Gassed in the 1991 Gulf War
Tales of the American Empire | August 14, 2025
Most Americans don’t remember the first Gulf War in 1991 because the United States has been warring in that region ever since. A key objective was to demonstrate that American military power can be used without killing thousands of American soldiers. The official count shows this was accomplished with just 148 Americans killed in action and another 70 who died in accidents. There were rumors that American soldiers had been exposed to deadly chemicals, but these were denied by the Pentagon. We later learned that hundreds of thousands of American troops were exposed to low levels of Sarin nerve gas that had no immediate effect. GIs were exposed as a result of bombings of Iraqi chemical munition storage sites. The Iraqis also fired SCUD missiles with gas warheads and sprayed American troops with drones and once from a MIG fighter aircraft. Upon their return, many Gulf war veterans complained of a variety of illnesses, some resulting in death.
_______________________________________________
“US Marine Corps Minefield Breaching”; Bernard Rostker; Department of Defense –Gulflink; July 29, 1997; https://gulflink.health.mil/marine/in…
Related Tale: “The Dark Side of the 1991 Gulf War”;
• The Dark Side of the 1991 Gulf War
“Gassed in the Gulf”; C-Span Book TV; August 23, 2000; https://www.c-span.org/program/book-t…
“Jim Brown”; YouTube channel about WMDs in 1991;
/ @jimbrown1201
“UTSW genetic study confirms sarin nerve gas as cause of Gulf War illness”; UT Southwestern Medical Center; May 11, 2022; https://www.utsouthwestern.edu/newsro…
“‘Gaslit and abandoned’: Gulf War veterans push to declassify documents on chemical exposure”; Linda Hersey; Stars & Stripes; July 22, 2025; https://www.stripes.com/veterans/2025…
Related Tale: “Netanyahu Ordered the 2003 Invasion of Iraq”;
• Netanyahu Ordered the 2003 Invasion of Iraq
Related Tale: “Saddam Never Gassed Kurds”;
• Saddam Never Gassed Kurds
Scott Ritter Lists Two Things That Need to Happen for Trump to Get His Ceasefire at Alaska Summit
Sputnik – August 15, 2025
The Ukrainian crisis is front and center of the Putin-Trump summit in Alaska. Sputnik asked renowned geopolitical analyst, former Marine Corps intelligence officer and ex-UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter to weigh in on the high stakes meeting.
First things first: the US president “doesn’t care about the geopolitical nuances of Ukrainian battlefield locations,” Ritter said.
“If Putin can convince him that the quickest route to a ceasefire is for Ukraine to leave” Russia’s new territories “and say no to NATO, that’s it. That’s all that has to happen for a ceasefire.”
The Russian military has mastered drone warfare, counter-drone warfare, and new battlefield tactics to the point where its advance has become “an irreversible process,” Ritter added, commenting on what happens if the peace push doesn’t pan out.
“There’s nothing that can be done. Nothing can be done to stop this. The advantage is 100% Russia, and we’re looking at the Ukrainians on the verge of total collapse,” the observer stressed.
Can Trump Convince Congress?
Trump’s base doesn’t want to continue fueling a proxy conflict against Russia, much less getting into a hot war with Russia over Ukraine, Ritter said.
“Don’t worry about Congress. They don’t elect the president, and they will fall in behind the president, because if he can secure his base with a peace deal, he can ruin everybody in Congress, especially a Republican, who goes against him,” he stressed.
In November 2024, the CIA briefed Congress on the risks of a nuclear war breaking out, estimating that there was a “greater than 50% chance” thanks to the Biden administration’s decision to greenlight long-range ATACMS strikes into Russia, Ritter revealed.
“The director of plans of Strategic Command, the American military command that carries out nuclear war briefed a Washington, DC think tank in November that the United States is prepared for a nuclear exchange with Russia, (that means nuclear war) and that the United States thought they were going to win,” he said.
“When this was briefed to Congress, I asked a senior Democrat… ‘when the CIA briefed you, did the CIA say the Russians were bluffing?’ He said no. The CIA said the exact opposite. He said but that’s not the scary thing. The scary thing is that the Biden administration officials who were in that room said ‘oh we’re ready for that. If the Russians wanna play, we’re ready to go to nuclear war with them.’ This is the insanity that existed in November of last year!” Ritter stressed.
Western media silence on anti-conscription, anti-war protests in Ukraine
By Dmitri Kovalevich | Al Mayadeen | August 15, 2025
In early August, the most discussed topic in Ukrainian society concerns protests against the governing regime in Kiev, including their future prospects. Beginning July 23, two different forms of public demonstrations erupted in Ukraine, quite opposite in their aims. One-sided reporting of them by Western media agencies has revealed to the Ukrainian population this media’s hypocrisy and double standards.
Protests in Kiev by pro-Western NGOs erupted late on July 22, quickly earning the moniker ‘Cardboard Maidan’. This refers to the cardboard signs being carried by protesters (bearing demands similar to those of the ‘Euromaidan’ protests, which began on Maidan Square in central Kiev in late 2013 and led to the violent, paramilitary coup of February 2014). Protesters gathered in their thousands in Kiev beginning on the evening of July 23 and during the days following to condemn the decision of the regime of the unelected ‘president’ Volodomyr Zelensky to severely weaken the work and the powers of the two leading anti-corruption agencies of the Ukrainian state.
The sham role of anti-corruption agencies
The agencies were created at the insistence of Western embassies following the 2014 coup but have never actually fought corruption. They have served, instead, to warn or chastise certain thieving officials in the governing regime and economy of the country. The record shows that even if a government or police official is caught taking a bribe, he or she is rarely convicted of anything or sentenced to prison. Instead, ‘anti-corruption’ agencies usually oblige the accused to ‘make a deal’ with investigators, after which the accused typically find employment at Western embassies or non-governmental organizations.
In reality, these agencies have served as tools for external control of Ukraine and the Zelensky-led governing regime.
Zelensky and his legislature (both of whose electoral terms expired in April 2024) approved a bill on July 22 that would henceforth subordinate the work of anti-corruption agencies to the presidential office of Zelensky. The bill was approved within a couple of hours of the meeting, and following the vote, legislators were quickly sent on vacation.
“Corruption has eaten away at the office of the Ukraine president. As anti-corruption agencies get closer to Zelensky’s closest thieves, NABU detectives are being arrested and NABU itself is being disbanded,” writes Ukrainian blogger Anatoly Shariy, who previously fled Ukraine to Spain.
In July, the work of anti-corruption agents and their two leading agencies began to get uncomfortably close to Zelensky’s own entourage and relatives. In response, agents of the SBU (national secret police agency), who are entirely controlled by Zelensky and his regime, began searching and arresting investigators of the National Anticorruption Bureau (NABU), as well as those of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor (SAPO). SBU officers accused the agents of ‘working for Russia’.
Zelensky’s team hoped that since the anti-corruption agencies being targeted had been created during the previous US presidential administration of Joseph Biden, the administration now led by Donald Trump would be unlikely to defend them.
The reaction of Western media and embassies to the turn of the Zelensky regime against the agencies was immediate. The British and American media began accusing Zelensky of authoritarianism. Representatives of Western NGOs took to the streets of Kiev carrying their cardboard protest signs. Formally, any and all protest rallies are prohibited in Ukraine under martial law, but this was a case of protest by several thousand people who happen to work for Western embassies or for NGOs whose salaries are paid directly or indirectly by the embassies.
A further reason for the ‘courage’ of these protesters in taking to the streets is that all employees of Western NGOs in Ukraine are exempt from conscription and cannot, therefore, be punished by the threat of immediate conscription. Those who work directly for a Western government or Western-financed NGO are considered to be an ‘elite’ in wartime Ukraine, unlike the workers in Ukrainian enterprises who keep the country and its war running, so to speak. The recent protesters in Kiev have covered their actions in nationalist slogans reminiscent of the 2014 Euromaidan coup, demanding Zelensky’s resignation and accusing him of betraying the ‘ideals of Europe’.
Zelensky was soon forced to repeal the law, having lost face and being subject to public humiliation. Legislators were hastily called back from vacation on July 30. Within a day, they solemnly adopted a bill, unanimously no less, repealing the bill they had passed one week earlier.
This case showed Ukrainians who is the real boss in the country. Legislator Alexander Dubinsky writes that starting from August 1 (the day after the repeal of the presidential order and legislation to weaken anti-corruption agencies), “The president will begin a new and interesting life — a phase of explanatory diplomacy in 24/7 mode.” In other words, Zelensky will have to steadily twist and turn as he continues to tell Western sponsors that there is no corruption in Ukraine, and adds that Russia is trying to frame him. Ukrainians and Russians have a saying ‘to wriggle like an eel’; many are now using this to describe Zelensky’s behavior.
Marat Basharov, a professor at the Russian Higher School of Economics, believes that anti-corruption agencies were created by the Western powers in Ukraine in order to gather information on who is stealing in Ukraine, by how much, and then bring such individuals and groups of individuals under the supervision of the Ukrainian elite as a whole through their state institutions. He writes that “the anti-corruption agencies work not for justice but for the CIA: everything that agents of NABU collect, including documents, wiretaps and other products of surveillance, have gone to the U.S. embassy and from there to Washington. NABU has also created a whole network of informants to snitch and betray; the amount of compromising material so collected is enormous.”
Ukraine as mercenary state
Ukrainian media outlets are citing threats by the International Monetary Fund and the European Union to cut off funding as being the main reason for Zelensky’s retreat. Currently, Ukraine’s entire budget–including government spending and social payments, building and maintenance of infrastructure, and provision of military supplies–depends entirely on the continued ‘generosity’ of the Western powers.
In early August, the head of the financial committee of Ukraine’s national legislature, Danil Getmantsev, stated that everything in Ukraine that is not related to the war is being paid for by the West, but most of this is in the form of loans. According to him, Ukraine does not use its own budget revenues for non-military needs; all tax revenues are directed exclusively to the country’s military.
According to Bloomberg News on July 25, the Zelensky-led regime is preparing to demand that countries of the European Union undertake the financing of the salaries of Ukrainian military personnel. Should the EU concur, the Armed Forces of Ukraine will formally become what it already acts like: a mercenary army. So far, news outlets in Europe are silent on the matter. The Estonian vice-president of the EU, Kaja Kallas, issued a statement on August 6 stating, “The EU and its member states remain committed to provide Ukraine and its people with all the necessary political, financial, economic, humanitarian, military, and diplomatic support, for as long as it takes and as intensely as needed.”
Ukrainian economist Alexei Kushch cautions that Ukraine is approaching complete and irreversible bankruptcy. He told a podcast on July 30, “Soon, our creditors may start lining up to divide up strategic assets. The Americans will shout that they have an investment fund and will show off papers to this effect, the Brits will wave a century-old agreement with Ukraine (giving them privileged consultation on government decisions), and the EU will talk about a Ukraine ‘association’ (integration). Someone in charge will shout ‘Get in line, you sons of bitches, get in line!”
In financial terms, Zelensky is like a swindler who has managed to mortgage the same property to multiple banks all at once. But this is impossible to pull off if the Western officials who allocate loans to Kiev from their state public budgets are not themselves involved.
Suppression of protests against conscription
Alongside the protests opposing any restrictions on Western financial control over Ukraine, spontaneous protests against forced conscription are also rising in the country daily. The largest of recent protests took place on August 1 in the city of Vinnytsia in south-central Ukraine (app. 200 km southwest of Kiev, pre-war population of 350,000). A crowd of women and youths stormed a stadium where more than 100 forcibly conscripted men were being held. Zelensky threw all available police and SBU forces against the protesters, including the use of tear gas.
Western media stubbornly ignore reporting on anti-conscription protests. Instead, they pay close attention to rallies by handfuls of nationalists employed at Western-funded NGOs in a regional center, while there is total silence when it comes to protests against conscription. Banning of rallies during martial law does not apply to rallies held in the name of protesting corruption, while Ukraine’s entire policing apparatus is unleashed against anti-conscription protests. These examples are serving as living proof to ordinary Ukrainian citizens of the hypocrisy and double standards of the Western media and Ukrainian authorities.
One exception to Western media silence over conscription is a recent report in the Financial Times (paywalled) entitled ‘Shoved into vans, slashing tyres, Ukrainians balk at conscription’. The report notes that resistance to the recruiters is growing in Ukrainian society but concludes, oddly, that this is being stoked by Zelensky’s refusal to respond to calls from the West to begin conscription of young people under the age of 25.
The Ukrainian online publication Strana wrote on August 5 that intolerance toward military recruiters and the law enforcement officers assisting them is growing in Ukrainian society, and this could lead to even more clashes between civilians and recruiters. The confrontations will only intensify, Strana believes, if rumors of an upcoming reduction in the conscription age from 25 to 18, long demanded by Western governments, are confirmed.
An anarchist writing from Odessa, Vyacheslav Azarov, sees the protest at the stadium in Vinnytsia as the beginning of a new phase of resistance to conscription. “The stunning nighttime storming by protesters of the Lokomotiv stadium in Vinnytsia, where forcibly mobilized recruits were being detained, marks a new phase in the tensions in the Ukrainian rear. Ukrainians are tired of the war. Not only the relatives and friends of the victims of the recruiters but also representatives of certain public organizations tried to rescue the prisoners from the stadium, so much so that the police had to use tear gas and batons in order to disperse them.”
Legislator Alexander Dubinsky, who has been detained for the past 21 months under criminal accusations of treason, has written an appeal to Donald Trump, seeking to draw his attention to the arbitrariness of the recruiters and police in Vinnytsia. “The situation in Ukraine is escalating,” he writes. “There are fierce clashes between civilians, the TCC [military recruiters], and the police. People are rising up against the violent mobilization of their sons, husbands, and brothers. Men are being grabbed off the streets like cattle, beaten, forced to sign consent forms to participate in the war, and then are sent straight to the front lines.”
Dubinsky emphasizes in his open letter to Trump that Ukraine’s Western allies are closely following and publicizing the protests in Kiev defending the anti-corruption agencies being targeted, but are failing to report the news of “pregnant women being tear-gassed for simply demanding to know whether their son, husband or brother is alive”. He believes that without a reaction from the US government to Zelensky’s terror, he will continue to denigrate and destroy the Ukrainian people and nation.
In another post to social media about the protests against conscription, this one dated August 4, Dubinsky admits that the West is keen to see continued ‘busification’ (forced conscription) of Ukrainians, so help and sympathy should not be expected from there. “Since war is the approved policy of the EU and the U.S. towards Ukraine, it is impossible to expect them to protest against the actions of the military recruiters and the police who enforce the conscription policy. But if the Ukrainian authorities decide to push back and protest against external control over their actions, then protesting is allowed. Understand this, serfs,” writes the imprisoned Ukrainian legislator.
The Ukrainian underground organization ‘Workers’ Front of Ukraine’ (WFU) is asking why the spontaneous protest in Vinnytsia was not supported by thousands more city residents. “What about the rest of the city; couldn’t more concerned people have protested in Vinnytsia? Yes, they could have. After all, the protesters launched an online broadcast, and its broadcast information instantly spread across social media networks. But more people did not rally”, the WFU laments. Activists of the organization call this a disgrace for Ukrainian society, which they accuse of “meekly going to the slaughter, its members acting like sheep being set upon by wolves”.
The Ukrainian magazine Liberal notes that Zelensky’s administration is preparing for an increase in spontaneous protests and intends to suppress them with particular force. “Volodymyr Zelensky has long since established himself as a full-fledged dictator. He may show his true colors in the challenging times ahead”, Liberal writes. According to the magazine’s sources, prisoners convicted of criminal offenses are being transferred out of prisons in the Kiev region. The publication concludes that this is happening in order to make room for a coming wave of detentions of political prisoners.
The liberal-left publication Assembly in the city of Kharkiv (the second largest city in Ukraine) notes that the civil conflict unfolding on the streets of Ukraine between the people and the repressive forces of the state is continuing unabated, although it does not attract as much media headlines as do the rallies protesting the curtailment of the powers of anticorruption agencies. (Many Ukrainians call these particular allies a ‘competition among parasites’.) Assembly acknowledges, nevertheless, that in Kharkov, “rebelling while on one’s knees remains the lot of protesting civilians”. It says that “Soldiers voting with their feet by conducting mass desertions have a much better chance of stopping the ‘conveyor belt of death’ taking place on Ukrainian soil compared to protesting on one’s knees.”
In early August, legislator Anna Skorokhod stated that the total number of desertions in the Ukrainian army had reached almost 400,000. That amounts to a rate of desertion of some 40 per cent of Ukrainian army recruits (voluntary or conscripted, with some deserters being recaptured or returning of their own accord).
In this situation, the tactics of the advancing Russian army have changed somewhat, as reported by the commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Alexander Syrsky, in early August. According to him, there is now a “total penetration” of Russian army groups into the rear of the Armed Forces of Ukraine along the front lines. The Ukrainian army does not have enough personnel to cover the entire front line, so Russian soldiers often bypass its sparse positions, creating panic and chaos in its operations.
There appears to be no way out of the morass for the Kiev regime. That includes the upcoming meeting in Alaska between the Russian and US presidents. The meeting was supposed to offer some hope for the Trump regime in Washington that a ceasefire could be agreed on that would halt the accelerating Russian military advances. But Russia says the original goals of its military intervention in Ukraine—demilitarization and ‘de-Nazification’ of Ukraine–remain in place, while US media is reporting on August 12 that the White House now expects the meeting in Alaska to be limited to ‘exchanges of information’.
How the West Criminalised Diplomacy
By Prof. Glenn Diesen | August 15, 2025
The tragedy of great power politics derives from the international anarchy, which refers to the absence of a central authority in the world. The point of departure in international security studies therefore tends to be the competition for security, as security for one state often results in insecurity for another.
This international system based on international anarchy originated with the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, which laid the foundation for the modern world order. The hegemonic system had broken down, and after 30 years of war, it became evident that there would be no peace through victory by a new hegemon. The Thirty-Year War thus ended with the Peace of Westphalia, which was based on the recognition that peace would depend on a balance of power between sovereign states. Security in the Westphalian system therefore entails mitigating security competition by attempting to establish formats for indivisible security. The Westphalian peace is often blamed for the international anarchy, yet this is not the crisis of our time.
What is often left out is that the Westphalian system relied on recognition of mutual security concerns as a condition for reducing mutual threats as a way to advance indivisible security. The Peace of Westphalia therefore also introduced the foundations for modern diplomacy, which entails dialogue for mutual understanding as the condition for reducing the security competition.
Our politicians and media no longer do this. They do not recognise the security concerns of our opponents, which means that they can no longer reduce the security competition and pursue indivisible security. Those who attempt to understand the opposing side, to place themselves in the shoes of the opponent and have some empathy, are labelled as Putinists, Panda-huggers and apologists for the Ayatollahs. Recognising the security concerns of the opponent has become tantamount to “legitimising” or “supporting” the policies of the opponents, which is seen as an act of treason. The result is that it becomes impossible to pursue indivisible security and peace.
In every war, we are fighting the most recent reincarnation of Hitler, which implies that negotiations are tantamount to appeasement and peace must be achieved through victory on the battlefield. Diplomacy risks “legitimising” Putin and, as former NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg stated, “weapons are the path to peace”. If adversaries must be defeated to have peace, then we are no longer pursuing a Westphalian Peace that pursues peace by managing a balance of power and mitigating the security competition. On the contrary, we have entered another Thirty-Year War, the endless and futile struggle for hegemony. Toward this end, we no longer refer to nuclear stability as a guarantor of the balance of power; rather we refer to “nuclear blackmail” that must be ignored.
Recognising Mutual Security Concerns?
The main problem of our era in terms of reducing the security competition derives from the inability to recognise the security concerns of our opponents. Why did we criminalise understanding?
We can look toward human nature as human beings organise in groups, and when we experience an external threat, we demand greater group cohesion for security. We begin to think solely in tribal terms as “us” (the in-group) versus “them” (the out-group), exaggerating the similarities among “us” and exaggerating the differences with “them”. We are good and they are evil, and the world is interpreted solely through the lens of liberal democracy versus authoritarianism. Under these conditions, no dissent threatens group cohesion, yet there is also no understanding for the other side.
The group psychology of “us” versus “them” also diminishes the rational considerations of the individual, which is exploited by our war propagandists. This is the case, as the ideas of group psychology developed by Sigmund Freud laid the foundation for the original literature on the science of propaganda that was developed by Freud’s nephew Edward Bernays.
Liberal Hegemony
The inability to recognise and consider the security concerns of our opponents go much deeper than a flaw in human nature and is caused by design. After the Cold War, the Westphalian system was abandoned as the Political West pursued an international system based on hegemony. In this system, security does not depend on managing a balance of power and taking into account the security concerns of our opponents. Instead of a balance of power, the hegemon is to be so powerful that it does not matter if we undermine the security of our opponents. Furthermore, a liberal hegemony implies that our dominance is a “force for good”, something that benefits the entire world. Recognising security concerns caused by our aspirations for hegemony is a betrayal of the assumption of being a force for good. Our opponents are presented with the dilemma of accepting that the hegemony is positive, or being considered an opponent of liberalism and civilisation. Hegemony is subsequently treated as a liberal norm.
The format for European security is to integrate the entire continent under NATO and the EU, except for Russia. We are developing a Europe where the country with the largest population, territory, economy (PPP) and military does not have a seat at the table. It is predictable and it has indeed been widely predicted over the past 30 years, that constructing a Europe without Russia would inevitably result in a Europe against Russia. Yet, the commitment to the narrative of the benign hegemon prevents us from addressing the obvious.
Liberal hegemony also corrupts diplomacy, which was intended to map out mutual interests and security concerns to make compromises and mitigate the security competition. Instead, under liberal hegemony, diplomacy takes on a pedagogic format between the subject and the object, between the teacher and the student. In this relationship, diplomacy does not aim to reach a compromise, as the teacher does not compromise with the student. Rather, the student must accept unilateral concessions.
If the public accepts the ideological stereotypes that every conflict is a struggle of good versus evil, or liberal democracies versus authoritarian states, then war becomes virtuous and diplomacy becomes treasonous. Ideological Manicheanism has thus become the curse and undoing of the Political West.
The article is a summary of my speech at the Vatican in June 2025
Ukraine’s Soviet Arsenal Nearly Depleted, Kiev ‘Almost Entirely’ Reliant on Western Aid
Sputnik – 15.08.2025
Ukraine’s military has reached a critical turning point, transitioning from relying on its legacy Soviet and Russian artillery and rocket supplies to becoming almost entirely dependent on Western aid, the latest quarterly report of the Operation Atlantic Resolve revealed.
“As of this quarter, Ukraine had nearly exhausted its supplies of Soviet and Russian artillery and rocket ammunition, making the UAF [Ukrainian armed forces] almost entirely reliant on Western assistance,” the report released on Thursday said.
The report of the US Department of Defense’s ongoing mission to bolster the security of NATO allies and provide support to Ukraine also details persistent challenges in other critical areas.
Despite significant aid, Ukraine’s air defenses and its fleet of F-16 fighter jets remain insufficient to deal with missile and uncrewed aerial systems (UAS) attacks, which continue to inflict damage on Ukrainian infrastructure.
Fulfilling Ukraine’s air defense needs is further complicated by a global shortage of essential components, according to the Security Assistance Group-Ukraine (SAG-U), a US-led German-based command that coordinates military assistance to Ukraine. The global demand for these parts presents a significant challenge to the timely delivery of crucial defensive systems.
Russia believes that arms supplies to Ukraine are hindering the peace process in Ukraine and getting NATO allies directly involved in the conflict. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov noted that any cargo containing weapons for Ukraine would become a legitimate target for Russia.
Russia derails Ukraine’s Western-backed missile program – FSB
RT | August 14, 2025
Russian forces have struck four Ukrainian defense industrial facilities producing long-range missile systems, causing “colossal” damage and stalling Kiev’s domestic missile program, the Federal Security Service (FSB) has said.
In a statement on Thursday, the FSB said the operation mounted by the agency and the Russian Defense Ministry targeted chemical and mechanical plants in Pavlograd, Dneptropetrovsk Region, as well as the ‘Zvezda’ plant and State Scientific Research Institute of Chemical Products in Shostka, Sumy Region.
The impact of the strikes has been confirmed by satellite imagery and open-source intelligence, it added.
The FSB said that Ukraine, with NATO’s permission, had planned to use Sapsan long-range missiles for strikes deep into Russian territory. “Thanks to the joint efforts of the FSB and Russian Armed Forces, Ukraine’s missile program plans have been thwarted,” the statement added.
The agency described the damage to Ukraine’s military industrial complex as “colossal,” and said it far surpassed Kiev’s “Spiderweb” operation that targeted strategic Russian aviation in early June. Moscow said that the Ukrainian attack, which involved dozens of drones, damaged several aircraft but dismissed Kiev’s claims that approximately 40 warplanes were destroyed.
An unnamed FSB official told TASS that the Sapsan missile systems were developed with financial support from Germany and assistance from foreign specialists.
The Sapsan is a Ukrainian tactical ballistic missile with a warhead weighing around 480kg. The missile can travel at speeds over 6,000kph and has a range estimated of up to 700km.
The FSB published a map outlining the Sapsan’s range, with a large part of Western Russia – including Moscow – being within the kill zone.

In May, Chancellor Friedrich Merz announced that Germany would fund Ukraine’s domestic production of long-range missiles, although he did not specify the type of weapon. The German Defense Ministry also stated at the time that investing in Ukraine’s production would enable Kiev to have a “substantial” number of long-range weapons this year.
Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has since threatened new long-range strikes deep into Russia, saying Kiev will “do everything possible to bring the war onto Russian territory.” – Video
Pentagon effectively confirms ‘Golden Dome’ will breach Outer Space Treaty
By Drago Bosnic | August 14, 2025
On January 27, US President Donald Trump announced that the construction of the “state-of-the-art ‘Iron Dome’ missile defense shield” will begin “immediately” and will be made “right here in the USA 100%”. Since then, apart from a name change to avoid confusion with a homonymous Israeli system, there’s been little concrete information on the project.
However, last week, the Pentagon presented more details about the upcoming “Golden Dome”, revealing that it will be a four-layer missile defense system and that it will also include a space-based component (the other three are ground-based, including eleven short-range batteries planned for deployment in the continental US, Alaska and Hawaii). Reuters cited a presentation of the project, titled “Go Fast, Think Big!”, shown in Huntsville, Alabama, last week to around 3,000 representatives of the American Military Industrial Complex (MIC).
The revelation didn’t really show much more than what was already known about the US strategic missile defenses. The slides revealed there would be early warning satellites for detecting missile launches, tracking and “boost-phase interception”. The “upper layer” would be composed of the Next Generation Interceptors (NGI), Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) and “Aegis” systems, with a new missile field “likely in the Midwest”.
This would be followed by the “under layer” composed of “Patriot” systems, new radars and a “common launcher for current and future interceptors”. The space-based “boost-phase interception” capability is particularly curious. Although the slides didn’t really reveal how this would be accomplished, common sense implies that this is either deliberate disinformation (like the SDI was) or the Pentagon is actively pursuing space-based weapons.
Reuters noted that “one surprise was a new large missile field – seemingly in the Midwest according to a map contained in the presentation – for Next Generation Interceptors (NGI) which are made by Lockheed Martin” and “would be a part of the ‘upper layer’ alongside Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) and ‘Aegis’ systems which Lockheed also makes”. The NGI is supposed to be the next iteration of GBI (Ground-Based Interceptors), which is part of the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD).
This system is a nationwide network of radars, interceptors and other assets that the US planned for decades, even unilaterally withdrawing from the 1972 ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile) Treaty back in 2002, so it could pursue the project. This arms control agreement served to prevent the US and USSR/Russia from being incentivized to endlessly enlarge their thermonuclear arsenals by limiting the number of deployed ABM systems.
The logic was that, whoever acquired better missile defenses, this would only force the other side to increase their offensive potential to enable saturation attacks that would inevitably overcome all ABM systems. Although the treaty was by no means perfect, it still slowed down the growth in the number of warheads and delivery systems.
However, after the unfortunate dismantling of the Soviet Union, the US thought that Russia would be unable to revive its massive military-industrial potential, meaning that the aforementioned ABM Treaty was now “holding America back” in its quest for total global dominance. And yet, the opposite happened. Moscow not only reactivated much (if not most) of its military-industrial might, but actually restarted a number of highly advanced military programs that eventually resulted in a decades-long lead in a plethora of various high-tech hypersonic weapons.
Now that this backfired, Washington DC is faced with a far more complex and challenging task of intercepting weapons that work on very different principles, eliminating the predictability of regular ballistic missiles. The cumulative effects of these factors have increased costs and made maintenance and logistics a true nightmare. Not to mention that the (First) Cold War was far simpler due to the fact that America had only the Soviet Union to worry about, while its aggression against the entire world forced several more countries to build up their arsenals (notably China and North Korea).
Unfortunately, there’s no other way to ensure viable deterrence. However, instead of easing tensions, the US is doubling down on its belligerence. Despite formally being a defense system, Washington DC sees the “Golden Dome’s” actual purpose as a way to facilitate its global dominance by undermining other arsenals.
The Pentagon’s presentation last week suggests that the “Golden Dome” will effectively be both an expansion and integration of existing missile defenses, with the third site in the Midwest serving to augment the current GMD launch sites in California and Alaska. The US military will have to deal with challenges such as “communication latency across the kill chain (a step-by-step sequence of actions needed to find, target and destroy a threat)”, so the most prominent corporations of the American MIC (Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, RTX/Raytheon, Boeing, etc.) will be included in the program.
However, the very idea that the “Golden Dome” will be able to shoot down hypersonic weapons is highly questionable, given the horrible performance of the GMD even against regular ballistic missiles. On the other hand, the MIC is exhilarated with such a windfall (considering the system’s costs).
And yet, while the project has a lot of similarities with the (First) Cold War-era SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative, but better known as the so-called “Star Wars”), the idea of space-based weapons is still a highly disturbing development that would lead to an inevitable militarization of space. US Space Force Gen Michael Guetlein, who serves as the head of the “Golden Dome” program, is required to “deliver the first designs within 60 days and a complete roadmap of the project within 120 days”.
The new missile defense system is expected to be able to “intercept targets in their boost phase” and “deploy relocatable defenses capable of rapid global deployment”. This is a clear violation of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty (OST).
There’s also a lot of symbolism in Trump’s first announcement of the “Golden Dome”. As previously mentioned, he unveiled it on January 27, which was when the OST was signed by the US and USSR.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
Coalition of Willing Opposes Any Restrictions on Ukrainian Army as Part of Ukraine Deal
Sputnik – 14.08.2025
The so-called “coalition of the willing” has opposed any restrictions on the Ukrainian armed forces as part of the deal on settling the Ukraine conflict ahead of the meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump, a joint statement read.
“Ukraine must have robust and credible security guarantees to effectively defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. The Coalition of the Willing is ready to play an active role, including through plans by those willing to deploy a reassurance force once hostilities have ceased. No limitations should be placed on Ukraine’s armed forces or on its cooperation with third countries. Russia could not have a veto against Ukraine‘s pathway to EU and NATO,” the coalition said in a joint statement published by the office of UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Wednesday.
The coalition also believes that constructive negotiations can only take place “in the context of a ceasefire.”
The meeting between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin is scheduled for this Friday in Anchorage, Alaska. The leaders are expected to discuss ways to resolve the Ukrainian conflict as well as other issues of mutual interest.
Kremlin reveals details of Putin-Trump summit
RT | August 14, 2025
The summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart, Donald Trump, on Friday will focus not only on the Ukraine conflict but on a broader security agenda and involve several top Russian officials, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov has said.
Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Ushakov said that “final preparations” were underway for the meeting on Friday, which will take place at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska. Given the short notice for the summit, “everything is being done in an intensive mode,” including tackling several technical issues, including visa-related matters, he added.
Ushakov said the summit will begin at approximately 11:30 a.m. local time (19:30 GMT) with a one-on-one conversation between Putin and Trump, accompanied by interpreters. “Then, there will be negotiations in the format of delegations, and these negotiations will continue over a working lunch,” he said.
The Kremlin aide noted the very high level of the Russian delegation, which he said would include Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Ushakov himself, Defense Minister Andrey Belousov, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, and Special Presidential Representative for Investment and Economic Cooperation with Foreign Countries Kirill Dmitriev, who has been a key figure in the Ukraine settlement process.
“In addition to the presidents, five members from each delegation will participate in the negotiations,” he said, adding that “of course, a group of experts will also be nearby.”
Regarding the agenda, it is “obvious” that the central issue in the talks will be the Ukraine conflict, Ushakov said, adding, though, that “broader objectives of ensuring peace and security will also be addressed, as well as current and most acute international and regional issues.”
There will also be an exchange of views “regarding the further development of bilateral cooperation, including in the trade and economic spheres,” Ushakov noted, adding that such ties have “enormous and, unfortunately, still untapped potential.”
Ushakov confirmed that Putin and Trump will not only deliver a short opening statement but also hold a joint press conference after the talks. He said the duration of the talks “would depend on how the discussion goes” and confirmed “the delegation will return [to Russia] immediately after the negotiations conclude.”
EU state blasts Ukraine over key pipeline attack
RT | August 13, 2025
Hungary has lashed out at Ukraine over a drone strike on Russia’s Druzhba oil pipeline system, a key supply route to EU countries, warning that the attack endangered its energy security.
Druzhba is one of the world’s longest networks, transporting crude some 4,000km from Russia and Kazakhstan to refineries in the Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia.
In a post on X on Wednesday, Hungary’s Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto wrote that “overnight, Ukraine launched a drone strike on a key distribution station of the Druzhba oil pipeline in Russia’s Bryansk Region.”
According to media reports, multiple Ukrainian drones struck Russia’s Bryansk Region on Tuesday night, sparking fires at several sites. One target was the Unecha station, a major hub in the Druzhba oil pipeline linking Russia and the EU.
The Ukrainian General Staff confirmed the attack on the pumping station in a Facebook post. Russia has so far not commented on the alleged incident.
Szijjarto called the attack “outrageous,” saying the pipeline is vital to Hungary’s energy security given that the country relies on oil shipments through the system.
He also noted that Hungary is Ukraine’s “number one electricity supplier” and that without it Ukraine’s energy security would be “highly unstable.” He urged Kiev to stop endangering Hungary’s energy supplies and to halt strikes on routes “in a war we Hungarians have nothing to do with.”
Ukraine has repeatedly targeted Russian energy infrastructure throughout the conflict, including the Druzhba system. In March, the Ukrainian General Staff confirmed having targeted the oil pipeline.
In January, Ukrainian forces attempted to attack a compressor station of the TurkStream pipeline, which supplies natural gas to Turkish customers and several European countries, including Hungary, Serbia, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Greece.
Russian officials have repeatedly condemned Ukrainian attacks on civilian energy infrastructure, labeling them acts of terrorism.
Why both sides want the Putin-Trump Alaska summit to succeed
By Dmitry Suslov | RT | August 13, 2025
On Friday, Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump will meet in Alaska. This will be the first full-scale Russia-US summit since June 2021 in Geneva, and the first official visit by a Russian president to American soil since Dmitry Medvedev’s trip in 2010 at the height of the “reset.”
It will also be the first time the leaders of Russia and the US have met in Alaska, the closest US state to Russia, separated only by the narrow Bering Strait, and once part of the Russian Empire. The symbolism is obvious: as far as possible from Ukraine and Western Europe, but as close as possible to Russia. And neither Zelensky nor the EU’s top brass will be in the room.
The message could not be clearer – Moscow and Washington will make the key decisions on Ukraine, then inform others later. As Trump has said, “they hold all the cards.”
From Geneva to Alaska: A shift in tone
The Alaska summit marks a sharp departure from the Biden years, when even the idea of such a meeting was unthinkable and Washington’s priority was isolating Russia. Now, not only will Putin travel to Alaska, but Trump is already planning a return visit to Russia.
Moderate optimism surrounds the meeting. Summits of this type are rarely held “just to talk”; they usually cap a long process of behind-the-scenes negotiations. The idea for this one emerged after three hours of talks in Moscow on August 6 between Putin and Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff. Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov described Washington’s offer as “very acceptable.” That suggests Putin and Trump will arrive in Alaska with a preliminary deal – or at least a framework for a truce – already in place.
Why Trump needs this
Trump has good reason to want the summit to succeed. His effort to squeeze Moscow by pushing China and India to stop buying Russian oil has backfired badly. Far from isolating Russia, it triggered the worst US-India crisis in 25 years and drove New Delhi even closer to Moscow. It also encouraged a thaw between India and China, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi now set to attend the SCO summit in Tianjin.
BRICS, which Trump has openly vowed to weaken, has only grown more cohesive. The Alaska summit is Trump’s chance to escape the trap he built for himself – trying to pressure Moscow through Beijing and New Delhi – and to show results on Ukraine that he can sell as a diplomatic victory.
Why Russia does too
For Moscow, a successful summit would be a powerful demonstration that talk of “isolation” is obsolete – even in the West. It would cement Russia’s standing with the “global majority” and highlight Western Europe’s diminished influence. The transatlantic split would widen, weakening Brussels’ claim to be Russia’s toughest opponent.
Most importantly, Washington today has little real leverage over Russia, especially on Ukraine. If the summit yields a joint Russian–American vision for a truce or settlement, it will inevitably reflect Moscow’s position more than Kiev’s or Brussels’. And if the Western Europeans try to derail it, the US could pull the plug on all aid to Ukraine – including intelligence support – accelerating Kiev’s defeat.
Resistance at home and abroad
Not everyone in Russia is cheering. Many prominent “Z”-aligned war correspondents see the war as unfinished and oppose any truce. But they have been asked to stick to the official line. If the Alaska meeting produces a deal, they will be expected to back it – or at least use “cooling” language for their audiences. The Kremlin is betting it can manage this dissent.
Western Europe, for its part, will be watching from the sidelines. Its leaders are “scrambling” for scraps of information via secondary channels. The optics will underline a humiliating reality: for the first time in almost a century, decisions about Europe’s security will be made without the likes of Italy, France and Germany in the room.
Beyond Ukraine
The location hints at other agenda items. Arctic economic cooperation, largely frozen since 2014, could be revived. Both sides stand to gain from joint development in the far north, and a deal here would be politically symbolic – proof that the two countries can work together despite the baggage of the last decade.
Arms control will also be on the table. Moscow’s recent decision to end its unilateral moratorium on deploying intermediate-range missiles was almost certainly timed to influence the talks. Strategic stability after the New START Treaty expires in February 2026 will be a central concern.
The stakes
If Alaska delivers, it could reshape the conflict in Ukraine and the broader Russia-US relationship. A joint settlement plan would marginalize Kiev and Brussels, shift the diplomatic center of gravity back to Moscow and Washington, and reopen channels for cooperation on global issues – from the Arctic to arms control.
If it fails – if Trump bends to last-minute EU pressure – Moscow will continue fighting, confident that US involvement will fade. Either way, Russia’s position is stronger than it was two years ago.
What’s different now is that the two powers with “all the cards” are finally back at the same table – and Western Europe is on the outside looking in.
Dmitry Suslov, member of the Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, deputy director of World Economy and International Politics at Moscow’s Higher School of Economics, and Valdai Club expert.
NATO membership, $1tn in reparations: Zelensky maps out ‘red lines’ ahead of Putin–Trump summit
The Cradle | August 13, 2025
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky arrived in Berlin on 13 August for virtual meetings with European leaders and US President Donald Trump, ahead of talks between the president and Vladimir Putin in a summit in Alaska later this week.
Hosted by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Zelensky held an online meeting with officials from Finland, France, Britain, Italy, Poland, the EU, and NATO.
A source told Reuters that Trump and US Vice President JD Vance joined the call afterwards.
According to POLITICO, Ukraine planned to use the Wednesday meeting to “map out red lines” aimed at deterring Russia from using the meeting with Trump to achieve its goals.
Recent comments by Ukrainian officials indicate skepticism from Kiev over the Trump–Putin summit.
“I don’t expect any breakthrough from this summit. Putin did not abandon his ultimate goal to destroy Ukraine. He can only agree to a ceasefire that will create the conditions for our destruction,” said Oleksandr Merezhko, head of the foreign relations committee in the Ukrainian parliament.
Earlier this week, Zelensky said, “We understand the Russians’ intention to try to deceive America – we will not allow this.”
“We support what President Trump wanted – a ceasefire, and then sit down at the negotiating table and talk about everything else,” he told reporters on Tuesday, vowing not to give up any territory and retreat from the frontlines. “We will not leave Donbas. We cannot do this. Donbas for the Russians is a springboard for a future new offensive. If we leave Donbas of our own free will or if we are pressured, we will open a third war.”
“[Putin] doesn’t want the occupation of our state from the point of view of territory. He doesn’t want a sovereign Ukraine to exist. And that’s the whole endgame,” Zelensky added.
An informed source told POLITICO on 12 August that “If Kiev does ultimately have to make some compromise as part of a final deal based on the realities on the battlefield, it will then only talk about the territorial matters after Russia agrees to and sticks to a ceasefire.”
According to the outlet, Ukraine is doubling down on demands for an unconditional ceasefire before moving ahead with any negotiations, retaining all territory it has captured, $1 trillion in reparations from Russia, NATO membership, and unconditional release of all prisoners.
“Additional pressure through economic sanctions on Putin is necessary to reach a ceasefire agreement. We will not give up any territory in Donbas, and there will be no discussion on Ukraine’s territorial integrity,” Zelensky said on Wednesday.
As the Berlin meetings were going on, the Russian Defense Ministry announced the capture of two communities in the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR).
“Battlegroup Center units liberated the settlements of Suvorovo and Nikanorovka in the Donetsk People’s Republic through active and decisive operations,” the ministry said.
Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers have been killed or wounded since the start of this year, Russian media reported on 1 August, citing weekly Defense Ministry reports.
A third round of Turkish-hosted ceasefire talks between Moscow and Kiev last month failed to yield significant progress.
The US and Russia had held talks in Saudi Arabia in March this year, agreeing to establish a path to ending the Ukraine conflict.
However, Trump recently announced that Washington will be sending “massive” supplies of weapons to Ukraine, in what was described as a significant policy shift.
He also issued a 50-day deadline for a deal to be made, after which he would impose 100 percent tariffs on Russia. Late last month, Trump announced plans to shorten this deadline.
