Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The Redheaded Stepsister Goes to the Ball

Kerch Strait Bridge
By William Schryver – imetatronink – July 14, 2025

Against the AGM-158 JASSM missile, has Russia’s Kerch Strait Bridge finally met its match?

Talk of sending Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles to Ukraine commenced last year, during the later months of the Biden administration. It was reported at the time that it would take “months” to adapt the missiles to operate with the rag-tag Ukrainian air fleet consisting of a few surviving Soviet Su-27s and MiG-29s and whatever 1980s-era boneyard F-16s NATO could cobble together and render airworthy (not many).

Of the two dozen or so F-16s shipped to Ukraine, the evidence suggests few (if any) are currently airworthy, and it is likely several have already been destroyed on the ground, in addition to the handful that are confirmed to have crashed or been shot down.

JASSM Cruise Missile

The JASSM is an air-launched cruise missile, with reputed (but dubious) stealthy properties and a 450 kg warhead. The majority of production consists of the relatively short-ranged (~350 km) AGM-158A.

The later-model AGM-158B (JASSM-ER) claims a range of 1000 km, but that has never been demonstrated in a live scenario. Although at least several dozen JASSM strikes were made against Syria and Yemen during Trump’s first term, none were of the extended range variety.

The JASSM was actually considered a bust during its many years of development (1998-2009). On multiple occasions, it appeared the entire program was going to be canceled.

What was the problem? It was notoriously inaccurate!

But eventually Lockheed was able to formulate a testing regimen more likely to indicate success, and the missile finally went into production.

The US Air Force contracted to buy ~5000 units.

The US Navy declined to buy any of them.

Foreign sales have been unimpressive.

It is almost certain that the Pentagon will not throw away many (if any) of the long-range AGM-158Bs on the irreversibly lost Ukraine War. That means all that can be hoped for is a few hundred AGM-158As, with their ~350 km range.

And, in my considered opinion, the only way “Ukraine” will be able to deploy these short-range air-launched cruise missiles is if “volunteer” NATO pilots fly front-line NATO planes to deliver them.

NATO F-16s and F-15s can carry two JASSM missiles, one under each wing.

In a mission (for example) to strike the Kerch Strait Bridge, NATO aircraft (likely flying from Romania) would have to penetrate deeply into Russian air defense coverage areas extending around Crimea.

It would almost certainly require at least a dozen JASSM 450 kg warheads to make a meaningful dent in the Kerch Strait Bridge. That translates into half a dozen strike aircraft.

And, unless the NATO generals are just utterly clueless and indifferent (which they probably are), it would be a dereliction of duty to not provide a half-dozen fighters for combat air patrol.

So a dozen NATO aircraft in total — not counting any refueling tankers and ISR platforms that would be required.

I assess as VERY LOW the likelihood of success for a JASSM attack against the Kerch Strait Bridge.

I assess the risks for the attacking force to be VERY HIGH.

But I reckon they’re stupid enough to give it a try all the same.

July 15, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

‘Russia doesn’t respond to pressure’: How Moscow sees Trump’s ultimatum

From skepticism to strategic recalculations, Russian analysts interpret Washington’s new pressure campaign – and its limits

By Georgiy Berezovsky | RT | July 15, 2025

On Monday, July 14, US President Donald Trump issued a stark ultimatum: Russia has 50 days to reach a peace agreement, or face “very severe” tariffs on its exports – potentially as high as 100%. The move signals a shift from rhetorical posturing to a time-bound strategy aimed at forcing negotiations.

While Trump’s statement made waves in Washington and Europe, it is the reaction from Moscow that may prove most consequential. In this roundup, RT presents a cross-section of views from Russian political analysts, foreign policy scholars, and institutional insiders – voices that provide a window into how the American ultimatum is being interpreted in Russia.

Dmitry Suslov, deputy director of the Center for Comprehensive European and International Studies at HSE University:

Trump’s remarks are a major setback for any meaningful progress on Ukraine and will likely freeze US-Russia normalization for the foreseeable future. Zelensky now has no incentive to engage in serious negotiations with Moscow or consider the terms outlined in the Russian ceasefire memorandum.

Meanwhile, the European ‘party of war’ will seize on Trump’s statements as cover to promise Ukraine an endless stream of military aid – further escalating the conflict. The result? No truce, no talks, just a deepening of hostilities. Kiev may even walk away from the Istanbul peace process in the coming months – unless the battlefield situation shifts dramatically in Ukraine’s favor.

As for US-Russia relations, they were already at a standstill. Washington had effectively put dialogue on hold. Now, that pause could drag on indefinitely. When Trump issues ultimatums, sets arbitrary deadlines, and threatens Russia’s key trading partners with 100% tariffs, it’s clear there’s no space for normalization – or cooperation.

That said, unlike the Biden administration, Trump’s team appears committed to keeping diplomatic channels open with Moscow, regardless of whether there’s progress on Ukraine. But this isn’t an opening for a settlement on Russia’s terms. Trump’s goal is to pressure Moscow into compromise – something that simply isn’t going to happen.

His statement also signals that he has no intention of letting Congress dictate US foreign policy. He wants full control over tariffs – their size, timing, and structure. That’s why it’s entirely possible he’ll tweak or delay his self-imposed deadline.

Ivan Timofeev, program director of the Valdai Club:

1. Trump is frustrated with Moscow’s position on Ukraine.
Russia has refused to freeze the conflict on terms favorable to the US and Kiev – a signal that Trump sees dialogue as having hit a dead end.

2. The Lindsey Graham sanctions bill is now much more likely to pass.
Among other things, it would authorize secondary tariffs of up to 500% on countries that import Russian oil and other raw materials. While the US president already has the power to impose these measures unilaterally under IEEPA, the bill would bring Congress into alignment and add yet another layer to the already sprawling legal web of sanctions on Russia.

3. Trump would have full discretion over these secondary tariffs.
That could mean 100%, 500%, or anything in between – and he could calibrate them differently depending on bilateral relations. For example, India might face lower tariffs, China higher ones – or he might apply them uniformly. The Iran sanctions precedent shows that countries which reduced oil purchases were granted exemptions as a reward for ‘good behavior’.

4. A coordinated pushback from the Global South is unlikely.
Trump has already been pressuring both allies and neutral countries with new tariffs since April – and most are caving. Even China is treading carefully. So in the short term, we may see reduced purchases of Russian commodities simply out of a desire to avoid Trump’s wrath. Alternatively, countries may demand a higher risk premium. While there’s a lot of rhetorical support for Russia in the Global South, few are willing to stick their necks out when it comes to action.

5. Trump’s 50-day deadline amounts to an ultimatum.
Moscow will almost certainly ignore it, making the imposition of secondary tariffs a highly probable – perhaps even default – scenario. That said, Russia isn’t without leverage, limited though it may be. And it’s clearly preparing for a hardline path. Tight global commodity markets and well-established export channels work in Russia’s favor.

6. This may mark the end of backchannel diplomacy on Ukraine.
Sanctions will be ramped up, and arms deliveries to Kiev are likely to intensify. Russia, for its part, will maintain military pressure. We’re back to a familiar standoff: The West betting on economic collapse in Russia, while Moscow counts on Ukraine’s military defeat and the West’s internal turmoil. But after three years, it’s clear neither side’s assumptions have panned out. Sanctions haven’t broken Russia’s resolve, and the war effort is now on a new long-term footing.

7. The optimism in Russian markets is puzzling.
Yes, sanctions haven’t been imposed just yet – which some investors may have hoped for – but the risk landscape has only worsened. The current rally looks short-lived. Those banking on a quick end to sanctions may be in for a long wait.

Timofey Bordachev, professor at the Higher School of Economics:

In theater or film, ‘playing a scene’ means performing a role convincingly – conveying emotions, building a character, advancing the plot. Donald Trump does that rather well. He seems to grasp a fundamental truth: Bold moves between nuclear superpowers are dangerous precisely because they are impossible. They risk the irreversible – and Trump clearly wants no part of that. On some level, he understands that the diplomatic chess match will drag on indefinitely, and that there are no clean resolutions. Still, the show must go on – and the audience must be entertained.

That’s why Trump substitutes real strategy with theatrics: Shifting arms deliveries to NATO, proposing a new financing scheme for Kiev, tossing around tariff threats against Russia and its trading partners. It’s about constantly filling the political space with action – or at least the illusion of it – to avoid the impression of paralysis or failure. If no progress is made on Ukraine within 50 days, he’ll unveil a new plan that overwrites the old one.

None of these announcements should be treated as final or irreversible – and in that, Trump is perfectly in tune with the nature of today’s international politics. His behavior isn’t a deviation – it’s a reflection of the system.

Maxim Suchkov, director of the Institute for International Studies at MGIMO University:

Trump’s statement brings both good and bad news for Moscow. The good news is that the final decision was largely predictable – no surprises, no sudden turns. As is often the case with Trump, the ‘teaser’ for his policy was more dramatic than the main act. Europe wants to continue the war – and Trump is happy to let it pay the price. For now, he’s held back from embracing the more radical measures proposed by the hawks in his circle, which means dialogue with Washington is still on the table.

The bad news: After six months in office, Trump still hasn’t grasped Russia’s position or understood President Putin’s logic. It’s as if the repeated visits to Moscow by Steve Witkoff never even registered with him. More broadly, Trump seems to have learned very little about this conflict. And that’s a problem – because without some form of resolution and a working relationship with Moscow, key elements of Trump’s domestic agenda simply aren’t achievable.

Either he genuinely believes the Ukraine conflict can be settled by setting a deadline and hoping for the best – or he just doesn’t care. Maybe this is just his way of playing global peacemaker: Making noise, tossing out promises to fix everything, knowing full well there will be no political consequences if he fails. American voters won’t judge him on Ukraine.

Which scenario is worse is anyone’s guess. But one thing is clear: If anyone still had hopes for this administration to play a serious role in ending the conflict, those hopes look misplaced. Whether they were premature – or already outdated – we’ll find out in 50 days.

Fyodor Lukyanov, editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs:

If you strip Trump’s latest White House remarks down to their essence, one thing stands out: He still desperately wants to avoid becoming a full party to the conflict – in other words, he doesn’t want a head-on confrontation with Russia. That’s why he keeps repeating that this is “Biden’s war,” not his. From Trump’s perspective, what he announced is a cautious, compromise-driven approach.

First, the tariffs he’s threatening on Russian commodities – and let’s be clear, these aren’t ‘sanctions’ in his lexicon – have been postponed until the fall. Just like in other cases, the offer of negotiations remains open.

Second, the US won’t be sending weapons to Ukraine directly. Deliveries will go through Europe, and only on a full-cost basis – meaning the Europeans will foot the bill. To Trump, that’s not direct confrontation with Moscow – it’s a way to nudge the parties toward talks.

We can set aside the usual flood of self-congratulation and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte’s over-the-top flattery – that’s all part of the ritual now.

Russia is unlikely to see this as a genuine invitation to dialogue. It’s pressure – and the Russian leadership doesn’t respond to pressure. It’s also a worsening, though perhaps not a dramatic one, of the military situation for Russian forces, which naturally elicits a response. But Moscow won’t engage in verbal sparring. There’s no point. The conversation is now happening on the battlefield.

Most likely, we’ve reached the end of the first phase of US-Russia relations under Trump – a six-month stretch now drawing to a close. When the next phase begins, and what it looks like, remains anyone’s guess.

Dmitry Novikov, associate professor at the Higher School of Economics:

Trump’s bombastic statement – supplemented by his Q&A with reporters – boils down to three core messages.

First, the objective hasn’t changed: Washington still wants a deal on Ukraine, but only on terms acceptable to the US.

Second, the carrot for Moscow remains the same: Promises of good political relations (‘talking to Putin is always pleasant’) and vague suggestions of future economic cooperation (‘Russia has enormous potential’).

Third, the stick – for now – isn’t particularly impressive. The announcement of Patriot systems for Ukraine is just the latest iteration of something Trump and his team have floated before: Boosting Kiev’s air defenses to protect against Russian strikes. And that, it seems, bothers Trump more than the frontline situation itself. He’s criticized Russia before for deep strikes into Ukrainian territory, and he did it again this time – presumably after being shown some grim images.

As for other weapons, there were no specifics – just the familiar ‘billions of dollars in military aid’ line.

The introduction of 100% secondary tariffs, delayed by 50 days, appears to be Trump’s main instrument of coercion. As an economic determinist, he likely believes this is his most powerful and effective threat. But whether it will actually be implemented is unclear. Previous efforts to squeeze Russian energy exports – price caps, import bans – didn’t exactly shut the flow. Russia adapted.

In essence, the message is more psychological than strategic: You’ve got 50 days. After that, I’ll ‘get serious’.

But Trump left one key question unanswered: How far is the US actually willing to go if there’s no progress after 50 days? If tariffs are the endgame, and Washington backs off after that, that’s one scenario. But if those tariffs are just the prelude to broader military or political escalation, that’s something else entirely.

Trump deliberately keeps things murky, leaning on the old idea that ‘a threat is more powerful than an attack’. He seems to be counting on Moscow to imagine the worst.

Nikolai Topornin, director of the Center for European Information:

With his latest statement, Trump didn’t just leave a crack open for Russia – he threw the window wide. He made clear he expects a practical response from Moscow within the next 50 days. As things stand, nothing prevents Russia from acting on the terms previously discussed with Trump: Initiating a 30-day ceasefire and entering talks with Kiev to start hashing out a concrete peace agreement.

Of course, the problem remains that many of Russia’s proposals are fundamentally at odds with Ukraine’s position. Still, from a diplomatic standpoint, the ball is now in Moscow’s court. And Kiev, in the meantime, comes out as the clear short-term beneficiary of Trump’s announcement.

We can expect the usual statements from Moscow rejecting the pressure – that sanctions don’t scare Russia. And it’s true that US-Russia trade is already near zero. There are no billion-dollar contracts left to speak of. Most economic ties were severed back in the Biden era. Washington has already imposed sweeping sanctions on Russian businesses and the financial sector.

So if nothing changes over the next 50 days, the US will likely continue expanding military aid to Ukraine – but on a pragmatic basis. In doing so, Washington can channel European funding to keep its own defense industry running at full speed.

Sergey Oznobishchev, head of the Military-Political Analysis and Research Projects Section at IMEMO RAS:

Trump needs to save face. He once vowed to end the conflict in a single day – but that hasn’t happened. Russia isn’t backing down, isn’t agreeing to a ceasefire with Ukraine, and isn’t halting its offensive. There’s nothing Trump can point to and sell as even a partial fulfillment of that campaign promise. So now he’s under pressure to act.

He’s signaling to Moscow that he expects some kind of reciprocal move – and he’s trying to extract it through a mix of diplomatic pressure and economic threats.

What exactly Trump discussed with the Russian president remains unclear. But it’s likely that Russia’s core position was laid out: Full control over the territories now enshrined in its constitution. Russia simply cannot walk away from those claims. It’s even possible that Trump’s 50-day deadline is meant as a tacit acknowledgment of that reality – a window for Russia to consolidate its hold before talks resume. That would be his version of compromise.

Trump often opens negotiations with bold, hardline offers – the kind you ‘can’t refuse’, as American political lore puts it – only to walk them back later and land somewhere in the middle. That’s his style, drawn straight from the world of business deals: Apply pressure first, then strike a bargain.

Of course, these latest announcements – especially the pledge to send weapons – will only increase criticism of Trump within Russia. Still, this isn’t the harshest stance he could have taken. It’s a tough message, but one that still leaves room for maneuver.

Nikolai Silayev, senior research fellow at the Institute for International Studies, MGIMO University:

I wouldn’t say we’re standing at the brink of a new escalation. Trump hasn’t endorsed the sanctions bill currently under discussion in Congress. Instead, he’s talking about imposing 100% tariffs by executive order – just as he’s done in the past. In doing so, he’s clearly distancing himself from that legislation.

There are no immediate sanctions coming. The 50-day timeline he mentioned is just the latest in a series of deadlines he’s floated before.

On the one hand, Trump wants to avoid sliding back into the kind of confrontation with Russia that defined the Biden era. On the other, he doesn’t want to see Ukraine defeated – nor is he willing to accept a Russian ceasefire on Moscow’s terms, since that could be spun as a US loss, and by extension, a personal failure. He keeps repeating that this is “Biden’s war” – but the longer it drags on, the more it becomes his own.

As for the Patriots, it’s Europe that will be footing the bill. Trump didn’t promise any new funding from the US budget. What remains to be seen is how many systems and missiles the US defense industry can actually produce – and how many European countries are willing to buy.

From Moscow’s perspective, this is still the US arming Ukraine. Washington is also continuing to share intelligence and support logistics. No one in the Kremlin is going to say, ‘Thank you, Grandpa Trump – now you’re just a vendor’. That’s not how this will be seen.

Sergey Poletaev, political commentator:

The scale of this conflict is such that no single move – not by the US, not by Russia, not by anyone – can produce a sudden breakthrough. The only person who could do that is Vladimir Zelensky – by surrendering. There’s no weapon system that could fundamentally change the course of this war, short of nuclear arms. And the only other game-changer would be direct involvement by the US or NATO – but if they’d wanted that, they would’ve intervened long ago.

As for Trump’s tariff threats against Russia and its trading partners – that’s really just kicking the can down the road for another 50 days. Classic Trump.

From Russia’s standpoint, we’re not shipping anything to the US anyway. As for our trading partners – yes, we’re talking about China and India. But this move would only add to the contradictions in Trump’s chaotic tariff diplomacy, where every issue is approached through economic threats. I don’t think it’s going to work.

I don’t see how Trump thinks he can pressure India. China – maybe. But Beijing is already staring down a whole slew of tariff threats. One more won’t make things easier – just worse. If anything, it will reinforce the idea that the US sees China as vulnerable to pressure. And that’s not a message China will take lightly.

Konstantin Kosachev, Russian senator and foreign affairs specialist:

If this is all Trump had to say about Ukraine today, then the hype was definitely overblown. Most of Lindsey Graham’s alarmist fantasies remain just that – fantasies. A 500% sanctions package makes little practical sense.

As for Europe, it looks like they’ll keep picking up the tab – again and again. What they thought was free cheese turned out to be a trap. The only true beneficiary here is the US defense industry.

Ukraine, meanwhile, is left to fight until the last Ukrainian – a fate they seem to have chosen for themselves.

But 50 days is a long time. A lot can change – on the battlefield, in Washington, and in NATO capitals. What matters most, though, is that none of this has any real impact on our own determination. At least, that’s how I see it.

Alexander Dugin, political philosopher and commentator:

Trump has given Russia 50 days to complete the job: To fully liberate our four regions, take Kharkov, Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk – and ideally, Kiev. After that, he’s promised to get truly angry and hit back with 100% tariffs on our key oil buyers – India and China. That’s a serious threat.

So now we have 50 days to finish what we’ve left unfinished over the past 25 years.

This is precisely the kind of moment captured in the old Russian saying: ‘We take a long time to harness the horses, but we ride fast’. Given the circumstances, I believe any weapons can be used, against any targets. We have 50 days to win.

July 15, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Moldova’s ‘Victory’ Bloc Seeks Union State With Russia – Opposition Leader

Moldova’s opposition bloc Pobeda (Victory) and Sor party leader Ilan Shor
Sputnik – 14.07.2025

CHISINAU – On Monday, Ilan Shor, leader of Moldova’s opposition Pobeda (Victory) bloc, announced the bloc’s support for establishing a Union State between Moldova and Russia, along with greater cooperation between the country and the Eurasian Economic Union.

“Pobeda will fight for the right to represent a free Moldova in parliament. We believe in our strength, because we have the votes of hundreds of thousands of people, and we will never betray their trust. Pobeda offers a clear and transparent program: for the Union State with Russia; for trade and economic cooperation with the EAEU countries; for cheap gas and fair prices; for the preservation of national identity and sovereignty,” Shor wrote on Telegram.

According to him, the bloc will closely monitor the actions of the Central Election Commission, acknowledging that the authorities may attempt to prevent the registration of the political formation.

July 15, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics | , | Leave a comment

Bornholm Island: NATO’s Baltic Bridgehead for Aggression Against Russia

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 14.07.2025

Copenhagen is using the old ‘Russian threat’ excuse to justify the militarization of its easternmost island, but NATO operational planning and drills reveal otherwise.

Where is Bornholm?

Situated about 140 km southeast of Copenhagen in waters between Sweden, Poland and Germany, the 588 km2 island has been a strategic stronghold since medieval times, used by Vikings, Scandinavian kings, Napoleon and the Nazis for both defensive and offensive operations.

In 2022, NATO announced plans to turn the Baltic Sea into a ‘NATO lake’. Bornholm would play a key role in this calculus.

Breaking Old Agreements

Freed from the Nazis by the Red Army in WWII, Bornholm was returned to Denmark by Moscow on the understanding that foreign troops would never again be stationed there. Denmark reneged in 2022, okaying large-scale NATO drills on and around the island.

Drills have included deployments of US HIMARS MLRS (300 km max range) and Typhon missile system components (2,500 km range). The Typhon TEL can fire SM-6 and Tomahawk missiles, whose payload, notably, can include nuclear warheads.

Military Infrastructure Buildup

  • construction of a 85m spy tower in Ostermarie (2017)
  • inclusion in NATO’s Baltic “island chain” strategy alongside Gotland and Aland (2023)
  • plans to add 5k troops to the local garrison (2025)

Air and Naval Power Projection

Bornholm’s Ronne Airport has a military apron, and has been used in drills by Finnish F-18 jets (2024). Moscow has accused USAF strategic bombers flying toward Russian cities including Kaliningrad and St. Petersburg of hiding in the island’s airspace to avoid interception by Russian jets.

Ronne’s seaport has undergone expansions (2023) to accommodate large ships, including military and support vessels.

Fictitious Justifications

“Bornholm’s militarization is taking place under the false pretext of the need to protect the island from the ‘Russian threat,’” even though Russia “has never had aggressive intentions toward Denmark,” Ambassador Vladimir Barbin has said.

July 14, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Trump issues threat to Russia over Ukraine conflict

RT | July 14, 2025

US President Donald Trump has threatened to impose “severe” tariffs of up to 100% on Russia’s trading partners unless a deal is reached to end the Ukraine conflict within 50 days.

Trump issued the warning on Monday during a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in the Oval Office.

“We’re very, very unhappy – I am – with [Russia], and we’re going to be doing very severe tariffs if we don’t have a deal in about 50 days,” he stated.

Trump blamed his predecessor Joe Biden for dragging Washington into the conflict, saying the US had spent approximately $350 billion on aid for Ukraine.

The US president also mentioned a congressional bill that would impose tougher sanctions on Russia, saying, “I’m not sure we need it, but it’s good they’re doing it… could be very useful.” A Senate vote is expected next week.

He noted that, if there was no progress on Ukraine, slapping Russia with secondary US tariffs would not require congressional approval.

Secondary tariffs are sometimes introduced on countries that do business with a sanctioned country.

Trump also announced that the US will send weapons to Ukraine through NATO, which would handle both payment and distribution.

“We’ve made a deal today where we are going to be sending them weapons, and they’re going to be paying for them,” he said.

Russia has repeatedly denounced the West for supplying Ukraine with weapons, warning that this only serves to prolong the conflict and makes no impact on its outcome.

The Russian stock market soared on Trump’s remarks, with the main index jumping nearly 3%, according to data from the Moscow Exchange.

July 14, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , , , | 1 Comment

Zelensky threatens ‘long-range strikes’ in Russia

RT | July 14, 2025

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has threatened new strikes deep inside Russia, days after the US pledged to resume military aid to Kiev.

Zelensky made the remarks after a meeting with Defense Minister Rustem Umerov, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces Aleksandr Syrsky, and Chief of the General Staff Andrey Gnatov on Sunday.

“Our units will continue to destroy the occupiers and do everything possible to bring the war onto Russian territory. We are preparing our new long-range strikes,” Zelensky wrote on X.

He added that Ukraine is preparing for a visit by US presidential envoy Keith Kellogg and will “work with partners on arms deliveries and scaling up joint production of essential defense assets.”

Among its recent attacks far from the front line, Ukraine targeted military airfields housing strategic bombers in several Russian regions last month. Ukrainian drones and missiles also repeatedly struck apartment blocks and other civilian infrastructure. According to Moscow, Ukraine was responsible for the passenger train derailment on March 31, which left seven people dead.

The EU has allocated hundreds of billions of euros in recent months to expand its military-industrial complex and support Ukraine’s domestic armament production.

Berlin will provide Ukraine its first batch of long-range missiles financed by Germany in the coming weeks, Major General Christian Freuding, who oversees the coordination of the country’s military support for Kiev, has said.

US President Donald Trump said earlier this week that the Pentagon will resume deliveries to Kiev, following weeks of suspension, and reportedly considers approving a first new aid package since returning to office.

Russia has said that it views the use of foreign-supplied missiles as direct participation by Western states in the conflict and claimed that Ukrainian troops cannot operate sophisticated weapons systems on their own.

July 14, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Lasha Kasradze: Azerbaijan as the Next Frontline Against Russia & Iran?

Glenn Diesen | July 13, 2025

As Azerbaijan takes an increasingly hostile approach to both Russia and Iran, it risks becoming a proxy in a wider regional war. Azerbaijan’s Zangezur corridor connects Azerbaijan closer to Turkey, and thus NATO. Many uncertainties emerge in terms of what happens to Armenia, to what extent Turkey and NATO can project power that deep into the South Caucasus, and how Russia and Iran will react. Lasha Kasradze is an international affairs analyst from Georgia, and an expert on the wider region.

July 14, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Video | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Moscow dismisses US media’s Putin-Iran nuclear claim

RT | July 13, 2025

Moscow has dismissed a US media report claiming that Russian President Vladimir Putin urged Iran to accept a nuclear deal that would strip it of the right to enrich uranium, calling it a dirty ploy to stoke tensions in the region.

In a statement on Sunday, the Russian Foreign Ministry slammed Western outlets as a “tool” in the hands of the political establishment and “deep state,” which it said does not hesitate to resort to any means, including provocative acts and “fake news.”

Russian officials singled out the US outlet Axios, which it described as a “toilet tank” that consistently spreads targeted disinformation, mentioning in particular its recent article titled “Scoop: Putin urges Iran to take ‘zero enrichment’ nuclear deal with US, sources say.”

The Axios story, the ministry said, was “apparently yet another dirty, politicized campaign launched with the aim of escalating tensions around Iran’s nuclear program.” It also reiterated that Moscow’s position remains that the crisis around Iran’s nuclear program should be resolved “exclusively by political and diplomatic means.”

On Friday, Axios reported, citing European and Israeli officials, that Putin told both US President Donald Trump and officials in Tehran following the 12-day Israel-Iran war that he would support a nuclear deal involving “zero enrichment.”

One European official told the paper that Putin encouraged Tehran to move in this direction in order to aid talks with Washington, but noted that the Iranians declined to consider the idea.

Iran’s Tasnim news agency, citing sources, reported that Tehran had received no such messages from Putin.

The US has insisted that Iran commit to zero enrichment as part of a potential nuclear deal, a demand Tehran has dismissed as unacceptable, explaining it needs such capacity for its civilian nuclear program. Iran also maintains it has no plans to create a nuclear bomb.

July 13, 2025 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | Leave a comment

Russia Accuses NATO of Provoking Escalation in Baltic Sea

Sputnik – 13.07.2025

MOSCOW – Russia notes the line of NATO countries on restricting freedom of navigation in the Baltic region, the military-political situation has become significantly more complicated because of this, the risks of escalation have increased, Russian Ambassador to Oslo Nikolay Korchunov told Sputnik.

“We note the deliberate line of NATO member countries on restricting freedom of navigation in the region, launching for these purposes, under the pretext of threats to underwater infrastructure, among other things, the alliance’s mission ‘Baltic Sentinel,’ which is accompanied by the strengthening of the naval group operating in the open sea, as a result of which the military-political situation in the region has become significantly more complicated and the risks of possible escalation and conflict have increased,” Korchunov said in an interview with the agency.

The ambassador emphasized that the norms of international maritime law must be observed by all countries in the region.

“We proceed from the imperative of compliance by all countries in the region with the norms of international maritime law and the exercise of restraint in the interests of ensuring commercial shipping and preventing military incidents. It is obvious that in the current conditions, the forces and means of the Baltic Fleet and other security services of the Russian Federation in the Baltic Sea region are an important factor in ensuring freedom of navigation both in the interests of the Russian Federation and third countries,” Korchunov noted.

He drew parallels with the actions of Russia’s neighboring states in the past — Poland, Germany, Sweden — in the 17th-19th centuries.

“They also tried with all their might to prevent the passage of ships carrying Russian goods through the Baltic to the priority markets of Britain, Holland and France. The Swedes did not even shy away from pirate seizures. Ultimately, these efforts, as is known, ended in failure. It is regrettable that the spirit of unfair rivalry and confrontation is once again being implanted in the Baltic, which for decades has been a platform for peaceful multilateral cooperation,” the diplomat said.

July 13, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

US-led drills pose threat to peace in Asia – Lavrov

RT | July 12, 2025

The military activities of the US and its allies around the Korean Peninsula threaten the stability of the entire region, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said during his visit to North Korea.

The US, South Korea, and Japan are increasing the number of joint military drills, some of which involve “a nuclear component,” Lavrov told reporters at a press conference in Wonsan on Saturday.

“This does not contribute to peace and stability, not only on the Korean Peninsula but throughout Northeast Asia,” the diplomat said, expressing skepticism about Seoul’s intentions to normalize relations with Pyongyang.

Lavrov condemned what he described as “dangerous attempts by actors outside the Indo-Pacific to form exclusive alliances and expand NATO infrastructure in the region.” He emphasized that countries should not build alliances at the expense of others, adding that both Russia and North Korea are committed to “equal and indivisible security” for all nations in Eurasia.

The US, South Korea, and Japan conducted joint exercises this week involving the deployment of America’s nuclear-capable B-52H strategic bombers. In a joint statement, the allies accused Pyongyang of “unlawful activities” that “destabilize the Korean Peninsula.”

Russia and North Korea signed a defense pact in June 2024, after which Pyongyang dispatched troops to help expel Ukrainian forces from Russia’s Kursk region later that year. The cooperation is a testament to the “invincible brotherhood” between the two countries, Lavrov said.

July 13, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Iran, US Respond With Attention to Russia’s Proposal to Help Iran Deplete Uranium

Sputnik – 11.07.2025

MOSCOW – Iran, the United States and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have paid close attention to Russia’s proposal to remove excess enriched uranium from Iran, but the matter has not yet reached specifics, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov told Sputnik.

“We have conveyed this proposal to both the Iranian side and the American side, and the IAEA is also aware of it. Its purpose is to solve two problems at once – one is related to the fact that the Iranian side, as we understand it, is firmly insisting on the importance of preserving the right to carry out enrichment work on its territory. On the other hand, we see that there are opponents of Tehran who are expressing great concern about the accumulation on its territory of uranium enriched above the levels that are usually used in the manufacture of fuel for nuclear reactors,” Ryabkov said.

If Russia could take this material out of Iran and carry out appropriate work with it in order to produce fuel from it or manage it in such a way that it becomes a commercial product subject to sale, then both of these tasks could be effectively solved, he said.

“Considering that it is still unclear how the dialogue will proceed, whether it will proceed at all, and if it does, in what format, we have not yet reached the specifics of such practical measures. But all interested parties approached this with attention and, perhaps, one can say, perceived this as a reflection of the seriousness of our efforts, the seriousness of our intentions in this regard,” Ryabkov said.

July 12, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Apartment block destroyed by Ukrainian airstrike – Russian governor

RT | July 11, 2025

A five-story residential building collapsed after being hit in a Ukrainian air strike, the governor of Russia’s Kherson Region, Vladimir Saldo, said. Ukraine’s forces are attacking the area with drones to prevent rescue teams from helping people trapped under the rubble, according to the local authorities.

The building was located in the town of Aleshki, about seven kilometers from the Dnieper River, which separates Russian and the Ukrainian forces in the area.

“The enemy has hit a residential building in Aleshki in an airstrike,” Saldo told Russian media, including TASS and Ria Novosti. “The building has collapsed. Civilians are trapped underneath.”

The exact number of people affected remains unclear, as Ukrainian troops are preventing emergency services from reaching the site with drone attacks, regional authorities said.

Kiev’s forces have been regularly launching attacks against various Russian regions bordering Ukraine, often hitting civilian targets. A Ukrainian drone struck a public beach in the city of Kursk as people gathered to celebrate the Day of Family, Love, and Fidelity, a holiday celebrated on July 8. The strike killed four civilians, including a five-year-old boy.

Last week, four people were killed in a Ukrainian strike on the city of Donetsk. Ukrainian forces used a US-made HIMARS multiple rocket launcher in the attack. Another woman was severely wounded and three others sustained moderate injuries, according to the local authorities.

Last month, the Russian Foreign Ministry accused Kiev of deliberately committing atrocities against civilians in Donbass, including mass killings of elderly people and drone strikes on residential homes.

“It is a deliberate policy that has already been elevated to the level of state doctrine,” Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said at the time.

July 11, 2025 Posted by | War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »