than two days after the Kremlin proposed direct talks with Ukraine, that "Putin should stop playing games and start seriously talking about peace negotiations." Kallas's message is just one of many European and even North American publications—Keith Kellogg, Donald Trump's envoy, who has repeatedly demanded a ceasefire as a starting point—clutching to the idea of ​​a pre-trial truce to avoid an early start to the peace negotiations they are trying to protect Zelensky from.

In his attempt to add further pressure to the ultimatum, Emmanuel Macron yesterday gave Russia a few hours to accept the ceasefire or he will carry out his threat to increase military supplies to Ukraine, an increase in military flows he also plans to carry out even if a ceasefire is reached. Foreign Minister Merz also threatened to do something he has already expressed his support for, whether there is a ceasefire or not: deliver Taurus missiles to kyiv if Moscow does not immediately accept the ceasefire demanded by Ukraine. Zelensky, for his part, also insists on the same idea. "We expect a full and verifiable ceasefire starting tomorrow, May 12, so that there is sufficient basis for diplomacy. And I expect Putin on Thursday in Istanbul," he repeated Sunday evening. With this message, the Ukrainian president introduced another element, which makes the propaganda objective of the ceasefire ultimatum more clearly evident. No one has yet asked Zelensky whether a direct meeting is the best place to agree on a ceasefire and discuss how to verify it.

“The ceasefire offer is deceptive, as it is destined to be rejected. It is a way to prolong the war and test more sanctions and weapons. To continue searching for the magic wand that has proved so elusive for the past three years. If they wanted peace talks, they would accept them without preconditions. Putin knows it will happen sooner or later,” wrote Russian opposition journalist Leonid Ragozin yesterday, reposting a message posted by one of the most well-known faces of the OSCE monitoring mission during the heated phase of the Donbass war. A Canadian and member of the Ukrainian diaspora in Canada, Michael Bociurkiw cannot, in any way, be mistaken for someone pro-Russia and has the experience of the OSCE's failed attempt to monitor a ceasefire that was never complete and that Ukraine used at will as a leverage tool in the negotiations. “Monday,” he said, referring to Zelensky’s demand for immediate verification that simply doesn’t exist, “represents an extremely short deadline for initiating an unconditional ceasefire. There is no infrastructure on the ground comparable to that of the OSCE monitoring mission I was part of in 2014/2015. Reliable monitoring, verification, and reporting are crucial for a successful ceasefire.”

The 30-day verifiable ceasefire remains Ukraine's condition for starting negotiations with Russia. To achieve this, it not only demands that Moscow unconditionally accept the orders and threatens military and economic measures if it refuses, but also demands immediate action from the Kremlin and a verification process for which the means are lacking, a proposal as credible as the latest warning. Yesterday, several Ukrainian media outlets claimed that "if Russia does not accept the ceasefire, the European Union may impose sanctions against Nord Stream 2." If there were any doubts that the European ultimatum and Zelensky's game of challenging Vladimir Putin are a sign of weakness and desperation, the threat to the destroyed Nord Stream is enough to dispel them.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/13/alto- ... ciaciones/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
The main statements from Dmitry Peskov's briefing.

- Russia continues to prepare for the talks scheduled for Thursday in Istanbul, and the Kremlin is not going to comment on this matter any further;

- Europe's approach to the Ukraine issue is aimed at continuing the war and contrasts with the approach of Moscow and Washington.

- Europe is entirely on Ukraine's side and cannot claim a balanced approach to the negotiation process.

- Russia does not accept biased conclusions on the MH17 case.

- Putin will hold a meeting of the boards of trustees of the Bolshoi and Mariinsky theaters on Tuesday.

***

Colonelcassad
It is reported that the Russian delegation in Istanbul will be headed by the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry Sergey Lavrov. Ushakov will also go to Istanbul.

This information is still unofficial. The exact composition of the delegation will be officially announced by Thursday.

***

Colonelcassad
Kursk region, attacks continue

In the Tetkino direction, periodic clashes with Ukrainian formations continue, carrying out new and new attacks in the border area.

Despite the fact that time after time, the attacks are repelled, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are still purposefully hitting two areas - Tetkino itself and in the area of ​​​​the New Way.

At present, the enemy is using infantry groups, whose task is to break through the forward lines of the barrier near the border. Apparently, they are preparing a bridgehead for the introduction of the main forces.

In addition, sabotage groups on boats have increasingly begun to flicker on the Seim River, shelling positions from the side of the river basin.

Taking into account the ongoing accumulation of forces in the rear, the transfer of PMCs from different countries, as well as the active work of aviation in the Kursk direction, we believe that the Armed Forces of Ukraine can go on a more serious attack.

Therefore, in no case can we relax.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

“IT SAYS, DID YOU GET MY MESSAGE?” – CEASEFORCE AT ISTANBUL-II, NOT CEASEFIRE

Image

By John Helmer @bears_with

When politicians fight wars to truce or ceasefire, there’s a mistake they often make. That is to give up escalation dominance, escalation control, to the adversary so that he gains confidence that when he is ready, he will resume fighting in a much stronger position than he was at the truce. In short, ceasefire doesn’t deter the resumption of fighting; it doesn’t make for ceaseforce.

As President Vladimir Putin prepares for Istanbul-II — the resumption of negotiations with the Ukraine proposed for May 15 — he has announced that he understands the difference better now than he did at Istanbul-I in March 2022. The Russian General Staff and the intelligence services believe so.

The aim of “serious negotiations”, Putin read from a statement, “is to eliminate the root causes of the conflict and to achieve a long-term last peace…in the course of these negotiations it will become possible to agree on some kind of new truce and a new ceasefire. And a real ceasefire that…would be the first step, I repeat, towards a long-term, sustainable peace, rather than a prelude to continuing armed conflict after the Ukrainian armed forces have been rearmed, re-equipped…Who needs such peace?”

The President took no questions from the press assembled to listen to him at 2 am on Sunday morning.

While Putin was addressing the departing heads of government and of state who had joined in the Moscow celebration of Victory Day, the strategic Russian ally who was absent, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, sent Putin a message of his own after his brief war with Pakistan.

Through his air force chief, Air Marshal A.K. Bhakti, briefing the press later on the same day, May 11, the message was: “[It is] time to convey a message to our adversaries…We have the capability to target every system at these bases, and more. However, it was only a measured response to install good wisdom to our adversary to deter further escalation.”

In this podcast, Nima Alkhorshid, Ray McGovern and I discuss the tipping of the strategic balance which Russia is aiming to achieve against the Zelensky regime in Kiev and those who finance, arm and instruct it – Donald Trump, Friedrich Merz, Emmanuel Macron, and Keir Starmer. In parallel, Modi believes he has achieved this strategic tipping in the dismantling of Pakistan as a platform for China to threaten war against India in the future; we discuss whether the Indians are right to claim a strategic victory against China, too.

These are big questions for discussion. The answers are surprising, and although they are recognized in Moscow, they are not yet for public discussion. Click to watch.

In the sequence of events and statements preceding Putin’s late-night summons to reporters, President Donald Trump closely coordinated with French President Emmanuel Macron in Kiev German Chancellor Friedrich Mertz, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

According to French presidential film clips posted on Macron’s Twitter account, Macron had telephoned Trump to confirm that Vladimir Zelensky had agreed to conditions Trump had ordered, including a 30-day ceasefire starting the next day, Monday May 12.

Image
Source: https://x.com/

Trump remained silent during Saturday’s meetings in Kiev. On Sunday, reacting to Putin’s overnight statement, Trump tweeted that Putin “doesn’t want to have a Cease Fire Agreement with Ukraine”, but he ordered Zelensky to agree to the Russian proposal for meeting in Istanbul.

Image
Source: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrum ... 3180275292
The time shown was Moscow time; the tweet was posted at 12:17 pm Washington time.

When Zelensky tweeted on Sunday evening in Kiev, he did what Trump had told him: “Starting tomorrow, we await a ceasefire — this proposal is on the table. A full and unconditional ceasefire, one that lasts long enough to provide a necessary foundation for diplomacy, could significantly bring peace closer. Ukraine has long proposed this, our partners are proposing it, and the whole world is calling for it. We await a clear response from Russia…Here in Ukraine, we have absolutely no problem engaging in negotiations, we are ready for any format. I will be in Türkiye this Thursday, May 15, and I expect Putin to come to Türkiye as well. Personally. And I hope that this time, Putin won’t be looking for excuses as to why he ‘can’t’ make it. We are ready to talk, to end this war. Thursday. Türkiye. President Trump has expressed support. All the leaders support this.”

Image
Source: https://x.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1921642678057635893

The US Secretary of State Marco Rubio telephoned Chancellor Merz and British Foreign Secretary Davdi Lammy. The State Department communiqués confirmed their conversations touched on the Ukrainian negotiations but without details.

Trump followed with a tweet foreshadowing a big announcement.

Image
Source: https://truthsocial.com/

Four hours later, what followed from Trump had nothing to do with the Ukraine negotiations. Instead, he announced his plan to cut domestic drug prices.

On Monday (May 12), before he left Washington to fly to the Middle East, Trump called reporters to a White House press conference in which he claimed he had “insisted” on the Istanbul meeting between the Ukraine and Russia. “Don’t underestimate Thursday in Turkey…I think you may have a good result out of the Thursday meeting in Turkey between Russia and Ukraine. I believe the two leaders were going to be there. I was thinking about flying over. I don’t know where I’m going to be on Thursday. I’ve got so many meetings, but, uh, I was thinking about actually flying over there. There’s a possibility of it, I guess, if I think things can happen, but we’ve got to get it done.”

Image
Source: https://truthsocial.com/

Trump had nothing more to say as he flew to Saudi Arabia with a stop at the Royal Air Force Mildenhall base enroute to Riyadh. Over flight time of almost sixteen hours, Trump issued no tweets.

(More, about India/Pakistan.)

https://johnhelmer.net/it-says-did-you- ... more-91575

******

An Immediate Peace Is The Best One Ukraine Can Ever Get

The attritional war in Ukraine is moving towards a new phase. The Ukrainian army is crumbling but its leadership, with the support of some Europeans, is unwilling to concede its defeat.

There are still very unrealistic views in the West about the losses and capabilities in this conflict. They prevent those who have them from acknowledging the urgent need for peace negotiations.

In a new analysis Alex Vershinin, an expert from RUSI, provides sound arguments and numbers for those who support an immediate end of the war.

In military circles Vershinin is a well known capacity:

Lt Col (Retd) Alex Vershinin has 10 years of frontline experience in Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan. For the last decade before his retirement, he worked as a modelling and simulations officer in concept development and experimentation for NATO and the US Army.

Vershinin is working for the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), the official think tank of the British military. His experience with modeling and simulations allows him to take the 'big picture' view.

In June 2022 RUSI published his piece on The Return of Industrial Warfare (Jun 17 2022) in which he warned about of lack of an industrial base in the West to sustain a war in Ukraine against Russia. I have referred to the piece in some of my writings:

Russia Is Winning The Industrial Warfare Race - Moon of Alabama, Sep 14 2023

A warning that Russia will outproduce the West was given back in June 2022 when Alex Vershinin of RUSI issued a note about The Return of Industrial Warfare:

The winner in a prolonged war between two near-peer powers is still based on which side has the strongest industrial base. A country must either have the manufacturing capacity to build massive quantities of ammunition or have other manufacturing industries that can be rapidly converted to ammunition production. Unfortunately, the West no longer seems to have either.
It has become too expensive for the West to regain that capability.

That Russia was running out of stuff was always wishful thinking, not fact based analysis. On that point it took the media more than a year to catch up with reality. On other aspects of the the war, casualty numbers come to mind, the media are still miles behind.


In another RUSI piece published in March 2024 Vershinin repeated his warning. I referred to it in May 2024:

When it came out in March I had read and linked to the latest Alex Vershinin piece at RUSI:
The Attritional Art of War: Lessons from the Russian War on Ukraine - RUSI
The attritional character of the war was obvious since Putin ordered the de-militarization of Ukraine. It is finally getting some discussion.
Vershinin is thus right in that the war in Ukraine is a war of attrition. But it is a one-sided one. It is only NATO and its proxy force Ukraine which get attrited while the Russian military gains in quality and quantity.

Still, it's a must read:

The fastest way to lose a war of attrition is to focus on manoeuvre, expending valuable resources on near-term territorial objectives.
This is exactly what Ukraine has done so far (Bakhmut, Krinky).
...
The 'west' (i.e. the U.S.) has lost its mind on the issue:

If the West is serious about a possible great power conflict, it needs to take a hard look at its industrial capacity, mobilisation doctrine and means of waging a protracted war, rather than conducting wargames covering a single month of conflict and hoping that the war will end afterwards.


Shortly after that writing the Ukrainian army launched its disastrous incursion into Russia's Kursk region. It was, after Bakhmut and Krinki, the third large operation which wasted Ukrainian lives and resources on a large scale for temporary propaganda gains.

A months ago Vershinin came out with a third piece that covers the issue. RUSI refrained, for whatever reason, from publishing it. It first appeared in Russia Matters under the title:

Battlefield Conditions Impacting Ukraine Peace Negotiations - Russia Matters, Apr 18 2025

It received little response. It was later republished under a different headline by Responsible Statecraft where I finally noticed it:

Ukraine’s battlefield position is deteriorating fast - Responsible Statecraft, May 5 2025
Should Kyiv collapse, the Russian army will surge forward, pushing the line of contact deeper into Ukraine and peace terms will get worse


Vershinin starts by pointing out the geopolitical importance for the West of wining (or losing) the war:

Historically in many conflicts, peace negotiations lasted years, even as the war raged on, such as during the Korean and Vietnam wars. Thus, the balance of power, measured in resources, losses and quality of strategic leadership are critical to the outcome of negotiations.
For Western powers, this carries serious consequences. They have staked their reputation on this conflict and with it, the fate of the rules-based world order. The Global South and the multipolar world order is waiting in the wings to take over. Failure to achieve victory has the potential to fatally undermine that order and remove the West from global leadership, which it has enjoyed for the last several centuries.


He goes on to describe the nature of the war in Ukraine:

The war in Ukraine is now attritional. These types of wars are won not by capturing terrain, but by careful management of resources, preserving one’s own while destroying the enemy’s. The exchange rate of losses must not only be favorable to one side, but it must also account for the total reserves available to the enemy. The path to victory lies in the ability to replace losses while fielding new forces and sustaining the civilian economy and morale.
...
For this war, terrain is far less important. Fighting is often centered on the same patch of ground with only a little movement until one side is no longer able to sustain the conflict.
...
Strategic leadership is vital because it guides the resource management of the conflict. Failure to identify strategic goals and wasting resources on irrelevant objectives causes the odds of victory slip away.


Vershinin follows up by a summary of each side's losses and their capacity to maintain the conflict. He is one of the few serious military analysts who dares to publish reasonable numbers for casualties:

Russia appears to be able to replace its losses and still grow the size of its army.
...
This currently averages to about 3,600 dead [Russian soldiers] per month. Historically, for every dead there are four wounded, so another 452,000 wounded needs to be added to the Russian count, which equates to a monthly loss of 14,400 or 18,000 total. However, the same data indicates that out of these, three quarters usually return to duty (RTD) after treatment. To break it down, Russian forces are suffering 7,200 permanent losses and 10,800 RTD per month. At the same time, Russians are recruiting 30,000 volunteers a month, plus the wounded who have recovered. This translates into growth of 24,000 soldiers every month, including RTD. Even if Russian losses are double what Mediazona was able to count, the Russian army is still expanding.[/i]

Over 40 months of war this sums up to a total of 144,000 dead Russian soldiers and the same number of seriously wounded.

In conclusion Russia can sustain the war at its current and even a higher level.

The Ukrainian position is much worse:

My view is that the Ukrainian senior political leadership has spent too much time trying to attain public relations objectives at a significant cost to military operations. The tremendous losses of resources, especially human, have significantly depleted Ukraine’s combat capability and places long term combat potential at risk. This is doubly challenging because Ukraine started out with fewer resources. Russia has three times the population of Ukraine, and in the case of artillery ammunition, it vastly outproduces not only Ukraine, but the entire West by a ratio of three to one.

Vershinin details the horrific Ukrainian losses in Bakhmut and Krinki. They add up:

Ukraine’s total losses are hard to assess. The Jamestown Foundation estimated that Ukraine had mobilized 2 million men back in July 2023, and the number should be approaching 3 million by now. Most estimates place the Ukrainian fielded army at about 1 million men, while Zelenskyy claimed to be fielding 880,000. The official Ukrainian losses of 43,000 are unrealistic in the light of previous numbers. For a more realistic estimate, the “Antiseptic” Telegram channel has one of the few databases that compare current and prewar satellite photos of select Ukrainian cemeteries.
...
The final estimate is about 769,000 dead, and based on historical data, likely another 769,000 wounded who will never recover enough to go back to the front.
...
This matches the Jamestown Foundation’s estimate. Some 1.5 million are permanent losses, another 400,000-600,000 wounded recovering in hospitals, leaving 1 million to 800,000 still in the field.
This loss rate means that Ukraine is running out of trained, motivated formations.


(Remembering anecdotes from the battle field I doubt that Russian and Ukrainian care for wounded soldiers is on an equal level. Ukraine likely has much higher relative numbers of seriously, non-recoverable wounded that Russia.)

It is not only the irreplaceable losses of men but also of the material means to continue fighting:

Equipment is also running out. The West, whose military support is keeping Ukraine in the fight, appears to have emptied out its equipment storage, and there is little left to give.
...
With mounting manpower and equipment shortfalls, it is difficult to see how Ukraine can hold on without the direct intervention of Western, and specifically U.S., forces. Especially with Ukrainian political leadership continuing to prioritize PR instead of military objectives.


Which brings us to the issue of negotiations and how to make the best of them:

Western powers have staked the liberal world order on the outcome of this war. Negotiated peace on Russian terms today would be bad, but betting on an unlikely improvement in battlefield conditions and losing would be far worse.
With especially European powers unwilling to give in, the war may turn, from a western view, to a worse end:

Right now, Russians are demanding Crimea and four of Ukraine’s oblasts, a ban on Ukraine entering NATO and the EU and guaranteed rights for Russian-speakers. These demands are for regions where the Russian army already controls 60% or more of the territory. Should Ukraine collapse, the Russian army will surge forward, pushing the line of contact deeper into Ukraine and terms can get worse. There is a good chance that Russia will go for all of Novorossiya, adding Kharkiv, Odesa, Mykolaiv, Poltava and Dnipropetrovsk oblasts to its demands, as well as referendums on succession in Trans Carpathia, and if the political climate in Romania is favorable, for Northern Bukovina, and other Romanian-speaking areas as well, buying off select NATO members with territories to split the unity of alliance. This will reduce Ukraine to a landlocked rump state based around Kyiv, Chernihiv and Lviv.

Vershinin's current view of where the war might end, should Ukraine fail to negotiate, is consistent with the prediction I made on the very day the war started:

Looking at this map I believe that the most advantageous end state for Russia would be the creation of a new independent country, call it Novorussiya, on the land east of the Dnieper and south along the coast that holds a majority ethnic Russian population and that, in 1922, had been attached to the Ukraine by Lenin. That state would be politically, culturally and militarily aligned with Russia.

Image

This would eliminate Ukrainian access to the Black Sea and create a land bridge towards the Moldavian breakaway Transnistria which is under Russian protection.


Vershinin closes with this question:

The real question is: Can Ukraine gain an acceptable, if bitter, peace now, or will it keep fighting, risking a military collapse and a far worse Russian dictate later?

My view is that Ukraine could gain peace now but will likely miss the chance due the unwillingness of its current leadership to concede defeat and due to the irrational fear of European leaders to lose their imagined importance in this world.

Or, as Gordon Hahn summarizes:

Unfortunately, Moscow’s limited need for either a ceasefire or peace at this point, the Trump administration’s lack of a strategy, and the Europeans‘ and Ukrainians‘ insincerity and political speculation on the war bodes ill for an agreement on either a ceasefire or direct Russian-Ukrainian talks any time soon. Moscow will be forced to intensify the pressure on Kiev. Trump will continue to thrash here and there. Europe will insist on discrediting itself further, becoming even more irrelevant — a ‘coalition of the willing’ to do something different and of limited purpose. And poor Ukraine will be subjected to more suffering, bringing the collapse of its defense lines, army, regime, and state even closer than it is now.

Posted by b on May 12, 2025 at 15:45 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/05/a ... .html#more

******

RIA Novosti on Vladimir Putin’s proposed direct peace talks in Istanbul

https://news-pravda.com/world/2025/05/11/1317700.html

BRUSSELS, May 11 – RIA Novosti. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s proposal to start direct negotiations with Ukraine was a brilliant response to the “malicious behavior” of the leaders of Britain, France, Poland and Germany, who came up with the idea of a 30-day truce without preconditions and threatened “devastating sanctions,” an American historian based in Brussels and an expert on Russia’s relations with the EU told RIA Novosti. and the USA – Gilbert Doctorow.

“I was particularly struck by President Putin’s decisive reaction to the characteristic malicious behavior of Starmer, Macron, Tusk and Merz during their visit to Kiev, where they demanded the Kremlin’s unconditional agreement to the proposed 30-day cease-fire, threatening, otherwise, new and even more devastating sanctions. Russia’s counter-proposal to hold direct talks with Zelensky’s team in Istanbul on May 15, including a discussion on a cease-fire, is a brilliant step,” the source said.

According to him, in this way, these four engaged in sabotage are excluded from the process, as well as the inconsistently acting team of US President Donald Trump. “It’s for the best! If the Ukrainians accept this neutral proposal from Russia, then, indeed, the whole process can move much closer to a peaceful resolution of the conflict,” says Doctorow.

Earlier, Putin said that Kiev had not responded at all to Russia’s proposal for a cease-fire in the days of the Victory anniversary, despite this, Russia offers Kiev to resume direct negotiations without preconditions – on May 15 in Istanbul on May 15. He noted that he would discuss the possibility of holding them with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. On Sunday, the Kremlin’s press service reported that Erdogan, during a telephone conversation with the Russian leader, supported Putin’s initiative for direct talks with Ukraine, stressing his willingness to provide an Istanbul platform.

After Putin’s proposal for direct talks with representatives of Kiev in Istanbul, US President Donald Trump said that this was a potentially great day for Russia and Ukraine, and promised to continue working with both sides.

Putin noted that Russia is committed to serious negotiations with Ukraine, the point is to eliminate the root causes of the conflict, and the Russian Federation seeks to achieve long-term peace in Ukraine during negotiations. At the same time, he added that Moscow’s proposal for negotiations is on the table, the decision is up to Kiev and the curators of the Kiev regime.

On Saturday, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, as well as British and Polish Prime Ministers Keir Starmer and Donald Tusk attended a meeting in Kiev of the so-called “coalition of the willing.” Macron said that a new package of sanctions could be imposed against Russia within a few days if Moscow does not accept the terms of the truce proposed by the West for 30 days, despite the fact that the Kiev regime violated all truces and has not yet lifted the ban on negotiations with the Russian Federation.

******

Note: Volodymyr Zelensky has rejected the Russian President’s proposal of direct peace talks in Istanbul saying that the Russians must first agree to a 30 day cease-fire.

This comes against the background of Donald Trump’s having warmly greeted the Putin proposal and having urged Zelensky to IMMEDIATELY accept this initiative

The question now is whether Trump will do what logic dictates and break all relations with Ukraine.

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2025/05/11/ ... -istanbul/

******

Everything You Needed To Know))

The key word was always "unconditional"))

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has stated he is ready to “personally” meet Russian President Vladimir Putin in Türkiye on Thursday but only if Moscow first agrees to a truce. His statement came in response to Russia’s proposal to begin peace talks without pre-conditions. “I will be waiting for Putin in Türkiye on Thursday. Personally,” Zelensky wrote in a post on X on Sunday. He still maintained that Kiev awaits “a full and lasting ceasefire, starting from tomorrow, to provide the necessary basis for diplomacy.” The Ukrainian leader also stated that he expected Moscow not to look for “excuses” this time.

You see, so simple.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/05 ... -know.html

******

"Package" for Banderovites
colonelcassad
May 12, 19:01

Image

"Package" for Banderovites

The Ukrainian Main Intelligence Directorate has published an infographic about a new Russian cruise missile codenamed "Banderol", the remains of which, apparently, were preserved as a result of an impact or failure of the warhead to rupture.

What is known about the missile?

▪️This is an air-launched missile developed by the Kronshtadt enterprise. It is about 5 meters long and was first spotted during the visit of Deputy Chairman of the Russian Security Council Dmitry Medvedev to the Kapustin Yar test site.

▪️The warhead for such a missile is not small - about 50 kg. According to the GUR, the "Banderol" is assembled from components from different countries: an engine from China, a Japanese battery, and a Russian "Kometa".

▪️The speed is 500-600 km/h. But the most important thing is that the carriers are not tactical aircraft, but Mi-28 helicopters and Orion unmanned aerial vehicles.

The envisaged possibility of use with UAVs and helicopters is something that absolutely no one in the world has had in working order yet. The Turks are testing the Chakyr cruise missile with the Akıncı, but this has not been observed in real combat.

Also, in theory, it is possible to increase the power of the total salvo of missile weapons: if now only strategic aviation aircraft and the Su-57 launch cruise missiles, now everyone else will be able to, to whom they can be suspended.

Of course, there are quite a lot of imported parts, but in terms of the nomenclature, this is explained by the fact that somewhere there are no analogues that would not worsen the characteristics and would be cheaper. In addition, imports allow for faster serial assembly of the Parcels, because the missiles are needed here and now.

In general, these serial missiles are truly unique weapons in the world and a huge step forward, since their price is much lower than that of the "Caliber" or the X-101. At the same time, its performance characteristics are decent, and there are more potential carriers.

A relatively inexpensive cruise missile is an area that many countries are working on. In the United States, heavy transport aircraft are being used for this task ( https://t.me/rybar/69477 ), while the Turks are using drones. In the future, such weapons will appear everywhere, but it is very pleasing that we were the first in this.

@rybar - zinc

The premiere of these products during the demonstration strikes on military facilities in Odessa was very impressive. The enemy's air defense was completely unprepared to meet the "Panderoly".

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9834837.html

Preparing for Istanbul 2
May 13, 13:34

Image

May 13th arrived and all the threats of the cocaine coalition remained just threats. And so yesterday they were amusingly kicking their legs, counting down, threatening.

As a result, the fighting is still ongoing. And the talks in Istanbul scheduled by Putin for May 15 are in the process of preparation. Russia, the United States, China, Brazil and Turkey support these talks.
Accordingly, the Russian Federation has quite skillfully defused the ultimatum about a 30-day truce.
The cocaine coalition now has to restructure itself and threaten sanctions if Putin does not meet with Zelensky or if Russia does not agree to a truce in Istanbul.

Putin has no reason to meet with Zelensky now. Judging by publications in domestic media, the delegation will include Lavrov, Ushakov and possibly Medinsky (aha-ha). Zelensky said that he will not meet with anyone in Istanbul except Putin. But he may not meet. The issue of negotiations between delegations has been raised, Zelensky is not needed there.

As for the truce, Russia is not against discussing it, but subject to the fulfillment of specific conditions related to the cessation of arms supplies and verification of violations of the truce. Which is unlikely for now.

So for now the war is going on as usual, and on the 15th and a little later we will find out how much the Russian Federation and the US were able to bring their positions closer together and how much the US was able/wanted to bend the cocaine coalition.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/

Google Translator

*****

Meat storming of Dzerzhinsk
May 12, 2025
Rybar

Image

On the eve of Victory Day, Ukrainian formations launched a counterattack from Nelepovka and Shcherbinovka in the direction of Dzerzhinsk , which had been newly liberated by Russian troops . During this attack, a large armored group of the enemy with infantry on board managed to "fly" into the city itself, while individual units of equipment were able to drive right up to the center of the settlement.

More about the situation on the site
Despite the apparent "visual success", the attack resulted in heavy losses already at the first stage. The armored group was tracked and began to be destroyed by UAV crews on the way to the city.

However, at least eight units of equipment, including one T-64BV , managed to reach the settlement and began to advance along 3rd Maysky Lane towards the center, where the first losses began, among which were the only previously mentioned tank, the Bradley IFV and the M113 APC of the Ukrainian Armed Forces .

Having reached the crossroads, the enemy split up. One part of the group continued moving straight along Mayakovsky Street , where it was subsequently destroyed. The other part turned left and moved towards Druzhby Street, but it also suffered the same fate. In total, the Ukrainian Armed Forces lost two more Bradley IFVs, a Marder 1A3 , and two more M113 APCs as part of the two groups .

During this suicidal assault, the enemy failed to gain a foothold in Dzerzhinsk itself. According to local data, Ukrainian formations lost about 12 armored vehicles. At the same time, the situation in the area remains difficult, and neither the Russian nor Ukrainian Armed Forces have been able to gain a foothold on the outskirts of the aforementioned city. This is primarily due to the oversaturation of the area with drones on both sides.

In addition, to the west of Dzerzhinsk, Russian troops are advancing in several areas at once. In fact, they managed to reach the outskirts of Rozovka by May 4. At the same time, advancement was achieved to the east of Kalinov . Today, the Russian Armed Forces continue their offensive further north, accompanied by the alignment of the former Ukrainian Armed Forces wedging in the Zarya area.

At the moment, the city is mainly controlled by Russian troops, who are strengthening previously occupied positions. The main combat actions today are taking place on the flanks. The Russian Armed Forces continue to advance in the area of ​​Romanovka and Staraya Nikolaevka , where an attempt is underway to break through the defense of Ukrainian formations.

https://rybar.ru/myasnoj-shturm-dzerzhinska/

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 14, 2025 11:45 am

Challenges and threats
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 05/14/2025

Image

"If there is no progress on the ceasefire before the end of this week, sanctions against Russia will be strengthened and will affect the energy and financial markets," said the newly elected German Chancellor Friedrich Merz yesterday. His statement is striking for two reasons. First, the deadline for Russia to unconditionally accept the 30-day truce offered by Ukraine, which would buy kyiv and its European allies time before having to face the dreaded diplomacy, theoretically ended that same Monday. “Macron, Starmer, Merz, and Tusk were in Kiev this Saturday. They explained to us that they had issued an **irrevocable** ultimatum: ceasefire by Monday the 12th,” wrote a noticeably annoyed Alberto Sicilia, a correspondent for La Sexta yesterday . He criticized the “total silence in the foreign ministries,” assumed that “Europe has made a fool of itself,” and declared that “either you issue an ultimatum and comply with it. Or don't issue it. But issuing ultimatums (sic) and not complying with them only makes you lose credibility.” In reality, as Bloomberg pointed out yesterday , European countries are waiting for Trump to impose sanctions if Russia does not agree to negotiate in the manner demanded by the European countries. The strategic autonomy of the EU and its British allies is to wait for the United States to implement the measures they desire.

On the other hand, Merz threatens Russia with sanctions that are already being applied and that will by no means be lifted, regardless of whether there is a ceasefire or not. As was the case during the Minsk conflict, the lifting of sanctions against Russia is always something that can only be imagined in the long or very long term. One need only review the European and Ukrainian counterproposal to the final US offer regarding sanctions. Yesterday, the EU announced its latest package of sanctions against Russia.

A reduction in sanctions would be one of the main incentives that could be offered to Russia to come to the negotiating table despite being in a position of strength at the front. However, this scenario is one of the red lines of countries such as France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, which in their response to the White House propose a gradual and future, rather than immediate, lifting of US sanctions only. European sanctions, including Russia's disconnection from the international payment system SWIFT—by far the most important aspect of all those introduced in the seventeen European sanctions packages—are not even mentioned in the document, so it can be deduced that there is no plan to eliminate any European coercive measures against Russia. Moreover, the European Union, which is incredibly considering sanctioning the Nord Stream-2 consortium, is not only not considering reducing sanctions, but actually increasing them. Brussels, for example, is preparing legislation to prohibit the purchase of Russian gas.

“There is no need to be afraid of new sanctions, but we must be prepared for anything,” Vladimir Putin stated yesterday, referring to the economic measures against Russia that, according to the Russian leader, European countries are imposing “to their own detriment.” Fear was also the main argument in the philosophical message published yesterday by Mikhail Podolyak, who, from a country that has been at war for more than ten years, paying off loans with more loans, and is currently financed from abroad for its survival, referred to the “ruins of the Russian Federation.” Comparing Vladimir Putin to “the paranoid Stalin,” Andriy Yermak’s advisor asserts that the Bolshevik leader was at least “credited with industrialization and the capture of Berlin.” Without bothering to recall the state of the Russian Federation at the end of Yeltsin’s presidency, the Ukrainian official mentions “the launch of Vkontakte and the genocidal wars against the smaller Georgia and Ukraine.”

Podolyak, who has never criticized, for example, Israel's actions in Gaza, calls the eight-day war in Georgia in 2008—for which even the European Union places some of the blame on Mikhail Saakashvili—and the war in Ukraine, which he puts on the same level, genocidal. Everything, according to Podolyak, is driven by Vladimir Putin's fears. “Future researchers will be surprised to discover the extent to which Russian politics in recent decades have been determined by the leader’s personal fears. The Orange Revolution, viruses, Navalny, aging, Russophobia (a result of Russia’s global rudeness and arrogance), independent media, Prigozhin, fake trips to the front lines… It seems the list could be extended to include Vladimir Zelensky’s [interestingly, Podolyak doesn’t spell Volodymyr, as the Ukrainian president’s name is usually written – Ed ] tough and direct initiatives. How much do you have to fear a direct conversation with the Ukrainian leader on a difficult topic to choose to continue the bloody war?” he wrote.

The entire Ukrainian and European discourse is currently revolving around Thursday's meeting in Turkey, convened by the Russian president, but counterscheduled by his Ukrainian counterpart. "I think changes will be made to the decision of the National Security and Defense Council," Mikhail Podolyak said yesterday in a television interview. "If we are going to sign a legally verified document, I think it will be appropriate to make legal adjustments," he added, referring to the decree that makes it theoretically illegal to negotiate with Vladimir Putin's administration. From the words of Andriy Ermak's advisor, it can be understood that Ukraine would repeal the decree, not this week to begin negotiations that Ukraine does not want, but to which it is now demanding the Russian leader attend, but if some kind of agreement or treaty were to be signed. Even so, as Podolyak insisted yesterday, "it won't be a presidential meeting if Putin shows up." In other words, Ukraine, which banned negotiations with Vladimir Putin in 2022, is demanding that the Russian president appear in Turkey on Thursday so that his Ukrainian counterpart can stage a new episode of his trademark showmanship. In any case, Zelensky clarified yesterday, echoing one of Donald Trump's maxims, the decree does not affect the president and is, moreover, an ideal reason to demand more sanctions. "Volodymyr Zelensky demands the 'strongest' Western sanctions in history if Putin refuses the meeting," AFP headlined yesterday afternoon . "No one but me can negotiate with Putin," Zelensky asserted, "and I haven't banned myself from anything." This twist would have been hard to believe in one of his films.

The question remains, however, as to why Ukraine wants Vladimir Putin's presence, given that Ukraine's demand for diplomacy to begin remains the same. "Ukraine is ready for any format of negotiations, but the first and most important step is a ceasefire. It is impossible to talk about peace when our cities are attacked daily by missiles and drones," Andriy Ermak wrote again yesterday, repeating his message from the previous days, even when the most reluctant actors have moved on and opted to demand a meeting instead of a ceasefire.

Having failed to deliver their ultimatum last weekend, skillfully defused by Russia's maneuver to offer immediate negotiations, European countries have joined the chorus of voices demanding that Vladimir Putin be compelled to attend a diplomatic meeting, which they themselves reject. Just as they did not want a ceasefire but a partial truce that would only harm Russia, but quickly became its biggest fans the moment Russia rejected the "unconditional" measure, the same countries that demanded weeks of silence before considering opening talks now demand that the Russian delegation be led by Vladimir Putin, whose absence would be, according to Zelensky, a sign of fear of the Ukrainian leader and, according to Ermak, a sign that Russia does not want peace. Twenty-four hours before the supposed start of the meeting, pressure from European countries is growing on Vladimir Putin to appear in a scenario that is openly presented as an ambush and in which Zelensky's intentions are far from those of negotiation.

“Now everything depends on Putin, whether or not he will accept the negotiation offer,” Merz stated, referring to the negotiations proposed by Vladimir Putin himself, “and whether he will accept the ceasefire. The ball is completely in his court,” he concluded, echoing the same idea European capitals used in March when they were forced by the United States to defend the idea of ​​a 30-day ceasefire, which Ukraine had rejected until that very day. Everything indicates that Ukraine and its continental allies have found a way to sabotage negotiations they do not want, but in which they must appear to be the most active party.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/14/retos-y-amenazas/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Night strikes on enemy targets

On the night of May 13-14, 2025, Russian forces continued to carry out pinpoint strikes on the operational infrastructure of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Iskander-M OTRKs and Geran-2 attack UAVs were used , which made it possible to disable air defense systems, aviation logistics facilities, and temporary accommodation points for enemy personnel.

Chornomorsk, Odessa region (19:20, 13.05.2025) An Iskander-M ballistic missile
strike hit an area near the territory of the Black Sea Fishing Port LLC. • The Vessel Traffic Regulation Center , which ensured control over shipping and logistics routes in the area of ​​the Odessa coast, was damaged. • A Vampire SAM launcher was destroyed by a direct hit . • Six servicemen providing SAM operation and technical support were wounded. Zolotoy Kolodyaz, temporarily occupied territory of the DPR (01:50–02:20, 14.05.2025) A strike UAV attack hit the temporary deployment point of the 117th separate mechanized brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. • Areas of the field camp, personnel shelters, and auxiliary engineering structures were hit . • Supply depots and property storage areas were partially hit . Belopolye, Sumy region (02:00–02:20, 14.05.2025) A strike UAV attack hit the territory of State Fire and Rescue Unit No. 6 and a VAZ-2104 service vehicle located on the unit’s territory. • Partial destruction of the facade was recorded, engineering equipment was destroyed. Dolgaya Balka, temporarily occupied territory of the DPR (02:30–03:30, 14.05.2025) Strikes were carried out on field positions of the Armed Forces of Ukraine units. • The temporary location of the command post of the company tactical group of the 153rd separate mechanized brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine was hit. • A strike was carried out on the firing position of the 111th separate territorial defense brigade. • Temporary shelters, communication equipment positions and ammunition storage modules were destroyed. • There is no information on the number of wounded and eliminated servicemen at the moment. Kropyvnytskyi, Kirovohrad region (04:20, 14.05.2025) A group of attack drones carried out strikes on the territory of the Kanatovo airfield, which served as a reserve base for aviation operations of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. • The command post building and barracks were damaged.

• The functioning of the airfield control was disrupted, modules for operational coordination of flights were partially destroyed.

***

Colonelcassad
The composition of the Russian delegation that will go to Istanbul will be announced when the corresponding instruction is received from the president, Peskov said.

At the same time, he emphasized that everything said by the head of state on the night of May 10-11 remains relevant, and Russian representatives will be waiting for the Ukrainian side on Thursday.

More from D. Peskov's statements:

- The dates of Putin's visit to Iran have not yet been agreed upon;

- The entire system of strategic stability and security in the world is in a deplorable state;

- The proliferation of nuclear weapons in the EU will not add security and stability to the European continent;

- Russia, the United States, and European countries that possess nuclear weapons will have to make significant efforts to form strategic security;

- Putin has several telephone conversations scheduled for the evening.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

SITREP 5/12/25: More 'Talks' Games as Russian Machine Barrels Forward
Simplicius
May 12, 2025

Again the smokescreen of peace talks tries desperately to overshadow mounting Russian advances. I find it nearly pointless to split hairs over the incessant back and forth ‘negotiations’ charade because it’s all simple posturing from both sides, with each vying to outdo the other in the media in order to present the best face of ‘peace maker’ to their own respective allies.

In the case of Russia, Putin clears allies like China from having to answer any tough questions like “Why do you continue supporting an obvious warmonger nation?” It gives a kind of plausible deniability, allowing Russia to say it’s doing everything it can for peace. In reality, Russia has not changed its demands in the slightest and they are not even close to being met by Ukraine and its Western handlers.

In fact, for the first time MSM seems to have at least acknowledged this recently:

Image
https://archive.ph/jEtP9

Well, there you have it.

Vance answered by saying Russia is asking for “too much”:

Image

But listen to how he said it—he admits that Russia is in the driver’s seat, advancing and capturing territory and stops just short of conceding that US is only negotiating to prevent Ukraine’s total collapse: (Video at link.)

US Vice President Vance said that Russia cannot count on those territories of Ukraine that it has not yet conquered, writes the publication “Strana”.

"Question: Yesterday you spoke at the Munich Security Conference here in Washington. You said that Russia is essentially asking for too much in the deal to resolve the war with Ukraine. What should we do now? Get away from this situation or, on the contrary, increase military support for Ukraine?

"We'll see how it all plays out, of course. But look, we knew that Russia would ask too much, because from the Russian point of view, what's happening on the ground is their victory. And of course, the Ukrainians would like a ceasefire, partly because the last few months have not been good for them.

Our position is that we don't want Ukraine to collapse. We obviously want Ukraine to remain a sovereign country. But Russia cannot expect to be given back territories that it hasn't even seized. And that was what their original peace plan was.

I actually think it's progress that the Russians and Ukrainians have started talking at all. It's also progress that there are concrete peace proposals on the table. We knew from the start that the first Russian proposal would be excessive.

We knew they would ask for more than was reasonable to give. That often happens in negotiations. It doesn't bother me.

I would be concerned if we came to the conclusion that Russia was negotiating in bad faith. And if that happens, yes, we will step aside. The President will say: we are leaving this process.


Everyone seems to understand—as Trump himself hinted—that Russia remains in the driver’s seat yet for some reason they still expect Russia to make a massive concession by simply agreeing to stop advancing for virtually no reward: Ukraine would still get military aid, be allowed to keep its Nazi ideology, etc. This is simply asinine.

Now European leaders think they’ve somehow got Russia ‘cornered’ by forcing Putin into an ultimatum. But does this look like a picture of winning confidence to you?

Image

Pawel Wargan writes:

The contrast between these images is stark. The West looks increasingly isolated, weak, and desperate. In its renewed belligerence, lingering colonial attitudes, and blatant attempts to rewrite history, it is locking itself out of the multipolar world that is in formation.

By contrast, Victory Day in Moscow gave us a glimpse at the contours of that multipolar world — one that is open, inclusive, and committed, at the very least, to dialogue. Bringing together the leaders of the anti-imperialist bloc, from China to Cuba, Venezuela to Burkina Faso, it carried faint echoes of the Third World internationalism that shaped the 20th century.

In these images, we can see the ideological edifice of imperialism crumble — white supremacy, the organising logic of an international system dominated by imperial and colonial powers, has been rejected.


Funnily enough, for the first time I heard a very pivotal change in the phrase widely used to denounce Russia. One of the top European puppet compradors called Russia “isolated in Europe”. It’s a subtle shift, but all the more telling—even they can no longer deride Russia as truly isolated, but rather isolated in Europe, an increasingly irrelevant open air museum, good only for passing tourism.

Image

(Video at link.)


Russia ‘exudes confidence’ after a stellar Victory Day, with China showing full backing for the SMO; Xi even wore the St. George ribbon in solidarity:
(Video at link.)

Image

But getting back to the topic of advances, as I said the ‘negotiations’ smokescreen is meant merely to give cover to the West’s desperate assertion that the conflict has ‘stagnated’ or become ‘frozen’, and that negotiations is the only way out. Nothing of the sort—Russian advances are again picking up, with multiple captures over the past few days happening under the cover of the ‘peace talks’ red herring.

<snip>

Lastly, again we have new reports of Russian troop landings along the Dnieper, this time near Nova Kakhovka where large island chains were allegedly captured:

Image

Image

Islands on the Dnieper near Nova Kakhovka in the Kherson region have come under the control of the Russian Armed Forces, writes Divgen

👉 Something brewing




One interesting thing to note is the shift in narrative about Russia being the one up against the clock, to the new admission that it’s actually Ukraine ‘running out of time’:

Image
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/10/worl ... apons.html

The above NYT piece notes that Biden’s last military aid line will run out this summer, and that Europe will take upwards of a decade to get their own production lines up and running:

While European leaders and investors appear willing to pump more money into weapons production, industry executives and experts predict it will take a decade to get assembly lines up to speed.

Who knew?

“Europe is trying to replace the assistance that we lost from the United States, but unfortunately, they don’t have the capacity to do this,” Mr. Chernev said. “It takes time between the decision and the real assistance.”

Meanwhile, Russian production of key arms components has skyrocketed:


‼️🇷🇺🦾 Russia has sharply increased production of military equipment, — infographics from The Economist

▪️All defense plants show a sharp increase in activity after 2022.

▪️The most noticeable jump was at the Kazan Helicopter Plant: production volumes reached 950 units. The Perm and Kazan Gunpowder Plants also stand out, where the figures rose to 598 and 329, respectively.

A new report points to huge expansion for a new explosives plant which will vastly increase Russia’s ability to produce artillery shells:

Russia is significantly expanding the "Plant named after Ya. M. Sverdlov" for the production of explosives – Reuters. According to the outlet, citing satellite imagery and other documents, the facility is constructing a new production line for the manufacture of RDX or HMX, both of which are used in munitions.

Plans include reconstruction and construction of at least 20 new structures, including additional storage facilities, new tunnels, protective walls, and an expansion of the railway line.

The new facility is expected to be completed in 2025 and will be capable of producing 6,000 tons of explosives per year, enough to load approximately 1.28 million 152mm artillery shells.

According to U.S. Army General Christopher Cavoli, Russia could reach a production rate of around 250,000 shells per month or 3 million per year, enabling it to build stockpiles three times larger than those of the U.S. and Europe combined.

Image

Ukraine is forced to use its artillery sparingly to such an extent that, according to one Russian frontline observer, they have now resorted to using artillery primarily for fire against enemy assaults—i.e. defensively. In the offensive role, drones take precedence almost exclusively, he says:

If the replenishment instructor was last on the LoC 6 months ago, then this is no longer an instructor - his knowledge is outdated. Working with electronic warfare, frequencies, masking, how art works, what to do in certain situations. Everything changes very quickly.

A year ago, everyone was talking about electronic warfare, and now the entire front is being rolled up in the network. The enemy's artillery used to dismantle our strongholds, but now it sits deep in the rear and opens fire only on the outgoing assault groups. All other work in the depth of our defense up to 30 km is done by FPV and heavy drones of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Fortifications are now being dismantled exclusively by drone raids.


(More at link.)

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/sit ... s-games-as

******

Vexing vegetation: frontline update

Kill zones and green zones. Russian advances under tree cover. 'Getting to the positions isn’t much easier than surviving on them.' 200 days in a frontline hole.

Events in Ukraine
May 13, 2025

‘if you flip through the pages of history, it becomes clear that after prolonged battlefield stagnation, one side inevitably starts collapsing entirely. We certainly don’t want that side to be us.’

Before we get to the full text that quote comes from, a somewhat unexpected element that has been disrupting frontline stagnation - nature.

Spring is generally associated with life. This is true on the frontlines too. This, however, is not to everyone’s satisfaction.

Image

The war is not simply a war of trenches. Trees are just as important, if not moreso. In Russian and Ukrainian, these are called lesoposadki or lisosmugi - wooded areas, tree lines dividing up steppe agriculture. It is under cover of such greenery that infantry is able to evade drones and encircle trenches. That way, as I’ve covered many times in the past, even quite impressive trench constructions can become useless through being outflanked.

Over the past few weeks, there has been a flurry of worry among Ukrainian troops that the regrowth of greenery is making it harder for drones to spot Russian infantry as they infiltrate Ukrainian defence lines.

Stanislav Buniatov, April 29:

Now that the greenery is starting to grow, it’ll become harder to hit the faggots. I strongly advise brigade commanders to seriously consider mastering remote mining of forest strips and the production of anti-personnel mines — otherwise, we’re going to have a problem

Officer, April 30:

The weather is making its adjustments, which are now more beneficial to the faggots.

In spring, the number of assaults significantly increased, and I’m referring to the last 2 weeks, when the "greenery" appeared and the ground dried up completely, allowing for unrestricted access to our positions with any kind of equipment, and, if necessary, quick landing and hiding in the tree lines.

The enemy's efforts remain focused mainly on the Pokrovsk direction.


Officer, May 3:

The green has grown, the ground has dried, the weather has warmed up, and overall, the weather conditions have improved, which has sharply contributed to the intensification of assault operations, especially in the Pokrovsk and Kostiantynivka directions.

And while in the latter the enemy is trying to sneak up to the city through villages, in the Pokrovsk direction, it’s mostly fields and tree lines, through which the enemy is trying to advance to the administrative border of the region.

It's tough in both areas.


It seems like the greenery effect may be statistically observed as well - according to Ukraine’s DeepState OSINT project, Russia took more territory in April (175 square kilometers) than it did in March (133 square kilometers).

This is the first time since November 2024 that an upswing in Russian advances has been recorded. Note, however, that this excludes the hundreds of kilometers of territory Russia retook in its Kursk oblast in March.

Could it be that a significant factor behind the slowing of Russian advances in the December-March period was the winter-time barrenness? This is plausible, given that the Russian tactic for advancing has been the deployment of small (2-5) infantry groups to outflank Ukrainian defenses. Due to Ukraine’s manpower deficiencies, it can only counter this with drones. When the tree cover disappeared in wintertime, they became much harder to avoid.

Image

Given this pressure, new recruits are as precious as ever. No wonder that Jehovah’s Witnesses were denied the ability to avoid service on religious grounds by Ukraine’s high court on May 1.

No wonder the army is doing its best to recruit more youth. The latest advertising strategy to get those aged 18-24 to sign the military contract aimed at them doesn’t focus on roblox and female attention, like previous ones did - now it’s shoes:

How many pairs of shoes does the average Ukrainian man own? For those who’ve signed a contract, at least six: shower shoes, everyday wear, summer shoes, autumn shoes, winter shoes, and extreme winter boots. Sign a contract at 18–24, earn up to two million hryvnias, and get footwear as a bonus! (Video at link.)

The 18-24 contract hasn’t been particularly successful, despite the PR campaign. The army announced in mid-April that only 500 have actually signed up on the program. Nevertheless, the government has decided on another vector for recruits - the elderly.

On April 30, parliament proposed a new contract aimed at those aged 60 and older. While the legislation refers to non-combat positions the elderly could take, one wonders how it would look in reality. That’s because in reality, the list of 'non-combat’ positions is constantly shrinking. On April 31, the ministry of health announced that a range of different medics would lose their exemption from mobilization.

Young or old, any newcomers to the Ukrainian army will have to abide by the trendsetters – the neo-nazi Azov movement. This popular sentiment is expressed in the following May 5 post by Stanislav Buniatov, commander of the Aidar Batallion, an allied but smaller nationalist unit:

"Azov" is 11 years old 🫡

Much has already been said about the heroism of this unit, but I want to highlight the most important point:

through its example, Azov pushed all units of the Ukrainian Defense Forces toward reform — and that deserves respect and a separate chapter in Ukraine's history.

Glory to Ukraine!
Glory to the Nation!


(Paywall with free option.)

https://eventsinukraine.substack.com/p/ ... ine-update

******

Third-Party Mediation Between Russia & Ukraine Is Approaching Its Limits
Andrew Korybko
May 13, 2025

Image

Trump is about to be placed into a dilemma due to his unwillingness or inability to coerce Ukraine into Russia’s demanded concessions.

The US’ mediation between Russia and Ukraine captivated the world due to the hopes that many observers had of it leading to a breakthrough, but expectations have since been tempered, including on the American side as evidenced by the toughening of its negotiating stance towards Russia. The latest developments saw Ukraine and the West demand Russia’s compliance with an unconditional ceasefire, to which Putin reacted by offering the unconditional resumption of bilateral talks with Ukraine instead.

Zelensky’s response was to declare that he’ll visit Istanbul on Thursday, the place and day that Putin suggested for resuming bilateral talks, though it’s unclear whether the Russian leader will go. The spring 2022 peace process that Putin mentioned in his video address early Sunday morning only involved their delegations, not direct talks between their presidents, plus Putin considers Zelensky to be illegitimate now. He’s also unlikely to meet him unless Zelensky agrees to significant concessions ahead of time.

Therein lies the problem because Zelensky refuses to budge on Putin’s demands that Ukraine restore its constitutional neutrality, demilitarize, denazify, and cede the disputed territories, and Trump won’t coerce him into doing so either. The only outcome from the US’ mediation efforts thus far has been talk of a strategic partnership with Russia, likely built upon energy and rare earth cooperation, that’s it. From Russia’s perspective, it looks like the US wants to buy it off, not resolve the core issues of this conflict.

The US is the only country with leverage over Russia and Ukraine that could be wielded to influence them into compromising as part of a grand deal, something that other potential mediators like China and Turkiye lack, yet its approach has been uneven. The US is threatening Russia with more sanctions and possibly even more military aid to Ukraine, while all that Ukraine is threatened with is the US walking away from the conflict, but it just greenlit a new missile package so that might just be a bluff.

If the US doesn’t soon correct its approach to evenly pressure Russia and Ukraine, and seeing as how no other country is capable of wielding leverage over both to influence them into compromising, then third-party mediation will have reached its limits. In that event, an escalation might be inevitable, either due to Russia initiating it through the potential expansion of its ground campaign into new regions and/or the US defiantly doubling down in support of Ukraine if Trump blames Putin for the peace talks’ collapse.

Putin hasn’t signaled that he’s willing to freeze the conflict and thus tacitly drop all his other demands, which could also create space for the Europeans to possibly deploy uniformed troops to Ukraine during an unconditional ceasefire, so he’s bound to get on Trump’s bad side unless something changes. If Trump “escalates to de-escalate” on these terms, then he risks a hot war with Russia, while walking away could make him responsible for one of the West’s worst geopolitical defeats if Russia then steamrolls Ukraine.

Trump is about to be placed into this dilemma due to his unwillingness or inability to coerce Ukraine into Russia’s demanded concessions. It would be better for him to make a clean break from this conflict in that case than to escalate US involvement, but the minerals deal and subsequent weapons packages suggest that he’s more likely to double down. He’d then ruin his desired legacy as a peacemaker, however, and undermine his planned “Pivot (back) to Asia” for more muscularly containing China.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/third-pa ... een-russia

******

Putin Proposes Direct Talks With Ukraine, Zelensky Says Ceasefire Must Happen First
May 12, 2025
By Dave DeCamp, Antiwar.com, 5/11/25

On Sunday, Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed starting direct peace talks with Ukraine without preconditions in Turkey this Thursday.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky initially responded by saying there must be a ceasefire before talks could be held. He later said that he was willing to meet with Putin in Istanbul this Thursday, but made clear it would still be conditional on a ceasefire.

“We await a full and lasting ceasefire, starting from tomorrow, to provide the necessary basis for diplomacy. There is no point in prolonging the killings,” Zelesnky wrote on X. “And I will be waiting for Putin in Türkiye on Thursday. Personally. I hope that this time the Russians will not look for excuses.”

In his announcement proposing the talks, Putin said that Ukraine had rejected previous Russian ceasefire offers, including the three-day truce he declared for Russian Victory Day, which ended at midnight on May 11. Throughout the three days, both sides accused the other of violating the ceasefire.

“I will repeat: we have proposed steps towards a ceasefire on many occasions. We have never refused to engage in dialogue with the Ukrainian side,” Putin said.

President Trump said that he wanted Ukraine to accept Putin’s offer for direct talks without a ceasefire. “President Putin of Russia doesn’t want to have a Cease Fire Agreement with Ukraine, but rather wants to meet on Thursday, in Turkey, to negotiate a possible end to the BLOODBATH. Ukraine should agree to this, IMMEDIATELY,” he wrote on Truth Social.

“At least they will be able to determine whether or not a deal is possible, and if it is not, European leaders, and the U.S., will know where everything stands, and can proceed accordingly!” he added.

Despite Trump’s post, Zelensky said he expects a ceasefire to begin on Monday. “Starting tomorrow, we await a ceasefire — this proposal is on the table. A full and unconditional ceasefire, one that lasts long enough to provide a necessary foundation for diplomacy, could significantly bring peace closer,” he said.

European leaders have been threatening to increase sanctions on Russia and ramp up military aid to Ukraine if Moscow doesn’t agree to a 30-day ceasefire, and reportedly have the Trump administration’s support to do so.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/05/put ... pen-first/

******

Life in exchange for rolls
May 13, 16:59

Image

Sign up for meat in the Armed Forces of Ukraine to get 2857 sets of Philadelphia rolls. So to speak, they are looking for surviving Darwin Award winners.

Meanwhile, Putin reported today that 50-60 thousand people are recruited voluntarily for a contract in Russia every month.
According to Putin, in Ukraine, man-catchers forcibly mobilize about 30 thousand people per month.

This, of course, also affects the situation on the front line and the ardent desire to get a 30-day respite.
ISW gave birth to the same topic today.

Zelensky's demand for a 30-day ceasefire is caused by the colossal losses of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in personnel.

If it were not for the situation on the front line and the pressure from the Trump administration, which is conducting separate negotiations with Russia, then of course no ceasefire in Ukraine would even be discussed.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9836042.html

Prohibition on division of income of a participant of the SVO
May 13, 21:02

Image

The State Duma is actually going to introduce a ban on the division of property of SVO participants after a whole series of scandals with fictitious marriages, where the "wife" pursued the goal of cheating the SVO participant or receiving "funeral payments".

The need for such a ban was discussed back in 2023. By 2025, it will be more difficult for scammers to claim the division of the soldiers' property. But of course, some individuals will not give up this dirty business.

Well, here are a few stories for example.

A resident of the Tver region fictitiously married his daughter to a participant in the SVO in order to subsequently receive a payment for his death.
In the city of Udomlya, FSB and Rosgvardia officers detained local businessman Sergei Dmitrienko for attempted fraud with a payment from the Ministry of Defense.

The man is suspected of fictitiously marrying his daughter to a military man so that she could later receive 13 million rubles from the state, due to a widow in the event of the death of a soldier. And before that, the entrepreneur himself convinced a lonely man, who is 30 years older than his bride, to go to the front.

When the fraudster's plans failed, he offered a law enforcement officer a bribe of 2 million rubles. The man was detained while handing over the money.

Now two criminal cases have been opened against Dmitrienko - for attempted fraud with social payments and for bribery.


https://www.ntv.ru/novosti/2862993/ - zinc

* * *

In Krasnodar Krai, the ex-wife of a special military operation (SVO) fighter in Ukraine appropriated "funeral" payments transferred to children. This was reported by the prosecutor's office of the Russian region.

Several years have passed since the spouses divorced, however, according to the department, upon learning of the death of her ex-husband at the front, the Russian woman applied for payments.

The money was supposed to go to the serviceman's children, so the woman told the guardianship authorities that the funds would be used to buy housing for them.

Having received more than 3.3 million rubles, the Russian woman spent them on her own needs and paid. She was charged with fraud on an especially large scale. The case was sent to court.

Earlier in Crimea, a mother deprived of parental rights left the daughter of a SVO fighter without payments. She withdrew 2 million 236 thousand rubles from her account and spent it on buying real estate for one of her relatives.


https://lenta.ru/news/2025/04/29/rossiy ... 3392773445 - zinc

* * *

In Primorsky Krai, a married couple was suspected of fraud in receiving a cash payment for a deceased participant in a special military operation in Ukraine. The spouses were detained. According to investigators, they came up with an entire fraudulent scheme to receive "funeral money." The suspects convinced an acquaintance to marry a pensioner and sign a contract with the Ministry of Defense. After his death, they appropriated the funds transferred to the account of the soldier's widow.

https://dzen.ru/a/Zh1W7mFMFXq3l5gd?yscl ... 8127909200 - zinc

* * *

In February 2023, Pavel left for a special operation zone as part of the special forces. A month before leaving, he married the mother of his child and also issued a general power of attorney for the property to his wife.

- However, when he returned home in June in serious condition after a serious injury, the soldier discovered empty bank accounts and a sold apartment, bought out of wedlock, - the Telegram channel reported.

Also, according to the channel, his wife filed for divorce and does not allow Pavel to see their child. In addition, with her new partner, the woman is trying to evict the SVO member from their shared dacha.

As reported by the press service of the Investigative Committee of Russia, the head of the Investigative Committee of Russia Alexander Bastrykin instructed to report to him on the results of the investigation into the incident


https://59.ru/text/incidents/2024/09/22/74112182/ - zinc

And there is much more like this.
Such bad people should be rolled up to the fullest and deprived of parental rights.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9836763.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 15, 2025 11:46 am

Resumption of direct diplomacy?
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 05/15/2025

Image

When Vladimir Putin offered last Saturday night—without suspending the numerous meetings and encounters with heads of state and government of the countries who had visited Moscow for Victory Day—the start of negotiations in Turkey, his words had clear implications. The mention of the work carried out in Istanbul in 2022 cleared up any doubts about both the location and the type of representation he proposed and the objectives he would pursue. As academics Sergey Radchenko and Samuel Charap wrote in Foreign Policy last year after having access to the working documents of those negotiations, the foundations laid then, when things went further than was publicly disclosed, could be a good starting point when Russia and Ukraine resume diplomatic relations. This is precisely what the Russian president offered in his speech, at no point implying that the negotiations would take place in the form of a presidential meeting and assuming they would take place in Istanbul. With his ability to shape his discourse and prevent reality from hindering his plans, the Ukrainian president has managed to transform the offer to revive the Istanbul format to continue the work that was interrupted there—the obvious offer reflected in Vladimir Putin's words—into a face-to-face meeting between the two presidents in Ankara. "If he's not coming, it's because he's not seeking a political victory," Zelensky stated, continuing to pressure his Russian counterpart in an interview. Putin will not be in Turkey, where he is sending a technical delegation led by Vladimir Medinsky, another sign of continuity, as the former Russian Minister of Culture led the Russian team in Istanbul in 2022 and believed he had reached an agreement with his Ukrainian counterpart, David Arajamia.

In it, Volodymyr Zelensky, relatively certain that the Russian president would not respond to the call from the leader of the country most in need of negotiations and a ceasefire to halt the loss of territory and soldiers, made his objectives clear. Zelensky was not only seeking a political victory in which to boast of having forced Vladimir Putin to attend a meeting that should have been political, but also technical, and that did not correspond to heads of state but to delegations who, as in Istanbul, are capable of studying step by step each point of the different aspects of the war, but rather much more tangible and important objectives for the situation on the front line. Insisting that not attending would be "a total defeat" for Vladimir Putin, the Ukrainian president stated, according to the French press yesterday, that "If I meet with him, we have to come out of this with a political victory: a ceasefire, an all-for-all prisoner exchange, or something similar."

In addition to the various statements by leaders seeking to force Vladimir Putin to attend a meeting where there is little chance of achieving a constructive outcome, or the words of those using such pressure to prepare the ground for the claim that Russia does not want peace and fears confronting Ukraine head-on, two important pieces of news emerged yesterday. First, completely overshadowed by self-serving speculation about whether Vladimir Putin would appear in Turkey, news of the significant advance of Russian troops in the center of Chasov Yar was announced. With this, after more than a year of fighting, Russia begins the process of breaking through to Konstantinovka, the last urban barrier before the Kramatorsk-Slavyansk conurbation.

On the other hand, the European Union announced its seventeenth package of sanctions against the Russian Federation, a step useful only for propaganda purposes, but one that European countries want to accompany with tougher sanctions if the Kremlin does not act as ordered by Paris, London, or Kiev. To achieve this, they need the participation of the United States, which does not rule out, as Donald Trump stated again yesterday, "imposing secondary sanctions." To this end, they already have the work done by one of the most fanatical senators, Lindsey Graham, who claims to have the support of around 70 senators to impose severe economic measures against any country that trades with Russia. Considering that this would involve sanctioning China or India, Graham's threat may prove as effective as his mineral discoveries. Graham was the senator who discovered trillions of dollars worth of minerals in Afghanistan that the United States never found, something similar to what may happen in the future with the large reserves of rare earths in Ukraine that have never been proven.

In this hyperbolic discourse of threats and equally exaggerated expectations, the US president has not stopped at warnings. "I don't know if he'll go if I'm not there," he said yesterday regarding the possibility of traveling to Turkey today to arrange a meeting between Putin and Zelensky. On a tour of the Middle East, after receiving a huge personal gift in the form of a luxury plane from the emirate of Qatar and praising the past of Jolani, a former member of al-Qaeda in Syria, Donald Trump has several meetings scheduled today in the United Arab Emirates, apparently an ally he was willing to stand up to—unlike his team, who admitted that the change of agenda would be logistical chaos—to get the photo op he has long desired and boast of having achieved what no one has managed since 2019.

It was then, at the Normandy Format summit in Paris, that Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky met for the last and only time. Even then, the Ukrainian president's objective, in which Russia still relied to reach an agreement to resolve the war in Donbas, had a clear political agenda that he imposed thanks to his interlocutors, Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron. In return for vague public promises to implement the Minsk agreements—and the private announcement to his allies that Ukraine had no intention of doing so—Zelensky obtained from Russia the extension of the gas transit agreement, then a significant source of income for Ukrainian coffers, and a large prisoner exchange. For three years, the war in Donbas remained stable, without a complete ceasefire, with Ukraine taking advantage of the agreements and reneging on the parts it disliked, and with no prospect of progress. The parallels with that situation are striking. Ukraine continues to rely on the strength of its allies to pressure Russia, from which it no longer seeks a trade agreement, but rather the other conditions it sought at the time. Even then, Zelensky, pressured in his first months by the nationalist far right, which feared a compromise with Russia, needed a political victory that, in the current case, would have clear military implications. It is Ukraine, not Russia, that needs a pause to avoid further territorial losses and that is struggling to recruit soldiers to replace the lost soldiers. It is well known that the number of prisoners of war in Russian hands is significantly higher than the number of Russian soldiers held captive in Ukraine, so the all-for-all exchange that Zelensky sought in 2019 and is seeking now would represent a significant concession for Moscow. Communication—direct or indirect—between the two countries has never completely broken down, and, as evidenced by the continuation of the prisoner exchange processes, this has been the area where agreements have most easily emerged since 2014. In this case too, a commitment in this direction would be the most likely outcome of an initial diplomatic contact.

Neither the threats of sanctions, nor the cross-statements, nor the uncertainty until last night about who would represent Russia and whether the Ukrainian delegation would agree to meet with the Russian delegation have dissuaded Donald Trump from his optimism. Hours after warning of the possibility of new sanctions, the US president announced yesterday that good news could come between yesterday, today, or tomorrow. However, there is no indication that, even if a bilateral meeting between presidents or a trilateral meeting with the US leader had taken place, any progress worthy of praise would be possible even before it happens. The high expectations of Donald Trump, who seems to continue to believe that this war can be resolved in a meeting, in 24 hours, or simply by looking Putin and Zelensky in the face and ordering a ceasefire, may be useful to whichever side manages to convince him that he is not an obstacle to peace. Trump's pendulum has swung, depending on the moment, from blaming Zelensky to blaming Putin, and the attitude of both countries toward this semblance of negotiations could be decisive for his actions in the short or very short term. Given his rapid changes of opinion, his limited understanding of the conflict, and the malleability of his opinions, there is never a guarantee that the words the US president utters one day will continue to be his policy in a few days or even hours.

His advisors have shown more consistency, among whom the two men, Keith Kellogg and Steve Witkoff, assigned to serve as interlocutors with Ukraine and Russia respectively, stand out. “The president has issued an ultimatum to both sides: if there are no direct talks, and if they don't happen quickly, he believes the United States should withdraw from this conflict, whatever that means, and not get involved,” Witkoff declared in an interview published by a far-right outlet aligned with Trump. Witkoff, who has been criticized for his effusiveness in referring to his numerous meetings with Vladimir Putin, insisted that Washington wants to “mediate this” to help end the war through a ceasefire that would allow “the main problems to be addressed.” Confident of being able to achieve this, Witkoff mentioned the aspects he considers most complicated: “the territories, the nuclear power plant, the way the Ukrainians can use the Dnieper River and access the sea.” It's hard to believe that at this point, US representatives fail to understand that the priority for both countries is not territory but security, and that neither Witkoff nor Kellogg are aware that the conditions they are proposing are unacceptable to Russia, which would have to cross one of its main red lines: the possibility of the presence of NATO troops on its border with Ukraine, one of the main causes of the war.

“There are things that I don't think will be difficult to resolve if we bring the parties together at the table, if they talk to each other, if we narrow down the issues between them, and then come up with compromises and creative solutions to address each of their concerns. If we achieve that physically—and I think, hopefully, we'll have some good news soon—but if we achieve that physically, we have, in my opinion, a very good chance of ending this conflict,” Witkoff added. His words are echoed by those of Keith Kellogg, the most pro-Ukrainian of Donald Trump's foreign policy team members, who has embraced virtually all of Ukraine's current security postulates. The general has insisted that a ceasefire is necessary prior to any negotiations and presents as official the Ukrainian idea of ​​a 30-kilometer buffer zone —15 kilometers on each side of the front—a "third force" in between, and European troops west of the Dnieper. Kellogg has even taken the liberty of adding the presence of Polish troops—a possibility flatly denied yesterday by Radek Sikorski representing Poland, who prefers to watch from the sidelines—to the French, British, and German troops, countries that have indeed expressed interest in putting boots on the ground in Ukraine, albeit at a prudent distance from the front lines.

Although it's possible that Russia will sooner rather than later agree to the prisoner exchange Zelensky is demanding—the Minsk precedent shows that an all-for-all is not possible due to the manipulation of lists and conflicting interests—and the Kremlin could even be pressured to accept a ceasefire, perhaps solely so as not to be portrayed as an obstacle to peace, it's difficult to imagine that the security scenario Kellogg paints is viable for Moscow. Russia, which insists that negotiations must address the causes of the war—that is, the issue of security and NATO's expansion to its borders—aims to avoid this Western military presence, not to approve it and perpetuate it. For the moment, neither incentives nor threats are sufficient to force Russia to cross that red line.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/15/32207/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's telegram account:

Colonelcassad
The JAGUAR ship with a Russian crew attacked by the Estonian military has arrived in Primorsk. The Estonian Navy, together with NATO aircraft, attempted to seize the ship in neutral waters on the eve of the negotiations between Russia and Ukraine
. Despite the threats, the sailors continued moving.

There were also reports that a Su-35 fighter jet (VKS) of the Russian Federation was used to protect the tanker heading to the Russian port from the ships of the Estonian Navy

. The ship is currently moored near the port of Primorsk. There are citizens of Russia, India and Myanmar on board the ship.
(Damn chihuahuas...)

***

The Kharkov OTG stated that the Russian Armed Forces have already effectively launched the summer offensive of 2025. Thus, the summer campaign has begun.

In recent days, the Russian Armed Forces have noticeably increased pressure on a number of sections of the front, which immediately led to a whole series of tactical results, which, if the current pace of operations is maintained, could lead to the transformation of tactical results into operational ones as early as June.

That is why the enemy needs a 30-day ceasefire to slow down this pace.

***

Colonelcassad
1. The talks in Istanbul will start after lunch. The delegation from Ukraine hasn't even arrived yet, although ours have been waiting for them since the morning, as promised.

2. Zelensky wants to somehow justify his presence in Turkey and is going to hold talks with Erdogan. It looks pretty pathetic.

3. Trump said he doesn't expect Putin to come to Turkey because Trump himself won't come to Turkey. A transparent hint that Putin is only interested in talking to Trump, and doesn't really care about Zelensky. Trump doesn't rule out that he might come to Turkey tomorrow.

4. Representatives of the "cocaine coalition" from France and Britain rushed to Istanbul to advise the Ukrainian delegation on how to properly disrupt talks with Russia.

5. The media's rumours that Ukraine wants to discuss only a 30-day ceasefire are, of course, aimed at realising the goals of the "cocaine coalition", since Russia came to discuss completely different things within the framework of the negotiations in Istanbul 1.0, which were effectively interrupted 3 years ago.

In general, we are waiting, now there will be many diplomatic moves and even more various information foam.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

HOW MANY ANGELS CAN DANCE ON A PIN – TOMORROW’S ISTANBUL TALKS IN PODCAST NOW

Image

By John Helmer @bears_with

In his 48-minute speech in Riyadh, President Donald Trump was applauded many times for rewriting the past of US wars in the Middle East, and also the future of US wars in the region, and elsewhere. From the Arab point of view, the outcome of these wars has been the destruction of Arab national ideology by Jewish national ideology, and independently, the success of Arab oil money.

All that remains of the former is the Yemen resistance of Ansar Allah and the Houthis. “We had 52 days of thunder and lightning like they’ve never seen before,” Trump claimed. “This was a swift, ferocious, decisive and extremely successful use of military force…” And Iran: “The biggest and most destructive of these forces is the regime in Iran, which has caused unthinkable suffering in Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq, Yemen and beyond. There could be no sharper contrast with the path you have pursued on the Arabian Peninsula, than the disaster unfolding right across in the Gulf of Iran.” “if Iran’s leadership rejects this olive branch and continues to attack their neighbors,” Trump proposed “o inflict massive maximum pressure, drive Iranian oil exports to zero, like I did before.”

For the past of the war against Russia, Trump repeated the falsehood that “[US withdrawal from Kabul, August 30, 2021] is probably why Putin decided to go into Ukraine, something he never would have done if I were president.”

For the future, Trump said he was sending his men to Istanbul – Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Keith Kellogg, Steven Witkoff. “Talks are being held in Turkey later this week, probably on Thursday and they could produce some pretty good results. Our people are going to be going there, Marco’s going to be going there. Others are going to be going, and we’ll see if we can get it done.” Trump’s earlier hint that he might go himself has been removed.

Enroute to Qatar, about noon on Wednesday, Moscow time, Trump was asked if he would meet President Vladimir Putin in Turkey; he replied that he might and that he might not. “[Putin] would like me to be there and that’s a possibility if we could end the war I’d be thinking about it. So we have a very full situation now, that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t do it to save a lot of lives and come back. But, uh, yeah, I think they’re thinking about something. I don’t know that he would be there if I’m not there.”

Trump has arranged for Zelensky to meet Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and wait in Ankara for Trump to appear. Zelensky has already said he has agreed with Erdogan, Trump and the European allies on the formula – “full and unconditional ceasefire” first, negotiations to follow. Zelensky’s ultimatum is that he will go to Istanbul with Trump if Putin comes — “Putin is the one who determines everything in Russia, so he is the one who has to resolve the war. This is his war. Therefore, the negotiations should be with him.”

Responding to Zelensky’s challenge, Peskov said: ““We respond only to Putin’s statements.” Russian officials do not refer to Zelensky by a title because his current rule by martial law is not recognized, and because new elections to replace him are a Russian condition for denazification of the Ukraine. New elections are also on the Russian term sheet sent to Trump for tabling in Istanbul.

“We remember the 2019 summit in Paris,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Maria Zakharova has posted, referring to the last and only meeting Putin has had with Zelensky, “for Vladimir Zelensky’s provocative negotiating tactic when he suddenly refused to approve the outcome document despite the fact that it was already drafted and coordinated by the parties involved, including Kiev. He asked to remove the provision on the separation of forces along the entire line of contact and insisted on replacing it with a provision which provided for the separation of forces in three sections only. However, he failed to deliver even on these commitments which he had articulated himself… Today, these same countries are pushing [Zelensky] for a 30-day truce to give Kiev a respite and enable it to restore its military capabilities to be able to continue confronting Russia.”

Until hours ago, the Russian lineup in Istanbul appeared to be the same as with Rubio, Witkoff, and the now sacked Michael Waltz in Riyadh in February – Sergei Lavrov, Yury Ushakov, Kirill Dmitriev. Lavrov may have conveyed this in a telephone call with his Turkish counterpart on Tuesday night. On Wednesday afternoon, however, Lavrov was reported by Kommersant as not participating in Istanbul.

Since then Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov cautioned: “The Americans are well aware of our position. We remain in contact. However, this is not the word [coordination] to use in this particular case,” After meeting with the Turkish ambassador in Moscow on Monday, Ryabkov told Tass: “The topics are the same that we have talked about repeatedly, which has been on the agenda lately.: how can we ensure a reliable, sustainable settlement of the situation, first of all addressing the primary sources of this conflict, resolving issues related to the denazification of the Kiev regime, ensuring recognition of the realities that have recently developed on earth, including the entry of new territories into the Russian Federation.”

Click on the podcast here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY_pZu_anJU

Image
President’s speech in Riyadh on May 13: video, transcript. “Ever since President Franklin Roosevelt met with King Salman’s father, King Abdul Aziz, aboard the USS Quincy in 1945, the US-Saudi relationship has been a bedrock of security and prosperity. Today, we reaffirm this important bond and we take the next steps to make our relationship closer, stronger and more powerful than ever before.”


Left: King Abdulaziz meets President Roosevelt on February 14, 1945, at the Great Bitter Lake entrance to the Suez Canal. Roosevelt had met in Yalta with Joseph Stalin and Winston Churchill from February 4 to 11. Roosevelt was seriously ill; he died on April 12, 1945. Film footage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpXdO_KfqqE
The present Saudi king was Abdulaziz’s 25th son; he was 9 years old when the Roosvelt meeting took place and is not visible in the Saudi delegation which included two of his older brothers.
Right: for the story of the plotting behind the scenes, read the book, Ch.3.

For background on the current ceasefire between India and Pakistan, and the damage which the combination of Indian and Russian military capabilities have done to China’s future positioning in the war with the US, view this discussion by a group of Indian generals.

Image
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVjMA2QMiF4

Listen carefully – if the ceasefire dynamics which have been achieved, and India has emerged with escalation control, what is the lesson to be learned in Moscow and in Washington for the war in the Ukraine?

https://johnhelmer.net/wp-content/webpc ... &nocache=1

********

Ukraine and the 80th Anniversary Commemorations of the Defeat of Nazi Germany
Posted by Internationalist 360° on May 13, 2025
Dmitri Kovalevich

Image
According to the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, this European coalition assembling in Lviv is reminiscent of Hitler’s coalition during World War II.

Dmitri Kovalevich examines how post-2014 Ukraine has transformed Victory Day commemorations into clandestine acts, reflecting a broader state-sanctioned revisionism that glorifies Nazi collaborators and suppresses anti-fascist memory.


Until 12 years ago, the Day of Victory over Nazi Germany was an annual, national holiday in Ukraine taking place on May 9. Mass rallies were typically held in all the cities of the country. These would include soldiers of the Ukrainian armed forces carrying red flags symbolizing the victory, together with Ukrainian national flags.

For the majority of Ukrainian people, May 9 has always been a day of remembrance of the millions of Ukrainians who fought in the Soviet Red Army or in anti-fascist, guerilla units. Millions of Ukrainian soldiers and civilians died at the hands of the Nazi invaders. But a much smaller number of Ukrainians chose collaboration with the invaders and fought on the side of Hitler’s coalition and its collaborators. Despite the historical record, the governing administration in power in Kiev, since the 2014 coup, has made the ideology of Nazi collaboration into its state ideology, a tool to be used in promoting Western hegemony over the world.

From 1941 to 1944, workers and farmers in Ukraine were routinely rounded up en masse by the Nazis and local collaborators from villages and settlements, and sent like cattle to work in Germany. There, they were called Ostarbeiters (‘eastern workers’). At the time, German Nazi imperialism was experiencing an acute shortage of laborers.[1]

The foundation ‘Remembrance, Responsibility, and Future’ was created in 2000 by the government of the then-Federal Republic of Germany to compensate victims of Nazism. It was partly funded by German industry. By 2007, it had paid out 4.37 billion euros to 1.6 billion survivors and heirs in more than 100 countries. Payments in Ukraine alone were made to 471,000 survivors and their heirs, totaling 867 million euros.

Suppression of wartime commemorations in today’s Ukraine

Every year since 2014, in Ukraine cities on or around May 9, officers of the SBU (Ukraine’s national police) equipped with video cameras take up ‘duty’ at wartime cemeteries, recording and harassing those who attend in commemoration. Typically, ‘reserve’ gangs of neo-Nazi thugs are nearby, ready to deliver a threatening or violent ‘message’ that such commemorations are not accepted or welcomed in coup Ukraine.

As a result, for their own safety, many people commemorate on May 9 at wartime cemeteries in remote locations in villages or the countryside. Thus have commemorations of the victory over Nazi Germany been turned into clandestine events, as potentially dangerous today as is attendance at services of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.[2]

Even after the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991, it was hard to imagine that Ukrainian state policy towards the Nazi occupation years could be reversed and millions of Ukrainian citizens would be accused of being ‘Bolshevik occupiers’ of their own country. Nationalist repression and violence have marked the years since 2014. Only small groups of elderly and determined adults and children dare to visit on May 9 the mass graves of the fallen soldiers of Soviet Ukraine.44444

The 2014 coup in Kiev is termed a ‘revolution of dignity’ by the far-right ideologues of coup Ukraine. Before 2014, radical nationalists holding revanchist ideas and a desire to avenge ‘their’ defeat in 1945 were small and marginal. But they were successful in using violence in 2013/14 to impose a new, authoritarian administration in power in Kiev, with the assistance of Western governments and media, and are now beholden to them.

Liberal politicians and media in the West have long turned a blind eye to the far-right forces in Ukraine and the violence they employ against anyone or anything deemed ‘Russian’ or favorable to the record of Soviet Ukraine. Most particularly, this media outright denies the growing power and influence of the far right and neo-Nazi political movements and paramilitary brigades.

The first symbols to be attacked following the 2014 coup were monuments and memorial sites associated with the October Revolution of 1917, its principal leader Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, and other Russian revolutionaries, and the Ukrainian revolutionaries of the day. The next to be attacked and dismantled were monuments to anti-fascists, Red Army soldiers, and victims of Nazi terror. This repeated earlier patterns in other, former Soviet republics in eastern Europe, for example, in neighboring Poland.

Currently in western Ukraine, bodies at the gravesites of those who fell in the fight against Nazism are being exhumed from cemeteries and re-buried in less prominent locations. These are acts of pure hatred and revenge.

It is no coincidence that in the city of Lviv in western Ukraine, on Victory Day, May 9, 2025, Ukrainian authorities, together with the Council of Europe and dozens of EU foreign ministers, signed an agreement on the creation of a special tribunal to investigate ‘Russia’s aggression against Ukraine’. The Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (FIS) has noted that this European coalition assembling in Lviv is reminiscent of Hitler’s coalition during World War II, which included the governments of Italy, Romania, Hungary, Finland and Slovakia (not forgetting Japan and not to speak of the ‘appeasement governments’ which ruled in France, Denmark and Holland during German occupation).

The FIS statement said, “The circle of European countries invited to Kiev on May 9 almost completely corresponds to the configuration of Hitler’s coalition, which fought against the USSR and included foreign fighters from the ranks of the Nazi Wehrmacht (armed forces) and SS units.” Commentators in Russia and in Ukraine are reacting to this gathering in Kiev by calling it, variously, a ‘public relations campaign by scoundrels in Brussels’, a ‘day of the losers’, or a ‘day of Nazi descendants’.

Continued threats and provocations against Russia

On the eve of Victory Day, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (whose electoral mandate, such as it was, expired 13 months ago) provoked Moscow with threats of drone strikes to take place against the grand parade on Red Square on May 9, with many world leaders in attendance. He and his administration are very much afraid of being abandoned to deal with Russia on their own. That is why they have rejected Russia’s unilateral, three-day truce declared for May 7, 8, and 9, to coincide with Victory Day.

Zelensky declared on May 3, “There are signals coming out of Europe that should a ceasefire be agreed, some countries will want to leave us to face Russia on our own. These are such signals being made, but Europe, I’m sure, will still be there for us.”

The record-breaking number of drone attacks by Kiev against Moscow on May 6 are part of attempts to disrupt Victory Day commemorations in Moscow. (Commemorations and marches are taking place all across the Russian Federation on May 9.) The Russian Defense Ministry announced that 524 drones were shot down on May 6 and did not cause any particular damage. But the attack disrupted dozens of incoming flights to Moscow carrying guests and spectators for the parade and other events in the city on May 9. The Ukrainian military specifically wrote the message ‘Happy 9th of May, Vladimir’ on their kamikaze drones, demonstrating the importance to them of symbolically spoiling the day, in retaliation against the heirs of the victors and others who commemorate the enormous occasion.

Neo-Nazi ideology is moving into the West’s political mainstream

Since the 1960s, Western imperialist countries have been redefining the term ‘Nazism’ itself, glossing over the historical reasons for its emergence and reducing its significance by dismissing it as the ideas of some sick maniacs opposing the ‘free world’. Recall that many Nazis and Nazi-collaborators were welcomed into Great Britain, the United States and other ‘Allied’ powers after 1945 as ‘fighters for the free world’. Escaped Nazis from Ukraine, Russia and the Baltic states were rehabilitated in the West, by design or by negligence. Many of them were subsequently drafted into bloody wars by Western imperialism against liberation movements in Algeria, Vietnam, and elsewhere.

In the former Soviet Union, by contrast, Nazism is an outlawed ideology and treated as a scourge. Political analysts in the Soviet states always described fascism in Marxist terms: as a reaction by big, Western capital to the rise of working-class struggles, liberation movements, and socialist revolutions around the world.

Western ideologues believe that the whole world should adapt their terms and concepts. These should coincide exclusively with Western outlooks. Hence the discrepancies according to which the people of Russia (and most of the world) see the disturbing manifestations of neo-Nazism in Ukraine and condemn it, while the West sees and protests nothing.

The central idea of European fascism and Nazism during the dark decade leading up to World War 2 was that of racial superiority of white Europeans over ‘inferior’, darker skinned peoples. Such peoples should be conquered and ruled over. The idea of racial superiority was actually borrowed from British colonizers, whose dirty work of colonizing peoples already dated back several centuries.

In the governing and leading military circles of modern Ukraine, an ideology of ‘European superiority’ prevails and is expressed by the idea that the western part of Ukraine, heavily agricultural, should control and dominate the proletarian and industrialized part of the country in the east. Modern Ukrainian nationalists speak of a racial superiority of Ukraine as a whole over the ‘Asian hordes’ located in Russia to the east.

This was a core set of beliefs behind the civil conflict launched in the Donbass region in April 2014 by the new coup in Kiev. The decade-old-and-counting civil conflict still being waged by Kiev is the origin of the Russian military intervention in February 2022, which aims to bring peace. The intervention soon became a large-scale war as the Western powers redoubled their supply of money and weapons to Kiev.

The attempted suppression by Kiev and the West of the anti-coup rebellion in Donbass (today a constituent of the Russian Federation in the form of the ‘peoples republics’ of Lugansk and Donetsk) risks degenerating further and sparking a new world war as the Western powers strive to maintain their privileges and domination of the countries and peoples of the Global South and the Euro-Asia land mass.

It is not by chance that on the anniversary in 2025 of victory over Nazi Germany and the ideologies of racial superiority, we see the contours emerging of a new, multipolar world. Gathered in Moscow at the Victory Day parade were the leaders of China, Serbia, Egypt, Turkmenistan, Brazil, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Cuba, Mongolia, Burkina Faso, Congo, Ethiopia, Palestine and Vietnam. Parade groups from 13 countries, in addition to Russia, marched through Red Square: Azerbaijan, Vietnam, Belarus, Egypt, Kazakhstan, China, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Mongolia, Myanmar, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan.

The first Victory Day Parade took place in Moscow in 1945. Flags of the defeated fascist powers were symbolically deposited onto a special platform at the foot of Lenin’s mausoleum. (See a one-minute historical film of this here.) The flags were later distributed to museums throughout the Soviet Union, while the platform and the gloves used to handle the flags were burned.

In time, Ukraine will join the list of countries honoring Victory Day. The Nazification of Ukrainian society that has taken place during the past 11 years and the current conflict, now in its fourth year, have deeply traumatized the country. But with hard work and good fortune, the trauma may be healed and the country may be reborn.

Explanatory notes:

[1] This 2024 report, published in 2024, recounts the experiences of many of the ostarbeiters. The report explains, “During the Second World War, approximately 13.5 million men, women, and children from 26 European countries worked on the territory of Nazi Germany, its allies, and Nazi-occupied territories. Of those, over 4.5 million were prisoners of war, while 8.5 million were civilians and concentration camp prisoners.”

[2] The Ukrainian Orthodox Church is being persecuted and silenced by Ukrainian authorities and pro-Western nationalists due to its historical ties to the Russian Orthodox Church. A rival ‘Orthodox Church of Ukraine’ was established in 2018 and is promoted by Kiev to supplant the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2025/05/ ... i-germany/

******

‘Judging Freedom,’ 14 May edition: EU Nonsense on Ukraine!



We are all in waiting mode, expecting news on whether Trump is indeed going to be in Istanbul for peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war. The latest word from the White House is that he may be there. In that case, and only in that case, Vladimir Putin will also come to Istanbul. Zelensky has already said he will be in Istanbul regardless of who will be present from the other side.

In the meantime, my reading of the situation as I explained in this chat with Judge Napolitano is that Trump’s unconventional approach to mediation gives us no confidence of success. He is sending to the talks his two envoys who hold directly contradictory positions on the preferred outcome: Steve Witkoff, who is favorable to the Russians’ solution and General Kellogg, who is promoting the joint Ukrainian/European solution. How this can be resolved is utterly unclear. But why should it be clear given the fundamental illogic of the entire situation: namely that a co-belligerent aligned with Ukraine over the past three years, the USA, steps forward as a mediator or facilitator of peace.

As I say in the interview, the odd, even bizarre Trump approach to these negotiations cannot be laid at the door of his ‘business’ approach, since no corporate top executive would ever create the confusion that Trump seems to think essential to solving thorny problems. This at best is the behavior of an eccentric entrepreneur, for which I raise Elon Musk as another example, matching Trump.

Somehow the Trump magic seems to have worked in achieving a cease-fire between India and Pakistan, a situation where the USA is also most closely aligned with one side in the conflict, India.

Of course, other topics also were dealt with in this chat, including the general feeling of prosperity in Russia, the inflation that is resulting from more cash to spend in everyone’s wallet, the very large monthly enlistments of soldiers to fight in the Special Military Operation and much, much more.

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2025/05/14/ ... n-ukraine/

'Eccentric' is often a euphemism for mentally ill.

******

A new false tribunal is in the making

Stephen Karganovic

May 14, 2025

The Ukraine Tribunal makes no secret of the fundamental task assigned to it, and in fact it flaunts it.

Kaja Kallas’ delusional and laughably ill-timed announcement, made the day after Russia’s 9 May Victory Day triumph in Moscow, that European puppet leaders are planning to establish a “special tribunal” within the framework of the Council of Europe to judge Russia for “aggression” and other alleged crimes in Ukraine jogs some memories from the Hague. ICTY, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, is located there, as the new Tribunal Kallas has mentioned will also be. This writer had spent some of the most interesting years of his life there.

An enduring memory is former Serbian and Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, who was abducted by the vassal regime installed in his country after the October 2000 colour revolution and sent to the Hague to be put on trial. During his initial appearance in the courtroom, addressing the judges and Prosecutor Carla del Ponte, Milosevic referred to the court as a “false tribunal.”

That phrase stuck in my mind. Milosevic’s English was adequate, but it was not flawless. Hence the picturesque turn of phrase he used. Had he been more fluent in idiomatic English he would have called it a “phony” or “bogus” tribunal. Instead he translated what he meant to say directly from his native Serbian with a result that was more amusing than academically precise. But no harm was done. In fact, under the circumstances the glaringly unidiomatic locution made his profound point even stronger.

Regrettably, Kaja Kallas has not disclosed technical details about the projected Tribunal which should be made available before the credibility of this venture can be properly assessed. There are several parameters that must be established before any such “court” can be taken seriously.

The first of these is a clear definition of the new judicial body’s mandate. It is not enough merely to say that it shall deal with war crimes and crimes against humanity arising from the conflict in the Ukraine since February 2022. Whose crimes will be the subject of the court’s investigation and ultimately judgment? Kallas’ rationale behind the creation of this court raises serious issues in that regard. She refers exclusively to “Russian crimes,” a reference also echoed by EU Commission President Ursula van den Leyen and EU Rule of Law Commissioner Michael McGrath. Has no one else been observed committing crimes in Ukraine during the period under consideration, or perhaps going back a bit further, to 2014? If there are any lingering doubts concerning this matter, which directly impacts the Tribunal’s objectivity, they were settled by the clarification on the European Commission posted on its website:

“The Tribunal will have the power to investigate, prosecute and try Russian political and military leaders, who bear the greatest responsibility for the crime of aggression against Ukraine.”

The side that Kallas speaks for has called the military operations in the context of which the crimes the Tribunal is preparing to deal with are alleged to have occurred a “full scale” war. Does it appear credible, in a conflict of such broad scope, to a priori confine the commission and adjudication of crimes to only one side, and that even before the court had begun its work and any proper investigation could have taken place? Can such an approach win the trust and respect of the international community for the judicial body which engages in it? By “international community” we mean the world at large, not the relatively tiny portion of it grouped around the leading powers of the collective West. The reaction to the projected court’s proceedings of the international community in that inclusive sense of the term should be of some significance to Ukraine Tribunal’s sponsors and creators. There is a saying that “justice must not only be done, but seen to be done.” The customary judicial theatre, consisting of red robes worn by stern faced judges, no longer impresses anyone. The configuration of the world has changed and the 9 May event in Moscow was a vivid reflection of that transformation. A careless attitude to the appearance of justice would gravely undermine the new Tribunal’s capacity to accomplish its propaganda purpose and would make it stillborn. Have Kaja Kallas and her colleagues thought about that? Common sense dictates that their Tribunal should either pretend that it is judging even-handedly, or refrain from getting involved altogether.

It is unlikely that this Tribunal will follow either of the two courses of action outlined above. It cannot, because unlike the other False Tribunals in the Hague it is being set up in a manner that deliberately disregards even the simulacrum of judicial independence that could possibly fool anyone. It is the product of a treaty concluded between the European Commission and Ukraine, one of the parties in the conflict, which furthermore, at least in the initial stages of the operation, will be supplying the Tribunal with the “evidence” it will require to conduct its business. That arrangement suspiciously resembles what prevailed in the summer of 1943, when under German auspices Katyn victims were exhumed. It was Nazi German authorities that were providing field evidence of the crime to the “international commission” that was specifically set up by Goebbels to establish responsibility for the execution of captured Polish officers. The Goebbels Commission’s conclusions followed the predictable pattern.

Interestingly, the European Commission’s timeline for the formation of the Ukraine Tribunal states that the project was launched in March 2022, only a few weeks after the presumed “aggression” commenced, with a mandate to investigate “core international crimes committed in Ukraine.” It would be natural to ask how sufficient crimes of the required gravity and scope could have been committed in such short order to justify the initiation of such a complex undertaking? The answer is suggested further on in the same EC document: “Following the discoveries of atrocities committed in Bucha and other liberated areas of Ukraine, the Commission pledged to support the investigation and prosecution of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Ukraine.” Doesn’t that give the game away?

It also follows precisely the pattern originally introduced in Bosnia in the early 1990s to manufacture the rationale for establishing ICTY, the Hague Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. The Ukraine Tribunal’s antecedents, as clearly admitted in the quoted text, go back to the false flag operation organised immediately following the withdrawal of Russian forces from Bucha in March 2022. As those with an unimpaired memory will recall, the propaganda mechanism used for the establishment of ICTY was also a false flag operation. It was staged in the Vasa Miskin Street in Sarajevo in May 1992, where as in Bucha innocent people were also callously sacrificed for a “higher” political purpose.

There is another highly indicative similarity which links the two fraudulent “Tribunals.” The Ukraine Tribunal makes no secret of the fundamental task assigned to it, and in fact it flaunts it. It is to indict the Russian side before any evidence had even been considered. That obligation necessarily preordains the Tribunal’s future verdicts. During the war in Bosnia, the same geopolitical actors were acting identically. Dubious “intelligence assessments” turned up in the hands of Madeleine Albright, who promptly disseminated them at the UN in order to set the stage for ICTY. These bogus findings claimed, without a shred of evidence or any methodological justification, that 90 percent of war crimes in Bosnia were committed by the Serbs, leaving but a tiny fraction that could have been committed by others. As in the present case, then also the designated culprits were marked in advance.

It is evident already, even before the Ukraine Tribunal’s formal inauguration, which is expected to take place in 2026, that it is a faint copy of its infamous predecessor and that nothing of consequence is likely to result from it. Had it been launched earlier, whilst Ukraine mania was still at its height, perhaps it could have had an impact. Since then however, Ukraine fatigue has set in and even some of the project’s major supporters are abandoning it, making the timing for this hare brained venture terrible. It will be a poor and ineffective imitation of a very flawed and largely useless original.

But there is no purpose in telling this to coke-snorting European leaders who have lost whatever creativeness they ever had, sound judgement being an attribute that they never could boast.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... al-making/

Let’s just get on with the planned Istanbul peace talks on Thursday, whether or not Putin and Zelensky meet

Ian Proud

May 14, 2025

Zelensky should stop playing to the international press gallery in the hope that Russia cancels

As we gear up for the first direct talks between Russia and Ukraine since the failed Istanbul talks of March 2022, a complex game of brinkmanship is underway.

Not surprisingly, in my view, President Putin ignored the coalition of the willing’s ultimatum to Russia to embark on an unconditional ceasefire for thirty days or face massive new sanctions. Instead he proposed what the Americans have been pushing for since Trump assumed office, direct bilateral talks with Ukraine in Istanbul on Thursday 15 May.

I have long argued that the only route out of the war in Ukraine is through talks. Compromise was offered by both sides in the first round of Istanbul talks in March 2022. Any new negotiations will require compromise from both sides, but the difference today is that the cards are more heavily stacked in Russia’s favour than they were in 2022.

Against this backdrop, President Zelensky has called on President Putin to meet him personally in Istanbul on Thursday. From my perspective, this appears an attempt to call off talks if Putin doesn’t show up.

Usually, when Heads of State meet, officials will have hammered out the negotiation for some time before hand. The leaders can then arrive and either sign on the dotted line or tackle the most difficult issues one on one. It’s now Tuesday 13 May. There is simply no way that Russian and Ukrainian officials will have lined up the framework for a deal for both leaders to sign in Istanbul on Thursday.

Even if Putin showed up on Thursday, Zelensky isn’t going to announce unilaterally that Ukraine is giving up its NATO ambition before the full negotiations have even started. Whether you agree or not, this is self-evidently Russia’s core ‘root cause’ of the war. The new German Foreign Minister, Johann Wadephul recently repeated the line that Ukraine’s path to NATO is irreversible, even though the Trump administration disagrees.

A form of words on Ukraine’s NATO aspiration that is agreeable to both sides in the war will take time to draft. And there’s a huge list of other detailed points that have to be addressed, including the line of control, the role of military forces from other states, the return of Ukrainian children, the protection of minority languages and so on.

Every statement that Zelensky has made since the war started has emphasised the need for the west to pile more pressure on Russia to ensure ultimate victory. He would meet Putin in Istanbul without the back slapping adulation that he receives in western capitals and with no pressure cards in his back pocket.

That doesn’t mean I think a meeting shouldn’t happen, because I do. The image of both war times leaders meeting in Istanbul, however awkward and uncomfortable, could be deeply symbolic in announcing the commencement of long overdue peace talks between officials. They could agree, face to face, to maintain a ceasefire for as long as those peace talks continued.

But no leader likes to turn up to any international meeting without the preparatory ground work in place. There is deep enmity between Putin and Zelensky for obvious reasons. Given Zelensky’s penchant for publicity stunts, the Russian side would want to be absolutely sure that the choreography of any meeting and the deliverables – what they would announce, however limited – had been agreed.

Putin will know that if he does not now turn up to Istanbul that Zelensky will hit the international airwaves calling for massive sanctions. But that if he meets Zelensky and a comprehensive deal isn’t agreed there and then – a frankly impossible feat it seems to me – then the same calls for massive sanctions against Russia will be made.

Of course, Putin will also know that that Europe can’t muster new sanctions massive enough to make a difference at this late stage in the process, having exhausted most avenues since 2014. On Victory Day, Britain unilaterally announced the ‘biggest ever sanctions package’ against Russia’s so-called shadow fleet of oil tankers. The idea that unseaworthy hulks are carrying illicit Russian oil into Britain is obviously fanciful. But in any case, with the global oil price now close to the G7 oil price cap on Russian oil, the idea of a shadow fleet, delivering oil at its market rate, has fallen away. Britain’s February sanctions package against 107 persons and entities was labelled the largest sanctions package since 2022. Let’s be clear, the biggest sanctions package against Russia was imposed in February 2022, and everything since that time has offered diminishing marginal returns.

But that’s not really the point. By trying to force a showdown in Istanbul, Zelensky may want to continue to paint Russia as the aggressor and to press the case for more military aid, having asked for three million new artillery shells during his recent trip to Prague. However, this war really must now end, having blighted over one million lives already.

Boris Johnson was wrong in March 2022 to discourage Zelensky from accepting the first Istanbul peace deal precisely because he could not back up the promise that he made; to support Ukraine for as long as it takes. Even though Britain continues to pump £4.5bn in yearly military aid into Ukraine, that sum pales against the free aid that the U.S. offered under Joe Biden.

Trump is offering nothing more now than to plunder Ukraine’s resources so that it can buy American weapons, and Europe cannot afford to make up the difference, for as long as it takes. Ukraine is still losing on the battlefield and now, apparently, treating its traumatised troops with ketamine to help them deal with the PTSD.

Despite significant risks around inflation and high interest rates caused by the enormous fiscal splurge on its war economy, Russia is still growing at a respectable rate. Europe is not.

For now, President Putin is keeping his powder dry by not responding to Zelensky’s relentless press stunts. It’s clear to me that Russia’s initiative of a second round of Istanbul peace talks from Thursday is essential in edging both sides closer to a cessation of the killing that should have ended over three years ago. Whether or not both leaders meet at the start or at the end of those negotiations, let’s just please get down to the business of talking.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... nsky-meet/
"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 16, 2025 11:45 am

Show in Türkiye
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 05/16/2025

Image

The political spotlight yesterday shifted to Turkey, where, in addition to the spectacle surrounding the direct meeting between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul, an informal meeting of NATO foreign ministers took place. Marco Rubio praised Donald Trump for his leadership and insisted on imposing the 5% of GDP target for military spending that the US leader has been demanding for months. This measure would mean increasing defense investment to more than double their current spending for some European countries. Among those countries is Germany, whose new chancellor has already expressed his support for following the White House's orders. Yesterday, Johann Wadephul, Annalena Baerbock's replacement at the head of the Foreign Ministry, reaffirmed this position despite the economic difficulties the country has experienced in recent years, partly due to the voluntary renunciation of one of the foundations of its industrial competitiveness: cheap energy from Russia. Rearmament priorities, justified by the current war and the scenario of armed peace they are preparing for the day after a possible agreement, determine the policy and discourse of European countries.

Unlike his European NATO allies, who are more focused on empty phrases like Marc Rutte's repeated "the ball is in Russia's court," which he insisted on yesterday, Donald Trump adds to his demand for increased military spending the need to end the war. His position is not marked by pacifism but by an interest in focusing on the confrontation that truly interests and concerns him: the containment of China. After hours of speculation, false reports about the time the meeting between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul was supposed to begin, and even a media announcement that it would start in the mid-afternoon, which turned out to be false, Donald Trump addressed the events of the day. Asked upon his arrival in the United Arab Emirates if he was disappointed by Vladimir Putin's absence from Turkey, the US president replied, "No. In fact, I said, 'Why would he go if I'm not going?' Because I wasn't going. I wasn't planning on going. I would go, but I wasn't planning on going. And I said, 'I don't think he's going if I'm not going.' And it turned out to be true... but I didn't think it was possible for Putin to go if I wasn't going."

Despite Trump's ego, Putin's absence in Turkey yesterday, which was never planned since it made no sense for the presidents to participate in a meeting that was always intended to be preliminary, is due more to the message Russia is trying to project than to the possibility of a meeting between the Russian and American presidents, which both desire, but whose teams have repeatedly insisted will only happen when there is some progress. The politics of spectacle can leave images, and it's likely that Zelensky hoped to get a photo yesterday publicly reproaching Vladimir Putin for his actions since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but it's unlikely he can advance a process that hasn't even begun. "Zelensky confirms the sending of a Ukrainian delegation to Istanbul but rules out attending the meeting after Putin's snub," Europa Press wrote yesterday afternoon . Perhaps Ukraine's greatest success this week has been to instill in Western discourse this idea of ​​Putin snubbing Zelensky, a plot twist artificially provoked by the twisted way Ukraine chose to interpret Russia's offer of negotiation. Russia's proposed return to Istanbul was an obvious nod to the 2022 negotiations, both technical and political, in search of a minimal approach that would later be finalized in a meeting between presidents. Hence, Medinsky's presence leading a team with civilian, military, and intelligence presence should not have been surprising, although it was quickly used to favor the Ukrainian cause throughout the day.

The contacts had not yet begun, and the German Foreign Minister was already warning Russia of the danger of "over-straining" the negotiations. From early morning, the press gathered outside the venue for a meeting for which there was no agreed time and, of course, no agenda. While the Russian delegation waited in Istanbul, the Ukrainian delegation, headed by Volodymyr Zelensky and composed of his right-hand man, Andriy Ermak, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the Minister of Defense, landed in Ankara with no intention of agreeing with the Russian side on how the day would unfold. The attempt to impose conditions is not limited to the resolution of the war, but also to the form, place, and even time at which the contacts can be held.

“There has been no change in Ukraine’s plans since Tuesday. Zelensky’s office confirmed this to me, and the president himself just announced on the tarmac after his plane landed in Ankara that he will meet with President Erdoğan and then decide whether his team will meet with the Russians in Turkey. The Ukrainian delegation includes Chief of Staff Yermak and at least two of his deputies; Defense Minister Umerov; Foreign Minister Sibiha; and intelligence officials,” Financial Times correspondent Christopher Miller wrote this morning . Ukraine was thus postponing any contact with the Russian Federation until after Zelensky’s meeting with the Turkish president after midday, which lasted more than three hours. It is likely that Ukrainian President Erdoğan will convey Ukraine's conditions for negotiations and the red lines for resolving the war to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, as the Turkish leader is considered by both countries to be a figure capable of mediating. Erdoğan has defended Ukraine against Russia, handed Prokopenko and the rest of the Azov cadres over to Zelensky despite the agreement that they were to remain in Turkey until the end of the war, defended the country's accession to NATO, and repeatedly insisted that Crimea must be returned to Kyiv. However, Turkey has not joined the sanctions against Russia and continues to trade with the Russian Federation, from which it acquired S-400 air defense systems, which it has refused to deliver to Kyiv despite Zelensky's pleas. Sometimes uncomfortable for both sides, both Russia and Ukraine are aware that they need skilled mediators with a minimum understanding of the conflict and who will not offend the hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded by claiming, as Donald Trump does, that this is "a stupid war."

After his meeting with Erdoğan, Zelensky confirmed what the press had already reported the day before: although Vladimir Putin would not go to Turkey and the Ukrainian president refused to meet with any other Russian representatives, a Ukrainian delegation would still attend the meeting with the Moscow delegation. Just as Vladimir Putin could not afford not to react to the European ultimatum for a 30-day ceasefire without a proposal that was considered a peace proposal, Volodymyr Zelensky could not afford not to send a working team to meet with the Russian delegation, especially after Donald Trump's moderate remarks, who did not condemn Russian actions or the president's absence from Turkey.

Virtually coinciding with Zelensky's announcement that Defense Minister Rustem Umerov was heading to Istanbul for the meeting, where the "mandate" was the ceasefire, Vladimir Medinsky addressed the press at the previously announced time. The appearance of Putin's advisor and former Minister of Culture, widely criticized by the Russian population for his actions considered excessively soft during the 2022 negotiations, sought to further highlight the differences between the two countries' positions and attitudes. In this game in which both seek the same thing—to make the other side perceived as an obstacle to peace—Medinsky did not react to Zelensky's statements, who called the delegation a "farce" and questioned its ability to make decisions "because we already know who makes the decisions there." Instead, he insisted on setting objectives and opening the door to compromise. As both Vladimir Putin and Sergey Lavrov had already insisted, Russia's intention is not a temporary cessation of the war, but rather the search for a definitive resolution, an area in which its interests clash with those of Ukraine, which desires a pause that does not imply the signing of a treaty formalizing the loss of territories or withdrawal from NATO, Russia's main objectives. However, despite the obvious contradictions between the parties' positions, Medinsky insisted that "the delegation is constructively willing to seek possible solutions and points of compromise."

From Ankara, Ukraine's rhetoric continued to focus on the demand. "Today, Russia once again demonstrated that it does not intend to end the war by sending a delegation of low-level representatives. Furthermore, this Russian approach is disrespectful to the world and all partners. We expect a clear and forceful response from our partners," wrote Zelensky, who in his appearance demanded sanctions from the United States, the European Union, and countries of the Global South if "Russia does not demonstrate a real will to end the war." Hours earlier, condensing this week's entire Ukrainian and European discourse into a single post , Anton Gerashchenko, an advisor to Arsen Avakov during his time as Interior Minister and a man linked to both Myrotvorets and the introduction of Azov into the National Guard in 2014, had written that "Putin proposed holding direct negotiations in Turkey on May 15. President Zelensky and his team arrived in Turkey. Putin is absent. Instead, he sent an unrepresentative delegation with no decision-making power. Does Putin want to achieve peace and stop the war? The answer is obvious: no." Any delegation not led by Vladimir Putin and that did not go to Turkey to ratify its acceptance of the 30-day ceasefire demanded by Ukraine was always going to be considered clear proof that Russia does not want peace and sufficient argument to demand the reinforcement of sanctions that have never been halted. Ukraine, which approached Turkey with the certainty that Vladimir Putin would not yield to Zelensky's capricious wishes, also did so with a blocking position, negotiating only for Russian acceptance of the ceasefire ordered by European countries. All of this was a delaying strategy, a way to buy time by halting the current Russian advances in Donbass and, above all, to justify demanding even harsher sanctions. The objective is always the same: to present Russia as the only obstacle to peace, to demand coercive measures, and, perhaps, to secure the activation of the part of the Kellogg-Fleitz plan that promised Ukraine a massive increase in the flow of military aid if Russia did not agree to negotiate or did not do so in good faith. That remains the hope of Ukraine and the European countries.

While Medinsky and the rest of the delegation had been in Istanbul for almost 24 hours, awaiting the possible arrival of Rustem Umerov, President Zelensky concluded by stating, "I hope the meeting with the Russian delegation will take place and not just for show. And that the time for real talks will finally be found." Zelensky, who limited the topics the delegation could discuss with the Russian representatives to one—accepting the ceasefire—left the door open for continued contacts throughout Friday. After a full day of speculation, recriminations, and cross insults, there was no first meeting between the Russian and Ukrainian delegations. According to the Turkish press, today's meetings will be trilateral, with the participation of the United States or Turkey. The outlook is uncertain. "I hope I'm 100% wrong and tomorrow brings a ceasefire and real talks. Honestly, I doubt it," Marco Rubio declared yesterday.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/16/espec ... n-turquia/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
What was the GUR planning?

Yesterday, rather unfairly, most Telegram channels missed (or ignored) the information from the Sumy OVA, let's see what it was.

- Around 16:00, the OVA announced that the Russian Federation was planning some kind of missile strike on Sumy. Several things are incredibly curious here. Firstly, the OVA knew exactly the addresses where the strikes would be carried out, and several objects at that . Secondly, the OVA even knew the approximate time of the allegedly planned strike on the city! And they wrote all this about an hour before the fantasy strike.

Here, in principle, all this looks very fabulous, because such statements have not been particularly observed before, or there were isolated cases. The time and place (we remind you) for the missile strike are described in such detail! That is, a strike that is clearly planned and approved not in WhatsApp or in simple headquarters, but at the highest level, i.e. not where you can just "sniff out" the info. And there seem to be no precedents like that .

- Around 10:30 pm, the OVA issued a statement again, but here they had to issue a bit of an anti-crisis. The OVA chief said that they were simply "acting preventively" and that they received the data (attention) from intelligence ! In conclusion, he simply said that "the enemy is insidious" and was gone... It is known for sure that the OVA was at least pressured by residents, because they demanded an explanation for such a serious reason "for shaking things up", our friends in Sumy confirm this. Moreover, the OVA mentioned intelligence, i.e. the info came from them directly. In general, what are we getting at? We have sudden information from the GUR that the RF Armed Forces will launch a missile strike exactly at the time when the delegations of the RF and Ukraine were supposed to meet in Istanbul. At that time, no one there (GUR) clearly knew that due to circumstances (logistics problems) the delegations would not meet. Do you understand what the joke is? Of course, this is speculation, we are not confirming it, but it is extremely, extremely difficult not to notice the "elephant in a china shop". The speculation is that the GUR was planning a provocation in Sumy, they planned it 100% in advance, since they even drew the OVA into their games, thought out the information to give to the media, etc. Even the Ukrainians did not believe that suddenly their intelligence officers found out everything in the world about the missile strike, this simply does not happen and everyone knows it. They decided to write about it at least to warn the residents of Sumy about the likely planned GUR operation, directed against these same residents of Sumy. Why? Putting 1 + 1 together, namely the time of the probable provocation and Ukraine's weak position in the negotiations, we understand that in this way Ukraine could earn points in the eyes of the world community, in particular Turkey. To develop the idea of ​​an alleged crime by the Russian Armed Forces right during the negotiations, isn't it wonderful from the point of view of the Ukrainian negotiators? All this would also have been presented on the eve of the arrival of the American side, which would also strengthen Ukraine's position.

Yes, nothing happened, yes, as such there is no evidence, but this is just logical thinking, nothing more. Was it profitable for the Russian Armed Forces to hit a large city with missiles, risking it during the negotiations? Who would benefit from this? We urge residents of Sumy to be attentive and remind you of the recent events with the explosion of ammunition within the city limits. They have already tried to deceive you, stating that the Russian Armed Forces launched a strike, now they will probably try again - do not fall for it and be attentive TODAY ! @The_Wrong_Side

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Brief Frontline Summary – May 14, 2025

The Ukrainian Armed Forces Position in the Malinovka Area May Soon Be Enveloped by Russian Forces. Report by Marat Khairullin with illustrations by Mikhail Popov.
Zinderneuf
May 15, 2025

Image

Fighting continues along the Russian border in the Tetkino-Novy Put sector. The enemy is deploying new assault groups in an attempt to break through, but these units are being destroyed by Russian border defense forces while still on approach.

Key directions of enemy activity:

- Ryzhevka-Tetkino
- Iskriskovshchina-Tetkino
- Pavlovka-Novy Put

Scattered Ukrainian Armed Forces groups remain on Russian territory near the settlement of Tetkino. Our units are conducting clearing operations to eliminate them.

Over the past day, the enemy attempted to send two engineer-sapper groups (from the AFU’s 425th Separate Assault Regiment) to clear obstacles on the Pavlovka-Novy Put axis. Both groups were destroyed by combined firepower.

Intense Fighting Continues in Chasov Yar

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

Elements of the Russian 98th Guards Airborne Division are engaged in grueling urban combat while providing flank security.

The enemy controls approximately 20% of the city, primarily elevated areas with multi-story residential buildings. Assault groups of paratroopers are advancing from lower ground, which complicates offensive actions and is exploited by the enemy.

The use of armored vehicles is severely limited due to urban ruins, which has formed natural barriers. Assault troops rely on motorcycles, ATVs, and buggies. Both sides are actively employing drones of all types.

The Russian Armed Forces’ command strategy focuses on exhausting the enemy through sustained pressure and attrition of personnel and equipment.

Advance on the Pokrovsk Axis

Image
ЛБС 16.01.2025=Line of Combat Contact January 16th, 2025. Зона Продвижения=Zone of advancement.

On the right flank of the Pokrovsk direction, Russian units continue to build on their success. The Russian Ministry of Defense has announced the liberation of the settlement of Mikhailovka, located on the opposite (left) bank of the Kazennyi Torets River from Mirolyubovka, which was freed the day before.

This expansion secures the area south of Novoekonomichnoe and threatens the encirclement of enemy forces defending near Malinovka (Ulyanivka), where our assault troops established positions on the eastern outskirts May 13.

Across the entire right flank (northeast of Pokrovsk), Russian forces are creating conditions to fully dominate the enemy’s key supply routes, cutting them off from reserve and logistics staging areas.

https://maratkhairullin.substack.com/p/ ... ay-14-2025

******

Russia proposes Istanbul talks begin Friday morning: Live Updates

Delegation from Moscow will be waiting for the Ukrainian side to meet starting at 10 a.m. on Friday, Russia’s chief negotiator has said
Russia proposes Istanbul talks begin Friday morning: Live Updates

Image
FILE PHOTO: The Russian-Ukrainian talks at the Dolmabahce Palace in Istanbul in April 2022. © Getty Images / Cem Ozdel

The first direct talks between Russia and Ukraine in more than three years are expected to take place in Türkiye’s largest city, Istanbul, on Friday. The delegation from Moscow will wait at the Dolmabahce Palace starting at 10 a.m. as proposed by Russia’s chief negotiator, Vladimir Medinsky.

According to Anadolu news agency sources, the Russian and Ukrainian teams are also set to meet with US and Turkish representatives the same day.

As the talks were planned to take place on Thursday, the Kremlin delegation had been waiting for its counterpart to arrive for the whole day. Vladimir Zelensky named his delegation later in the evening. It will consist of 12 delegates and be led by Defense Minister Rustem Umerov.

Russian President Vladimir Putin offered on Sunday to resume direct dialogue between Moscow and Kiev to find a lasting settlement that would address the root causes of the conflict.

Zelensky, who had previously ruled out any talks with Moscow, only agreed to attend following US President Donald Trump’s announcement of his support for the talks, and his claim that Kiev should accept it “immediately”. But instead of going to Istanbul, Zelensky went to Ankara, where he had direct talks with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

The Russian President's spokesman Dmitry Peskov claimed Putin is not planning to personally take part in the talks with Ukraine in Türkiye.

Moscow and Ukraine last held direct talks in April 2022, also in Istanbul. Following initial reports that an agreement had been reached, Kiev unilaterally withdrew from the talks. President Putin later blamed Western interference and, in particular, then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who had reportedly urged Kiev to “just continue fighting,” for derailing the peace process.

Russia, which had withdrawn its forces from the outskirts of Kiev as a goodwill gesture, later accused Ukraine of backtracking, saying it had lost trust in Ukraine’s negotiators.

(Live updates at link.)

https://www.rt.com/news/617518-ukraine- ... -zelensky/

******

In Lviv, the SBU forcefully checks people and police: what happened
15 May 2025, 18:05Read also in Russian

Image
photo: SBU

The security service conducts safe entry in Lviv. The stench starts from 15 to 18 May. Surrounded by the SBU, they are supported by the National Police, the Military Law Enforcement Service and the National Guard

The SBU Department of the Lviv region reported this , RegioNews reports .

It means that law enforcement officers will cover the whole place. Safe entry is subject to the legal regime of the military regime.

“ Meta – defeating and neutralizing the threat of intelligence-led activity against our state and increasing the security of the people in the minds of the Russian armed aggression against Ukraine,” says informed

During the hour of counter-intelligence visits, you can:

bordered by passages and streets;
verification of documents of citizens and inspection of cars;
It is also possible to survey the territory and place a gravesite to identify buried objects.
The SBU asks citizens to reasonably confront possible difficulties and to properly respond to legal actions and the needs of law enforcement officials. Also, Ukrainians will be reminded that they need to take documents with them in order to certify a person and comply with the curfew regime.

Apparently, the SBU recently hounded an FSB agent as she was preparing a terrorist attack near Mykolayiv.

https://regionews.ua/ukr/news/lvovshchi ... g_rewarded

Google Translator

******

Ukraine gets smaller every time Kiev disrupts talks — diplomat

Maria Zakharova recalled Sergey Lavrov's words that Ukraine would have kept a part of Donbass if the agreements reached at the April 2022 talks in Istanbul had been implemented

MOSCOW, May 15. /TASS/. Ukraine's territory is getting smaller every time the Kiev regime disrupts the negotiation process, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said at a briefing.

"If you want to understand the connection between the negotiation process and territories, I will remind you of the top Russian diplomat’s quote from September 28, 2024," Zakharova said. She recalled Sergey Lavrov's words that Ukraine would have kept a part of Donbass if the agreements reached at the April 2022 talks in Istanbul had been implemented.

"But every time, Sergey Viktorovich Lavrov added, when an agreement, which Russia always supports, is derailed, Ukraine becomes smaller. It seems to me that this quote would be right to remember now for all those who are looking for a correlation between the negotiation process and the size of the territory," the diplomat explained.

https://tass.com/politics/1958265

******

As has been apparent since ’22 the Russians have no intention of making peace on any terms Kiev and the Europeans would be happy with. Putin’s recent remarks during his meeting with some businessmen indicate that he’s not only written the Europeans off as serious players. He’s now prepared to say so publicly.

The word he used for the Europeans has been translated as “idiots”. Ever the diplomat even when he’s being undiplomatic Putin failed to use the correct term. “Suicidal lunatics” best describes the current crop of European politicians.

The Americans are a different matter. The Americans don’t have the military or economic power to bring to bear that could affect the result of the Ukrainian war. But by continuing Intel and arms support they can prolong that war. They did so in Biden’s time. They are doing so now.

Biden’s aim was to “bleed” the Russians, albeit at some cost to the proxies, though he could not beat them. So far Trump has continued that policy. Trump now has to decide whether to continue “bleeding” the Russians and face defeat later, or whether to cut his losses now. Both courses of action have electoral advantages and electoral disadvantages for Trump. With the midterms looming he ought really to make up his mind soon which way to jump.

What none of us know is how far the Ukrainians themselves are prepared to play their role of piggy in the middle in this conflict between the Great Powers. There’s now an active resistance in remnant Ukraine. As it becomes clearer to the Ukrainians that defeat is closer, more in the administration itself are veering towards the Russians and more in the general population are assisting Russian Intel. The economic situation is poor – Ukraine now only survives on Western aid and that’s not as extensive as it was. And more Ukrainians are grasping the fact that the West has used and then betrayed them. That’s been noticeable in the Ukrainian internet and media at least since Vilnius and is more noticeable now.

So when we hear some analysts and commentators remarking confidently that this war is still set for the long haul, we should remember that we don’t know much about what’s happening in remnant Ukraine itself and that there’s always the possibility of internal collapse. Trump may not have as much time to make up his mind as he’d like.

Posted by: English Outsider | May 15 2025 12:24 utc | 2

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/05/u ... /#comments

******

Istanbul 2.0
May 16, 1:57 p.m.

Image

Negotiations in the Istanbul 2.0 format have begun.
These are the first direct negotiations of this kind since March 2022, when Istanbul 1.0 was thwarted by Johnson and Biden.
More than 3 years later, the situation is much worse for Ukraine, with roughly the same people in roughly the same format.
The negotiations will be held behind closed doors. At the same time, the official ban on negotiations with Russia has not been lifted. However, it does not actually hinder anything, due to the lack of a legal framework in Ukraine.
Russia has demonstratively and pointedly ignored Zelensky.

Image

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9842021.html

Ukraine Loses Another F-16
May 16, 9:05

Image

The enemy reports that another American F-16 fighter was lost under unknown circumstances while repelling another attack by the Geraniums. The pilot managed to eject and survived. This is the 4th American fighter lost by the Ukrainian Air Force. As expected, they did not become another "wonder weapon", and there were so many cries and hopes...

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9841283.html

GoogleTranslator
"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 17, 2025 11:57 am

First meeting in three years
Posted by @nsanzo ⋅ 05/17/2025

Image

A day late following the spectacle staged by Volodymyr Zelensky to use the entire day of media attention, insisting on the infamy of Vladimir Putin's failure to rise to the challenge he had posed and demanding that Russia unconditionally accept the 30-day ceasefire that Ukraine and its European allies demand as a prerequisite for the start of political negotiations, the first direct meeting between delegations from Kyiv and Moscow in almost three years began yesterday in Istanbul. As the continued exchange of prisoners and bodies of fallen soldiers at the front showed—just yesterday, a new process was confirmed in which Kyiv handed over the remains of 34 Russian soldiers and received those of 909 Ukrainian soldiers—communication between the two warring countries has not completely broken down at any point, although all the aspects discussed between June 2022 and yesterday have taken place indirectly, with the participation of mediators. Turkey, which also provided the venue for negotiations during the first weeks of the war, actively participated in the negotiations for the Black Sea grain export agreement, while humanitarian issues such as exchanges and the return of minors evacuated from the front and whose families were in Ukraine have been mediated by various Arab countries, primarily the United Arab Emirates.

The step taken yesterday in Istanbul, largely forced by the United States' change of stance and pressure on both countries to demonstrate a willingness to achieve peace, also reflects the state of the war and the changes that have taken place in the three years in which Moscow, kyiv, and their suppliers' sole option has been military action. As a result of the nature of the conflict—a proxy war in which Ukraine is fighting for its own interests and those of its European allies—the day began with a meeting in which Ukraine feels much more comfortable with its allies.

“Coordinated positions on this important diplomatic day of a crucial week for peace efforts. We agree on the need to move forward quickly in the peace process. We inform our colleagues that President Zelensky has sent a Ukrainian delegation to Istanbul to truly promote peace, with appropriate mandates and intentions,” stated Andriy Sibiga, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, demonstrating that, in these negotiations, Kyiv has the support of its European and North American allies, as well as Turkey. Hours earlier, the Ukrainian president had recalled that President Erdoğan had insisted that he supports him and that “Crimea is Ukraine.”

As the Victory Plan , a document quickly forgotten due to its unfeasibility but containing only Kiev's point of view and objectives, showed, the Ukrainian government wanted to focus on negotiations leading to peace, but involving as little contact as possible with the Russian enemy. Zelensky's proposal was clear and demanded a series of steps from his allies to bring Ukraine as close as possible to what he had proposed with the Peace Formula published months earlier, a list of steps Russia should take and which assumed Moscow's complete and unilateral capitulation. In other words, the sum of both documents presented Ukraine's ambition for funding, armament, and protection from its allies so that this action would pressure Russia and force the Kremlin to give in on all aspects of the war: territory, security, and future relations with the Russian Federation.

This collective pressure is Ukraine's main strength—real or imagined—which, despite the evidently difficult situation it is facing, both at the front and economically, continues to apply pressure and act as if it were holding the initiative. "Russia is facing a moment in which it must demonstrate that it is serious. We need concrete decisions. First and foremost, on an unconditional, comprehensive, and lasting ceasefire for at least 30 days," wrote Ukraine's Foreign Minister after the meeting with the United States and its European allies. He also ignored the fact that pressure on Ukraine to open up to peace negotiations has been severe in recent months, during which kyiv has been forced to reluctantly change its rhetoric, stop talking about victory—or use the term peace as a euphemism for a situation in which it has achieved all its objectives and must make no concessions to its enemy—and start talking about peace.

The previous statements, Ukraine's attempt to force Russia to adapt to its demands, the constant threats of sanctions, and the emphasis on the presence of its allies reveal kyiv's starting point and strategy for the start of the negotiation process. "The Russians want to establish associations with the year 2022. But the only thing that connects the current negotiations to that period is the city of Istanbul, nothing else. All Russian attempts to link the current moment with 2022 will fail," Andriy Ermak, Zelensky's right-hand man and a very high-profile figure, especially in his relations with foreign partners and allies, wrote early this morning. His words reveal Ukraine's attempt to distance itself from that process, possibly not because it didn't lead to an agreement that would end the war, but because it had to negotiate alone, without the protection of its allies. Ukraine's desire is to have negotiations similar to those in Minsk and a subsequent process comparable to that of Normandy.

Yesterday, Zelensky insisted on asking his allies to impose sanctions against Russia if Moscow did not accept the 30-day ceasefire and lamented that Vladimir Putin had rejected the opportunity for a breakthrough. A face-to-face negotiation between two presidents, possibly mediated by third countries, evokes memories of the February 2015 night when Vladimir Putin and Petro Poroshenko, under the supervision of Angela Merkel and François Hollande, agreed on the Minsk agreements, a vague roadmap to peace that failed to resolve specific problems and offered promises for the future that Ukraine never intended to keep. In Russia, the demand for 30 days of silence and the possibility of further negotiations is too reminiscent of Minsk and the subsequent negotiation process , during which Kyiv consistently refused to discuss political issues with Donetsk and Luhansk, leading to the Normandy Format, in which Ukraine enjoyed the invaluable and unconditional support of France and Germany.

Russia's insistence on presenting the current negotiations as a continuation of what was agreed upon in Istanbul responds, in part, to these two circumstances: the need to reach an agreement that cannot be rewritten as easily as Ukraine manipulated Minsk, and to ensure that Ukraine's strength is not artificially increased by the presence of its allies, whose interests make an agreement less likely. The Ukrainian reaction, suggesting that things have changed and that its position now enjoys greater strength also responds to these interests, seeks to focus on the support of its allies and overlook the fact that after three years in which kyiv and its allies opted for military action to defeat Moscow, the results have been meager, and Ukraine has neither managed to sufficiently wear down Russia nor achieved the military victories with which it hoped to force the Kremlin to sign a tailor-made peace agreement in which it would not have to make the security concessions—withdrawal from NATO—demanded in the Istanbul agreement.

The issue of security, a priority for both countries then as now, was one of the most prominent topics in those negotiations. Faced with the security guarantees Russia was willing to offer in the Ukrainian territories with the exception of Crimea and Donbass—implicitly acknowledging that they would remain under Russian control, but that Moscow would return control of the remaining areas captured since the Russian invasion of February 22—both the United States and the United Kingdom leaked to their sympathetic media that they were unwilling to offer such guarantees, which they equated with Article V of NATO's collective security. In this sense, it is clear that the situation has changed, and several European countries are now willing to send an armed deterrent mission in the event of an agreement with Russia (and guarantees from the United States), making a pact with Moscow less likely. Although some media outlets have highlighted this week that the Kremlin no longer has the pressure tool of its troops besieging kyiv, the reality is that Russia is now under less pressure than at that time. Although it had not been publicly disclosed, the situation of Russian troops in northern Ukraine was already practically unsustainable, and their withdrawal would be announced shortly thereafter. The Russian Federation, much stronger in its positions, with an industry that has proven capable of supplying its army with the necessary military equipment for years, and no longer the serious personnel shortages that hampered the efforts of the first months, is not as in need as Ukraine of a pause to recover. It is clear that time is on Russia's side in this war of attrition, a much more powerful tool of pressure than the troops who, with difficulty and enormous casualties and losses of equipment, were trying to hold on to positions near kyiv.

Even so, the Russian delegation sought to show a degree of openness to compromise on some aspects. After the first meeting ended, media outlets such as Reuters criticized Russia's position, which had rejected the ceasefire and demanded that Ukraine fully withdraw from the territories under Kyiv's control in the Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson regions, which Moscow claims as its own. In response to these two statements, Oleksiy Honcharenko, the MP from Poroshenko's party who became famous for his stroll through the House of Trade Unions in Odessa when the bodies of those killed on May 2 had not yet been removed, criticized the fact that the talks had taken place without interpreters, that is, in Russian. This interpretation of the meeting left little room for continuation or compromise. Standing out among these were the words of Rustem Umerov, Ukraine's Defense Minister, who told the press that the agenda for the next meeting would be announced soon, adding that "we are preparing for a potential meeting at the level of leaders of both countries." "We have taken note of the request for a meeting between the presidents of Russia and Ukraine," said Medinsky, who expressed satisfaction with the outcome of the meeting.

As the Ukrainian outlet Strana wrote , “For now, Umerov’s comments are far from the harsh and negative leaks that have been circulating in Western (primarily British) and Ukrainian media.” The parties did not agree to the ceasefire or the free-for -all exchange that Zelensky demanded from Russia as a sign that he is serious , although the truce is likely to be a major item on the agenda of the upcoming meeting. While the main outcome of yesterday’s meeting is the expected continuation in the coming days, the most tangible practical step was the agreement on a prisoner exchange. Ukraine and Russia pledged to each hand over 1,000 POWs in what, if completed, will be the largest exchange since the war began in 2014.

https://slavyangrad.es/2025/05/17/prime ... tres-anos/

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
The main points of Dmitry Peskov’s statements:

- A meeting between Putin and Zelensky is possible, but only if the delegations reach certain agreements;

- The Russian Federation will prepare and hand over to Ukraine a list of conditions for a ceasefire,

Peskov said; - There have been no contacts between the Russian Federation and the United States following the Russian-Ukrainian meeting in Istanbul, Peskov said;

- The Kremlin will inform if it is decided to hold a conversation between Putin and Trump;

- The first step is to fulfill the agreements reached in Istanbul, including the exchange of 1,000 for 1,000 prisoners;

- It is essential for Russia who exactly from Kiev will sign the documents if the delegations of the Russian Federation and Ukraine reach agreements;

- There is no talk of any possible change in the composition of the Russian delegation at the negotiations with Ukraine, the work has just begun;

- The Russian Federation does not comment on leaks about the conditions put forward at the negotiations on Ukraine, the process should take place behind closed doors.

***

Colonelcassad
4:05
Northerners captured a murderer from the Maidan: the prisoner of war confessed that he burned alive law enforcement officers

Surma M.V. (born April 2, 1995) 225th separate assault regiment

Northerners captured a criminal from the 225th separate assault regiment, who spent a significant part of his life in Ukrainian prisons.

Part one

In 2014, instead of a prison term, the criminal was offered to go to the Maidan, where he had to kill law enforcement officers.

The prisoner of war tells in detail how he was given the task of throwing Molotov cocktails at a Berkut armored personnel carrier. Today, Surma directly confesses that he killed law enforcement officers. There is no remorse in the eyes of the Ukrainian criminal. At that time, he received "as much" as 100 dollars for killing people.

After the Maidan events, persecution of Berkut officers began all over Ukraine, many left for Russia, where they still work in law enforcement agencies. The editors of our channel sincerely hope that by the will of fate, the prisoner of war will be interrogated by one of the former employees of the Ukrainian special forces.

At this stage, Surma talks in detail about Ukrainian prisons, gives up the coordinates of the positions of the 225th separate regiment and other units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

***

Colonelcassad
1:22
Trump on Russia-Ukraine talks in Istanbul:

Putin is at the table. He wanted this meeting. But I felt that there could be no meeting without me. I don’t think there will be a deal without me because there is so much hatred on both sides. We have a good relationship with Putin. I think we can have a deal. We should meet, and we will probably schedule it . Because I’m tired of other people doing this. Steve Witkoff has done an amazing job. But it’s a very tough job.

And it’s a job that only one person can do. Because of the current situation, only me. I think Putin is tired of all this. He doesn’t look very good, although he wants to look different. Remember, this was supposed to be over in a week. And if he hadn’t gotten stuck in the mud with his tanks, he would have been in Kiev in five hours.

I had a tough conversation with Zelensky because I didn’t like what he was saying. He has no cards. He has no cards in his hand. I’m being honest about that. Because he is dealing with a massive army and with those who are brave and have excellent weapons.

(the moron can speak with both feet in his mouth!)

***

Colonelcassad
0:44
US President D. Trump, in his usual manner, praised Iranian drones yesterday and criticized the American military-industrial complex. According to him, he told one American company that he wanted a lot of drones and cited Iran as an example, which produces good drones for 35-40 thousand dollars and therefore he wants something similar. As a result, two weeks later they came to him with a drone for 41 million dollars. Then Trump said that he does not need drones for 41 million dollars, but he wants drones for 35-40 thousand dollars, which can be launched in thousands. This is a fast and deadly weapon, according to Trump.

https://t.me/ImpNavigator/10768 - zinc

At this time, Russian "Gerani" for 20,000 dollars - Hold my beer.

***

Colonelcassad
British media claim that Medinsky allegedly said during the negotiations that

"We [Russia] do not want war, but we are ready to fight for a year, two, three - as long as it takes. We fought with Sweden for 21 years. And how long are you ready to fight?"

***

Colonelcassad
There are a number of important points to note.

1. Russia easily bypassed the cocaine coalition's ultimatums regarding the May 12 ceasefire.
2. Russia imposed its own format for negotiations in Istanbul. And the shift in date from May 15 to May 16 did not change anything.
3. The cocaine coalition's attempts to break the Russian scenario by forcing negotiations with Zelensky on Russia were also ignored, and Zelensky fled to the cocaine coalition in Albania.
4. After which negotiations began at a level convenient for Russia, essentially continuing Istanbul 1.0 on the worst terms for Ukraine.
5. Thus, Russia, without ceasing hostilities, resumed a variation of Istanbul that was beneficial for itself and demonstrated its peacefulness.
6. Along the way, they showed everyone that negotiations can be conducted without Zelensky and completely ignoring his decree banning negotiations with Russia.
7. They will also exchange 1,000 of our prisoners.

Overall, not bad for the first day. There are no particular minuses (not to mention Zelensky's hysterics and lies), but there are a few pluses. This does not mean that this round of negotiations will bring peace closer, but it shows that our diplomacy has learned a lot since Minsk-2 and Istanbul-1. Although, of course, the situation at the front gives diplomats the opportunity to speak a completely different language.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Ukraine - Negotiation Failure Plus Other Items

After some diplomatic gyrations, talks between the Russian Federation and Ukraine took place today in Istanbul, Turkey.

The Russian side had sent largely same delegation which had negotiated with Ukraine in March and April 2022. It sees the current negotiations as a continuation of the older ones, provided that new facts on the ground are taken into account.

The Ukrainian delegation was headed by its Minister of Defense Rustem Umerov. Its task was to demand an immediate ceasefire and to prepare a meeting between the presidents of the two countries.

The talks ended after just two hours.

The Russian side is said to have demanded a Ukrainian retreat from the four oblast the Russians have largely conquered and integrated into their country.

The Ukrainian side demanded an immediate ceasefire, the return of children the Russians had removed from the areas involved in military operations and the exchange of all prisoners (of which Russia has many more than Ukraine). It is obvious that Ukrainian side is not interested (yet) in making peace.

Both sides rejected the other side's demands and that was it. For now ...

The balance of power in the war is clearly on the Russian side. The Ukrainian army will thus continue to bleed and lose on the battlefield.

---
Another exchange of dead soldiers also occurred today. Thirty four corpse of Russia soldiers were exchanged against 909 Ukrainian ones. The rather absurd relation of 1 to 27 has been the case for quite a while. Indeed it seems that Russian side has limited the number of Ukrainian corpses it is willing to release per exchange to 909.

Image

There are three reasons that contribute to the strong divergence of the numbers of dead on each side.

For the Ukrainian side the evacuation of dead (and wounded) soldiers is not a priority.
The Russian side is moving forwards winning control of areas that the Ukrainian side has lost. This allows to collect all dead while not being under fire.
The Ukrainian losses are in general much higher than the Russian ones.
---
Lieutenant-General Andrey Mordvichev, who the Ukrainians had claimed to have killed on March 19 2022, has become the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Ground Forces in the rank of a Colonel-General.

---
The Ukrainian government 'lost' over $700 million buying arms and munitions which were never delivered or unusable.

How Ukraine lost hundreds of millions on arms deals gone wrong (archived) - Financial Times, May 16 2025
Desperate to source munitions, Kyiv paid foreign brokers for weapons and shells that were sometimes unusable or never arrived

A Financial Times investigation, based on leaked Ukrainian state documents, court filings and dozens of interviews with procurement officials, weapons dealers and manufacturers, and detectives, has uncovered how hundreds of millions of dollars Kyiv paid to foreign arms intermediaries to secure vital military equipment has gone to waste over the past three years of war.
...
To date, Ukraine has paid out $770mn in advance to foreign arms brokers for weapons and ammunition that have not been delivered, according to figures from Ukraine’s Ministry of Defence, as well as documents seen by the FT.

...
Most the deals have (presumably) involved large bribes.

Posted by b on May 16, 2025 at 14:04 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/05/u ... l#comments

******

BBC morning news: “Russian and Ukrainian sides meet face to face for the first time since the war began…”

The notion that the British Broadcasting Company is an independent news source was proven yet again yesterday morning to be totally false. The top of the hour news bulletin informed viewers that at 10.00 am local time Russian and Ukrainian negotiators would meet in Istanbul “for the first time since the war began.” They then put the accent on the decision of Russian President Vladimir Putin not to come to Istanbul, quoting Volodymyr Zelensky that this was proof positive of the Russians’ unwillingness to make peace.

As anyone with a functioning memory knows, Russian and Ukrainian negotiating teams met face to face in Istanbul in March 2022, less than a month into the war, and reached agreement on a peace treaty that both sides initialed. All that remained to do was for the heads of state to meet and agree on several open questions that required decisions at the top. This did not happen precisely because of the intervention of Britain’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson who came down to Kiev and persuaded the Ukrainian leader to toss the document into the waste basket and to proceed with the war in confidence that his country would get full military and financial support from the West.

Put simply, yesterday’s utterly false BBC narrative was handed down to them by Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s propaganda team, as is the case in every substantive position taken by the broadcaster. This is not free journalism, this is not even state propaganda. It is the line assigned to the broadcaster by one man who happens to be the country’s top politician of the day.

Happily, not all British media take their lines from the PM. Yesterday’s Financial Times, no fan of Putin that they are, nonetheless, did do a better job setting out the facts even if they were sloppy in places.

They took the time to quote Vladimir Putin on the reasons for his proposing a meeting in Istanbul in the first place, namely “to remove the root causes of the conflict and move towards creating a long-term, durable peace in a historical perspective.” Bravo!

They also quote Zelensky, but his words make him look like an idiot: “Zelensky said he was prepared to attend, but only if Putin also showed up, because ‘everything in Russia depends’ on the Russian leader.” Everything?

Of course, these days, when the American President, head of a country that has been fully engaged in this war on the Ukrainian side for three years, claims to be a peace broker and tells reporters, as he did yesterday, that there will be no peace until he meets with Putin, we can be more generous in grading the claptrap coming from the Kievan dictator.

To their credit, the FT is fairly serious in evaluating the negotiating team that Vladimir Putin is sending to Istanbul. Many media outlets in the West say it is a low-level delegation. Some, are more kind, calling it a medium level delegation. The FT does better.

The FT quotes Putin on his decision to dispatch ‘a delegation led by his adviser, former culture minister Vladimir Medinsky.’ And they bestir themselves to identify Medinsky and the reasons why Putin now selected precisely him: “The move signals that Russia is keen for the talks to pick up where they left off in the spring of 2022, just weeks after Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of its neighbour. Medinsky took the lead in those talks…”

After that, FT heads off into disinformation, telling us that ‘the talks broke down in acrimony and fighting continued.” Well, there were two rounds of negotiations. The second round a week or two after the first ended in the initialed full draft peace treaty as I mentioned above. It was sabotaged by Boris Johnson acting on behalf of Washington.

By the way, Putin’s remark about ‘a durable peace in a historical perspective’ can also be seen as a reference to his selection of Medinsky, who is a professional historian and brings precisely that perspective to the negotiations on an outcome to the war.

****

We are today, Friday, 16 May. There was no meeting between Russians and Ukrainians yesterday. Instead the Ukrainian delegation met with U.S. and Turkish officials. The Russian-Ukrainian meeting is now set for today. If the sides agree that these first talks are constructive, then we may assume that there will be many more in the days and weeks ahead. They will necessarily draw in Donald Trump for photo opportunities and claims to his Nobel Prize for Peace.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2025/05/16/ ... war-began/

******

Zelensky 2003-2013: rise of the Kvartal comedy empire

Ronald Lauder and Ronald Reagan. Zelensky's skit about the Israeli doctor. Rodnyansky, Khoroshkovsky, and Kolomoisky. Russo-Ukrainian show business and money business

Events in Ukraine
May 15, 2025

Last week, we learned about Zelensky’s youth and the emergence of his Kvartal 95 comedy group. Today, we will go into the period when he truly came into his own as the Joker of Ukrainian politics. It will involve everything from Zionist American media investor Ronald Lauder to the larger than life Ukrainian oligarch Igor Kolomoisky. Strap in for a ride through Ukraine’s roaring 2000s.



Why should you care? For one, given all the complex intertwinements between Russian and Ukrainian politics and show business the reader is about to encounter, one will be hardly surprised to hear that one Ukrainian MP declared a few days back that Zelensky’s government has been conducting constant secret negotiations with Russia ever since 2022. Zelensky’s list of contacts is endless.

We left Zelensky’s path at the end of the 1990s. He’d already made a name for himself in the post-soviet comedy world, but he and his Krivoy Rog colleagues were frustrated by their inability to win the ‘Club of the Happy and Inventive’ (KVN) comedy cups judged in Russia. In response, they focused more on the Ukrainian market.

This was a good time to do so. As I wrote here, it was in the late 1990s and early 2000s that President Leonid Kuchma essentially created modern Ukraine. He oversaw the centralization of economic power among a small group of eastern Ukrainian oligarchs. Though himself a soviet-era ‘Red Director’ that had hitherto managed Dnepropetrovsk’s famous Yuzhmash rocket factory, he would side alternatively with the Dnepropetrovsk and the rising Donetsk clans.

Image
Kuchma
A new political landscape was settling in the country. Complex patronage networks and rent-seeking schemes, macabre violence (Kuchma was famously implicated in the decapitation of a critical journalist), and confusing geopolitical intrigues between east and west. In short, the Ukraine we all know and love.

Such a world of divided loyalties lends itself quite well to irony and satire. In 2003, Zelensky’s existing ‘95th kvartal’ comedy team created the structure that lives on to this day – ‘Kvartal 95 studio’. Alexandr Pikalov, one of Zelensky’s closest associates in the project, recalls how political satire lay at the origins of Kvartal:

By that time, we had a base from the KVN —we were doing what we knew and what interested us. The televised "Kvartal” began with a conflict with the KVN leadership. It wasn’t even a conflict, just a very loudly slammed door that eventually flew off its hinges—our departure from KVN. After that, we decided to go to Kiev and do what we wanted. Our first televised concert was both a snapshot and a starting point. A snapshot of who we were and what we had, and a start—the beginning of our new path. Everything went quite successfully, both in terms of ticket sales and audience feedback. Moreover, the TV channel wasn’t afraid to air our experiment. And the second starting point came when we introduced political satire—this happened a year after the first concert. We created parody sketches on political topics. For example, in America, this was already very popular at the time.

Image
Pikalov, one of the top figures in Kvartal and a school friend of Zelensky from his Krivoy Rog days.

The reference to America is surely not incidental. Is it not a stretch to propose that political satire represents something deeply American? The marketisation of the world also means the devaluation of politics. Transformed into lobbying battles, politics become only worthy of satire. In turn, the public’s main political privilege is to laugh at politicians, rather than meaningfully engage in politics.

(Paywall with free option.)

https://eventsinukraine.substack.com/p/ ... he-kvartal

******

Brief Frontline Summary for May 16, 2025

Important Maneuvers on the Flanks. Report by Marat Khairullin with illustrations by Mikhail Popov.
Zinderneuf
May 16, 2025
Pokrovsk Direction

Image
ЛБС 15.5.2025=Line of Combat Contact May 15th, 2025.

The presented schematic of the central sector of the Pokrovsk direction shows the configuration of the line of combat contact as of May 16, 2025.

The first ten days of May were marked by activity on the right flank of the sector: the settlements of Mirolyubovka and Mikhailovka were liberated, and a staging area was prepared for advancing toward Novoekonomichnoe, where the Armed Forces of Ukraine have a logistics hub connecting their flanks via the H-32 highway. Securing this hub would shorten the enemy's maneuverability.

The left flank of the central sector remained in deep defense for almost the entire month of April. The initiative belonged to the enemy, who attempted to eliminate the Kotlino salient—formed by the offensive actions of the Russian Armed Forces—through flanking attacks in the Pokrovsk-Shevchenko and Muravka-Uspenovka areas.

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

After exhausting the AFU in defensive battles and stretching their reserves, our army began cautiously pressuring the enemy's right flank. By the first third of May, the settlements of Troitskoye, Kotlyarovka, Novoaleksandrovka, and earlier Uspenovka, were liberated.

Currently, the most problematic area is Kotlyarovka—Pokrovskaya Mine, where the enemy has established a heavily fortified defensive zone. Securing Pokrovskaya Mine will allow our left flank to establish a key reference point for enveloping Pokrovsk from the west.

From the line of combat contact configuration, we can discern the tactical objective: severing the enemy's logistics along the H-32 highway on both its western and eastern stretches.

I do not believe the ongoing negotiations in Istanbul will affect the activity of our armed forces. In the near future, we will likely see further developments in this direction.

Southern Sector of the Donetsk Direction (V. Novoselovka)
Russian Defense Ministry Report: "Units of the 'East' Group have liberated the settlement of Volnoye Pole in the Donetsk People's Republic."

Image
ЛБС 31.10.2024=Line of Combat Contact October 31st, 2024. ЛБС 01.01.2025=Line of Combat Contact January 1st, 2025. ЛБС 01.02.2025=Line of Combat Contact February 1st, 2025. Продвижение после предыдущей сводки=Progress since the previous summary.

Throughout April 2025, the enemy in the Shevchenko area (Velikaya Novosyolka district) attempted to lure our units into a kill zone southeast of Shevchenko. The terrain, engineered fortifications, and pre-prepared fire systems allowed the Armed Forces of Ukraine command to feign a retreat along the Burlatskoye-Shevchenko road, aiming to inflict a devastating defeat on our forces with combined fire and hinder their escape.

The command of the Russian Armed Forces grouping in this sector uncovered the enemy's plan. Our assault units did not fall for the AFU's feigned retreat and held their positions.

Simultaneously, fire was directed at the enemy's flanks (north of Burlatskoye and in the Privolnoe-Volnoye Pole direction). Flanking attacks north of Burlatskoye and toward Privolnoe-Volnoye Pole created an envelopment of Shevchenko.

Securing Volnoye Pole opens the possibility of bypassing Shevchenko by moving northwest along the ravine and extending the encirclement line on the left flank of this sector.

https://maratkhairullin.substack.com/p/ ... for-may-16

******

The Istanbul kabuki – decoded

Pepe Escobar

May 17, 2025

The endgame is clear: the US losing the entire Eurasian land mass. Ukraine, under these immense geopolitical imperatives, is only a sovereign-deprived pawn in the (Great) Game.

Did President Putin really change the game by proposing the resumption of negotiations on the proxy war in Ukraine in Istanbul – over three years after the first ones were scotched by NATO?

It’s complicated. And depends on which “game” we’re talking about.

What the Russian move instantly accomplished was to throw into total disarray the European warmongering Three Stooges (Starmer, BlackRock chancellor, Le Petit Roi) Cocaine Express.

Irrelevant Europe was not even at the table in Istanbul – except via extensive previous briefing of the low-rent, shabby-dressed Ukrainian delegation. That was compounded by the noisy barking threat in the sidelines advocating “more sanctions” to “pressure Russia”.

In March 2022 in Istanbul, Kiev could have stopped the war. Every one of us who were in Istanbul at the time could foresee that Kiev would eventually have to be forced to the table all over again.

So in essence we are back to the same negotiation – with the same top Russian negotiator, competent historian Vladimir Medinsky, heading a delegation composed by pros, but with Ukraine now facing over a million dead; deprived of at least four regions – more on the way; what’s left of its mineral wealth de facto controlled by the US; and a horrendous black hole that passes for an “economy”. We are talking about country 404 territory.

During the negotiations on Friday, Medinsky went straight to the point:

“We don’t want war, but we are ready to fight for a year, two, three – as long as it takes. We fought with Sweden for 21 years [the Great Northern War, 1700-1721, as it is known in Russia]. How long are you ready to fight?”

That’s the geopolitical/military state of things for Kiev and their “to the last Ukrainian” warmongering backers: either you capitulate, or we’re going to hurt you even more.

What’s the point of these negotiations?

Turkiye under uber-opportunist Sultan Erdogan in fact hosted a P.R. meeting between Moscow, Kiev and itself – with the Ukrainians unleashing a blitzkrieg of infantile tantrums only designed to influence global public opinion. In sharp contrast, the head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, Kirill Dmitriev, did his best to put a positive spin on the proceedings.

Istanbul 2.0, Dmitriev asserted, achieved a large exchange of prisoners (1,000 on each side); ceasefire options to be presented by both sides; and a continuation of dialogue.

That’s not much. Well, at least they discussed in the same language: Russian. Nothing was lost in translation.

A serious case can be made that to propose the resumption of these negotiations, under this format, was meaningless. There’s no evidence in the horizon both parties might touch the fundamental issue anytime soon: the whole geopolitical strategic equation in Eastern Europe, from the Barents Sea to the Black Sea and beyond – leading to an “indivisibility of security” new deal with global repercussions.

That implies that whatever track these negotiations may follow further on down the road, they are an objective impossibility. Meanwhile, the proxy war in Ukraine – and the SMO – will go on.

That would also suggest that the Moscow security establishment considers the neo-nazi instrumentalized goons in Kiev at best as a re-enactment of the 6th Army of Paulus, with which you negotiate the end of a battle, but not the end of the war.

Even NATO semi-realists as retired Commodore Steven Jermy have been forced to admit that “Russia is in the driving seat” and clueless Europeans “appear to believe that the losers should dictate the terms of ceasefire or surrender.”

All the barking by the – European – chihuahuas of war cannot disguise the fundamental geopolitical/military fact: a massive NATO humiliation. Trump’s humongous problem is that he has to manage it – and sell it to domestic public opinion and the global public opinion as some sort of “deal” he struck with Putin.

It’s enlightening once again to go back to Grandmaster Lavrov, always the uber-realist, back in September 2024: “In April 2022, Russian and Ukrainian negotiators reached agreement in Istanbul. If that agreement had been observed, Ukraine would have preserved part of Donbass. But every time another agreement, always accepted by Russia, is broken, Ukraine shrinks in size.”

The (Great) Game, revisited

Now back to the (Great) Game. Kiev negotiators eventually admitting Ukrainian capitulation means a NATO capitulation and an Empire of Chaos capitulation. That’s the ultimate anathema for the US ruling classes. Even an ultra-negotiated, carefully managed Ukrainian surrender will be an impossible sell – not to mention Washington under Narcissus Drowned Trump acknowledging a strategic defeat.

Because that will mean the Empire of Chaos losing Eurasia for good: the ultimate Mackinder/Brzezinski nightmare. Coupled with the consequential solidification of the multi-nodal, multipolar world.

The Russia-China stategic partnership is very much aware of every nook and cranny in this larger-than-life process. Beyond the current Turkish kabuki, they clearly understand the Big Eurasia Equation.

Beijing is fully aware NATO’s real goal was always to confront it via Russia. Ukraine was NATO’s pawn to take down Russia then get to China from the West. The goal of the US ruling elites as they configured their thalassocratic empire remains to blockade China from the West by land and sea, using Russia; then use Taiwan as a staging area to blockade China from the East by sea. No wonder control of Taiwan is a Chinese strategic imperative.

Enter Mackinder panic – all over again: the China-Russia strategic partnership can beat NATO hands down – and Russia, by itself, is already doing it. Xi and Putin once again discussed the chessboard in detail, in person, prior to the Victory Day parade last week in Moscow.

The endgame, once again, is clear: the US losing the entire Eurasian land mass. Ukraine, under these immense geopolitical imperatives, is only a sovereign-deprived pawn in the (Great) Game.

As for the tantrum-addicted clown in Kiev, he is merely an actor with no authority whatsoever, negotiations included. He is completely dominated by Ukrainian neo-Nazis who will kill him if and when the war is over. He merely fronts for them and gets paid off. And that’s why – enthusiastically supported by inconsequential London, Paris and Berlin – he’s obsessed to continue a Forever War destroying the very nation he claims to represent.

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

Post Reply