Russia today

[blindpig]

Dmitry Anatolievich Medvedev on New National Security Strategy

Translated post
East Calling
Dec 07, 2025
Cross-posted by East’s Substack

"Dmitry Medvedev once again delivers his style of biting commentary!"
- Zinderneuf


Deputy Chairman of the Security Counsel of the Russian Federation - Dmitry Anatolievich Medvedev on his VK:

The Americans continue to tame the crazed European Union. Naturally, so that the sick animal remembers who’s the real boss. Even Musk (in response to the fine against X) contributed to this, wishing for the EU’s disintegration. Not bad! Overall, this is to our benefit. Better Trump’s great-power pragmatism than Biden’s globalist insanity.

In this regard, the new National Security Strategy prepared by the current White House administration stands out. It is notable for its realistic assessment of many modern challenges. I should point out that the significance of such a strategy should not be exaggerated. It is merely a collection of political declarations. What matters is what’s in their heads. And not only in the minds of the inconsistent Washington brass, but also in the notorious “deep state.” And yet...

1. This time, a very interesting document has emerged from the depths of the White House. This is not just another pile of arrogant American diplomatic formulas. It’s more like an attempt to turn around a huge ship that has been sailing along by inertia for a long time and has finally decided to change course. For the first time in many years, Washington is openly talking about the need to restore “strategic stability” in Eurasia and improve relations with Russia.

This is no longer the language of the money-grubbing Derzhimorda, who, under Biden, declared a virtual crusade against Moscow. The overseas superpower has begun to realize that playing superhero on its own is too costly. It hurts its own interests the most.

For us, this means that space is emerging for more or less civilized diplomacy. This is not a friendly embrace, but a fairly clear signal: the US is ready to discuss security architecture, not just slap on endless, and most importantly, senseless sanctions (although new restrictions on Russian oil mean a continuation of the current course).

2. Washington is effectively admitting that the global world no longer rests on American shoulders alone. The sky has become too heavy for a country that so zealously portrayed itself as an Atlas. Now it’s looking for those who can share the unbearable burden. And here, inevitably, Russia appears as one of the few countries with a real influence on European security.

For the first time in many years, our country is not called a “threat” in an American document, but a participant in a dialogue on stability. It’s noteworthy that it mentions halting NATO expansion, and Ukraine doesn’t figure at all in this context. This strategy unexpectedly resonates with what we’ve been saying for years: security must be shared, and the sovereignty of states must be respected. Russia has long proposed reaching agreements, rather than arrogantly imposing a world order based on rules that aren’t even enshrined in international law. Now, the window of opportunity for dialogue has been cracked open.

3. The United States is proposing that an imbecile Europe, bloated from parasitism, become more independent in matters of defense. For Russia, this is a double signal. On the one hand, there’s a risk that the Europeans will aggressively build up their military capabilities. This will completely destroy their economies and require the establishment of regimes bordering on dictatorship. Europe already has such a tragic experience: Hitler himself came to power with harsh militaristic slogans.

On the other hand, the easing of endless financial injections from the United States creates opportunities to reduce tensions on the Eurasian continent and engage in negotiations. This is simply because Russia is a major global player, and constructive cooperation with us is more beneficial, as it was for many years, before the events in Ukraine.

4. As I already noted, strategy is a political declaration, and certainly not, to use the words of our beloved Lenin, “a change in all our views on socialism.” Fierce disagreements within the American and European elites continue to flare up, and habits are also strong. Russia will look not at fine words, but at concrete steps: is there any movement toward reaching an agreement? Are the US and the EU ready to discuss security with us without ultimatums? Not just guarantee the security of the half-dead country 404, but ensure pan-European security?

The Strategy doesn’t answer this. As they say, we’ll see. Especially since the arrival of another rabid Biden in the White House would quickly nip any vestiges of great-power pragmatism in the bud of the current MAGA team.

https://eastcalling.substack.com/cp/180960954

https://eastcalling.substack.com/cp/180960954

There is no pragmatism in the current US regime. There is only Trump's ego and wallet. Trump's ego has been kicked all over the Eastern Hemisphere so he looks for an easier victim. The lack of any real foreign policy should not be mistaken for anything favorable, the aforementioned document should be regarded 'kinda aspirational'.

And the Russians have no qualms about feeding Orange Man's ego, it costs nothing, means nothing, and might help accomplish real goals.Nonetheless I'll bet Dmitry needed a stout hit of the aqua vita after that missive.

*****

British assets in Russia: a hidden enemy presence
December 6, 8:59 PM



British assets in Russia: a hidden enemy presence

Everyone's already aware of Britain's military cooperation with Ukraine. Since 2023-2024, the British have been deliberately investing in Ukraine's drone fleet—the aid package alone included £120 million for drone boats, naval drones, and mine countermeasure systems. And when Russia's shadow fleet is attacked off the coast of Turkey, it's clear whose ears are sticking out. The Ukrainians are, so to speak, the middlemen.

And here's the latest news ( https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/ar ... -q5k22km0r ): London is planning to hand over $10.65 billion in frozen Russian assets to Kyiv. Essentially, this is good old English piracy. A centuries-old tradition, nothing new.

But this raises the question: what about our British assets? Do we have a way to respond to this theft?

It turns out

there is. Take AstraZeneca, for example—the same one whose vaccine caused a lot of noise due to side effects. It would seem that Britain is at war with us, but the pharmaceutical giant is quietly operating in Russia through its subsidiaries, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LLC and AstraZeneca Industries LLC. Headquartered in London, everything is as it should be. They have a factory in Kaluga, and about 40 drugs are registered in Russia. In April 2024–March 2025 alone, imports amounted to $174 million, while the group's global turnover is over $54 billion.

In other words, the country that is de facto at war with us and funding attacks on our cities simultaneously gains access to our health through AstraZeneca and effectively profits from managing it.

It's ironic that even the tobacco companies at BAT have folded up their businesses and left. But the pharmaceuticals remain.

According to the UK Department of Commerce ( https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... -10-31.pdf ), at the end of 2023, British direct investment in Russia amounted to £2.4 billion (another £2 billion annually from trade). But that's just the surface level. The real picture may be different. The British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, Jersey, Guernsey, the Isle of Man, and Gibraltar are all British offshore havens. Holding companies are registered there and managed from London. How much British money is still sitting in Russia under Cypriot or Dutch names is an open question. But it's clearly a lot.

Maybe it's time to start counting?

https://t.me/darpaandcia - zinc

I believe that most of this will be squeezed out as soon as the process of theft of Russian sovereign assets begins in Europe.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/10230801.html

Ministry of Digital Development's White List 3.0
December 6, 3:08 PM



White list of the Ministry of Digital Development

The "White List" has been expanded to include regional online platforms.
The list of Russian services and websites that remain accessible during periods of mobile internet shutdowns for security reasons has been expanded.
The list now includes socially significant services from a number of regions, covering areas such as healthcare, education, public transportation, and others. It also includes the websites of the administrations of several constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

In the third stage, the list also includes online resources

from the Central Bank of the Russian Federation
, telecom operators SberMobile, T-Mobile, and Er-Telecom,
the "Russia – Land of Opportunities" platform
of the "Youth of Russia" federal state automated information system, and the all-Russian student project "Your Move."
Media outlets include Izvestia and TASS, the
"DomClick" real estate search, purchase, and sales service,
the "Caesar Satellite" security system, and
the Okko online cinema.

Work to fill the so-called "white list" is ongoing. The list of digital platforms is compiled from the most popular internet resources in Russia, as well as proposals from federal and regional authorities and in consultation with agencies responsible for security. It is impossible to include a resource in this list by any other means.

An important condition for inclusion is that all computing resources used must be located within Russia.

The list in the first and second stages already included the most popular Russian services, websites of government agencies, media, supermarkets, etc.

Services VKontakte, Odnoklassniki, Mail.ru and the national messenger Max
Services of the State Services
Yandex Services
Marketplaces Ozon and Wildberries
Avito
Zen
Rutube
Official website of the Mir payment system
Websites of the Government and the Administration of the President of Russia
Federal platform for remote electronic voting (REV)
Telecom operators Beeline, MegaFon, MTS, Rostelecom, T2

Websites of government agencies: the State Duma, federal ministries, services and agencies, state information systems, the Prosecutor General's Office, governments of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation
Russian Post
Alfa-Bank
state system for digital labeling of goods Honest Sign
Media: Komsomolskaya Pravda, RIA Novosti, RBC, Gazeta.ru, Lenta.ru, Rambler
Russian Railways and the tourist portal Tutu.ru
Navigator 2GIS
Taxi Maxim
Weather forecast website Gismeteo

https://t.me/mintsifry - zinc.

During internet restrictions during air raids, MAX still works, but with issues.
Telegram calls only work with a VPN, and even then, not in every country after the recent restrictions.
Government services are indeed operating under restrictions.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/10230119.html

Admiral Nakhimov undergoing sea trials
December 7, 1:00 PM



Photo of the Admiral Nakhimov, a Project 11442M nuclear-powered missile cruiser, preparing for its next sea trials.
The cruiser is preparing to return to the fleet.



blinov_navy - photos

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/10232008.html

On the prospects of Russian BECs
December 7, 11:06



On the prospects of Russian BECs

NATO has noted Russia's significant progress in using naval drones.

Western experts have noted Russia's significant progress in the development and use of unmanned vessels, according to a NATO Defense College review (available to TASS). The alliance believes that such combat assets could be used to isolate Ukraine's coastal infrastructure.

The review also mentions that future targets for Russian naval drones could include ships transferred to Kyiv by the UK, France, Sweden, and the US, located in the Black Sea, as well as the Danube and Dnieper rivers.

On August 28, Russia used unmanned drones for the first time in an attack, sinking the Ukrainian Navy ship "Simferopol" in the mouth of the Danube. According to local publications, the "Simferopol" was equipped with the latest Ukrainian electronic intelligence station, the Melkhior, at the time of its launch.



Dozens of naval drones are being developed in Russia. Interesting facts:

Last ​​year, the Russian Orkan, Vizir, and BEK-1000 unmanned combat vehicles (UCVs) were unveiled for the first time. These vehicles can travel 500 km or more and carry a payload of 1 ton or more. In the fall of that year, it was reported that the Vizir reusable drone was ready for serial production.
Unified systems are being developed – a UAV and an UAV working in tandem. Specifically, the main strike and reconnaissance element of this tandem will be a universal strike FPV platform, which will be modified for launch from unmanned naval boats.
In July of this year, the Ministry of Defense released footage showing forces of the Baltic Fleet destroying a mock enemy ship using a combined use of unmanned naval systems. The unnamed naval drone struck a large naval target with a spectacular explosion.
In the fall, the Novgorod-based Ushkuynik Scientific and Production Center presented the country's first unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) with fiber optic control, similar to the technology used for UAVs immune to electronic warfare.

Pictured are the Orkan and Vizir UAVs.

https://t.me/voenkaRUS/392 - zinc.

The main challenge in developing our naval drones is communication. In fact, this is largely the reason why we are lagging behind in the development and production of naval drones compared to our adversaries, who are already using them en masse.
Of course, we will overcome this gap, just as we did in the aerial drone segment. We are already ahead of our adversaries in the NRTK segment. We are waiting for the sailors.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/10231645.html

Google Translator

*****

Russia Is Taking The Finnish Front Of The New Cold War Very Seriously
Andrew Korybko
Dec 07, 2025



Medvedev’s article shows that Russia is prepared to tackle all Finnish-emanating threats from NATO.

Former Russian President and incumbent Deputy Secretary of the Security Council Dmitry Medvedev published a scathing article at TASS in early September about “The New Finnish Doctrine: Stupidity, Lies, Ingratitude” in which he excoriated Finland for its former alliance with the Nazis and warned about new threats from it. This follows reports in May that Russia has been beefing up its defenses along the Finnish frontier, which was analyzed here and includes links to several briefings on this subject.

Much of Medvedev’s article is devoted to the WWII-era period, with special attention drawn to what the Supreme Court of Karelia (an autonomous republic in Russia bordering Finland) recognized last year as the Finnish Genocide of the Soviet People during that time. This focus is meant to remind Russians that Finland was once their country’s enemy even though Moscow showed mercy upon it after WWII in order to create a neutral buffer zone that formally remained in effect till Finland joined NATO in 2023.

Medvedev’s motive is to rally Russians in support of their country’s more muscular policy towards Finland in response to its new hostile policies since joining that bloc. These include compliance with Western sanctions and agreeing to let the US possibly use up to 15 military facilities. Moreover, NATO “is now intensively mastering all five operational environments of Suomi (how Finns refer to their country) - land, sea, air, space and cyberspace”, according to Medvedev. The threats are therefore multiplying.

He warned that Russia might pursue criminal liability for Finland’s WWII-era genocide of the Soviet People, since there’s no statute of limitations on this crime in international law, and demand more reparations if this trend continues as expected. His piece ended soon thereafter on the ominous note that Finland might lose its statehood “forever” if it participates in another war against Russia. The subtext is that this is an increasingly credible scenario that Russia is taking very seriously going forward.

It’s timely to re-evaluate the threat that NATO poses to Russia via Finland in light of this article. Prior to recent developments, it was thought by some in Russia that Finland’s formal membership in the bloc wouldn’t really change much since it was already a de facto member for decade, thus making this more of a symbolic achievement for NATO than a meaningful military-strategic one. What they didn’t foresee, however, was what Medvedev described as the “Ukrainization of Finland itself (that) took place quietly.”

This was brought about by the NATO-backed resurgence of ultra-nationalist sentiment in society that takes the form of ethno-territorial revanchist goals vis-à-vis Russia. To oversimplify a complex historical subject, Finno-Ugric people are indigenous to parts of modern-day Russia, including Karelia. Although they’ve integrated into society and are actually privileged in today’s Russia due to their minority status, which affords special rights for such groups, Finnish ultra-nationalists still want to annex their land.

The stage is accordingly being set for an escalation of New Cold War tensions between NATO and Russia along the Finnish frontier, thus serving as a triple extension of their already boiling ones in the Arctic, the Baltic, and Central Europe. Finland boasts the bloc’s largest land border with Russia by far, however, so NATO-related threats from there are more dangerous than from anywhere else. Russia is taking them very seriously though and is prepared to defend itself from any form of aggression that it might face.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/russia-i ... nish-front

[blindpig]

Bait and switch stage two – Shooting the breeze in Moscow

Alastair Crooke

December 8, 2025

Putin does not want a ‘deal’. What he insists on is a legally binding treaty – as he has repeatedly stated.

President Trump’s friend, Steve Witkoff, together with Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, met on 2 December with President Putin at the Kremlin in Moscow.

Taking part in the meeting on the Russian side were Presidential Aide Yury Ushakov and Kirill Dmitriev. This marked Witkoff’s sixth meeting with Putin in 2025 and Kushner’s first in-person involvement in these talks.

Reportedly, the core agenda was an ‘update’ of the U.S. ‘talking points’ – one that is said to have incorporated further (unspecified) input from the Ukrainians and Europeans.

Despite the redrafting, the talking points reflect a U.S. agenda that is little changed in essence from earlier Witkoff talking points. It is, for example, again framed around a ceasefire (rather than a wider political agreement, as Russia demands); on de facto border recognition (rather than de jure recognition of the four oblasts now constitutionally incorporated into Russia).

Some possible Ukrainian concessions in the Donbas region seemingly were discussed too, as well as security guarantees for Ukraine that would be coordinated with European allies; and finally, ‘restrictions’ on Ukraine’s military capabilities (somewhat laughably ‘capped’ at 800,000 men – rather than the 2022 Istanbul ball-park figure of some 50,000-60,00).

Putin reportedly agreed that some elements of the proposal might merit further discussion, but reiterated Russia’s non-negotiable positions.

In sum, it seems that, as Marco Rubio has stated, “[the U.S. continues] to test to see if the Russians are ‘interested in peace’. Their actions – not their words, their actions – will determine whether they’re serious or not, and we [team Trump] intend to find that out sooner rather than later …”.

Effectively, Witkoff was sent to Moscow ‘to test yet again’ (after another American escalatory episode, with four ATACM long-range missiles fired ‘deep into Russia’ and the imposition of more oil sanctions) whether Putin now was willing to do a ‘deal’ that Trump could present as an ‘American achievement’.

The U.S. ‘carrot’ is the offer of incremental sanctions relief (at U.S. discretion). The ‘stick’ was represented by the missiles launched into deep Russia – and more sanctions imposed on Russian oil companies. These latter clearly were intended as a ‘memo’ of what might follow – should Putin not agree a ‘deal’.

This is the same ‘deal’ that has been offered to Russia before. And here is the rub – simply, Putin does not want a ‘deal’. What he insists on is a legally binding treaty – as he has repeatedly stated.

Putin pointedly underlined this demand through Lavrov’s absence from the Witkoff meeting. It was a clear signal from Russia that the foundation for actual negotiations is still not in place. Putin’s goal was to explain — politely and firmly — what Russia’s fundamental positions are with respect to settling the war in Ukraine.

These positions are unchanged from those that Putin outlined on 14 June 2024 in his address to the Russian Foreign Ministry staff.

Putin however, sent his own ‘message’ to the White House.

Speaking to reporters in Bishkek, in Kyrgyzstan last Thursday, Putin explained how negotiations with the U.S. should – and must – be handled. He said that Foreign Minister Lavrov is responsible for handling contacts and negotiations on possible terms to end the war in Ukraine, and that he relies on Lavrov’s reports from these talks, while avoiding public discussion of specific proposals.

So, there it is. Putin scents the coming U.S. ‘switch’ – and won’t have any of it.

He is indicating that the negotiation process is only to be conducted through professional channels, in a professionally staffed and legal format that leads to a treaty, rather than ‘a deal’.

Putin thus explicitly renounces ‘a deal’. Witkoff and Kushner were intent on seeking to extract concessions from Russia: they sought a temporary ceasefire (rather than any binding settlement), sweetened by sanctions relief that would incremental: i.e. as ‘periodic rewards’ for continued Russian good behaviour (rather as rats in a laboratory are trained to press the food button).

Why is the U.S. so stuck on a ceasefire rather than a comprehensive security framework including a new security architecture for East Europe?

The answer is that Trump wants a ‘win’ – an outcome that can be presented to the American public as another war ‘stopped by Trump’ (he claims it would be the eighth), whilst simultaneously sold to the deep powers as merely a hiatus in a conflict that will be resumed after a pause – when the Europeans (‘security guarantors’) have rebuilt the Ukrainian army. It would represent ‘a win’ for the ‘hawks’ because it can be ‘narrated’ that resumed military conflict would eat into the Russian economy, and might even end with Putin’s removal from office.

Wishful thinking, of course. But so many western narratives are wishful, rather than realist thinking.

In short, the overall aim to the American opaque and ambiguous ‘talking points’ is to corner Putin, and push him off his fundamental principles – such as his insistence on eliminating the root causes to the conflict, and not just the symptoms. There is no hint in this or earlier drafts or of any recognition of root causes (expansion of NATO and missile emplacements), beyond the vague promise of a “dialogue [that] will be conducted between Russia and NATO, mediated by the United States, to resolve all security issues and create conditions for de-escalation, thereby ensuring global security and increasing opportunities for cooperation and future economic development”.

The Sherlock Holmesian ‘dog that significantly did not bark in the night’ consists in the odd absence of Rubio, who is the formal Secretary of State, and the man, who, in normal circumstances would negotiate a legal and binding treaty.

Instead, we have Trump’s New York real estate friend and his son-in-law. Neither are formal members of the U.S. Administration; neither are mandated by the official organs of the U.S. state to negotiate on behalf of the United States.

So should America decide to resume its war on Russia, it would be possible to say, as per the “not one inch eastward” (as after the reunification of Germany), ‘but was that not-an-inch further’ commitment written on paper?

Witkoff and Kushner? ‘They were but Trump’s friends shooting the breeze during a visit to Moscow’.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... in-moscow/

******

John Helmer - An Amazing Life

Alfredo Bolduc




334 views Dec 7, 2025 Dateline: News & Conversation
ohn Helmer is the longest continuously serving, independent, foreign journalist in Moscow.

He is a lawyer, served on the staffs of President Jimmy Carter, the Australian PM, and the Greek PM.

With advanced degrees from Harvard University, he has been a professor of political science, sociology, and journalism in the US, UK, and Australia.

His website, Dances with Bears, is the most widely read website in the business world focusing on Russia.

A unique and rare interview in which John shared some of the most important and difficult moments in his life. He has lived in Moscow since 1989, before the collapse of the Soviet Union. No other English-speaking journalist or person for that matter has seen and documented Russia’s rise from the ashes of that collapse.

John's website, Dances With Bears: https://johnhelmer.net/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlHPE0aAQ4I

******

Congress of Terrorist Deputies
December 8, 12:48



The Russian Supreme Court has upheld the Prosecutor General's Office's claim to designate the Congress of People's Deputies*, founded by former State Duma deputy Ilya Ponomarev**, as a terrorist organization and to ban it, a RIA Novosti correspondent reports from the courtroom.

"The claim of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation is satisfied...," the judge announced.
The court added that the decision to designate the Congress of People's Deputies* as a terrorist organization and ban it in the Russian Federation is subject to immediate execution.

https://russian.rt.com/russia/news/1569 ... -terrorizm - zinc

. Remember, a few years ago, the democratic schizos were all about alternative parliaments, councils of alternative mayors, and other subversive ideas. Now they're either abroad or in jail. Those who actively support terrorist attacks on Russian territory abroad and profit from Western NGOs and intelligence agencies.
And yet, not so long ago, there was a time when this crap was tolerated within the country.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/10233383.html

Google Translator

[blindpig]

PRESIDENT PUTIN AND PRIME MINISTER MODI SHARE A FUTURE STRATEGY THAT’S NO JOKE FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP



By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

It is rare for the ceremony of a state visit to generate such a combination of national pride and comedy at the expense of an enemy; that’s to say, making a mockery of President Donald Trump.

This is what this Indian cartoon (lead images) of the meetings in Delhi last week of President Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister Narendra Modi has expressed. The upshot is that the video is going viral in both India and Russia.

It’s a parody of a still popular song from the 50-year old Hindi comedy Sholay. Because Dharmendra, star of the original comedy, died two weeks ago – he was as beloved by Indian filmgoers as Yury Nikulin (d. 1997) was by the Russian audience – there is special Indian emotion in the song’s revival today. For Russians, the cartoon is also a reminder of the 50-year old Ugly American defeated with Russian help on the battlefields of Vietnam, and revived again by Trump, depicted here with a hand on his impotent hosepipe.

“We will keep our friendship”, Modi and Putin sing together as they refill the tank of their motorbike from the Russian petrol bowser, ignoring the US one and spinning Trump around in fury as they accelerate away. “We will take on the world.” That’s the message for Trump and his officials whose verbal insults, tariffs and visa penalties for India have transformed public opinion across India. “We will keep on dealing”, they sing at Trump who has ordered India to stop buying Russian oil for their refineries or pay a 50% penalty on all trade. “We will not break this friendship. Difficulties will come but we will not leave you.”

In his official welcome speech, Modi told Putin: “After the Ukraine crisis, we have been in touch…You have also been making us aware of the developments as a true friend. This trust is a big strength, and we have discussed this issue many times…whenever I have spoken to world leaders, I have always told them that India is not neutral, India is on the side of peace, we support all efforts towards peace. And we stand shoulder to shoulder in these peace efforts.”

In a second speech, Modi linked the war Russia is fighting against the US and NATO in the Ukraine and the war India fought against Pakistan last May: “India and Russia,” the Prime Minister said, “have always supported one another and worked shoulder to shoulder in the fight against terrorism. The terrorist attack in Pahalgam and the cowardly atrocity at Crocus City Hall are connected by a common, hateful ideology. India firmly believes that terrorism constitutes a direct assault on universal human values. Our unity within the global community is the only effective way to combat this evil.”

Putin responded with discreet references to the sanctions war Trump is waging against both Russia and India: “Our two countries have developed resilient interbank channels for lending and financial transactions. Russian economic actors have been making wider use of the rupees they generate from export contracts….There has been positive momentum in our energy partnership. Russia is a reliable supplier of energy resources and everything India needs for developing its energy sector. We are ready to continue ensuring uninterrupted fuel supplies for the Indian economy to support its rapid expansion.”


Putin’s first line is the new realism Modi accepts; the two of them have begun to work in the secrecy required to secure against Trump’s sanctions and tariff war. Putin’s last line is more optimistic than the Indian side is prepared to be, also in secrecy.


Indian and Russian sources acknowledge the personal bonhomie between the two leaders and the “positive momentum” of the 70-point Joint Statement issued at the close of the meetings. Putin added there is “clear potential” to increase the export-import trade between the two countries to $100 billion. He conceded, however, that the 12% growth of the trade turnover between 2023 and 2024 to “between US$64 and US$65 billion” has not grown this year and “will stand at a comparable level”. If the Indian government figure for last year was in fact $63.8 billion,

then this year’s total may prove to be less, taking into account the decline in crude oil volumes in the last quarter.

Indian officials and business analysts are frank: “How much of this bonhomie will translate into trade figures, particularly in achieving the much-touted goal of reaching $ 100 billion in bilateral trade between these two trusted neighbours? While $100 billion trade by 2030 may be an ambitious target, what may really happen is a significant reduction in India’s import of Russian oil after the recent US sanctions. This may actually lead to a big fall in bilateral trade in the near term. Subsequently India Russia trade will have to be rebuilt on a more sustainable footing outside of oil trade.”

An Indian source in Moscow adds: “As Putin announced, the Russians are willing to do their utmost to sell oil — whatever it takes. This promises real short-term benefits. But this has no long-term benefits for us. Russians are proposing more sales of high-tech defence equipment and we are interested. This is because we trust Russians more than we trust the US and France. But Russians know our goal is to produce locally. Almost none of the top-thousand Russian private businesses have shown any interest in India since the so-called Eastern Pivot was announced from 2014 and they were not visible in Delhi.”

Sberbank and VTB have announced their presence in India, and the Russian Central Bank is opening a representative office in Mumbai. These are the necessary “resilient interbank channels for lending and financial transactions”, which Putin announced. For “resilient”, read protection from Trump. However, a Delhi investment financier comments: “We consider these to be baby steps when they [Russians] should be taking giant leaps.”

The underlying problem is that for Indian exports to grow in the Russian market, the Russian oligarchs and leading businesses need to invest in manufacturing in India, with the aim of then exporting to the Russian consumer market as well as to the rest of the world. This has been the model for US foreign direct investment (FDI) in India so far.


However, at least half, possibly as much as three-quarters of current foreign direct investment in India is coming from Indian oligarchs and businesses operating through offshore low-tax havens like Mauritius, Singapore, UAE, Lichtenstein, and Cyprus. Also, this FDI is coming from the Indian business diaspora in the US and UK. In India they are as reluctant to compete against new Russian investors, as the Russian oligarchs and businesses are reluctant to run India risks for their assets – unless they have the protection of the state or of Indian partners.

Laugh, then listen to the discussion led by Dimitri Lascaris of the Russia-India-China strategic relationship which the Yankocentric podcasters are missing.


Click to view: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o46QaPIOgOM

The trade statistics for India and Russia reveal that, if not for the surge of crude oil purchases by India triggered by price discounting on the Russian side to escape US and European sanctions, the volume of Indian imports from Russia and Russian imports from India would be relatively more balanced – but at a much lower turnover aggregate. As the charts of Indian imports reveal, China is the largest source with 18.5%; Russia comes next with 10.2%; the UAE, a re-export hub, trails at 8.5%.

By contrast, as a destination for Indian goods, Russian demand amounts to just 1.1% of India’s export total. The US leads with 18.3%; Indians acknowledge this is a vulnerability which Trump is exploiting with his tariff threats.

THE INDIA-RUSSIA TRADE IMBALANCE AND THE RUSSIAN CRUDE OIL FACTOR


The obscured figure in the chart for the European Union’s share of Indian exports is 17.8%. Click for larger view and analysis: https://thewire.in/trade/the-economic-r ... n-ambition

The data on Indian imports of Russian oil suggest that the surge was a short-term, price opportunity tactic by Indian refiners. It was not a strategic shift by the Modi government. In fact, according to the Indian assessments, the government in Delhi was attempting to reduce the volume of Russian oil imports and diversify the refiners’ sourcing before (repeat before) Trump imposed his 25% additional tariff penalty.

“The Russian oil-related 25% additional tariff by the U.S. on Indian imports came into effect on August 27. However, India has cut the value of Russian oil imports in eight out of the previous 10 months up to September 2025, compared to the corresponding months of 2024. In five of these months — February, May, June, July, and September — the cuts were by more than 20% each. ‘India has known for a while now that its dependence on Russian oil imports had grown too high and so it was already working on a plan to reduce this,’ an official in the Ministry of Commerce and Industry told The Hindu on the condition of anonymity given the sensitivity of the issue. ‘The Trump tariffs have come during that time,’ the official said. ‘Yes, they are a factor to be kept in mind, but they are not driving Indian policies.’”


Source: https://www.thehindu.com/business/Econo ... 298792.ece

This reduction of Russian oil imports is not just in absolute terms, but also in terms of the Russian share in India’s total oil imports. This hare of India’s oil imports grew from 1.6% in 2020-21, to 2% in 2021-22, before jumping in the first of the war years to 19% in 2022-23; 33.4% in 2023-24, and 35.1% in 2024-25. On a month-by-month basis, in September 2024 Russian crude peaked at about 41% of Indian imports, but by September of this year the share had dropped to 31%.


Source: Indian Ministry of Commerce & Industry -- note: Data for 2025-26 is for the April-September 2025 period

Thus, when Putin announced publicly “we are ready to continue ensuring uninterrupted fuel supplies for the Indian economy to support its rapid expansion,” the evidence is that Modi is far from persuaded to buy, and Trump’s interference is not the only reason.

Therefore, in order to reach the $100 billion trade turnover target the two leaders have now agreed to, with more balance and an increase in Indian exports to Russia, the requirements will focus, as the Joint Statement indicates, on Russian military industrial exports, Russian nuclear technology, joint ventures in fertilizer supplies, pharmaceuticals and their raw materials, and “critical minerals for emerging technologies”.

Indian and Russian experts are asking whether there is Russian consumer demand to match American consumer demand for the top-ten Indian exports. If there is not, as the experts answer for the time being, the solution must be increased Russian investment in India for return exports to the Russian market, as well as for India’s global markets.

THE US-INDIA COMMODITY TRADE MODEL – CAN RUSSIA APPROACH OR REPLACE IT?


Source: https://www.india-briefing.com/news/ind ... 0790.html/

A Moscow source in a position to know says: “Putin might be sincere but the oligarchs have no interest in India as a market, as a manufacturing partner. The Indians should expect nothing of consequence from them unless Modi has persuaded Putin that he must direct Russian capital into India. For the time being, there was little evidence of the seriousness of the Kremlin in this direction from either the membership of the Putin delegation or in the subsequent business forum organised by the Roscongress Foundation and the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI).”

Delhi sources differ. “Inconsequential traders made up the bulk of the audience; there was no serious dialogue”, commented one. Others disagree, pointing to the presence of Russian bank leaders, Rosneft chief executive Igor Sechin, fertiliser industry representatives, as well as Oleg Deripaska’s Rusal aluminium, alumina and bauxite group. According to a Moscow source, “the

Russian oligarchs and big business are waiting to run back to the western havens once the war ends and there is sanctions relief” — “if there is sanctions relief,” the source added the qualifier.

FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT (FDI) IN INDIA BY COUNTRY SOURCE, VOLUME, YEAR – TOP-TEN TABLE SUMMARIES SHOW RUSSIA TRAILING



Source: https://www.dpiit.gov.in/static/uploads ... da6df3.pdf

In the 70-point Joint Statement concluding the Delhi talks, just four points focus on the military priority of the two sides, India to buy, Russia to sell. The negotiations under way for India to acquire the Su-57 aircraft for offence and the S-500 for air defence are not mentioned in the text. No decision has been reached for the time being; there is keen French and American counter bidding. There is also an active Indian and Chinese debate over India’s strategic intentions for the new weapons.

Ahead of Putin’s arrival in Delhi, the Kremlin organised a special advance briefing for the Indian press by presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov. Peskov was speaking by videolink from Moscow to reporters gathered in Delhi. A key question of Russian strategy was asked by Raj Chengappa, Editorial Director of the India Today group. “Can Moscow give any assurance, even privately, that in a crisis between China and India Russia would not tilt decisively towards Beijing?”

Peskov answered: “India wants to listen to us. We want to explain ourselves. India hears us, and it’s a mutual understanding. And it’s also our privileged strategic partner. And we enjoy a very, very high level of cooperation with China in various fields, like with India. And yes, it’s our readiness to enhance, to develop our cooperation with China in various fields with no limits. But the same stand we have with India. We are ready to go as far as India is ready. We respect bilateral relationship between India and China, and we have no doubt that the two oldest countries to [inaudible line cut] in order to keep global stability, global predictability, and global peace, and regional peace. Russia will continue to develop our friendship with India and with China. Thank you.”


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfRdHV_wr5M – Min 22-24:43.

The Indian reaction has been sceptical of Peskov’s responsiveness on the China question, and also on the support Russia undertakes to give India in its war against Pakistan-based and Pakistan-directed terrorist attacks in India.

The Joint Statement was more explicit than Peskov: “The two Leaders reaffirmed their strong commitment to preventing and countering terrorism in all its forms and manifestations including cross-border movement of terrorists and terrorist financing networks and safe havens. They condemned in the strongest terms the terrorist attack in India in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, on April 22, 2025, and in Russia at the Crocus City Hall in Moscow on March 22, 2024. They unequivocally condemned all acts of terrorism as criminal and unjustifiable, regardless of their motivation by any religious or ideological pretexts, whenever, wherever, and by whomsoever they may be committed. They also called for concerted actions against all UN-listed terrorist groups and entities, including Al Qaeda, ISIS/Daesh and their affiliates, aimed at rooting out terrorists’ safe havens, countering the spread of terrorist ideology, eliminating terrorist financing channels and their nexus with transnational crime, and halting cross-border movement of terrorists, including foreign terrorist fighters.”

The Chinese are also interpreting the expanding India-Russian military alliance with the expressed concern that it is aimed at them. If there is a new crisis along the still undefined border in the Himalayas, and new fighting at the Line of Actual Control, which side, Chinese analysts have been asking, will Russia take – for India against China, or vice versa?

In this review of the Chinese suspicion and speculation, Lieutenant-General Ravi Shankar reviews the new publications from Beijing and assesses their credibility from the Indian point of view.


Listen to the discussion with Dimitri Lascaris of the India-China border conflict, starting from Minute 31:50. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o46QaPIOgOM

https://johnhelmer.net/president-putin- ... ent-trump/

******

Q&A with Maria Zakharova on Outlaw US Empire's New Imperial Policy Guidelines

Otherwise known as the National Security Strategy
Karl Sanchez
Dec 08, 2025


One of my stock images of Maria

Maria Zakharova today was asked a few questions by Russian media about the Trump Gang’s newly revealed imperial plans. The Q&A session was actually rather short given the overall vastness of the topic. IMO, it’s essential to compare her answers and POV with those of other analysts. A selection of comments by other Russian officials as reported by Russian media follows.

Question: On December 4, the US President Donald Trump’s administration unveiled yet another and at the same time largely new US National Security Strategy. This time, it seems that the “Strategy” is moving away from the stereotypes and attitudes of previous similar American documents. The first and main question in this regard is: how will its provisions affect U.S. relations with Russia?

Maria Zakharova: In the new version of the US National Security Strategy, we note a number of provisions that indicate a serious rethinking of US foreign policy doctrine, which is especially noticeable in contrast to its previous version in 2022. First of all, attention is drawn to the revision of Washington’s previous bet on hegemony—the document directly states that earlier “the American elites made grave miscalculations” by making “a very erroneous and destructive bet on globalism.” Of course, time will show to what extent the Trump administration will be able to take into account this difficult statement for the United States. Nevertheless, as it seems, at the moment the very recognition of the bankruptcy of the globalist model is indicative.

As we understand it, this basic ideology also defines another key tenet of the Strategy: the call to “put an end to the perception of NATO as an ever-expanding alliance,” together with the task of “preventing such a reality.” In other words, for the first time, the United States is recording, if not a commitment not to expand the alliance, then at least officially questioning its eternally aggressively expansionist dynamics.

It is also important that Russia is mentioned in the document in the context of pan-European security, and there are no calls for systemic containment of our state and increasing economic pressure on us. Nevertheless, without naming Moscow directly, in the new version of the “Strategy”, Washington loudly outlined plans to achieve “energy dominance” by “reducing the influence of adversaries.” Behind these words, one can clearly see the desire to continue ousting Russia from global energy markets by any available means.

Question: What does the Russian Foreign Ministry think about the military-political aspect of the new Strategy and, in particular, the stated goal of achieving strategic stability in relations with us?

Maria Zakharova: Despite the general pragmatic approach to the topic, we are witnessing a number of contradictory points. For example, we did not see any elements in the document that would allow us to understand the American vision of the “post-New START Treaty.” We are referring to the determination of parity in the central quantitative limits of nuclear weapons.

We also consider the provisions on the US Golden Dome global missile defence system to be streamlined. We are still waiting for specifics from the American side regarding the interdependence of strategic offensive and strategic defensive potentials.

Despite the strict upholding of US interests in the strategy, the document makes it possible to search for joint “common ground” with us. True, the likelihood of a change of course in the US national strategy under the next administrations also remains.

Question: It is impossible not to pay attention to the harsh criticism in the document of the liberal elites ruling in Europe for suppressing “undesirable” political forces. The migration policy of Brussels is even characterized as a threat of the civilizational disappearance of Europe. Does this indicate a split in the so-called “collective West”?

Maria Zakharova: As in the case of globalism, it is more about acknowledging the deepening contradictions between the United States and the EU, which culminated in Brussels’ openly sabotage policy with regard to Donald Trump’s peacemaking aspirations on the Ukrainian issue. There is an objective coincidence of Russia’s traditional views and the sensible assessments of the new US leadership on the truly alarming processes taking place in the Old World. In this regard, it remains to be hoped that the new American “Strategy” will have the same sobering effect on the European “party of war” as the recent statements by President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin about the absurdity of the European “motivations” for preparing for some kind of “war with Russia.”

At the same time, it is worth emphasizing that certain provisions of the document regarding the Ukrainian crisis lay the foundation for continuing our joint constructive efforts with the Americans to find ways to peacefully resolve the conflict.

Question: How can you assess the thesis about the “revision” of the need for a US military presence in those regions “whose relative importance for American national security has decreased in recent years and decades”?

Maria Zakharova: The thesis reflects the concept of “America First,” but it should hardly be regarded as the United States’ refusal to maintain its military presence abroad, which, in turn, corresponds to another American idea, the so-called “peace by force.” For example, in the passages of the document on the Asia-Pacific region, the presence of conflict language towards the PRC is alarming, as well as calls for all major regional partners to provide the Pentagon with greater access to their ports and “other facilities.”

Question: The Strategy shows a shift in the focus of US foreign policy to the Western Hemisphere. This is stipulated as a “Trump amendment” to the notorious “Monroe Doctrine”. Doesn’t that sound threatening?

Maria Zakharova: The relevant passages sound more like a direct reference to the so-called Roosevelt Amendment, the doctrine of the 26th US President Theodore Roosevelt, who at one time proclaimed Washington’s right to invade Latin America under the pretext of “stabilising the domestic economic situation” of a particular country in the region. This is particularly alarming against the backdrop of the current tensions that the Pentagon is deliberately escalating around Venezuela. We hope that the White House will still be able to refrain from further sliding into a full-scale conflict that threatens to turn into unpredictable consequences for the entire Western Hemisphere.

A large amount of optimism was expressed along with a balancing degree of pessimism. The expression “New wine in Old bottles” seems to fit rather well. Overall, the new Imperial plan shows the continuing disdain to obey international law and thus perpetuate its label as the Outlaw US Empire. Recent actions by the Trump Gang show a lack of seriousness when it comes to genuinely negotiating an end to the war the Empire started and has lost in Ukraine—neither Witkoff or Kushner have the legal capabilities to negotiate on behalf of the Empire as they are merely personal emissaries of Donald Trump. That’s why the picture of the meeting’s participants told the real story. Alastair Crooke explained that well today during his chat with Judge Nap.

Russian concern over the escalation in the Empire’s plans toward China are well placed. Russia’s recent message by Ryabkov as reported by TASS to the Trump Gang not to FAFO with Venezuela:

“We express our solidarity with Venezuela, with whom we recently signed a strategic partnership and cooperation agreement,” the deputy foreign minister noted. “We support Venezuela, as it supports us, in many areas. In this hour of trial, we stand shoulder to shoulder with Caracas and the Venezuelan leadership. We hope that the Trump administration will refrain from further escalating the situation toward a full-scale conflict. We urge it to do so,” Ryabkov emphasized.

TASS also reported what Dmitry Medvedev wrote about the Empire’s new stance:

The updated US National Security Strategy signals a readiness to discuss security architecture, Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev said.

“This is not a friendly embrace, but a fairly clear signal: the US is ready to discuss security architecture rather than impose endless and meaningless sanctions (although the new restrictions on Russian oil mean a continuation of the previous course),” he wrote on his Max page. [Max is a new social media platform similar in organization to Telegram.]

The security official noted that for the first time in many years, the US document refers to Russia not as a “threat” but as a participant in the dialogue on stability. Medvedev also pointed out that the updated strategy includes a clause on halting NATO expansion and that Ukraine is not mentioned in this context.

“The strategy unexpectedly echoes what we have been saying for over a year: security must be shared and sovereignty respected,” Medvedev emphasized, recalling Russia’s longstanding proposal for negotiations. “Now, a window of opportunity for dialogue has been opened,” he concluded.

It appears the two Russians share similar assessments as the plan relates to Russia and that this view is also shared by the Kremlin as revealed by this RT report:

Trump’s policies are “a pretty big turnaround compared to what we had with the previous administrations,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told VGTRK journalist Pavel Zarubin in an interview which aired on Sunday. Peskov warned that the American “deep state” could attempt to undermine Trump’s approach, which is why Russia would “carefully monitor the implementation” of the strategy.

He went on to add that a lot of the changes “actually line up with our own vision.”

“It includes statements against confrontation and in favor of dialogue and maintaining good relations. This is also what Russian President Vladimir Putin is saying,” Peskov said.

He noted that the new NSS offers hope for “constructive work toward a peaceful resolution for Ukraine.”

I’d call the new plan incremental change mostly towards Russia, not a “big turnaround” because the plan is global, nt just aimed at Russia. It remains hegemonic and not at all in the interests of Humanity. And as some have noted, it’s incomplete as it omits mention of other regions, Africa in particular. Not included in the report’s body was the admission made in the sub-headline:

The American “deep state” could attempt to undermine Trump’s approach, Dmitry Peskov has warned.

TASS’s report on Peskov’s statement noted this:

The Kremlin is going to review the updated US national security strategy in more detail and to analyze its provisions, the press secretary of the Russian President stressed. “Certainly, it should be considered, analyzed in more detail,” Peskov noted.

I’ve yet to read any comprehensive analysis or reply from China to the Empire’s new plot aside from a very short, two-paragraph blurb about trade that can be read here. The region most affected by the altered direction of US Imperialism is the Western Hemisphere where I’ve yet to look for reactions, although we already know what general line will be taken by nations with longstanding histories of resistance to the Outlaw’s actions.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/q-and-a- ... -on-outlaw

Not only the required soothing of the ego beast but some nice inferences that might get Trump wondering.(If anyone would read this to him...)

******

Delayed consequences
December 9, 1:00 PM



Regarding yesterday's anniversary of the Belovezhskaya Pushcha agreement.

The day of the final destruction of the USSR, which, thanks in part to the efforts of its signatories, agonized after Perestroika, democracy, and glasnost.

We are now dealing with the consequences of that event, and we will continue to do so at various levels for a long time to come.
Those involved in the country's destruction have still not been convicted. Some are still alive, though the main figures have already died, cursed by "an ungrateful people who did not understand their good fortune."

The war in Ukraine is essentially one of the delayed consequences of the USSR's destruction. Some simply came a little earlier, and some a little later. A costly lesson in what happens when you help destroy your country with your own hands.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/10235623.html