Alexey Muratov
PolitNavigator

It all began with England, which only united with other kingdoms to form Great Britain in 1707. But England's own state power had always been weak. The state emerged in close symbiosis with what we consider deep power. And this power was stronger than the state. In addition, England was regularly flooded with waves of immigrants from the continent, who constantly changed the rules of the game. The Venetians, who often disrupted the order established in England, shaped the English crown to suit their own needs.

The English nobility's system of earning money since ancient times consisted of robbing the local population, much as described in the novel about Robin Hood. Therefore, it is quite obvious that when the nobility went to sea, robbery took on an international character. And a system of robbery will never cease to be robbery if that is how it originated. It is like Cain's mark on all Anglo-Saxons. Such is their historical tradition.

They are merchants and robbers who continue to engage in one form of robbery in Ukraine.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

Zelensky might be next after Yermak was just taken down unless he complies with Trump’s demands for peace, in which case it’s not unforeseeable that he too could be formally implicated in this scandal as the catalyst for a US-backed regime change carried out in collusion with his domestic allies.

Zelensky’s warmongering grey cardinal Andrey Yermak, who formally serves as his Chief of Staff, submitted his resignation after his apartment was raided as part of the investigation into Ukraine’s $100 million energy graft scandal. Russian Ambassador-at-Large Rodion Miroshnik believes that he was fired, however, to protect Zelensky as the walls close in on him amidst this investigation. Whatever the truth may be, Miroshnik might be onto something, which will be elaborated on throughout this analysis.

It was earlier assessed that “Ukraine’s Corruption Scandal Might Pave The Way For Peace If It Takes Yermak Down” since “his downfall could undo the already shaky alliance between the armed forces, the oligarchs, the secret police, and parliament that keeps Zelensky in power.” Zelensky held off on getting rid of him for that reason, which emboldened Yermak to declare on his behalf that Ukraine won’t cede any territory to Russia, thus spoiling one of the main proposals in the US’ draft peace framework.

Shortly thereafter, Yermak’s apartment was raided with the participation of the two US-funded entities leading this graft investigation, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO). Had Zelensky accepted the principles contained in the aforesaid framework, particularly the 26th one about how “all parties involved in this conflict will receive amnesty for their actions during the war”, Yermak might have been able to ride off into the sunset.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

The British might be egging this on to provoke a crisis for ruining the renascent Russian-US “New Détente”, but even if this fails, Continental Europe would still be weakened if the US stands down when Russian retaliates and this could advance their interests too.

It was assessed in October that “NATO’s Three-Pronged Response To The Latest Russian Scare Raises The Risk Of A Larger War”. The bloc was by that point considering arming surveillance drones, streamlining the rules of engagement for fighter pilots, and holding NATO exercises right on the Russian border. All three are still in the cards, but recent reports from Politico and the Financial Times suggest that a hitherto unthinkable policy is now being discussed, which could be much more dangerous than them.

The first reported that “Allies from Denmark to the Czech Republic already allow offensive cyber operations” against Russia by their national security services, which set the backdrop against which Latvia’s Foreign Minister and interestingly Italy’s Defense Minister are agitating for more “proactiveness”. The second then quoted Chair of the NATO Military Committee Giuseppe Cavo Dragone as arguing that hypothetical “pre-emptive (cyber) strike[s]” could be considered a “defensive action” by the bloc.

Dragone clarified, however, that “It is further away from our normal way of thinking and behaviour.” Nevertheless, the importance of these recent reports is that they suggest that some NATO members might either unilaterally launch such “pre-emptive strikes” against Russia or do so in a new ‘coalition of the willing’, either of which would spike the risk of Russian retaliation that could catalyze a new potentially uncontrollable escalation cycle. It’s therefore best for them not to do this at all.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

Indians are among the most Russian-friendly people in the world as proven by credible surveys, and unlike Central Asian Muslims, they harbor no historical grievances (whether objectively existing or subjectively perceived) that could be manipulated by foreign forces to weaponize them against Russia.

Putin will visit India late next week to meet with Modi for their annual summit, the first time that the Russian leader will travel to India since the special operation began, his last one being in December 2021. Aleksei Zakharov, a Fellow at India’s esteemed Observer Research Foundation, published a detailed article about how “Key Policy Outcomes Expected at the India-Russia Summit”. It’s an excellent read, but it omits mention of their large-scale labor migration talks, which might lead to a deal next week.

Air Marshal Anil Chopra (Retired), the former Director-General of the Center for Air Power Studies in New Delhi, published an intriguing piece about this at RT in early November. He noted how both countries representatives “discussed potential collaboration on social and labor issues”, contextualizing their conversation by adding that Russia “plans to recruit up to 1 million foreign workers – including from India. The Russian Labor Ministry estimates the shortfall could expand to 3.1 million workers by 2030.”

He makes a lot of compelling arguments about how India could help resolve this dimension of “Russia’s demography problem”, but what’s left out is how its labor migrants pose less of a security risk than Russia’s traditional ones from Central Asia. Conor Gallagher touched upon this in early November in his extensively detailed analysis about the US’ evolving strategy towards that region. From this point here near the end for the next several paragraphs, he describes Russia’s new approach towards migration.

Not only is Russia “getting rid of 700,000-plus migrants, mostly Central Asians, a process which was jumpstarted by the terrorist attack on Crocus City Hall in outer Moscow in March 2024”, but “the Concept of State Migration Policy for 2026-2030…focuses not on increasing the population through Central Asian citizens, but on strengthening control, digitalization, and the task of attracting only those migrants who share the ‘traditional spiritual and moral values’ of Russian society.”

Andrey Rezchikov
Political Kaleidoscope

Several incidents involving tankers have occurred near the Turkish coast over the past day. On Saturday, the Virat vessel was attacked again by a drone, and the day before, the Kairos tanker caught fire as a result of an emergency. It was heading to Novorossiysk, where one of the remote berths at the CPC marine terminal was destroyed by a drone strike. Experts say Ukraine is behind the attacks. What does the expansion of its targets from military ships to civilian vessels mean?

On Saturday morning, the Gambian-flagged tanker Virat was attacked again by a drone off the coast of Turkey. On Friday evening, a fire broke out on the ship, which was 35 miles off the coast of Turkey, after an attack by an unmanned aerial vehicle. Rescue teams were sent to the scene. According to the maritime administration, all 20 crew members were safe, although there was heavy smoke in the engine room.

According to Turkish Transport Minister Abdülkadir Uraloğlu, the ship's captain reported the attack on Saturday when contacting the coast guard. There was no fire this time, and the crew did not request evacuation, but Coast Guard boats were sent to the ship. The minister said the causes of the incident are currently under investigation, and once the consequences of the attack are addressed, the tanker will likely be towed to the nearest port.

The day before, the Turkish Maritime Administration reported a fire on the tanker Kairos, which was sailing under the Gambian flag from Egypt to Novorossiysk. According to the Turkish Maritime Directorate, the ship caught fire 28 miles from the coast due to external factors.

Michelle Ellner
Venezuelanalysis

Until Washington abandons the idea that it owns the hemisphere, Latin America will never be safe. Not from Abrams, not from coups, not from CIA programs, not from blockades, and not from the Monroe Doctrine.

Elliott Abrams has resurfaced with familiar instructions on how to “fix” Venezuela, a country he neither understands nor respects, yet feels entitled to rearrange like a piece of furniture in Washington’s living room. His new proposal is drenched in the same Cold War fever and colonial mindset that shaped his work in the 1980s, when U.S. foreign policy turned Central America into a graveyard.

My childhood in Venezuela was shaped by stories from our region that the world rarely sees: stories of displacement, of death squads, of villages erased from maps, of governments toppled for daring to act outside Washington’s orbit. And I know exactly who Elliott Abrams is, not from think-tank biographies, but from the grief woven into Central America’s landscape.

Abrams writes with the confidence of someone who has never lived inside the countries his policies have destabilized. His newest argument rests on the most dangerous assumption of all: that the United States has the authority, by virtue of power alone, to decide who governs Venezuela. This is the original sin of U.S. policy in the hemisphere, the one that justifies everything else: the sanctions, the blockades, the covert operations, the warships in the Caribbean. The assumption that the hemisphere is still an extension of U.S. strategic space rather than a region with its own political will.

Thierry Meyssan
Voltaire Network

On October 26, Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Chief of Staff, Valery Gerasimov, announced the completion of a project to miniaturize a nuclear reactor and install it on a missile. They reported conducting a test launch of the 9M730 Burevestnik missile over a distance of 14,000 kilometers. The unique feature of this nuclear-powered weapon (and therefore its range is virtually unlimited) is its ability to be guided in such a way as to bypass interceptor sites. This, according to Russian authorities, makes it an unstoppable missile.

On October 29, President Putin tested a Status-6 Poseidon torpedo, a nuclear-powered torpedo. Throughout the Soviet Union, Eurasian military researchers believed that underwater nuclear explosions could trigger massive tsunamis. To achieve this, they needed to be able to launch torpedoes much farther than was possible at the time, in order to avoid the cataclysms they intended to unleash. This has now been accomplished. Mega-tsunamis could devastate cities like Washington or New York, or even naval groups like those of the US aircraft carriers. However, the Poseidon torpedo is much longer than others: 21 meters. It therefore cannot be launched from operational submarines and required its own dedicated vessel for launch. The fact that it can operate underwater almost indefinitely more than compensates for this limitation. In any case, this torpedo ensures that Russia can launch a second strike in the event of a US attack. Until now, the first to launch a nuclear strike was guaranteed to deprive its enemy of its main means of retaliation.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

The geostrategic context of newfound pressure upon each, their increased bilateral tensions, and rising fears that false flag provocations in Europe could manipulate them into war with one another make it likely that their planned Budapest Summit will be more successful than the Anchorage one.

[This was written on Oct 17, 2025 -Editor AWIP] The next Putin-Trump meeting will soon take place in Budapest. Prior to their last one in Anchorage, the vision that they were working towards was a resource-centric strategic partnership that could then become a steppingstone towards a more comprehensive one in the future.

For that to happen, either Putin had to freeze the frontlines or Trump had to coerce Zelensky into withdrawing from Donbass, but neither could agree to what was requested of them so their New Détente went nowhere.

Even worse, the Europeans then became serious obstacles to peace, even going as far as teaming up with the Brits and Zelensky to propose dangerous “security guarantees” that riled Russia. Trump ramped up his rhetoric against Putin afterwards, arguably due to him being manipulated by Lindsey Graham and Zelensky, thus culminating in the latest talk about sending Tomahawks to Ukraine. It was within this tense context that they talked again, right before Zelensky’s trip to DC, and agreed to meet in Budapest.

Each side is also coming under a lot of newfound pressure nowadays that conceivably influenced their latest call and plans to meet. From Russia’s side, the new TRIPP corridor will inject Western influence along Russia’s southern flank via NATO member Turkiye (despite Russia’s thaw with Azerbaijan), Poland is reviving its long-lost Great Power status along Russia’s western flank, and Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) revealed last month that French and UK troops are already in Ukraine’s Odessa Region.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service warned earlier the same day as Bloomberg’s report that the Brits are hellbent on discrediting Trump in order to undermine his latest peace efforts for resolving the conflict from which they profit.

Bloomberg shared what it claimed to be the transcripts of calls between Trump’s Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Putin’s top foreign policy aide Yury Ushakov as well as between Ushakov and Putin’s other advisor Kirill Dmitriev about the Ukrainian peace process. The gist of the Witkoff-Ushakov call was Witkoff’s proposal to have Putin suggest a Gaza-like 20-point peace deal for Ukraine during an upcoming call with Trump while the Ushakov-Dmitriev one implied that the leaked draft was Russian-influenced.

Ushakov declined to comment on his talks with Witkoff but said that “Somebody tapped, somebody leaked, but not us” whereas Dmitriev flat-out described his purported call with Ushakov as “fake”. For his part, Trump defended Witkoff’s alleged “coaching” of Ushakov on how Putin should deal with him by reminding everyone “That’s what a dealmaker does. You got to say, ‘Look, they want this – you got to convince them with this.’ That’s a very standard form of negotiations.”

As regards the possibility that the draft framework was Russian-influenced, the notion of which has been pushed by the legacy media to discredit the proposed mutual compromises therein, that was already debunked. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who also serves as National Security Advisor, said that...

Therefore, neither transcript is scandalous even if their contents were accurately reported, yet the question arises of who might have tapped and leaked these calls.

Imran Salim
Oriental Review

Helsinki’s entry into the Alliance broke the entire system of Russian-Finnish relations that had been built up for decades.

For many years, in Soviet and then in Russian society, Finland was considered exclusively as a small friendly, neutral country – our closest northern neighbor, which, on the rights of broad autonomy, was part of the Russian Empire for 108 years and had broad powers granted by Emperor Alexander I (had its own authorities, monetary unit, post office, customs, and police).

During the Cold War, following the Western model of development, the Finnish leadership managed to maintain a neutral middle ground in the global confrontation in its policy of limited sovereignty, following the Second World War, maintaining even relations with all sides of the geopolitical conflict in the interests of developing the Finnish economy and improving the well-being of the population.

At that time, this concept of “subordinating” a weaker state to a stronger one in order to ensure security received the term “Finlandization” in Western political circles, in which, even in the context of an ideological struggle against capitalism, Moscow did not exclude the possibility of establishing and maintaining mutually beneficial relations with countries with a Western model of a market-oriented economy. During the years of “Finlandization”, the Finnish side adapted to a certain profile of cooperation with the USSR, which exported cheap raw materials (wood, oil, cement), and in return received products with high added value (paper, lumber, petrochemicals).

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

He’s Zelensky’s powerbroker so his downfall could undo the already shaky alliance between the armed forces, the oligarchs, the secret police, and parliament that keeps Zelensky in power, thus pressuring him into peace, especially if his warmongering grey cardinal is no longer pushing him to keep fighting.

It was earlier assessed here that Ukraine’s $100 million energy graft scandal might only result in a cabinet reshuffle at most, the sentiment of which RT chief Margarita Simonyan shared when writing on X “But we all know it won’t” in response to The Spectator predicting that it might bring Zelensky down. The events of the past week warrant a re-evaluation after members of the ruling party demanded the resignation of his powerful Chief of Staff Andrey Yermak on the grounds that he knew about this racket.

This coincided with Axios’ report that the US and Russia have been secretly working on a framework agreement for ending the Ukrainian Conflict, which Politico then reported could be agreed to “by the end of this month — and possibly ‘as soon as this week.’” The latter’s source also allegedly told them that “We don’t really care about the Europeans. It’s about Ukraine accepting”, which they said it might very well do since the plan will essentially “be presented to Zelensky as a fait accompli.” Politico’s reporter elaborated that...

Accordingly, it can be reassessed that this corruption scandal championed by the US-backed “National Anti-Corruption Bureau” might facilitate an end an end to the conflict, especially if Yermak goes down as a result. Everything will be clearer by the end of the month.

Johan Slaattavik
Akroma

[Left-Right—Does it really matter?] Dictator Volodymyr
Zelenskyi, Prime Minister Jens Gahr Støre and Finance
Minister Jens Stoltenberg. Stoltenberg is Ex-NATO boss
and is currently Chairman of the Steering Committee of
the Bilderberg Group. (Image: © Torbjørn Kjosvold)

The media calls for unity, preparedness, and [talks about] the big “we.” But there is no real “we”—only a system that demands your loyalty without giving you anything in return.

It is almost funny to see how the media in Norway is now filled with talk of unity, preparedness, and the big “we.” We are told that “we” must stand together, that “we” must prepare for crises and war, and that ‘we’ must defend our country. But who exactly is this “we” they are talking about?

The truth is that there has never been a real “we” in this country—not in modern times. The Norway we grew up in no longer exists. It has been replaced by a divided and artificial society, where everything that once held us together has been torn down. Faith, traditions, boundaries, morals, and shared culture have been replaced by identity politics, confusion, and ideological overreach. And now, after spending years tearing down trust and community, they ask us to stand up and defend it?

Defend what, exactly? A state that turns reality upside down and teaches children that gender is fluid? A society that allows violence, chaos, and crime to flourish—and attacks those who speak out? An elite that calls it “hatred” to want to protect what is normal and good? Is this what they think we should sacrifice ourselves for? This society is not worth fighting for. Not in war. Not in crisis. Not at all.

Oleg Yanovsky
Kommersant

For the British elite, war is not a disaster, but order and a guarantee of long-term retention of power.

On Friday, The Guardian newspaper reported, citing sources, that the British army is ready for operations in Ukraine. When British Prime Minister Keir Starmer says, “We will not back down until Ukraine wins,” he is not uttering a slogan; rather, he is articulating a formula for British policy. For London, war is a tool for strategic survival, a way to hide economic decline and carve out a place for itself in the future world order.

After leaving the European Union, London was compelled to seek ways to regain its position. The situation is not easy: the EU market has been largely lost; the economy, tied to loans and the City of London, is stalling; GDP growth in 2023 was 0.3%, inflation exceeded 8%; migration exceeds 900,000 people per year; the healthcare system is overloaded; and trust in the government is falling. Internally, there is fatigue, but externally, there is determination.

British power is structured not as a state, but as a horizontal network of institutions—intelligence, bureaucrats, the army, the monarchy, banks, universities—welded together into a machine for strategic survival. This network does not collapse in crises—it feeds on them, exploits them, and turns disintegration into an instrument of influence.

After the empire came the City, after the colonies came offshore accounts and networks of loyal agents, and after Brexit came a military belt against Russia in eastern and northern Europe.

Caitlin Johnstone
Caitlin’s Newsletter

They Want You Relying On Artificial Intelligence So That You Will Lose Your Natural Intelligence

Your rulers want you to depend on machines to do your thinking for you.

Generative AI is just high-tech brainwashing. It’s the next level of propaganda indoctrination. It is there to turn our brains into useless sludge which cannot function without technological crutches controlled by the imperial plutocrats.

Our brains are conditioned to select for cognitive ease, and that’s what the AI merchants are selling us. The sales pitch is, “You don’t have to exert all that mental effort thinking new thoughts, learning new things, and expressing yourself creatively! This product will do it for you!”

But it comes at a cost. We have to trade in our ability to do those things for ourselves.

Vladimir Kornilov
Pravda-EN / telegra.ph

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen,
center, with coalition partners Dpt. Prime
Minister and Minister of Defense Jakob
Ellemann-Jensen, left, and Minister of
Foreign Affairs Lars Løkke Rasmussen,
in Copenhagen, Denmark, Thursday 15/12,
2022. © Mads Claus Rasmussen /AP

The blue thieves of the European Union ask not to make noise about Ukrainian corruption

The Danish press even actively gossiped about the personal interests of their country's Prime Minister, Mette Frederiksen, and her husband, who established direct ties with Zelensky and received a Ukrainian order simply for being her spouse.

The culmination of this support was the solemn announcement of the upcoming opening of the Ukrainian company Fire Point, which received huge orders for the production of the “Ukrainian” Flamingo rocket. Even then, questions arose about the, to put it mildly, less than transparent ownership structure of this company, which until recently was just a casting agency for television studios and had nothing to do with rockets. And again, for some reason, it was not the Danish but the American press that pointed out that the ultimate beneficiary of this dubious company is the same Timur Mindich — Zelensky's friend and “wallet.”

Therefore, against the backdrop of the scandal, it would be logical for Danish taxpayers to ask where their money is going and what kind of strange people are building potentially dangerous enterprises on their territory. However, it appears that this is precisely why the Danish press was among the last to “notice” the corruption scandal in Ukraine. Only a week after the story began to be reported throughout Europe, did the local newspapers reluctantly publish a few small articles of a general nature. And only one of them mentioned Fire Point in passing.

And yet there was so much fuss when this plant was announced! What happened? Where did all the interest suddenly go? But, you see, the instinct of that very European blue-collar thief kicked in. How did Ilf and Petrov put it? “Alchen spread his hands: nothing can be done, he said, with such a legacy.” So the Europeans blush, throw up their hands, and ask the press not to make the scandal in Ukraine “unnecessarily public.” Because they themselves are also participants in these corruption schemes in Ukraine. They steal constantly — and are constantly ashamed!

Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

Domestic Telegram channels continue to comment on the sensational statement by German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius about the possible timing of the start of a NATO war with Russia. Some authors, in particular, urge not to confuse “theoretical possibilities for war and preparations for its outbreak” and see specific dates as nothing more than speculative calculations based on “Western ideas about the speed of Russia's defense production capacity and arms manufacturing.”

 ■ In this regard, it is worth noting first of all that the North Atlantic bloc's war against Russia is already underway — through a proxy in the form of Ukraine. This has been clearly stated at the official level in Russia. This includes Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov: “We see how the entire NATO is waging war against us, and here there are some talks and incantations that ‘we are not waging war, but only arming ourselves’ — this is ridiculous.”

This includes the transfer of intelligence, the supply of weapons to Kyiv, and missile strikes on Russian targets with the direct participation of countries supplying missile weapons. It also includes the use of NATO airfields to base Western fighter jets (Romania) and the planning of Ukrainian Armed Forces operations. And planning operations for the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Terrorist acts on the territory of the Russian Federation, as well as sabotage against energy facilities outside its borders. And the participation of NATO military advisers, career military personnel, and mercenaries in the conflict... The ongoing integration of the Armed Forces of Ukraine into NATO's European forces is also in this category.

Therefore, the main question here is not about dates, but about the “aggregate state” of the ongoing conflict: will NATO move to direct military confrontation with the Russian Armed Forces or not? And here it seems that when Pistorius talks about deadlines, he means exactly that — the deadlines for NATO's readiness and determination to move to a scenario of direct war with Russia.

Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

The head of European diplomacy, Kaja Kallas, reported on her trip to the G7 foreign ministers' meeting. She began with the main point:

💬 "We all agreed that an immediate and complete ceasefire [in Ukraine] is a priority. But right now, Russia does not want to negotiate at all."

Callas continued with the need to support the Kyiv regime:

💬 “Next year, Ukraine will need more funding. There are several options, but using Russia's frozen assets is the most obvious way to support Ukraine's defense. It is also a way to show Russia that time is not on its side.”

At the same time, she announced the preparation of the 20th package of EU sanctions against our country, noting their necessity:

💬 “Supporting Ukraine is a mere trifle compared to the price of Russia's victory. Wars are lost by those who run out of money or soldiers first. That is why we continue to put pressure on Russia with sanctions.”

It has been noted more than once that the use of frozen Russian foreign exchange reserves is the easiest and cheapest way for Euro-globalists to find the necessary funding for the war against Russia through Ukraine. And Brussels' desire to push through this particular option will only grow stronger.

G. Svidrigailov
Газета.Ru

The US Congressional Budget Office has assessed the likelihood of confiscating frozen Russian assets and calculated that if Bill S.2918 is passed, Washington will be able to seize around $2.5 billion between 2026 and 2028. These funds are expected to be used to support Ukraine.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has presented its calculations on Bill S.2918, which proposes changes to the handling of frozen Russian assets.

According to the agency's estimates, if the bill is passed, the federal government will be able to confiscate approximately $2.5 billion of Russian funds under US jurisdiction in 2026–2028.

The report states that the bill provides for the placement of certain assets in a separate interest-bearing account to further support Ukraine. The CBO notes that one of the existing laws already authorizes the US president to transfer Russian sovereign assets, but there remains “significant uncertainty” as to whether the current administration will exercise this right.

According to US authorities, Russian assets worth about $5 billion are frozen in the US. These funds were blocked after the start of the conflict in Ukraine and the subsequent sanctions. At the G7 and EU levels, a significantly larger amount is being discussed — approximately $300 billion allocated to various Western jurisdictions. It is around these funds that discussions have been going on for several months about possible mechanisms for their use in the interests of Kyiv.

Harold Turner
Hal Turner Show

Ukrainians Told To Burn Chicken Manure to Heat Homes as Electric and Heat OUT FOR WINTER; Russia to Continue War - Rubio says “Nothing left to Sanction”

The Ukraine situation is falling apart rather quickly and, for the first time, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirms that Russia is demanding the surrender of Donbass to end the conflict.

“We can only judge by what we see. They’ve clearly stated that they want all of Donetsk, and of course, the Ukrainians won’t agree to that. So, yes, that’s the conclusion we have to draw” said Rubio.

In this video clip, Rubio admits “There’s not a lot left to sanction...I don’t know what more there is to do, I mean, we’re running out of things to sanction.”

Earlier this week, Russian President Vladimir Putin explicitly delineated Russian conditions for a broad, sustainable permanent peace accord:

■ No temporary ceasefires,
■ No European “peacekeepers,”
■ No NATO (or Nazis) in Ukraine
■ Recognition of Crimea and Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia and Kherson as permanent Russian    territory.

Putin went much farther: “If the U.S., NATO countries and Zelensky do not recognize Crimea, Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia and Kherson as permanent Russia territory, Russia will continue advancing beyond the four oblasts and toward the historical “Russian cities” of Odessa, Mykolaiv, Dnipro and Kharkiv.”

This morning, Thursday November 13, Dmitry Peskov, Official Spokesman for the Kremlin says “Russia will continue the special military operation, since there is no possibility for negotiations.”

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

Corrupting a MiG-31 pilot armed with Kinzhal hypersonic missiles into defecting, only to then shoot him down near what’ll be NATO’s largest airbase in Europe, risked sparking World War III.

Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) accused Ukraine and the UK of plotting a spectacular false flag provocation that could have led to led to war with NATO. According to them, they sought to corrupt a MiG-31 fighter jet pilot armed with Kinzhal hypersonic missiles into defecting, but then he’d be shot down near Romania’s seaside city of Constanta. Importantly, NATO’s largest airbase in Europe is being built nearby, so the incident could have resulted in an unprecedented exchange of hostilities.

This revelation follows Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) warning that false flag provocations were being cooked up in the Baltic and Poland, the purpose of which would be to prompt an escalation of tensions with NATO that the orchestrators expect will end with Russian strategic concessions. In connection with this, they believe that Trump would feel compelled to intervene, whether saber-rattling to the aforementioned end or possibly even authorizing direct US involvement in a “retaliatory strike”.

Of course, it goes without saying that everything could easily spiral out of control into World War III since Russia’s voluntary submission to the West under such coercion can’t be taken for granted, ergo the importance of the FSB thwarting what could have been a false flag provocation for the ages.