Russia today

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

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Fri Jul 04, 2025 3:47 pm

PRESIDENT VLADIMIR PUTIN DID NOT ASK PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP FOR A BOTTLE OF HIS FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT AND VICTORY PERFUMES — “I’M NOT HAPPY ABOUT THAT”, TRUMP HAS REVEALED

Image

By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

In the hour-long telephone call on Thursday (July 3) between the presidents of Russia and the United States, something President Vladimir Putin said, and also didn’t say, got up President Donald Trump’s nose.

Trump was so confident he could persuade Putin to agree to access to the Russian market for Trump’s perfumes for men and women – Fight Fight Fight cologne and Victory 45-47 – that he announced their telephone call 21 minutes before it started:

Putin was more reticent. “The Kremlin will not be announcing to media in advance a possible date and time of a telephone call between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump and will provide information only if such a conversation takes place, Russian Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday. ‘We are never announcing such telephone calls in advance and we will inform you following the fact when and if this happens,’ Peskov said at a news briefing.” It was two in the Moscow afternoon – three hours before the call began.

Putin then left a public appearance to prepare. “No good to keep him waiting – he may be offended,” Putin told Tass. The state news agency does not translate irony from Russian to English

After the call had concluded at 11 am Washington time, 6 pm Moscow time, Trump said nothing. He tweeted instead that “we brought the price of Eggs back to what they were supposed to be.” At the end of Trump’s day, six hours later, he was celebrating a flyover he has arranged for Friday of B-2s and F-35s over the White House. But there was a word about the Putin call in a brief airfield Q&A although it has been omitted from the excerpt on Trump’s tweet log.

In fact, according to the longer Fox News video record, Trump told reporters that his expectations had been dashed. “We had a call. It was pretty long call. We talked about a lotta things, including Iran. And we also talked about the, as you know, the war, Ukraine. And I, uh, I’m not happy about that. No, I didn’t make any progress with him today at all.” — Min 1:57-2:03.

Image
Source: https://www.foxnews.com/video/6375225337112

Trump also denied he had stopped the flow of US weapons to Ukraine. “Why did you pause?” Trump was asked. “We haven’t. We are giving weapons… we are trying to help them, but Biden, you know, emptied out our whole country giving them weapons. And we have to make sure we have enough for ourselves.” Min 5:29.

In short, Trump has rejected every one of the terms for an end-of-war settlement in the Ukraine which Putin has tabled.

Putin’s foreign affairs assistant and spokesman, Yury Ushakov, does not want to leave a bad smell. In his read-out of the presidents’ conversation, posted by the Kremlin thirty minutes after it had ended – five hours before Trump made his comments – Ushakov acknowledged that in the opening small talk Putin had “wished Donald Trump success in implementing the [tax law and budget] changes he envisioned and, naturally, offered greetings for Independence Day, the national day of the United States, which will be celebrated tomorrow. At the same time, it was noted by our side that Russia had played a significant part in the establishment of the United States as a nation, including during the War of Independence, fought 250 years ago, and later during the Civil War, which ended 160 years ago. It was stated that our countries are bound not only by their alliance during World Wars One and Two, but also by deeper historical ties.”

About Trump’s Fight Fight Fight, the USAF bombing raid on Iran on June 22, Ushakov says Putin “emphasised it was crucial to settle any and all contentious issues, differences, and conflicts exclusively via political and diplomatic means. The two leaders agreed to maintain contact on the issue between the respective foreign services, defence ministries, and presidential aides.” Ushakov’s references to “political and diplomatic means” and to “contact…between the…defence ministries” was Putin’s hint that if Trump is thinking of another US Air Force attack on Iran, Russian-supplied air defence systems may be activated and fired.

Image
Source: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/77354

On the war in the Ukraine, “naturally the issues surrounding Ukraine were also discussed,” Ushakov has recorded. “Donald Trump has once again raised the issue of ending the hostilities as soon as possible. In turn, Vladimir Putin noted that we still continued the search for a political, negotiated solution to the conflict. He informed his counterpart on the progress in implementing the humanitarian agreements reached during the second round of direct Russian-Ukrainian talks held in Istanbul. He also noted Russia was willing to pursue negotiations. Additionally, the President of Russia said that Russia would strive to achieve its goals, namely the elimination of the well-known root causes that led to the current state of affairs, the bitter confrontation that we are seeing now. Russia will not back down from these goals.”

Putin’s emphasis to Trump in the connection he made between the phrases “root causes” and “not back down” upset the US president. He was still smarting five hours later when he said: “I’m not happy about that. No, I didn’t make any progress with him today at all.”

So upset was Trump that he failed to register Putin’s offer to give Trump’s business constituents money. According to Ushakov, Putin’s deals included “an exchange of motion pictures promoting traditional values, which both we and the Trump administration hold dear” and “a number of promising projects in economy, notably the energy sector and space exploration.”

Earlier in the week, anticipating the Putin-Trump call, a Moscow source in a position to know said: “Trump is avoiding talking details. He is not getting any concessions. He asked for unconditional ceasefire and did not get it. He is not ready to completely abandon Ukraine.”

Ushakov has attempted to paper over the widening differences with Putin which Trump is now acknowledging. “I would like to point out that the conversation between the two presidents has, as always, shown that they are on the same page. It was candid, business-minded, and concrete.”

As for concrete business with Trump’s line of cologne and perfume, no Moscow source in a position to know claims to know. At the last report of Putin’s taste in perfume, a Russian perfumer said she had created “for Putin, a chord of metallic freshness, tart and dynamic, with the warm breathing of sandal and cedar, the smoke of the vetiver and expensive leather. …The president’s perfume was placed in a box in the form of an ancient chest, and a bottle was placed in the form of an old flask with a spray gun… I [Zhanna Gladkova] hear from rumours that Putin enjoyed my fragrance before meeting with the heads of state…mixing grapefruit with bergamot.”

Image
Left: https://www.rbth.com/lifestyle/331719-t ... m-of-putin (February 2020); right, https://ria.ru/20190105/1549059349.html (January 5, 2019).

In January 2019 it was reported that a Moscow perfumer was selling male and female perfumes with Putin’s image on the bottle, box, and advertising. “Male and female fragrances, inspired by Russian President Vladimir Putin, appeared on sale in Moscow. At the same time, the Kremlin reported that it did not consent to the use of the name of Vladimir Putin for commercial purposes. ‘No, no one was approved,’ presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov told RIA Novosti.”

Image
“My new Trump fragrances are here…They represent winning. We all want to be winning,” Trump says in a sales promotion on the website https://gettrumpfragrances.com/

https://johnhelmer.net/president-vladim ... more-92011

******

Mark Episkopos: Despite war, Moscow is booming
July 3, 2025
By Mark Episkopos, Responsible Statecraft, 6/10/25

Russia is no stranger to costly, grinding wars. Soviet authorities made a point of allowing the performing arts to continue during the 872-day battle for Leningrad during World War II, widely considered the bloodiest siege in history.

Thousands of displaced and starving locals flocked to the Mariinsky, Komissarzhevskaya, and other theaters to the unrelenting hum of shelling and air raid sirens. The 1942 Leningrad premiere of Shostakovich’s Seventh Symphony stands as both a singular cultural achievement and a grim reminder of Russian tenacity in the face of unspeakable hardship.

The situation today is very far removed from the horrors of the Eastern Front. I found nary a hint after spending over a week in Moscow that I am in a country prosecuting the largest and most destructive war in Europe since 1945. Business is booming. Previously vacant storefronts in Moscow’s luxury GUM department store and the city’s many other shopping malls are, for the most part, reoccupied by Chinese companies and multibrand stores selling the same Western high-end products that continue to flood into Moscow through countless parallel import schemes that have proven highly lucrative for Russia’s neighbors.

It was striking how convincingly Chinese car manufacturers have tightened their grip over the Russian market. “What, did you expect us to walk?” one of my interlocutors said, perhaps sensing my incredulity. “We have to drive something.” Yet German cars remain a clear status symbol for well-off Russians — one can find far more Mercedes and Maybach makes on the streets of Moscow than in Washington, D.C.

It is true the city is peppered with military recruitment posters, but this, too, is a remarkable testament to the normalcy the Kremlin has been able to maintain over three years into this war. Russian President Vladimir Putin resisted calls from Moscow’s hardliners — more on them shortly — to pursue full-scale wartime mobilization, instead creating a soft semi-mobilization model that draws large numbers of contract soldiers with generous compensation and benefits packages.

The government enjoys popular confidence, stemming in no small part from its effective handling of the economy. It is shocking to the Western imagination that, even amidst this war and the many personal tragedies that come with it, there is a sense among the people I spoke to that the post-1999 Russian Federation is the most stable, comfortable iteration of Russia in recent and even distant memory.

The rhythm of Moscow life is dictated by an insatiable hunger for upward mobility and ever-greater consumption — there is a brazenly capitalistic quality to it all that would take many Americans, let alone our more staid Western European friends, by surprise. Russians generally still do see themselves as Europeans and as part of a broader Western civilizational inheritance, but there is a realization that must have crept in somewhere between 20,000 sanctions imposed since 2014 that life will go on with this conflict in the background and without the West, even if the vast majority of Russians strongly prefer to be part of a common Western commercial and cultural space.

I came away from my contacts with the Moscow elite, including officials, with the conclusion that there are two broad camps in Russia. Most elites are what I would describe as situational pragmatists. These aren’t people who would give away the farm for a peace deal, but they are well aware of the long-term costs of prosecuting this war — including a deepening dependence on China that far from everyone in Moscow is comfortable with.

They are also cautiously interested in working with the Trump administration on a settlement that doesn’t just end the war but potentially addresses a broader constellation of issues in the ongoing confrontation between Russia and the West.

Then there is a smaller faction of hardliners who treat this war not as an arena for resolving larger strategic issues between Russia and the West but as a bilateral conflict wherein Moscow’s goal is simply to crush Ukraine and secure its unconditional capitulation. Though the political balance of power decidedly tilts toward the moderates, especially with the advent earlier this year of a U.S. administration that supports a negotiated settlement, the hardliners’ influence wanes and waxes proportionally with the belief that the U.S. is unable or unwilling to facilitate a settlement that satisfies Russia’s core demands.

What exactly these demands are, and whether Russia is willing to compromise on them, is a complex issue that hinges on all the potential linkages involved. To what extent would Russia, for example, be willing to scale back its territorial claims in exchange for a reopening of Nord Stream 2, reintegration into the SWIFT financial messaging system and other financial institutions, or an agreement foreclosing NATO’s eastward enlargement?

Still, nearly everyone I spoke to identified a baseline set of conditions for any peace deal. These include Ukrainian neutrality and non-bloc status, limits on Ukraine’s postwar military, guarantees against the deployment of any Western troops on Ukrainian territory, and at least de facto international recognition of territories controlled by Russia. My interlocutors argued that an unconditional ceasefire without a roadmap for addressing these issues is a recipe for freezing the conflict in Ukraine’s favor, something they say the Kremlin will never agree to.

These points are of course subject to numerous caveats and provisos. For one, Russia’s insistence on non-bloc status never extended to Ukraine’s ability to seek EU membership, something Kyiv can hold up as a victory in a settlement. There is also an implicit recognition that Moscow can’t prevent Ukraine from maintaining a domestic deterrent, even if subject to certain restrictions along the lines discussed during the 2022 Istanbul negotiations, against a Russian reinvasion.

I developed the impression from my meetings that Russia would demonstrate a great degree of flexibility in other areas, including rights of Russian speakers in Ukraine and the status of around $300 billion in Russian assets frozen in the West, if the strategic issues rehearsed above are resolved to Moscow’s satisfaction.

No one in Moscow who favors a settlement, which is almost everyone I spoke to, wants America to “walk away” from this war in the way that U.S. officials have previously suggested.

There is a widespread recognition that, if the White House permanently extricates itself from the conflict, Moscow would be left with European and Ukrainian leaders who will reject anything that can be remotely perceived as a concession. In that case, the Kremlin will undoubtedly decide that it has little choice but to take this war to its ugly conclusion.

I return from Russia with the conviction that such an outcome is neither inevitable nor desirable from Moscow’s perspective. A deal is possible, which is not to say that it can be achieved in short order or that Russia won’t drive a hard bargain. But for all of the destruction and tragedy visited by this war, it is not, mercifully for all involved, Leningrad in 1942.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/07/mar ... s-booming/

******

Permitted terrorist organization
July 4, 11:00

Image

Russia has officially recognized the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. Earlier, the Taliban was removed from the list of terrorist organizations.

The Taliban have fulfilled most of Russia's wishes since 2021 ("they are cutting down the blacks", reducing poppy crops, and not interfering with Central Asia. Yes, women are still oppressed and their government is far from inclusive, but overall, they demonstrate adequacy and constructiveness. The Taliban committed their last terrorist attacks back in 2021 against the occupation forces and the puppet regime of Ashraf Ghani. Unofficially, the Russian Federation has long recognized the Taliban and actively maintained contacts with them since 2021-2022, despite the fact that the Taliban were considered terrorists by us for several years after their victory. For several years now, Afghanistan has been receiving fuel and grain from Russia. It is expected that Russia's trade turnover with Afghanistan will expand.

The Taliban can be wished that they have more adequate factions at the helm and that they do not allow a new civil war in Afghanistan. And they continued to sell drugs pinch.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9936212.html

Project of an artificial island in Sevastopol
July 4, 16:48

Image

A project for an artificial island at the entrance to Sevastopol Bay. So far, it has only been submitted to a competition.
Something in the style of the Arab artificial islands. If it ever gets to implementation, it will clearly not be cheap.
As for me, it would be good to first build a tunnel/bridge across the bay, and then think about artificial islands.

Image

Image

There won't be any mega-projects in Sevastopol before the end of the war anyway.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9936967.html

In the footsteps of the Kuril landing
July 3, 19:08

In the footsteps of the Kuril landing

The search expedition "In the Footsteps of the Kuril Landing" has started in the Sakhalin Region.
On July 1, 2025, a unique search expedition "In the Footsteps of the Kuril Landing" began on Shumshu Island. About a hundred volunteers from various regions of Russia are participating in it. The goal of the expedition is to find the bodies of the fallen heroes and bury them with military honors. Such large-scale work has never been carried out here before.

The assault on Shumshu Island in August 1945 was the last major operation of the Red Army during World War II. Soviet paratroopers attacked the prepared positions of the enemy, who had a tenfold numerical superiority, and won. The Japanese tried to throw the landing force into the sea with the help of tanks, but were unsuccessful. The destroyed vehicles remained on the battlefield. Today they are part of the exposition of the memorial complex. During the plenary session of the Eastern Economic Forum in the fall of 2024, Russian President Vladimir Putin instructed to perpetuate the memory of the Kuril landing operation. Work in this area is under the control of Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation - Presidential Plenipotentiary Envoy to the Far Eastern Federal District Yuri Trutnev.

The first group of expedition participants, consisting of 30 people, has already arrived in Shumsha on two helicopters. On the first day of work, the team focused on setting up the camp, which is equipped with everything necessary for comfortable living.
- The guys have just arrived, today they will have an introductory day. We will help them settle in our tent camp, tell them how things are with life support, food, what the daily routine is, and conduct a sightseeing tour for them. After that, we will get together with the squad leaders, set out a route for each, and tomorrow the participants will go out into the fields, - shared Artem Bandura, head of the Sakhalin regional branch of the Search Movement of Russia.
The expedition will work in the northern part of the island, including the area of ​​Mount Severnaya. This is where the most fierce battles took place. The exact number of fallen Soviet soldiers is still unknown.

- Of course, we really wanted to get here. The road we traveled was worth it. This is a significant place in the history of our country. Shumshu reminds us of the price of Victory over militarist Japan. Everyone is charged with work, everyone has experience in various expeditions, including in the battlefields of the Far Eastern Front. Therefore, we are not afraid of the conditions in which we will have to be, - shared Margarita Morozova, a participant in the expedition from Moscow.
Sakhalin searchers began reconnaissance work before the start of the expedition. Personal belongings of servicemen and elements of uniform have already been found. They can help in establishing the identity of the fallen. In addition, samples of weapons have been found. In particular, the remains of a Japanese 320 mm mortar.
The grand opening of the memorial complex on Shumshu Island will take place in August. The plans include a large-scale reconstruction of the battle, as well as the triathlon "Height 171".

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Good luck to the searchers in their important work.
This year we must worthily celebrate the 80th anniversary of the Victory over imperialist Japan. Japanese complaints and whining about this matter - absolutely do not care.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9935286.html

Google Translator

******

Aliyev Expects To Rise To Global Stardom By Stirring Up Highly Publicized Trouble With Russia
Andrew Korybko
Jul 03, 2025

Image

This might backfire if the Global South perceives him to be a Western proxy and Russia intensifies its asymmetrical responses, however, so it’s best for him to relent before it’s too late.

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev was hitherto known as a pragmatic leader who was actively multi-aligning between competing power centers. As part of that policy, Azerbaijan and Russia became strategic allies, yet he suddenly jeopardized their mutually beneficial relations by stirring up highly publicized trouble with Russia over the past week, which readers can learn more about here and here. It was completely out of character for him to do this, thus raising questions about his motives.

In short, Azerbaijan appears to be taking advantage of reports that Armenia might open the “Zangezur Corridor” but without allowing it to come under Russian control like agreed. That would streamline Turkiye’s military logistics to Central Asia and thus turbocharge its rise as a Eurasian Great Power at the expense of Russian influence there. Even if that unfolds, Aliyev could still maintain his country’s strategic ties with Russia, so he might arguably have image-related motives for unexpectedly jeopardizing them.

To explain, his decision to stir up trouble with Russia might be partially meant to cement his standing among the Central Asian members of the Turkic bloc that Ankara seeks to assemble on the basis of the “Organization of Turkic States” (OTS). By spinning his moves as “standing up to Russia”, he could be trying to inspire them to follow his lead in future disputes with it. If successful, then the influence that he obtains over them could help prevent Azerbaijan from becoming Turkiye’s junior partner in the OTS.

Aliyev is also already popular with the broader Muslim World (“Ummah”) beyond Central Asia after expelling Armenia’s occupying forces from his country. Azerbaijan’s example of “standing up to Russia” could thus inspire other medium and lesser Muslim powers to do the same vis-à-vis other Great Powers. Through these means, his personal influence and Azerbaijan’s national influence could spread further across the Eastern Hemisphere, which he might expect to bring him and his country more benefits.

Another image-related motive might be connected with the rest of the Global South’s perception of Azerbaijan. His country chaired the Non-Aligned Movement from 2019-2023, which catapulted its influence among this diverse community of countries. He might therefore have also intended to have Azerbaijan serve as an example for all of them too by spinning his latest moves as embodying the principles that they all adhere to in order to maximally expand Azerbaijan’s influence and his own.

The irreplaceable role that Azerbaijan plays for turbocharging Turkiye’s rise as a Eurasian Great Power at the expense of Russian influence in Central Asia could pair with the influence that he wants to obtain across the entire non-West to facilitate a rapprochement with the US and the EU. They exploited the Second Karabakh War to accuse him of “ethnic cleansing” as part of a ploy to turn Armenia into their bastion of regional influence but might soon embrace him now that he’s “standing up to Russia”.

These motives suggest that Aliyev expects to rise to global stardom by stirring up highly publicized trouble with Russia. Apart from this ambition, he might have also been misled by Erdogan into believing that Azerbaijan will benefit from opening the West’s “second front” against Russia, albeit only a political one (for now at least). This might backfire if the Global South perceives him to be a Western proxy and Russia intensifies its asymmetrical responses, however, so it’s best for him to relent before it’s too late.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/aliyev-e ... -to-global

*****

The parliamentary seat has been shaken
July 3, 2025

The parliamentary seat has been shaken

" On the fate of the defender of Uzbeks from the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug Duma "

A month has passed since the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug Duma deputy Khalid Taghi-Zade assured the public of the original Uzbek affiliation of Yugra and praised Khan Kuchum, who fought against Russian troops in the 16th century. How does the situation look now?

Today, a regional parliament session was held to discuss the issue of the deputy's performance. As it turned out, during the last session of the Duma, he actually boycotted his duties and was busy with other things .

The parliamentarians almost unanimously decided to deprive Taghi-Zade of his salary, while leaving him with a parliamentary mandate. The deputy was offered to work for the benefit of the residents for free, which he called illegal, citing the absence of a decision on this from one of the committees and the presence of a family.

The subject of discussion was also his May statements, which actually fall under the criminal code. Some deputies demanded that he be completely stripped of his powers, but they still have not come to a decision on conducting an expert examination of his words.

The irony of the situation is that the region itself has been actively fighting illegals and violations of the migration regime for the past year. In this context, maintaining the deputy's powers looks, hmm, extremely contradictory.

And how such a step of half a bump looks in the media against the backdrop of the events surrounding the arrest of an Azerbaijani ethnic organized crime group in Yekaterinburg is a completely rhetorical question.

https://rybar.ru/deputatskoe-kreslo-poshatnulos/

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

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

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sat Jul 05, 2025 5:56 pm

Western businesses in no rush to leave Russia – survey
July 4, 2025
RT, 6/10/25

The majority of Western companies operating in Russia are not planning to leave the country, despite the challenges posed by sanctions, according to a new survey by the Association of European Businesses (AEB).

Many US, European, and Asian businesses exited Russia after the West imposed sweeping sanctions on Moscow over the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Others left citing reputational concerns or fear of secondary sanctions. However, the annual poll from the AEB published on Monday indicates that most companies that stayed see long-term potential in the Russian market, despite Western restrictions weighing on short-term performance.

Of the companies surveyed by the AEB, 67% said they were not considering leaving, up slightly from 66% last year. Most respondents said their Russian operations remain a key part of their global business.

Companies identified opportunities such as market share growth (50%), business expansion (39%), and new customer segments (32%) as the primary reasons to stay. Over half (56%) said they are continuing investment projects, citing the Russian market’s size, potential, and positive developments.

The survey showed that while short-term business confidence among foreign firms has dipped, longer-term expectations have improved compared to last year: 82% of respondents said they were anticipating significant growth within a decade, up from 66% last year.

The survey found that most companies have adapted to sanctions but still face challenges, including payment delays, reputational risks and reluctance from foreign partners to work with Russia-linked entities. About 87% said they were negatively affected by Western sanctions and Russian countermeasures over the past year, citing banking curbs, export-import restrictions, frozen assets, SWIFT disconnection, and software and transport limits. Some 71% said they don’t expect any sanctions relief in 2025.

Still, 59% forecast turnover growth over the next three years, up from 53% in 2024. The AEB said its Business Climate Index has climbed to 127 points out of 200, steadily improving since falling to 80 points in 2022.

“[This] confirms that European companies in Russia have reached a certain equilibrium in the new economic reality,” AEB CEO Tadzio Schilling said. “Business has entered a phase of stabilization – companies have adapted their operating models, found alternative supply chains and learned to work under the conditions of the remaining restrictions.”

He added that the results reflect “business environment’s stability,” noting that despite the ongoing challenges and uncertainty, companies remain “cautiously optimistic.”

The AEB represents more than 380 companies from EU states, the European Free Trade Association, and other foreign countries operating in Russia. This year’s survey was conducted between April and May and included input from top managers at 100 member companies across various sectors.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/07/wes ... ia-survey/

****

Chairman of the Azerbaijani Cultural Autonomy of the Moscow Region is expelled from Russia
July 4, 18:53

Image

Azerbaijani media reports that the chairman of the Regional National-Cultural Autonomy of Azerbaijanis of the Moscow Region, Elshan Ibragimov, has been stripped of his Russian citizenship and is being expelled from the country.

P.S. You know, despite the state's inertia in diaspora issues and extremely slow reaction, it seems to me that this time everything will be different. It is difficult to rouse the state machine from its dormant state in such matters, but if this does happen, if it starts up and moves, no one will be happy. Georgian business and Georgian thieves in law under Saakashvili will not let you lie.

So, I think we will not see a nervous hasty reaction, but rather long-term consequences for Azerbaijan, which will be very painful for Azerbaijani business, networks of influence and crime.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9937373.html

Tourist flow from Russia to Azerbaijan decreased by 40%
July 5, 17:14

Image

The tourist flow from Russia to Azerbaijan has already decreased by 40%. The number of new bookings is rapidly falling. Citizens, in general, listen to the recommendation of the Russian Foreign Ministry not to visit Azerbaijan in the near future, so as not to become hostages.

Trips to Azerbaijan and ignoring Azerbaijani products and services are exclusively a matter of citizen consciousness.
Moreover, there are more than enough alternatives. By the way, in Crimea, the tourist flow has increased by 15% in six months compared to the first half of 2024. The war, the closed airport and the accident in the Kerch Strait with fuel oil emissions have not scared them off.

P.S. Investigative actions are also ongoing in a number of cases related to Azerbaijani crime with potential arrests and deportations from the Russian Federation. The millstones have slowly begun to turn.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9938769.html

Google Translator

******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
At the congress, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation is going to call on Putin to rename Volgograd to Stalingrad. Putin has already spoken out on this issue, pointing out that it is up to the city's residents to decide. Now the city is renamed Stalingrad several times a year for holidays + this year the city airport was named Stalingrad.

They have also finally decided to review the results of the 20th Congress and recognize Khrushchev's report on Stalin as erroneous and politically biased.
In fact, Khrushchev's report is more than a mistake - it caused enormous damage to both the USSR and the entire socialist camp. In 2026, it will be 70 years since the 20th Congress. It's time to call a spade a spade.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

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

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

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sun Jul 06, 2025 5:44 pm

The Communist Party of the Russian Federation officially condemned Khrushchev's report at the 20th Congress of the CPSU
Shvonder
July 6, 13:15

Image

Yesterday evening, after discussions, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation officially recognized Khrushchev's report "On Stalin's Personality Cult" as a serious mistake.
Zyuganov in his speech called Khrushchev's report a crime against the peoples of the USSR.
Yes, all this is very late, of course, but better late than never. Khrushchev with his "de-Stalinization" campaign caused enormous damage to the USSR, the Soviet bloc and the international communist movement. One of the greatest ideological sabotage of the 20th century. It took our Communist Party 69 years to officially recognize this. Well, I repeat - "mistake" is putting it mildly. We are still dealing with many of the consequences of that policy.

Also at the congress, Zyuganov was re-elected as the head of the CPRF. Considering that during the war, real political life is practically at a standstill, in the current reality this is not so critical. Although talk about updating the party leadership has been going on for a long time. Zyuganov himself is already over 80, although when he was recently at the 2nd anti-fascist forum in Moscow, he gave quite a vigorous speech there. I will also note that one of the friends, who is also a reader of the magazine, was approved as a candidate for membership in the Central Committee.

Image

Another noteworthy event was the presence at the congress of Kiriyenko, who oversees domestic policy and spoke at the podium with a portrait of Lenin. In addition to the protocol message from Putin, Kiriyenko in his speech noted the patriotic position of the CPRF in supporting the SVO and many years of work on delivering humanitarian aid to Donbass. Dozens of party members died at the front. The main message is the need for a stable rear to achieve victory in the war against Nazism.

Image

He did not elaborate on the recent excrements of the Black Hundreds that are splitting this very unity.

Generally speaking, in the coming years, the participation/assistance of the army in the SVO will play a pressing role in matters of domestic policy and elections. The "SVO Participant" card is already in high demand among people who plan their political careers in advance (including by means of forgery). Accordingly, active assistance from the SVO for the CPRF may become a guarantee of improved results in the next elections.

More photos from the congress.

Image

Image

Image

(More photos at link.)

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9940212.html

Another Stalin monument unveiled in Vologda Oblast
July 6, 18:50

Image

In the Vologda region, in Nikolsk, another monument to Stalin was unveiled in the form of a small bust on a high pedestal.
The monument was installed at the initiative of local residents in the 50th Anniversary of Victory Park.
The local administration stated that it respects the will of local residents and notes the importance of perpetuating the role of Stalin. At the same time, it asks that next time advance notice be given about the installation of monuments.

In 6 months, 3 monuments to Stalin have already been erected in the Vologda Region. This activity is associated with the position of Governor Filimonov, who, in addition to a complimentary attitude towards Stalin, also lobbies for the perpetuation of the memory of Ivan the Terrible. Actually, why not, like Stalin, Ivan the Terrible fully deserves it for his services in strengthening our state. Despite various blunders, there was more good in his activities, like Stalin, than bad.

Image

The approved project of the monument to Ivan the Terrible. It should be erected this year.
It is worth noting that it was under Stalin that the role of Ivan the Terrible was actualized through a famous film. Under the Romanovs, the memory of Ivan the Terrible was pretty much oppressed.

Image

In general, adequate people have no problems with the installation of monuments to outstanding figures of the Tsarist, Imperial and Soviet eras.
Ivan the Terrible, Peter the Great and Joseph Stalin organically coexist in the concept of a single national history.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9940900.html

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

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

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Tue Jul 08, 2025 2:50 pm

FLASH IN THE PAN — RUSSIAN PUBLIC OPINION TOWARDS GERMANY, U.S. AS ENEMIES

Image

By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

Russian public opinion isn’t well understood in the US because Russian opinion changes with the news from the Ukraine battlefield and from President Donald Trump’s (lead image, right) warmaking elsewhere; because there are more Americans who want to be loved by Russians than there are Russians who want to be loved by Americans; and because US experts on Russia haven’t caught up with the latest Russian opinion polling.

This reveals that the initial Russian optimism of last December and January that Trump’s inauguration might produce a negotiated end to the war is evaporating rapidly. Immediately after the presidential election last November, Levada, an independent Moscow pollster, reported that 54% of Russians surveyed across the country were hopeful of an improvement in relations with the US. This had shrunk to 44% in January after the inauguration. At that time, the Levada poll revealed that “almost two thirds of the respondents rate relations between Russia and the United States as bad. The majority of respondents have a bad attitude towards Joe Biden, while the majority have a good attitude towards Donald Trump. The good attitude towards Trump is due to his attempts to resolve the Ukrainian conflict and improve relations with Russia.”

That was measured between February 20 and 25. The survey followed Trump’s telephone call with President Vladimir Putin on February 12 and the first round of face-to-face negotiations between US and Russian delegations in Saudi Arabia on February 18.

Five months later, after the Russian media have reported Trump’s bombing of Yemen and Iran, his involvement in the drone attack on Russian bomber bases on June 1, and the failure of the end-of-war negotiations in Istanbul, the Levada Centre has not yet reported the shift in Russian sentiment towards Trump.

Because Russians also report believing that Germany follows US orders, and that the German tanks which invaded Kursk between last August and December have now been destroyed, public hostility towards the Germans as the “main enemy” is shrinking below the levels of hostility recorded towards France and the UK.

A poll released in mid-May by the state-owned Russian Public Opinion Research Centre (VTsIOM) ranked France several points ahead of the UK and Germany on the enemies list. “The three ill-wishers included: France (48%, +27 p.p. from 2022), the United Kingdom (42%, +3 p.p.) and Germany (41%, +9 percentage points).” “For the first time in the history of monitoring, the United States lost its leadership in the rating of ill-wishers at once to three European countries, the so-called leaders of the ‘coalition’ in the conflict in Ukraine – France, Great Britain and Germany — which is largely due to the change of power abroad and their rhetoric to resolve the Ukrainian crisis.”

Levada analyst Denis Volkov was asked if he believes the trend for the “main enemy” was a flash in the pan towards Germany, and is now reverting towards the US again. He replied that Levada hasn’t made a new poll on this question so he cannot say if this trend has taken place or not.

In Volkov’s analysis of the Levada poll of last December, the main enemies were, in order of magnitude, the Ukraine at 74%, followed within the margin of statistical error by Poland (74%), the US (71%), the European Union (70%), and the UK (70%). At the time Germany trailed with France at 61% and 59%, respectively. This accurately reflected the battlefield news. A spurt in hostility towards Germany followed the televised images of German tanks in the invasion of Kursk from last August and fresh threats against Russia from the newly elected German Chancellor, Friedrich Merz (lead image, left).

Image
Source: https://www.levada.ru/2024/12/09/i-ne-d ... rag-a-kak/ -- published on December 9, 2024. For analysis, click to read.

Levada’s tabulation of the five main enemies from 2010 to 2025 shows the US led the Europeans by a large margin immediately after the putsch in Kiev in 2014 with the start of sanctions war by the Obama Administration. There was no noticeable decline in hostility towards the US during Trump’s first term. The abrupt decline at the start of 2025 was exceptional.

Image
Source: https://www.russiamatters.org/blog/foll ... nded-fence

As for the perception of the US as Russia’s main enemy, Levada polling shows that with each new presidential election Russians have expressed hopefulness towards an improvement in relations. The result is volatility around the start of Barack Obama’s first term in 2009, Trump’s first term in 2017, Biden’s first term in 2021, and Trump’s second term in 2025.

Image
Source: https://www.russiamatters.org/blog/foll ... nded-fence

According to Simon Saradzhyan last month, the flash in the pan for Trump has come, not from Trump’s actions, but from Putin’s words. “Obviously, Trump, unlike Biden, throughout his third presidential campaign, reportedly hinted at readiness to support some of Russia’s demands if he were to get a chance to mediate an end to Russian-Ukrainian hostilities from the White House. But many Russians would not have appreciated these hints if Russia’s state-controlled national television channels—which over half of them rely on for news, according to Levada—had not, on orders from the Kremlin, publicized them, ramping up the positive coverage of Trump, who had not only had ‘a very good’ relationship with the Russian leader, but also whom Putin apparently viewed as more likely to strike a deal on ending the Russia-Ukraine war on terms that would be favourable for Russia.”

“Should, however, Trump ‘disappoint’ Putin on Ukraine (or other issues), expect another swing first in Putin’s views and then in the Russian public opinion.”

https://johnhelmer.net/flash-in-the-pan ... more-92033

******

Survey on parasitism
July 7, 22:59

Image

VTsIOM conducted a survey on the introduction of a tax on parasitism in Russia. 59% spoke out against the tax, 33% for it.

Survey on parasitism

The VTsIOM analytical center presents the results of a monitoring study on parasitism.

Welcome to the workers, or No Entry for parasites

In Soviet mass culture, a person who avoided socially useful work and lived at the expense of others was something of a national antihero. Times have changed, but the perception of the phenomenon in question has not: the word "parasitism" still has an exclusively negative connotation in our society. In the understanding of Russians, parasitism is a kind of deviant behavior, characterized by a conscious refusal to work, a parasitic attitude and often a marginal lifestyle. Hence the image of a parasite as a lazy, selfish, passive person without life goals and guidelines, in whom it is hardly possible to see a victim of difficult economic circumstances.

From the above, it is easy to guess that people of working age who consciously do not work will face public censure. However, this is probably all that will happen: the use of formal punitive measures against parasites today finds little support. In Russia, there is still no consensus on the return of institutional punishment for evading work: as ten years ago, the opinions of Russians on this issue are divided equally. Our fellow citizens are also less likely to support punishing parasites with the “ruble”: there are almost twice as many opponents of the initiative as there are supporters. Thus, despite all their dislike for parasitism, Russians apparently realize the inappropriateness of the stick method and are less likely to place responsibility for solving the problem on the state. The question of the effectiveness of “carrots” remains open for now…

Just so as not to work

Russians have repeatedly named work as one of the most important attributes of everyday life. And it is not only about material incentives: the motivation to work remains in the case of a hypothetical and real lottery win. During the June survey, the majority of Russians also said that if they had the opportunity not to work, they would refuse such an opportunity. The data obtained once again show that Russia has a special attitude to work. The Soviet period laid a solid foundation for labor education, the echoes of which are most strongly felt by older generations. If the latter firmly adhere to the attitude "he who does not work, neither shall he eat", then the wisdom of "not only work ..." resonates more with the youth. Young people are more open and tolerant of alternative life scenarios in which work does not necessarily play a primary role. In particular, zoomers admit 1.5-2 times more often than representatives of the Soviet generations that they are ready not to work if they had such an opportunity. And it is not about laziness, but about the hierarchy of life values. Not working for zoomers does not mean being an irresponsible egoist, it is rather an opportunity to occupy yourself with something else - a hobby, self-development, sports, etc. That is, entering the labor market for young people may be associated with the fear of losing personal freedom, the inability to find time for themselves and their hobbies. This is one of the reasons why Russians who consciously do not work are unlikely to be censured by the youth; a negative attitude towards parasites, as well as the desire to prosecute them by law and even fine them, grows with age, reaching a maximum among generations hardened by work (stagnation and thaw). This explains the observation, which at first glance seems paradoxical: a higher level of support for the return of criminal liability for parasitism is observed among unemployed Russians, consisting mainly of representatives of the older generation (pensioners).

Author: Lyudmila Bogomozova

https://wciom.ru/analytical-reviews/ana ... t-tot-chto - zinc

It is worth noting that now Russia has the lowest unemployment rate since 1991. The unemployment rate has fallen to less than 2%. Now the country has a serious labor shortage, especially skilled workers. Objectively, the problem of parasitism is not the most urgent now.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9943195.html

A law on perpetuating the memory of Lenin has been submitted to the State Duma
July 7, 21:00

Image

The CPRF deputy Glazkova introduced a bill to the State Duma on perpetuating the memory of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin.
It is proposed to protect objects associated with Lenin in Russia from acts of vandalism at the legislative level. So to speak, so as not to become like Ukraine.
The corresponding legislation exists in the same China regarding Mao, who can even be criticized for certain things, but for any attempts at vandalism you can get a pretty good jail sentence.

The CPRF also proposed recognizing the "Spas" garbage dump as a foreign agent.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9942793.html

(I can hear the oligarchs grinding their teeth but there's nothing for it. In times of war the masses had better be catered to. )

Former Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces Arslanov Sentenced to 17 Years in Prison
July 7, 18:47

Image

Former Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces Arslanov received 17 years in prison for fraud related to the supply of communications equipment to the troops. Arslanov was also found guilty of bribery. Araslanov must also pay a fine of 24,000,000 rubles. The damage from Arslanov's activities amounted to several billion rubles.

Image

Former deputy head of the Russian National Guard Viktor Strigunov has been arrested for embezzlement during the construction of a landfill in Siberia. He is charged with at least three episodes of receiving large bribes.

We are losing the best.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9942747.html

Former Russian Transport Minister Shot Himself
July 7, 16:05

Image

The Russian Minister of Transport and former Governor of Kursk Oblast, Roman Starovoit, who was fired today (Putin's decree was published this morning), shot himself today at his dacha in Odintsovo.
Apparently, a criminal case became inevitable and he decided to end it this way. The investigation into theft during the construction of fortifications in Kursk Oblast has been ongoing for a long time. Khinshtein's predecessor is involved in this case. But part of the investigation touches upon the period when Starovoit was still governor and at the beginning of the year there were many publications on the topic of whether Starovoit could not have known about the fraudulent schemes associated with fake contractors, through whom huge amounts of money allocated for the construction of field fortifications leaked out.

One way or another, the investigation will still continue and then it will be clear from the facts - what exactly prompted Starovoit to commit suicide.
The media reports that former Governor of Kursk Oblast Smirnov, who is under investigation, testified against Starovoit.

Starovoit was at the ministry this morning, said goodbye to everyone, then went home and shot himself in his car in a parking lot in Odintsovo.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9942456.html

Former Deputy Defense Minister Popov Faces New Charges
July 8, 11:32

Image

Former Deputy Defense Minister Popov Faces New Charges

Former Deputy Minister of Defense (MoD) of Russia Pavel Popov was charged with abuse of power, illegal arms trafficking and official forgery. This was reported to Lenta.ru by the Investigative Committee of Russia. The department noted that the investigation is ongoing.

On June 26, it was reported that Popov was hospitalized in serious condition from the capital's Lefortovo pretrial detention center. In May, his chronic disease worsened.
Pavel Popov was detained in August 2024. He was accused of fraud on an especially large scale. According to the investigation, in 2021-2024, the general, responsible for the development, maintenance and operation of the Patriot Park, enriched himself at the expense of this institution - he used building materials for construction in his country house and forced the park employees to work at the dacha.

https://lenta.ru/news/2025/07/08/byvshe ... vye-stati/ - zinc

"Putin's repressions in the army" continue.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9943402.html

Hot tours to Afghanistan
July 7, 13:04

Image

Finally.
The first tourist tours to the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan have opened.
For a total of up to 254,000 rubles, you can go on holiday for 8 days to hospitable Afghanistan.
At the same time, you will also need to pay separately for air tickets to Kabul, hiring local hospitable security and separate medical insurance in case of any force majeure.
In April, an application for registration of the travel agency "Taliban-Tour" was submitted in Russia.

In general, fans of extreme tourism can be pleased. This is not your hated Antalya and Dubai.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9941987.html

On the situation in Armenia
July 8, 15:14

Image

Regarding what is happening in Armenia.

I wrote in this blog back in 2018 that Pashinyan is a remake of Yushchenko for Armenia.
His task is to sever relations with Russia as much as possible and undermine Russia's influence in Armenia.

For this, Artsakh has already been surrendered. The influence of the Karabakh clan has been undermined. The power structure in the republic has been monopolized. Armenia's participation in the CSTO has been blocked. Part of Armenia's territory has been surrendered. The issue of pushing through the topic of the Armenian genocide by the Turks has been abandoned. Pro-Russian oligarchs and the anti-Pashinyan church are currently being purged. Due to the insignificance of the Armenian opposition, this is not the end yet. The best is yet to come. As soon as they create the necessary ground, they will officially leave the CSTO (and in the future, the CIS), and will raise the issue of a complete withdrawal of Russian troops from Armenia and the closure of the base in Gyumri.

Nothing new or surprising is happening. All this was obvious 7 years ago after the "Armenian Maidan", where, as in the case of Belarus-2020, alternatively gifted citizens said - yes, this is not against Russia, we are for a better life in Armenia and for everything good.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9943892.html

Google Translator

***

Lest we hear, "OMG, those Russians are so corrupt!" we should keep in mind that our capitalist paradise has had many decades to refine means of extra-legal profiteering. Much has been rendered legal, such as 'campaign contributions' and the 'revolving door'. Of course the more mundane methods are also practiced, ask any congresscritter or sheriff. And not all Russian crooks are so obvious, as John Helmer has documented over the years.

*****

Riley Waggaman: Russia to become world leader in convenience thanks to digital ruble
July 7, 2025

For our younger readers who may have a harder time picking up on such things in this day and age, this writer engages in lots of sarcasm. – Natylie

By Riley Waggaman, Substack, 6/11/25

In less than four months, the Russian government could begin disbursing funds using a CBDC issued and controlled by an IMF-obedient BIS member managed by a Yale World Fellow (colloquially known as the “Bank of Russia”).

A draft law submitted to the State Duma at the end of May will permit the federal government to use the digital ruble to pay for a limited list of budget expenditures starting October 1. The full-scale use of the central bank-controlled digital currency for all types of budget payments will begin on January 1, 2026.

Russia adopted the digital ruble as its third form of legal currency, alongside the cash ruble and the electronic ruble, two years ago. While the “full-scale implementation” of the Bank of Russia’s CBDC (as publicly advocated for by Vladimir Putin last year) has been pushed back, the transition period for its introduction at the regional level is currently scheduled to begin on July 1, 2027. The draft law lists the same date as the deadline for credit institutions to offer clients access to the digital ruble platform.

Image
source: vedomosti.ru

A week before the bill was submitted, the Bank of Russia launched an info-offensive against the conveniencephobes who spread malicious lies and innuendo about the safe, convenient, and forever-voluntary digital ruble.

Image
source: kp.ru

It wasn’t easy, though. Russia’s incredulous mainstream media had a lot of hard-hitting questions about the endless pitfalls of a programmable, centrally-controlled digital token issued by an entity that is not answerable to the Russian government.

Here’s how Komsomolskaya Pravda prefaced its interview with Bank of Russia Deputy Chairman Zulfiya Kakhrumanova:

In the field of finance, we are ahead of the rest of the world! Well, or at least among the world leaders. The financial sector is one of the most technologically advanced in Russia, many countries would envy such a level of development of payment technologies. Large banks are actively introducing innovations that change and simplify our lives. And the rules of the game in this market are set by the Central Bank. And it also creates new entities. For example, the same digital ruble.

What changes await us in the coming years? And how will this affect our wallets? Zulfiya Kakhrumanova, Deputy Chairman of the Bank of Russia, spoke about this and much more in an exclusive interview with KP.RU


And they say journalism is dead. Shame on the people who say that. Shame!

With her feet to the fire, Kakhrumanova regurgitated the boilerplate talking points:

[What is the digital ruble?] It’s simple. The digital ruble is another form of Russian currency … And what’s important is that the choice of [what type of ruble to] use remains with the person. […]

It cannot be said that we are exactly following the Chinese path. But this is a global trend — to simplify life when making not only payments, but also any of our actions in any spheres. We have already gotten used to this convenience.


Rich and pungent word-dung, even for a Novgorod-based manure connoisseur such as myself. Unsurprisingly, the interview attracted the attention of numerous convenience-haters in Russia, including commentator Alexander Lezhava, who worked in the banking sector for many years before going rogue.

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/ ... blejsapi=0

Responding to the KP interview, Lezhava wrote on his Telegram channel:

Another propaganda article from the Bank of Russia has appeared in Komsomolskaya Pravda. This time, the new deputy chairperson of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, Zulfiya Kakhrumanova, sang hosannas to the digital ruble under the title “Why do we need a digital ruble, will it become mandatory, and what will a single QR code give us?”

There’s nothing new in what she said. It is a rehash of the same banalities from the Bank of Russia, criticisms of which they are unable to respond to intelligibly. There is no point in repeating the same thing, so it is much more interesting to look at this speech from the point of view of manipulation and logical errors.

The interview begins with an appeal to the readers’ feelings and an attempt to create some kind of positive emotional background:

“And yet, in the field of finance, we are ahead of the rest of the world! Or at least among the world leaders.”

This is necessary to evoke positive emotions in the reader and distract his attention from possible substantive criticism. In essence, this is an attempt to create a pseudo-reality, wherein the emotional background is used to shape public opinion in favor of the policy pursued by the central bank.

Then comes the manipulation, through a simplification:

“The digital ruble is another form of Russian currency… the choice of what to use is up to the individual.”

The complex system of the digital ruble is presented as a simple replacement for cash and non-cash funds – just a third type of currency, nothing interesting. At the same time, the potential risks and consequences with regard to maintaining the privacy of citizens and monitoring or managing them with this tool are ignored. This is a typical example of “manufacturing consent”, in which complex processes are simplified to the level of an inconsequential selection in order to reduce the level of critical thinking.

But that’s not all. She also has to underscore the divide between “us” and “them”:

“We are not following the Chinese path exactly. But this is a global trend…”

It is significant that the Chinese path and the introduction of the digital yuan are mentioned as a potentially negative thing, but at the same time she notes that the trend is global. Here, an external model is used to legitimize internal actions, but in such a way as not to associate it with one’s own policy, which is no different from the external one. (Surprisingly, the deputy chairperson did not bring up the Nigerian experience.)

Once again we see manipulation in her touting of the idea of freedom, or, rather, a false promise of freedom of choice:

“If a person does not want to use it [the digital ruble], he will continue to use the services he is accustomed to.”

The statement regarding the voluntary use of the digital ruble contradicts the possible creation of conditions and pressure from the Bank of Russia that can make it essentially mandatory. This is “managed democracy”, when freedom of choice is declared, but in practice it is limited by systemic factors.

At the same time, the Central Bank positions itself as an expert who “knows better”, although it provides no proof of this, and openly avoids open dialogue with the public. And when there was some interaction with the public on these matters, the Bank’s representatives came out on the losing side. This is called “elite management” — when officials of various kinds determine the direction of society’s development without taking into account the real needs of citizens. This is how it sounded this time:

“We predict what will be in demand in the coming years. We take into account the requests of market participants…”

The practical results of such forecasting are well known and have little correlation with real life, and it is practice that is the standard of truth.

Nevertheless, the Bank of Russia does not hesitate to openly manipulate hope, promising future well-being:

“The digital ruble platform is standardized… providing additional convenience for people.”

The idea of some future convenience and technological progress is used to justify current actions, without a detailed justification of their benefits. This approach is known as “technological determinism”. It presents the development of a technology as an end in itself, while the ethical and social consequences of its implementation and use are not taken into account. As our reader correctly noted, if you are unable to explain the usefulness of the digital ruble even to the former Minister of Finance, then what kind of convenience and usefulness are we even talking about?

There are also purely contradictory statements. They contain multidirectional ideas in order to satisfy different groups of readers but not give a clear position. For example, she asserts that there is a need to both unify and preserve the many payment systems, creating a logical contradiction:

“The QR code must be universal and recognized by any payment service…” but then “a universal QR will not eliminate all the different payment services.”

And need we even mention the concealment of information or the provision of incomplete information by the Bank of Russia:

“The digital ruble platform is a unified system… It is impossible to just steal them.”

This does not address the issues of who controls the platform, how data protection is ensured, or what risks there are for users. This is “information control”, when key issues are hushed up during the implementation of the project in order to avoid criticism and doubts. The Bank of Russia itself has previously admitted that digital ruble thefts will occur and that it will be difficult to get them back. The only thing that can be done is to follow them, where they go, but this will not help the victim, since they will already have been spent, and the Bank of Russia does not block channels for funneling stolen funds abroad.

At the moment, we have the following situation: The Bank of Russia forces banks, trade enterprises, and other market participants to invest billions of rubles into organizing the digital ruble infrastructure, with questionable benefit for society, instead of directing these resources to ensuring cyber security and preventing theft of funds from citizens.


How dare you, Mr. Lezhava. Don’t you read Simplicius the Thinker, the Internet’s #1 Thinker, who correctly observed that the digital ruble is a good CBDC that will remain eternally-voluntary as it karate-chops the globalists?

I mean, does Lezhava even read TASS?

Image
source: tass.ru

Here are some very inspirational words from First Deputy Chairman of the Bank of Russia Sergei Shvetsov, speaking at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum in 2021, as quoted by Russian state media:

“Once again: we can thank the pandemic; paper spreads infection. You’ve heard of ‘dirty’ money, now we also have infectious money. This [cash] is probably a technology that’s on its way out, serving either ‘gray’ business or used when there is no alternative. Internet coverage is growing, gadgets are reaching the people. Russia is one of the leaders in this field, and thus we have a technology that allows us to replace cash with digital rubles,” he added.

[…]

“We have moved away from certain inconvenient forms of money. I think that cash will also be marginal at some point, in 10/20/30 years. The digital ruble will have to replace it. And the speed at which this product is created depends very much on our technological readiness,” [the First Deputy Chairman of the Bank of Russia] emphasized.


Yes. Good.

For more information on the World-Leading Convenience that awaits all Russians, read the latest offerings from Katyusha.org:

Image
source: katyusha.org
Image

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/07/ril ... tal-ruble/


James Carden: Democracy in Georgia Is Under Threat by the US Congress and the Helsinki Commission
July 6, 2025
By James Carden, Landmarks Magazine, 6/11/25

The following, by Simone Weil Center board member James Carden, first appeared in the Realist Review.

Tbilisi—It was Lincoln who once said “I would like to see someone proud of the place in which they live.” The 16th president never made it to the South Caucasus, but here reside a people quite justly proud of the place in which they live. Among the most striking differences between the vision offered to Georgian citizens by the ruling Georgian Dream (GD) party and by the Western-backed opposition parties is that the former is unabashedly so.

From the perspective of an American of rather longstanding, it seems the politics of the GD are not dissimilar to those of MAGA Republicans; Hungary’s Fidesz; France’s National Rally; Poland’s Law and Justice; or the UK’s Reform Party. The pro-NATO, pro-EU Georgian opposition coalition, having lost a democratic election by a convincing margin last October, continues to call for foreign powers (the US, the EU) to sanction members and funders of the GD. The bedraggled youth who sit in protest on the steps of the Georgian Parliament under the flags of a foreign powers are calling for those powers to sanction the legitimate winners of their country’s last national election: Do they not know what “democracy” means?

For some reason, the Georgian opposition thinks Washington and Brussels (a EU and NATO “Information Center” resides in a handsome building just off Tbilisi’s Freedom Square) have something to teach Georgia about democracy. Still worse, the illusion that Washington has both the right and duty to teach Georgia how to govern itself persists in the American media and in the halls of Congress.Pledge your support

***

The Helsinki Commission: A National Embarrassment

Last month Congress passed the MEGOBARI Act. Taking a page from Orwell (as Congress often inadvertently does) megobari is the Georgian word for ‘friend’—it is also, in the manner of these sorts of bills, an acronym for “Mobilizing and Enhancing Georgia’s Options for Building Accountability, Resilience, and Independence.

In reality it is a sanctions bill that seeks to cripple the financing behind the GD.

The bill is the hare-brained-child of the Helsinki Commission, a relic of the Cold War that now employs odd-ball-starved-for-social-media-attention staffers LARPing as freedom fighters for Ukraine.

Before we get to the specific problems with the MEGOBARI act, a few words about the Commission are perhaps in order. To be perfectly blunt, Congress should disband the Helsinki Commission, it is a national embarrassment. And has been for years. It is an unaccountable office that for the past decade and a half has prostituted itself to William Browder, a billionaire hedge fund manager who renounced his American citizenship.

Browder, the grandson of the Stalinist dupe Earl Browder, was tried and convicted in absentia by a Russian court on credible charges of tax evasion. To avoid being hauled back to Russia by Interpol, Browder spent untold sums in Washington, London, and many places besides, on an admittedly brilliant PR strategy that transformed him from a tax cheat into a human rights crusader, and, eventually (and unbelievably) into a Knight of the British Empire. One would have to be deeply stupid to have fallen for the act. But many have. For readers understandably unfamiliar with what kind of character Browder actually is, here is a video of him jumping out the backseat of a car and running down 51st St. in Manhattan to avoid being served a subpoena.

“Sir” William worked hand in glove with the Helsinki Commission’s adviser (now its Chief of Staff—they ‘fail up’ on Capitol Hill, you know), Kyle Parker, who last year found himself under investigation for acting as a foreign agent for Ukraine. Parker, deeply compromised by, among other things, his marriage to a Ukrainian woman, began to act as a freelance weapons dealer to further, you know, the real cause.

Congress, being what it is, promoted him.

In any event, Parker, and his financial patron Browder, crafted a fictional account of the death of Browder’s hapless accountant Sergei Magnitsky (Browder claims that Magnitsky was his attorney—another lie). Parker was later given a “Sergei Magnitsky Human Rights Award” by Browder for his efforts. An aside: Browder’s name never appears in the numerous accounts of foreign influence in Washington: Why would that be?

As a piece of fiction, the Magnitsky saga would have been trashed by critics as so far removed from reality that it could not be believed. For example: In his book Red Notice, Browder claims he got a late night call,

…That night, at 12:15 a.m., the voice mail alert on my BlackBerry vibrated. Nobody ever called my BlackBerry. No one even knew the number. I looked at Elena and dialed into voice mail.…I heard a man in the midst of a savage beating. He was screaming and pleading. The recording lasted about two minutes and cut mid-wail.” He writes, As soon as the sun came up, I called everyone I knew. They were all okay. The only person I couldn’t call was Sergei.”

As the award winning investigative journalist Lucy Komisar, the only American journalist to have exposed the Browder fraud, notes,

…Imagine Magnitsky, handcuffed based on what Browder claims and the bruises found on his wrists, being beaten by, Browder says, eight riot guards.

Magnitsky: “Hey guys, I have to make a phone call. Can we take a break?”

Even Magnitsky’s mother doesn’t believe the story Browder peddled. But then again, she’s clearly brighter than the staff of the Helsinki Commission which took Browder’s claims at face value (no investigation was ever done to validate any part of Browder’s tale) and duly drew up the 2012 Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act, a sanctions bill against Russia and one that effectively stuck a dagger into the heart of President Obama’s “reset” policy and put the US squarely on track for a new and even more perilous Cold War.

But that was the goal all along. Browder’s tale, sold to a credulous media, was weaponized by the Helsinki Commission in the service of a policy favored by neoconservatives in Congress—a policy that, allow me to add, subverted the foreign policy of a duly elected President of the United States.

Democracy in action.

***

Old Habits Die Hard

The Helsinki Commission is at it again—this time it has Russia’s southern neighbor, Georgia in its sights. And naturally Russia is both the pretext and the ultimate target. Helsinki Commission chairman Joe Wilson (R-SC) and ranking member Steve Cohen (D-TN) praised the passage of their bipartisan effort to overturn the Georgian election. Cohen, a loud and unscrupulous peddler of the Russiagate conspiracy, said the act “sends a strong message to the Georgian people that the U.S. supports them as they fight for their democracy.”

In fact it does the opposite.

In reality, the act demands that Georgians relinquish their right to vote for whom they want to vote. Indeed, the MEGOBARI act is based on the faulty premise that the GD is riddled with Russian influence—in the manner it was alleged that Ukraine’s ill-fated Party of Regions was said to have been a proxy for Russian interests in that country. I suspect that all the GD wants are simply non-hostile relations with their restive northern neighbor. But that, in the eyes of the zealots on the Helsinki Commission, is a grave sin not to be countenanced.

The passage of the MEGOBARI act (which President Trump should veto if it ever makes it to his desk) only serves to alienate a small, friendly, Christian country in a very tough neighborhood. Bounded by Russia to the north, Islamist Turkey to the West, and another Islamist dictatorship to the East in Azerbaijan—Georgia would be far better off charting its own path—free of dictates emanating out of Washington or Moscow or, for that matter, Beijing.

Election interference is something we Americans deplore. We should practice what we preach.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/07/jam ... ommission/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

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

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Wed Jul 09, 2025 4:12 pm

Lavrov's Post-BRICS Summit Presser
A 45-minute performance
Karl Sanchez
Jul 07, 2025

Image

Well, the 2025 version of the BRICS Summit is over. Pepe Escobar filed a first day report during his chat with Nima yesterday and said it was better than anticipated. Now we get to read Lavrov’s take and see if the Q&As are about the Summit or not. Yesterday, Lavrov did give an interview to a Hungarian media outlet that was an educational experience for the person asking the questions as much of it reiterated Russia’s position on Ukraine, NATO, and the EU in general. The BRICS Rio Declaration can be read here. And now, here’s Lavrov:
Ladies and gentlemen,

We have completed our work at the 17th BRICS summit in Rio de Janeiro.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to President of Brazil Lula da Silva, our Brazilian friends who worked in his team at this event, for the excellent organization of the summit and the traditional Brazilian hospitality at the meeting, which brought together a significant number of countries from the Global South and East.

The Brazilian hosts managed to ensure excellent cooperation within the BRICS. In 2024, the Russian Federation held the chairmanship. The summit in Kazan was regarded by everyone as very successful. I am sure that similar assessments will be made of our Brazilian friends following the summit that ends in Rio de Janeiro.

For the first time, the summit was attended not only by full-fledged BRICS members, but also by partner countries. Let me remind you that this category was established following the Kazan Summit on October 22-24, 2024 and includes Belarus, Bolivia, Vietnam, Kazakhstan, Cuba, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Uganda and Uzbekistan. In addition to the partner countries, which were now represented at the summit in this capacity, the Brazilian Presidency invited a number of heads of state and government from the Global South and East to separate sessions. Everyone could familiarize themselves with the list of those who participated as guests in the BRICS+ and BRICS Outreach meetings.

In addition, the heads of the secretariats of the UN, the WHO and the WTO, as well as the heads of multilateral banks, including the New Development Bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and the Latin American Development Bank, were traditionally invited and spoke at the relevant sessions.

If we talk about the results and the documents that were adopted, the BRICS members and their like-minded countries are unanimous in the fact that it is impossible to effectively solve the numerous problems of our time without taking into account the positions of the countries of the Global South, the East, in other words, the World Majority.

In this context, everyone noted the role of BRICS as a platform for coordinating the interests of the leading countries, the very world majority, as one of the key pillars of multipolarity, objectively replacing the globalization system that is becoming a thing of the past.

Speaking via videoconference at the BRICS summit, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the previous system was designed exclusively to serve the interests of the "golden billion." This era is becoming a thing of the past. Everyone is guided by the principles that promote BRICS as the basis for truly multilateral, equal and mutually beneficial cooperation between all countries.

Russia has coinciding positions on key international issues. The first plenary session was devoted to this. They reaffirmed their common commitment to promoting the formation of a more just, sustainable and polycentric world order based on the principles of the UN Charter, which are not selectively used and applied. Whereas our Western colleagues, as part of their specific adventure in the international arena, "pull out" what suits them at the moment, and then justify their actions. The principles of the UN Charter must be applied as it was written by the Founding Fathers and then adopted and ratified-–in the totality and interconnectedness of its fundamental requirements.

The BRICS leaders were presented with a report on the final meetings of the BRICS High Representatives in charge of security issues.

Speaking about specific aspects of the international agenda, there was a common opinion that Israeli and American strikes on Iranian territory, which were carried out in violation of international law, the UN Charter and IAEA agreements, were unacceptable.

In the final Declaration adopted at the end of the first day of meetings, all BRICS members spoke in favor of stopping any aggressive actions not only against Iran, but also in the Gaza Strip, where a catastrophic humanitarian situation has developed.

Everyone has a clear feeling that Israeli representatives and the army are going to act in a similar way not only in Gaza, but also in the West Bank, which seriously undermines the prospect of creating a Palestinian state. All BRICS members called for the implementation of UN decisions on a two-state "solution" to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. We will try to ensure that no one tries to consign these decisions to oblivion.

The Declaration and speeches expressed the position of many participants regarding the situation in Ukraine. Everyone spoke from a balanced, objective position and showed a growing understanding of the root causes of this crisis, which lie in the threats to Russia's security that have been created by the West for many years, including NATO's eastward expansion with the obvious goal of absorbing Ukraine and "building" the NATO military machine right on our borders. But it is no less important to seek the abolition of all decisions taken by the Kiev regime after the 2014 coup d'état and which are aimed at legislatively exterminating everything Russian, including language, education, the media and culture. Recently, the basis for banning the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church was created.

Much attention was paid to a comprehensive approach to the reform of global governance, primarily with regard to the long-overdue reforms of the Bretton Woods institutions so that they reflect the real weight of the world-majority countries in the world economy and economy. In this regard, demands were again voiced, it was the consolidated position of the BRICS that it is necessary to accelerate the reform of the distribution of quotas and votes in the IMF.

We drew attention to the need to ensure that the practice used by the IMF and the World Bank Group is terminated in the course of reforms. It is to provide funding to those who are puppets of the West. First of all, this was demonstrated in relation to Ukraine. Funding from the Bretton Woods institutions over the past couple of years has far exceeded the resources allocated to all African countries. This is a shameful statistic for the IMF, for the World Bank.

Great importance is attached to the reform of the World Health Organization. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom spoke about the progress of the reform, which will make the Secretariat more efficient and less bureaucratic. We drew attention to the need to avoid attempts to politicise this structure, which should deal primarily with epidemiological security and the prevention of infectious and non-communicable diseases.

The documents of the session and the discussions reflect the tasks of environmental protection, including in the context of preparations for the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which will be held in Belém (Brazil) on November 10–21, 2025. Crucially, everyone agreed on the need to avoid diktat on climate change and the adaptation of relevant national strategies. The West is actively trying to persuade developing countries to spend more and more on the "green transition" by slowing down their interests in accelerating socio-economic development.

Interstate discussions are facilitated by such structures as the New Development Bank, the BRICS Business Council, the BRICS Women's Business Alliance, and the BRICS Civil Council. All their leaders made presentations during this summit on how things are progressing in their respective areas. These mechanisms are very useful. Everyone notes that their work is an important help in deepening cooperation between our countries in the financial, economic, humanitarian and cultural areas.

We commend the achievements of BRICS this year. This is not only a summit, it is many dozens of different sectoral events in the areas of economy, culture, technological development, artificial intelligence.

A statement has been adopted on artificial intelligence, emphasizing the need to develop mechanisms for its regulation exclusively in universal formats under the auspices of the UN, and not during closed "private" meetings, where only those who will "obey their senior comrades" are invited.

At the summit, the launch of the BRICS partnership to eliminate socially caused diseases was announced. This is one of the concrete initiatives of the Brazilian Presidency. It enriches the agenda of our association. I am sure that this will be another positive experience.

We will promote all the developments that are being implemented within BRICS in the field of artificial intelligence and healthcare in the relevant international formats, including the WHO and the UN.

The work of the Brazilian presidency is not yet over. By the end of 2025, a number of events at the expert and ministerial level are planned. I am referring, for example, to the meetings of the presidents of the supreme courts, the heads of the tax and customs departments of the countries that are members of the association.

On January 1, 2026, India will assume the chairmanship of BRICS. During the meeting with our Indian counterpart, we discussed the plans that are now being developed in New Delhi. We believe that they are very promising and ensure continuity in our work last year, this year and with an eye to the year ahead.

Question: How would you assess the new format of the BRICS summit when partner countries take an active part in it?

Sergey Lavrov: This format is relatively new in the sense that a number of the invited countries have the status of "partner countries." Their main difference from the guests is that these countries will constantly participate in all BRICS events, not only in summits and ministerial meetings, but also in most sectoral formats dedicated to various aspects of economic cooperation and in solving humanitarian problems. Otherwise, such a number of participants is not news for the BRICS. It's just that they used to participate in the BRICS Plus and BRICS Outreach formats, or as invited by the chairmanship.

I remember that in 2023, the heads of state and government of all African Union countries attended the BRICS summit in Johannesburg as invited participants. Not everyone came, but more than 50 countries were present. So, from the point of view of managing such a large forum, there have already been precedents, but, of course, the fundamentally new qualities of participation of the ten countries that were identified as "partner countries" at the summit in Kazan are, of course, a new step in the development of our association. There is still more work to be done to involve them as closely as possible in "everyday" affairs.

Question: Even before the summit, the Western press began to claim that BRICS was running out of steam and that its expansion had "eroded" the association's ability to act as a united front. So, they say, this is why Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping did not come. What is your assessment?

Sergey Lavrov: I think they are reflecting, because everyone is seeing an example of NATO expansion, which did not benefit anyone, including the members of the North Atlantic Alliance themselves. Disagreements deepen there. Such a slight mutiny is brewing on the ship. More and more countries want to be guided not by some ideological guidelines imposed by the "master", but by their national interests.

There has never been such a risk in BRICS and there is no threat of dilution of our activities. The association has always been based on the principles of equality, mutual respect and consensus in all its steps. And one that reflects the real balance of interests, and is not dictated by the "Big Brother". So I cannot agree with such attempts to artificially describe the BRICS as an organization that has exhausted its purpose. On the contrary, its potential is only beginning to be revealed.

Much attention was paid to the reform of global governance mechanisms. [A very large section of the Declaration at its outset is devoted to this topic.] I have already said how the reforms of the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO sounded at this summit.

An unusually large amount of attention, in comparison with previous years, was paid to the reform of the UN. Clearly, the reform of the Security Council has attracted the most attention. The text that has been agreed reaffirms the need to expand the Security Council by overcoming the underrepresentation of the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America. We are not talking about the West. For a long time and undeservedly, he received more seats than he is entitled to in terms of the balance of power, the balance of power in the international arena. But, perhaps, for the first time, the topic of the reform of the UN Secretariat was considered in detail. It contains direct criticism of the problem associated with the dominance of citizens of Western countries in senior positions in the Secretariat. It gave an example of the UN leadership. There are several dozen positions of deputy secretary general. But the key issues on which the real functioning of the Secretariat depends, and, accordingly, the preparation of proposals for states, which significantly affects the agenda, are all occupied by NATO member countries. The Secretary-General with whom I spoke here, Antonio Guterres, is from Portugal. There is a deputy for political affairs who is a US citizen, the deputy for peacekeeping operations is a French citizen, and the deputy for humanitarian affairs is a British citizen. There is also the Deputy Secretary-General, who is a citizen of Nigeria, but at the same time a citizen of the United States.

Now Antonio Guterres is promoting his idea as a follow-up to the General Assembly resolution on the development agenda adopted at the last session. The UN-80 concept is being promoted, which already outlines practical steps to reform the Secretariat that require very serious attention. And the task of "overseeing" this process has been entrusted to a person for whom the additional post of Under-Secretary-General has been specially created to oversee the issues of transformation within the Secretariat. What do you think? A British subject. So this imbalance is already obvious to everyone, and there are attempts, in particular, within the framework of the UN80 process, to carry out a reform so that intergovernmental bodies, primarily the UN General Assembly, are simply informed about how decisions are made behind the scenes in the interests of certain groups of countries. Russia, together with its like-minded people in New York, has submitted a resolution calling for attempts to circumvent intergovernmental bodies in resolving such important issues for the fate of the UN.

Question: You held a bilateral meeting with your Iranian counterpart. Does Tehran intend to resume contacts with the IAEA and in what format? Is Russia ready to help in mediation?

Sergey Lavrov: You are asking in what format the talks between Iran and the IAEA can resume? This is the Iran-IAEA format.

I have the impression that here, first of all, the IAEA leadership should show responsibility for the assessments that it publishes, published in the past and that were presented to the Board of Governors of the Organization just a few days before the start of the aggression. These assessments are characterized by many as, let's say, ambiguous. Unlike previous reports by the Secretariat, they lend themselves to interpretations that imply that Iran is not in good faith in fulfilling its obligations. As you know, the "Western troika" (France, Britain and Germany) seized on this, throwing in a resolution at a meeting of the UN Security Council with serious criticism of Iran.

A day or two later, Israel attacked civilian nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards. That is, a fairly simple and understandable "chain", in which the IAEA Secretariat willingly or unwittingly played a role. Therefore, we are now confident that the Secretariat should provide guarantees that it will henceforth be guided in the strictest possible way by the powers vested in it, and not try to throw in some stories that are subsequently used to politicise and promote the unilateral interests of individual members.

As for Russia, we are not talking about mediation. President of Russia Vladimir Putin recalled that when the Joint Comprehensive Programme of Action on Iran's nuclear programme was agreed, it took into account Russia's ability to provide services related to the depletion of uranium (which had accumulated in the Islamic Republic of Iran before the adoption of this document) to the level necessary for energy purposes for use at nuclear power plants. Because in the years after the United States unilaterally withdrew from this Joint Comprehensive Program, Iran did not have any obligations to limit enrichment, and now this is being discussed. You just reminded us that we have such technological capabilities. We are ready to provide them by taking the surplus of excessively enriched uranium for processing in Russia and returning the energy-enriched uranium to the Islamic Republic to its nuclear power facilities.

Of course, if the parties are comfortable with Russia helping to bring their positions closer. Now, first of all, the United States wants to resume dialogue with Iran, Oman and a number of other Arab states of the Persian Gulf helped in this...

Let's not forget that the Joint Comprehensive Programme of Action, which was approved, for which the international community thanked all participants, and which was later canceled, was developed with the participation of Europeans, Americans, Russia and China, among others. So if there is a desire for the main actor, which is Tehran, it will not be up to us.

Question: Even before his inauguration, Donald Trump threatened the BRICS countries with 100% tariffs in the event of the introduction of the BRICS currency. Just the day before, he had already threatened 10% tariffs on all countries that, as he put it, are pursuing an anti-American policy of the BRICS. Will a union currency be created? What about Donald Trump and what is the reaction to these words of the US president?

Sergey Lavrov: This is a strange question. US President Donald Trump does not hide his goals. He defends the interests of the United States, primarily economic, in the field of investment and trade.

This means that the conclusion that the model of globalization, which the United States has been promoting in the neoliberal context for many years and which for a certain period was "accepted" by everyone, is once again confirming the conclusion that the model of globalization has ceased to function.

But with regard to payments as such, the creation of a "currency" has never been discussed in the BRICS. The first impetus for work on alternative payment platforms was given at the Johannesburg Summit. President of Brazil Lula da Silva promoted this issue on his own initiative. The Brazilian proposals went quite far. In the declaration, they proposed to describe specific forms of functioning of a possible mechanism of alternative payment platforms. But in the end, central banks and finance ministries were instructed to prepare a proposal for platforms that would allow for settlements, the use of a system of mutual payments that does not depend on the dollar, whose position in the world economy and the global financial system of the United States under the Democrats began to be grossly abused. And it is not for nothing that during the preparations for the inauguration, US President Donald Trump directly accused Joe Biden and his administration of undermining the role of the dollar for many years. Now we will have to take into account that confidence in him has fallen.

In fact, this is true. We have been told for a long time (over the past 30 years, or maybe more) that the dollar is not American property, it is the "heritage of all mankind" that ensures the smooth and uninterrupted functioning of the world economy, and US guarantees must be understandable and acceptable to everyone. No one knows when, who and for what they will decide to punish. I can cite many examples, but I will not. Even those who are seen as almost an ally of the United States cannot feel at ease.

In the BRICS, "currency" was not discussed. What was discussed, as I have already said, was, first, an increase in the role of national currencies. This is a process that is already "underway" in real life. Secondly, it is a new investment platform, a cross-border payment initiative. All this together creates such a "menu of opportunities" to avoid dependence on the dollar, and on the euro too. Speaking at the first meeting of the summit in Rio de Janeiro, President of Russia Vladimir Putin cited the figure of 90% – this is how many settlements in our trade and financial relations with our BRICS partners and with state partners are carried out in the currencies of the countries that participate in this. So that, in my opinion, is a good guarantee. Such a process is developing with other states as well. These are all the consequences of actions taken to punish the Russian Federation, in this case, in order to destroy all the principles on which international trade and international investment were based, including the inviolability of property, the presumption of innocence and fair competition. All this was discarded in an instant, and now there is a process of fragmentation of structures that were created in the era of globalization according to American patterns and did not cause rejection from anyone until they began to be abused.

Question: This is the first time that the final BRICS Declaration specifically condemns attacks on Russian civilian infrastructure, including the mention of child victims. This is an unprecedented formulation for such a diverse association. Does this mean the unanimity of the BRICS countries on this issue and the formation of a new international consensus on the inadmissibility of strikes on civilian targets? And does Russia plan to use this Declaration as a basis for initiating an investigation into these attacks at the UN or other international organisations?

Sergey Lavrov: Of course, if it depends on the Declaration approved by the heads of state. This means unanimity among the BRICS countries, and not in the matter of forming a new consensus on the inadmissibility of strikes on civilian targets. Such strikes have long been prohibited by numerous conventions. First of all, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and subsequent documents. This applies not only to civilian objects, but also to the civilian population, especially children. Therefore, this should not be perceived as something out of the ordinary. This is simply a reaffirmation of commitment to principles that the international community approved by consensus a long time ago and which the West blatantly disregards. Those who enjoy the patronage of the West, primarily the Kyiv regime, get away with everything.

These were such egregious cases when the peaceful railway infrastructure and absolutely civilian trains passing through it were deliberately attacked. It is impossible not to condemn this, and it is impossible to turn a blind eye to it as representatives of various UN bodies tried to do when we asked them on this topic, as well as officials at the UN Human Rights Council and the OSCE.

As for the investigation and bringing the perpetrators to justice, we are not trying to throw this topic into the international discussion. We are working on this ourselves through the Russian Prosecutor General's Office and public organisations. We periodically publish such materials and distribute them at the UN and European international organisations. This work will continue. No one will be able to escape responsibility.

Question (retranslated from English): My question concerns the fact that US President Donald Trump has proposed introducing multi-percentage duties on the BRICS member countries. How can this affect Russia's proposal to develop an alternative financial system? What does Russia think about the decision of the Brazilian presidency to slow down the discussion of platforms and means of payment, a single currency for international trade?

Also, the final Declaration of the BRICS summit condemned strikes on Russian territory. How can BRICS facilitate the mediation offers of Brazil and China?

Sergey Lavrov: As for the first question, there is no "Russian initiative."

As I mentioned in response to a previous question, the focus on the development of alternative payment platforms and mechanisms was first placed in the Johannesburg Summit Declaration at the suggestion of President Lula da Silva. He proposed to work more actively on these issues. Ultimately, it was decided to authorize central banks and finance ministries to submit recommendations on alternative payment platforms for future summits. This is what we are considering. This means that not only Russia is interested in this.

Brazilian President Lula da Silva is promoting similar initiatives in the context of CELAC. We know that. In CELAC, the discussions are much closer to the concept of currency than in the BRICS context. This is understandable, because the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States is a more geographically connected, coherent structure. So we do not see that there is any "slowdown". There is none. The statistics available to the leaders show that the volume of transactions serviced without the use of the dollar is growing, as is the percentage of such transactions in the context of total trade.

As for Brazil and China...

Question (retranslated from English): The BRICS member countries condemned the bombing of peaceful infrastructure in Russia.

Sergey Lavrov: Yes, they criticized. I have just said this.

Question (retranslated from English): This could "spoil" the Brazilian-Chinese mediation in the settlement of the Ukrainian crisis...

Sergey Lavrov: Do you mean the condemnation of the bombing of civilian infrastructure?

Question (retranslated from English): I mean that they came up with a six-point proposal for negotiations. And the final declaration could destroy these proposals.

Sergey Lavrov: I do not understand how a principled position in favour of international conventions prohibiting attacks on civilian infrastructure and civilians can spoil an initiative with good intentions.

We discussed with our Brazilian and Chinese colleagues the evolution of their initiatives. We noted, for example, that France and Switzerland were suddenly present at one of the meetings of the Friends of Peace group (created by China and Brazil), which held a regular meeting in New York in March of this year. France is one, if not the very country, that is at the forefront of its attacks on the Russian Federation, continuing to pump weapons into Ukraine.

The initiative of China and Brazil was important because they said from the very beginning that they wanted a neutral and objective consideration. This was a counterbalance to the unilateral initiatives that the Ukrainians promoted together with their Western masters, including the Bürgenstock process and the Vladimir Zelensky peace formula. I think it is good that the group of Friends of Peace in Ukraine has remained committed to its principles in the document that has been circulated.

Since we have touched on Ukraine, I would like to remind you that it is the only country where language, especially if it is an official language of the UN, is banned in all spheres of life–-in education, the media, cultural events, etc. In no other part of the world where there are any conflicts, there are no such examples. I am referring, among other things, to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. There is no other conflict where this would happen.

This grossly violates the UN Charter. Today I met with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. He reiterated yesterday that everyone must respect international law. Then he spoke about the territorial integrity of Ukraine. But the principle of territorial integrity means that no one cares about the inalienable rights of the people living in these territories. The UN Charter states respect for human rights regardless of race, gender, language or religion. The Russian language and the canonical Orthodox Church in Ukraine are prohibited by law.

I replied to him: look, the West, which always teaches everyone about human rights, including you, us, China and Venezuela, never uses these words ("human rights") in relation to the situation in Ukraine. On the contrary, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kallas Kallas and others said that by fighting Russia, Ukraine is defending "European values." If these "European values" consist in the abolition of culture, this is a return to Nazism. We do not expect the West to recognise the reality of human rights violations in Ukraine.

Our friends in the Global South, who are interested in advancing their initiatives, can be at the forefront of the fight for human rights, not as the West wants, but as required by the UN Charter. [My Emphasis]
I don’t recall Lavrov framing the human rights issue in Ukraine in that manner, although the first sentence has been spoken by him before. “We [Russia] do not expect the West to recognise the reality of human rights violations in Ukraine.” IMO, Lavrov also told Guterres he’s worthless as the UNGS and is nothing but a stooge for the West. Lavrov also outlined why the UN has failed as an institution—it’s not neutral or unbiased in far too many critical areas. Western presstitutes are so steeped in their false narrative they leave themselves wide open for attacks using truth spears, which Lavrov did at the end.

On Iran, the top-secret docs that Iran pilfered at the beginning of June have yet to be made public, especially those incriminating the IAEA of espionage and collusion with the Zionists and their US Masters. I recall that days before the 13 June attack Iran was already hopping mad at IAEA and was ready to kick them out which has now been done. The question now is will Iran stay in the NPT. Many including myself argue that Iran should demand the Zionists submit to the NPT and IAEA or they will quit. IMO, 190 nations will back Iran’s position.

Article 34 deals with Terrorism and is affiliated with Article 36, which states:

We reiterate our commitment to preventing and combating illicit financial flows, including money laundering and the financing of terrorism, extremism and proliferation, as well as other forms of transnational organized crime, such as drug trafficking, cybercrimes, crimes that affect the environment, illicit trafficking of firearms, trafficking in persons, corruption and the use of new technologies, including cryptocurrencies, for illegal, in particular terrorist, purposes.

So far, I’ve yet to see any direct accusations of the West for developing and using terrorism as a proxy which isn’t a modern issue. That this has yet to be done reflects a certain degree of meekness within the Global Majority. Although the terrorism within Syria is noted, its sponsors are not named.

By far the largest section of the Declaration is Deepening International Economic, Trade and Financial Cooperation, which has 38 Articles and introduces a number of hitherto unknown agencies and organizations all aimed at facilitating development. For example, there’s the BRICS Think Tank Network for Finance, which is only one of many. AS Lavrov said, BRICS is only beginning to reach its potential and is far from being a “dead” organization. As Escobar continually intones, “Trump doesn’t even know what BRICS is.”

I’ve only touched on a few major aspects of the Declaration’s 126 Articles covering 31 PDF pages. One thing not asked was who the next full member candidates might be. And as usual, Lavrov and his team met with many on the sidelines. Lavrov might go West from Brazil to the next round of Summits in Asia that will begin later this week.

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

******

Centuries-Long History of Russophobia Opens the Doors to Cold War 2.0
Posted on July 8, 2025 by Yves Smith

Yves here. Americans, who typically have the memories and historical knowledge of goldfish, likely attribute the ease of whipping up Russophobia with the red scares of the McCarthy era, and later movies and works of fiction that depicted Russians as bad guys. Well, not all:



Sadly, The Russians Are Coming, in poking fun at anti-Soviet paranoia, was an exception that proved the rule.

Nevertheless, suspicion and antipathy towards Russia culture has deep roots, going back to the Catholic Church proselytizing Eastern Slavs. The Vatican was effective in creating a religious and cultural identity among people, many of whom were of the same genetic stock as Russians, anchored in the West. These very deep roots explain why mere dog whistles work so well.

Please note that Dr. Sotirovic repeats the neoliberal view that the US is dependent on foreigners to buy its bonds. We have explained that that is not true as far as Federal debt is concerned. But they US could suffer severe currency depreciation in an “investor revolt” scenario. Up to a point, that is what Team Trump wants. I’ve been told they would like to see the dollar 15% to 30% cheaper.

By Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirovic, Ex-University Professor, Research Fellow at Centre for Geostrategic Studies Belgrade, Serbia

The 2018 Skripal Attack Case

The current orchestrated Western policy of total Russophobia, directed by Collective West, can be recorded to start by the British Cabinet of Theresa May – the focal servant-dog to US global imperialism. Followed by the creation of the War Cabinet of the US President Donald Trump (first administration), it was a nothing else than a jumping to the new stage of the post-WWII Cold War (2.0) which was originally started (1.0) by the US, It is not over since its main task of total economic, political, and financial subordination or/and occupation of Russia still is not realized. The Russian punishment, at that time just diplomatic, was a “punishment for Russia’s alleged nerve gas poisoning of a former Russian/MI6 double-agent, Sergei Skripal (66) and his daughter Yulia (33), who was visiting her father from Moscow” [1] (March, 2018).

However, it was quite obvious that “blaming Russia for Skripal attack is similar to ‘Jews poisoning our wells’ in the Middle Ages” [2] In other words, the 2018 Skripal Attack Case was just another Western “false flag” in international relations with a very precise geopolitical purpose – to continue the Cold War 1.0, revived post-Yeltsin’s Russia.

We have to remember that originally American administration started the Cold War 1.0 as it was “the Truman administration (1945−1953) used the myth of Soviet expansionism to mask the nature of American foreign policy, which included the creation of a global system to advance the interests of American capitalism”.[3] However, the current Western virus of total Russophobia (the Cold War 2.0) is a natural continuation of historical Western anti-Russian policy, which had looked as if it was over with the peaceful dismemberment of the USSR in 1989−1991.

P. Huntington’s Warnings and International Relations (IR)

Samuel P. Huntington was quite clear and correct in his opinion that the foundation of every civilization is based on religion (i.e., on metaphysical irrational beliefs).[4] S. P. Huntington’s warnings about the future development of global politics as taking the form of a direct clash of different cultures (in fact, separate and antagonistic civilizations) are, unfortunately, already on the agenda of international relations.

Here we came to the crux of the matter in regard to the Western relations with Russia from both historical and contemporary perspectives: the Western civilization, as based on the Western type of Christianity (the Roman Catholicism and all Protestant denominations) has traditional animosity and hostility toward all nations and states of the East Christian (Orthodox) confession.

As Russia was and is the biggest and most powerful Christian Orthodox country, the Eurasian geopolitical conflicts between the West and Russia started from when the German Teutonic knights and the Swedes from the Baltic were constantly attacking northern Russian territories up to the fateful battle in 1240, which the Swedes lost to the Russian Prince of Novgorod Alexander Nevski at the Battle of Neva.

However, only three decades later, the ruler of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Algirdas (1345‒1377), started to occupy the Russian lands. That process continued with the Roman Catholic common state of the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania when it launched its confessional-civilizational imperialistic wars against the Grand Duchy of Moscow at the very end of the 14th century; i.e., after 1385 when Poland and Lithuania became united as a personal union of two sovereign states (the Union of Krewo).[5]

Role of the Vatican

The present-day territories of Ukraine (which at that time did not exist under this name) and Byelorus (Belarus, White Russia) became the first victims of Vatican policy to proselytize the Eastern Slavs. Therefore, the biggest part of present-day Ukraine became occupied and annexed by Lithuania till 1569[6] and after the Polish-Lithuanian 1569 Lublin Union by Poland. In the period from 1522 to 1569, there were 63% of the East Slavs lived on the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania out of its total population.[7]

From the Russian perspective, the only way to stop an aggressive Vatican policy of reconversion of the Christian Orthodox population and their denationalization was by military counterattacks to liberate the occupied territories. However, when it happened from the mid-17th century till the end of the 18th century, a huge number of the former Christian Orthodox population had already become Roman Catholics and the Uniates, losing their original national identity.

A conversion to the Roman Catholicism and making the Union with the Vatican on the territories occupied by the Polish-Lithuanian common state till the end of the 18th century divided the Russian national body into two parts: the Christian Orthodox and the pro-Western oriented converts who, basically, lost their initial ethnonational identity. This is especially true in Ukraine – a country with the biggest number of Uniates in the world due to the Brest Union signed in 1596 with the Vatican.

The Uniate Church in (West) Ukraine openly collaborated with the Nazi regime during WWII and for that reason, it was banned after the war till 1989. Nevertheless, it was exactly the Uniate Church in Ukraine which propagated an ideology that the “Ukrainians” were not (Little) Russians but instead a separate nation with no ethnolinguistic or confessional connection with the Russians. Therefore, a way was opened to the successful Ukrainization of the Little Russians (and Minor Russia), Ruthenians, and Carpatho-Russians during Soviet (anti-Russian) rule. After the dissolution of the USSR, the Ukrainians became an instrument of the realization of the Western anti-Russian geopolitical interests in Eastern Europe.[8]

The unscrupulous Jesuits became the fundamental West European anti-Russian and anti-Christian Orthodox hawks to propagate the idea that a Christian Orthodox Russia does not belong in a real (Western) Europe.

Due to such Vatican propaganda activity, the West gradually became antagonistic to Russia. Russian culture was seen as disgusting and inferior, i.e., barbaric, as a continuation of the Byzantine Christian Orthodox civilization. Unfortunately, such a negative attitude toward Russia and the East Christianity is accepted by a contemporary US-led Collective West for whom Russophobia has become an ideological foundation for its geopolitical projects and ambitions.[9] Therefore, all real or potential Russia’s supporters became geopolitical enemies of a Pax Americana, like the Serbs, Armenians, Greeks, Byelorussians, etc.

Western Defeats and Russian Blowback

A new moment in the West-Russia geopolitical struggles started when the Protestant Sweden became directly involved in the Western confessional-imperialistic wars against Russia in 1700 (the Great Northern War of 1700−1721) which Sweden lost after the Battle of Poltava in 1709 when Russia of Peter the Great finally became a member of the concert of the Great European Powers.[10]

A century later, that was a Napoleonic France to take a role in the historical process of „Eurocivilizing“ of „schismatic“ Russia in 1812, that also finished by the West European fiasco[11], similar to Pan-Germanic warmongers during both world wars.

However, after 1945 up to the present, the „civilizational“ role of the Westernization of Russia is assumed by NATO and the EU. The Collective West, immediately after the dissolution of the USSR, by imposing its client satellite Boris Yeltsin as the President of Russia, achieved an enormous geopolitical achievement around Russia, especially in the territories of the former Soviet Union and the Balkans.

Nevertheless, the Collective West started to experience a Russian geopolitical blowback from 2001 onward when the B. Yeltsin’s time pro-Western political clients (Russian liberals) were gradually removed from the decision-making positions in Russia’s governmental structures. What a new Russia’s political establishment correctly understood is that a Westernization policy of Russia is nothing else but an ideological mask for economic-political transformation of the country into the colony of the Collective West led by the US Neocon administration[12] alongside with the task of the US/EU to externalize their own values and norms permanently. This “externalization policy” is grounded on the thesis of The End of History by Francis Fukuyama:[13]

…that the philosophy of economic and political liberalism has triumphed throughout the world, ending the contest between market democracies and centrally planned governance.[14]

Therefore, after the formal ending of the Cold War 1.0 in 1989/1990, the fundamental Western global geopolitical project was The West and The Rest, according to which the rest of the world was obliged to accept all fundamental Western values and norms according to the Hegemonic Stability Theory of a unipolar system of the world security.[15] Nevertheless, behind such doctrinal unilateralism as a project of the US hegemony in global governance in the new century clearly stands the unipolar hegemonic concept of a Pax Americana, but with Russia and China as the crucial opponents to it.

Stability Theories and IR

According to the Hegemonic Stability Theory, a global peace can occur only when one hegemonic center of power (state) acquires enough power to deter all other expansionist and imperialistic ambitions and intentions. The theory is based on a presumption that the concentration of (hyper) power will reduce the chances of a classical world war (but not and local confrontations) as it allows a single hyperpower to maintain peace and manage the system of international relations between the states.[16] Examples of ex-Pax Romana and Pax-Britannica clearly offered support for an imperialistic idea that (the US-led) unipolarity will bring global peace. That inspired the viewpoint that the world in a post-Cold War 1.0 era under a Pax Americana would be stable and prosperous as long as the US global dominance prevails.

Therefore, a hegemony, according to this viewpoint, is a necessary precondition for economic order and free trade in a global dimension, suggesting that the existence of a predominant hyperpower state willing and able to use its economic and military power to promote global stability is both a divine and rational order of the day.

As a tool to achieve this goal, the hegemon has to use a coercive diplomacy based on the ultimatum demand that puts a time limit on the target to comply and a threat of punishment for resistance as, for example, it was a case in January 1999 during the “negotiations” on Kosovo status between the US diplomacy and Yugoslavia’s Government in Rambouillet (France).

However, in contrast to both the Hegemonic Stability Theory and the Bipolar Stability Theory, a post-Yeltsin Russian political establishment advocates that a multipolar system of international relations is the least war-prone in comparison with all other proposed systems. This Multipolar Stability Theory is based on a concept that a polarized global politics does not concentrate power, as it is supported by the unipolar system, and does not divide the globe into two antagonistic superpower blocs, as in a bipolar system, which promote a constant struggle for global dominance (for example, during the Cold War 1.0).

The multipolarity theory perceives polarized international relations as a stable system because it encompasses a larger number of autonomous and sovereign actors in global politics, which as well as giving rise to a greater number of political alliances. This theory is, in essence, presenting a peace-through model of pacifying international relations as it is fundamentally based on counter-balancing relations between the states in the global arena. Under such a system, an aggressive policy is quite hard to implement in reality as it is prevented by the multiple power centers.[17]

A New Policy of Russia and Cold War 2.0

A new policy of international relations adopted by Moscow after 2000 is based on a principle of a globe without hegemonic leadership – a policy which started to be implemented at the time when the global power of the US as a post Cold War 1.0 hegemon declines because it makes costly global commitments above ability to fulfill them followed by the immense US trade deficit – even today the cancer of American economy which the current US President desparately wants to heal. The US share of global gross production has been in the process of constant decline since the end of WWII.

Another serious symptom of American erosion in international politics is that the US share of global financial reserves has drastically declined, especially in comparison to the Russian and Chinese shares. The US is today the largest world debtor and even the biggest debtor that ever existed in history (36.21 trillion dollars or 124 percent of the GDP), mainly, but not exclusively, due to huge military spending, alongside tax cuts that reduced the US federal revenue. The deficit in the current account balance with the rest of the world (in 2004, for instance, it was $650 billion), the US administration is covering by borrowing from private investors (mostly from abroad) and foreign central banks (most important are those of China and Japan). Therefore, such US financial dependence on foreigners to provide the funds needed to pay the interest on the American public debt leaves the USA extremely vulnerable, especially if China and/or Japan decide to stop buying the US bonds or sell them. Subsequently, the world’s strongest military power is at the same time the greatest global debtor, with China and Japan being direct financial collaborators of the US hegemonic leadership’s policy of a Pax Americana after 1989/1990.

It is without any doubts that the US foreign policy after 1989/1990 is still unrealistically following the French concept of raison d’état that indicates the Realist justification for policies pursued by state authority, but in the American eyes, first and foremost of these justifications or criteria is the US global hegemony as the best guarantee for the national security, followed by all other interests and associated goals. Therefore, the US foreign policy is still based on a realpolitik concept that is a German term referring to the state foreign policy ordered or motivated by power politics: the strong do what they will, and the weak do what they must. However, the US is becoming weaker and weaker, and Russia and China are more and more becoming stronger and stronger.

Final Words

Finally, it seems to be true that such a reality in contemporary global politics and international relations is, unfortunately, not properly understood and recognized by the current US President Donald Trump as he is going to be just another Trojan horse of the US Neocon concept of a Pax Americana followed by the megalomanic Zionist concept of a Greater Israel of „From the River to the River“[18], and, therefore, there are no real chances to get rid of the US imperialism in the recent future and to establish international relations on a more democratic and multilateral foundation. Therefore, the US-led Western turbo Russophobia since 2014 has already driven the world into a new stage of the post-WWII Cold War–2.0.


__________

[1] Peter Koenig, “Russian Exodus from the West”, Global Research – Centre for Research on Globalization, 2018-03-31: https://www.globalresearch.ca/russian-e ... st/5634121.

[2] John Laughland, “Blaming Russia for Skripal Attack is Similar to ‘Jews Poisoning our Wells’ in Middle Ages”, Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, 2018-03-16: http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archive ... ddle-ages/.

[3] David Gowland, Richard Dunphy, The European Mosaic, Third Edition, Harlow, England−Pearson Education, 2006, 277.

[4] Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilization and the Remaking of World Order, London: The Free Press, 2002.

[5] Zigmantas Kiaupa, Jūratė Kiaupienė, Albinas Kuncevičius, The History of Lithuania Before 1795, Vilnius: Lithuanian Institute of History, 2000, 106‒131.

[6] On the Lithuanian occupation period of the present-day Ukraine, see: [Alfredas Bumblauskas, Genutė Kirkienė, Feliksas Šabuldo (sudarytojai), Ukraina: Lietuvos epocha, 1320−1569, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos centras, 2010].

[7] Ignas Kapleris, Antanas Meištas, Istorijos egzamino gidas. Nauja programa nuo A iki Ž, Vilnius: Leidykla “Briedas”, 2013, 123.

[8] About this issue, see more in [Зоран Милошевић, Од Малоруса до Украјинаца, Источно Сарајево: Завод за уџбенике и наставна средства, 2008].

[9] Срђан Перишић, Нова геополитика Русије, Београд: Медија центар „Одбрана“, 2015, 42−46.

[10] David Kirbz, Šiaurės Europa ankstyvaisiais naujaisiais amžiais: Baltijos šalys 1492−1772 metais, Vilnius: Atviros Lietuvos knyga, 2000, 333−363; Peter Englund, The Battle that Shook Europe: Poltava andthe Birth of the Russian Empire, London: I.B.Tauris & Co Ltd, 2003.

[11] On Napoleon’s military campaign on Russia in 1812 and its fiasco, see [Paul Britten Austin, The Great Retreat Told by the Survivors, London−Mechanicsburg, PA: Greenhill Books, 1996; Adam Zamoyski, 1812: Napoleon’s Fatal March on Moscow, New York: Harper Press, 2005].

[12] The US-led NATO bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999 is only one example of a gangster’s policy of a violation of the international law and the law on war when the civilian objects became legitimate military targets. Therefore, the attack on Serbia’s television station in the downtown of Belgrade on April 23rd, 1999 attracted criticism by many human rights activists as it was apparently selected for bombing as „media responsible for broadcasting propaganda“ [The Independent, April 1st, 2003]. By the same gangsters the same bombing policy was repeated in 2003 in Iraq when the main television station in Baghdad was hit by cruise missiles in March 2003 followed next day by the destruction of the state radio and television station in Basra [A. P. V. Rogers, Law on the Battlefield, Second edition, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004, 82−83]. According to the international law expert Richard Falk, the 2003 Iraq War was a „crime against Peace of the sort punished at the Nuremberg trials“ [Richard Falk, Frontline, India, No. 8, April 12−25th, 2003].

[13] Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man, Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1992.

[14] Charles W. Kegley, Jr., Eugene R. Wittkopf, World Politics: Trend and Transformation, Tenth edition, USA: Thomson−Wadsworth, 2006, 588; Andrew F. Cooper, Jorge Heine, Ramesh Thakur (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy, New York: Oxford University Press, 2015, 54−55.

[15] David P. Forsythe, Patrice C. McMahon, Andrew Wedeman (eds.), American Foreign Policy in a Globalized World, New York−London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2006, 31−50.

[16] William C. Wohlforth, „The Stability of a Unipolar World“, International Security, No. 24, 1999, 5−41.

[17] Charles W. Kegley, Jr., Eugene R. Wittkopf, World Politics: Trend and Transformation, Tenth edition, USA: Thomson−Wadsworth, 2006, 524.

[18] On the policy of Zionist movement, see [Ilan Pappe, Ten Myths about Israel, London‒New York: Verso, 2024, 23‒49.

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2025/07 ... r-2-0.html

I saw 'The Russians Are Coming' when I was a kid and loved it. That trailer brought tears to my eyes. While Jonathan Winters, that poor crazy sob, was an attraction I had been pro-Russian/communist from an early age. There ain't no explaining it given my social environment, life is funny.

******

(This tidbit for those who claim that Sino-Russian relations are limited by conflicting territorial claims:)

Russia, China officially confirm renunciation of territorial claims, diplomat says

Maria Zakharova stressed that the mutual renunciation of territorial claims by Moscow and Beijing had been enshrined in the July 16, 2001, Treaty of Good Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation, with Moscow and Beijing putting border issues to bed once and for all by signing the Additional Agreement on the Eastern part of the Russia-China Border on October 14, 2004, and ratifying the document later"

Image
Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova
© Sergey Bulkin/TASS

MOSCOW, September 3. /TASS/. Russia and China have officially confirmed the renunciation of any territorial claims between the two countries, and Moscow does not care about what some fringe politicians think about this, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said.

"What some fringe politicians obsessed with revanchism think about this, someone else can worry about, but we won’t," she pointed out, commenting on a remark by Lai Ching-te, head of the Taiwanese administration, that China should seize lands in the Far East from Russia. "In short, Lai, who is being pushed towards separatism by the Americans, can say whatever he likes but it will do no good for him or Taiwanese residents," Zakharova added.

Meanwhile, the Russian diplomat stressed that "the mutual renunciation of territorial claims by Moscow and Beijing had been enshrined in the July 16, 2001, Treaty of Good Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation, with Moscow and Beijing putting border issues to bed once and for all by signing the Additional Agreement on the Eastern part of the Russia-China Border on October 14, 2004, and ratifying the document later." "This position was confirmed in a number of other joint documents that China and Russia adopted at various levels, including at the highest one," the diplomat went on to say. "Russia has consistently respected the One China principle, and views the Chinese government as the country’s only legitimate government." That said, "the Taiwanese administration head is in no position to make statements on behalf of Beijing," and Taipei could only be recommended "not to overestimate itself when eyeing something that belongs to someone else," Zakharova noted.

According to her, Lai should "pay more attention to the island’s economic issues and demonstrate a constructive approach to the Chinese leadership’s proposal of a peaceful reunification with mainland China." "We are confident that our friends in Beijing share the same position," the diplomat concluded.

https://tass.com/politics/1837481

******

Victims of deportations of the communist regime
July 8, 19:29

Image

This is a demonstrative "mourning" in Moldova for the "victims of the communist" regime.
In the background is a photograph of a wagon with "victims of deportation".

Image

True, the photo shows the deportation of Ukrainian residents to Nazi Germany in 1944. But who cares about such trifles.

Image

Also today, the German embassy in Russia posted a map of the occupation zones, where instead of the USSR flag, a flag stylized as the flag of Nazi Germany was shown.
Then they shamefully deleted it, but the general course of modern Europe on the rehabilitation of Nazism and maximum demonization of the USSR is quite clear.

I am not even talking about the recent crap in Ukraine about Hitler with an excellent European education.

Domestic anti-communists and de-Stalinizers in the conditions of war in Ukraine are de facto direct accomplices of those who are implementing this course on the territory of Europe and the former republics of the USSR. In fact, ideological hiwis.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9944340.html

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

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

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Thu Jul 10, 2025 2:29 pm

BRICS FUDGE

Image

By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

President Vladimir Putin’s speech to the BRICS summit session in Rio de Janeiro this week (July 6) was brief. Unusually so for Putin’s public speeches, but not so for his speeches to the BRICS summit in earlier years.

This time he took 810 words (Kremlin English version; 710 in the Russian). Leaving aside the 2024 summit when Putin hosted the BRICS meetings in Kazan, Putin took 635 words in 2023; 451 in 2022; and 683 in 2021.

In substance, Putin emphasized the positives on which all the attending states could agree in Rio – the four original members of 2006; the fifth in 2011; the four added in 2024; the fifth added in January 2025; and the ten partner states added in 2024 — and he avoided the negatives on which they don’t agree. The rule for the ten members for composing their final communiqué is that “the decision-making process is based on consensus.”

Accordingly, Putin emphasized how big BRICS is becoming: “not only a third of the Earth’s landmass and almost half the planet’s population, but also…40 percent of the global economy, while their combined GDP at purchasing power parity stands at $77 trillion…By the way, BRICS is substantially ahead of other groups in this parameter, including G7.”

Without naming the enemies in war of Russia, China, India, and Iran, the President emphasized the economic over the political and military, money over lethal force. “The unipolar system of international relations that once served the interests of the so-called golden billion, is losing its relevance, replaced by a more just multi-polar world…Everything indicates that the liberal globalization model is becoming obsolete while the centre of business activity is gravitating towards developing markets, launching a powerful growth wave.”

Putin was making a point which is not made in the final communiqué drafted by this year’s chairman, President Luis Lula da Silva, and his government. Titled “Rio de Janeiro Declaration — Strengthening Global South Cooperation for a More Inclusive and Sustainable Governance”, it runs in English for 31 pages. Not on a single one of these pages is there mention of the terms which Putin dismisses – unipolar, liberal, globalization.

The United Nations is mentioned 22 times in the Rio Declaration; there is no mention at all of the United States. “Hegemon”, the diplomatic euphemism for the US, is also absent.

This is the BRICS fudge – and it appears to have been largely the doing of Lula and the Brazilians.

Putin left it to Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov attending the summit in person to spell out or hint at the details of Russia’s differences with them.

If it was also understood by the Russians that Lula was attempting to pacify US President Donald Trump, Trump announced within 72 hours that Lula had failed. In a text posted by Trump, he has accused Lula of pursuing former president Jair Bolsonaro in a “witch hunt that should end IMMEDIATELY!” Trump also targeted “Brazil’s attacks on Free Elections and the fundamental Free Speech rights of Americans [social media platforms]”. Unless Lula stopped, Trump said he would impose a new Brazil-specific tariff penalty of 50%.

As Brazil’s currency dropped sharply, the Financial Times in London noted that Trump was acting on prompting from Elon Musk whose Twitter/X media platform was banned and fined in Brazil last year. “The US president’s intervention in favour of Bolsonaro will cheer Brazil’s far-right movement, which claims a judicial crackdown against digital misinformation unfairly targets conservatives,” the newspaper said.

Listen to the discussion of the BRICS summit results with Nima Alkhorshid starting at Minute 39.

Image
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuej555xllw

In a presentation and question-and-answer session with the press in Rio, immediately after the summit, Foreign Minister Lavrov took 4,300 careful words to explain the Russian interpretation of the summit outcome. Click to read his full text.

Image
Source: https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/2034668/

Here are Lavrov’s main points:

Israel: “Regarding specific aspects of the international agenda, the participants unanimously affirmed that the Israeli and US strikes at Iranian territory were unacceptable and constituted violations of international law, the UN Charter, and IAEA agreements. In the final Declaration adopted at the conclusion of the first day of meetings, all BRICS states spoke in favour of ceasing all aggression not only against Iran but also in the Gaza Strip, where the humanitarian situation has reached catastrophic levels. There is a shared impression that Israel’s representatives and military intend to pursue similar actions not only in Gaza but also in the West Bank, which seriously jeopardises the prospects of establishing a Palestinian state. All BRICS states supported the implementation of UN resolutions on a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. We will take all necessary action to ensure these resolutions are not disregarded.”

International Monetary Fund (IMF). “In a unified position, the BRICS countries reiterated their call for accelerated reforms to the IMF’s quota and voting power allocation system.”

The UN Security Council. “In comparison to previous years, an unusually strong emphasis was placed on reforming the United Nations. Predictably, the reform of the Security Council attracted the most attention. The text that was agreed upon reaffirms the need for expansion by addressing the underrepresentation of Asia, Africa, and Latin America – not the West, which already holds more seats than it is entitled to, given the global balance of power. For the first time, the reform of the UN Secretariat has been given detailed consideration. The text explicitly criticises the overrepresentation of Western nationals in leadership positions within the Secretariat. I cited the example of the UN’s senior management: among the many Under-Secretary-General posts, the key positions – those that shape the Secretariat’s operations and thus influence the agenda – are all held by NATO members. Secretary-General António Guterres (Portugal) is supported by a US national overseeing political affairs, a French citizen leading peacekeeping, and a British subject in charge of humanitarian issues. There is also a First Deputy Secretary-General – a Nigerian national who simultaneously holds US citizenship. Mr Guterres is now advancing his UN-80 concept, which builds upon last session’s General Assembly resolution on development. This outlines concrete steps for Secretariat reform, which demand rigorous scrutiny. Yet, oversight of this process has been entrusted to a newly created Deputy Secretary-General position – unsurprisingly, filled by a British national. This is why we believe the Secretariat must now offer assurances that it will strictly adhere to its mandate in the future, avoiding any statements or reports that could be politicised or used to advance unilateral agendas.”

Iran. “As for Russia, we are not talking about mediation. President Vladimir Putin recalled that, when the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) on Iran’s nuclear programme was agreed, Russia’s possible role was considered, particularly in depleting the enriched uranium stockpiles accumulated by Iran prior to the agreement, rendering them suitable for peaceful energy use in nuclear power plants. In the years since the US unilaterally withdrew from the JCPOA, Iran has not been bound by its earlier enrichment limitations, but now that is the subject of renewed discussions. You have just reminded us that we have the necessary technological solutions. We are ready to provide them, including processing Iran’s surplus of highly enriched uranium in Russia and returning it to Iran in a form suitable for energy purposes. Of course, this would happen if both parties are comfortable with Russia helping to bridge the gap. At present, the US is showing an interest in resuming dialogue with Iran, with support from Oman and several other Gulf states. It is worth noting that the JCPOA was the result of multilateral diplomacy involving not only the US, but also European partners, Russia, and China, and it was widely welcomed by the international community before its collapse. Should Teheran – its central party – express a desire to move forward, Russia would have no objections to contributing to the mediation effort.”

De-dollarization. “The creation of our own currency within BRICS has never been considered with regard to payments. The first impetus towards creating alternative payments platforms was given at the Johannesburg summit [2023]. President of Brazil Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva advanced that initiative there. Brazil’s proposals were quite extensive. It proposed complementing the declaration with a description of concrete forms of operation of alternative payments. But it was ultimately decided to instruct the central banks and finance ministries to draft proposals on platforms for making settlements through a system of mutual payments that won’t depend on the dollar, because the Democratic US administration was taking unacceptable advantage of the dollar’s place in the global economy and finance. It is one reason that before his inauguration President Donald Trump openly accused Joe Biden and his administration of undermining the role of the dollar for years to come. They will now have to take into account the fact that trust in the dollar has plummeted. This is a fact. We have been told for a long time, probably for the past 30 years or longer, that the dollar is not American property but a global asset that ensures the smooth and uninterrupted functioning of the global economy, and that US guarantees should be clear and acceptable to everyone. Nobody knows who will be punished, when or for what. I could provide many examples, but I won’t do it now. Even those who were almost regarded as US allies can’t feel safe. We didn’t discuss our own currency at BRICS. As I have said, we discussed increasing the role of national currencies. This process is already underway in practice. Second, we talked about a new investment platform and a cross-border payments initiative. Taken together, they offer a set of opportunities to avoid dependence on the dollar and also the euro. During his address to the first session in Rio de Janeiro, President Vladimir Putin mentioned the figure 90 percent, which is the share of national currencies used in mutual transactions with BRICS countries and partner states. I regard this as a good guarantee.”

Image
Source: https://brics.br/en/documents/presidency-documents

Here are the main points on which there was consensus on the general language of the communiqué but disagreement on the particulars:

— IMF: “In the current context of uncertainty and volatility, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) must remain adequately resourced and agile, at the center of the global financial safety net (GFSN), to effectively support its members, particularly the most vulnerable countries. Despite the absence of quota realignment, we have provided consent to the proposed quota increase under the 16th General Review of Quotas (GRQ) and urge IMF members that have not yet done so to provide their consent and give effect to the quota increases under the 16th GRQ with no further delay. We urge the IMF Executive Board to fulfil the mandate set by the Board of Governors to develop approaches to quota share realignment…”

— World Bank. “We reaffirm that the 2025 World Bank Shareholding Review, co-chaired by Brazil, is a critical tool to strengthen multilateralism and enhance the legitimacy of the World Bank Group, as a better, bigger, and more effective development finance institution. In line with the Lima principles, we continue to advocate for the increased voice and representation of developing countries.”

— G20. “We underscore the key role of the G20 as the premier global forum for international economic cooperation that provides a platform for dialogue of both developed and emerging economies on an equal and mutually beneficial footing for jointly seeking shared solutions to global challenges and fostering multipolar world. We recognize the importance of the continued and productive functioning of the G20, based on consensus and with a focus on result-oriented outcomes. We reiterate our strong support to the South African presidency and look forward to the successful hosting of the G20 Leaders’ Summit in Johannesburg in November 2025 under the South African Presidency.”

— US sanctions, Trump’s tariff war. “We voice serious concerns about the rise of unilateral tariff and non-tariff measures which distort trade and are inconsistent with WTO rules. In this context, we reiterate our support for the rules based, open, transparent, fair, inclusive, equitable, non-discriminatory, consensus-based multilateral trading system with the World Trade Organization (WTO) at its core, with special and differential treatment (S&DT) for its developing members. We condemn the imposition of unilateral coercive measures that are contrary to international law, and reiterate that such measures, inter alia in the form of unilateral economic sanctions and secondary sanctions, have far-reaching negative implications for the human rights, including the rights to development, health and food security, of the general population of targeted states, disproportionally affecting the poor and people in vulnerable situations, deepening the digital divide and exacerbating environmental challenges. We call for the elimination of such unlawful measures, which undermine international law and the principles and purposes of the UN Charter. We reaffirm that BRICS member states do not impose or support non-UN Security Council authorized sanctions that are contrary to international law.”

— Israel. “We strongly condemn all violations of international humanitarian law [IHL], including deliberate attacks against civilians and civilian objects, including civilian infrastructure, as well as the denial or obstruction of humanitarian access and the targeting of humanitarian personnel. We underline the need to address accountability for all violations of international humanitarian law. We reiterate our grave concern about the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, with the resumption of continuous Israeli attacks against Gaza and obstruction of the entry of humanitarian aid into the territory. We call for adherence to international law, in particular to international humanitarian law and international human rights law, and condemn all violations of IHL, including the use of starvation as a method of warfare. We also condemn attempts to politicize or militarize humanitarian assistance…We note, in this regard, the provisional measures of the International Court of Justice in the legal proceedings instituted by South Africa against Israel, which, inter alia, reaffirmed Israel’s legal obligation to ensure the provision of humanitarian aid in Gaza.”

— Palestine. “We recall that the Gaza Strip is an inseparable part of the Occupied Palestinian Territory. We underline, in this regard, the importance of unifying the West Bank and the Gaza Strip under the Palestinian Authority, and reaffirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including the right to their independent State of Palestine. We call on the international community to support the Palestinian Authority in undergoing reforms to fulfill the Palestinians’ legitimate aspirations for independence and statehood, as well as the expeditious reconstruction of the civil infrastructure of the territory, with a central role by the Palestinians, as agreed in the Emergency Arab Summit on Palestine of 4 March 2025.”

— De-dollarization. “As the New Development Bank is set to embark on its second golden decade of high quality development, we recognize and support its growing role as a robust and strategic agent of development and modernization in the Global South. We welcome the Bank’s steady expansion of its capacity to mobilize resources, foster innovation, expand local currency financing, diversify funding sources, and support impactful projects that advance sustainable development, reduce inequality, and promote infrastructure investments and economic integration. We also acknowledge and encourage the ongoing expansion of its membership and the strengthening of its governance framework…We welcome the BRICS Interbank Cooperation Mechanism (ICM) focus on facilitating and expanding innovative financial practices and approaches for projects and programmes, including finding acceptable mechanisms of financing in local currencies. We welcome a continued dialogue between the ICM and the NDB. 50. We task our ministers of finance and central bank governors, as appropriate, to continue the discussion on the BRICS Cross-Border Payments Initiative, and acknowledge the progress made by the BRICS Payment Task Force (BPTF) in identifying possible pathways to support the continuation of discussions on the potential for greater interoperability of BRICS payment systems. We welcome the progress on the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA), including the consensus reached by the Technical Team on the proposal for the revised Treaty and regulations. We support efforts to enhance the CRA’s flexibility and effectiveness, notably through the inclusion of eligible payment currencies and improved risk management. We also value the participation of new BRICS members who have expressed interest in joining the CRA and we are committed to onboarding them on a voluntary basis and according to country-specific circumstances.”

— Ukraine. “We recall our national positions concerning the conflict in Ukraine as expressed in the appropriate fora, including the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly. We note with appreciation relevant proposals of mediation and good offices, including the creation of the African Peace Initiative and the Group of Friends for Peace, aimed at peaceful resolution of the conflict through dialogue and diplomacy. We expect that current efforts will lead to a sustainable peace settlement.”

— Colonialism, racism. “We reiterate the need to intensify the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance as well as discrimination based on religion, faith or belief, and all their contemporary forms around the world, including the alarming trends of rising hate speech, disinformation and misinformation. We welcome the proclamation of a Second International Decade for People of African Descent (2025 – 2034), by the UN General Assembly. We welcome of the decision of the African Union to designate 2025 as the year for “Justice for Africans and People of African Descent Through Reparations” and recognize the efforts of the African Union to tackle the destructive legacy of colonialism and the slave trade…We stress the importance of the return of cultural property and heritage to their countries of origin and its potential for rebuilding international relations in a non hierarchical, cooperative basis, and we recognise the need for a more robust international framework on the matter; as a path for promoting social cohesion, cultural and historical justice, reconciliation, and collective memory.”

https://johnhelmer.net/brics-fudge/#more-92050

******

Peace In Ukraine Won’t End The West’s Hybrid War On Russia
Andrew Korybko
Jul 08, 2025

Image

Their refined Hybrid War model will involve efforts to win the “tech race”, a new Western division of labor for containing Russia in Europe, and AI-generated anti-Russian infowars.

Russia’s natural resource wealth and new role in accelerating multipolar processes incentivize the West to continue its Hybrid War on Russia even in the event of peace in Ukraine. The US’ neoconservative policymaking faction and the EU’s liberal-globalists (essentially one and the same at this point) continue to perceive Russia as an enduring rival to contain and ideally dismember. That’s why they’re expected to refine their ongoing Hybrid War on Russia in the coming future through the following three means.

The first involves their efforts to win the “tech race”, specifically in terms of AI and the Internet of Things, which they envisage will enable them to lead the “Fourth Industrial Revolution” (4IR). The consequent economic and military edge that they anticipate is supposed to “leave Russia in the dust” as they see it. They believe that economic and then political instability will eventually follow in Russia. This could take the form of Color Revolutions, renewed terrorist insurgencies, and/or uncontrollable elite infighting.

The second aspect concerns the West’s division of labor in containing Russia. The US will “Lead From Behind” by providing back-end support for its European junior partners as it prioritizes containing China. Meanwhile, the UK wants a sphere of influence in the Arctic-Baltic, Germany just in the Baltic, Poland in Central & Eastern Europe, and France in Romania-Moldova. The EU’s associated €800 billion “ReArm Europe Plan”, which will likely lead to social spending cuts, is being spun as a ‘defense of democracy’.

And finally, the last element of the West’s refined Hybrid War on Russia will focus on AI-generated anti-Russian infowars, both to demoralize Russians and boost morale among Westerners. They’ll write entire articles, control more realistic bots on social media, create lifelike videos, and ultimately masquerade as policy experts and average folks alike. Years of secretly scraping Mainstream Media, Alt-Media, social media (including non-Western platforms), and YouTube for data will make these fakes very convincing.

For as compelling as these plans may be, they won’t destabilize Russia. Its economy has already proven itself remarkably resilient and China can help it catch up to the West in the tech race. As for conventional Western military threats, Russia’s military-industrial production far surpasses NATO’s, while Russia’s effective “Democratic Security” policies have preemptively neutralized infowar threats. The end result will be that Europe becomes more subordinate to the US without either of them subordinating Russia.

The West’s plans could also backfire. The European public might embrace populist-nationalists who promise to restore social spending levels by cutting newly planned military spending. Even if they’re kept out of power through Romanian-like machinations, that would be at the expense of further discrediting the myth of “Western democracy”, which might fuel an even greater public trust crisis. At the very least, standards of living will stagnate or even decline, and Europe might thus be the one “left in the dust”.

The West’s refined Hybrid War on Russia that’s expected to follow peace in Ukraine, whenever that might come and regardless of the terms, is inevitable due to how deeply embedded neoconservatives and liberal-globalists are in its decision-making ecosystem. Even the best-case scenario of Trump coercing Zelensky into Putin’s demanded concessions and then Russia and the US agreeing to a resource-centric strategic partnership can’t avert this. Russia is ready, however, so this will all be for naught.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/peace-in ... -the-wests

Russia’s Formal Recognition Of The Taliban Comes At A Crucial Time For The Broader Region
Andrew Korybko
Jul 09, 2025

Image

Trump wants to return US forces to Afghanistan’s Bagram Airbase; there are newfound concerns about the North-South Transport Corridor’s viability after the recent Iranian-Israeli War; and Turkiye is making a powerplay to expand its influence into Central Asia.

Russia became the first country to formally recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan earlier this month. This development comes at a crucial time for the region: Trump wants to return US forces to Afghanistan’s Bagram Airbase; there are newfound concerns about the North-South Transport Corridor’s (NSTC) viability after the recent Iranian-Israeli War; and Turkiye is making a powerplay to expand its influence into Central Asia. Here are three background briefings:

* 16 May: “Trump’s Desired Return To Bagram Airbase Could Reshape South Asian Geopolitics”

* 18 June: “Protracted Instability In Iran Could Adversely Affect India’s Strategic Interests”

* 2 July: “Why’d Erdogan Decide To Expand Turkiye’s Sphere Of Influence Eastwards?”

Correspondingly, the direct consequences of this latest development aim to: bolster the Taliban’s resilience to American pressure to once again host US forces; assist in the construction of Kabul’s portion of the Pakistan-Afghanistan-Uzbekistan (PAKAFUZ) railway and/or make a bid for control over it; and rely more upon PAKAFUZ as a complement or even alternative to the NSTC with the tangential benefit of naturally expanding economic influence in Central Asia so as to gently counterbalance Turkiye’s.

It's here where the economic drivers of this diplomatic decision come into play as detailed below:

* 19 May 2024: “Analyzing The Strategic Importance Of Russia’s Reportedly Planned Afghan Oil Hub”

* 28 May 2024: “Russia Is Preparing To Strategically Partner With The Taliban”

* 27 November 2024: “Russia’s Grand Geo-Economic Plan A Step Closer In Afghanistan”

The gist is that the expansion of Russian economic influence in Afghanistan, the prerequisite of which is formal recognition of the Taliban as that country’s legitimate government, will enable Moscow to pioneer energy and real-sector connectivity with Pakistan’s promising emerging market via Central Asia. For that to happen, however, Afghan-Pakistani tensions must first abate and Afghan-emanating terrorist threats to the region must be neutralized or at least contained. Here are some briefings about that:

* 16 June 2023: “Russia’s Afghan Point Man Hinted At The Possibility Of Military-Technical Ties With The Taliban”

* 1 September 2024: “The CIA Isn’t Responsible For The Upsurge Of Terrorism In Pakistan’s Balochistan Region”

* 12 February 2025: “Russia Has A Better Chance Of Mediating Afghan-Pakistani Tensions Than China Does”

All in all, the economic, security, diplomatic, and ultimately strategic opportunities unlocked by Russia’s formal recognition of the Taliban will turbocharge its influence in the broader region, which couldn’t have come at a better time given concerns about the NSTC’s viability and impending Turkish-US inroads. The timing of this development is coincidental, but it nevertheless comes at a crucial time for the broader region, thus strengthening Russia’s stakeholder role and increasing its ability to shape events.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/russias- ... ion-of-the

******

Chaos in the Caucasus: The Great Armenian Sell Out and Turkish/NATO Dreams of a Turan Corridor Stretching to China
Posted on July 9, 2025 by Conor Gallagher

On Monday we looked at Azerbaijan’s deteriorating relationship with Russia on manufactured grounds—with a heavy assist from the US and Israel—and how it fits into a long-planned Turkic corridor project slicing through the South Caucasus. Key to that plan is Armenia where the US and company have been laying the groundwork for this operation for years. We’re now seeing it come more fully into the light. Let’s examine what’s taking place in Armenia before turning to Türkiye and wider implications for the Eurasian heartland.

Armenia’s Least Worst Option: Beg Russia for Help (But That’s Not Going to Happen)

The US with heavy French involvement, has successfully turned to Armenia into a tool of the West in recent years. The US has one of its largest embassies in the world in Armenia and even a representative of the US armed forces embedded in the Armenian Defense Ministry. The biggest problem for the West was that the plan to get a stooge government in Georgia failed — an effort that isn’t completely dead, but it’s on life support, and with it the logistics to Armenia.

Nonetheless, the Armenian government, by most objective accounts acting against the interests of its people, has successfully eroded ties with Russia over the past few years,[1] despite Moscow being the historic counterweight to the designs of Türkiye and Azerbaijan. Why did the Armenian government of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan do this? Hard to say for certain. The charitable view is that was a clumsy rebalancing act. Either way, Armenia is now in an untenable position, and it looks like the final sell-out has begun.

There is now talk that the US, having abandoned the plan to weasel itself more comfortably militarily into Armenia, is instead content to turn the job over to Türkiye and Azerbaijan. It’s also possible this was the plan all along and that resistance from the Armenian government and tensions between Azerbaijan and the West were just a feint that are so in vogue in the West nowadays. It would make sense that the plan to open the Turan Corridor not get the green light until Armenia had successfully pushed Russia out of any involvement. That now appears to be the case unless Armenia does an about face and pleads for Moscow’s help, and/or Russia were to forcefully intervene.

As of now, the government in Yerevan is doubling down on its anti-Russia stance as it arrests clergymen and businesspeople who were allegedly plotting a coup. Armenia is speeding towards nationalizing a power grid owned by jailed Russian businessman as Pashinyan stated there is a “high probability that certain circles in Russia are behind these hybrid operations and this hybrid war.” One thing Armenia has not done yet is make any request that Russia vacate its military base in the country — one Russia is reportedly reinforcing:

Russia is increasing its military presence in Armenia, according to Ukraine’s Defense Intelligence (GUR), which reports that the Kremlin has accelerated the reinforcement of its military base in Gyumri as part of a broader effort to exert pressure on countries in the South…

— CaucasusWarReport (@Caucasuswar) July 5, 2025



Armenian analysts are pointing to the Russian Orthodox Church’s opposition to the arrests, as well as the alleged involvement of some members of the ArBat Battalion, a unit of Armenian volunteers that is part of the Russian Armed Forces, as evidence that Moscow is behind the unrest.

Image
Pashinyan and Putin meet in October of 2024 at the Kremlin.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov recently commented on the upheaval, saying the following:

“This is, of course, an internal matter for Armenia,” he stated. “We are, of course, interested in the preservation of law and order in Armenia, so that Armenia is a prosperous, stable country, friendly to Russia.”

The archbishops who have been detained are key members of the Armenian Apostolic Church, which has been the main driver of protests against Pashinyan over his policies towards Azerbaijan, which some see as a betrayal of Armenian interests.

Included in the arrests is Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan, the leader of the Sacred Struggle opposition movement. Galstanyan was educated in the U.K. and Canada and in recent years has risen to prominence due to his opposition to any land deals with Azerbaijan. He has the support of much of the political opposition, as well as the Sasna Tsrer organization, an extra-parliamentary force that is anti-Russian, pro-West, and has perpetrated political violence in the past.

Public outcry and protests have followed the crackdown with some leading to clashes with police. The arrests began as Pashinyan made a historic visit to Istanbul to meet with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

And just prior to that trip to Türkiye the situation had seemingly reached a point of no return with the head of the Armenian Church accusing Pashinyan of being circumcised in comparing him to Judas. Pashinyan responded that he was ready to ‘“prove the opposite.”

Setting aside the status of Pashinyan’s foreskin, where does this all leave us?

Should Pashinyan be looking to make some sort of deal with Türkiye and Azerbaijan, it would help explain the crackdown on the opposition. There is a fear among the Armenian opposition that Pashinyan will agree to—if he hasn’t already—cede territory to allow Türkiye and Azerbaijan to open their coveted Zangezur Corridor. Note from the Monday post that Zangezur would not touch Iranian territory, nor does it mean that Turkiye and Azerbaijan would invade Iran, which seems far-fetched. It does, however, hurt both Russia and Iran economically, weakens their influence in the South Caucasus, and could potentially stir up trouble in Iran’s northwestern states. In other words, it’s a major headache that has significant long term consequences.

And it’s fairly clear that the point from the 2020 Moscow-brokered peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan that Russia oversee any such Zangezur route will not be honored. While Russian officials remain tight-lipped, others aren’t being quite so diplomatic:

Since returning from Türkiye, Mr Pashinyan – or is it Effendi Pashinyan now – has unleashed a campaign of smears, searches and threats against the Armenian Apostolic Church and its head Catholicos Karekin II.

To Armenians living in their homeland: what are you waiting for? For… pic.twitter.com/yHl1GH6RXI

— Margarita Simonyan (@M_Simonyan) June 27, 2025


Let’s contrast with the stance from EU:

The EU and Armenia have never been closer.

Today, we announced a political agreement on an ambitious Partnership Agenda.
We also signed an agreement to enhance cooperation in crisis management.

My press conference with @AraratMirzoyan ↓ pic.twitter.com/enuN40oupo

— Kaja Kallas (@kajakallas) June 30, 2025


Of course, Brussels and the US are very interested in a direct route to get their hands on all that Caspian and Central Asian fossil fuels and strategic minerals. They had hoped to do so through Georgia, but a Turkic corridor that simultaneously hurts Iran makes for a fine Plan B—even if it means turning to old friend/foe Erdogan.

As the Atlantic Council so-eloquently put it a few years back: “Türkiye can become an energy hub—but not by going all-in on Russian gas.” Washington wants that gas to come from Azerbaijan and elsewhere in Central Asia.

Türkiye Does Türkiye Things

The relationship between Türkiye and the West is often described as transactional and with good reason. That’s usually how things get done with the second most important member of NATO (recall the deal for Türkiye to approve Sweden’s NATO accession in exchange for 40 F-16s).

For months, the EU has been increasing Türkiye’s role in the bloc’s defense industries and it was recently capped off by news last week that the two sides will hold defense talks after a three-year pause. Ankara is looking for access to the EU’s new $170 billion defense fund.

Perhaps the biggest news of all on this front is that, according to Erdogan, the US is easing up on 2017 the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA). Washington imposed sanctions on Ankara in 2020 over its purchase of the Russian-made S-400 missile defense system. Erdogan said a month ago that the sanctions, which have hammered Türkiye’s defense sector, are softening and that steps toward lifting them are progressing rapidly, which Türkiye has insisted on for years.

US Ambassador to Türkiye Tom Barrack said recently that he expects a deal on lifting the sanctions by the end of the year, which would involve welcoming Türkiye back into the F-35 program.

There was also the recent launch of a joint venture between Turkish drone maker Baykar and Italian defense contractor Leonardo (Leonardo has very close defense ties with Israel).

Türkiye had for some time been trying to purchase 40 Eurofighter-Typhoon new-generation aircraft, but Germany was holding up the sale.

“There are still some hurdles to be jumped over” for #Türkiye. One of them is “quite sensitive” – @eurofighter CEO Degenhardt. Make of that what you will… pic.twitter.com/Zorxzg9NU3

— Gareth Jennings (@GarethJennings3) June 18, 2025



That sensitive issue is now apparently resolved. According to the German Handelsblatt daily, Berlin is giving the green light.

Recall that prior to the Syria offensive, Germany and others eased off a years-long unofficial embargo on defense exports to Türkiye. Two months ahead of that operation, Der Spiegel reported that Germany’s Federal Security Council, which meets in secret, was approving the sale of $368 million worth of heavy weaponry to Türkiye, as well as reconsidering Türkiye’s request to purchase Eurofighter warplanes.

The big question is what is the West getting in return for all this recent goodwill? One could argue it’s an attempt to shore up NATO’s industrial base, which is severely lacking. That’s certainly possible.

It could also be a cooperation with the US plan to further weasel its way into the Caucasus. While Türkiye’s moves eastwards via a link up with Azerbaijan through Armenia are part of its own grand visions for a Turkic corridor stretching into China and it has long insisted Armenia will cooperate one way or another, it likely took some deals to get Ankara to agree to the potential Washington role in that plan. This US policy is not a product of the Trump administration, but it certainly has its own motivations:

The U.S. model envisions American business interests as a stabilizing force, similar to a recent deal involving rare earth minerals in Ukraine. One U.S. official reportedly told [Olesya Vardanyan of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace] that the plan could even lead to a Nobel Peace Prize for former President Donald Trump, suggesting that the initiative may become part of his broader foreign policy platform.

Meanwhile, Türkiye’s eastwards march will ratchet up the pressure on Iran and Russia. Tehran is worried that Ankara’s visions of Pan-Turkism will incite ethnic unrest and divisions in the Azeri and Kurdish areas in the northwest of Iran. As Ali Nassar writes at The Cradle:

It reveals a layered geopolitical project anchored in Pan-Turanist nationalism, Muslim Brotherhood-aligned political Islam, and strategic deployment of military and development tools – crafted to serve Ankara’s national interests while converging with NATO’s broader regional goals.

…Pan-Turanism, an early 20th-century ideology premised on the unification of Turkic-speaking peoples from Anatolia to western China, has been resurrected in Ankara as a vehicle for geopolitical consolidation. Today, Turkiye deploys this vision to deepen its grip on Central Asia – particularly in Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Azerbaijan.

This ideological push is operationalized through the Organization of Turkic states, which functions as a joint political, economic, and security bloc linking Ankara with these post-Soviet republics.

Türkiye and the West also have visions of using the Zangezur as an energy corridor to send fossil fuels and other resources from Central Asia and the Caspian westwards while cutting out Russia and Iran, all the while increasing their footprint in these countries, effectively carving out a chunk of the Eurasian “heartland.”

Image

Here’s a better view for those in the back:

Image

***

I can’t find the comment right now, but someone here at NC said the Western Zionists see Iran as a game of Jenga. Is it fair to say Iran won the 12-Day War and that Russia is winning/has won in Ukraine? Yes.

But the empire always has tricks up its sleeve, works on long timelines, and as Israel demonstrates daily, it has no red lines.

Should Türkiye, Azerbaijan and Armenia make a move for Zangezur, the bet in think tank landia is that Iran and Russia are too preoccupied with their other conflicts against Western proxies to do all that much about it. We’ll see. Iran has called such a scheme a red line, and Tehran and Moscow will no doubt respond in some fashion.

Economic measures are easy to envision. As Fitch Ratings notes, Armenia’s economy relies significantly on Russia for both trade and energy. For example, Armenia also currently pays Russia $165 per thousand cubic meters of gas, well below the market price in Europe, and Russia is Armenia’s number one trading partner. Due to Russian companies’ large investments in the Azerbaijani oil and gas sector, it is one of the bigger beneficiaries of Brussels’ efforts to increase energy imports from Azerbaijan in order to replace Russian supplies. Azerbaijan is also importing more Russian gas itself in order to meet its obligations to Europe. Türkiye gets nearly half of its natural gas and a quarter of its oil from Russia on good deals and profits from sending Turkstream gas on to Southeastern Europe.

Will economic measures be enough, though? Moscow often seems convinced that at some point national self interest will kick in for these countries, as will an awareness that conflict would be devastating, but common sense is in short supply these days, and the US is proficient at getting rulers to go against their country’s national interest. As Yves detailed yesterday, Russia might in typical late fashion be coming to that conclusion. It’s important to note that the issue of Zangezur was a cause of friction between Moscow and Tehran with Iranian leadership alarmed while Russia thought it was going to be involved and benefit.

They’re on the same page now. Is it too late to avoid violence? With drones being launched against Russia from Kazakhstan and against Iran from Azerbaijan, we could be well on our way towards a wider conflict.

From the American neocon-Zionists perspective, if they set Russia and Iran’s backyard on fire, great. They’re happy to help provide the gasoline. And no doubt they’re already well on their way starting their next inferno while Moscow and Tehran try to put this one out.

Notes

As we wrote on Monday, Armenia blamed Russia for not coming to its aid more forcefully in its conflicts with Azerbaijan. While one can sympathize with that sentiment, let’s review some other key details:

It was Armenia that moved peace talks to Western platforms, and it was during those meetings that Armenia agreed to officially recognize Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan.

Once Armenia did so (and PM Pashinyan declared so publicly), the die was cast. The region was (and is) recognized as Azerbaijani territory by the international community but was overwhelmingly populated by ethnic Armenians. Roughly 100,000 of them fled to Armenia after Azerbaijan blockaded the region for months and then moved militarily to assert control in September – an operation that resulted in hundreds of deaths.

Despite moving the negotiation process under the guidance of the West and publicly recognizing Nagorno-Karabakh as Azerbaijani territory, the Pashinyan government has sought to lay all the blame for its loss at the feet of Russia.

It quickly became apparent why. Armenian officials are arguing that since the 2020 agreement also included provisions about Russian peacekeepers in Nagorno-Karabakh and their control over a corridor that ran from Armenia to Nagorno-Karabakh, and since that all fell apart, the rest of the document is essentially null and void, which means no Russian involvement in any Zangezur Corridor. We’ve since heard Armenian officials discuss alternatives like private security forces or Russia monitoring from afar—whatever that means. Among a series of downgrades to Russia’s presence in Armenia, on January 1, Russian border guards withdrew from the Armenian-Iranian border checkpoint at Yerevan’s request. Since 1992 Armenia’s borders with Türkiye and Iran had been the responsibility of Russian troops.

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2025/07 ... china.html

******

1 million migrants from India will come to work in Russia
July 9, 17:16

Image

1 million migrants from India will come to work in Russia

Russia plans to attract 1 million labor migrants from India to compensate for the shortage of highly qualified personnel. This was stated by the head of the Ural Chamber of Commerce and Industry Andrey Besedin.

"As far as I heard from my Indian colleagues, by the end of the year, 1 million specialists from India will come to Russia, including the Sverdlovsk region. A new Consulate General of this country is opening in Yekaterinburg, which will deal with these issues ," he explained in an interview with the EAN agency.

According to him, Russian industrial enterprises need to increase production capacity, but the region is experiencing an acute shortage of labor. Some employees are involved in a special operation in Ukraine, and young people are not eager to work in factories, which, according to Besedin, is due to "an ideological mistake made in the country before."

In addition to India, work is also underway with Sri Lanka and North Korea. However, as the head of the chamber noted, cooperation with labor migrants from these countries may be difficult.

New workers will be sent primarily to the metallurgical and mechanical engineering industries, which require highly qualified specialists.

On July 8, the Investigative Committee of Russia reported an increase in the number of crimes committed by migrants, including particularly serious offenses. In the first five months of 2025, the number of such crimes increased by 10% compared to the same period last year, reaching 18,873 cases. The share of crimes committed by foreigners in the total number of offenses in the country increased from 4.3% to 5%.

https://www.vedomosti.ru/society/news/2 ... -migrantov - zinc

It's all banal here. Since there aren't enough of our own workers, we have to attract workers from abroad.
We are paying for the collapsed system of secondary vocational education, decades of training "lawyers and managers", cultivating disdain for people in blue-collar jobs, etc.
So, despite all the costs, they will continue to attract migrants to work from abroad on an industrial scale.

P.S. Against the backdrop of the Indians, several tens of thousands of North Koreans who must come to work in Russia look very modest. For India, one million more, one million less.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9945980.html

Taliban reduces poppy cultivation in Afghanistan by 14 times
July 9, 15:20

Image

The Russian Foreign Ministry reported that after the Taliban came to power, the area of ​​poppy crops in Afghanistan decreased by 14 times.

This is essentially a repeat of the situation in the last year before the US aggression against Afghanistan. In 1999-2000, the Taliban negotiated international recognition and, against this background, sharply reduced the area under poppy crops. Heroin production in Afghanistan was then steadily falling.
But in 2001, aggression and occupation of Afghanistan followed. The area under poppy crops and heroin production began to grow rapidly, setting new records.

As soon as the Taliban returned to power, the situation of 2000-2001 began to repeat itself. On the question of who actually supported the growth of drug production in Afghanistan.

Russia, China and Iran had previously made it clear to the Taliban that the key to international recognition lay, among other things, in the issue of reducing drug production in Afghanistan. The Taliban are keeping their promises in this matter.

And this means that fewer drugs will flow to Central Asia, from Central Asia to Russia and from there to Europe.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9945776.html

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

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

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Fri Jul 11, 2025 4:03 pm

WHAT IS THE “NEW IDEA, NEW CONCEPT” RUBIO SAYS LAVROV HAS JUST GIVEN HIM?

Image

By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

Following their 60-minute meeting in Kuala Lumpur on Thursday (July 10), Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has announced the only new points he made with Secretary of State Marco Rubio are two he has made before, often. These were “the resumption of direct flights [between Russia and the US] and continued efforts to normalise the functioning of bilateral diplomatic missions.”

The third point Lavrov says he made is a new point camouflaged as an old formula. “It has been agreed to continue constructive dialogue on a growing number of issues of mutual interest based on mutual respect between the Russian and US foreign policy offices.”

What this means is that President Vladimir Putin agrees to ignore President Donald Trump’s foul mouth and his reference to Putin’s “bullshit” if Trump implements actions to halt the US arms flow to the Ukraine and other terms for ending the war in the Ukraine.

Russia will turn the other cheek when US actions speak louder than words – that, Rubio told the press later, is “a new idea, a new concept that will – I’ll take back to the President to discuss.” Eyes, closed, Rubio then added his qualifying scepticism. “Hopefully, it will lead to something positive. I can’t guarantee it. The President has been frustrated at the lack of progress. He’s made that clear publicly. But we’ll see if that changes.”

This is the official form of words in the State Department’s record. But this record has added words Rubio didn’t actually say. According to the verbatim transcript, Rubio’s doubt that Lavrov’s “new idea” will change Trump’s mind is missing: “Again, I wouldn’t characterize it as something that guarantees a peace, but it’s a concept that we’ll – I’ll take back to the President today and – here as soon as I finish with you.”

Following Rubio’s return to Washington, Trump then told NBC by telephone that he is still “disappointed in Russia” and will be making “a major statement on Russia on Monday [July 14]”. Trump added that he has just made a “deal” with NATO for US arms deliveries to the Ukraine to go through NATO “and NATO is paying for those weapons 100 percent.” These new weapons supplies will include Patriot missile systems, NBC has reported Trump as saying.

Image

President Putin has designated two subordinates to specialize in turning the other cheek — Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin spokesman, and Kirill Dmitriev, the representative of the Russian oligarchs.

The specialists on distinguishing actions from words, capabilities from intentions, are the General Staff and the intelligence agencies. Between the cheek-turning and actions-not-words specialists, there is often disagreement the President must resolve. This is because Peskov and Dmitriev were opposed to the Special Military Operation; delayed it for as long as Putin could put off the advice of the General Staff; and recommend still that Putin negotiate terms with the US which stop short of the capitulation of the regime in Kiev and the expulsion from the Ukraine of the American, British, German and French militaries.

Peskov’s running orders are to display the other cheek every time Trump opens his mouth. Follow the official Peskov record in Tass.

After Trump began repeating his attacks on Putin following their telephone call on July 3, Peskov announced: “We are calm about it. We expect to continue our dialogue with Washington and our policy aimed at mending the damaged bilateral relations.” Speaking for Dmitriev, he added: “the Kremlin highly appreciates the efforts of the United States, President Donald Trump personally and members of his team to initiate a direct negotiation process between Russia and Ukraine. Moscow believes that there is a very wide potential for restarting trade and economic relations between the two powers, launching many projects in the field of economics, mutual investments, trade, etc. These projects are really in demand by business representatives of the Russian Federation and the United States and can bring great profits to businesses in both countries. But we know that the United States is currently implementing a number of restrictions. We believe that these sanctions are illegal. And they harm not only our entrepreneurs, but also the entrepreneurs of the United States.”

After Trump’s bullshit insult, Peskov replied: “We react quite calmly to that. First of all, Trump makes quite harsh statements, judging from the phrases that he has used.”

After the disclosure of Trump’s claim to have told Putin last year that he would “bomb the shit out of Moscow”, Peskov replied: “The Kremlin cannot confirm the authenticity of US President Donald Trump’s statements published by CNN regarding his possible intentions to bomb Moscow, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said answering a question from TASS at a briefing. He said that he is not authorized to comment on statements made by an American politician in the US: ‘Thank God, I work in Russia. Whether this is fake or not, we don’t know either. There are a lot of fakes now. Often there are many more fakes than truthful information. And we always proceed from this when analyzing this or that news,’ he added.”

Follow the Dmitriev archive in Tass here; and the investigations file on Dmitriev here.

Before the Putin-Trump call on July 3, Dmitriev announced: “The President Putin and President Trump dialogue continues and is vital for the world. Russia and the US can accomplish a lot.” After the call, he announced he is “wishing the American people a Happy Independence Day! May the spirit of freedom and dialogue always guide us forward.”

The General Staff does not announce how calm it is feeling; it also refrains from telegraphing its wishes. Instead, it announces its actions after the event in a daily military bulletin from the Defense Ministry. Many of the NATO states block readers from reading the bulletin at this site.

Image
Source: https://t.me/s/mod_russia

In parallel with Trump’s expostulations, the bulletin has been reporting the accelerating casualty rate for Ukrainian forces as Russia’s armies advance westward along the front in multiple directions. The daily bulletins also record an escalation of drone and missile strikes at the Ukrainian, American and NATO command-and-control centres for the war between the Polish border and Kiev. In the July 10 bulletin, it was reported that “last night, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation launched a group strike with high-precision long-range weapons and unmanned aerial vehicles against enterprises of the military-industrial complex of Ukraine in Kiev and the military airfield infrastructure. The target of the strike has been achieved. All designated objects are affected [Все назначенные объекты поражены.]”

That is not Russian for turning the other cheek. This is — подставив другую щеку.

The Foreign Ministry specializes in words, not actions; between what Peskov and Dmitriev say and what the General Staff does. It is Foreign Minister Lavrov’s job to camouflage their differences; bridge the gap between them; exploit the ambiguity for Russia’s strategic goals; and reflect the decision-making consensus which the President works out with the Security Council. When there is less difference to camouflage, Lavrov’s public demeanour is jovial. When there is more, it ranges between deadpan and grim-faced.

Image
The ASEAN meeting between Lavrov and Rubio on July 10. Source: https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/2035296/

This is how Lavrov agreed to describe his latest tabletalk with Rubio. “On July 10, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov held a meeting with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on the sidelines of the annual ASEAN ministerial events in Kuala Lumpur. As a follow-up to the agreements reached by the presidents of Russia and the United States, including during their latest telephone conversation on July 3, the ministers reviewed all issues on the bilateral agenda and the global situation. They also held a substantive and frank exchange of views on the settlement in Ukraine, the situation in Iran and Syria, as well as a number of other international issues.”

“They have reaffirmed mutual commitment to searching for peaceful solutions to conflict situations and resuming Russian-US economic and humanitarian cooperation and unhindered ties between their countries’ societies, which could be promoted by the resumption of direct flights. They also emphasised the importance of continued efforts to normalise the functioning of bilateral diplomatic missions. It has been agreed to continue constructive dialogue on a growing number of issues of mutual interest based on mutual respect between the Russian and US foreign policy offices.”

This was published in Moscow at 14:37. The State Department did not follow immediately; the Department has issued no formal communiqué at all. Instead, US officials read what Lavrov had posted and three and half hours later, Rubio met with a group of reporters for a question-and-answer session. “I’m not going to characterize our conversation, “ Rubio said, “other than to tell you that I expressed what the President said publicly, which is that we feel as if we’ve dedicated a lot of time and energy to this matter and just not enough progress has been made. We need to see a roadmap moving forward about how this conflict can conclude, and then we shared some ideas about what that might look like. And obviously, I’ll take that back to the President here as early as this evening, and hopefully there’s something that we can build on there.”

An American reporter asked Rubio to explain the difference between the “roadmap we need to see” and the 33-point memorandum which the Russian side has tabled in Istanbul. “What concrete ideas have been presented, and how did Russia respond in this meeting? SECRETARY RUBIO: Well, I – again, these things are best negotiated – I don’t want to – in private, and that’s how these things generally work. There were some ideas exchanged today, some viewpoints that they expressed to us that I’ll take back to the President for his consideration, and hopefully it will lead to something. I don’t want to over-promise something. Again, as I said, this is a conflict that’s been going on now for three – over three years, and as has already been pointed out by one of the questions here, we’ve seen an acceleration of attacks. I think it’s the – probably the largest drone attack in a city close to the Polish border, actually. So, it’s a pretty deep strike.”

Image
Source: https://www.state.gov/

Another reporter pressed Rubio to be clearer. “QUESTION: Can I ask you one more quick question on Russia? Just these ideas that were put on the table today, would you characterize them as new ideas from the Russian side that the Trump Administration had not heard before? “

“SECRETARY RUBIO: Yes. Well, I think maybe – yes, I think it’s a new and a different approach. Again, I wouldn’t characterize it as something that guarantees a peace, but it’s a concept that we’ll – I’ll take back to the President today and – here as soon as I finish with you.”

As for what actions the Administration is taking for the arms flow to the Ukraine, Rubio categorically denied there has been a halt. “So, my point is that there wasn’t a policy decision not to give weapons to Ukraine. It was a review in which certain munitions were temporarily paused for that review and for that purpose. And this reporting out there that there was no awareness of it is not true. Now – but no policy decision was made, in essence. No one ever said we’re not sending weapons to Ukraine. That’s been appropriated by Congress, and that’s continued, and that continues to this very day.”

“But when you’re doing a review, there’s some period of time in which during that review, it’s possible that some shipping is slowed down – not stopped, but because it’s being reviewed, someone would say, okay, well, let’s not send it today, let’s wait a couple days because we’re conducting a review of that particular munition. So that’s what happened here, and I think it was not appropriately reported, initially. But nonetheless, it’s pretty clear now that review has occurred. And as the President’s made clear, there has been no change to our posture with regards to providing what we have available.”

“Now, I would remind everybody – again, I go back to the point I made, and that is that there are certain things that Ukraine needs like Patriot batteries. Those are available. There are multiple countries in Europe that possess Patriot batteries that they could share with Ukraine, and we’re actively talking to countries [Greece, Spain, Germany] about doing that.”

https://johnhelmer.net/what-is-the-new- ... more-92060

*******

International Crime & Money Laundering: Russia's Report.

Meeting with Head of the Federal Financial Monitoring Service Yury Chikhanchin
Karl Sanchez
Jul 08, 2025

Image

I found no graphic depicting government involvement.

In virtually every summit declaration I’ve read, there’s an article about the need to combat international crime. Within the just published BRICS Declaration, that is conveyed in Articles 36 & 37 with Article 36 saying the following which is rather standard:

We reiterate our commitment to preventing and combating illicit financial flows, including money laundering and the financing of terrorism, extremism and proliferation, as well as other forms of transnational organized crime, such as drug trafficking, cybercrimes, crimes that affect the environment, illicit trafficking of firearms, trafficking in persons, corruption and the use of new technologies, including cryptocurrencies, for illegal, in particular terrorist, purposes. In this regard, we underscore the importance of enhancing capacity-building and technical assistance, particularly for developing countries, to support the implementation of relevant international obligations. We reaffirm our commitment to the principles of technical and non-politicized nature of international anti-criminal cooperation, including for the purpose of prevention and of financial investigations.

I recall Larry Johnson saying in one of his chats that the major drug cartels couldn’t operate without the assistance of the major banks to launder their illegal profits. Michael Hudson has provided some very shocking and interesting revelations about US government involvement in that criminal activity. This excerpt is from an autobiographical interview made in 2018, although his writings and interviews are all sprinkled with this info:
That gave me the clue about what people these days talk about money laundering. In the last few months that I worked for Chase Manhattan in 1967, I was going up to my office on the ninth floor and a man got on the elevator and said, “I was just coming to your office, Michael. Here is a report. I’m from the State Department (I assumed that this meant CIA). “We want to calculate how much money the US could get if we set up bank branches and became the bank for all the criminal capital in the world.” He said, “We figured out we can finance, (and he said this in an elevator), we can finance the Vietnam War with all the drug money coming into America, all of the criminal money. Can you make a calculation of how much that might be?”

So I spent three months figuring out how much money goes to Switzerland, from drug dealings, what’s the dollar volume of drug dealings. They helped me with all sorts of statistics on that, and said, “We can become the criminal capital of the world and it’ll finance the dollar and this will enable us to afford the spending to defeat communism in Vietnam and elsewhere. If we don’t do that, the bomb throwers will come to New York.”

So I became a specialist in money laundering! Nothing could have better prepared me to understand how the global economy works! I had all the statistics, I had the help of the government people explaining to me how the CIA worked with drug dealing and other criminals and kidnappers to raise the money so it would be off the balance sheet funding and Congress didn’t have to approve it when they would kill people and sponsor revolutions. They were completely open with me about this. I realized they’d never done a security check on me. [My Emphasis]
I’ll bet most every reader never read the above, although many likely held suspicions. It’s all of the above that the rest of the world’s nations try to combat, while many of us know just how broad all that criminal activity is nowadays. Today, Putin met with his point man on this topic for a review of the current status. As you’ll read, there’re very serious amounts of money involved just in Russia, and important people are involved as another Russian general was arrested yesterday while the fired minister of transportation killed himself as he too was likely being investigated for corruption from his days as Kursk Governor. Now for the report:
Yu. Chikhanchin: Vladimir Vladimirovich, I wanted to tell you how the national anti-money laundering system works in 2024, and to report on the results. I also wanted to discuss the challenges that lie ahead.

V.Putin: Yes, good.

Yu. Chikhanchin: The most important task on the international platform was to preserve our positions and prevent Russia from being included in the sanctions lists. We have succeeded in this at the FATF [Financial Action Task Force] meetings, and we continue to expand the formats of international action. Currently, about 40 countries are actively cooperating. This includes the BRICS countries, parliamentarians, and the International Compliance Council.

As for BRICS, of course, we have taken as a basis the decisions of the Kazan Declaration, which outlines our topics related to both information and communication technologies and [the fight] against corruption, against drugs and transnational crime. We are preparing for the next FATF assessment. We have created an interdepartmental commission.

We are creating a system of information exchange between countries. Taking into account the suspension of activities in the Egmont Group, this association of financial intelligence agencies, we [have] our own program, 30 countries have already joined together, and the exchange of [information] is closed.

Together with VTB and the Central Bank, we are improving the Transparent Blockchain project, which allows us to control and monitor cryptocurrency transactions.

The Center for International Risk Assessment, [the decision to] which was signed and launched by the heads of the CIS countries. Today, 19 countries have already joined, in addition to the CIS, and we are identifying the main risks. Based on these materials, 50 international shadow platforms have been identified, more than 600 financial investigations have been conducted, and more than 100 criminal cases are ongoing.

We are currently actively working with China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Belarus, and the United Arab Emirates on transactions related to foreign economic activity using fictitious documents. Our colleagues are very actively helping us.

As for cross-border financial flows, I have already reported that the vector has changed somewhat: it is now the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and the Central Asian region. This corresponds to the creation of a unified system of fast payments, an alternative to SWIFT, primarily in the CIS countries. Alternative forms of payment, such as gold and cryptocurrency, are being actively used. Now, netting has emerged: the clearing operations that we are currently engaged in.

V. Putin: Regarding the shadow platforms. What are these international shadow platforms?

Yu. Chikhanchin: These are the platforms that criminals are using today. The money has been stolen and transferred abroad, and we have identified all the criminal flows together with the countries: where they are hidden, in which banks, and in which countries. We have identified this to date. We are currently searching for evidence and looking at who else has used these shadow platforms.

Of course, our main allies in resolving these issues are financial institutions, primarily banks. It should be noted that, together with the Central Bank, the Prosecutor General's Office, and law enforcement agencies such as the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Federal Security Service, we have managed to maintain the compliance of approximately 90% of financial institutions with the law. This is a very high percentage.

Last year, the Central Bank revoked the licenses of six banks, but the share of suspicious transactions in regional banks increased slightly. The non-banking sector also started to commit some errors, so we are paying special attention to this issue. To address these issues, we are changing the regulatory framework. Last year alone, about 20 laws were adopted.

As for the dynamics of changes in financial flows, I would like to say that, together with the Central Bank and law enforcement agencies, we have managed to reduce the use of budget funds in high-risk banks by almost 2.5 times, and we have prevented the transfer of about 500 billion rubles into the shadow economy. This is based on the criteria and indicators developed jointly by the Central Bank and law enforcement agencies. We have also blocked the operations of high-risk organizations, amounting to about 20 billion rubles. These are significant amounts.

We have managed to practically reduce the use of such financial institutions as notaries. That is, previously notaries participated in the confirmation of questionable transactions, the same Commission for labor disputes and the market of professional participants in the securities market.

It should be noted that the situation in the courts, which were also involved in confirming transactions with questionable operations, has changed dramatically. This year alone, they have prevented about 100 billion rubles from entering the shadow market.

As for the public sector. First of all, we pay attention to contracts that go with a single contractor, and those where there is an additional agreement to increase the contract price. All this made it possible to reduce the participation of technical companies by about 10 percent. Work is currently underway to identify when contract owners use assets for personal purposes, that is, they acquire real estate and cars for themselves, hiding behind the activities of the contract.

Together with the Prosecutor's Office and, again, the Federal Security Service, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and the Federal Antimonopoly Service, we have identified tenders with restricted competition worth 39 billion rubles. Through our joint efforts, we have saved more than 27 billion rubles in budget funds. We are working on almost 1,300 criminal cases and providing assistance, with a total damage of approximately 26 billion rubles.

As for national projects in the public sector. I would like to say that you once supported a very important area–-treasury support. And exactly where it exists in the federal budget, there is practically a minimum number of terminated contracts, only about nine percent. But there is a problem in the budgets of subjects and municipal budgets, where the growth is about two or three times. Therefore, we are now planning to launch a system of treasury support specifically for the subject's capabilities, in order to track these types of operations there as well.

Based on this, we have noticed that a number of regions require close attention. For example, there are regions where approximately 50 percent of contracts are terminated based on the amount, and approximately 20 percent of contracts are terminated based on the number of contracts. We are paying special attention to these regions. We are primarily working with law enforcement agencies and the treasury.

The second problem is the increase in the price of contracts. Within 10 [percent], this is the acceptable cost of an increase during the execution of a contract. However, there are regions where this amount exceeds and is much higher. We have identified these regions, and we are actively working with law enforcement agencies and the Treasury to address them. The increase can be up to 50 percent.

We continue to work within the framework of the state defense order. One of the areas is the reduction of accounts receivable, which has decreased by more than five times. We are able to solve this issue together with the Ministry of Defense and the Prosecutor General's Office.

At the same time, there are a number of budget financing mechanisms in the form of subsidies, concession agreements, and letters of guarantee, where the level of opacity is very high and requires additional attention and processing. In the case of one of the subsidies, we reported to the Ministry of Industry and Trade that the partner selected for the subsidy was not the most appropriate, and the subsidy was stopped.

Work is being carried out to counteract corruption. Here, of course, it is worth noting that crimes are usually committed with cryptocurrency and through the use of affiliates.

V. Putin: The use of cryptocurrency in payments has increased, hasn't it?

Yu.Chikhanchin: Yes, it was the corrupt officials who started using it.

Together with the Federal Security Service, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and the Prosecutor General's Office, we worked out the methodology, identified the so – called decision-making points: where money is distributed, and focused commercial banks on the model of a corrupt official. They have now started to inform us (increased the number) about such transactions, that is, we have started to grow.

And of course, we work together with the Presidential Administration and the Prosecutor General's Office on anti-corruption requests, declarations, and so on. In total, we are working on about 400 corruption cases, and we are actively involved. So far, we have identified approximately 13.5 billion rubles in damages. And we have already returned about 5 billion to the state.

You asked a question about shadow platforms at the international level. We also have shadow platforms in Russia. Last year, six platforms with a turnover of approximately 11 billion rubles were closed. Approximately 350 organizers and customers of these platforms were identified. As a result, the price of cash withdrawal increased dramatically, with a market value of approximately 20-25 percent, which is very high. However, these services are still in demand.

Of course, there are a number of concerns about the fact that budget recipients are using the services of shadow platforms, so we are working closely with the Treasury and the Prosecutor General's Office. Unfortunately, I must say that there are still 10 platforms operating in our country, and we are working on them.

Another area that raises a lot of questions, and you even held a meeting on this topic, is the involvement of citizens in various shadow schemes. This is primarily due to the increased availability of financial services and the emergence of information and communication technologies. The reach of these schemes has expanded to include more than 50,000 websites that actively promote them. These schemes have become transnational, involving individuals from various countries, and the number of non-residents involved in these schemes has increased by almost 3.5 times. However, the concern lies primarily with the involvement of minors. These are schoolchildren, and today there are already seven-year-old schoolchildren who are involved in these operations. They have lunch cards, which are usually linked to their parents' accounts, and criminals are taking advantage of this. This is a complex system at work. However, this is only one aspect of the crime.

As a rule, this criminal world then begins to criminalize those who have fallen into these shadow schemes, involving them in drug trafficking, extremism, and terrorism. This is a very serious problem. We are currently working on these issues with the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Federal Security Service, the Prosecutor General's Office, and the Investigative Committee.

Nevertheless, we have managed to activate the counteraction mechanism and have managed to stop the activities of about 90 financial pyramid schemes and pseudo-brokers. Roskomnadzor has blocked about 40,000 websites. The activities of about 60 illegal lenders have been stopped. About 700,000 accounts used by the criminal world have been blocked, and about 10 billion rubles have been seized. These are significant amounts.

As for working on drug trafficking and financial income. Here it is necessary to say that the number of drug releases on the territory of Russia (synthetics) has increased and the "shoulder" of regional calculations has decreased, it has become more difficult to identify. But we are actively working, and, of course, one of the main reasons is distribution via the Internet, payments via the Internet, via instant messengers, which are very difficult to detect and block.

In addition, foreign crypto exchanges and "drop" cards are actively used, as you know. This gave us the opportunity to work with the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the FSB, and the Investigative Committee to correct (we are constantly correcting it) the behavior model of drug traffickers, and bring it to the banks. This allows us to increase the flow that we are processing. Last year alone, there was about a six-fold increase in [the number of] messages.

We are working on more than 200 criminal cases in this area, including those related to the legalization of cryptocurrency. This is a success, and we have already recovered approximately 3 billion rubles.

Together with our colleagues from Belarus and Kazakhstan, we have eliminated a transnational criminal group (together with law enforcement agencies). There are about 500 members, and the turnover is about 1 billion rubles. These are drug dealers.

I would like to say a few words about the financing of terrorism and extremism. We work together with the FSB, the Interior Ministry, the Investigative Committee, and the Prosecutor General's Office to keep a list of terrorists and extremists, which is constantly being updated. Only last year it was possible to freeze assets worth about 250 million rubles. The interdepartmental commission, pre-trial and extra-judicial freezing, including on extremist articles, works well.

In the international direction, lists are exchanged with countries. This has allowed us to identify and freeze the accounts of about 1,300 people on our territory. And about 400 or more [accounts] have been frozen by our colleagues abroad, Russians who use services.

In addition, we continue to work on the new functions assigned to us, which are related to economically significant organizations. This includes the deprivation of corporate rights from foreign holdings and companies.

And another functionality is currency monitoring. Today, I would like to say that the majority of our exporters are law-abiding and worthy of respect: with a 40 percent standard, they sell approximately 70 percent. I would like to say that there is a significant increase in the share of the ruble in transactions, as well as a significant increase in trade in the currencies of friendly countries and a decrease of approximately two times in trade with unfriendly countries.

V. Putin: Are these dollars, euros, and pounds?

Y. Chikhanchin: Yes, they are falling significantly, they are there, these deals, transactions, but practically there are fewer and fewer of them.

V. Putin: What is netting?

Y. Chikhanchin: Netting is when the exporter gives the importer an opportunity, the exporter does not return the money, the importer pre-imports the goods with his money and pays already on the territory of the country. This is a clearing operation.

V. Putin: But you're tracking everything, right?

Yu. Chikhanchin: Yes, there are some issues there, I will stop on them separately.

As for currency monitoring. At the same time, our monitoring, although we are not a currency control authority, has revealed non-fulfillment of import contracts worth 7 billion (currently being worked on together with customs), and illegal withdrawal of assets worth about 60 billion (also being worked on). In total, this mechanism has resulted in the additional return of approximately 130 billion rubles.

But there is another problem–-not all participants in foreign economic activity designate their affiliated companies. We identified about 250 such companies that have made transactions worth about 460 billion.

But, given the fact that the population is being actively drawn into shady transactions, we continue to work on the International Financial Olympiad. You were at the third Olympiad and supported the so-called creation of a financial security movement.

V. Putin: I have signed your paper.

Y.Chikhanchin: Thank you very much. We have already launched this international movement. [Dmitry] Chernyshenko has been elected chairman of the movement with the consent of [Mikhail] Mishustin.

This is the fifth time we've held the Olympiad this year. Taking into account your recommendation, we've decided to hold it in the regions. This time, it will be held in Krasnoyarsk, and we plan to continue holding it in various regions. While the first Olympiad had only seven participating countries, the second had 12, the third had 19, and the last had 36, this year, 40 countries have expressed interest. The Olympiad will take place in late September and early October.

We are currently conducting financial security classes and preliminary selection rounds. More than five thousand Russian and foreign students and schoolchildren have already registered for the selection round. This number is growing.

In addition to the Olympiad, there is a large number of events: international forums, sports, and cultural programs. Last year, children's drawings from Siberia were exhibited, and this year, we are holding a competition for national costumes. Everyone has supported this initiative. There are various financial security tests, which means that this movement has been launched and is still ongoing.

Therefore, we invite you to the fifth anniversary Olympiad in Krasnoyarsk, which will take place in late September and early October.

V. Putin: Okay. Thank you very much.

I understand that the use of gold bars in transactions has increased significantly.

Yu. Chikhanchin: Yes, it is significant.

V.Putin: More than twice as much.

Yu. Chikhanchin: Yes, it has dropped a little now, although it is still active. There is a complete lack of regulation regarding the handling of gold. We are currently working closely with the Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank to amend the legislation, and I believe that we will be able to make improvements. Essentially, the free export of gold is yielding results. It is advantageous to purchase gold here for rubles, export it, sell it for foreign currency, and then convert it back. This is the game being played. The price of gold is very high today, and the difference is exactly [profit].

V. Putin: The historical peak [of the gold price].

Yu. Chikhanchin: A very good margin. [My Emphasis]
Because Russia is the West’s main adversary, it’s subjected to a wide variety of many attacks. Yes, traditional corruption still occurs, but the great mass is in the drug and weapons trade. I find it funny that Russia and other nation’s main allies in the fight are banks while within the Outlaw US Empire and wider West it’s the banks who are allied with governments in this illegal venture that as Hudson described has a geopolitical and geoeconomic aspect. The more unsavory aspects of this criminality—human trafficking and organ harvesting—is occasionally covered by Maria Zakharova in her Weekly Briefings but merits much greater exposure. The use of drugs including alcohol to destabilize societies is linked to the Colonizing & Plundering Eras, with the Anglo-Americans being and remaining the primary instigators. The testimony by Hudson, Johnson and many others indicts the US Federal government as being the primary facilitator of the drug trade within the USA that goes back at least 100 years. The lawbreaking became policy many decades ago, which ought to make readers pause and reconsider what the Drug Enforcement Agency’s main job is outside the Empire’s borders. Some will also recall the song by Glenn Frey, “Smuggler’s Blues,” and the lies it contains based upon the known facts even at that time—1984.

It’s encouraging to see more nations banding together to fight what’s an imperialist scrouge. The crime scene is the entire planet. That adult versions of the schoolyard bully extorting children’s lunch money now exist is nuts. To quote Frank Zappa, it’s “Gross and perverted,” the perpetrators “obsessed and deranged,” yet “they’ve existed for years, but very little has changed.” Meanwhile, today the banks in New York and at other offshore laundering centers will process billions as they do daily without a care in the world of being caught, arrested, found guilty, and facing major prison time. If they were the transparent public utilities they ought to be, this criminal abetting wouldn’t be happening.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/internat ... laundering

******

Glenn Diesen: Wars Bring Together Russia, China, Iran, Pakistan & North Korea



The first third of today’s discussion was directed at the title subject, namely the growing consolidation of what is a military alliance in all but name between these five Asian powers. The principal source for what I said was last night’s Vladimir Solovyov talk show which featured top level Russian academic Orientalists.

I stress that the Solovyov shows are ‘hit or miss’ in terms of value, with a goodly number of wasted evenings and then the occasional highly valuable event such as last night. We were told that China is now shipping a lot of military hardware to Iran in return for the large quantities of oil it receives from Iran. The hardware includes fighter jets, latest generation air defense installations and a lot more. Moreover, China’s readiness to fight, if necessary, to ensure that Iran is not defeated by Israel, by the United States, was demonstrated by its sending a naval task force to the Gulf in the final days of the Iran-Israeli war – set to attack the U.S. navy if necessary. Surely this signal was not missed by Washington.

In the words of the panelists last night, Pakistan is ready to send to Iran any and all military supplies that it requires. Considering that Pakistan is a long-established nuclear power, I suggest that delivery of nuclear bombs to Iran should not be excluded if Iran comes under existential threat. From this angle, the total focus of attention by the United States and other Western powers on the levels of enrichment of uranium going on in Iran is foolishness. Why build when at any moment you can buy?

The other interesting appraisal of the aforementioned ‘axis’ pertains to North Korea, which is said to be seen in its neighborhood as very powerful, far more than you would imagine if The New York Times was your only source of information. Indeed, there is reason to think that South Korea is recalibrating its defense posture given that fact and the equivocal nature of the security guaranties it enjoys from Donald Trump’s USA.

Otherwise, my discussion with Professor Diesen also turned on the question of Russia’s new, massive aerial bombardments on Ukraine. More than 728 drones and numerous missiles were fired at Ukrainian cities a day ago and that number is rising daily, while in addition there is now large-scale use of glide bombs by the Russians to destroy Ukrainian fortified positions. The Russians are now attacking heavily the Western Ukraine, meaning Lvov and the area between Lvov and the Polish border where incoming shipments of arms from the West are stored for transshipment east to the front. The threat is being felt by the Poles, so that their president Duda yesterday said Poland is considering stopping the use of their airport in the southeastern corner of their country as the hub for Western arms shipments to Ukraine.

What is the meaning of the new Russian aggressiveness? I believe it is a clear signal to German chancellor Merz to watch out because Russia is ready for war and will defend its red lines with overwhelming military force. Why Merz? Because as we heard from Vladimir Solovyov last night, ‘he is a Nazi.” That appears to be the new Kremlin line: Germany has replaced the United States as Russia’s enemy number one and Nazism is back in power in Berlin.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2025/07/10/ ... rth-korea/

I separated Gilbert from John Helmer for his own good...hate to see him getting beat up again))

*****

"Yuzhuralzoloto" nationalized
July 11, 15:18

Image

This sweet word - nationalization.

"Yuzhuralzoloto" is nationalized

The Sovetsky District Court of Chelyabinsk, at the request of the Prosecutor General's Office, confiscated shares in the gold mining group of companies Yuzhuralzoloto and other assets of businessman Strukov and his entourage in favor of the state. The trial was held behind closed doors.

Strukov ranks 78th in the Forbes ranking of the richest people in Russia with a fortune of $1.9 billion. Since 2000, he has been a deputy of the Legislative Assembly of the Chelyabinsk Region, and since 2017, its deputy chairman from United Russia. At the same time, the businessman is a member of the Committee on Ecology and Nature Management, which, as stated in the lawsuit, provided him with access to information on priority infrastructure projects in the field of subsoil use. Thus, according to the Prosecutor General's Office, Strukov had the opportunity to introduce such regulations that were beneficial to the business interests of the commercial organizations under his control.

The supervisory agency demanded that assets that, according to the prosecutor's office, were acquired by Strukov using his official position be transferred to the state. Other defendants in the case include alleged affiliates of the businessman. The list of third parties includes PAO Yuzhuralzoloto Group of Companies, OOO UK YGK, as well as the companies Business-Aktiv, Home, and Uralvent, registered in Chelyabinsk. Thus, according to the agency, Strukov illegally gained control of YGK and ten other companies using his positions and position in government agencies. They are currently registered in the names of his daughter Alexandra Strukova, a Swiss citizen, and trusted persons. In 1997,

the businessman established control over the state-owned enterprise Yuzhuralzoloto when he was appointed director of the company under the governor of the Chelyabinsk region, Pyotr Sumin (he held the post from 1997 to 2010). The enterprise was transformed into an open joint-stock company, and then, through bankruptcy proceedings, transferred to the structure controlled by Strukov, PAO Yuzhuralzoloto Group of Companies. The assets of the enterprise were transferred in favor of the new legal entity, where Strukov retained key management positions.

YGC produces 450 thousand ounces of gold per year, developing deposits in the Chelyabinsk region, Krasnoyarsk Krai and Khakassia. Annual revenue is 54 billion rubles, gross profit is 34 billion rubles.

Thus, the deputy in charge of subsoil use, "concentrated key assets in this area under his control, monopolizing the strategic gold mining industry in the Urals and other federal districts," the Prosecutor General's Office said in its lawsuit. A source for RBC reported that, according to the supervisory authority, Strukov transferred significant amounts of business income abroad, where “he and his relatives acquire real estate, cars, yachts and other luxury items, and the organizations’ income does not go towards increasing employee salaries or maintaining the safe operation of equipment, which leads to emergency situations.”

https://www.rbc.ru/business/11/07/2025/ ... m=newsfeed - zinc

Another effective manager turned out to be not very effective. Until 2025, he effectively developed a former state enterprise and transferred funds abroad.

P.S. Today, there is also a trial in the case of fake tablets from Rusnano, where billions of rubles were stolen.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9949227.html

Took money for a fixed match and spent it on a wedding
July 11, 17:11

Image

Funny.
Against the backdrop of the latest scandals in Russian football about bought matches, referees and football players, this story was especially amusing.

Kazan Sokol player Alexander Tsiberkin, who was suspended from football for 10 years for violating betting regulations, told how he was threatened because of a failed fixed match.
Tsiberkin admitted to receiving 800 thousand rubles for organizing a fixed match in 2021. According to the footballer in the video, “the fixed match did not take place because the information was leaked.”

“I did not react [to offers to influence the outcome of matches] until 2021, when I wanted to teach them a lesson. It was the end of November. I did not think that there could be any consequences. I discussed the idea with my brother, we decided to try. I wrote to them from another account - where there was no photo, name, and the phone number was hidden in the privacy settings. Only a nickname. I said that I was an agent, I supervise youth teams and I can help. It only takes time - when the offseason ends and the players have certainty about the teams.
We agreed to meet in Moscow - a man came with a bag of money. 800 thousand rubles, as it turned out. He gave them to me, and that was it. I think it was just a courier who didn’t know anything.

The most interesting thing: they didn’t even ask me my name or what team it was. I thought: if they can give away 800 thousand like that, how much do they bet?
We corresponded on Telegram for about two weeks, and I didn’t give any specifics – what team it was, when the match would be. I just said: “It will be soon. I’ll tell you right away.” Later , I blocked the account of the person I was texting.

For a long time, I didn’t hear from them. A few months later, two people of southern appearance – one very impressive in size, the other just plump – came to the Biolog base. It was a dilapidated building without security, I lived there so as not to rent an apartment. They told me: “Let’s go talk in the car.” They threatened me with a gun.
Another Biolog player lived at the base, and he got worried. He followed us, but of course he couldn’t do anything. They warned him: “We won’t touch him.” He stood near the car and waited for me to be released.

In the car, these two said that I had to return the money. But by that time I didn’t have it anymore – I spent it on the wedding. Then they made a video, which was sent to the RFU. They threatened me and forced me to say what I said. Then they warned me: “If there is no money, we will post the video.”

After the season, I returned to Kazan and told my brother everything. He decided to talk to these people. He called me to a meeting in Kazan, they refused. From that moment on, there was nothing at all – no messages, no calls. I thought that there were no questions for me. Three years later, that very video appears.

I don't know how these people found me. I repeat, I didn't introduce myself in the correspondence, didn't give a photo, didn't say what team I played for. Because I wasn't going to participate in their schemes. I thought about it for a long time: maybe they have their own sources in different teams who somehow figured me out. But these are just guesses. The question remains open."


In the 90s, the bandits would have killed him or tortured him with an iron for something like that.
He took money to organize a fixed match, blocked the one who gave the money, and spent the money on a wedding.
The bandits, judging by this wonderful story, also turned out to be not very smart.

P.S. The character was suspended from football for 10 years in May.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9949468.html

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

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

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sat Jul 12, 2025 3:30 pm

Lavrov's Post-Summit Presser at Kuala Lumpur
Karl Sanchez
Jul 11, 2025

Image

Fresh from Rio to Kuala Lumpur after a trio of meetings/summits, Sergei Lavrov met with media to give his impressions and answer questions. It’s unusual for Lavrov to praise a questioner; he said this to the last Q: “Good question.” Now, Lavrov:
Good afternoon!

Here in Kuala Lumpur, we hold ASEAN events. They are annual. Now they are held at the ministerial level, and summits will be held in the fall. There are three main formats:

Russia-ASEAN Dialogue Partnership. Yesterday, the annual meeting at the level of foreign ministers was held.

The second format is the East Asia Summit, which is attended by a wide range of countries, primarily those that are developing a dialogue partnership with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. It was conceived that the East Asia Summit would consider projects of practical cooperation, connectivity in the economic, trade, transport and cultural fields.

The third format is the ASEAN Regional Security Forum. In addition to the members of the Association, the circle of participants is even wider.

All this together makes up the annual ASEAN events held here in Malaysia. It is symbolic that it was in this country that the Russian Federation took part in such meetings for the first time. Here, for the first time, the foundation was laid for the Russia-ASEAN dialogue partnership, which has since reached the level of strategic partnership. This is enshrined in our joint documents.

This year, we assessed the implementation of the commitments that were made on a reciprocal basis during previous meetings, including at the Russia-ASEAN summit in 2016. It continues to be a forum that has laid the strategic direction for our cooperation.

We are preparing an assessment of the implementation of the Strategic Partnership Plan for 2021-2025. In fact, it is executed in all its components. Today we noted that our special representatives located at the ASEAN headquarters in Jakarta are actively working on the 4th strategic plan. We hope to have time to adopt it before the end of 2025, ideally at the Russia-ASEAN summit scheduled for October 2025 in the capital of Malaysia.

As for the meeting of the countries participating in the East Asia Summit, which took place today. It was devoted primarily to the development of practical cooperation projects in various fields. We believe that this should be the basis for the activities of the East Asia Summits.

Regrettably, our Western colleagues who take part in these events are increasingly straying towards politicisation, ideologisation and Ukrainisation, which has also manifested itself in today's discussions, to the detriment of the potential laid down in the East Asia Summit to achieve practical results that are important for our countries and citizens.

It is not the first year that we have been promoting initiatives to promptly respond to epidemic threats. It would seem that the topic is much more relevant. We put it forward back in 2021 and it was approved. But due to the fact that the West has "struck a pose", this interaction is practically not moving anywhere. In 2023, we proposed developing cooperation in the field of tourism, promoting tourist exchanges as much as possible so that the connectivity of our countries is transmitted at the level of societies and citizens. Tourism is developing in any case, and the incentives we have proposed have been approved to be implemented in everyday activities. But so far little has been done.

We proposed developing cooperation in the development of remote areas (this was also agreed). In large countries, such as Russia, Indonesia, Malaysia, China and other countries, there are remote territories where civilization has already reached, but benefits are not distributed as actively as usual in megacities. This is an urgent task for everyone. We hope that practical results will be achieved on it.

Another of our initiatives in the field of humanitarian cooperation is to ensure the cultural ties between our countries. Eurasia is a huge continent. It is the cradle of several great civilizations. The cultural heritage of each of these civilizations deserves to be mutually enriched. I hope that our initiative will also be implemented.

At the meetings of the East Asia Summit and the ASEAN Regional Security Forum, it is not complete without an exchange of views on political problems and issues. Today, all ASEAN members and most partner countries, including Russia, spoke with great concern about the ongoing and even worsening tragedy in the Palestinian territories, where the humanitarian catastrophe artificially created in the Gaza Strip is followed by similar situations in another part of the Palestinian territories. I am referring to the West Bank, where Israel continues its aggressive policy of creating new settlements in ever increasing, record volumes. There will soon be nothing left of the territories where the Palestinian National Authority operates.

Today I was surprised to read that there is already a project to create the "Emirate of Hebron". This is seen as the first step towards promoting the concept of forming a "United Palestinian Emirates" on Palestinian lands. It sounds like science fiction at this stage, but the fact that such ideas are increasingly "popping up" in the public space speaks to the emerging risks that continue to escalate with regard to the prospects for the creation of a Palestinian state, as decided by the UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council. This is a great challenge for the international community.

We talked about the problems created by Israel's unprovoked attack on the Islamic Republic of Iran, followed by United States missile and bomb strikes. This violates international law, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and the principles of the IAEA, under whose safeguards were the nuclear facilities that were attacked.

We called for the declared truce to continue without any interruptions, so that, despite the damage and damage caused to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and the IAEA's assurances to the facilities under their control, we can try to remedy the situation, put it on a political track and resolve all problems exclusively through negotiations. This is important in order to prevent the recurrence of disregard for the fundamental documents designed to ensure access to the peaceful use of nuclear energy without any attempts or temptations to possess nuclear weapons production technologies.

We also talked about the situation in Myanmar, where there are signs of normalisation. We support the process being carried out by the Myanmar leadership and ASEAN's desire to help this normalization and fully restore Myanmar's full participation in the work of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

We outlined the need to avoid any provocative actions on the Korean Peninsula, which, unfortunately, continue with regard to the DPRK, including by strengthening the military alliances of the United States, South Korea and Japan. More and more large-scale military exercises are being conducted, and even with a nuclear component. There is a (also serious) conflict potential here. We will do everything we can to ensure the legitimate rights of our North Korean allies and prevent provocations that could end badly.

Our Chinese friends have identified disputes over the South China Sea among the problems that they consider a priority for themselves in this region. We firmly believe that this problem should be resolved on the basis of the Code of Conduct concluded between Beijing and the ASEAN member states. On this basis, their negotiations continue. We consider it unacceptable for a non-regional power to interfere in this process.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi also mentioned the situation around Taiwan in sufficient detail, firmly stressing the immutability of the final settlement of the Taiwan problem based on the concept of a single Chinese state.

We have taken note of the words of some of our Western colleagues, which have been said before, that they respect the "one China" principle, but that the status quo cannot be changed. This is hypocrisy, obvious to anyone who is more or less familiar with this problem and with how the West is now acting in relation to Taiwan. The "status quo" for the West is relations with Taiwan as an independent state. Therefore, we once again confirmed the immutability of our approach in support of Beijing's position and Russia's readiness to assist in every possible way in the implementation of this position.

Question: Last year, at a meeting with the leadership of the Russian Foreign Ministry, President Vladimir Putin spoke about the need for a new Eurasian security architecture, which would focus on the principle that "the security of some states cannot be ensured at the expense of the security of others." What is the attitude of Asia in general and ASEAN in particular to this idea, given NATO's ongoing policy of militarization?

Sergey Lavrov: In fact, the initiative to form a Eurasian security architecture is a development of President Vladimir Putin's previous initiative, which he put forward at the first Russia-ASEAN summit, on the formation of a Greater Eurasian Partnership through the establishment of ties, deepening joint activities, joint projects and programmes between the existing integration structures on the Eurasian continent. Links have already been established between the executive heads and secretariats of the EAEU and the CIS, between these organizations and the SCO, and between all of them and the ASEAN countries. This is a useful process that allows you to harmonize integration plans and projects, combine efforts, and avoid duplication. Moreover, the membership of these integration formations intersects and intertwines.

We promote the concept of the Greater Eurasian Partnership with the understanding that discussions on this matter and negotiations on practical activities are open to all countries and integration structures on the Eurasian continent. In particular, there are good prospects for establishing ties between the EAEU, the SCO, the CIS, ASEAN and the GCC. In South Asia, there are integration associations on the South Asian Peninsula. So there are many structures here that can usefully improve connectivity.

This process (as various ideas are translated into practical actions) creates a material foundation for discussions and for ensuring security on the entire Eurasian continent. I have repeatedly touched on this topic as a follow-up to President Vladimir Putin's initiative. There are also many sub-regional integration associations in Africa and Latin America. But there are continent-wide structures there, such as the African Union and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States. And in Eurasia, the largest, most powerful, richest and fastest growing region in the world, there is no such continent-wide structure in the form of a dialogue platform (it is not necessary to create an organisation).

We are well aware that this is not a quick process. All countries of the continent invited to participate in these discussions must first "mature". Most of our European neighbours are not yet "mature" and clearly dream of spreading their influence through the North Atlantic Alliance and its infrastructure to the entire Eurasian continent in a "neo-colonial" way. They say directly, without hesitation, that in the current conditions this is a defensive alliance, and its main task is to protect the territory of member countries. They say that in the current conditions, the threat to the territorial integrity and security of NATO countries comes from the "Indo-Pacific region" (as they call it), that is, directly from the Pacific Ocean. I am referring to the South China Sea, the Taiwan Strait and many other things.

In our concept of Eurasian security and the Greater Eurasian Partnership, one of the main principles is respect for the structures created in various sub-regions, including ASEAN, its central role played by the Association as a result of the work that has been going on for almost 60 years to unite countries interested in cooperation on the principles of equality, openness and inclusiveness. Our concept respects the role of ASEAN and other similar formations. And the one promoted by NATO proceeds from the fact that the alliance will dictate to everyone how they should behave, whether ASEAN is needed. Formally, yes. All Western countries today participated in the meeting of the East Asia Summit and the ASEAN Regional Forum on Security.

But while pronouncing beautiful words, in parallel (you know this) "troikas", "fours", "quartets" are being created - AUKUS, the USA-Britain-Australia to implement the project to create nuclear submarines. I have already mentioned attempts to introduce nuclear elements into military exercises in the south of the Korean Peninsula. There are the "Indo-Pacific Four" - Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand. As well as a number of other similar "troikas" (QUAD-1, QUAD-2). They are trying to involve ASEAN members in these formations, "tearing" them away from the Association. We are talking frankly with our friends about this. They are well aware of the difference between the approach when everyone is invited to the table for an equal dialogue and the development of consensus positions that meet the interests of all states and reflect the balance of these interests, and the approach when the North Atlanticists come to this region and begin to "call the tune" and bring their own rules here. I believe that this is not good for the cause.

We are interested in ensuring that these formats and forums held here annually contribute to a better understanding of each other's positions, so that everyone acts openly and does not have any "stones" or any hidden plans against anyone in their bosom. But so far, the process is proceeding on different planes. I am convinced that our approach is more promising.

Question: The Rio summit a few days ago showed that against the backdrop of Washington's increasingly tough sanctions, BRICS is becoming a reliable alternative to the lawlessness of sanctions. Have the ASEAN countries "matured" to the point of readiness to start more active cooperation with Russia in particular and BRICS in general, not in words, but in deeds?

Sergey Lavrov: I think that the ASEAN countries are interested in cooperation with Russia, regardless of what is happening in the West and what the United States or its allies are doing with regard to them.

They do not have such a thing that "if the West did not put pressure on us, we would not be friends with Russia." Not at all. Friendship with Russia began long before the current US administration began to impose sanctions in the form of tariffs (these are also sanctions). I do not see any direct response in the way our relations with ASEAN are developing and how cooperation within BRICS is developing.

But if you have a choice either to trade in the context of an association, where no unscrupulous methods of suppressing competitors are used, on the one hand, and on the other hand, to trade with those who will blackmail you, then the conclusion suggests itself.

Question: Based on the meetings held within the framework of the forum, what conclusions could you draw? Are the ASEAN countries ready to actively resist NATO's advance and the bloc's attempts to gain a foothold in the region? Do the ASEAN countries have the necessary resources to remain a guarantor of security in the region today, especially given the serious duties imposed by US President Donald Trump on many of the ASEAN member countries?

Sergey Lavrov: I have just spoken in detail about our vision of the actions that NATO is taking here, trying to penetrate here, to introduce its infrastructure and gain a foothold. I have no doubt that the ASEAN countries understand what I am talking about and realise that they are invited to formally remain members of ASEAN in parallel and at the same time join non-inclusive bloc-based structures, which are largely aimed at creating a kind of "political and diplomatic front" to contain China (this is not hidden) and the Russian Federation at the same time.

I don't want to decide for them, it's their sovereign choice. We will perceive it as such. But I have no doubt that preserving ASEAN's unity and its central role in determining the mechanisms, formats and architecture of cooperation in Southeast Asia is in everyone's interests to the best extent. We will proceed from this.

Question: Yesterday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said following talks with you that a new "plan for Ukraine" was discussed. Which of the parties proposed these new approaches, what are they, what is their fundamental difference from the previous ones? Are the supply of American weapons also included in the plans? Was it discussed?

Sergey Lavrov: I would like to respond with the words of US President Donald Trump: "I will tell you so. Expect big surprises."

I don't know about the "big surprises". But you understand yourself, you are familiar with diplomatic activities, and you often accompany us, that there are things that are not commented on. Yes, we discussed Ukraine and reaffirmed the position expressed by President Vladimir Putin, including once again on July 3 in a conversation with President Donald Trump.

As for this "dialogue", "leak", "recording" (whether it is a neural network or not, I don't know) about the bombing of Moscow and Beijing, we discussed serious things.

Question: Did you discuss the issue of strategic offensive arms at your meeting with Marco Rubio? Is there an understanding of the future of START-3, which expires next year?

Sergey Lavrov: This was not discussed.

Question: Recently, German Chancellor Frank Merz said that diplomatic ways to resolve the conflict in Ukraine have been exhausted. On the one hand, I would like to ask you, as the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry, for an official reaction. And on the other hand, as an experienced professional diplomat, ask whether such actions by Germany fit into the diplomatic "arsenal"? Does this apply to the diplomatic sphere of work?

Sergey Lavrov: Good question.

It worries us. Because the latest statements and actions of Berlin, Paris and London show that the current class of politicians who have come to power in these and a number of other countries have forgotten the lessons of history, the conclusions that all of humanity has drawn from them, and, by and large, are trying to "raise" Europe again for a war (not a hybrid one) against Russia.

We showed a news conference by French Foreign Minister Jean-Nuel Barrault, who was sitting on the stage with other participants at a political science event, and a Frenchman from the audience, who often visited Donbass, asked him why Paris is actively supporting the Nazi regime, which has already been revived in Ukraine. You saw how Minister Jean-Nicolas-Barrault broke down, shouting in a hysterical tone that they were defending Ukraine's territorial integrity and international law. He won the applause of some part of the hall. But after everything that is known about the actions of the Kyiv regime, about why it needs territorial integrity... And it is needed in order to suppress all the rights of the Russian, Russian-speaking population, and to physically destroy those who do not agree with the position of Kiev after the coup d'état.

Yesterday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio handed over a small summary of quotes from Vladimir Zelensky, Prime Minister of Ukraine Dmitry Shmyhal, Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Andriy Yermak and Yury Podolyaka, which directly state the need to legally destroy the Russians, or better yet, physically. When Mr Jean-Nicolas Barrault and others like him say that they do not want to see anything but the territorial integrity of Ukraine, this is self-exposure.

As for German Chancellor Merz. He said "funny" things more than once. Including the fact that his main goal is to make Germany the leading military power in Europe again. At the word "again" he did not even choke. He also said things that let Israel "work" in Iran, it does the "dirty work" for us. This is a quote from the "owners" of the concentration camps. When they preferred to use collaborators to exterminate Jews, so as not to get their hands dirty, realizing that this was a "dirty business".

If Chancellor Merz believes that the peaceful possibilities have been used and exhausted, then he has finally decided to devote himself to the complete militarization of Germany at the expense of his people, just to prance again under Nazi slogans to repel the "threats emanating from Russia." This is complete nonsense. I hope that any sensible politician understands this.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly said that this nonsense is being used to keep the people in obedience and prevent protests from breaking through, which inevitably lead to a deterioration in the socioeconomic situation and stagnation observed in Europe. All this is due to the fact that hundreds of billions have been sent and are being sent to Ukraine again.

I came across a quote. It was interesting to see how Europe perceived Germany at the time. There was a quote from the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet of June 22, 1941. In other words, they glorified the Nazis as a symbol of freedom. If Europe is moving towards this again... What can I say? Mournfully.

We will fully take this into account in all areas of our planning.
While the BRICS Summit and all the ASEAN meetings were happening, China was preparing for a similar yet different event, The Global Civilizations Dialogue Ministerial Meeting, which seeks to begin the implementation of China’s Global Civilization Initiative. As Lavrov noted, Eurasia is host to many great civilizations, but it is also host to a group of “immature” nations who are clearly not ready to become civilized. Lavrov’s somewhat cryptic closing comment IMO gives us a look into what’s stewing in the back of his mind as I’m sure he’s aware of Mr. Trenin’s op/ed and its thesis. And as Lavrov also said, “there are things that are not commented on.” For many years now, Lavrov has said directly the EU/NATO doesn’t want peace as its stated aim is to defeat Russia. I’ll now remind readers of the Outlaw US Empire’s #1 policy objective that has yet to be renounced—Full Spectrum Dominance. That’s why NATO wants to expand to the Western Pacific Ocean. That’s why the Taiwan “hypocrisy.” That’s why the Zionists were planted in Palestine. Yes, the imperial project to establish total dominance is just over 200 years old, which is when the Zionist project was formulated in Europe. My intent isn’t to retell those 200+ years of history. Rather, it’s to declare Western Civilization as Uncivilized. 87.5% at minimum of the global population is all ready for China’s several global initiatives, and fundamentally they mean the establishment of peace and harmony so global civilization can continue to develop. Only the hegemonic nations and some of their populous are against that aspiration, and the obvious question is why?

Lavrov IMO and many of us are sick and tired of the SOSDD—Same Old Shit Different Day. We know enough of the past to understand how we reached this moment in time, but we haven’t discovered an exit from the mess that past has caused. Well, let me rewrite that. We haven’t discovered a way to convince that 12.5% of humanity that it must change its ways so humanity can evolve and progress—that they are not exceptional or chosen but human like all other humans. Yes, I know some believe that’s an impossible task and humanity is doomed to failure and extinction all for A Few Dollars More. How to reconcile those wanting to be civilized with those who don’t? Currently, the Outlaw US Empire’s leadership is busy slowly isolating itself from the Global Majority while still trying to attain its #1 policy goal. I often wonder how Uncle Remus would tell that story.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/lavrovs- ... r-at-kuala

******

On youth patriotism and attitudes

With the beginning of the SVO, not only economic and political transformations, but also ideological ones, are taking place in Russian society. It is understandable, in a country at war and in a difficult confrontation with the superior forces of American and European imperialism, it cannot be otherwise. In the last year, a strong shift has been noted among young people towards patriotism. This raises questions.

The younger generation, as it turns out, reacts to rapidly changing social conditions with a strong delay. And the fact that this reaction takes the form of fashion is not at all surprising. Because this is not the result of some kind of state propaganda, policy or, for example, leftist propaganda, but a spontaneous reaction, a reflection of the new social situation in the minds of young people.

To understand what is happening to young people, it is necessary to trace the main stages of the evolution of public reaction to war, because war, as an acute crisis, is a natural source of public perception.

So, let's go back to 2022, to the beginning of the SVO.

It is now obvious that no one was preparing for a protracted war. Even Zelensky and the Ukrainian Armed Forces' patrons from NATO's military leadership at the first stages of the NVO relied more on guerrilla actions, at most on the local defense of fortress cities. In line with this logic, light equipment and antitank missile systems were supplied, Ukrainian soldiers were trained in ambush attacks and combat in dense urban areas. But the war in the trench form in which it has been going on since 2014 in Donbass quickly stretched out to a huge line of combat contact. After that very painful regrouping from central Ukraine and to this day, the trench, frontline nature of military operations has become the face of this armed conflict.

It is clear that after the announcement of the SVO, all Western liberals and a small part of the intelligentsia, propagandized by them, came out with a sharp pro-Ukrainian position.

All these openly pro-American and pro-European views have traditionally nested in people's minds and been passed down from generation to generation since the so-called thaw. Dissidents (1960-1970s), perestroika supporters (1980s), democrats (1990s), liberals (2000-2020s) - all of these are representatives of the same ideological line that serves the interests of Western imperialism. They used to be anti-Soviet, now they have become anti-Russian, anti-Putin, but they have never ceased and will never cease to be anti-communists.

After the collapse of the USSR, this gang had state support and included a significant part of the leadership of the Russian Federation, since the bourgeoisie that took power itself was a comprador dreaming of squeezing into the narrow ranks of the bourgeois-aristocratic circles of England, the get-togethers of the rich in France and the closed clubs of the financial magnates of America. But, as they say, they did not make a good showing.

After 2014, this liberal pseudo-intelligentsia fraternity completely relied on funding from the CIA and a couple of oligarchs dreaming of having fun in the Kremlin. They became direct agents of the US inside the Russian Federation, as did their naive and not very smart supporters. After the adoption of the corresponding law, interpreting their position as anti-state (the so-called law on fakes about the army), they packed their bags and went to countries that are not at war with their neighbors.

Here it can be noted that the first wave of anti-war immigration lost touch with Russian society and degenerated into those same useless dissidents who, for sandwiches, talk about the horrors of totalitarianism on radio. True, now they have settled in Twitter and YouTube.

The second important point is their anti-war slogan. For a while, the liberals pretended that they were all pacifists. But as the fighting expanded and became more violent, especially in the situation with the Bandera garrison of Azovstal and after the start of the failed counter-offensive operation of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, pacifism was discarded, and the place of the doves was taken by the German-Bandera trident.

During that initial period of the SVO, the proletariat and the masses were disoriented, watching the events with their mouths open. The policy of the bourgeois state regarding the war corresponded to the basic pattern of the relationship between any bourgeois government and the people - fear of the masses of ordinary people. Let me remind you that the state punished for what the SVO called a war, and the state-controlled media made it clear that society was not being drawn into military action. The message was as follows: the army and politicians would solve all problems.

The beginning of the SVO and the worsening foreign policy situation had no effect on the youth. The kids only laughed weakly at the bans, internet bans and the clumsiness of state propaganda. Even the exodus of popular brands and the mass hysteria of Western stars, on which the CIA experts in the secrets and nooks of the Russian soul were counting, did not receive a response from the youth environment.

The bulk of workers in large cities, office workers, engineering and technical workers, people of intelligentsia (teachers, doctors, scientists), being strongly impressed by the online broadcast of the war on Telegram, took a passive wait-and-see position, not wanting to indulge in political reflection: “I wish it would all end sooner.”

The proletarian masses in the provinces expressed sympathy for the Russian army out of a sense of superficial patriotism, but still mostly watched from the sidelines, like sports fans.

However, the situation, as V.V. Putin now likes to say, dictated its own terms on the ground. The operation to defeat the Kiev regime in the style of American political thrillers had reached a dead end, and it was necessary to move on to plan B. But neither in the artistic heritage, nor in the well-known manuals on overthrowing banana tyrants, was there a suitable plan B. Therefore, the situation itself quickly escalated into a confrontation of the military-political potentials of the Russian Federation and NATO countries on the territory of the former Soviet Ukraine in the direct form of military action .

Hence the next turning point for Russian society - the implementation of mobilization. Under the pressure of circumstances, the state had to include society, the masses of people, in the war in the most direct way - to fill the armed forces with personnel, train and staff the fighting units in the most emergency mode. Here, the masses of people who were directly or indirectly affected by mobilization were forced to develop some kind of political position.

Who was actually mobilized? Mainly the rural and urban proletariat, men who were not afraid of war. Those for whom self-respect was more important than fear. They came to the recruiting stations, driven by the most general ideas about duty and trust in Putin as a more or less adequate leader, unlike many other politicians. Thanks to these people, the crisis of a shortage of soldiers was overcome and the miscalculation of the concept of a compact, mobile, professional army was compensated. They paid with sweat and blood.

Mobilization finally split society, including the led, unorganized proletarian masses, into three unequal parts.

The first was the second wave of anti-mobilization immigration: IT specialists, apartment rentiers and show business stars. They were joined in their positions by the oligarchs Tinkov, Deripaska, Abramovich, Potanin and smaller bourgeois, who, relying on their capital, came out with soft but open criticism.

This part of society has a usual, bourgeois, selfish reaction: they do not like the SVO, the confrontation with the West, because they personally suffer from this geopolitics. IT specialists and rentiers do not want to end up in the trenches and die, stars and capitalists are losing income and the opportunity to lead a luxurious lifestyle in the places they dreamed of since childhood (London, Paris, Rome, Venice, New York, Nice, etc.) due to sanctions and restrictions. As you can see, the difference in class position did not prevent their synchronous reaction. They can also include that part of the corrupt top and not so top officials who cynically enrich themselves at the expense of the SVO.

The second part of society was made up of armchair patriots - workers, housewives, pensioners, who were imbued with deep sympathy for the Russian armed forces, often staffed by their mobilized relatives, friends, neighbors, acquaintances; and deep antipathy not so much to the Banderites, but to the Vsushniks in general. It was the armchair patriots who sincerely donated 50 billion rubles to the soldiers, wrote hundreds of thousands of comments of support and generally passively empathized in a variety of ways.

The logic of this part of society is described by the statement "Our guys are there." That is, if this is to be considered patriotism, then it is more like a street yard patriotism (our guys are being beaten!). There is something inappropriately condescending in this concept - "guys." Front-line soldiers do hard combat work, and to consider them guys is even derogatory. Unless it is their mothers who say this... Apparently, mothers, sisters, grandmothers set the tone in this conditional part of society. They are quite radically minded and are often the bearers of nationalistic views and kitchen chauvinism.

The third part of society is the most numerous - these are those who have no attitude towards the war and the situation in the country, they try not to know anything, not to have any opinion, not to read the news, and so on. They are generally against any politics, against everyone, and think only about the purely essential, about themselves, family, work. They say: "When will all this end?"

This part of society also included young people.

However, after the first year of the SVO, there was the first warning sign - schoolchildren fell under the influence of the Wagner charisma. Pseudo-patriotic aesthetics, the romantic fatalism of soldiers of fortune caused a short-term fashion. The background for it was the PMC propaganda inflated in the media, especially during the months of the assault on Artemovsk. This means that the war is beginning to break through in the information sphere of teenagers, displacing Hollywood superheroics, anime and other garbage. The form, again, developed purely spontaneously - what was most striking, that is what caught the attention of children's eyes. After the Wagner mutiny, the death of Prigozhin and the liquidation of the PMC, the fashion quickly faded away.

The next shift in public consciousness occurred gradually, firstly, with the habituation to war, secondly, with the involvement of more and more people due to the fact that every month tens of thousands of people sign a contract and go to war, thirdly, with the steady increase in the advantage of the Russian army at the front. It can be said that after the repulsed offensive of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the summer of 2023 and the liquidation of the so-called Kursk bridgehead at the end of April 2024, the situation at the front took its current form: the Russian army is advancing, the Ukrainian Armed Forces are retreating with battles, actively spending reserves, the depletion of enemy forces is increasing with each month.

The situation received a new reflection in the public consciousness.

The first part of society fell into despondency and disappointment. Some IT specialists and apartment rentiers headed back to their homeland.

The second part of society, on the one hand, grew even larger, on the other hand, it lost its enthusiasm and became tired of the news of everyday life at the front and endless urgent gatherings.

The third part gradually accepted the reality of at least not war, but confrontation with the West.

It should be noted that, despite all the gigantic hype in the media and the chatter of various loms about a deal in connection with the change in the European course of the United States, in general, neither the people nor the front believed in the possibility of ending the conflict by diplomatic means. After all, the crazy political dynamics of the events of the 2020s taught people to judge not by slogans, statements and chatter, but based on actions and facts.

In 2025, one could say, the most unexpected thing flared up - the youth fashion for patriotism. And this is not just some superficial popularity of Shaman, Kadysheva and Bulanova, but rather a slight love for one's country , one's culture, which includes support for the Russian Federation in the war with NATO. A number of objective (primarily the war itself) and subjective factors led to the formation of this fashion.

What is not obvious is that the myth of the West's civility and high quality has been destroyed. A generation has grown up that does not believe in the fairy tales about the greatness of America and Western Europe. From the very beginning of their growing up, they have observed the hypocrisy of Western imperialism and the technological might of China. These are the youth that emerged in the conditions of the fading of the US hegemony, and it is more difficult for them to hang liberalist noodles on their ears.

In general, I am inclined to believe that it will be very difficult for the oligarchs and bourgeoisie in power to digest the generations of 2005-2010 and later. These children and teenagers are very developed intellectually, brought up by machines, computers, the Internet, new technologies, and squeezing them into the narrow framework of hired labor will be difficult and problematic. They represent a powerful potential for the revolutionary transformation of society. This is a new proletariat growing up in terms of the quality of consciousness and psychological makeup, which is much more predisposed to everything communist. They lack the awareness of collectivity, they lack knowledge and theory, they lack discipline and will, but they are too smart for capitalism.

These young people, with their fashion for patriotism, show that they are capable of independently reacting to external circumstances. Although with a significant delay, in a frivolous, humorous way.

One might think that the youth fashion for patriotism is the result of state propaganda and serves to strengthen the bourgeois system. But rather the opposite, it is more like a counterculture, a spontaneous mass reaction. Of course, it is bad that there is no place for the USSR, Bolshevism, or communism in this fashion. Of course, it is bad that the mass consciousness of youth is filled with nothing but irony and sarcasm. But, on the other hand, what can we expect from young people brought up on the most primitive cultural models and historical fakes?

As is well known, many fatal mistakes have been made in combining contradictory tasks – patriotism and communism. And the idea of combining communism and fashion is even stranger. Therefore, youth fashion cannot directly influence our work. At the same time, fashion hides, at least in some cases, a desire for political knowledge. And this means that there is an opportunity to tread the road to Marxism. No matter how strange this may sound at first glance.

Thus, the youth, joining the third , passively-waiting part of society, demonstrated one of the options for accepting objective political reality with their fashion for patriotism. But behind this, as was said above, one can read a certain perspective of the development of this generation itself. The generation that will live under communism.

Redin
12/07/2025

https://prorivists.org/107_fashion/

Google Translator

******

Matt Taibbi: Brennan, MSNBC Can’t Stop Lying About Trump and Russia
July 11, 2025
By Matt Taibbi, Substack, 7/10/25

Last evening, former CIA director John Brennan made his first public comments since news broke that the FBI under Kash Patel has opened a criminal investigation into his conduct in the Trump-Russia investigation. He was interviewed on MSNBC, where he is a paid contributor. The one piece of salient information host and former Bush administration spokesperson Nicolle Wallace didn’t leave out is that Brennan is a “Senior national security and intelligence analyst right here at MSNBC.”

This was after Wallace interviewed former Hillary Clinton lawyer Marc Elias, who in 2016 was the point man responsible for hiring the “research” firm Fusion-GPS, which in turn hired former British spy Christopher Steele to compile reports on Donald Trump. Elias in other words paid the firm that shopped bogus reports to virtually every news agency in America, along with the FBI and politicians like John McCain, in an effort to kick-start a political investigation of a political rival.

What did Elias have to say about investigations into Brennan and Comey? Abandoning all self-respect, humorously hoping no one would remember his entire political raison d’être has been leveraging iffy information into legal trouble for antagonists, he said, “Like honestly, I’m just imploring the media, do NOT report” the news of the investigations. Priceless:

The amusing Elias video means people like the former Clinton lawyer are worried that not only conservatives, but friendly audiences at places like MSNBC might begin exploring what actually happened in 2016-2019. If those audiences put even minimal effort into learning the basics of these cases, it’s possible mainstream public opinion will finally turn — not on Trump, but on the concocted Trump-Russia mania of those years, which deserves a place in history next to or even above the WMD scandal as the biggest intelligence fiasco of our time.

The Wallace interview with Brennan was similarly comic. A summary of the segment is included for those who believe he’s innocent. This article isn’t paywalled, so Racket readers can circulate it to anyone who they feel may still be holdouts on Trump-Russia island. If that describes you, the MSNBC segment below is a small, jewel-like example of how you’ve been lied to by media and by officials like Brennan:

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/ ... blejsapi=0

Note that Wallace early on says “exactly what conduct is being investigated is not clear.” That’s not strictly true. It’s been reported in multiple places (including here) that the FBI is looking at perjury and conspiracy charges. Wallace does say investigations are in connection with Brennan’s handling of a January 6th, 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, but she doesn’t tell you why this is important.

Nor does the New York Times, whose headline read, “Administration Takes Steps to Target 2 Officials Who Investigated Trump,” as if the gravestone modifiers for Comey or Brennan might be, THEY INVESTIGATED TRUMP. The Times, like Elias, is going with a “misuse, abuse, [and] authoritarian takeover” theme, insisting these investigations signal only that “Trump’s appointees intend to follow through on his campaign to exact retribution against his perceived enemies.” The Washington Post used the same construction, highlighting Trump’s campaign-trail promise to “exact retribution against many of his political enemies.”

It’s probably true Trump is anxious for payback — he denounced Comey and Brennan as “very dishonest people” in the wake of the investigation news and suggested there may be a “price to pay” — but that doesn’t mean these goofs have no real exposure. Mainstream press audiences just haven’t been told what both men did, and specifically how both benefited from an illegal leak of material from their January 2017 Intelligence Assessment, material that was both bogus and classified.

In early 2017, it wasn’t inevitable that President-Elect Donald Trump was going to face years of exhaustive Russia investigations. Contrary to popular legend, as of January 6th, 2017, neither the FBI nor the CIA had developed intelligence supporting a conclusion that Vladimir Putin “aspired” to interfere with our presidential election specifically to help Trump. In fact, there was evidence in the opposite direction, suggesting Russia and Putin were less than thrilled by the prospect of a White House run by the “unreliable” Trump, and may have seen Clinton as “manageable and reflecting continuity.” However, the Democratic Party by the end of 2016 already committed publicly to the idea that Putin aided Trump’s win. On December 16, 2016, for instsance, Hillary Clinton blamed her loss on Putin’s “personal grudge” against her.

There was no reason government officials had to co-sign this conclusion in the Intelligence Assessment Barack Obama commissioned, but they did. To get there, they had to use material from Steele, who had already been dismissed as a source by the FBI on November 1st, 2016, after he leaked reports for a Mother Jones story by David Corn.

Without Steele material, there would have been no pre-inauguration report saying “Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton.” In order to keep that storyline, the FBI had to take seriously Steele’s assertions about the existence of a “well-developed conspiracy of cooperation” between him and Russia. With Trump about to enter the White House and FBI investigations into Carter Page, Michael Flynn, and Trump stalling, this “Assessment” was the whole ballgame, the last chance to keep Trump-Russia going. Two actions were crucial: the controversial internal decision to include the Steele stuff, and the near-immediate leak of the report’s classified contents to the public before Trump was sworn in.

Here’s how first Wallace, then Brennan handled this:

Nicolle Wallace (at 2:22 above):“But the report or the Note doesn’t dispute the conclusion of the intelligence community. And that conclusion is that Russia interfered.”This is a silly mischaracterization of John Ratcliffe’s “Note,” which didn’t even look at the question of whether or not Russia “interfered.” Ratcliffe and the CIA instead “focused particular attention on the ICA’s most debated judgment— that Russian President Vladimir Putin ‘aspired’ to help then-candidate Donald Trump win the election.” Ratcliffe did “dispute” that conclusion, repeatedly.The CIA chief said that “placing a reference to the [Steele] material” as a “supporting bullet for the judgment that Putin ‘aspired’ to help Trump… elevated unsubstantiated claims to the status of credible supporting evidence.”He also noted the CIA and FBI should not have said they had “high” confidence in the notion that Russia aspired to help Trump, given that multiple quality sources are required for “high” confidence, and they didn’t have those. As reported last year, the ICA authors — like the authors of the original WMD report — also suppressed “credibly sourced reporting” that “suggested Putin was more ambivalent about which candidate won the election.”
Nicolle Wallace (at 4:34 above).“In fact, a report authored in part by Donald Trump’s current secretary of state and current national security advisor, then-Acting Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Marco Rubio, actually did look into the process of how the intelligence community came to this conclusion that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. And that report… says this: “Every witness interviewed by the committee stated that he or she saw no attempt, no attempt to pressure or politicize the findings.”Wallace is describing a five-part Senate Intelligence Committee Report on the 2016 election. She’s right that it’s odd Marco Rubio took part in a report concluding Russia engaged in an “extensive” campaign to meddle for Trump. What Wallace didn’t mention is that the Senate relied on different evidence than the CIA/FBI’s 2017 Assessment to come to the same conclusion, a transparent indictment of the 2017 report.If Brennan and Comey got it right in 2017, why was a second report with all-new evidence necessary? The Senate report was a repair job, designed to replace Comey and Brennan’s car-wreck of a 2017 paper with a Senate product whose chief assertions — particularly around former Paul Manafort aide Konstantin Kilimnik, whose tie to Trump they said posed a “grave” intelligence threat — were not even reviewable, since lines like “Konstantin Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence officer” were not backed by visible evidence.
John Brennan (at 10:27)“But you’re supposed to be interviewing the people involved in this to try to get a better understanding of the context for a lot of the actions that were taken.”Brennan’s unintentionally hilarious complaint is that John Ratcliffe didn’t bother interviewing him for the 8-page note released last week.This is the same Brennan who included an explosive “annex” of classified material from ex-spy Christopher Steele that upended American politics for years without interviewing Steele, his “Primary Sub-Source” Igor Danchenko of the Brookings Institute, or any of the Russian sources who ostensibly provided the pillars of Steele’s reports: tales of Trump “employing a number of prostitutes to perform a ‘golden showers’ (urination) show,” the “well-developed conspiracy” between Trump and Russia, and the notion that “Russian authorities had been cultivating and supporting… Donald Trump, for at least five years.”When Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz put out his review of these issues in 2019, he pointed out that nobody interviewed Steele’s “Primary Sub-Source” until January of 2017, i.e. after the Assessment was released. When the FBI finally did talk to Steele’s sources, they disavowed almost every key point of Steele’s: the prostitute romps (“rumor and speculation,” the sub-source said), the “well-developed conspiracy” (there was “nothing bad” in communications between the Kremlin and Trump, per the source), and the notion that Trump and Page had been offered “the brokerage of up to a 19 percent (privatized) stake in Rosneft” in exchange for lifting sanctions (the sub-source “never stated that [Rosneft] had offered a brokerage interest”). Beyond that, no American official during this entire process ever picked up the phone to call key players/suspects like Julian Assange or Konstantin Kilimnik. It’s rich for Brennan complain no one interviewed him.
John Brennan (10:40).“That’s why we went to extraordinary lengths to protect the sensitive intelligence that really undergirded the assessment that was extensively footnoted in the assessment. But also, as I said, to protect individuals involved, including Donald Trump. To make sure that none of this intelligence that could have been seen as inflammatory and as something that was, you know, very damning, would get out. And so that’s why we wanted to make sure it was done in a very appropriate and meticulous and diligent manner…”In a wounded tone, Brennan notes that he and James Comey went to extraordinary lengths to “protect the sensitive intelligence that really undergirded the assessessment” and “also… to protect individuals involved, including Donald Trump.”The timeline on this: Brennan, Comey, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and NSA chief Michael Rogers decided to present a 2-page summary of the classified Steele material to Trump on January 6th, 2017. It was decided Comey would tell Trump the bad news that “Russians allegedly had tapes of him and prostitutes” at the Ritz-Carlton in 2013.“I said media like CNN had them and were looking for a news hook,” Comey explained. “I said it was important not to give them an excuse to say the FBI has the material or [redacted] and that we were keeping it very close-hold.”Four of the nation’s most senior intelligence chiefs gave a briefing of classified information to the President-Elect of the United States on January 6th, 2017. One might expect that experienced intelligence officials handling classified information might be able to keep a lid on for at least a week.No luck. The whole story was on every front page and every TV station within four days. Here’s the CNN headline from January 10:The lede of the CNN piece contained details only someone with advanced knowledge of the meeting would know. “Classified documents presented last week,” the four CNN writers said, included “allegations that Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump” and that “there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.” Material was presented in “a two-page synopsis that was appended to a report on Russian interference in the 2016 election,” and “came, in part, from memos compiled by a former British intelligence operative.”That’s what Brennan means by going to “extraordinary lengths” to protect information. The CNN story in one swoop outed classified intelligence, blew its source (all of Washington knew which “former British intelligence operative” CNN meant, which is why Buzzfeed could publish Steele’s dossier within hours) and betrayed the target, Trump. That’s a rare trifecta of incompetence. A coked-up Tourette’s patient would have done a better job guarding information. Are there really people left who believe these people?

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/07/mat ... nd-russia/



******

From Cassad's Telegram account:

Colonelcassad
Pyongyang will unconditionally support Russia's policy of protecting its territorial integrity and sovereignty, said North Korean Foreign Minister Choi Son Hee.

According to her, the participation of combat units of the DPRK Armed Forces in the operation to liberate the Kursk region clearly demonstrates the highest level of cooperation between the two countries.

The participation of North Korean military personnel in the liberation of the Kursk region confirms the fraternal nature of relations between Moscow and Pyongyang - Lavrov

"The Russian Federation had no reason to refuse to help the DPRK in the SVO, it was a sincere expression of solidarity. The issue of further assistance to Russia in the SVO in Ukraine is decided by Kim Jong-un himself ," the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry added.

Other statements by the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry from the meeting with his counterpart from the DPRK, Choi Son Hee:

- the issue of further assistance to Russia in the special operation from Pyongyang is decided by Kim Jong-un, Lavrov noted;

- the countries plan to resume maritime communication. Putin and Kim Jong-un are in constant contact, personal contacts will certainly continue in the future;

- Pyongyang made the necessary conclusions long before the US and Israel attacked Iran, which ensured security;

- Moscow warns the US and its allies against creating threats to the security of the Russian Federation and the DPRK. Russia will assist in the dialogue between Pyongyang and Seoul only on those issues that are of interest to the DPRK;

- Russia respects and understands the reasons why the republic is developing a nuclear program;

- Moscow does not take seriously attempts to create a "corps of multinational forces to protect Ukraine", this is fantasy;

- Russia and the DPRK consider attempts to create NATO infrastructure in Northeast Asia and in the Asia-Pacific region as a whole to be dangerous.

***

Colonelcassad
The court has transferred the key assets of the owner of Glavprodukt to the state.

The Moscow Arbitration Court has fully satisfied the claim of the Prosecutor General's Office against the American Universal Beverage Company, which owns the canned food manufacturer, and personally the group's shareholder Leonid Smirnov, one of the participants in the case told the publication.

Smirnov was accused of withdrawing almost 1.4 billion rubles to accounts in the American bank JPMorgan Chase, bypassing restrictions under the "splitting" scheme. The decision is subject to immediate execution.

***

Colonelcassad
Vladimir Putin's main instructions:

- To designate the Day of Languages of the Peoples of the Russian Federation;

- To organize an all-Russian song poetry competition;

- To study the possibility of launching a "children's card" worth 3,000 rubles for purchasing books;

- To engage in the creation of a single scientific and methodological center for Russian as a foreign language;

- To provide a system of incentives for taxi drivers for transporting disabled people;

- Starting in 2026, to hold the Defenders of the Fatherland Cup with the participation of disabled veterans of military operations;

- Starting in 2026, to increase rewards for Olympians and their coaches;

- To organize open international sports competitions for the disabled "We Are Together. Sport";

- To create at least 10 prosthetic and rehabilitation centers for the disabled, including heroes of the Air Defense Forces, in federal districts by 2027;

- The Federal Medical and Biological Agency should form databases with data on the health of athletes from national teams.

https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin

Google Translator

******

Gorbachev's accomplice Medvedev dies
July 12, 11:49

Image

One of Gorbachev's accomplices, Vadim Medvedev, has died. Vadim Medvedev, an active participant in Perestroika and the dismantling of the CPSU.
In fact, he was one of the destroyers of the USSR. - in charge of ideological issues, he promoted Troikogo, Solzhenitsyn, etc. within the country. He prepared the liquidation of the Communist Party as the main backbone of the state's integrity. After the destruction of the USSR, he worked for a long time in the "Gorbachev Foundation".
He died quietly in his bed at the age of 97.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9950491.html

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

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

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sun Jul 13, 2025 6:20 pm

Vladimir Solovyov: Merz is a Nazi
Karl Sanchez
Jul 13, 2025

Image

Increasing rhetoric coming from Russian leadership is now being duplicated by major media actors. We just read such rhetoric from Mr. Lavrov yesterday as I reported:
Question: Recently, German Chancellor Frank Merz said that diplomatic ways to resolve the conflict in Ukraine have been exhausted. On the one hand, I would like to ask you, as the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry, for an official reaction. And on the other hand, as an experienced professional diplomat, ask whether such actions by Germany fit into the diplomatic "arsenal"? Does this apply to the diplomatic sphere of work?

It worries us. Because the latest statements and actions of Berlin, Paris and London show that the current class of politicians who have come to power in these and a number of other countries have forgotten the lessons of history, the conclusions that all of humanity has drawn from them, and, by and large, are trying to "raise" Europe again for a war (not a hybrid one) against Russia….

As for German Chancellor Merz. He said "funny" things more than once. Including the fact that his main goal is to make Germany the leading military power in Europe again. At the word "again" he did not even choke. He also said things that let Israel "work" in Iran, it does the "dirty work" for us. This is a quote from the "owners" of the concentration camps. When they preferred to use collaborators to exterminate Jews, so as not to get their hands dirty, realizing that this was a "dirty business".

If Chancellor Merz believes that the peaceful possibilities have been used and exhausted, then he has finally decided to devote himself to the complete militarization of Germany at the expense of his people, just to prance again under Nazi slogans to repel the "threats emanating from Russia." This is complete nonsense. I hope that any sensible politician understands this….

I came across a quote. It was interesting to see how Europe perceived Germany at the time. There was a quote from the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet of June 22, 1941. In other words, they glorified the Nazis as a symbol of freedom. If Europe is moving towards this again... What can I say? Mournfully.

We will fully take this into account in all areas of our planning.
Dr. Gilbert Doctorow is the source reporting what Solovyov said at both his website and more completely with his chat with Dr. Glen Diesen where he said Solovyov said Merz was a Nazi not once but thrice:
What is the meaning of the new Russian aggressiveness? I believe it is a clear signal to German chancellor Merz to watch out because Russia is ready for war and will defend its red lines with overwhelming military force. Why Merz? Because as we heard from Vladimir Solovyov last night, “he is a Nazi.” That appears to be the new Kremlin line: Germany has replaced the United States as Russia’s enemy number one and Nazism is back in power in Berlin.
I highly suggest watching that chat as much more important info is provided. The “new Russian aggressiveness” is related to the massive escalation in the size and locations of Russia’s aerial bombardment of Ukraine with a much higher concentration on the “Nazi Homeland” in far Western Ukraine up to the Polish border.

The Ukrainian Nazi rhetoric has existed since the war was started by the Outlaw US Empire as avowedly Nazi Ukrainians were the ones doing all the killing, particularly in Odessa. Russia has provided plenty of proof while Western BigLie Media and its politicians ignore the facts Russia provides. As I recently wrote, Russia is sick and tired of Western intransience, and IMO that’s been the driving force behind the last two op/eds by Dmitri Trenin which are aimed at the Europeans with his most recent warning them of the potential ruin that will befall them if they continue their folly of supporting the Empire’s war in Ukraine, with the latest one entitled, “What role do nuclear weapons play in modern international relations?” which echoes the rhetoric employed by Sergei Karaganov in 2024 to prod Putin into upgrading Russia’s nuclear doctrine. Here are three paragraphs from the middle portion of his essay:
The growing involvement of European countries in the Ukrainian conflict is thinning the Kremlin's strategic patience. Last year, Russia's nuclear doctrine was adjusted to increase the number of conditions for the use of nuclear weapons. The doctrine also extended its effect to the threats posed to Belarus as an integral part of the Union State. The demonstrative use of the Oreshnik missile system in November 2024 to destroy a military-industrial facility in Ukraine reinforced the seriousness of these doctrinal changes. Unfortunately, the leading European states in response decided to demonstrate "fearlessness," which in fact means recklessness.

Probably, by now, the conflict in Ukraine has once again come to a fork in the road. An attempt at a diplomatic settlement was unsuccessful due to the unwillingness of the United States to take into account Russia's security interests and the desire of the EU countries to weaken it as much as possible by prolonging hostilities. The West expects that Russia will bleed, overexert itself, and experience growing difficulties in the economy and social sphere. At the same time, Europe and America, supplying Ukraine with new batches of weapons and ammunition, feeding it with "volunteers" from the countries of the eastern and southeastern flanks of NATO, expect to simultaneously restore and develop their military industry and build up their military power. The goal is to turn the course of events in their favor and eventually deal a crushing blow to a weakened Russia.

Such dynamics lead to a large-scale aggravation, the outcome of which will be determined not only by the outcome of the Ukrainian conflict. It is clear that Russia will break this strategy. It is logical to assume that the intensification of nuclear deterrence will play a role in this. The existential threat to Russia from the West, primarily from the EU states, must be balanced by a similar threat to these countries themselves. The stakes for Russia are higher than for the West, which gives Moscow an advantage in the escalatory confrontation. The enemy must have no doubt as to the seriousness of our intentions. Sobering signals could be the organization of combat duty of aircraft carrying non-strategic nuclear weapons; Russia's withdrawal from the moratorium on the deployment of intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles in the European part of the country, in Chukotka and in Belarus; resumption of nuclear tests; delivering retaliatory or preemptive strikes, initially in conventional equipment, against targets on enemy territory (outside Ukraine).
RT has an abridged, altered version in English for those interested. Lavrov was in DPRK today and said this about its nukes:
The technology used by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is the result of the work of North Korean scientists. We respect the actions of the DPRK and understand the reasons why they are carrying out their nuclear program.
Lavrov was very pleased with his visit, and with Trump levying heavy sanctions on South Korea, new impetus will likely be given to solving East Asia’s main security issue. The main point is Comrade Kim is very keen on sending more people to work within Russia and Russia is very willing to have them.

Others have recently written and called Merz a Nazi. Dmitri Medvedev back in April said he was like Gobbels because he employed his methods. It appears Merz is going to supply Ukraine with the Tarus missile and the Germans to make it work. As some will know, it’s an air-launched cruise missile with a 500Km range. Russia’s longest range air-to-air missile has a range of 400Km. And as with all previous NATO cruise missiles, it takes a few observations until their properties are known and can be more easily shot down, not that they’ll be successful in hitting their targets those first few times. It appears NATO thinks Russia is bluffing on attacking an enemy outside Ukraine. As some have said, Germany lacks its own nukes making it a prime target for an Oreshnik. IMO, by the end of August we’ll know the outcome.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/vladimir ... -is-a-nazi

******

Asia Times: Why Anwar’s ASEAN is reaching so robustly to Russia
July 12, 2025
By Phar Kim Beng and Luthfy Hamzah, Asia Times, 5/19/25

It may seem paradoxical that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is now deepening its engagement with Russia after publicly reaffirming its commitment to “sovereignty, political independence and territorial integrity” in a communique soon after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Yet ASEAN’s diplomatic posture should be viewed not through the lens of moral idealism but rather strategic realism. For ASEAN and this year’s chair, Malaysia, engagement is not endorsement.

Rather, it is a highly conscious effort to anchor Russia within an evolving regional framework that prizes dialogue over confrontation and sustains a long-standing tradition of hedging and strategic autonomy amid major power rivalries.

Last week’s meeting between Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow—expected to be followed by Putin’s attendance at the East Asia Summit (EAS) in Kuala Lumpur in October 2025—marks a critical moment.

ASEAN was never meant to be a sanctions-driven alliance, nor an adjudicator of great power misconduct. It is a convening architecture—ASEAN+1, ASEAN+3, the East Asia Summit and the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF)—that emphasizes inclusion, consensus and continuous dialogue.

It was designed precisely to accommodate rivals, outliers and even belligerents on the assumption that talking is always better than total disengagement. Thus, engaging Russia through ASEAN channels is not a contradiction—it is the essence of ASEAN diplomacy.

Welcoming Moscow to the EAS in Kuala Lumpur is a diplomatic bet that Russia may still be seeking avenues of cooperation over confrontation. It is also a message to the world that ASEAN does not subscribe to bloc politics or enforced isolation as a pathway to peace.

Avoiding a Bipolar Trap

Malaysia and ASEAN envision an Indo-Pacific that is diverse, multipolar and strategically balanced—not one held hostage by zero-sum US-China dynamics. ASEAN’s Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP) is a clear expression of this intent.

Russia’s involvement, alongside India, Japan, South Korea and Australia, ensures that no single hegemon dominates the regional agenda. This multiplicity is ASEAN’s insurance policy and safeguard against being subsumed by external rivalries.

For this reason, a constructive Russian role in East Asia is not only acceptable—it is essential. It helps ASEAN retain policy flexibility and geopolitical space, allowing it to maneuver without choosing sides in an increasingly polarized world.

Even amid sanctions and international condemnation, Russia remains a relevant economic actor. It is a major exporter of energy, fertilizer and arms. Russian Sukhoi Su-30 fighter jets remain in active service in Malaysia’s air force. Countries such as Vietnam and Indonesia still maintain defense ties with Moscow, recognizing both cost-effectiveness and strategic diversification.

Severing these links in the name of moral absolutism may satisfy some, but it could erode national security and economic resilience across Southeast Asia. For ASEAN, continued technical cooperation with Russia is not about blind dependence—it is about avoiding overreliance on any one country or bloc, especially in defense and energy security.

Russia’s activities in Central Asia, the Arctic and along the Northern Sea Route (NSR) may seem remote, but they matter for ASEAN’s long-term connectivity agenda.

The convergence of Russia’s Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) with China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) signals an emerging transcontinental corridor that could reshape Asia-Europe trade flows, complementing ASEAN’s regional integration ambitions.

Engagement, therefore, offers ASEAN influence—however subtle—over the trajectory of Russian involvement in Eurasian and Arctic dynamics. By including Russia in multilateral dialogues, ASEAN helps steer that engagement toward peaceful integration rather than exclusionary blocs.

Defining Russian test

Putin’s potential visit to Malaysia in October 2025—potentially his first ever—will be closely watched far and wide, including in Washington. Putin’s visit would be more than protocol; it would be a test of whether Russia can conduct diplomacy on ASEAN’s terms, i.e. inclusive, peaceful and future-oriented.

Will Russia remain trapped in historical resentments and revisionist impulses? Or will it see the summit as a moment to reset its engagement with Asia? The ball, diplomatically speaking, is in Moscow’s court.

Malaysia, as the pivotal summit’s host, has an opportunity to send a clear signal. Prime Minister Anwar’s stated personal commitment to justice, multilateralism and civilizational dialogue gives him standing to engage Putin—not as an apologist, but as a moral and strategic interlocutor.

In an era defined by economic fragmentation and great power antagonism, ASEAN’s outreach to Russia is not a betrayal of values—it is a reclaiming of diplomacy’s purpose. To isolate a nuclear power is to risk escalation; to engage it is to seek transformation.

Russia, under the right conditions, could evolve from a source of disruptive conflict to a contributor to regional stability. The 2025 East Asia Summit in Kuala Lumpur will be its opportunity to show that such a transformation is possible.

ASEAN, and especially Malaysia, are offering the table. The question now is: will Russia take the seat and rise to the occasion?

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/07/asi ... to-russia/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

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

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Mon Jul 14, 2025 3:10 pm

Grab Bag: Lavrov, Wang Yi & SCO + Putin Interview
Karl Sanchez
Jul 13, 2025

Image

Which makes the better header photo? The one above or the one below? Too bad I can’t put them side-by-side.

Image

Initially I was only going to provide what’s been published by Russia’s MFA about Lavrov’s visit to China and the SCO meetings that will follow. Then the release of a previous interview segment by Saida Medvedeva and Pavel Zarubin and aired by the Rossiya TV channel appeared on Russian media websites. So, I decided there was plenty of space to report on all the items involved since no transcript of the interview’s been made available—just a few news snippets. The first item is a PR about the “Upcoming meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation” that contains some important, useful information, which I’ll elaborate upon. Then the various media snippets of the interview will be provided along with my commentary. There are other happenings with the chat between Hedges and Crooke perhaps being the most important. Here’s the PR:
On July 15, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will take part in a meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) member states in Tianjin, China.

The agenda of the Council of Foreign Ministers includes issues of further development of the organization, exchange of views on current regional and international problems.

China's presidency of the SCO has entered a decisive stage. The Russian side is actively supporting the implementation of a solid action plan. Representatives of our agencies participate in high-level meetings, expert meetings, various forums, seminars and festivals.

Currently, active preparations are underway for the key event – the meeting of the Council of Heads of State (CHS) of the SCO on September 1 in Tianjin. It will be followed by a summit meeting in the SCO Plus format. Representative events with the participation of state leaders, as well as heads of international and regional organizations (about 30 in total) will demonstrate the growing attractiveness of the SCO's creative agenda for the countries of the Global South and East.

The foreign ministers will discuss draft documents and decisions that are planned to be submitted to the leaders for consideration.

Traditionally, the agreed assessments of the SCO member states on the situation in the world and its development trends, as well as consolidated approaches to promoting multifaceted cooperation within the organisation, will be recorded in the Tianjin Declaration.

A common vision for the further evolution of the SCO will be reflected in the Development Strategy until 2035. When preparing the project, the results of the implementation of a similar document, which was adopted at the SCO summit in 2015 in Ufa, were analyzed.

In May of this year, in Moscow, at the invitation of President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin, the leaders and high-ranking representatives of friendly states shared the joy of the 80th anniversary of the Victory of the Soviet people in the Great Patriotic War. On September 3, in Beijing, the leaders of the SCO member states and other countries will take part in the celebrations on the occasion of the anniversary of the victory of the Chinese people in the War of Resistance to Japanese Aggression.

A common commitment to the memory of the historical feat of our countries in the name of peace and tranquility on earth, the enduring importance of the defeat of fascism, Nazism and militarism by the peoples of peace-loving countries will be emphasized in the relevant statement of the SCO Council of Heads of State on the occasion of the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and the establishment of the UN.

Relevant ministries and departments are preparing thematic statements and documents on artificial intelligence, green industry, investment cooperation, and the digital economy.

The ministers will discuss the progress of work on the implementation of the Proposals of the Council of Foreign Ministers on improving the activities of the SCO approved at last year's summit. At present, the process of expert consultations has been launched on the draft agreement on the establishment of the Universal Centre for Countering Security Challenges and Threats, prepared by the Russian side together with its Kazakh and Kyrgyz colleagues, as well as the Tajik project on the establishment of the Anti-Drug Centre. Initiatives in other areas are also being worked out. An important step in the context of ensuring security will be the approval at the summit of the Programme of Cooperation in Countering Extremist Ideology in the SCO Space for 2026-2030 (the document was prepared by the SCO Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure).

A discussion on global and regional issues is envisaged. The foreign ministers will exchange views on the situation in the Middle East, the state of affairs after the recent strikes by Israel and the United States on Iran, and will also discuss the tasks of building work in the Afghan direction.

Together with other SCO member states, we intend to use the results of the upcoming high-level events in Tianjin in the substantive content of the meeting of the Council of Heads of Government of the SCO member states, which will be held under the chairmanship of Russia on November 17-18 in Moscow.

It should be noted that the plan of events of the Russian presidency is being actively implemented. An important stage in the preparation of the meeting of the heads of government will be the Meeting of Ministers of the SCO Member States Responsible for Foreign Economic and Foreign Trade Activities, which will be held in September this year in Vladivostok. [My Emphasis]

As you read, I emphasized the topics of the key upcoming meetings, the most important IMO being the ones devoted to security issues. The SCO’s clause about being an Anti-Terrorist and Anti-Extremist organization I’ve highlighted many times and opined when we’d see action taken using that clause as a pretext to deal with the primary sowers of extremism and utilizers of terrorism. It’s that aspect that makes SCO decisively different from BRICS—it has a security/military component that BRICS lacks. That a response is overtly being made with the participation of the SCO’s Central Asian members is significant. You’ll note the Russian delegation will have several days to recuperate from its globetrotting and to engage in more leisurely talks with their Chinese counterparts which will be needed given the subject matter.

The PR dealing with Lavrov’s meeting with Wang Yi contained the usual boilerplate verbiage about good relations and satisfactory discussions. The following three paragraphs IMO merit reproducing and some commentary:

An in-depth exchange of views took place on issues of cooperation within the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Particular attention was paid to the content of the upcoming meeting of the Council of Heads of State of the SCO member states, as well as the summit meeting in the SCO Plus format.

The importance of strengthening close coordination between the two countries in the international arena, including in the UN and its Security Council, the SCO, BRICS, the G20 and APEC, was emphasized.

The parties also discussed relations with the United States and the prospects for resolving the Ukrainian crisis in accordance with the principles of the UN Charter in their entirety, totality and interconnection. Other "hot" topics were touched upon, including the Iranian-Israeli conflict and the situation on the Korean Peninsula.
Now more than ever Russia and China must speak with one voice in the international arena. Trump’s Trade and Tariff Wars have opened up some excellent opportunities to alter the geopolitical equation, particularly the Korean, Japan, Chinese situation. It should be noted that the 2025 Eastern Economic Forum will occur at the same time as the Meeting of Ministers of the SCO Member States Responsible for Foreign Economic and Foreign Trade Activities. After spending several days together in Rio for the BRICS Summit, Yi and Lavrov will have had lots of time to deeply review the past and plan for the future. I look forward to the upcoming joint statement.

The headlines and short snippets of information from the release of a previously recorded interview with President Putin leave much to be desired. TASS: “Contradictions between Russia, West arise from geopolitics, Putin believes;” Sputnik International: “Putin Explains What Truly Divided Russia and the West;” RT: “Russia-West clash not about ideology – Putin;” but nothing from Ria Novosti, Izvestia, Kommersant. or the Kremlin website. Why only English language madia and not Russian media? Let’s look at what they report. RT ‘s secondary headline reads, “The standoff is only about geopolitical interests, the Russian president has said,” and here’s its short report:
Western nations’ hegemonic aspirations and dismissal of Russia’s security concerns have led to the ongoing standoff between Moscow and the West, President Vladimir Putin said in an interview released on Sunday. Ideological differences are only a pretext to advance the West’s geopolitical interests, he claimed.

Putin added that he expected the collapse of the USSR to alleviate tensions between Russia and the West.

“I also thought that key disagreements [between us] were ideological in nature,” he stated. “Yet, when the Soviet Union was gone… the dismissive approach to Russia’s strategic interests persisted.”

The president went on to say that his attempts to raise Russia’s concerns with Western leaders were in vain. “The West decided… they do not need to follow the rules when it comes to Russia, which does not have the same power as the USSR.”

All of Moscow’s proposals regarding mutual security, strengthening international stability, and reaching agreements on offensive weapons and missile defense were rejected, Putin said. “It was not just negligence. It was based on a clear desire to reach some geopolitical goals.”

“It has become clear that, unless Russia positions itself as an independent sovereign nation… we will not be reckoned with,” he added.

The Russian president has accused Western nations of betraying Russia and not fulfilling their promises. Last month, he said Moscow was “blatantly lied to” about NATO expansion for decades as the US-led military bloc approached Russia’s borders.

“Everything was good as long as it was against Russia,” he said at the time, adding that Western nations have supported separatism and even terrorism directed against the country.

Moscow has listed Kiev’s NATO ambitions and Western military assistance to Ukraine key reasons behind the Ukraine conflict. Prior to the escalation in early 2022, Russia sought to address its security concerns by seeking guarantees from US and NATO, as well as non-aligned status for Ukraine, which were rejected by the West.
TASS’s secondary headline: “Britain, France, and other former empires, still blame the dismantling of their colonial might on Russia, the Russian president continued adding that he could still sense this historical negative attitude toward his country.” Its short report:
Contradictions between Russia and the West stem from geopolitics even as it was once believed that the communist ideology of the Soviet Union hampered normal relations, Russian President Vladimir Putin said.

"Many believe, and I thought so, too, <…> that contradictions were mostly based on the [Soviet communist] ideology," Putin shared in an interview with VGTRK reporter Pavel Zarubin. However, "disregard for the strategic interests of the Russian Federation has survived" the demise of the Soviet Union, he continued. "And it became obvious to me that the ideology might perhaps play a certain role but that, after all, these contradictions arise from geopolitical interests," the Russian leader concluded.

Meanwhile, Britain, France, and other former empires, still blame the dismantling of their colonial might on Russia, Putin continued adding that he could still sense this historical negative attitude toward his country.

"But the trick is, post WWII, the United States, too, worked with the Soviet Union to demolish those empires, to a certain extent. They worked toward assisting colonies in regaining their independence and sovereignty," the Russian leader explained.
And Sputnik’s short report without any secondary headline:
President Vladimir Putin discussed the roots of the contradictions between the West and Moscow in a previously unpublished segment of an interview for the documentary Russia. Kremlin. Putin. 25 Years by Saida Medvedeva and Pavel Zarubin, aired by the Rossiya TV channel.

Journalist Pavel Zarubin shared the segment on his Telegram channel.

According to Putin, ideology played a role in the emergence of disagreements, but the real foundation was geopolitical:

“It wasn’t just disregard — it was clearly tied to an explicit desire to gain geopolitical advantages.”

Western countries, he said, chose to “live by rules they invented for themselves”:

“The West decided: 'well, the Soviet Union is gone, why should we follow any rules in relation to to Russia, which no longer possesses the potential power the Soviet Union had? Now we’ll just slice things up for ourselves however we want, and live by rules we invented for ourselves, ignoring their interests'.”

Russia, Putin noted, came to understand that it would not be taken seriously until it asserted itself as a sovereign power capable of defending its future.

He also recalled an episode during his time working in St. Petersburg when he refused to engage with a visiting US delegation after one of its members treated a Russian border guard disrespectfully.

Putin emphasized that such behavior was completely unacceptable:

“A man in uniform, while performing his duties, represents the state. To treat him that way is to show contempt for our country.”
So, what’s the message aimed at us English speakers? The issue isn’t ideology but geopolitics seems to be the main message. I went to Zarubin’s channel and most of the interview snippets are blank with the message “Media Too Big.” But there’s enough from the reports to mount a retort to President Putin saying of course ideology is involved as it’s involved in everything. The current ideology of the Outlaw US Empire is to rule the world through force. Yes, that’s geopolitics too. How about the Nazis; they had/have an ideology that’s very similar and it fueled their geopolitical goal. Now we know the West’s current conflict with Russia predates the Communist Era by 100+ years; so, what was Napoleon’s ideology, and after him we have the English—the Anglo-Saxons. Going back to the Great Schism of 1054 and the conflict it started, ideology was the main culprit, but geopolitics was there too—the Vatican wanted to rule the world and have only one Universal faith, which is what the word Catholic means. Currently we have Financialized Capitalism otherwise known as Neoliberalism; there’s also Zionism. Both claim Exceptionalism and a superiority over all others. Both also have geopolitical goals.

Putin claims Communism’s demise means Russia has no ideology. Well, that issue’s been reported on and discussed here at the Gym several times over the last two years. We see Russia’s political-economic system as a hybrid—Industrial Socialism with Russian Characteristics—that differs in some ways with China’s, although officially the word Industrialism is dropped. Both share a key component: State financed developmental investment and very tight control over the financial system. Both have policies directly aimed at uplifting all citizens at the expense of none. Neither Russia nor China have hegemonic desires; indeed, they aim to halt Western hegemony and thus uplift the Global Majority. Russia and China seek Harmony while the West seeks Chaos. I’d say that’s a rather important ideological divide.

Of course, the person I need to present that and more to is President Putin. I’d be very interested to hear his counter argument.

One final observation. It’s said by the main BRICS promoters that it’s not against the Outlaw US Empire or any other entity. If that’s true, then why is BRICS trying to overcome/circumvent the Empire’s hegemony and chaos, to free its members from the Empire’s shackles? Isn’t wanting freedom ideological? Isn’t wanting Peace instead of War ideological? The UN Charter says all nations are equal and have the same rights; isn’t that ideological? There are several nations/elites who say some humans are superior to other humans; isn’t that ideological? One major religious tract that’s the basis for three religions says all humans were created in the image of their god; now is that an ideology based on fact or a fact that’s been made ideological?

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/grab-bag ... -sco-putin

Karl misses one Big Thing in his comparison of Russia and China: In China the Party is the dog and Chinese capitalists are the tail whereas in Russia the oligarchs are the ultimate power, though they must give consideration to other important powers, the masses, STAVKA, the spooks and the President, who wields considerable executive power.

******

Both Would Benefit If Laos Complies With Russia’s Reported Request To Send Sappers To Kursk
Andrew Korybko
Jul 14, 2025

Image

Laos would bolster its geopolitical balancing act while Russia could experiment with a new military-political partnership model that it might then fine-tune for its other Global South partners.

Ukraine’s military intelligence agency GUR reported in early July that Russia wants Laos to send sappers to Kursk to help with demining operations. Neither party has yet to officially comment on these claims at the time of this analysis’ publication, but it wouldn’t be surprising if they’re true. That’s because Laos has plenty of experience with this over the decades after the US dropped more bombs upon it from 1964-1973 than all the bombs that it dropped during the entirety of World War II.

Laos is also partially dependent on foreign aid, Russia has remained among its top strategic partners from the Indochina Wars onward, and the Kremlin has an interest in experimenting with a new military-political partnership model for strengthening ties with countries across the Global South. In the order that these reasons were mentioned, the first could incentivize Laos to comply with this reported request if Russia promises more aid in exchange, especially financing and arms.

The purpose from Laos’ perspective would be to reduce its partial reliance on Western funds while obtaining modern military experience and newer equipment from Russia (likely at a discount). As for the second reason, comprehensively expanding relations with Russia through these means could bolster Laos’ geopolitical balancing act that’s mostly been centered on China, the US, and its ASEAN neighbors to a lesser extent, close Russian partner Vietnam being most prominent among the last-mentioned.

And lastly, the aforesaid aid- and balancing-related benefits that Laos might stand to receive upon compliance with Russia’s sapper request could be fine-tuned to appeal to the wide range countries across the Global South as part of a new military-political partnership model. To elaborate, many of them practice similar Sino-US balancing acts as Laos, hence the appeal of cultivating closer ties with Russia to alleviate related pressure and consequently give them more foreign policy flexibility.

They’re always looking for more financial aid too, and while Russia can’t compete with those two in terms of the direct funds that it could transfer to them, long-term deals to export discounted hydrocarbons (less relevant for hydroelectric-focus Laos) as a quid pro quo might suffice. Likewise, Russia wants to regain its lost share of the global arms market, to which end more (likely discounted) wares could help these countries avoid the zero-sum dilemma of choosing between Chinese and US arms.

From Russia’s perspective, the close strategic ties that it might cultivate with the Global South via this new military-political partnership model could craft the optics of more meaningful support for its special operation across the world while potentially unlocking new real-sector economic opportunities. This could take the form of the Kremlin leveraging these newfound relations to obtain greater market access and position itself as their priority partner for future (including large-scale) infrastructure projects.

Nevertheless, North Korea will always remain Russia’s top military-political partner with respect to this model that it might be experimenting with due to it being the first to participate and having also sent troops to fight Ukraine, which GUR’s report doesn’t claim that it’s asking Laos to do too. So long as Laos and whoever else only carry out non-combat roles within Russia’s universally recognized borders, then they likely don’t need to fear Western sanctions, so there won’t be any real costs for their compliance.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/both-wou ... s-complies

******

Putin: The West's Conflict With Russia Is Not About Ideology

In an interview with the Russian TV channel Rossiya President Vladimir Putin gave some insight into Russia's changing perspective of the West.

There is unfortunately no transcript available yet. Various Russian media provid snippets of the talk in English language:

Contradictions between Russia, West arise from geopolitics, Putin believes - TASS
Britain, France, and other former empires, still blame the dismantling of their colonial might on Russia, the Russian president continued adding that he could still sense this historical negative attitude toward his country
Russia-West clash not about ideology – Putin - RT
The standoff is only about geopolitical interests, the Russian president has said
Putin Explains What Truly Divided Russia and the West - Sputnik


I have yet to find the full interview. But these tweets of Djole include some quotes and subtitled video excerpts:

In an interview with Pavlo Zarubin, a well-known journalist on Russian state television, Putin spoke about deep misunderstandings that, he says, he initially mistakenly attributed to ideological differences. But over time, he points out, it became clear that the background is not ideology, but something else - interest.
"I thought that the contradictions with the West were primarily ideological. It seemed logical at the time - Cold War inertia, different views of the world, values, the organization of society," Putin said.

"But even when the ideology disappeared, when the Soviet Union ceased to exist, the same, almost routine deviation from Russia's interests continued. And it was not because of ideas, but because of the pursuit of advantages - geopolitical, economic, strategic."
...
"The world respects only those who can protect themselves," he said. "Until we show that we are an independent and sovereign power that stands behind our interests, there will be no room for anyone to treat us as equals."


My very first thought when reading that was 'what took him so long'. During the Cold War I was indoctrinated with the fairy tale of Western freedoms versus the evils of eastern communism. But I for one have never accepted that view. Western animosity against Russia goes back many centuries. (Maybe even further back than the big schism of 1054). The fight against the 'evils of communism' was just a contemporary variance of it.

One might call that ideological but I believe that it always has been and is about greed. There is one side in this conflict which never seems to have enough and therefore aims for Russia's riches. What else explains Napoleon's march to Moscow or the British war in Crimea? (See Karlov1 who writes a bit more about the 'ideological' aspect of this.)

But why did it take Putin and Russia until 2022 to accept the consequences of this insight?

Posted by b on July 14, 2025 at 12:52 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/07/p ... l#comments

******

A "Suffering" Card.

This is the issue which many in the West don't get. Holocaust industry can shut down ANY UK or US interlocutor with the Holocaust and "suffering" argument.



They cannot do that to Russians, Soviets in general--Belarus alone lost almost a quarter of her population. Those 27 million, most of them civilians, and in the end the same Red Army which liberated Auschwitz among many other death camps which also saw millions of the Soviet POWs starved to death or simply killed. Holocaust industry in the US, from Hollywood to media, was busy with obscuring the truth of the Eastern Front in order to single out Holocaust as THE ONLY human tragedy worthy of remembrance. They succeeded beyond wildest expectations.
However, in a magnificent movie about Holocaust with a stunning cast of late Robin Williams, Alan Arkin and others, the ending, despite putting Red Army armor force into T-72s, suddenly tells the truth about LIBERATION by the Red Army.



But then again, as we all know, Stalin was a bloody dictator and he wanted only the conquest--a BS which is believed easily in the US where WW II became a saving grace and pulled the country out of the swamp of economic decay precipitated by Great Depression of 1929-1933 and Great Recession of 1937-1938. WW II realities for the US remain unknown and will remain unknown, the role of the Soviet Union and the Red Army will continue to be increasingly diminished until the history of the WW II will be completely rewritten and the US Army would be portrayed as the only force which defeated Nazism. We are already there. This fact, however, is presented by me in order to point out ONE OF the main factors of US Zionists' hatred of Russia. Holocaust card simply doesn't work there.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/07 ... -card.html

******

Political crisis deepens in Armenia: After the Church, now the ARF is targeted

Erkin Oncan

July 14, 2025

Pashinyan’s orchestrated operations seem intended not only to suppress the opposition but also to position himself as the founder of a “New Armenia.”

The tensions sparked by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s operations against Bagrat Galstanyan and his supporters from the Armenian Apostolic Church (AAC) continue to escalate in Armenia.

Most recently, security forces detained seven individuals on the grounds that they were “preparing a terrorist attack.” One of the detainees is facing criminal charges under Article 43(1) and Article 308 of the Armenian Criminal Code (preparation of a terrorist act), which carry a prison sentence of up to 10 years.

Authorities announced that during the searches of the detainees’ residences, a remote-controlled electric explosive device, its components, a hand grenade, a grenade fuse, gunpowder, radio communication devices, and “various other items and substances deemed important for the investigation” were found.

However, both the detentions and the materials found during the searches have become matters of controversy. The investigations are being conducted not only under the scope of terrorist act preparations but also under the laws concerning “the illegal circulation of firearms, their main components, ammunition, and other materials, devices, and objects.”

Objections raised regarding the detentions and searches claim that all weapons seized by security forces were legally registered. It was also alleged that the items seen in the published photos from the searches were not weapons but airsoft equipment, and that the grenade in question was filled with plastic pellets intended for recreational purposes.

In response to these claims, the Investigative Committee released a new statement, asserting that the F-1 type grenade and two electric detonators found during the searches were in fact real and intended for combat.

Just as with the operations targeting the AAC, Armenian authorities are once again emphasizing a “planned terrorist attack.” This time, however, the target is one of Armenia’s oldest political forces: the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF), known as Dashnaktsutyun.

The Targeted Party: Dashnaktsutyun

On the morning of July 9, Armenian security forces launched operations targeting the opposition Dashnaktsutyun party in the capital Yerevan.

Arsen Martoyan, a member of the party’s Yerevan City Committee, and Taron Manukyan, the son of “Hayastan” parliamentary group MP Gegham Manukyan, were taken into custody.

Simultaneously, searches were carried out at the residences of Taron Manukyan, ARF Supreme Body Administrative Unit Chair Vahan Matinyan, and Gevorg Muradyan, a member of the Yegvard municipal council and head of the ARF Youth Union’s Central Council.

Lawyers for the detained opposition members reported that they were not allowed to meet with their clients.

Ishkhan Saghatelyan, a representative of the party’s Supreme Body, described the raids as a “new phase of political pressure,” coinciding with Pashinyan’s visit to Turkey.

ARF member and opposition MP Lilit Galstyan also criticized the raids, calling them “a clear violation of the political parties law” and “a deliberate assault aimed at obstructing Dashnaktsutyun’s activities.”

Human Rights Defenders Invoke ‘April 24, 1915’ Comparison

The “Five Human Rights Defenders” initiative, which provides legal monitoring and public oversight during official searches and operations against opposition figures, described the actions of the security forces as a form of terrorism. They compared the operations to the arrest of Armenian intellectuals by the Ottoman Empire on April 24, 1915.

Though the details of these operations vary across cases, they are largely categorized under general labels such as “terrorism” and “coup plot.”

Earlier this month, MP Artur Sargsyan accused Pashinyan in parliament of turning Armenia into “a fortress of dictatorship where everything is prearranged.” Sargsyan, who had called for Pashinyan’s resignation, was stripped of his parliamentary seat, his immunity was lifted, and he—along with 15 others—was charged with plotting a coup and terrorism.

Soon after, prominent figures from the opposition “Armenia Alliance,” Seyran Ohanyan and Artsvik Minasyan, were formally charged with corruption-related offenses. A third MP, Artur Sargsyan, is also facing legal proceedings for alleged involvement in a coup attempt. All three have lost their immunity and are expected to stand trial.

Allegation: “Pashinyan Pledged Genocide Concessions to Aliyev”

Another factor fueling tensions between Dashnaktsutyun and Pashinyan is the Prime Minister’s comments about the ARF’s ideology during a meeting with the Armenian community in France.

“There has been only one ideology in Armenia since the founding of the Third Republic — the ideology of Dashnaktsutyun,” Pashinyan said, advocating for a new ideological transformation. The harshest response came from Saghatelyan, who accused Pashinyan of “paving the way for new concessions” and of pledging to Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev that he would suppress political circles that keep the Armenian Genocide and Nagorno-Karabakh issues on the agenda.

Saghatelyan further stated:

“He talks about learning from history, but if real lessons had been learned, figures like him who oppose national values would not be in power, Karabakh would not have been occupied, and enemy troops wouldn’t be on Armenian soil. Pashinyan is the last person who should talk about sovereignty. Over the past six years, he has made the country entirely dependent on foreign powers.”

Different Arguments, Similar Debates

Despite varying arguments, the political turbulence in Armenia mirrors debates familiar to us. In Turkey, liberal and conservative circles claim that all political factions carry remnants of ‘Kemalism’ and its so-called ‘tutelage regime.’ This narrative is part of a broader reckoning with the past as the country searches for a new direction — a pattern that finds parallels in Armenia.

In Armenia, everything changed with the 2018 Velvet Revolution. Nikol Pashinyan came to power with a pro-Western, reformist image, initially presenting an alternative to authoritarianism and corruption. But over time, he has veered in a very different direction. Today, he faces not just an opposition bloc, but a broad “reckoning with history” front — from nationalists to the Church, from pro-Russian circles to the Karabakh diaspora.

‘Tavush for the Homeland’

The last straw in Armenia’s struggle between the “old” and the “new” came in the northeastern Tavush region. This strategic area, close to the Azerbaijani border, became the center of controversy due to Pashinyan’s plan to cede four villages to Azerbaijan as part of a border delimitation process.

Bagrat Galstanyan, the Archbishop at the center of the crackdown on the Church, launched the “Tavush for the Homeland” movement. Quickly renamed the “Sacred Movement,” it turned into a mass protest and marched toward Yerevan.

Similarly, Dashnaktsutyun—now also targeted by Pashinyan’s government—became one of the most active components of this opposition movement.

The AAC is Armenia’s official and largest church and one of the world’s oldest Christian institutions. Dashnaktsutyun is one of Armenia’s most established political parties, known for its nationalist right-wing orientation. Pashinyan has now declared war on both of these powerful institutions. At the center of it all lies the loss of Karabakh.

Pashinyan’s “Opportunity” in the Loss of Karabakh

Following the 2020 defeat to Azerbaijan, effective Armenian control over Nagorno-Karabakh came to an end. For much of the population, this was a traumatic loss, but for Pashinyan’s administration, it became an opportunity to sever ties with the past.

For Armenia’s pro-Western political forces, Karabakh has long been viewed not as a “historical cause” but as a “historical burden” that sustained Yerevan’s dependence on Russia. This framing shapes Pashinyan’s core domestic and foreign policies.

The dominant narrative he promotes is one of a “Real Armenia.” In his view, Armenia must break free from the myths of the past, the dream of a “Historical Armenia,” and burdens like Karabakh. The greatest political consequence of this “necessity” is distancing the country from Russia. That is why many of the targeted political factions are labeled as “pro-Russian.”

Pashinyan’s announcement that Armenia’s membership in the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) has been frozen, and his approval of Armenia’s accession to the International Criminal Court (ICC), which has issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin, are all natural steps in this direction.

Critical Elections Ahead

Amid all these developments, the parliamentary elections scheduled for June 7, 2026, are of great importance. Although Pashinyan and his party currently hold power, public support hovers around only 15%. Meanwhile, the opposition, though broad and diverse, has yet to form a united front.

Under these conditions, Pashinyan’s orchestrated operations seem intended not only to suppress the opposition but also to position himself as the founder of a “New Armenia.”

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

Post Reply