Russian missiles ‘fool’ US-made Patriots – Ukrainian military
RT | May 26, 2025
US-designed Patriot air defense systems are struggling to keep pace with Russia’s missile technology, particularly the Iskander missiles, Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Igor Ignat admitted on Monday.
Kiev has long praised the MIM-104 Patriot as a vital part of its arsenal following the deployment of the first battery in April 2023. But the American system is showing critical limitations in the face of Russia’s weaponry, Ignat told Le Monde in an interview.
“The Iskander missiles perform evasive maneuvers in the final phase, thwarting the Patriot’s trajectory calculations,” he said. “In addition, the Iskander can drop decoys capable of fooling Patriot missiles.”
While Ukrainian officials previously lauded the Patriot system for its ability to intercept Russian hypersonic Kinzhal missiles, Moscow has questioned such claims. Russian officials also argue that Kiev often overstates the number of missiles it downs compared to the number actually launched.
As of May, Ukraine is reported to have six active Patriot systems, primarily donated by the US and Germany, with additional components provided by the Netherlands and Romania.
Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has called the Patriot system the only viable defense against Russian strikes, and has stated an aim to acquire a total of 25 units. He recently proposed that Kiev’s European backers fund the purchase of an additional ten systems for Ukraine at a cost of $15 billion. However, the administration of US President Donald Trump has dismissed the proposal as unrealistic.
Ukraine also faces dwindling supplies of interceptor missiles for its Western-donated platforms, even as Russian forces adapt their drone tactics to circumvent existing countermeasures.
Ukrainian forces have escalated their own drone offensives against Russia, moving from overnight attacks to continuous launches throughout the day. The shift comes amid increased pressure from Washington for continued direct peace negotiations. On Sunday, Trump expressed frustration with the lack of progress, blaming both Moscow and Kiev.
Washington’s “Golden Dome” – Multi-Trillion Tax Dollar Heist at Best, Dangerous Provocation at Worst
By Brian Berletic – New Eastern Outlook – May 25, 2025
US President Donald Trump has announced his administration has chosen the architecture for the proposed Golden Dome missile defense system, claiming it will cost $175 billion and be operational in “less than three years” with a “success rate close to 100%.”
During President Trump’s announcement on May 21, 2025, it was claimed the Golden Dome will consist of technology deployed across land, sea, and space capable of intercepting hypersonic, ballistic, and advanced cruise missiles, “even if they are launched from other sides of the world and even if they are launched from space.”
Former-US President Ronald Reagan’s “Star Wars” program (also known as the Strategic Defense Initiative) was repeatedly cited during the announcement. That program sought to use space-based weapons to void the doctrine of “mutually assured destruction” allowing the US to conduct a nuclear or non-nuclear first strike on another nation and avoid what had otherwise been an inevitable nuclear retaliation that would destroy both nations in the process.
Specifically, because mutually assured destruction was seen as a better deterrence against a first strike by one nuclear-armed nation against another, along with concerns over costs, technological limitations, and then-existing arms control treaties like the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM), the initiative was never fully realized.
Granting the US Impunity to Attack, Not “Defend” Itself
US Space Force General Michael Guetlein, picked to lead the Golden Dome project and present during its announcement, would claim:
As you’re aware, our adversaries have become very capable and very intent on holding the homeland at risk. While we have been focused on keeping the peace overseas, our adversaries have been quickly modernizing their nuclear forces, building out ballistic missiles capable of hosting multiple warheads, building out hypersonic missiles capable of attacking the United States within an hour and traveling at 6,000 mph, building cruise missiles that can navigate around our radar and our defenses and building submarines that can sneak up on our shores and worse yet, building space weapons. It is time that we change that equation and start doubling down on the protection of the homeland.
Yet what General Guetlein calls “keeping the peace overseas,” is in reality the United States encroaching along the borders and shores of nations like Russia, Iran, China, and North Korea.
This includes the stationing of not only missile defense systems like Patriot, THAAD, and the Aegis Ashore system in close proximity to these nations in violation of the ABM treaty the US has since abandoned, but also first-strike offensive weapons like the Typhon missile launcher capable of firing both Standard SM-6 anti-air missiles, but also ground-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles previously prohibited under the INF treaty the US has also since abandoned.
For example, the US has positioned THAAD systems in both the Middle East and Asia, and its Typhon missile system is currently stationed in the Philippines with additional units on the way, specifically aimed at China.
Beyond the global-spanning military footprint of the United States, Washington is also preparing for or already directing multiple proxy wars against these nations.
The conflict in Ukraine was entirely engineered by the United States, beginning with Kiev’s political capture in 2014, the training and arming of Ukraine’s military, and the capture, reorganization, and direction of Ukraine’s intelligence agencies by the US Central Intelligence Agency.
The US has been waging war and proxy war against Iran for decades, including invading and occupying Afghanistan and Iraq right on its borders, invading and overthrowing the government of Iran’s ally Syria, the waging of war on Yemen-based Ansar Allah – also an Iranian ally. The US also maintains constant financial, political, and military support for Israel, which has repeatedly attacked Iran and its allies.
And despite officially recognizing Taiwan as part of “One China,” the United States has continued supporting separatist political parties administering Taipei, is arming local military forces, and is even stationing US troops on the island province itself.
All of this has forced Russia, Iran, China, and other nations to respond by bolstering military spending, increasing research and development into missile technology, and the creation of credible deterrents against decades-spanning US aggression and proxy war along and even within their borders.
While the Trump administration depicts the Golden Dome as necessary to “forever end the missile threat to the American homeland,” it is instead being built to enable the US to forever threaten other nations around the globe with its missiles.
Dubious Claims About Golden Dome’s “Near 100%” Success
At one point during the Golden Dome’s announcement, US President Trump would claim:
I will tell you an adversary told me, a very big adversary, told me the most brilliant people in the world are in Silicon Valley. He said, “we cannot duplicate them. We can’t.”
He also claimed:
We have things that nobody else can have. You see what we’ve done helping Israel. You probably wouldn’t have in Israel. They launched probably 500 missiles all together and I think one half of a missile got through and that was only falling to the ground as scrap metal.
Except none of this is true.
If President Trump is referring to the 2024 Iranian retaliatory strike on Israel, up to 200 missiles were fired, with dozens if not scores of them circumventing Israeli missile defenses and striking targets, including dozens striking and damaging Israel’s Nevatim Airbase alone, according to NPR.
No air or missile defense system has a “success rate close to 100%.”
While any particular system may have a “success rate close to 100%” intercepting individual targets, retaliatory strikes are planned specifically to include a large enough number of missiles, drones, and other projectiles to saturate a defense system’s ability to intercept them all during a single attack. This means that while many incoming targets will be intercepted, many others will not, and critical targets will inevitably be struck and destroyed.
Regarding the state of US missile defense technology, unless President Trump is referring to undisclosed innovations, nothing the US currently is known to possess in terms of air and missile defense systems consists of “things that nobody else can have.”
And while in the past Silicon Valley drove unparalleled advances in technology contributing to a decisive military advantage for the US, the gap has since drastically closed and in some instances is widening in favor of nations like Russia and China.
The conflict in Ukraine, for example, has demonstrated glaring Russian advantages in several key areas that void the entire premise the Golden Dome is predicated on. Russia has demonstrated that it is capable of producing both larger quantities of ballistic and cruise missiles as well as layered integrated air defense systems and at a fraction of the cost the US and its European partners spend on arms and ammunition production.
Russia’s advantage is so great, it prompted the first-ever US National Defense Industrial Strategy in 2022.
The paper admitted the US (and the rest of the collective West) suffers from a bloated, inefficient military industrial base incapable of meeting the demands of the type of large-scale, high-intensity, protracted warfare taking place in Ukraine and likely to take place in future conflicts with either Russia or China.
As previously reported, the paper lays out a multitude of problems plaguing the US military industrial base including a lack of surge capacity, an inadequate workforce, overdependence on offshore downstream suppliers, as well as insufficient “demand signals” to motivate private industry partners to produce what’s needed, in the quantities needed, when it is needed.
In fact, the majority of the problems identified by the report involved private industry and its unwillingness to meet national security requirements because they were not profitable.
Nations like Russia and China do not rely on private industry partners for national defense programs. Much of the industrial power researching, developing, and mass-producing arms and ammunition in these countries takes place within state-owned enterprises. Because national defense is the chief priority of these enterprises, money is invested whether it is profitable or not.
This is what allows Russian and Chinese industry to maintain huge workforces, facilities, and tooling even when production is reduced, while private industry in the West would slash all three to maximize profitability. The first model allows a nation to surge the production of arms and ammunition on short notice – the other requires strong enough “demand signals” to justify the time-consuming process of building up the levels of all three – a process that can take years.
None of the problems described regarding the US military industrial base have been addressed since the National Defense Industrial Strategy was published in 2022. Corporations like Lockheed, Raytheon, L3Harris, and newer companies like Anduril slated to play a role in the proposed Golden Dome system continue to pursue a strictly for-profit model that will create the same disparity in quantity and quality seen playing out on and over the battlefield in Ukraine.
This leaves the likelihood the Golden Dome – like all other modern US military programs – will fall far short of stated expectations because of the fraud, waste, and abuse that defines US military industrial production.
The ultimate irony is that while the Golden Dome is sold to the public as “protecting” America, vast sums of public money that could actually improve the lives of Americans at home through infrastructure, education, and healthcare, will instead be siphoned off by demonstrably incompetent and corrupt arms manufacturers, all in an attempt to enhance Washington’s ability to menace the rest of the world with greater impunity – not protect the US at home.
The rest of the world will predictably react to the Golden Dome by creating their own means to defend themselves and retaliate against the US if attacked, making Americans not only less safe, but in the process of building the Golden Dome, less prosperous.
Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer.
Scott Ritter: Will Trump Own the Ukraine War or Walk Away?
Glenn Diesen | May 23, 2025
Scott Ritter is a former intelligence officer in the US Marine Corps and a former UN Weapons Inspector. He expects that the negotiations will fail, and Trump will distance himself from the war. Thus, the failure of negotiations will hurt Ukraine and Europe the most.
Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:
Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_DiesenPatreon:
/ glenndiesen
Support the channel: PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenn…
Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/gdieseng
Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f
Trump’s phone diplomacy with Putin shatters the Euro-Atlantic Cold War mental bloc
Strategic Culture Foundation | May 23, 2025
As the old saying goes, “it’s good to talk.” Good, that is, for most reasonable people who understand that dialogue is a process that opens positive possibilities, especially when the dialogue is conducted respectfully and sincerely.
This week, US President Donald Trump held his third phone conversation with Russian leader Vladimir Putin since he was inaugurated in the White House in January. The latest one on Monday was even more substantive than the previous calls, lasting about two hours, and, according to both sides, it was conducted in a friendly and productive manner.
Of course, the main topic of conversation was finding a peaceful end to the more than three-year war in Ukraine. Trump deserves credit for at least trying to bring peace to the table, instead of more and more weapons, as his predecessor, the mentally decrepit Joe Biden, did, and assorted European leaders would like to continue doing.
There was also discussion between Trump and Putin, using first names in their verbal exchanges, about repairing US-Russia relations for trade and strategic cooperation.
That portends a transformation in Washington’s erstwhile agenda of hostility towards Russia.
Tellingly, however, the talking was deemed “not good” by others, as could be gleaned from the vexed reactions to Trump’s call with Putin from European leaders and American advocates of the Euro-Atlantic alliance.
European politicians were reportedly “stunned” and “shocked” by Trump’s diplomatic outreach to Putin.
Following his conversation with the Russian president, Trump briefed five European leaders jointly. They included Germany’s Merz, France’s Macron, Italy’s Meloni, Finland’s Stubb, and the European Commission’s chief Von der Leyen. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky was also part of the conference call. The non-entity British prime minister was not included. Sometimes, talking with toxic people is not good!
The Europeans tried to put a positive spin on the briefing from Trump, with Von der Leyen describing it as “good”. But that was the Europeans trying to save face from what is a stunning blow to the Euro-Atlantic alliance.
In a press conference at the White House on Monday, after his calls with Putin and the Europeans, Trump made it clear from his statements that the vaunted alliance is shattered. He is no longer listening to them, and his agenda towards Russia is transformational, if it is permitted to develop.
Trump rejected the European demands for an immediate 30-day ceasefire in Ukraine and more economic sanctions on Russia. He said that imposing more sanctions did not help resolve the conflict. Trump also indicated that he concurred with Russia’s logical position that negotiations must be focused on establishing a lasting peace, one that deals with addressing the root causes of conflict.
The European and Ukrainian demands for a 30-day truce as a precondition are not workable or logical. Indeed, such insistence impedes negotiations. From a cynical point of view, that is why the European backers of the Kiev regime are making such a song and dance about sanctions and the 30-day truce, because those demands are aimed at preventing diplomacy succeeding with Russia.
Britain’s Financial Times headlined its report on the Trump-Putin call: “Why Europe fears the worst after Trump’s ‘excellent’ chat with Putin”.
The BBC inadvertently shed light with its headline: “Trump’s call with Putin exposes shifting ground on Ukraine peace talks”. The BBC-speak about “shifting ground on peace talks” is an Orwellian translation. What the BBC should have said in plain language was that Trump is shafting the European warmongers.
Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, the supporters of the NATO proxy war against Russia tried their best to undermine Trump’s diplomacy.
The New York Times – the CIA’s main choice for gaslighting the American population – called the phone call a “diplomatic win for Russia” and snidely said, “Trump backs off ceasefire call”. The latter implied that Trump is against peace when, in fact, he is the only Western adult in the room calling for peace.
The Washington Post also did its best to smear Trump, reporting: “After call, Trump gives Russia more time for Ukraine war”. An op-ed piece also mockingly claimed: “Trump wasted two hours with Vladimir Putin”.
CNN, another outlet that has loyally and absurdly pushed the NATO proxy war as a noble endeavor, accused Trump for “siding with his friend in the Kremlin” and claimed that “peace in Ukraine looks further away after Trump’s call with Putin”, adding that “Putin got exactly what he wanted… stringing Trump along.”
The riot of negative and vitriolic reactions on both sides of the Atlantic shows that the US-European alliance under Trump has shattered. That alliance embodied by the NATO military bloc has been the linchpin of the “Collective West” for eight decades. It has now cracked wide open.
Unlike his predecessors in the White House, Donald Trump does not want to pursue a destructive and futile policy of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia. That policy is what engendered the war in Ukraine, from the CIA-backed coup in Kiev in 2014, to the provocative weaponization of Ukrainian NeoNazis, until Russia’s intervention in February 2022 to defend its rights.
Trump appears to genuinely want to end the proxy war and to normalize relations with Russia for the sake of world peace, and, why not, good business.
For the Euro-Atlanticists, with their incurable, imperialist, and Russophobic mindsets, such a policy is anathema.
However, the good news is that the gaping cracks in the so-called Collective West now provide a path to peace.
Trump and Putin can end the war in Ukraine and negotiate an important peace deal that addresses Russia’s historic security grievances that stem from the decades of NATO aggression, which past American presidents and their European surrogates have facilitated.
For Trump to do that, he needs to listen carefully to the Russian leadership and reciprocate. If a new detente can be achieved, then the world will be a better, more secure, and peaceful place.
The other thing that Trump needs to do is to dismiss European lackeys with their warmongering servility to the status quo ante. They are has-beens and have nothing constructive to offer.
Trump’s phone call with Putin this week has had a major impact, and one that has significant potential for peace. The cracks in the Cold War mental bloc, so to speak, are a way forward.
Russian military strikes drone-making plant in Kiev – MOD
RT | May 24, 2025
The Russian military has carried out a successful strike against a drone and missile production plant in the Ukrainian capital, Kiev, the Defense Ministry in Moscow has said.
The statement, issued by the ministry on Saturday, confirms earlier reports of a large-scale Russian drone and missile strike on Kiev overnight. Witnesses said they heard multiple blasts, with photos uploaded on social media capturing a huge explosion in the city.
“The Russian military performed a group strike with high-precision ground-based weapons and unmanned aerial vehicles against a Ukrainian military-industrial complex enterprise that produces missile weapons and unmanned aerial attack vehicles,” the statement read.
The other targets of the attack were a radar surveillance center and a US-made Patriot air defense system, it added.
“All of the goals of the strike were achieved. All designated targets were hit,” the ministry said.
According to media reports, the Russian strike targeted the Antonov aircraft manufacturing plant in the western part of the capital.
The Russian bombardment came after an intensification of Ukrainian drone attacks on Moscow and other Russian regions this week.
According to the Defense Ministry, 788 drones and 12 missiles were intercepted inside Russia between Tuesday and Friday. Another 104 UAVs were intercepted overnight, the ministry said on Saturday morning.
The Russian Foreign Ministry said on Friday that one person had been killed and 20 others injured, including four children, in Ukrainian drone strikes throughout the week. Four more civilians, including two kids, were wounded after the city of Lgov in Kursk Region was hit by a US-supplied HIMARS multiple rocket launcher, according to the ministry.
The Russian military said it would respond appropriately to the intensified drone raids by Kiev, but “unlike the Ukrainian side, our targets will be strictly limited to military facilities and defense industry plants,” it said.
Russian Ambassador Slams UK-German Missile Scheme As Militarization of Europe
Sputnik – 23.05.2025
The recent development of a new precision weapon with a 2,000-kilometer range—announced on May 15 by the UK and Germany—represents another setback for arms control, following the collapse of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), Russian Ambassador Andrei Kelin told Sputnik.
“This is part of a new wave of militarization in Europe under the pretext of a threat from Russia. This is another blow to the regime established 30 years ago by the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. This treaty was destroyed by the Americans,” Kelin said.
The high-precision weapon development plan, it was noted, seeks “to strengthen NATO’s deterrent capabilities.”
“When these missiles were banned, Europe’s security as a whole was at a much higher level. Now, unfortunately, another blow will be struck by the Europeans,” the ambassador emphasized.
In July 2024, the British press reported that London was considering a joint missile development project with Berlin, featuring a range of up to 3,200 kilometers. It is believed that these missiles could eventually replace American cruise missiles stationed in Germany.
In early 2019, the United States announced its unilateral withdrawal from the INF Treaty, accusing Russia of violations, a claim Moscow rejected. In July 2019, the Russian president signed a law suspending the treaty, and by August of that year, the pact officially ceased to be in effect. Russia has consistently maintained that it fully complied with the INF’s terms.
Meanwhile, Moscow emphasized that Russia has serious concerns regarding Washington’s implementation of the treaty and pointed out that the allegations of Russian violations are baseless.
Sic Transit Gloria Mundi
By William Schryver – imetatronink – May 22, 2025
The inexorable decline of the American Empire has arrived at an Imperial Paradox. It must either fight a war and die, or not fight a war and die.
Here are the options:
China
Neither South Korea nor Japan want anything to do with a war against China, leaving only the Philippines dumb enough to play along.
The US apparently pulled another brigade out of South Korea. They’ll pull out more in the future. They know damn well the North Koreans could easily conquer the entire peninsula if they chose to do so.
China and its local seas are a vast ocean away from America, and its capacity to defend its local seas is enormous and growing.
The Pentagon must understand it cannot sustain logistics in a war against China in the western Pacific. It simply cannot be done. Anyone who thinks otherwise must upgrade their proficiency in basic arithmetic.
Iran
In the context of a war against Iran, all the geography is against the US.
Iran is an exceedingly mountainous country that has, over the course of millennia, learned to use those mountains to defend itself against would-be conquerors.
They can field a satisfactorily well-equipped million-man army.
They have learned in the 21st century to burrow deep heavily fortified tunnels into their mountains.
Iran is also much more technologically advanced than most people understand. They have become impressively capable in terms of both offensive and defensive missiles. They pose a far greater challenge than the Yemeni have been over the past year and a half.
Indeed, they pose a “near-peer” challenge against US overseas power projection.
The US Navy could only operate at extreme risk in the southern Red Sea, the Gulf of Aden, the Gulf of Oman, the Strait of Hormuz, and the Persian Gulf.

Iran’s sphere of influence
Every US base in the region is well within range of Iranian missile strikes.
The US Navy very demonstrably cannot secure seaborne logistics into the Persian Gulf. They lack both the sealift ships, and the ability to protect them.
They cannot even open the Bab-el-Mandeb!
Russia
From a geographic and logistical standpoint, the only remotely conceivable war is one in Ukraine against Russia.
The US at least has bases and forces already in place in the UK, Germany, Poland, Romania, Finland, and in Baltic chihuahua fantasy-land — and what has served until now as a reasonably secure logistics pathway into all those places.
Of course, whether or not such a condition persists long in a war scenario is another question altogether.
Because, you see, the Russians are now unquestionably the most formidable and battle-hardened military on the planet — at least in the context of a war fought on their doorstep.
So if you’re an empire that thinks it needs a war to reaffirm at least its short-term relevance and fading glory … well, these are your choices.
Russia bans Amnesty International
RT | May 19, 2025
The Office of the Russian Prosecutor General has banned Amnesty International, the London-based non-governmental organization (NGO), accusing it of Russophobia and support for the Ukrainian military.
An official statement on Monday said that while the “organization positions itself as an active champion of human rights throughout the world,” its headquarters in the British capital have turned into a “center for preparing global Russophobic projects, paid for by accomplices of the Kiev regime.”
“Members of the organization support extremist organizations and finance foreign agents’ activities,” the Prosecutor General’s Office claimed.
Amnesty has been actively working toward “increasing military confrontation” since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Russian prosecutors have accused the NGO of whitewashing Ukrainian war crimes, calling for more financial support for Kiev and the economic isolation of Moscow.
Last month, Moscow banned US-based NGO Hope Harbor Society for providing financial support for the Ukrainian military as well as the coordination of anti-Russian protests in the US and other countries.
In early April, the Elton John AIDS Foundation was designated as ‘undesirable’ in Russia after being accused of promoting pro-LGBTQ agenda in the country.
Organizations with such a designation are banned from operating in Russia, and residents or companies may face legal penalties for providing financial or other forms of support to them.
The Russian Justice Ministry currently lists more than 200 such entities, including major Western influence groups such as George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, the US-based German Marshall Fund, and the pro-NATO Atlantic Council.
Trump should not threaten new sanctions when he talks to President Putin
By Ian Proud | Strategic Culture Foundation | May 19, 2025
The U.S. side has made various signals that it might impose massive new sanctions on Russia unless the war ends soon. This would be a huge mistake that would lock in the fighting for the rest of the year and leave Europe on the hook for a massive bill and political disruption that it cannot afford. Trump should not threaten Putin with sanctions when they talk on Monday 19 May.
In the run up to the Russia-Ukraine bilateral peace talks which finally took place in Istanbul last week, both the EU and the UK imposed new sanctions on Russia. On 9 May, as Russian commemorated victory Day, Britain imposed sanctions on Russia’s shadow fleet and the EU followed suit with its 17th package of Russia sanctions on 14 May, the day before the Istanbul talks were due to start. Both the UK and EU have threatened further sanctions should Russia not agree a full and unconditional ceasefire in Ukraine and, with Zelensky, have actively urged the U.S. to follow suit, which it has not done, so far. However, the Americans have spoken increasingly about the possibility of massive new sanctions against Russia: this would be a huge mistake.
Sanctioning a country before peace talks have already started, or while they are still going on, is already a bad look. Very clearly, the Ukrainians, Europeans and British hope that new sanctions will apply such pressure on Russia that it agrees to terms that are more favourable to the Ukrainian side. I.e. that Ukraine does not have to go back to the Istanbul 1 commitment to adopt permanently neutral status. The western mainstream press has been carpet bombing their intellectually degraded readers with the latest press line that Ukraine should not have to go back to the Istanbul 1 text as a starting point for talks.
But there’s a problem. For this strategy to be effective, the sanctions have to work.
As I’ve pointed out before, sanctions against Russian energy have had limited impact, not just since 2022, but since 2014. Nothing about the glidepath of sanctions since February 2014 suggests that new sanctions will work now.
This latest round of UK and EU sanctions aimed to apply more pressure on enforcement of the G7 oil price cap of $60 which was first imposed in December 2022. Since the war started, that policy has failed.
Between 2021 and 2024, total volumes of Russian oil exported fell by just 0.2 million barrels per day, or 2.6%. After a bumper year for tax receipts in 2022 caused by Russian tumbling rouble and skyrocketing energy prices, Russia pulled in current account surpluses of $49.4bn and $62.3bn in 2023 and 2024. This was on the back of still strong goods exports of $425bn and $433bn respectively.
There are several reasons why the oil price cap didn’t work, the biggest being that Russia diverted 3 million barrels per day, around 39.5% of total oil exports to India (1.9 mbd), Türkiye (0.6 mbd) and China (0.5 mbd). Türkiye and India boosted exports of refined fuels to Europe providing a backdoor route for Russian oil to Europe. The second reason the oil price cap didn’t work is the near ten month time lag between war starting and the limit being imposed, which gave Russia space to readjust before punitive measure had been imposed. During this period, oil prices also dropped sharply from the high of $120 in the summer of 2022, to around $80 when the measure was imposed: the G7 missed the boat to impose maximum damage; this reinforces the point I make all the time that coalitions cannot act with speed and decisiveness.
Today, the Russian Urals oil price is below the $60 G7 cap meaning that any registered shipping company can transport it without penalty, which renders the British and European sanctions as pointless in any case.
Let’s be clear, western nations imposing sanctions against Russia that don’t work is not a new phenomena. As I have pointed out many times before, the vast majority (92%) of people that the UK has imposed assets freezes and travel bans upon have never held assets in the UK nor travelled here. For companies, the figure is just 23. The same, I am sure, is true of EU and U.S. sanctions, which cover largely the same cast list of characters and companies, as we all share and compare the same lists of possible designations. Financial sector sanctions prompted a massive readjustment of Russia’s financial sector. Energy and dual use sanctions drove self-sufficiency in technology production, through Rosnet, Gazprom and RosTec: i.e. these companies invested more in R&D on component production while sourcing components from alternative markets, in particular China.
At well over 20,000 sanctions imposed so far, Russia’s economy has proved remarkably robust and its key export sectors still find ways to deliver similar volumes across the world. At some point, I hope policy makers in London, Brussels and Washington will start to ask whether this policy is working. We long ago passed the point of diminishing marginal returns. I fear, however, they have their heads in the sand or, possibly another, darker, place.
So, coming back to Trump’s phone call with Putin on Monday 19 May you might ask yourself, ‘so what if he imposes a few more sanctions if they won’t work anyway?’
Putin would see the imposition of new U.S. sanctions as a complete 180, destroying any emerging trust he had in Trump or any belief in America’s stated intentions to end the war in Ukraine.
It is clear to me that further U.S. sanctions on Russia would kill stone dead any chance of a ceasefire in Ukraine at a time when Russia still has the upper hand. Russia has increased the pace of its advance since the Victory Day ceasefire and seems to be adding new blocks of red to the battle map each day. At the current rate of advance, even without a catastrophic Ukrainian collapse, it seems realistic to expect that Russia would paint out the remaining territory in Donetsk and Luhansk during the remainder of this year. In the process they would need to overcome the heavily fortified towns of Pokrovsk, Kramatorsk and Sloviansk, in what would likely be brutal and attritional battles killing many thousands more on both sides.
Moreover, dragging out the war for longer would simply add to Europe’s liability to fund Ukraine’s war effort at a time when it is only ever going to lose. Ukraine is spending over 26% of GDP on defence in 2025 and 67.5% of its budget expenditure is on defence and security, leaving a budget black hole of $42bn that has to be filled. America under Trump isn’t going to fill this hole. And, as Ukraine is cut off from international lending markets, that black hole is being filled by Europe.
There is no money for this.
Europe has neither the political capital nor the funds to maintain a losing war in Ukraine at enormous expense without massive domestic political blowback in their own countries.
Notwithstanding the possibly understandable fear among European leaders of failing and being seen to fail in Ukraine, keeping the war going is at best, a gesture in cynical self-preservation, pushing their eventual political demise further down the track.
Unfortunately, we have been here so many times before. Right back to the Minsk II agreement, Ukraine has been pushing for ever more sanctions against Russia that only ever served to ramp up resentment and exacerbate the conflict. European leaders have invested too much in Zelensky and his self-serving demands aimed primarily at staying in power. He is quickly becoming the gun that shoots European elites in the head.
If Trump really wants to be seen as a peacemaker, he should avoid doing what every other western leader before him including Sleepy Joe did and resist the temptation to impose more sanctions. Instead, he should continue to press President Putin to continue to engage with bilateral peace talks that finally recommenced in Istanbul last week. He must also tell the Eurocrats and Zelensky that they must make compromises rather than plugging the same old failed prescriptions.
Putin outlines results Moscow seeks in Ukraine
RT | May 18, 2025
Russia is seeking to achieve “lasting and sustainable peace” by eliminating the root causes of the Ukraine conflict, President Vladimir Putin has said, in an extract of an interview released by Russia 1 TV on Sunday.
In a clip posted by journalist Pavel Zarubin on Telegram, Putin stated that Russia has “enough strength and resources to bring what was started in 2022 to its logical conclusion” while accomplishing Moscow’s key goals.
Russia wants to “eliminate the causes that caused this crisis, create conditions for long-term sustainable peace and ensure the security of the Russian state and the interests of our people in those territories that we always talk about,” he added.
The president was apparently referring to Crimea, the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, and the regions of Kherson and Zaporozhye, which overwhelmingly voted in favor of joining Russia in referendums in 2014 and 2022.
People in these former Ukrainian territories “consider Russian to be their native language” and see Russia as their homeland, he said.
Commenting on the ongoing diplomatic engagement with the US to settle the conflict, Putin acknowledged that “the American people, including their president [Donald Trump] have their own national interests.”
“We respect that, and expect to be treated the same way,” he added.
Putin’s remarks come on the heels of the first direct Russia-Ukraine talks since 2022. As a result of Turkish-mediated negotiations in Istanbul, both sides agreed to exchange lists of conditions for a potential ceasefire, conduct a major prisoner swap, and discuss a follow-up meeting. The Kremlin has not ruled out direct talks between Putin and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky if the ongoing peace efforts result in progress and firm agreements.
Following the talks, US President Donald Trump announced he would hold a phone call with his Russian counterpart on Monday, which would focus on trade and resolving the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov discussed the Istanbul negotiations with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who welcomed the results of the talks.
Russia outlines ceasefire conditions in Istanbul talks with Ukraine
Al Mayadeen | May 17, 2025
The Russian Ministry of Defense has revealed the conditions presented by Moscow during the Istanbul negotiations with Kiev, as shared by the Clash Report platform on social media.
The outlined terms reflect Russia’s position on a potential settlement in Ukraine, with an immediate ceasefire as the primary demand.
Russia’s ceasefire conditions
Neutrality modeled on Austria
The first condition proposed by Moscow is that Ukraine adopt a neutral status, similar to Austria’s model. This would prohibit the presence of foreign troops or non-Ukrainian military bases on Ukrainian territory, effectively excluding NATO or other military alliances from operating within the country.
No foreign troops or bases in Ukraine
Moscow emphasized that neutrality must be comprehensive, with Kiev legally committing to reject the stationing of foreign forces and equipment.
Territorial demands and border recognition
Among the key demands, Russia requires Ukraine to formally recognize its constitutional claims over five regions: Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, and the Crimean Peninsula.
The Russian Defense Ministry stressed that the immediate ceasefire is contingent upon the complete withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from all five regions claimed by Russia.
Renunciation of war compensation claims
Moscow is also seeking a mutual legal renunciation of any compensation claims related to war losses, including economic damage and human casualties.
Protection of Russian-speaking citizens
Russia demands that Ukraine commit to European standards on minority rights, specifically to safeguard the rights of Russian-speaking citizens. In addition, Moscow calls for an end to what it terms “nationalist propaganda” within Ukrainian society.
Russia, Ukraine agreed to exchange ceasefire conditions
Later on Saturday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia and Ukraine have agreed to exchange the lists of ceasefire conditions, noting that the Russian side is working on the matter.
The Russian side has prepared such a list and will hand it over, with exchange with the Ukrainian side,” he told reporters.
At the same time, the work on the resolution of the conflict in Ukraine has just started and it will be continued, he added.
Change in Russian delegation to negotiations not being discussed
Peskov pointed out that a change in the composition of the Russian delegation to the negotiations with Ukraine is not being discussed, emphasizing the importance of implementing the agreements reached during the recent Russia-Ukraine talks in Istanbul.
The Kremlin spokesperson also asserted that the ongoing negotiations “are and should be held in a closed format.”
Putin-Zelensky meeting possible if certain agreements reached
The Russian diplomat highlighted that a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky is possible if delegations of both countries reach certain agreements.
“Such a meeting as a result of the work of the delegations of the two sides is possible when certain agreements of these delegations are reached,” he said.
Elsewhere, Peskov also said that Moscow considers the candidacy of Kiev’s signatory as the main and fundamental thing when signing documents between the Russian and Ukrainian delegations during the negotiations.
First direct talks since 2022
Russia and Ukraine held their first direct peace talks in over three years on Friday in Istanbul, reaching a key agreement on a large-scale prisoner exchange but making little headway on a ceasefire or broader political settlement.
The 90-minute meeting marked the first direct diplomatic engagement between Moscow and Kiev since 2022 and came amid continued hostilities and mounting international calls for a de-escalation of the conflict.
Both sides emerged from the session expressing cautious openness to further dialogue, though no immediate breakthrough was achieved on halting the war, now in its third year.
Ukraine entered the talks seeking an unconditional ceasefire, hoping to bring relief to areas devastated by the conflict and to ease the humanitarian crisis affecting millions.
Russia, however, dismissed the demand, and both sides instead agreed to present their respective “visions” for a potential ceasefire at a later stage, according to Russian lead negotiator Vladimir Medinsky.
Prisoner exchange agreement reached
The only concrete outcome of the talks was an agreement to exchange 1,000 prisoners from each side. Both delegations hailed the deal as a positive humanitarian step.
Ukrainian Defense Minister and chief negotiator Rustem Umerov described the agreement as a “great result”, noting that it set the stage for further negotiations.
Ukraine pushes for Putin-Zelensky summit
Kiev pushed for a direct meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Georgiy Tykhy stressed that progress would require “a meeting of leaders.”
Russia acknowledged Ukraine’s request for a summit but did not commit. Putin declined to attend the talks in Turkey, instead dispatching a lower-level delegation. Zelensky accused Putin of being “afraid” to engage directly and said Moscow was not approaching the talks “seriously”.
Rubio urges ‘peaceful end to the war’
Ahead of the negotiations, Ukrainian representatives met with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Trump’s special envoy Keith Kellogg, and national security advisors from Britain, France, and Germany.
State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said Rubio had urged “a peaceful end to the war” and emphasized that “the killing needs to stop.”
Speaking at a European summit in Albania, Zelensky called on the international community to impose further sanctions on Russia if the talks failed to yield results, warning of global consequences should diplomatic efforts collapse.
Preliminary talks in Istanbul are a start… the real show to come is Trump and Putin
Strategic Culture Foundation | May 16, 2025
The talks in Istanbul this week provide a prospect for peace. It bears emphasizing that the three-year proxy war could have been avoided if diplomacy had been permitted by Washington in early 2022 instead of being sabotaged.
Three years on, we have a new president in the White House, and there appears to be a more enlightened policy. Or maybe it’s an implicit admission that the U.S. proxy war agenda is a failure and can’t go on.
In any case, Trump and his envoys are unequivocally saying that they want to stop the bloodshed in Ukraine. That’s a big change from his predecessor, Joe Biden, who vowed to back Ukraine for as long as it takes in a fantastical, reckless pursuit to strategically defeat Russia.
It was the Biden administration, along with the British government, that intervened to scupper nascent peace talks in March 2022 between Russia and Ukraine for a peace deal. Washington and London coaxed the Kiev regime to fight on with promises of more weapons.
The result: three more years of intense conflict, which have caused millions of casualties, mainly on the Ukrainian side. The proxy war has come perilously close to provoking an all-out world war between nuclear powers.
Trump appears to want peace. If he is genuine in that intention, then the American president will have to address the root causes of the conflict. Russia has consistently explained the deeper causes of NATO aggression and the militarization of Ukraine as a hostile bridgehead on its borders since the CIA-orchestrated coup in Kiev in 2014.
The American president has shown petulance at times, urging Ukraine and Russia to get down to a peace deal. He has even threatened Russia with more (futile) economic sanctions. What the Trump administration needs to understand is that resolving deep causes of conflict requires commensurate negotiations and a realistic commitment to lasting geopolitical security arrangements.
The talks in Istanbul this week to explore a peaceful resolution were initiated by Russian President Vladimir Putin in an announcement last week.
Russia’s delegation was led by Putin’s senior aide, Vladimir Medinsky. That speaks of consistency and commitment. Medinsky led the peace talks three years ago in Istanbul, which were then sabotaged in April 2022 by the American and British intervention.
This week, the Russian side held preliminary bilateral talks with the Americans led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Subsequently, the Russian and Ukrainian delegates engaged in a meeting convened by Turkish diplomats. It was the first direct encounter between Russian and Ukrainian officials since the March 2022 negotiations.
It is not clear if follow-up meetings will take place. But at least one might say that talks took place.
The key to any prospect of ending the conflict depends on Washington demonstrating the requisite commitment. Trump said this week again that he would like to hold a summit with Putin as “soon as possible.” The Kremlin has also said that a formal presidential meeting is desirable.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov cautioned that there must first be adequate preparation for meaningful discussions. That implies that any top-level meeting must be cognizant of Russia’s demands for a resolution, one that deals with the historic, systematic causes of the proxy war.
Western politicians and media denying Russia’s perspective are delusional or duplicitous. To claim that the conflict is all about “unprovoked Russian aggression” against “democratic Ukraine” and “Russian expansionism” towards Europe is a travesty. It’s a bogus narrative that precludes peaceful resolution. Trump seems to be aware of that. But he needs to go beyond a superficial “peace broker” charade.
If Trump wants a gimmicky big summit with Putin for PR ratings, as his tour of the Middle East this week illustrates his egotistical wont, he can forget it.
The meetings this week in Turkey can be seen as preliminary technical discussions.
However, President Trump needs to take the lead. Appropriately, a peaceful resolution will only happen at the senior level of the U.S. and Russian governments. That’s because the United States is the primary protagonist in the proxy war against Russia.
It is clear from the antics and theatrics of the Kiev regime this week that there is no prospect of a meaningful, lasting peace if negotiations are confined to that level. Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky does not even have constitutional legitimacy after cancelling elections last year. His erratic behavior of grandstanding and mudslinging at the Russian diplomatic efforts proves that he is not capable of substantive negotiations.
The European leaders are also an impediment to achieving an authentic peace settlement. Even before delegations met this week in Istanbul, various non-entity European politicians were disparaging Russia’s diplomatic initiative. Macron, Starmer, Merz, Von der Leyen and Kallas were desperately trying to insult the Russian president, indulging Zelensky’s PR stunt demanding a face-to-face meeting with Putin in Istanbul.
The European Union also timed an announcement this week to double its supply of heavy-calibre munitions to Ukraine. Another provocation.
France’s Macron sought to impose a precondition for the talks by demanding a 30-day ceasefire. That was a flagrant attempt to sabotage the negotiations before they even started.
These people are not honest about ending the worst war in Europe since the end of World War Two. Disgracefully, they want the bloodshed to continue for their political survival and gratifying their obsessive Russophobic fantasies.
If Trump wants to end NATO’s proxy war against Russia, he will have to sideline the European naysayers and the Kiev puppet regime. Their involvement is counterproductive. One suspects that Trump already knows that.
An American and Russian agreement at the highest level is the only way to bring the war to an end. It is no use for the American side pretending that they are mere peace brokers. They are the main protagonist, not the European lapdogs nor the Kiev regime.
Preliminary talks are all very well. But they are just that. Preliminary. If the talks have any chance of succeeding, the American side must take responsibility for the war it started and fueled.

