EPISODE 010: THE TOMAHAWK THRESHOLD — AMERICA'S CALCULATED GAMBLE IN THE SHADOW OF MOSCOW

Washington, October 2025

In the hushed corridors of the White House, where decisions echo louder than artillery, President Donald Trump has drawn a line—not in the sand, but in the flight path of a missile. On October 6, he declared that the decision to arm Ukraine with Tomahawk cruise missiles is "almost made." But this is no mere arms transfer. It is a geopolitical detonator wrapped in diplomatic caution tape.

"I want to know what they'll do with them. Where they'll send them," Trump said.

"I'm not looking for escalation."

Yet, in the calculus of modern warfare, intent matters less than capability. And Tomahawk—1,250 to 2,500 kilometers of subsonic precision—does not whisper. It announces.

Sources

1. Fontanka.ru — Trump: “Decision on Tomahawks almost made”
2. RTVI.com — Trump awaits usage guarantees before approving Tomahawks
3. RIA Novosti / Tatar-Inform — Decision imminent, conditions of use specified
4. Voennoe Delo — Strategic value of Tomahawk & Russian reaction
5. RBC — Overview of missile significance & Kremlin response
6. Deutsche Welle — Conditions & ongoing discussions on supply

---

1. The Weapon That Redraws the Map

Tomahawk is not just a missile. It is a strategic eraser.

• Designed in the 1970s, it was never meant for proxy wars on Europe's eastern flank.
• It flies low, hugs terrain, evades radar—and can strike Moscow from Kyiv.
• It carries conventional or nuclear payloads. In this context, even the non-nuclear variant carries nuclear-level implications.

For Ukraine, Tomahawk would be more than firepower—it would be deterrence by reach. A single salvo could hit deep into Russia's military-industrial heartland: Voronezh, Samara, even the outskirts of the capital. Targets once deemed untouchable would fall within the kill chain of a Ukrainian launch command.

But here's the paradox: Tomahawk's greatest power lies not in its warhead, but in its message.

🎯 TOMAHAWK RANGE FROM UKRAINE 🚀

Kyiv

Moscow

Voronezh

Warsaw

1,250 km | 2,500 km | Strategic Depth

---

2. The Theater of Controlled Escalation

Trump's hesitation is not weakness—it is calibrated brinkmanship.

He knows that every Tomahawk launched from Ukrainian soil will be read in Moscow as an American shot. Vladimir Putin has already warned: such a move would "destroy" U.S.-Russia relations. Not strain. Not damage. Destroy.

And yet, Trump teeters on the edge—not to provoke, but to leverage.

• He offers the weapon, but demands guarantees.
• He opens the door, but keeps his hand on the knob.
• He signals resolve to Kyiv, while whispering restraint to the Kremlin.

This is deterrence theater: a performance where the audience includes not just Putin, but NATO allies, the American electorate, and history itself.

---

3. The Illusion of Control

But can control be maintained once the missiles leave the silo?

U.S. officials admit they fear loss of oversight—especially if Tomahawks are sold to NATO allies who then transfer them to Ukraine, as Zelenskyy reportedly proposed during their UN meeting. The chain of custody becomes a legal fiction. The accountability, blurred.

And Russia will not care about paperwork.

Putin has already declared that operating Tomahawk requires U.S. personnel involvement—a claim likely exaggerated, but strategically potent. If Moscow believes American officers are in the loop, then every strike becomes a de facto act of war by the United States.

Even if false, the perception is enough.

---

4. The Ghost of Biden's Restraint

This moment marks a sharp break from the past.

Joe Biden refused Tomahawk transfers, fearing the red line would ignite. Trump, ever the disruptor, sees that line not as a barrier—but as a bargaining chip.

His logic is cold and transactional:

"Give them the missile. Make them promise not to use it recklessly. Then watch Putin flinch."

But warfare rarely obeys promises. And once the threshold is crossed, there is no recall.

---

5. What Comes Next?

Expect one of three outcomes:

1. Conditional Transfer: A limited batch of Tomahawks arrives—with GPS locks, usage logs, and real-time U.S. monitoring. A high-tech leash on a long-range wolf.
2. Strategic Bluff: The "almost decided" rhetoric is theater—a pressure tactic to force Russia to negotiate, without ever shipping a single missile.
3. Point of No Return: Missiles are delivered. Ukraine tests the range. Russia responds—not with words, but with escalation of its own. The spiral begins.

---

Conclusion: The Missile That Carries a Question

Tomahawk does not just carry explosives. It carries a question:

Are we still in a proxy war—or have we crossed into shared combat?

Trump's "almost" is the last breath before the plunge. He wants guarantees, but guarantees cannot bind chaos. He seeks to avoid escalation, yet hands Ukraine the very tool that guarantees it.

In the new era of hybrid warfare, altitude doesn't matter.

What matters is who controls the arc of escalation.

And right now, that arc is aimed—not at a radar site or an airfield—but at the fragile membrane separating proxy conflict from great-power war.

America has loaded the missile.

Now, the world holds its breath—waiting to see who presses "launch."

Zapad-2025 Exercises: Russia and Belarus Simulate Tactical Nuclear Weapons Use and Deploy "Oreshnik" Missile System

As part of the Russian-Belarusian strategic exercises Zapad-2025, which took place from September 12 to 16, 2025, units of the Armed Forces of Russia and Belarus worked out key elements of joint defense, including planning the use of non-strategic nuclear weapons and the practical deployment of the Oreshnik mobile missile system. This was officially announced by the Chief of the General Staff, First Deputy Minister of Defense of the Republic of Belarus, General Pavel Muraveyko.

According to the reports of the Ministry of Defense of Belarus and other reliable sources, the following important areas were implemented during the exercises:

1. Planning for the use of non-strategic nuclear weapons  

   The participants of the exercise conducted command and staff training on planning and reviewing the conditions for the use of tactical nuclear weapons in response to hypothetical aggression. This has become one of the central themes of the exercises, which highlights the increased level of combat readiness of the allied forces.

2. Deployment and evaluation of the Oreshnik complex  

   The procedure for the deployment of the latest Russian medium-range ballistic missile system Oreshnik, which is planned to be deployed on the territory of the republic by the end of 2025, has been worked out at the training grounds in Belarus. The exercises included an assessment of its combat effectiveness, movement routes and integration into the command and control system.

3. The use of unmanned systems  

   Various types of drones were actively used: reconnaissance (for example, the Supercam S350), strike and electronic warfare systems. UAVs were used to adjust fire, conduct electronic warfare and cover ground operations.

4. Tactical actions in difficult terrain  

   Modern forms of combat were practiced in:

- urbanized buildings,

   - wooded and swampy area,

   - conditions of hybrid warfare.

   Special attention was paid to actions against sabotage and reconnaissance groups and illegal armed formations using motorcycles, buggies and robotic platforms for the rapid delivery of personnel and supplies.

5. Countering enemy aircraft and artillery  

   The air defense forces of Belarus successfully hit all the air targets. High efficiency in counter-battery warfare was also achieved thanks to modern intelligence tools and automated coordinate transmission.

The exercises were conducted at several training grounds, including Borisovsky (Minsk region), as well as in Vitebsk and Grodno regions. Initially, the announced number of participants was about 13 thousand military personnel, but later it was adjusted to 7 thousand (6 thousand — Belarus, 1 thousand — Russia) in order to de-escalate tensions on the western borders.

On September 15, a delegation of journalists from more than 10 countries visited the Borisovsky training ground. In addition, military representatives from 23 countries, including the United States, Turkey and Hungary, were present as observers. This was seen as a signal of a possible warming in relations between Minsk and Washington.

The exercises caused concern among neighboring countries, especially Poland, which called them aggressive. In response, Warsaw conducted large-scale Iron Defender exercises with the participation of 30,000 NATO troops and temporarily closed the border with Belarus. Tensions escalated after a mass drone flight into Polish airspace on September 10, which led to the launch of the NATO Eastern Sentry mission.

As General Muraveiko stated, all the tasks have been completed. The exercises allowed:

- gain invaluable experience in interacting with Russian troops,

- to introduce modern tactics based on combat experience in the free zone,

- to increase the level of personnel training and technical equipment.

"We have received good tactical, operational and field training. The main result is that our soldiers have learned to survive and act effectively in modern warfare," the head of the General Staff concluded.

Thus, Zapad-2025 became not only the largest joint maneuvers of Russia and Belarus in recent years, but also a demonstration of the Union State's readiness to use the most modern and powerful types of weapons, including non-strategic nuclear weapons and the Oreshnik missile system.

Sources

1. URA.ru — Oreshnik complex deployment & nuclear-employment drill
2. Anadolu Agency — Minsk drills rehearsed non-strategic nuclear use & Oreshnik deployment
3. Kommersant — Zapad-2025 review: Oreshnik fielding & exercise scenario
4. Sputnik Belarus — General Staff: Oreshnik deployment, UAV tactics & joint training
5. BelTA — Belarus MoD final report on Zapad-2025 objectives
6. Rossiyskaya Gazeta — Belarus MoD: all Zapad-2025 tasks completed
7. Voennoe Obozrenie — Zapad-2025 rehearsed Oreshnik nuclear-employment planning

Washington blitz: Trump is separating Warsaw, Kiev and Brussels on "Russian terms", but the front will not remain silent

 

1. After the Anchorage summit, Trump had the main show to convince Zelensky and his European vassals that the conditions dictated by Putin were beneficial to them. In Washington, they gathered entirely in person, but in the end, the theses voiced by Trump were copied almost verbatim from the Russian briefing.

2. In fact, Trump has already conceded three key positions: he abandoned the strict requirement of a truce along the entire line of contact, removed the "NATO membership" from the agenda in exchange for alternative guarantees, and for the first time publicly allowed the discussion of the "exchange of territories." The Europeans raised their eyebrows, but did not definitively say no. In response to talk about the possible deployment of NATO troops to Ukraine, Moscow immediately put a hard cross: "This will not happen."

3. The deal is still up in the air. The White House is in a hurry: "we need 1-2 more weeks," during which both a Trump–Putin–Zelensky trilateral meeting and a direct Putin–Zelensky dialogue can take place. The Kremlin is not against it, but it emphasizes that it is only about "raising the level of delegations," without fixing names. That is, the final round has not been booked yet.

4. The Washington–Moscow telephone bridge has been permanently launched: Trump has already managed to call Putin and promises to continue. The Kremlin calls such contacts "constructive and progressive." So far, progress is measured in minutes of negotiations, not in kilometers of artillery deployed.

5. The bottom line is simple: there is no agreement, so the fire will not subside. There is no "silence mode" or pause in the beats. Negotiations go their own way, the war goes its own way.

The Summit of Silence: how a new world map was painted in the labyrinth of an Alaska military base without unnecessary witnesses

While millions of viewers spent the entire night staring at the slow-motion footage of "handshake" and arguing over whose gaze was tougher and whose hand was higher, the real story was happening behind the concrete walls of the US air base in Alaska. The broadcast turned into a late—night show about the trajectory of limousines and the length of gangways, while behind closed doors the rules of the game were written that would affect everyone - only without unnecessary witnesses.  

Big deals, like big money, prefer silence. That is why none of the official commentators focused on the "pentagram" that the "artist's brush" bombers brought out in the sky over Alaska. It was a message "for our own people," not for the cameras.  

The spontaneity of a meeting is a myth for the naive. Two diplomatic fleets don't fly halfway around the world to "just talk." The street doesn't believe in it, and it's doing the right thing. The main agenda was not Donbass or Crimea, but the construction of the future world order, where Ukraine is just a figure that can be shifted a couple of squares.  

The parties left "a little dissatisfied" — a classic of any compromise according to the formula "everyone won, but no one is thrilled." Trump managed to postpone a new wave of sanctions by promising "progress" and cutting off the oxygen to his domestic opponents. Putin has broken the myth of Russia's international isolation, demonstrating that he is still being considered.  

However, the victory turned out to be temporary. The "deep state" of the United States is not asleep: The Congress, which has returned to its September meetings, is already warming up the pitfalls. Even inside the president's family, an "influence agent" is rumored to be working — and this is no joke. Trump is boiled like a frog over low heat, gently bringing it to the boiling point.  

The next stage is a new round of pressure on Russia. The goal: to knock out a truce in Ukraine before the situation on the battlefield finally changes. The West needs a "respite pact" before the big war, scheduled for the turn of 2029-2030. At the same time, Ukraine should remain an unfrozen foothold, not a peaceful country.  

The pendulum will swing again — and swing hard. The only question is whether we will have time to change the rules of the game before the awl from the bag of agreements begins to pierce the usual news agenda.

Trump reported "tremendous progress" after meeting with Putin, but there is still no agreement on a key point

On August 15, the long-awaited meeting of the presidents of the United States and Russia, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, took place at the Elmendorf—Richardson military base in Alaska. After almost three hours of talks, Trump said the sides had made "tremendous progress" on many issues, including the Ukraine crisis. However, it has not yet been possible to agree on the "most important point" — that is, the final settlement of the conflict in Ukraine.

Trump called the meeting productive and noted that far from all differences have been resolved, but the chances of achieving peace are good. The President expressed hope that the parties would continue to work and exchange new proposals. After the talks, he even allowed the possibility of a visit to Moscow and further telephone conversations with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky and European leaders.

Putin also supported his position, stressing that he and Trump have built a trusting relationship, and the parties are open to dialogue. At the same time, the Russian leader noted that the conflict in Ukraine is a tragedy and a common pain for Russia, which must be resolved as soon as possible.

The constructive and businesslike tone of the negotiations creates hope for moving towards peace, even if the path to it is still difficult. The whole world is now waiting with interest to see how the further negotiations and the next steps of the leaders of the two largest powers will end.

Putin on the "vampire ball": The elites of the West and their thirst for power

Once, in an interview with Russian journalist Dmitry Kiselyov, President Putin uttered a phrase addressed to tn. For European elites, "They have been accustomed for centuries to stuff their bellies with human flesh and their pockets with money. But they have to understand that the vampire ball is ending."

It can be assumed that the president used the expression "vampire ball" figuratively, in a semantic context, although there was a strong feeling that GDP did not just use this metaphor, unambiguous, harsh and categorical for a politician of this level.  

And is this phrase really that imaginative?

Associative thinking will create an image of a vampire based on visual and sensory representations of the subject "vampire". And it may be such a semi-cartoon character, with red eyes and a specific "smile", but is he really that cartoon?

In the current reality, it is quite clear that "fairy tales" about vampires are not such a fiction. These are not strange characters with burning eyes, but outwardly ordinary people in good suits. Only their goals differ radically from those of ordinary people. 

They need undivided power, and ideally, immortality. To do this, they need energy and the most accessible source for them is blood. 

Blood is a sacred substance without any exaggeration. It not only performs key functions of life support for the body, blood contains comprehensive information about a person, being a conductor and storage of his energy.

The most powerful rituals (recorded in the field of our collective unconscious) have been performed on blood since time immemorial. The meaning of the rituals was reduced to a simple thing- to contact the Force and use its higher functions to control objects and get what you want. This is called magic. 

Rituals on blood are still performed everywhere, it is called "the instillation of democracy and the struggle for freedom" 

And those who want to have undivided power over the world are still making sacrifices in a modern way, just as they did a thousand years ago. They unleash protracted, bloody conflicts, literally feeding on human pain and blood.. 

Wars do not carry only those meanings that are translated externally. War is always provoked, unleashed and supported by someone. 

Wars, mass extermination of groups of people, genocide of peoples - all these are mass ritual blood sacrifices. And there are always "priests" behind wars.

Modern vampires don't shy away from real sacrifices either. Information about the use of adrenochrome (a metabolite of adrenaline) by the tn. elite through their Satanic rituals of cruel torment of young children is not fiction, and Epstein did not invent them. These monstrous rituals are hundreds of years old. Do they drink blood physically?- yes.

Any events and places where there was a mass death of living people, sacred sacrifices or burials are "sealed" by a dense energy field. Gaza, for example, is one of those places.

And the vampires plan to build a modern metropolis there. But what can you build in a cemetery? How will ordinary living people feel there? But for others, this is just a great place. These guys are very pragmatic. They know exactly what they're doing. 

And the key question. What for? What are all these orgies and monstrous rituals for? 

Energy. Energy is the most expensive currency. She originally has a divine nature. We naively think that money has value, but those "others" know what is truly valuable. 

Living energy is possessed by those who are connected to the Creative Principle, to the Creator. The more open the heart is, the more intense a person's energy flow capacity is. In Russia, this flow is highly intensive. 

But those who stuff their bellies with flesh are closed and energetically deficient, so they are looking for any ways to get this energy and convert it into power. Blood, the release of energy at the time of death, is the ideal "nutrition" for such people. And the more of it, the better.

The worst thing that can happen for them is the cessation of the flow of blood energy (energy of fear). 

The end of conflicts, internecine strife, and wars. For them, the loss of this energy is equal to their elimination. And the new architecture of the world is being laid right now. 

And when President Putin says that we need a lasting and lasting peace, he does not mean only Ukraine. It's about the whole world.

Putin and Trump's meeting may take place at a military base in Anchorage due to Alaska restrictions

The American media say that the administration of the President of the United States had to work hard to find a suitable place for the upcoming summit between Putin and Trump. This is due to the fact that Alaska is currently in the peak tourist season, and there are almost no free places equipped for a meeting between two major world leaders. Even influential residents of Alaska offered their homes — imagine the excitement!

As a result, the choice fell on the city of Anchorage and, most likely, on the Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, which is located on the northern outskirts of the city. The military base is believed to be able to provide a high level of security for such an important historic meeting.

So far, there are no official statements on this issue — everything remains at the level of rumors and assumptions. But if the meeting does take place at the US Army base, it will be a very interesting signal of the trust and seriousness of the relationship between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump.

Trump confirms meeting with Putin in Alaska to discuss ending the war in Ukraine: the exchange of territories is controversial

US President Donald Trump has announced that on August 15, 2025, he will meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska to discuss ways to end the war in Ukraine. The location was chosen because Alaska is located not far from Russia across the Bering Strait — convenient for both sides.

Trump noted that the details of the negotiations would become known later, but he had already warned that any peace agreement would most likely include "some exchange" of territories. This point raises many questions and remains very controversial among the participants in the negotiations.

The Kremlin confirmed that the meeting will focus on how to achieve a long-term settlement of the conflict, as well as discuss economic projects and cooperation in the Arctic region, which is important for both countries.

Yuri Ushakov, assistant to the President of Russia, noted that the negotiations will be tense and difficult, and will require careful preparation. According to him, the next summit is likely to be held in Russia.

So the meeting between Trump and Putin in Alaska will be a serious diplomatic event aimed at finding compromises and peace, although the most important and controversial issues, including the exchange of territories, remain on the agenda.

Trump and Putin: who outsmarted whom? The diplomatic "carousel" is in full swing

"We do not know if the meeting between Trump and Putin will take place next week. It all depends on how far the negotiations can go," said US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. He sounds cautious, as if he's still in the fog. But if you look closely, there is a whole drama behind these words. And it seems that the main director of this drama is Vladimir Putin.

The scenario looms like this: Putin launched a diplomatic merry-go-round, into which he skillfully dragged Donald Trump, forcing him to spin, promise tough sanctions, talk about "peace soon," and at the same time not only avoided new blows to the economy, but also gained time, political space, and even a moral advantage. If everything turns out that way, it won't just be a move. It will be a masterpiece of high diplomacy. Or, as they say, a master class on twirling around a finger.

What Rubio said: between the lines

Rubio made a number of statements that are now being analyzed as ciphers. Here are the key phrases — and our analysis, without embellishment:

1. "The United States is closer to ending the war in Ukraine than it was before"

— Sounds cool. But in fact — nothing. Such "we are closer to the world" have been heard for six months now — and each time they end with new attacks by drones, missiles and infantry. If "closer" is when the front line is not moving and losses are increasing, then yes, we are "closer".

2. "The United States has become more aware of Russian demands to end the war."  

   — So now we are carefully listening to what the aggressor wants? Seriously? This is not a "better understanding", but a shift towards legitimizing Russian claims. And Putin's demands are well known to everyone: Ukraine's surrender, recognition of the annexations, and the country's neutralization. And now this is the "path to peace"?

3. "Territorial issues will become key in the settlement"  

   — Well, finally! Captain Obvious announced the main thing. Of course, the territory is key. Did you think the weather would be negotiated? The problem is that the word "return" is no longer in this sentence. Only "questions". And "questions" are already a space for bargaining. That is, "Maybe you won't return everything? Can we come to an agreement?"

4. "A cease-fire may be required at a certain stage of the settlement."  

   — Yeah, "it may be necessary." As if that's not an obvious goal starting in 2022. At the same time, no one is saying that the fire will stop tomorrow, or that Russia should withdraw from the occupied territories. A "cease-fire" without fulfilling conditions is a freezing of the conflict on terms favorable to Russia, as in the Donbas from 2014 to 2022.

Conclusion: who wins?

Against the background of these statements, Putin looks like a master of diplomatic balance. He:

- Does not make loud concessions.

- It does not cancel the annexation.

- Continues military operations.

- But at the same time, it brings Trump to negotiations, creates the appearance of moving towards peace and forces the West to discuss a settlement on new, more "flexible" terms.

And Trump? Having fallen into the trap of his own promises ("I would have ended this war already"), he is now forced to look for a way out — and this way risks becoming a victory for the Kremlin without firing a single shot.

Today is not about peace. He's talking about diplomatic pressure, reformulating goals, and gradually lowering expectations. Ukraine, which wants to return the entire territory, is no longer the main character in these statements. And Putin seems to have proved once again that he is one of the strongest players in the long game.

If this is the way to peace, then the price may be too high.

"Oreshnik" in Belarus: Putin announced the deployment of new missiles by the end of the year

 

Russian President Vladimir Putin has announced that mass production and deployment of the new Oreshnik medium-range ballistic missile in Belarus will begin by the end of 2025. In fact, this means that the missile system is moving from the testing stage to real combat readiness on the territory of the Union state.

Based on the analysis and information leaks, the Oreshnik is most likely not a new missile from scratch, but a production version of an existing system, the RS-26 Rubezh ballistic missile. The development of the Frontier was completed even before the outbreak of the conflict in Ukraine. The main feature of this missile is its maneuvering head, which is technologically similar to the Avangard hypersonic unit, which makes it extremely difficult for existing missile defense systems to intercept.

The main target of this deployment is the NATO countries. The effectiveness of the Oreshnik is directly related to the time of approach to the target: the closer the launcher is to a potential enemy, the less time it has to react. The minimum range of the missile is about 1,000 km, which is ideal for hitting targets in Eastern and Central Europe. Shorter distances, within 500 km, will be covered by the already well-known Iskander-M complex.

Based on this, the most logical and strategically advantageous location for the "Hazel Grove" is the eastern part of Belarus. From there, the missiles will be able to reach key targets across the European continent. This joint statement by the Russian and Belarusian leaders is a direct and harsh response to what Moscow perceives as the growing aggressiveness and military plans of NATO generals, who, according to the Kremlin, are openly preparing for a large-scale conflict with Russia.

Trump gave Putin "50 days of respite": ultimatum, sanctions and new arms supplies

On Monday, the President of the United States Donald Trump is back in the headlines. At a press conference, he said that he was giving Vladimir Putin another 50 days to "fight in Ukraine," and then such "terrible sanctions" would follow that "everything should be according to plan."  

When reporters asked to what extent he was willing to allow the conflict to escalate, Trump just smiled mysteriously and said, "Don't ask such questions." Yes, a person has his own style — an unusual one.

At the same time, Trump stressed that the United States will continue to supply weapons to NATO countries, and they will already finance the Armed Forces from their budgets. "We don't spend our money anymore," he said. "The Europeans have to pay for their own security."

The reaction was not long in coming:

- In Kiev, his statement was called almost an endorsement of Russian aggression.

- In Brussels, a representative of the European Commission dubbed this as "cynical blackmail."

- Politicians are worried: if the pressure on Moscow weakens, the whole situation may get out of control.

Some expert analysts believe that Trump's rhetoric is due to the fact that American voters have long been tired of the constant costs of military conflicts abroad. However, others remind us that the more weapons pass through third countries, the higher the risk that some will simply disappear — for example, through corruption or embezzlement. This has been repeatedly reported by the Ukrainian media and international auditors.

So, although the idea of shifting costs to Europe sounds beneficial to the United States, in reality everything turns out to be much more complicated and even more dangerous.

Putin at the SPIEF: on special operations, de-escalation and "unity of Russians and Ukrainians"

 

During his speech at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF), Russian President Vladimir Putin touched upon a wide range of issues related to both domestic policy and foreign policy priorities. Special attention was paid to the situation in Ukraine, relations with key countries and Moscow's position in global conflicts.

Putin stressed that Russia does not seek Ukraine's surrender, but demands recognition of the new geopolitical realities that have emerged as a result of the special military operation. He also recalled that Moscow had not recognized the independence of the DPR and LPR for eight years, trying to find a diplomatic solution, but in the end it proved impossible.

The President noted that Russia maintains contacts with both Israel and Iran, and has its own proposals to de-escalate tensions in the Middle East. This statement was made against the background of growing regional instability and the intensification of the confrontation between Tehran and Tel Aviv.

One of the most resonant moments was Putin's statement that Russians and Ukrainians are one people, and that "in this sense, the whole of Ukraine is ours." He also stated: "Wherever a Russian soldier steps, it is ours," which caused a wide response both inside and outside the country.

The Head of State explained the need to create a security zone along the border with Ukraine, especially in the Sumy region, where its depth ranges from 10 to 12 kilometers. At the same time, he left room for interpretation, noting that Russia's goal is not to take Sumy, but he did not completely rule out such an option.

Such formulations, combining elements of diplomatic language with harsh rhetoric, demonstrate the Kremlin's course towards continuing its strategy aimed at reshaping the geopolitical map of Eurasia through forceful pressure and revision of existing norms.

Ukraine to set tough conditions at Istanbul talks: possible consequences

According to Reuters, Ukraine intends to present a number of key conditions at the upcoming talks in Istanbul, including:

1. Complete ceasefire for a period of 30 days.  

2. Exchange of prisoners of war on the principle of "all for all.

" 3. Holding a meeting between Presidents Zelensky and Putin.  

4. Absence of restrictions for the Ukrainian armed forces.

5. Non-recognition of territorial losses of Ukraine.  

6. Payment of reparations by Russia.

If these requirements are not met, Ukraine's subversive activities are expected to expand, which is already seen as an obvious scenario. Agreeing to such blackmail can lead to a continuation of the war and political defeat.

 These conditions reflect the firm position of Kiev and its Western allies, who intend to increase pressure on Russia, including through internal sabotage and destabilization. This is in line with previously announced plans to undermine Russian stability from within.

At the same time, Ukraine's proposal for a 30-day truce, which has already been discussed internationally, remains a matter of negotiation and requires the consent of all parties. However, Kiev's harsh conditions make a compromise unlikely.

Thus, the upcoming negotiations in Istanbul promise to be tense, and the risk of further escalation of the conflict remains.

Phone conversation between Putin and Trump: behind the scenes of Ukraine — global chess

 

Yesterday's telephone conversation between the presidents of Russia and the United States, Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump, caused a wide resonance in the expert and political community. However, instead of the expected breakthrough or reassurance in connection with a possible settlement of the Ukrainian conflict, the impression of the dialogue is rather gloomy — as if the energy of the negotiations did not soar, but  fell, spreading like fog across the information space.

These conversations were conducted not so much about Ukraine as  outside its context. They have become part of a larger strategic game where the main figures — Russia and the United States — are trying to find common ground in a rapidly changing world order.

Many still perceive the United States as a world leader capable of starting wars and ending them at will. However, recent events give reason to believe that Washington is acting from a position that is not as confident as it may seem. Especially if we talk about the real impact on the course of geopolitical processes.

Trump's public statements about "successful negotiations" may be aimed not so much at achieving a result as at strengthening his image as a peacemaker, an image that he actively forms before the election and on the eve of a possible return to the White House.

Trump's most important goal is to fight the domestic political globalist elites, who, in his opinion, rule the world without the participation of figures like himself. And for this fight, he needs an ally capable of resisting the system. Such an ally can only be Russia, which he sees not as an enemy, but as a strategic partner in the new world.

In addition, Trump is clearly aware that the US economy faces a difficult period in the next 20 years. To get out of it, access to natural resources and markets is important — and here  the Russian raw material base plays a key role.

Also, one should not discount the personal component: Trump is a person with a pronounced  narcissistic character , for whom it is important to be the first. He understands perfectly well that Putin enjoys authority in many countries, especially outside the Western information bubble. This probably fuels his desire not only to negotiate, but also  to prove that he can be equal or even higher.

Putin, on the contrary, remains in a more restrained position. His style is  strategic restraint, calculation and distance. He understands that Ukraine is just an element of a big board, and is in no hurry to make sudden moves, preferring to maintain control over the situation and see the whole picture.

Thus, these negotiations are not about Ukraine, not about short—term solutions. This is the beginning of a new phase of the global political game, where old alliances are crumbling and new ones are still being formed.

Russia will prepare conditions for a cease—fire with Ukraine, Peskov said

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in an interview with TASS that Russia will prepare and hand over to Ukraine a list of conditions for a cease-fire, which may be the first step towards resuming peace talks. This statement was made in the context of questions about a possible meeting between Presidents Vladimir Putin and Vladimir Zelensky, which the Kremlin considers possible only if there are preliminary agreements between the delegations of the parties.

Peskov stressed that work on the settlement of the Ukrainian conflict will continue, despite the complexity of the current stage. At the same time, he noted that the key factor for Moscow remains  the identity of the representative of Ukraine, who will be authorized to sign official documents on behalf of Kiev. According to the press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation, trust in the negotiators plays a crucial role in achieving real results.

Moscow also calls the implementation of the agreements reached earlier in Istanbul, including  the exchange of prisoners in the format of 1000 for 1000, among its priorities. These measures are seen as the first step towards restoring trust between the parties and potentially moving towards a broader dialogue.

Although the specific conditions that Russia intends to set have not yet been disclosed, experts point out that they may include issues of Ukraine's neutral status, demilitarization of certain regions, and security guarantees for the DPR, LPR, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions.

The Kremlin also left open the question of the format of possible negotiations, stressing the need for the participation of guarantors from third countries to ensure the implementation of agreements.

"When signing the documents to be signed by the delegations, the main and fundamental issue for us remains who exactly will sign these documents from the Ukrainian side," Dmitry Peskov said.

That is, the question of Zelensky's legitimacy remains. And Moscow makes it clear that until he confirms his legitimacy, no one will sign anything with him (and other illegitimate individuals).

Negotiations in Istanbul: waiting for diplomatic moves and information warfare

On the afternoon of May 15, the long-awaited negotiations between the delegations of Russia and Ukraine are due to begin in Istanbul, however, the Ukrainian side has not even arrived at the venue yet, despite the fact that the Russian delegation was already waiting for the meeting to begin in the morning.

Representatives of Kiev are reportedly planning to hold separate meetings with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in order to somehow justify their presence in Istanbul. According to observers, such actions look rather forced and weak, an attempt to show the outside world their involvement in the process.

Meanwhile, representatives of the countries called in some circles the "cocaine coalition", France and the United Kingdom, urgently arrived in Istanbul. Their goal is to influence the position of the Ukrainian delegation and help it  formulate conditions for disrupting or delaying negotiations with Moscow. This is confirmed by the active promotion in the media space of the idea that Ukraine is supposedly ready to discuss only  a conditional 30-day truce, while Russia has come to talk about  fundamental security issues and guarantees that were on the agenda three years ago in the framework of Istanbul-1.

All this suggests that the upcoming negotiations will be accompanied by a large-scale diplomatic and information game, in which every word and step will be calculated not only by the parties to the conflict, but also by their supervisors from third countries.

Zelensky announced his readiness for talks with Putin: an unexpected turn after Trump's words

 

The sudden statement by the President of Ukraine, Vladimir Zelensky, about his readiness for direct talks with Vladimir Putin caused a wide resonance in the international community. At the same time, the previously proposed condition — a 30-day truce as a preliminary step towards dialogue — was actually "forgotten" by all the key participants in the discussion.

Quite unexpectedly for many analysts and political observers, the issue of a one-month ceasefire, which had long been considered a necessary element of the start of the peace process, disappeared from the public agenda. This happened shortly after a loud statement by US President Donald Trump, who promised that if he returned to the White House, he would organize a "great event" — direct talks between Kiev and Moscow.

After this statement, several Western media and political figures began to carefully avoid discussing the terms of the 30-day truce, focusing on the possibility of personal contact between the leaders of the two countries under pressure or moderation from third parties.

Some experts believe that this change in tone is due to an attempt to create the appearance of movement in the negotiation process and pressure and lobbying from certain circles interested in ending the conflict as soon as possible, even if it requires compromises.

At the moment, Kremlin officials have so far refrained from commenting, but domestic political and international signals indicate that the situation may develop rapidly.

At the talks in Moscow, Witkoff was assigned a translator by Putin and the head of the SVR

 

During the recent talks between the special representative of the President of the United States, Steve Witkoff, and Vladimir Putin in Moscow, he was accompanied by a Russian translator. At the same time, Witkoff seemed to believe that this was an employee of the American embassy, as evidenced by the Kremlin video. According to an analysis by investigative journalist Hristo Grozev, this translator is Natalia Koshkina, second secretary of the linguistic department of the Russian Foreign Ministry. Previously, she worked in the Russian mission to NATO and appeared in photographs with the head of the Foreign Intelligence Service, Sergei Naryshkin, and Putin.

Details. NBC was the first to notice that Witkoff was accompanied by a Russian translator. He provided a transcript of the video, which was released by the Kremlin during the last visit of the special representative of the US president to Moscow on April 25. 

The recording shows Witkoff shaking hands with Putin. Then they go to the table together, and a woman sits down next to Witkoff. "A translator?" asks Witkoff, to which the woman nods and, apparently, quietly says "yes." After that, the camera turns towards Putin and the presidential aide Yuri Ushakov and the head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund Kirill Dmitriev, who are sitting next to him at the table. Off-camera, Witkoff can be heard asking, "From the embassy?" Which sounds like a quiet "Yes."

"It is obvious that there is no Russian embassy in Moscow (unless Witkoff thinks so), so the logical conclusion is that he was assured that it was sent or approved by the US Embassy," writes Grozev.

The woman's profile is only visible in the video, but Grozev was able to identify her using artificial intelligence-based facial recognition tools. According to the analysis of the journalist, we are talking about Natalia Koshkina. Grozev found a photo of her attending various high-profile events, including those attended by former President Dmitry Medvedev, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, and State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin. In one of the photos, Koshkina stands behind the head of the SVR, Sergei Naryshkin. 

According to Grozev's analysis, from 2018 to 2020, Koshkina worked as the third secretary of the Russian mission to NATO in Brussels, and since 2020, Koshkina has been the second secretary of the linguistic department of the Russian Foreign Ministry. In addition, Koshkina is listed as an employee of RT.

According to the Agency's analysis, 33-year—old Koshkina is a native of Astrakhan. She graduated from Moscow State University in 2013. He has been working at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs since at least 2015, according to photos posted on the Internet. At the same time, she began appearing at international meetings of Russia's top officials. In 2015, she sat next to Sergey Lavrov during a conversation with US Secretary of State John Kerry. In 2016, she was filmed next to Dmitry Medvedev at the East Asian Summit.  

Koshkina had worked at other Putin meetings before, the Agency found. In September 2022, she attended the tree planting ceremony at the SCO summit. The same ceremony was attended by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan, among others.

The context. Former U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul told NBC that using a Kremlin translator was a "very bad idea" that put Witkoff "at a real disadvantage." "I speak Russian and listened to Kremlin and American translators at the same meeting, and the language is never the same," says McFaul.

In addition, the presence of an American translator guarantees a more accurate written account of the meeting for the rest of the White House team, McFaul said. "At the end of every meeting I attended, I questioned the interpreter to make sure that we heard everything correctly, so that the conversation was absolutely accurate. You can't do this using a Russian official," the ex-ambassador is convinced.

A Russian translator made it impossible for Witkoff to understand what the Russian negotiators were saying to each other during the negotiations, one Western official told NBC.

Putin on peace talks with Ukraine: hope for dialogue remains

In a recent speech, Russian President Vladimir Putin did not rule out the possibility of reaching a truce during negotiations with Ukraine. According to him, the main goal is to eliminate the root causes of the conflict, which can become the basis for a long-term settlement.

Russia, as Putin stressed, is interested in holding serious and meaningful negotiations capable of leading to sustainable peace. "No one needs peace, accompanied by feverish digging of trenches and preparations for a new round of hostilities," he said, referring to the need for the parties to sincerely strive for dialogue.

However, the Russian leader also noted that the West, represented by a number of countries, continues to view the conflict as an instrument of pressure on Russia, promoting the interests of the Ukrainian military and politicians. According to Putin, the real desire to stop the bloodshed should be expressed in support of Moscow's initiatives for a diplomatic settlement.

At the same time, the Russian president made it clear that Russia remains open to negotiations if the other side really strives for peace, rather than using the negotiation process as a temporary pause to rearm and strengthen positions.

13 countries have joined the Russian-Chinese lunar station project

The initiative of Russia and China to create an International Scientific Lunar Station (ISS) is being actively implemented, said Dmitry Bakanov, CEO of Roscosmos. According to him, 13 countries have joined the project, including those from BRICS.

Bakanov raised this issue at a meeting of the heads of space agencies of the BRICS countries, TASS reports. He listed the countries with which cooperation is underway on the project: Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bolivia, Venezuela, Djibouti, Egypt, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Senegal, Serbia, Thailand, Ethiopia, South Africa.

In June 2024, President Vladimir Putin signed a law on ratification of the agreement with the Chinese government on cooperation in the creation of the MNLS. An agreement on the creation and operation of a station for the exploration and use of the Moon was signed between Moscow and Beijing in November 2022.

Earlier, Roscosmos reported that Russia, together with China, is going to send a nuclear power plant to the lunar station, and its development is underway. It is assumed that the installation will first be tested on Earth, and its sending to the Moon is planned after 2036. In addition, preliminary plans for the station include the construction of a nuclear power plant on the surface of the moon.