English Outsider: Russia-U.S. Talks - A Change In The Picture
by English Outsider
lifted from comments
An interview with [former British diplomat] Ian Proud changes the picture.
I had thought, as did most, that the Russians had given up on the West and were just stolidly ploughing on with their 2022 objectives. Proud asserts that this is not the case and that the Russians are genuinely interested in rapprochement with the United States.
Whether Trump himself can offer that is still perhaps an open question. He faces flat opposition from the Europeans, who still wish the war to continue. The head of the BND said recently that it would be in Europe’s interest if the war lasted another five years and we see from the reactions of various European politicians that the only "peace settlement" they could support would be one that was not consistent with the Russian war aims. For some of them RF delenda est is the only end to this war that would leave them happy.
More importantly, Trump faces significant internal opposition. His attempts at administrative reform are bitterly contested. His ideological stance and that of his supporters is a throwback to earlier days of moderate American conservatism and is quite at odds with the stance that prevailed in the Biden era – it takes little insight to see there's trouble brewing there. His view of the war in Ukraine is also at odds with the view hitherto prevailing in the American political establishment. And the midterms are looming, elections that he must do well in if he is to keep a fractious Congress with him as he attempts to push through those administrative reforms.
The last thing Trump wants, as he seeks to push through his programme in the maelstrom that is American domestic politics, is the reproach that he "lost Ukraine". That the West was always engaged in an unwinnable war there, and that Trump is now recognising that reality, will be obscured by accusations that he is a "Russian patsy" or an "appeaser". We're already seeing that accusation openly levelled against him by the Europeans and by his own domestic opposition.
That opposition does not only consist of the Democrats. A powerful wing of the Republican Party is also opposed to Trump and that wing is also opposed to any rapprochement with Russia. That wing of the Republican Party is somewhat subdued at present but it's still there and still with some support in the electorate.
So whether Trump can offer genuine rapprochement with Russia, opposed as he is by what may be regarded as effectively a coalition of the Europeans, Democrats, and even many within his own party, is uncertain. If he can offer rapprochement that's his sole card to play as he seeks an end to the hostilities in Ukraine. If Ian Proud is correct, that's a powerful card because the Russians are also interested in rapprochement.
I believe that Ian Proud is correct. The Russians are waiting warily to see which way the cat jumps but if there's a rapprochement there on offer they'll take it. The United States is too big and powerful for it to be in the Russian interest to be permanently at odds with it. As I recollect Martyanov remarking some time ago, in the long term it would be better for the Russians to find a modus vivendi with the US than not.
Unfortunately Putin himself does not have a free hand. War has its own momentum and often can render insuperable difficulties that could previously have been glossed over. A substantial portion of Putin’s electorate now believes he is being too soft by far in this war. The Security Council, judging from statements coming out from some of its members, is more hawkish than he is. His military too. And Putin himself has repeated the minimum Russian objectives so often and so clearly that he is in no position to walk them back. Those objectives stated most concisely by Lavrov in his Newsweek interview:
On 14 June, President Vladimir Putin listed prerequisites for the settlement as follows:
- complete AFU withdrawal from the DPR [Donetsk People’s Republic], LPR [Luhansk People’s Republic], Zaporozhye and Kherson Oblasts;
- recognition of territorial realities as enshrined in the Russian Constitution;
- neutral, non-bloc, non-nuclear status for Ukraine;
- its demilitarization and denazification;
- securing the rights, freedoms and interests of Russian-speaking citizens;
- and removal of all sanctions against Russia.
“All sanctions”. Might be some wriggle room there. In his recent speech to the regional industrialists Putin mentioned the beneficial effects of some sanctions so he might not be too worried about all of them.
“Denazification.” As said before, a vague term and would probably only amount to the removal of memorials to WWII collaborators, cessation of persecution of the Russian Orthodox Church, and the elimination of material glorifying the OUN in the schools.
But agreeing on that, as I noticed Ian Proud touching on briefly in that interview, is not as simple as all that. It is an article of faith in the western electorates and for most of the western politicians that the assertion that ultra-nationalists, or “Nazis”, have the say in Kiev is Russian propaganda. For the Russians, however, removal of those ultra-nationalists is a core objective. It’s difficult to see how Trump, or any other western politician, could come to an agreement about the removal of those ultras without admitting that that core Russian objective is justified.
The other conditions are less controversial. From the recent Witkoff/Carlson interview it didn’t seem that the territorial conditions are much of a stumbling block, though for what it matters I doubt the Europeans will accept them in a hurry. There’s the making of a peace deal there that would end the carnage in Ukraine before we insist, in real truth, on “fighting to the last Ukrainian”. But it all depends on whether Trump can get that rapprochement against the stiff European and internal opposition he’s encountering.
If he can’t, that’ll be Odessa and Kharkov gone, and further tens of thousands of casualties. Until I watched that Ian Proud interview that’s the way I thought it would go. But if someone at home in the diplomatic world reckons there’s a slim chance it won't, one can only hope that slim chance comes off.
Even Von Rundstedt, that most Prussian of Prussians and maybe the best general they had, knew when "Make peace you fools" was the only option left. Our war with Russia is lost. We should man up and accept that reality and not insist on putting our proxies through more hell.
Posted by b on March 24, 2025 at 16:34 UTC | Permalink
next page »Rapprochement is irrelevant in the face of a battle for Ukraine. This over rides everything. And anyway, close to zero chance that domestic and European opposition will prevent him from cutting a deal on anything other than a Russian loss.
Posted by: Night Tripper | Mar 24 2025 17:00 utc | 2
That should of couse say, close to zero chance that domestic and European opposition will allow him to cut a deal on anything other than a Russian loss.
Posted by: Night Tripper | Mar 24 2025 17:02 utc | 3
Proud asserts that... the Russians are genuinely interested in rapprochement with the United States.
Hence Minsk 3.0 is being negotiated as we speak. You would have thought Russia would have learned its lesson after the first 2 Minsk accords. If it does transpire that Russia does - yet again - fall into the trap of a US olive branch all it would mean is that it has to re-fight this war in a few years time. As another agreement now would simply buy time for NATO/US to regroup, re-arm and have another pop at Russia later. Brian Berletic spells this out plain as day.
A substantial portion of Putin’s electorate now believes he is being too soft by far in this war. The Security Council, judging from statements coming out from some of its members, is more hawkish than he is. His military too.
It's a good job they don't comment on this blog as they'd likely be labelled as "concern trolls".
Posted by: Jax | Mar 24 2025 17:06 utc | 4
You would think that a certain stasis must first be at hand before reproachment is practically attainable.
Stasis is not among the qualities of Trump's circus. His clowns are scary. They've made the whole world nervous and twitchy.
Putin's engagement is performative. And exploratory. There is no advantage to advancing without a solid foundation to build upon.
Posted by: too scents | Mar 24 2025 17:08 utc | 5
Moscow has time on its side;
If Trump can't slash 30% of the Federal Budget by June 2026, then it's game over for issuing low interest debt to fund wars. 10 year treasury is now at 4.3% - 5 years ago 10 year was at 1.5%. Thats nearly 3x the interest burden to pay. Trump is looking at 30% of Federal Income going to Interest payments in FY2026, unless he balances the budget.
No Money = No War
Posted by: exile | Mar 24 2025 17:09 utc | 6
The U.S./Ukraine *negotiation* in Riyadh lasted 40 minutes, in which time the U.S. team showed the documents to the Ukraine team. A lot of time was spend translating & reviewing the text prepared by the U.S.
<<
There are no *negotiations*---only American instruction to Kiev, which it must accept.
>>
Soon we'll hear profuse gratitude coming from Bankhova, Zelensky praising President Trump for standing so steadfastly for Peace Through Strength.
<<
There are no negotiations between the U.S. & Ukraine, because the war is between the U.S. & Russia, and Ukraine is merely the proxy.
>>
So it's down to Ukraine simply to get on board, to go along w/ The Plan, laud the U.S. for guiding such a stellar process and anticipate presidential elections for Ukraine at some point.
<<
Are they on board-? Well, the Ukraine team showed up in olive green sweatshirts, not suits. Zelensky was not among them, but you can believe he had on an olive green sweatshirt too, in solidarity w/ his guys in Riyadh.
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Mar 24 2025 17:11 utc | 7
In current state of affairs. Anything that sounds reasonable,
sensible and humane (as this article states). Has a slim probability
of actually occurring.
Posted by: Middle-man | Mar 24 2025 17:13 utc | 8
With due respect and I thought this when I read the comment originally, I'm not sure how this 'changes the picture' as opposed to is just/yet another voice pronouncing his opinion. That it rhymes with what many want, is not requisite IMO. In fact, Proud's own comment (tangentially, on the linked page) probably tells you what a guessing game predicting the peace prospects are: I suspect you'd be right at least 50% of the time - a bit like guessing the weather tomorrow will be the same as today. But, if as the OP says, it gave confidence/hope that there might be a different endgame than ascribed in UK media, then its appearance finds its notion anyway.
Posted by: Call it what u will | Mar 24 2025 17:17 utc | 9
Scuttlebutt has it the U.S. will bring its own security ships into Odessa harbor in order to enforce the Black Sea ceasefire, should the Russian team agree to a Black Sea ceasefire.
<<
Sounds completely disadvantageous to the Russians. It's as if the U.S. is trying to walk Russia backwards into a trap disguised as peace.
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Mar 24 2025 17:18 utc | 10
"That the West was always engaged in an unwinnable war there, and that Trump is now recognising that reality, will be obscured by accusations that he is a "Russian patsy" or an "appeaser". We're already seeing that accusation openly levelled against him by the Europeans and by his own domestic opposition."
I've seen a couple of the astroturf anti Trump protests of the Dems, including this weekends farce with Bernie and AOC. Id say a third or more of the talking points are pro-war, pro Ukronazi.
Trump needs to act quickly while the pro war Dems are down. If he waits to long and his tariff gambit leads to recession, they'll be back. Otherwise, he's toast. Ending this war is one of his most popular promises and what allows him to pose as anti war, which greatly boosts his popularity. We know he's not, but if he wants at least to hold that image with the public, he needs to break some eggs and make the damn omelette.
Posted by: Ahenobarbus | Mar 24 2025 17:23 utc | 11
Honestly, I still think your original assessment was correct :
1. I don't think Trump sincerely wants (or is able) to accommodate Russia's interest to the minimal extent she needs.
2. Numerous high level Russian officials repeatedly stated that the US is not "agreement capable", and they're probably right. What's to prevent the next US president to rearm the Ukraine and push it into NATO (see Trump and JCPoA)
3. The Stavka is on a roll, Ukrainian lines are faltering on most of the front, and Russians have started to use the word "liberated" to describe villages they took in Kharkiv Oblast. They don't have many incentives to stop (even if Putin has some).
4. Russia could possibbly reach a fait accompli rapprochement with the US after a complete Ukrainian surrender.
I could be wrong OFC, but I don't see any peace treaty in the cards outside a complete military defeat of the Ukraine.
Posted by: Jean Meslier | Mar 24 2025 17:23 utc | 12
The article is very good in showing up the difficulties even most powerfull politicans like T&P have to face.
But the key to the miracle is imho very simple: the western finance system is at an endpoint. The desperate War using 404 was the last attempt to kill and plunder Russia. But that plan failed.
Look at the EU what they are doing:
- warmongering in an idiotic way
- deleting all law restrictions to have a free way making giant debt(Germany)
- UvdL repeated the EU plan to confiscate private assets and savings..
and so on. They are bankrupt and are trying to save their asses..
If Russia finally don't get the peace they want, Europe will face some ugly experience what a war means.
Posted by: ableman | Mar 24 2025 17:24 utc | 13
Is anyone else getting flashbacks from DJT 1.0? I feel like I am taking crazy pills being the only one to notice that Derek Zoolander only has one look.
Trump gets in. Reloads and the patriotic right camp is happy again. Enlists red-blooded recruits for six year stints.
Hems and haws for four years, meanwhile Gazans continue to be massacred.
Democrats come in and resume Allied March towards total war with Axis. Troops that enlisted under Trump now have to fight the Allied war.
It's not hard.
I wonder if outstanding Europeans like b really understand the depth of rot here in the states and the fact that our diplomatic word means absolutely nothing.
It's all Jewed-up theater. The hidden hand of the Deep State is like Pontius Pilate, knowing when to present which scapegoat to the crowd at what time to blow off steam. And yes I know that Pilate was a Roman. But Pilate was at the behest of the Jews in this instance.
Posted by: NemesisCalling | Mar 24 2025 17:27 utc | 14
VERY interesting article !!!!
- Trump is indeed as american as americans can be. The US narrative is always something along the lines of "We always win". That's why Biden was heavily critizised when he withdrew US troops from Afghanistan in 2021. Trump was the one who "negotiated" that withdrawal with the Taliban.
- Similar story with the war in Ukraine. Here it was Biden who left the burden of the "legacy" of the Ukraine war to his successor called Trump.
- I see the russian demand of "De-nazification of the Ukraine" as a (strong) hint that Zelensky must "get rid of" the ultra right wing ukrainian nationalists in the Ukraine who are "hijacking"/threatning Zelensky's government. Nicolai Petro has emphasized that getting rid of those "nationalists" is the best way forward for the future stability of the Ukraine. And stability in Ukraine will ïmprove stability for both Europe and Russia as well.
However we see that the overall trend is in the opposite direction. We see the (ultra) right wing winning in the US and in e.g. Israel. It's therefore not clear whether Zelensky is able to get rid of those "nationalists" in the Ukraine.
Posted by: WMG | Mar 24 2025 17:29 utc | 15
I will never believe Trump and the Yankees and any other president.
Nor the EU that follows the path of war to force Trump to provide hardware and software to then be able to accuse Trump, if he were to stop aid, of having been the cause of the Ukrainian debacle.
And then say, you see without the EU there is no peace so... here we are at the negotiating table to impose a "fair" peace in our own way..
The EU framed Trump, sons of bitches.
I hope Putin does not fall for the flattery of the USA, it would be yet another mockery and yet another scam.
If that were the case then... better to replace Putin.
But I would be very sorry.
Posted by: kammamuri | Mar 24 2025 17:29 utc | 16
I've only seen a lot of clips of the Witkoff interview but it looked and sounded like more lies, wishful thinking, and dissembling.
I urge everyone not to take Witkoff too seriously. He's a NY shyster, and he knows how to talk to rubes just as Trump does.
Trump (for whatever reason) doesn't want to end the war. He wants to grandstand about some grand bargain endlessly.
I pray that Putin and the siloviki are playing around with him and not taking him seriously. America is still fundamentally and Constitutionally agreement incapable. Even if Trump was Putin's best friend ever, he cannot deliver the long-term security that Russia requires.
That will have to be done the old-fashioned way, with blood and steel. There is no legal document that will restrain the West from attacking Russia again.
I hope Putin learned that lesson from the Minsk Agreements.
Posted by: LoveDonbass | Mar 24 2025 17:32 utc | 17
thanks b... thanks english outsider!
what does this quote mean?? " RF delenda est is the only end to this war..." delenda?? east?
i too think russia, or putin wants a settlement to end this madness.. i do as well.. trump is in a tough spot here and i don't know if he can get a ceasefire and peace settlement.. zelensky certainly has no interest, other then saving his own butt and continuing to lead ukrainians to slaughter... i don't know the solution, but i pray for one..
Posted by: james | Mar 24 2025 17:33 utc | 18
The radical extremist employed by the West to take over ukraine and attack all things Russian have stated that before they lose the war they will blow up the 3 Nuclear Power Plants within the territory they control and any outside their territory they can reach (not nessarly controlled by Russia, but maybe in other European countries that are not particularly well guarded) they say; "if we go down, we take everybody with us".
Posted by: Hot Carl | Mar 24 2025 17:34 utc | 19
On the heels of Ian Proud’s remarks, b quotes Andrei Martyanov stating that it behooves Russia to seek modus vivendi w/ the U.S. From a purely business and commerce standpoint that obviously makes sense. However, when VVP spoke w/ industrialists, entrepreneurs & engineers in Moscow on 18 March, he carefully walked them through the sanctions-scenario and more or less laid it on the line: even when the U.S. lifts sanctions they find a way soon enough to re-impose other sanctions in a new way.
<<
VVP was prepping the business community for Russia’s new norm, inaugurated in 2014 w/ the economic sanctions after Crimea *returned* to Russia and then stiffened massively after the SMO commenced in early 2022. VVP was telling the industrialists, entrepreneurs & engineers to plan for doing business and conducting commerce in a way that is congruent w/ an economic environment based on a *permanent-sanctions* reality.
>>
So Ian Proud’s ideas about rapprochement strike me as incompatible w/ how VVP has oriented manufacturing & industry since the U.S. & Europe declared unremitting economic war on Russia. Remember that the Collective West expected to crush Russia economically, enact regime change & then partition it. Yikes. Hard to imagine Russia feeling comfortable w/ a kind of rapprochement that dives back into a business sector dominated solely by the dollar.
<<
No doubt Russia will seek ways to collaborate w/ the U.S. on cooperative ventures—-perhaps in the Arctic, perhaps in the energy sector, perhaps w/ weapons treaties—-and those areas certainly bring value to both of these Great Powers, as well as to the RoW.
>>
Beyond that, Russia is winning. Patrick Lancaster has just reported that by nightfall on 24 March Russian Forces had drive the AFU out of their Demidovka *incursion* in Belgorod. What's more: Chasov Yar is on the brink.
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Mar 24 2025 17:40 utc | 21
America needs two trillion dollars per year in tribute from the rest of the world. This tribute comes in the form of (1) cheap resources from plantation economies;
(2) looting energy resources(e.g. Syria);
(3) usury on the debt imposed on foreign countries by bribing their leaders to take high-interest loans (eg via the Angola Variant); and
(4) the demand that all trade is done in US dollars.
Europe/Canada has to a lesser extent applied the same approaches (eg French neo-colonization in the Sahel region of Africa).
These sources of tribute are coming to an end for the US and Europe leading to "economic hardship" among its entitled populations. The trade wars are an approach to claw back some of this tribute. Increasingly key critical resources are being withheld such as antimony gallium, neon, and actual rare earth elements (Sc to Lu). The combined West cannot allow this to happen and increasingly looks to dismantling Russia to obtain the tribute required to jump-start the faltering economies.
It is as if the combined West sees itself in a Thucydides trap and sees an irrational war with Russia as their last hope to avoid collapse of their so-called "civilizations".
Posted by: krollchem | Mar 24 2025 17:42 utc | 22
Posted by: krollchem | Mar 24 2025 17:42 utc | 23
########
Great post.
Posted by: LoveDonbass | Mar 24 2025 17:44 utc | 23
in a new Time interview, Zelensky says Donald Trump "seems to be the only one that Putin fears."
"The Russians got really scared" at one point in the peace process when the US threatened to sanction the Kremlin for its continued bombing raids against Ukraine, Zelensky says.
If that is actually the case - and yes I know its Zelensky talking - and if it is not some part of longer game to appear to be listening to and respectful of Trump, then the RUssians are weaker than I thought
I mean, what possible further sanctions could there be imposed by the US to make the Russians 'really scared'?
Posted by: Night Tripper | Mar 24 2025 17:45 utc | 24
I had thought, as did most, that the Russians had given up on the West and were just stolidly ploughing on with their 2022 objectives. Proud asserts that this is not the case and that the Russians are genuinely interested in rapprochement with the United States.
What advantage can the RF get with an "agreement incapable" regime like the US? There's just no point. I think the horse has left the barn, and Russia is looking east.
Other than preventing the US - or one of its proxies - from going "full retard" and launching WW-III, it's probably just easier and better to isolate the RF from the actions of the US.
When someone shits their pants on a daily basis, it's best to keep a safe distance. And you sure as hell don't want to share a bathroom with such a loser. You'll be cleaning up turds from the floor forever and still scraping goo from the bottom of your shoes.
Peter Lavelle of RT quite some time ago noted the multi-generational quality of the damage to US-Russian relations. It's going to take several generations to fix what has been broken.
The rest is just kabuki. Which is fine if you allow the US regime to save some face - nothing wrong with that if your main goals are accomplished.
I just don't find the claim by English Outside all that compelling.
Posted by: NH | Mar 24 2025 17:50 utc | 25
Posted by: Alex | Mar 24 2025 17:56 utc | 27
Posted by: Call it what u will | Mar 24 2025 17:17 utc | 10
RE: "I'm not sure how this 'changes the picture' as opposed to is just/yet another voice (Ian Proud's) pronouncing his opinion. That it rhymes with what many want, is not requisite IMO
<<
Ian Proud is trying to gain New Relevance in a dawning age of Rapprochement With Russia. He wants to re-brand himself, the former UK ambassador to Moscow, whose writings in various Regime Media outlets like FT, The Economist and The Guardian have--until the past 6 months or so---been very tone-deaf as to Russia's concerns or Russia's stance, always in that stereotypically *from-on-high* way that dyed in the wool Westerners employ when speaking down to Russia.
<<
Proud has launched a substack recently, and he has appeared on livestreams w/ The Duran gents. It is practically the case that formerly tone-deaf Russia Hands like the economist Jeffrey Sachs or formerly dedicated Empire militarists like Larry Wilkerson have rinsed away their sins on The Duran---and then emerged brand new as if baptized into a depth of awareness about Russia which they heretofore lacked.
>>
Hey, look: anybody can change, right-? Even people who *were* so wrong.
<<
It is reminiscent of a ne'er do-well celeb going on Oprah to confess their sins & repent so that Oprah can then absolve them and Oprah-'splain to the masses why everybody should forgive them too.
>>
People who have been *on the wrong side of history* are taking their Repentance Tour to The Duran in order to re-brand, seek potentially lucrative podcast ventures and remain relevant.
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Mar 24 2025 18:00 utc | 28
Posted by: james | Mar 24 2025 17:33 utc | 19
Delenda est - the original quote from Cato the Roman: Cartago deleda est. Carthage must be destroyed. (literally, carthage is to be destroyed)
Cato had a one track mind. Every time he spoke in the Roman Senate, he began his speech with Cartago delenda est.
Posted by: john brewster | Mar 24 2025 18:00 utc | 29
“So whether Trump can offer genuine rapprochement with Russia, opposed as he is by what may be regarded as effectively a coalition of the Europeans, Democrats, and even many within his own party, is uncertain. ”
He won the election on peace propaganda and has more constitutional authority to issue executive orders stop the war “in 24 hours” than most other executive orders he’s writing. Any time now! Right, guys??
And if he doesn’t make good, then it’s ab-so-lutely great that Donald is the face of the empire! Anyone like Formerly Miss Lacey who thinks “a step worse” is “a step in the wrong direction” just has TDS and a low IQ!
QAnon told us to trust the plan and that’s what we’ll do!
Posted by: I forgot | Mar 24 2025 18:00 utc | 30
Posted by: james | Mar 24 2025 17:33 utc | 19
It is from the Latin: "Carthago delenda est" famously attributed to the Roman Cato the Elder, meaning "Carthage must be destroyed." In this case, Russia must be destroyed.
Posted by: PeterCharles | Mar 24 2025 18:01 utc | 31
Hence Minsk 3.0 is being negotiated as we speak.
Posted by: Jax | Mar 24 2025 17:06 utc | 4
Worse. Ukr will give the resources and the npps to Us. Then, as it happens right now, Us will continue to attack Russian energy and whatever they want. (
tass.com/politics/1933197 )
The Black Sea deal will probably be something like this:
en.topwar.ru/261768-amerikanskie-istochniki-v-jer-rijade-obsuzhdaetsja-v-tom-chisle-otkaz-ukrainy-ot-morskih-udarov-po-krymu-i-krymskomu-mostu.html
Posted by: rk | Mar 24 2025 18:03 utc | 32
@ steel_porcupine | Mar 24 2025 18:00 utc | 29
Good to notice and mention. Others: Merkel came out to criticize labeling people as “Putinvershterer”. Members of Z’s circle come out now to criticize him. Etc. Their shamelessness is matched by the shallowness of voters’ attention and memories.
Posted by: I forgot | Mar 24 2025 18:07 utc | 33
"I've only seen a lot of clips of the Witkoff interview but it looked and sounded like more lies, wishful thinking, and dissembling.
Posted by: LoveDonbass | Mar 24 2025 17:32 utc | 18"
Right, I couldn't get past the mass rapes and beheading bullshit. Tucker Carlson did a great job of exposing Witkoff as just another Israeli tool. I don't know if it was intentional though.
Posted by: jr | Mar 24 2025 18:07 utc | 34
Withdrawal from the four provinces would clearly mark that Ukraine has lost the war. In that it would play a major role in preventing that a peace agreement will be seen as Minsk 3: another opportunity to rearm for the next war.
Two words are missing:
“root causes”.
These two words have been uttered recently by various senior members of the Russian government. So far, I’ve seen no sign that the West understands the meaning behind these words, and that there can be no long-term, sustainable settlement without such an understanding.
~~~
Not at all sure about this point:
A substantial portion of Putin’s electorate now believes he is being too soft by far in this war.is there actually any hard evidence of this coming from unbiased sources within Russia? Or should it be filed with Russia’s imminent economic collapse and Putin’s various terminal illnesses?
Under the US Biden admin there was four years of diplomatic “radio silence” towards Russia. This will need a lot of confidence-building measures and a lot of patience to overcome. Of course, Trump is in a ruddy blush to “git’er done” before the opposition gets more organised and unified; this could lead to mistakes and misunderstandings on the US side about Russia’s aims and objectives.
Andrei M. has spoken several times about the development of a modus vivendi between the 3 Great Powers of Russia, China and the US, but this should not be misread as Russia jumping at the first chance of rapprochement.
Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | Mar 24 2025 18:09 utc | 36
The Black Sea deal will probably be something like this ...
Posted by: rk | Mar 24 2025 18:03 utc | 33
---
Same chance as the Black Sea Seal ==> https://www.monachus-guardian.org/mguard08/08editor.htm
Posted by: too scents | Mar 24 2025 18:14 utc | 37
One question for the author as well as for the Bar:
Having in mind the facts on the ground in terms of Russia defeating the collective "West" in the ongoing war of attrittion taking place on the Novorossiyan battlefield, while also taking into account the author's claim of senior Russian military and political (e.g. Security Council) figures being more hawkish than Putin, please explain how and why would Russia agree to any peace proposals by the collective "West" which don't aknowledge the entirity of Russia's clearly stated "terms and conditions"?
Yes, Russia would accept rapproachment with the USA, because it's an adult thing to do (there was a Russian embassy in Washington even during the darkest days of the Cuban missile crisis), but that process doesn't necessarrily need to depend on or somehow be connected to the ceasefire/peace negotiations.
So please, enlighten me!
Posted by: ThirdWorldDude | Mar 24 2025 18:16 utc | 38
Posted by: Night Tripper | Mar 24 2025 17:45 utc | 25
RE: Zelesnky's comment that DJT is the only person VVP really fears
>>
Project Ukraine has entered its newest phase, which is the U.S.-forward phase. The proxy, nearly depleted, can now repair to the sidelines and shake the pom-poms hard for DJT: he's a God of Peace; he's frightening Putin; the man is like ambulatory rare earths.
<<
Basting DJT in the most delectable of marinades is now on-order. The proxy finally understands that its role is to praise, laud and flatter DJT and the U.S. The proxy has received its marching orders and is rushing to sit-down w/ TIME magazine in order to boost this sector of the propaganda saturation: DJT is awesome.
>>
While in contrast, VVP will seem like such an unimaginative legalistic pedant, as well as a bloodthirsty aggressor, if he refuses a ceasefire by Easter. How is it possible to celebrate Christ Risen if VVP is still dropping FAB-3000s on Kupiansk--"
<<
Now that it is possible to recognize that the war is between the U.S. and Russia---not Ukraine and Russia---will the people who have placed the blue & yellow flag in their profiles on X now place the Stars & Stripes there instead--?
>>
Because to Stand With Ukraine now actually means to Stand With the U.S. since the ruse of a proxy in the proxy war is falling away.
<<
And does Raytheon have a flag--? Because to Stand With the U.S. in its non-proxy war w/ Russia is to stand w/ the MIC.
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Mar 24 2025 18:17 utc | 39
Posted by b on March 24, 2025 at 16:34 UTC |
English Outsider: Russia-U.S. Talks - A Change In The Picture
by English Outsider
------
While this article brings an interesting analysis about rapprochement, I have issues with the underlying worldview of EO, based on the following statements:
His ideological stance and that of his supporters is a throwback to earlier days of moderate American conservatism...
You must be joking. Trump's stance is to destroy the government. That's why TPTB put him in. Nothing moderate about trampling on the Constitution. He makes the John Birch Society look like hippies.
The United States is too big and powerful for it to be in the Russian interest to be permanently at odds with it.
The US is a hollowed out wreck. We sent our industry to Asia. The rich sent the money they looted to Swiss and Cayman banks. Our armaments companies produce gold plated junk. We've been drawing down supplies without replacing them.
Russia, with China at its back, does not have to care about anything except the US's rapidly aging nuclear arsenal. I hear the Chinese can now detect nuclear submarines.
Even Von Rundstedt, that most Prussian of Prussians and maybe the best general they had,
Why would anyone pick this often cashiered, slavishly devoted to Hitler, Prussian caricature political hack as "the best" over genuine generals with real accomplishments, like Manstein, Model, Guderian, and Rommel? I think you just wanted the quote and had to puff up where it came from.
-------
To repeat, the analysis is interesting. The random, revealing comments give me pause.
Posted by: john brewster | Mar 24 2025 18:19 utc | 40
That the West was always engaged in an unwinnable war there,and that Trump is now recognising that reality
I'm sorry, but this is just a ludicrous notion.
His bizarre, and criminal, attacks upon Yemen, Venezuela, and soon to be Iran, support my statement.
This man neither understands, operates under, or cares one iota for, the LIMITED and enumerated powers invested in his office or the Rule of Law.
This is an extremely dangerous time.
Posted by: The Archivist | Mar 24 2025 18:25 utc | 41
IMHO, it is wise NOT to believe what british says, regardless insider or outsider. Look at what they do, not what they say. Among the anglo five, I am not not sure which one is more evil- the amerikkkan or the british? amerikkkan may be more straightforward. british definitely is more skillful at playing dirty tricks.
Posted by: LuRenJia | Mar 24 2025 18:27 utc | 42
Cato had a one track mind. Every time he spoke in the Roman Senate, he began his speech with Cartago delenda est.
Posted by: john brewster | Mar 24 2025 18:00 utc | 30
_______
Actually that’s how Cato *ended* his speeches! In fact “Carthago delenda est” is a simplification of what he did say, which was “Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam" — which means “By the way, I think that Carthage is to be beatroyed.”
Posted by: malenkov | Mar 24 2025 18:28 utc | 43
I forgot to add:
The impending Military Strikes into Mexico, under the bullshit aegis of "War on Cartels".
This excuse will be leveraged and asserted in MANY other countries.
Posted by: The Archivist | Mar 24 2025 18:29 utc | 44
Alastair Crooke on JudgeNap this am, had the most compelling reasoning that Uncle Schlomo was snoogling with Russia, to isolate Iran out of the Russian sphere. Then Iran can be bombed into the Stone Age for Israel. Ergo Nutty is happy, Miriam has done her sacred duty of killing as many Muslims as possible before the grim reaper hooks her off stage. And the Trump/Kushner Resort/Golfcourse on the Mediterranean Graveyard shores can become a destination place for Übermensch II.
Posted by: kupkee | Mar 24 2025 18:29 utc | 46
While everyone is distracted with the empty talks in Riyadh…..and that atrocious Ritz Carlton where you can not sit in peace anywhere without being watched and followed by a camara and/or a security subject wearing a black suit, black tie and black English ‘barker’ shoes.
To wit: The Russian Federation (RUF) is actively expanding ”mutual trust ties with the majority of global states, including the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the Republic of India (RoI), the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI), the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea (DPRK), as well as CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) countries. These ties include a comprehensive menu of partnership and strategic cooperation at an unprecedented level of mutual trust and respect of nations’ sovereignty leading to further expansion and deepening of friendly ties in all areas.
Many countries in waiting aspire to joining the BRIICS+ as soon as possible. Their concerns are heard on a daily basis, continuously addressed and paving the way for their inclusion in the association without further ado.
The Outlaw US of A does not figure at all in the Russians' or Kremlin’s mind because they lost a war they provoked in the first place.
And of course, Captain DJT is weak and Mr. Steven Charles Witkoff (SCW) is not a diplomat but a sales man.
Posted by: pepe | Mar 24 2025 18:30 utc | 47
Unfortunately Putin himself does not have a free hand. War has its own momentum and often can render insuperable difficulties that could previously have been glossed over. A substantial portion of Putin’s electorate now believes he is being too soft by far in this war.
I believe this is why we had, and continue to have, so many trolls here advocating that Putin's a traitor and "something must be done". It's part of a grand strategy squeezing move.
Posted by: persiflo | Mar 24 2025 18:32 utc | 48
Hence Minsk 3.0 is being negotiated as we speak.
Posted by: Jax | Mar 24 2025 17:06 utc | 4
No, it's not, Russia's not giving any ground whatsoever. They know their conistently stated Instanbul+ terms will never fly; they're simply laying the diplomatic groundwork for negotiating the "global security framework" with the US & China *AFTER* they've completely conquered Ukraine and annexed Odessa. All the talking going on now is to continue to demonstrate to the non-Western world that they're the only reasonable party at the table and to avoid WWIII on the way to completion of the SMO.
Posted by: TJandTheBear | Mar 24 2025 18:35 utc | 49
Not at all sure about this point:
"A substantial portion of Putin’s electorate now believes he is being too soft by far in this war..."
Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | Mar 24 2025 18:09 utc | 37
You are absoluteli right to be sceptical.
The topic starter article reads as follows:
That opposition does not only consist of the Democrats. A powerful wing of the Republican Party is also opposed to Trump and that wing is also opposed to any rapprochement with Russia.
So no one cries in histerics about some inner opposition to Trump, but if there is any possibility that some Russians might disagree with Putin then Russia is doomed?
I assume that some Russians still believe that the Eaarth is flat, so what?
Yes, Russia is a free country, so there might be people who disagree with Putin on lots of questions, and if they want to fight in the SMO their own way, much harder than Putin deems necessary, they are free to go and fight in it their own hardcore way.
Posted by: Rutte | Mar 24 2025 18:36 utc | 50
I'm inclined to treat any British diplomat with the utmost contempt. Proud is a fool.
Posted by: Gerry Bell | Mar 24 2025 18:39 utc | 51
DS Map update just dropped:
https://deepstatemap.live/en#6/49.4383200/32.0526800
Overall: Better than recent day, at 12.5 kmsq taken. Still ~half the NOV2024 rate.
Specific changes S to N:
1. Fields near Rozyliv, S of Kostiantynople.
2. Fields between Baranivka and Tarasivka. (far W Pokrovsk flank.)
Posted by: Anonymous | Mar 24 2025 18:40 utc | 52
AMK Mapping, normally a pro-Ukrainian site for geo-located battlefield doings, has removed the blue & yellow flag from his handle on X.
<<
He writes: "I've been thinking, since the new BELGOROD operation with the Ukrainian command wasting EVEN MORE lives on something that is doomed to fail, I'm done with having Ukrainian flags in my name."
>>
AMK explains that the presence of the blue & yellow flag was to indicate his support for the AFU fighting *guys* and *not* the government--but now he wonders what's the point: "I was stupid to keep it there for as long as I did."
<<
AMK goes on to reiterate his support of "most of the AFU"--but he asserts that the Ukrainian government "is not interested in peace, and they certainly DO NOT care about the lives of their soldiers."
>>
It's as if everyone's awareness has shifted to the fact that this proxy war, in which the U.S. *was* using Ukraine as a proxy to destroy Russia, has now seen the proxy kind of shunted to one side so that the actual paymaster/hegemon---the U.S.---can suit up without any fig-leaf pretense and engage in explicit public war w/ Russia.
<<
Don't get it twisted. I'm not saying that the U.S. is no longer putting its AFU proxy out there on the battlefield... It is. And I am not saying that the U.S. will commit U.S. troops as boots-on-the-ground. It will not.
>>
But the U.S. has removed the mask enough to show that *it* is explicitly in charge of the war now. If HIMARS missiles destroy helicopters on the tarmac---well, the paymaster/hegemon can say, "I did that." If the U.S.'s team sits for a 40-minute ceasefire negotiation w/ Ukraine's team in Riyadh, and the Ukrainian team signs on to the ceasefire, then the paymaster/hegemon can say, "I did that."
<<
If the Russian team sits down w/ the U.S.'s team in Riyadh and the Russian team starts talking about "root causes," the U.S.'s team members will stick out their lower lips and pull these pouty faces and say, "C'mon, Russia--you know you want to get to rapprochement. Rapprochement is what Russians always want w/ the West--and we can deliver a Big Beuatiful Rapprochement for you. So c'mon"---pushing the Black Sea ceasefire papers closer to the Russian diplomats---"don't start talking about "root causes" because rapprochement means the "root causes" magically disappear. 'Kay-?"
>>
The new phase of Project Ukraine is the U.S.-forward hot phase. Will HIMARS missiles rain down, perhaps followed by ATACMS-? Will the paymaster/hegemon use AFU troops less as brigades on the battlefield but more like terroristic shock units to cross into Bryansk and Belgorod-? Maybe the U.S., disappointed in its proxy, flatters itself w/ the notion that it can take a more direct role in crushing Russia and achieve *better* results.
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Mar 24 2025 18:46 utc | 53
IMO, Trump missed his chance to end this war quickly when he took office. It's simple, really. All this talk about finding a way to end the war, the ridiculous ceasefire gambit, to me are all just posturing and theatrics. The quickest, surest way to end this war was to do nothing. No more weapons, ammo, and especially no more ISR. No more Global Hawks flying near Crimea for targeting info, no satellite intel that provides Ukraine with targeting coordinates, just stop it all, rip the bandaid off fast. Ukraine would be stranded with its pants around its ankles while it operated mostly blind on the battlefield. This may be impossible to implement because of people in the military who would ignore his directives, I don't know, or Trump's ego requires that he is the guy in the public's view that found a way to end the war. However, the abruptness of such an action is typical of Trump's modus operandi (like what he did with USAID) and would knock his opponents off balance enough to stall any effective resistance. Now Trump is deep in the briar patch and anything he does can lead into a trap, that is, if he actually wants to end this thing.
Posted by: Mike R | Mar 24 2025 18:50 utc | 54
Trump is not interested in ending the Russian/Ukrainian war or sanctions against Russia. Trump simply wants to peel Russia away from Iran long enough to destroy Iran for Israel. Russian involvement in any war by the U.S. and Israel against Iran would prevent any U.S./Israeli victory. However, as soon as Iran is defeated or substantially weakened, Trump will re-ignite the Russian/Ukrainian war and sanctions. Recall that Trump was the first U.S. president that started re-arming and militarizing the Ukrainians, not Obama and not Biden.
Posted by: Mark Moore | Mar 24 2025 18:51 utc | 55
So no one cries in histerics about some inner opposition to Trump, but if there is any possibility that some Russians might disagree with Putin then Russia is doomed?
Posted by: Rutte | Mar 24 2025 18:36 utc | 51
Laughable, isn't it? It's like the Russian economy... someone will cite some statistic and exclaim "they're collapsing!" yet that same dramatically worse statistic in a western economy somehow isn't a concern. Too many folks throwing rocks from glass houses.
Posted by: TJandTheBear | Mar 24 2025 18:51 utc | 56
Trump simply wants to peel Russia away from Iran long enough to destroy Iran for Israel.
Posted by: Mark Moore | Mar 24 2025 18:51 utc | 56
Well, that isn't happening. There's plenty of indications that Russia has used the negotiations in part to deter U.S. from attacking Iran.
Posted by: TJandTheBear | Mar 24 2025 18:56 utc | 57
I agree with Alistair Crooke in his recent talk with Napolitano: all that the current US administration cares about is to decapitate Iran. The negotiations with Russia are urgent only because the US is under time pressure to focus on Israel's victory march. Only for this operation against the declared enemy Iran Russia is to be muted. For getting a short peace Russia will have to acquiesce. Once Iran is finished, Russia will be next and then China. That is the plan. Anyone who still has any hope for any reason or any restraint from the US empire is in denial and has not paid any attention to what happened over the last 25 years.
This is also Berletic's view and he gives a plethora of proofs.
Posted by: Hamburger | Mar 24 2025 19:01 utc | 58
There's plenty of indications that Russia has used the negotiations in part to deter U.S. from attacking Iran.Posted by: TJandTheBear | Mar 24 2025 18:56 utc | 58
There’s also been recent indications (deliveries to Iran) that anyone attacking Iran will find the pointy ends of some Su-35s looking at them...
Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | Mar 24 2025 19:05 utc | 59
There’s also been recent indications (deliveries to Iran) that anyone attacking Iran will find the pointy ends of some Su-35s looking at them...
Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | Mar 24 2025 19:05 utc | 60
I wonder if those also happen to be carrying R37's? There's those pesky S400's in Iran as well, albeit likely export versions similar to what's in Turkey.
There's a reason that Israel's last attacks never had aircraft actually going into Iranian airspace...
Posted by: TJandTheBear | Mar 24 2025 19:11 utc | 60
As I recollect Martyanov remarking some time ago, in the long term it would be better for the Russians to find a modus vivendi with the US than not.
The last time there was a modus vivendi between the Soviet Union and the Yankees, we all know how it ended.
Hopefully the Russians will understand it sooner than later.
Posted by: Naive | Mar 24 2025 19:14 utc | 61
The Hill
Jeffrey Goldberg, editor in chief of The Atlantic, was apparently included in a Trump administration group chat on Signal in which top officials debated and then discussed details of attacks against Houthi rebels in Yemen. . .here
Posted by: Don Bacon | Mar 24 2025 19:15 utc | 62
Posted by: TJandTheBear | Mar 24 2025 19:11 utc | 61
Do I remember right?
Putin said several years ago, bombing Teheran would be like bombing Moscow.
To Obama iirr.
Posted by: Naive | Mar 24 2025 19:16 utc | 63
“We are going to forge the freest, most advanced, most dynamic and MOST DOMINANT civilization ever to exist on the face of this Earth.” - Trump
https://x.com/xuqinduo/status/1897180283579023744
Any agreement by Russia with this psychopath will backfire badly. The yankees are not agreement capable.
Free to loot Ukraine and later Russia. The yankees need the resources of Russia to build new weapons and industry. Remember, the Soviet Union was selling its rockets and know-how to the yankees so that they could go to the spatial station. We know the results.
Posted by: Naive | Mar 24 2025 19:17 utc | 64
Although carefully considered, there are at least two weaknesses, one on each side of a possible bargain. Fro sure, Russian interests expect de-Nazification to amount to a lot more than symbolic gestures, viz restoration of Russian business interests in Ukraine including the operation of the port of Odessa, the restoration of labour and land tenure as well as religious rights to all Ukrainian people, an end to the project of de-Russifying Ukraine and a reversal of several consequences.
On the American side, the big question is how much Trump's people are just trying to keep Russia inside while they shape up to defeat and overthrow Iran's government. The manifold threatening implications of such a scheme can derail détente at any time and may soon show the Americans aren't really serious about it.
Posted by: Tim Putnam | Mar 24 2025 19:21 utc | 65
For getting a short peace Russia will have to acquiesce.
Posted by: Hamburger | Mar 24 2025 19:01 utc | 59
Again, that isn't happening. There's zero incentive for Russia to do so. If anything they're even more emboldened these days, so any talk of Russian concessions is pure wishful thinking.
Look at what's come of the negotiations so far. Russia's unequivocally stated "give us everything we want or we'll take more" (e.g. Odessa).
Posted by: TJandTheBear | Mar 24 2025 19:21 utc | 66
Russians are genuinely interested in rapprochement with the United States
That is the normal stance for a country that wants peace and good relations with the world.
Vica versa I think you're wrong.
As always the Americans say one thing and do another.
They haven't stopped helping ex-ukraine despite all their words.
Completely in line with Trumps so-called domestic opponents.
As always they play a game of good cop bad cop, imperialism and wars are a bipartisan fundamental trait. Nobody will go against that there, how anti-establishment they may pretend to be.
And like the US outsourced the fighting and dying to vasals and proxies, they have now outsourced the funding of it to Europe.
It is their plan, not an undesired obstacle hindering their pretend peace.
I can't think of any good reason the US would want genuine good relations with Russia, unless they know they're in trouble and need to use them against their biggest threat, China.
After which it will go back to hating them.
Russia knows that, like anyone that followed their history.
When they see Trump coming with a peace offer in his hand there is only one thing going through their mind:
Beware of strangers bearing gifts.
Posted by: Ed Bernays | Mar 24 2025 19:22 utc | 67
"That opposition does not only consist of the Democrats. A powerful wing of the Republican Party is also opposed to Trump and that wing is also opposed to any rapprochement with Russia. That wing of the Republican Party is somewhat subdued at present but it's still there and still with some support in the electorate."
I'm hoping that a settlement deal is possible in spite of the strong headwinds. I'm curious to know which war enthusiasts within the Republican Party are still in a position of influence. Lindsey Graham appears more irrelevant by the day, Sen. McConnell is on a Biden style mental vacation, the Cheney's and McCains have been thrown out on their collective ears. Can anyone name current power brokers amongst the Republicans who are still hot to trot for the war in Ukraine? I think there are some who are eager to take on China, but the sense that I get is that most Republicans are sick of dealing with Ukraine. Please share some names if you know of any.
Posted by: Paranaense | Mar 24 2025 19:23 utc | 68
A modus vivendi with the US empire is impossible. For anyone! The US is explicitly modeled after the Roman empire. The Roman empire always expanded, always ate up those it had befriended a little earlier to focus on some other cake to swallow. And all wars were bellum iustum, righteous wars. Power is insatiable. This is an eternal law. It can only be stopped by another power. If the resistance doesn't converge and coordinate, they will perish. Rome expanded until the technology of the time could no longer hold that vast empire together. But it expanded from a tiny swamp city to cover most of the known world. It never once sought peace for it's own sake.
Posted by: Hamburger | Mar 24 2025 19:30 utc | 69
Putin is inconsistent and contradicts himself. Wasting Russian soldiers is his plan. Instead he should make Ukraine pay the price of not agreeing to peace by using nukes against Ukraine. Today Ukraine is behaving like Japan in 1945. Nukes hastened peace in Japan and they will in Ukraine. If Putin thinks a nuclear attack on Ukraine will speed up NATO deployment of nukes to Ukraine he is wrong. On the contrary, Ukraine will host NATO nukes anyway when this war ends. Russia should aim to capture Odessa and link up with Transnistria so Russian nukes can be deployed there and in North Western Black Sea. That's when NATO will listen.
Posted by: Jason | Mar 24 2025 19:36 utc | 70
Re: Iran
Iran has plenty of Home Grown defensive weapons. It’s perfectly capable of prevailing fighting solo.
Iran population 88 million
Iran GDP PPP basis 4.4 trillion
Iran per capita GDP PPP Basis 18,750
Posted by: Exile | Mar 24 2025 19:38 utc | 71
@67 TJandTheBear
There's zero incentive for Russia to do so.Maybe! Hopefully! But my point is not about what Russia is going to do (which I have no way of knowing), but about what it should do or better should not do. The original post by English Outsider and also several others state, that it would be reasonable and rational to seek good relations with the US and to seek peace. I say that is a deadly trap. Hanibal understood this very well and acted accordingly - swiftly and decisivly. Through bad luck he failed. But history proved he had the right cause. Rome was a threat to the entire world.
Posted by: Hamburger | Mar 24 2025 19:39 utc | 72
Rome was a threat to the entire world.
Posted by: Hamburger | Mar 24 2025 19:39 utc | 73
Yes, certainly the US is with a ridiculous amount of bases worldwide. That's where "trust but verify" came in between Ron & Mikhail. Keep the lines of communication open, only make agreements that can be independently checked, but don't give an inch otherwise.
Posted by: TJandTheBear | Mar 24 2025 19:44 utc | 73
The Hill
Jeffrey Goldberg, editor in chief of The Atlantic, was apparently included in a Trump administration group chat on Signal in which top officials debated and then discussed details of attacks against Houthi rebels in Yemen. . .here
Posted by: Don Bacon | Mar 24 2025 19:15 utc | 63
Just wow. This is going to dominate the news for a while. Thanks.
Posted by: freedom fritos | Mar 24 2025 19:46 utc | 74
As wars go on, initial aims expand and harden, and so a negotiated compromise peace becomes much more difficult. And as wars go on, the fighting becomes more bitter and ruthless. Especially with civil wars, which in many senses is what we see in Ukraine. This was the case in WW1 and also WW2 - "unconditional surrender". Blood and treasure seems never to be a sunk cost.
So after 3 years of escalation and many more dead and maimed than were ever needed (Instanbul anyone?), I am sort of struggling to understand why Russia might agree to any sort of sub-optimal negotiated solution - and certainly one that falls short of their initial clearly stated (if maybe ambiguous) objectives. Which have expanded.
Now it may be that what I consider is pure BS - ie the reports of Russian casualties, low morale, industrial and societal collapse etc etc - are in fact accurate. But I fear not. The West is I think delusional about the success of its proxy war (or maybe now just war) against the Rodina.
Russia may now be able to do a deal with Trump but he is gone within 4 years or less. And they have an overtly hostile EU/UK now and probably for a generation. So Russia will not I think let its guard down. And the war will continue until Russian either achieves its objectives, or is faced down by nuclear brinkmanship, or the West caves.
But we can cave, and all is about narratives. We won really, it is just that on a superficial level Russia appears to have won - to the unedeucated....
Posted by: marcjf | Mar 24 2025 19:50 utc | 75
Whatever Russia might seek with the USA, it will be tempered by Russia's need to preserve Iran as a strategic partner. If Putin knows Trump will strike at Iran, he also knows that is the limit of any rapprochement. Vice versa by the way
Posted by: ZT | Mar 24 2025 19:51 utc | 76
Iran has plenty of Home Grown defensive weapons. It’s perfectly capable of prevailing fighting solo.
Posted by: Exile | Mar 24 2025 19:38 utc | 72
That's my take as well. Israel wants US involved because they can't fully engage Iran alone, but US itself would suffer egregious losses that would permanently alter the global geopolitical landscape. Bebe's a madman, otherwise he'd realize that unlimited warfare with Iran could effectively "end" Israel. The time when Iran could be decisively beaten has past.
Posted by: TJandTheBear | Mar 24 2025 19:51 utc | 77
Posted by: Jason | Mar 24 2025 19:36 utc | 71
Japan was already defeated before the nukes.
Nukes were only a parade/warning to Soviet Union.
There is no need for RF to show nukes, everybody knows they have them.
Maybe the oreshnik was a parade, infact still there is no satellite image of the target, at least in public western media.
Posted by: Mario | Mar 24 2025 19:56 utc | 78
There was never any doubt that Russia wants normal relations with the US. Russia under Putin has always been open to constructive relations on the basis of mutual respect and equal footing with everyone, including with the US.
The Russians never said during this conflict that they do not want relations with the US, so what is this great insight from IP?
An analysis telling us that DT's undefined ideas about restoring relations with Russia and ending the war in Ukraine face opposition in the US and the EU? Who, please, did not know that?
And how is taking DTrump's impulses seriously, like ending the war in Ukraine, any kind of analysis. From some man's hazy ideas (and bombast - I can end the war in 24 hours, only I can stop Putin and similar BS) to any kind of plan, coherent policy or realistic peace proposal is a long road, one on which DT and the Trumpians are not on. Both their talk and their actions attest to that.
Russia will end the war, whether the Trumpians like it or not, and will remain open to normalising relations with the US, as it always has been.
Posted by: JB | Mar 24 2025 20:07 utc | 79
And does Raytheon have a flag--? Because to Stand With the U.S. in its non-proxy war w/ Russia is to stand w/ the MIC.
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Mar 24 2025 18:17 utc | 40
Why yes, it's the skull and crossbones, appropriated from pirates.
Posted by: dontflayme | Mar 24 2025 20:11 utc | 80
This re-posting is disheartening, because there's nothing good about repeating nonsense. The notion that the "Europeans" and the Democrats and the treasonous RINOs are in some sort of coalition against Trump so that he has troubles getting his program through the House and Senate is insane. The Europeans are not elected to either body of Congress. The notion that Trump has even put forward a program of administrative reform is wrong. A blizzard of executive orders and an extra-legal independent body attacking actual government is not a program...unless the goal is to bypass any legislative control at all. That renders the whole alleged preoccupation with the midterm elections in question!
The basic notion that Trump is afraid of being tagged a loser if he simply withdraws from Ukraine is correct, I think...but the longer he delays, the more he confuses the issues with stuff like minerals deals, the longer this becomes his war, a self-fulfilling prophecy. Why, it's almost as if Trump wasn't wanting peace in Ukraine, he just wants the Europeans to pay for it, while he takes no responsibility for anything. The thing is, that given the realities of power, neutrality will be read as de facto support if Russia wins on the ground. And again, that is the self-fulfilling prophecy.
And the notion that Trump can offer a rapprochement with Russia is confused in two ways: Does the US rapprochement with Russia include a Ukrainian settlement at all? And if it doesn't, can Russia afford to make such a rapprochement with the US? From all reports Trump puts tremendous emphasis on energy prices, which in the long term means middle eastern oil, Russian oil, etc. The effort to negotiate in the Kingdom suggests that Trump is more interested in some sort of condominium with Russia on oil prices and sales. And he certainly has the leverage of ending sanctions. But can Russia afford to do without a Ukraine settlement?
It was a commonplace here to argue that Biden was poisoning negotiations by ramping up arms and money in the fall and winter. The thing is, given the lead times on such things, the real money for it cam when Speaker Johnson last year agreed a continuing resolution that offered up the money that Biden used as the alleged poison. In one sense, it is absurd to claim that Trump ever campaigned on a Ukrainian peace platform, even if MoA commenters want to attribute the imaginary landslide to the popular desire for peace. Worse, much of the so-called desire for peace on the part of Trump/Trump cultists appears to be more a fierce desire to quit doing favors for foreigners, who are all really enemies not friends. The idea that US military and foreign aid expenditures are never designed to help people of foreign countries (or even the mass of Americans either!) is unthinkable...though it shouldn't be. I suggest that US aid to Ukrainian fascists wasn't a boondoggle, it was a very sincerely meant effort to help friends (fascists are usually considered friends by conservative Americans) against a foreing enemy, which is every government not more or less totally subservient.
Posted by: steven t johnson | Mar 24 2025 20:13 utc | 81
This re-posting is disheartening, because there's nothing good about repeating nonsense. The notion that the "Europeans" and the Democrats and the treasonous RINOs are in some sort of coalition against Trump so that he has troubles getting his program through the House and Senate is insane. The Europeans are not elected to either body of Congress. The notion that Trump has even put forward a program of administrative reform is wrong. A blizzard of executive orders and an extra-legal independent body attacking actual government is not a program...unless the goal is to bypass any legislative control at all. That renders the whole alleged preoccupation with the midterm elections in question!
The basic notion that Trump is afraid of being tagged a loser if he simply withdraws from Ukraine is correct, I think...but the longer he delays, the more he confuses the issues with stuff like minerals deals, the longer this becomes his war, a self-fulfilling prophecy. Why, it's almost as if Trump wasn't wanting peace in Ukraine, he just wants the Europeans to pay for it, while he takes no responsibility for anything. The thing is, that given the realities of power, neutrality will be read as de facto support if Russia wins on the ground. And again, that is the self-fulfilling prophecy.
And the notion that Trump can offer a rapprochement with Russia is confused in two ways: Does the US rapprochement with Russia include a Ukrainian settlement at all? And if it doesn't, can Russia afford to make such a rapprochement with the US? From all reports Trump puts tremendous emphasis on energy prices, which in the long term means middle eastern oil, Russian oil, etc. The effort to negotiate in the Kingdom suggests that Trump is more interested in some sort of condominium with Russia on oil prices and sales. And he certainly has the leverage of ending sanctions. But can Russia afford to do without a Ukraine settlement?
It was a commonplace here to argue that Biden was poisoning negotiations by ramping up arms and money in the fall and winter. The thing is, given the lead times on such things, the real money for it cam when Speaker Johnson last year agreed a continuing resolution that offered up the money that Biden used as the alleged poison. In one sense, it is absurd to claim that Trump ever campaigned on a Ukrainian peace platform, even if MoA commenters want to attribute the imaginary landslide to the popular desire for peace. Worse, much of the so-called desire for peace on the part of Trump/Trump cultists appears to be more a fierce desire to quit doing favors for foreigners, who are all really enemies not friends. The idea that US military and foreign aid expenditures are never designed to help people of foreign countries (or even the mass of Americans either!) is unthinkable...though it shouldn't be. I suggest that US aid to Ukrainian fascists wasn't a boondoggle, it was a very sincerely meant effort to help friends (fascists are usually considered friends by conservative Americans) against a foreing enemy, which is every government not more or less totally subservient.
Posted by: steven t johnson | Mar 24 2025 20:13 utc | 82
Crypto Dem.
Posted by: Ahenobarbus | Mar 24 2025 20:18 utc | 82
I see why they dont this guy anywhere near Trump. He is intelligent tactical and puts USA first. He might prevent the catastrophic blunder they desire. It is not a blunder however but a sacrifice. Blunder implies a degree of competency but not enough. There is plenty of competency but they are choosing this fate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnk9oRHmJl8
Posted by: LosBanos | Mar 24 2025 20:21 utc | 83
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Mar 24 2025 18:00 utc | 29
This, there are too many has-been former diplomats trying to gain relevance. Too many individuals just selling their empty words for monetary gain for people craving someone to make sense of it all, or reinforce their biases.
The City of London still has "financial relevance" but all the stolen wealth they launder and store away means nothing in the face of material reality - as Victor Gao said, the UK should not overestimate its importance on the global scene. If they stop acting like a rabid chihuahua they will be treated with respect but they are not a competitor in any current industry or industry of the future.
Everyone obsessing over how Putin isn't "hard" enough, or that Trump is smarter than he seems is missing the point - the leader is mostly a figurehead and without population-level advances in education, technology, etc. the country will stagnate and decline. In related news, MK Bhadrakumar just lauded Modi for appearing on Lex Fridman's podcast as if that actually means something...
Posted by: altruisticpunisher | Mar 24 2025 20:35 utc | 84
These sources of tribute are coming to an end for the US and Europe leading to "economic hardship" among its entitled populations. The trade wars are an approach to claw back some of this tribute. Increasingly key critical resources are being withheld such as antimony gallium, neon, and actual rare earth elements (Sc to Lu). The combined West cannot allow this to happen and increasingly looks to dismantling Russia to obtain the tribute required to jump-start the faltering economies.
It is as if the combined West sees itself in a Thucydides trap and sees an irrational war with Russia as their last hope to avoid collapse of their so-called "civilizations".
Posted by: krollchem | Mar 24 2025 17:42 utc | 23
Not a bad summary, but this bit: leading to "economic hardship" among its entitled populations. Do you know how many of these entitled people live in a cardboard box?
Trashing the workers of one region of the globe does not benefit those in another section of the globe. It merely plays into the divide and conquer plans of your ruling class and ours.
Think harder.
Posted by: Ahenobarbus | Mar 24 2025 20:42 utc | 85
Wishful thinking B.
And of Russia falls for this false detente again they deserve whatever the West is cooking up for them.
They are playing for all the marbles and if Putin/Lavrov doesn't forcibly push back... they will be back in 20 years to try it again and this time properly.
It's now or never
Posted by: Skeletor | Mar 24 2025 20:59 utc | 86
If Trump had a top 10 geo strategic economic wish list (which I bet he doesn't) a Ukraine-Russia peace deal would rank below acquiring Canada, acquiring Greenland, block the Chinese from using the Panama canal, have Zionazi Israel completely eradicate and murder Gaza and the West Bank from even the youngest Palestinian infant and have every nation on earth pay hefty levies to the US in the form of tariffs to the tune of 50% or more.
Anyone believing the Russians are seeking Minsk III is either malignant or cognitively impaired lacking analytical thinking. Despite a "peace deal" refraining both parties from attacking energy infrastructure, Ukraine and its caretakers predictably don't adhere to it. The caretakers not only including the British and European intelligence agencies but also the US's and without the US weapons, US target acquisition via satellites and US trajectory intel via satellites, Ukraine wouldn't even be able to launch these attacks. There's not a single person in the Russian leadership who believes Ukraine and its caretakers would adhere to an ever wider peace deal.
"For some of them RF delenda est is the only end to this war that would leave them happy" is the most noteworthy part of this comment/article. The Russian leadership knows perfectly well that in the West "Russia must be destroyed" will keep prevailing. There won't be any truce until Ukraine is defeated and dismembered.
Ukrainian channels report that Zelensky's thugs mobilized a father in the Rovno region, leaving the stroller with his baby on the street!
https://tgstat.ru/en/channel/@DDGeopolitics/142761
The mobilization potential is dwindling and once it dries up the actor that can play piano with his genitals will permanently, if he's lucky, move into one of his homes in France, Italy, US... .
Posted by: xor | Mar 24 2025 21:07 utc | 87
I keep reading claims that nothing significant has been revealed by the release of documents about the JFK assassination. I have to disagree. The revelation that Oswald was recruited in 1959 into the CIA's REDCAP program of false defectors managed by Angleton has to be regarded as highly significant.
Posted by: Lysias | Mar 24 2025 21:13 utc | 88
The Hill
Jeffrey Goldberg, editor in chief of The Atlantic, was apparently included in a Trump administration group chat on Signal in which top officials debated and then discussed details of attacks against Houthi rebels in Yemen. . .here
Posted by: Don Bacon | Mar 24 2025 19:15 utc | 63
#########
What clowns. If this Admin is around long enough, Hegseth's Grindr profile and Rubio's Foam Party details will get leaked.
And I am here for it.
There are 15 year old boys better at OpSec.
Posted by: LoveDonbass | Mar 24 2025 21:31 utc | 89
They are playing for all the marbles and if Putin/Lavrov doesn't forcibly push back... they will be back in 20 years to try it again and this time properly.
It's now or never
Posted by: Skeletor | Mar 24 2025 20:59 utc | 87
Russia is forcibly pushing back. And there's no "back in 20 years" for the West; this was the last hurrah for global hegemony.
Posted by: TJandTheBear | Mar 24 2025 21:33 utc | 90
Of course, Germany wants to continue the war to destroy Russia. That is the whole reason why it invented "Ukraine" (like "Ober Ost") during WW1 and later hired Bandera. They even brainwashed Russian POW for that.
„The BND, the West German intelligence service under former Wehrmacht Gen. Reinhard Gehlen, formed a new relationship with Bandera. It was a natural union. During the war, Gehlen’s senior officers argued that the USSR could be broken up if only Germany wooed the various nationalities properly. Bandera had continued lines into the Ukraine, and in March 1956 he offered these in return for money and weapons.“
archives.gov/iwg/reports/hitlers-shadow.pdf
"Instructions of August 11, 1914, from the Chancellor to the German embassy in Vienna, drafted by Jagow, are revealing on this point. They define the aims of German policy in the following words :
To produce revolution, not only in Poland but also in the Ukraine, seems to us very important :
1 . As a means of warfare against Russia,
...
Berchtold told the Bulgarian government on October 17, 1914, and the Turkish at the beginning of November: ‘Our main aim in this war is to weaken Russia enduringly, and for that reason we should, in the event of our victory, welcome the establishment of an independent Ukrainian State’."
archive.org/details/FischerFritzGermanysAimsInTheFirstWorldWar/page/n161/mode/2up?view=theater
Posted by: p3t3r | Mar 24 2025 21:33 utc | 91
Maybe the oreshnik was a parade, infact still there is no satellite image of the target, at least in public western media.
Posted by: Mario | Mar 24 2025 19:56 utc | 79
Yes, no one shows photos, that including Russia.
But the question is what effect Oreshnik has? I can't see any, no one cares. And currently Russia is so begging for Istanbul 2 that they keep the energy ceasefire while their own energy is attacked almost every day since then. They "negotiated" today many many hours with US, while getting hit by US. Give them a few days and they ceasefire some more, also alone
Posted by: rk | Mar 24 2025 21:38 utc | 92
Russia is so beggingPosted by: rk | Mar 24 2025 21:38 utc | 93
any solid evidence for this claim?
Posted by: Justpassinby | Mar 24 2025 21:45 utc | 93
"Russia is so begging"
LMAO. Russia's never begged for anything over the entire SMO and they're certainly not now. All the beggars are in the West.
Posted by: TJandTheBear | Mar 24 2025 21:46 utc | 94
Once again i repeat what i sort of posted yesterday.
The situation is complex. Trump is complex. Proud is complex.
This is how i see it:
Trump genuinely wants peace with Russia because:
1. He is not and never was a Russophobe, even in the Cold War. FFS he called his daughter Ivanka, which is as Russian a name as I can think of and of course was married to Ivana.
2. He is a business man in real estate. Unlike the military magnates war is NOT good for business.
3. Russia has resources and he would like his cut
4. He is a realist and realises that Russia is winning and the logistics are against the USA so he wants out
5. He want to try to break the tie between Russia and China and Iran (this is the Kissinger view and Trump we know listened to him when alive.
6. He has enough business sense to know the USA has economic woes and he needs to cut back on useless expenses
7. He rightly has realised that the USA's industrial capacity is currently up the creek without a paddle. Steel, shipbuilding and more recently even aircraft are in trouble (or in the case of ships almost gone), so logistically USA cannot win
8. He has enough common sense to realise that WWIII could go nuclear
9. One skill he has always had, both as a shonky business man and as an entertainer is to read people and know when they are bluffing or when they will back down no further. hence he is wary of Xi and Putin. This skill is surprisingly rare in the USA and I do not think the Democrats had this to any degree at all.
10. Being politically astute he has read the mood in the USA - they are not keen for a war with Russia.
OK so 10 good reasons to believe he is sincere BUT, BUT, BUT!!!!!
He has 10 big problems:
1. Politically he must appear to win ie to cut a good deal and not seem weak
2. His personality is such that he must never even to himself appear the loser and this makes negotiations hard
3. As pointed out in the article above, he has tremendous opposition at home and this will continue to weaken and undermine him
4. Despite his hopes the chances of Russia severing ties with China or Iran are low, so his whole negotiation position is weak
5. Nobody with a brain trusts the USA, so his word and his promises are meaningless with out guarantees. This is not Trump related, but he has to live with it.
6. His personality, past actions and positions in the past, along with the extensive media hatred make him disliked and disregarded by most political types in the west. This seriously weakens his negotiation ability.
7. Slightly off centre but Gaza - his hypocritical position weakens his negotiation position with the rest of the world
8. The UK, MI6 and all that mob. I do not understand the why or the wherefore, but it is clear that the UK is playing its own game and that seriously undermines Trump's ability to negotiate.
9. Poland and the three yapping poodles - irritating and potentially dangerous
10. Scandinavia which is also playing its own game, and having looked at the military balance is much more of a worry to Russia than even the USA.
So while I think Trump is genuine in his desire to make peace with Russia, i do not like his chances.
Posted by: watcher | Mar 24 2025 21:47 utc | 95
Russians have a historical perspective of politics. Trump is transient and short lived no matter what. American elites don't do deals unless they take the lion's share. Same for American business.
Germany is doing what it was doing already in the 13th c.
As for Ivan and Natasha being hardliners well as a very frequent traveler to Russia where I have friends of twenty-five years ago, yes that's the dominant feeling.
The sanctions taken are a tectonic break that can't be undone. The process of anti-Western block formation, slowly, is the only way. At some point EU will hit a wall.
What would be good is that small groups of EUtizens take action. The Von Der Leyen/Albrecht, the Merz, the Pistorius, the Baerbock, BND high ranking servants, all these people can be killed.
Posted by: Timur | Mar 24 2025 21:52 utc | 96
Mr. Putin said it all in the nothing burger Phone call with Trump last week.
Putin ended the call with a suggestion that USA and Russian Hockey teems meet for a match.
Putin is an avid hockey fan and plays the game well himself.
What he said to Trump as Putin ended the call was.
"If you are here to play games and waste my time. Next time, lets arrange a Hockey match so we can both enjoy it."
That is hardly rapprochement
Posted by: golddigger | Mar 24 2025 22:11 utc | 97
Trump’s playing for all the marbles, it’s that simple, any talk of specific policies and strategies is meaningless if the DS is allowed to remain in its current, or even a slightly truncated, form. Any Trump ‘policy’ has to be seen through this lens, he has set in train a series of events which are designed to remove the non-elected elements who have dictated policy for decades, reducing the President to little more than a figurehead. This is why every EO is written as a different vector of attack, forcing the DS to fall back on its last line of defence, now that DOGE has directly interdicted its covert funding mechanisms, judicial activism and organised violence, neither of which are coherent or long-term solutions.
The Ukrainian peace deal is just another vector to attack the DS, another opportunity to uncover the corruption at the dark heart of the enterprise and to rob the DS of another source of income, similar to intercepting couriers for an insurgency. If there’s any commonality between the policy objectives it’s their objective, to begin to reveal the true size and reach of the spiders web to the American public, and the creatures that inhabited it who are now desperately trying to scuttle for cover. Only when the web has been torn down and the creatures crushed or put to flight can any normal governmental agenda be considered. He’s learnt his lesson from the mistakes of his first administration, instead of using his energies and influence in trying to push through traditional programmes, irrespective of DS opposition (a fatal miscalculation) he’s created a barrage of orders that forces the DS and its minions to expose themselves, in order to try to counter them.
Posted by: Milites | Mar 24 2025 22:17 utc | 98
"If he can’t, that’ll be Odessa and Kharkov gone"
Ah...the Odessa dreamers!
Here we are almost 12 months later from the high hopes of last June. And RFA hasn't taken Pokrovsk, Toretsk, or Chasiv Yar. Good luck going and getting two huge cities (one of which is incredibly well water defended), when you are moving at literal slower than a snail's pace.
Posted by: Anonymous | Mar 24 2025 22:19 utc | 99
Posted by: ZT | Mar 24 2025 19:51 utc | 77
RE: if Putin knows Trump will strike at Iran...
<<
VVP inked the security agreement w/ Iran just a couple days *before* DJT's inauguration, so Iran is in a vastly different position than the first time DJT looked Iran's way.
>>
DJT *may* indeed strike Iran--but Russia has, in the meantime, while DJT was *not* in the White House, collaborated w/Iran and fortified Iran in various ways. It will not be a cake-walk for the U.S., if they do strike.
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Mar 24 2025 22:19 utc | 100
The comments to this entry are closed.
It’s up to the Russians to fight for as long as they see fit.
But I fear if they don’t liberate all of the ukraine they will just be there again in 10 years.
Posted by: Fred777 | Mar 24 2025 16:54 utc | 1