The readouts from the U.S. and Russian side about yesterday's phone call between President Trump and President Putin has me concerned about the potential of another war in the Middle East.

The Russian readout has 674 words. It is quite specific about Ukraine issues. There is a two sentences paragraph about the Middle East:

Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump also addressed some other international issues, including the situation in the Middle East and in the Red Sea region. Joint efforts will be made to stabilise the situation in the crisis spots and establish cooperation on nuclear non-proliferation and global security.

What those 'joint efforts' might be is not specified.

With just 227 words the U.S. readout is much shorter. There is much less on Ukraine. A whole one fourth of the readout is with concern to the Middle East:

The leaders spoke broadly about the Middle East as a region of potential cooperation to prevent future conflicts. They further discussed the need to stop proliferation of strategic weapons and will engage with others to ensure the broadest possible application. The two leaders shared the view that Iran should never be in a position to destroy Israel.

Iran, not mentioned by the Russian's, is mentioned in the context of nuclear ('strategic') weapons.

Iran seems to be the next item on Trump's international meddling list.

Recently leaked documents point to major U.S. planning for a war with Iran. The suddenly renewed U.S. bombing of Yemen, despite no recent attacks by Ansarallah on international shipping, seem to be a provocation towards that:

Tehran has begun circling the wagons as a new phase is beginning in Trump’s foreign policies, with tensions rising steadily over the nuclear issue. The October deadline is drawing closer by the day for invoking the snapback clause in the JCPOA (2015 Iran nuclear deal) to reinstate UN Security Council sanctions will expire, and Iran’s enrichment programme, on the other hand, has apparently reached a point where it already has a stockpile to make “several” nuclear bombs, per the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Iran however has Russian and Chinese backing:

On March 14, China’s foreign minister Wang Yi hosted a joint meeting in Beijing with the Russian and Iranian deputy foreign ministers where he proposed five points “on the proper settlement of the Iranian nuclear issue”, which, for all purposes endorsed Tehran’s stance. It was a resounding diplomatic victory for Iran.

Interestingly, the Beijing meeting was timed to coincide with the conclusion of a 6-day naval exercise at Iran’s Chabahar Port with the theme of Creating Peace and Security Together between the navies of Iran, Russia and China.
…
Moscow has lately waded into the Iran nuclear issue and is positioning itself for a mediatory role potentially. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov recently came out against attaching extraneous issues (eg., verifiable arrangements by Tehran to ensure the cessation of its support for resistance groups in Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria) to the nuclear negotiations. Lavrov said frankly, “Such a thing is unlikely to yield results.”

Before the renewed bombing of Yemen Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Foreign Minister of Russia Sergei Lavrov had their own phone call. The short U.S. readout said:

The Secretary informed Russia of U.S. military deterrence operations against the Iran-backed Houthis and emphasized that continued Houthi attacks on U.S. military and commercial shipping vessels in the Red Sea will not be tolerated.

It did not mention that Russia spoke out against it:

The Russian Foreign Ministry, in a readout on Saturday, stated that US Secretary of State Marco Rubio called Lavrov and informed him about the US decision to attack the Houthis. It said Lavrov, in response, “emphasised the need for an immediate cessation of the use of force and the importance of all parties engaging in political dialogue to find a solution that prevents further bloodshed.” Well, the shoe is on the other foot now, isn’t it?

Trump seems to believe that he can gain Russia's support, or at least its neutrality, in a futile conflict with Iran, by offering to end the U.S. proxy war in Ukraine.

Russia however seems to completely reject such plans.

The publicly known results of yesterday's telephone call between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russia's President Vladimir Putin are only minor:

In the run up to today's call, Donald Trump made a big deal of his conversation with Russia's Vladimir Putin.

But the results look like there's little to shout about.

The Russian president has given the US leader just enough to claim that he made progress towards peace in Ukraine, without making it look like he was played by the Kremlin.

Trump can point to Putin's pledge to halt attacks on Ukraine's energy infrastructure for 30 days. If that actually happens, it will bring some relief to civilians.

But it's nowhere near the full and unconditional ceasefire that the US wanted from Russia.

The length of the call, more than two hours, suggests that there were more items to talk about than just a ceasefire in Ukraine. However neither side has given more than a hints of what these items might have been.

The Russian pledge to immediately halt attacks on energy facilities is not new at all.

The Russian readout of yesterday's talk is explicitly mentioning a ceasefire on energy facilities:

During the conversation, Donald Trump put forward a proposal for the parties to mutually refrain from strikes on energy infrastructure for 30 days. Vladimir Putin responded favourably to the proposal and immediately gave the relevant order to the Russian troops.

The White House readout acknowledges the offer but does not confirm a date for its acceptance:

The leaders agreed that the movement to peace will begin with an energy and infrastructure ceasefire, as well as technical negotiations on implementation of a maritime ceasefire in the Black Sea, full ceasefire and permanent peace. These negotiations will begin immediately in the Middle East.

Ukraine seems to have not yet agreed to such a deal (machine translation):

Cont. reading: Ukraine Still Rejects Temporary, Energy Related Ceasefire Deal

Badmouthing Russia's economy has a certain tradition:

• Russia's Collapse – Foreign Affairs, Sep 1, 1999
• Russia Is Finished – The Atlantic, May 2001
• The Russian Economic Crisis – CFR, Apr 2010

Since the start of the Special Military operation in Ukraine many outlets joined the above doomsayers of the foreign policy blob.

Since then most reports about Russia's economy predicted a collapse or at least severe difficulties. Here are some from just the previous six months:

• Russia's economy is signaling a fate worse than recession – Business Insider, Sep 26 2024
• Humiliation for Putin as Russia could plunge into 'economic collapse' to plug £30bn debt – Express, Oct 7 2024
• Putin's Economy Approaches 'Burnout Point' – Newsweek, Oct 8 2024
• Russia’s economy is overheating but Putin cannot change course – Atlantic Council, Oct 31, 2024
• Russia’s War Economy Is Hitting Its Limits – Foreign Policy, Nov 14 2024
• Russia’s economy is doomed – New Statesman, Nov 28 2024
• Russian rouble collapse exposes deep problems in the country’s economy – The Conservation, Dec 3 2024
• The Russian Economy Remains Putin’s Greatest Weakness – Foreign Affairs, Dec 9, 2024
• Russia’s war economy spirals out of control as 2025 brings looming stagnation – NZZ, Jan 7 2025
• Is 2025 the year that Russia’s economy finally freezes up under sanctions? – Atlantic Council, Jan 8 2025
• Russia’s war economy is a house of cards (archived) – Financial Times, Jan 13 2025
• Putin's war economy is running on fumes as inflation and shortages surge – Kyiv Independent, Jan 15 2025
• Don’t Blink Now, Trump. Russia’s Economy Is Cracking. – Bloomberg, Feb 10 2025
• Russia’s economy is stagnating – but that won’t force it to end the war – The Conservation, Mar 10 2025
• The Russian economy is on the brink of collapse and Putin knows it – Independent, Mar 13 2025
• Russia’s economy would struggle to cope with peace – Reuters, Mar 17 2025

Meanwhile the Russian economy is doing well. Its economy is growing faster than most other.

• Russia to grow faster than all advanced economies says IMF – BBC, Apr 16 2024
• IMF raises forecast for growth in Russia's GDP by 0.1 pp in 2025 – Interfax, Jan 17 2025

The lesson from this? Much of what one reads in mainstream media about Russia (and other so called enemies) is garbage.

(The system is acting up on my thus just this short take.)

Fresh US strikes in Yemen with 53 now dead, Houthis say – BBC

Thoughts:

• Bombing Yemen is stupid. The Saudis tried for years to get their way by doing that and were defeated.
• Yemen can and does shoot back.
• It is only a question of time until it hits a U.S. war ship and causes casualties.
• Then Trump will be hard pressed to escalate the war towards Iran.
• Iran can not be defeated.

That's it.

News & views related to the war in Palestine …

News & views related to the war in Ukraine …

Last week's posts on Moon of Alabama:

• Mar 10 – Gordon Hahn On Europe's Role And A Possible Coup In Kiev
• Mar 11 – The Pipeline Raid Of Sudzha
• Mar 12 – Trump Opts For More War With Russia
• Mar 14 – Echoes Of The May 2 2014 Odessa Massacre
• Mar 15 – NATO Sec.-Gen. On Ukraine Accession
  Related:
  – Zelensky’s Kursk gamble: Was it worth it? – Telegraph
  – Can Trump’s Ukraine peace plan succeed? – Canadian Dimension
  – NATO-Russia Ukrainian War Ceasefire: To Be Or Not To Be? – Gordon Hahn

  – Inside Ukraine's desperate fight to stabilize Donbas front (video) – Kyiv Independent
  – Ukraine War Day #1116: The Timely Death Of A Nazi Racketeer – Part I, Part 2 – Awful Avalanche
  – Hungary to hold special referendum on Ukraine’s EU membership – Anadolu
  – German intelligence chief Kahl believes Europe would be better off "if the war in Ukraine lasted another five years" – NSDC responds – Espreso.tv

—
Other issues:

Cont. reading: The MoA Week In Review – OT 2025-053

Took him a while …

NATO chief Mark Rutte says Ukraine's membership path is 'irreversible' – UPI / Yahoo, Oct 3 2024

"Ukraine is closer to NATO than ever before," he said. "And will continue on this path until you become a member of our Alliance. I very much look forward to that day."

Ukraine's accession to NATO is no longer under consideration, Rutte confirmed – news-pravda, Mar 14, 2025

Ukraine's accession to NATO is no longer under consideration, Rutte confirmed

When asked whether Trump was really removing the issue of Kyiv joining the alliance from the negotiating table, the NATO Secretary General answered “yes.”

On May 4 2014 I wrote about the February coup aftermath in Ukraine:

Two days ago a mob, supported by the fascists Right Sektor, killed over 30 federalist Ukrainians in Odessa by pushing them from their camp into a building and then setting fire to it. Those who escaped the massacre, not the perpetrators, were rounded up by police. Today pro-federalism people besieged the police headquarter in Odessa until the police released those it had earlier arrested.
…
The U.S. plan for Ukraine seems to be to bait Russia into an occupation. This would destroy EU-Russia relations, embolden NATO and help the U.S. to keep the EU as a secondary partner under its control. There would be lots of economic upsides for the U.S. in such a situation. Selling more arms and increasing energy market shares are only the starters.

There are two reasons to believe that this plan will fail:
…
Without Russian intervention and without German support the U.S. campaign against Russia is unlikely to reach its secondary target of isolating Russia. The primary target, Sevastopol harbor in Crimea, was already lost when Russia reunified with the island.

What is left to do then for Washington is to create more chaos in Ukraine and to hope that somehow out of total chaos some new chance may arise to stick it to Russia. For lack of real direction that strategy is also unlikely to succeed.

I was unfortunately wrong with the last sentence though it took the U.S. eight more years to succeed.

But it is the first paragraph I what to refer to today. The current two most popular pieces on the website of Strana are echoing it (machine translation):

From the first story (machine translation):

Cont. reading: Echoes Of The May 2 2014 Odessa Massacre

News & views related to the war in Palestine …

News & views related to the war in Ukraine …

News & views not related to the wars in Ukraine and Palestine …

The Trump administration has decided to resume the provision of weapons and intelligence to Ukraine. It is thus aiming at escalating the conflict.

The outcome of yesterday's talk between a Ukrainian and a U.S. delegation Saudi Arabia was not completely in favor of the European/Ukrainian idea of a 30 day ceasefire restricted to air and sea attacks. But it opened the desired pathway to prolonging the war.

The U.S. asked the Ukrainians to accept a 30 day long ceasefire offer. This would of course only be implemented if the Russian side agrees to it. Meanwhile the U.S. resumes all war support for Ukraine. The outcome demonstrates weakness on the U.S. side:

According to the latest from Riyadh, Ukraine says it is ready for a 30 day cease fire. If this is what Washington “extracted” from the Ukrainians, it is operationally meaningless. With Russia on the brink of winning in Kursk and elsewhere, the Russians won’t accept any such deal. If it is a ruse to allow the US to resume arms shipments to Ukraine, knowing Russia will reject it, the so-called peace initiative is a dead letter.

'The ball is now in Russia's court' was the media slogan launched by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and obediently repeated by various European underlings.

But why would or should Russia agree to this when the idea seems to be to trap Russia:

Cont. reading: Trump Opts For More War With Russia

Throughout the war in Ukraine natural gas was still pumped through the Brotherhood (Druzhba) pipeline system from Russia via Ukraine to Hungary and Slovakia.

bigger

At the beginning of the year the government of Ukraine decided to close the connection. It shut off the valves on Ukrainian ground. That event will be marked the end of the Ukrainian incursion into the Kursk region of Russia.

The map shows the Ukrainian held ground in Russia as of January 1 2025. It includes the city of Sudzha and some 20 Russian hamlets and villages.

Situation on January 1 2025

bigger via LiveUAmap

The Brotherhood pipeline system consists of five parallel tubes with a diameter of 1.4 meters (4'8"). These run roughly parallel to the 34k-004 road (H-07 in Ukraine) from Kursk southwest-wards passing north of Sudzah on towards Sumy in Ukraine.

The pipes are buried in the ground. Due to vegetation disturbances the buried pipelines are visible in satellite pictures.

Pipeline bundle (from upper right to lower left) near the exit point of the raid

bigger

Sometime after January 1 the Russian command responsible for the area developed a plan to use the pipeline system to attack the Ukrainian enemy from behind.

Natural gas was drained from one of the pipes of the Brotherhood pipeline system. Oxygen was pumped into it. Some 15 kilometer (~10 miles) north-east of Sudzha, near Bol'shoye Soldatskoye, an access hole was cut into the pipeline. Soldiers were sent into the pipeline to reconnaissance it. But there was still some natural gas and too little oxygen in the pipeline. The first soldiers fainted and had to be rescued. After weeks of work the pipeline was usable as a covered passageway towards Sudzha.

Drawn from five different military units a force of 800 men was assembled and prepared for the mission.

During the first two month of the year the Ukrainian forces had already lost ground on the western side of their incursion area. The general situation had gotten worse after the Russian forces gained fire control via drones over the only larger supply route from Sumy to Sudzha. Videos from that road showed dozens of wreaked and burned out vehicles. But the Ukrainian lines, and Sudzha, were still holding.

Situation on March 1 2025

bigger

In early March Russia commandos entered the pipeline (along the arrow above). They used it to get to the north of the industrial zone of Sudzha, started to cut exit-holes and dug through the ground covering the pipeline. Some 800 soldiers followed and settled down within the pipeline.

On March 8, when the command was given, the Russian commandos exited the pipeline and entered nearby woods. They moved on to blockade the 34k-004 road, crossed it and entered the northern part of the industrial zone of Sudzha. There they could dug in. No larger Ukrainian units were in the immediate area. No one could stop the move.

Exit point and attack route

bigger

Hearing reports on their radios of enemies in their back the Ukrainian soldiers panicked. Every unit north-east and east of Sudzha was cut off from supplies. There was no way to retreat. At the same time the Russian army attacked in the west and north of the Ukrainian held area. Resistance soon collapsed. Those who could retreated to Sudzha did so. From there they tried to move back to Ukraine.

Situation on March 11 2025

bigger

Within one day the Ukrainian held area had shrunk by half. The Russian re-captured and cleared a total of 12 settlements. Current reports say that the Ukrainian forces within Russia are in full retreat along roads under permanent fire. Some will survive.

Meanwhile Russian forces are entering Sudzha.

This operation is a wonderful demonstration of what the Russians call 'Operational Art'. It connects the details of tactics with the goals of the strategy.

The move through the pipeline, behind Ukrainian lines and the cut through major Ukrainian supply lines achieved within days more than months of bloody fighting. The commander of this operation has surely earned some high honors.

Dima of the Military Summary Channel discussed some of the above in yesterday's summary.

A Russian news channel provided an excellent five minute video (with English subtitles) which shows the operation. It includes takes from within the pipeline.

This operation is one for the books.

Two interesting thoughts from Gordon Hahn's latest piece:

The World Order’s Restructuring Intensifies as the Ukrainian War Implodes the West and Kiev

One question the piece tackles is a split between the U.S. and Europe. The core question:

The international level of the Ukrainian conflict is shifting from a bilateral confrontation between the West and Russia to a trilateral confrontation involving Russia, the U.S., and a new European-Ukrainian axis, with each riven by divisions generated by the intra-Atlantic cold civil war. This begs the question: Will Europe become a separate pole in the international system’s new multipolar stucture, adding to the U.S, and Sin-Russian pole?

Hard to tell, but I doubt it. Europe (which I understand to mean the European Union) does not have sufficient unity to become a real actor in a multipolar structure. The core project of the 'ever closer union' has failed politically and economically. It is bureaucratic laggardness, no intellectual heft, that is still driving it.

Europe's resistance to America’s rapprochement with Russia and peace efforts for Ukraine means stagnation which will only hinder its development towards a more autonomous structure.

Another point of Hahn's piece is made in his discussion about the future configuration of the government in Kiev. It is a warning to those who want to remove Zelenski:

Cont. reading: Gordon Hahn On Europe’s Role And A Possible Coup In Kiev

News & views related to the war in Palestine …

News & views related to the war in Ukraine …

Last week's posts on Moon of Alabama:

• Mar 3 – Starmer's Summit Gives Birth To A Mouse – It's Stillborn.
  Related:
  – Jeffrey Sachs: Negotiating Lasting Peace in Ukraine– Consortium News
  – How Would Peacekeeping Work in Ukraine? These Experts Gamed It Out. (archived) – New York Times
  – Drawing a line: A ‘Swiss army knife’ of options for achieving a sustainable ceasefire in Ukraine – GSPC
  – Europe faces a MAGA ‘vibe-shift’ as Trump moves to his primordial objective — The Global Reset – Alastair Crooke / Conflict Forums

• Mar 4 – Zelenski Tries To Make Nice With Trump
  Related:
  – As Trump flip-flops on Ukraine, Zelensky rushes to fix ties (archived) – Washington Post
  – Can Zelensky negotiate peace and stay in power? (archived) – The Times
  – Yes, Zelensky Is a Dictator – American Conservative
  – Zelensky’s NATO Illusion – American Conservative

• Mar 4 – Musing About Europe Without NATO
  Related:
  – Putin hits out at wannabe Napoleons – RT
  – Eurotard hysteria achieves new heights …  – Eugyppius
  – Europe returns to its history of militarism and war – Glenn Diesen

• Mar 6 – Trump's Tariff Wars Will Hurt U.S. The Most
  Related:
  – Trump trade wars making stagflation great again – Asia Times
  – Trump’s tariffs won’t hurt China The superpowers divorced years ago – Unherd
  – Consumer confidence registers biggest monthly decline since August 2021 as inflation fears take hold – CNN
  – US economic worries mount as Trump implements tariffs, cuts workforce and freezes spending – AP

• Mar 7 – WaPo Laments Loss Of News From Iran Which Is Not From Iran
  Related:
  – Atomic Detectives Who Inspect Iran Sites Are Affected by Trump’s Aid Freeze (archived) – New York Times
  – Iran’s Leader Rebuffs Trump’s Outreach Over Its Nuclear Program (archived) – New York Times
  – Putin Agrees to Help Trump Broker U.S.-Iran Nuclear Talks – Bloomberg – MSN

• Mar 8 – Atlantic: When We Ignore Its Attrition Ukraine Wins
  Related:
  – 10,000 Ukrainian troops at risk of encirclement – Telegraph
  – Ukrainian forces fighting inside Russia are almost surrounded, open source maps show – Reuters
  – Europe Regularly Supplies Ukraine With Outdated and Defective Weapons – Antiwar
  – Russia Hits Ukrainian Power and Gas Facilities in Widespread Attack – New York Times
  – Electronic warfare: key technology in the Ukraine war (video) – Austrian Army

—
Other issues:

Cont. reading: The MoA Week In Review – OT 2025-047

In The Atlantic two military historians are claiming that:

Russia Is Losing the War of Attrition

Wars are rarely won so decisively, because attrition is not only a condition of war, but a strategic choice. Smaller powers can, through the intelligent application of attrition, succeed in advancing their own goals.

Hmm …

Attrition warfare …:

… is a military strategy consisting of belligerent attempts to win a war by wearing down the enemy to the point of collapse through continuous losses in personnel, materiel and morale.

There are two (or more) sides in a war of attrition. To see which side is winning one has to estimate each sides capabilities and losses. The side which is the first to run out of the necessary resources will lose the competition.

A piece that claims that this or that side will be losing due to attrition should therefore provide numbers for each side of the conflict and compare them to support the claim.

The authors of the Atlantic piece fail to do so.

They mention the state of Russia's economy, the Russian loss of armored vehicle, and Russian manpower shortages – which, they claim, are all bad. But they, at no point, write about the state of the Ukrainian economy, its losses and dire manpower shortage.

The sources they quote are dubious to laughable:

Cont. reading: Atlantic: When We Ignore Its Attrition Ukraine Wins

Here is a funny incident in which a mainstream media headline is debunked by the sub-headline following it.

bigger

U.S. foreign aid cuts threaten to choke off information from Iran (archived) – Washington Post
The reduction in funding for Iranian groups, based largely outside Iran, is affecting the work of human rights monitors, news outlets and civic activists.

The piece laments that certain propaganda groups run by Iranian exiles have, under the Trump administration, lost the funds they need to run propaganda campaigns against Iran.

The cut-off of U.S. funds for these groups does not choke off information from Iran. There is plenty out there from the Iranian government as well as from people of all kind who are living in Iran. What is choked off is the distribution of highly selected (or even made up) (dis-)information by anti-Iranian groups in London or Los Angeles.

The piece itself admits this:

The organizations supported by the United States are largely based outside Iran and fall under the umbrella of “democracy promotion.” They include news organizations, programs supporting civil society and monitors collecting information on human rights abuses.

Most of the U.S. support for these groups comes from the State Department’s Near East Regional Democracy fund, known by the acronym NERD, which set up in the aftermath of the 2009 protests by Iranians against their government. In 2024, the Biden administration requested $65 million for NERD, including at least $16.75 million for internet freedom, according to the Congressional Research Service.
…
Most organizations that receive U.S. support operate entirely outside Iran. “Most of their work was collecting the statistics and data from other organizations. They don’t have their own sources inside Iran,” said Arsalan Yarahmadi, a founder of the Hengaw Organization for Human Rights, one of the most prominent Iranian human rights organizations, which operates with a network of sources inside the country. He said his group does not get U.S. funding.

Yarahmadi said some of the groups that receive U.S. funding do important work but others do little. “Some, all they have is an Instagram page,” he said.

Arsalan Yarahmadi is an Iranian of Kurdish heritage who has left Iran eight years ago and now lives in Erbil in the Kurdish region of Iraq. He seems to dislike the U.S. financed competition to his own propaganda outlet. His Hengaw organization is registered in Norway. Its website gives no hint on who finances it.

The WaPo writer, Susannah George, also laments that the lack of information from outside Iran is effecting the work of "news outlets" which write about Iran.

Is she admitting that part of her job as a Washington Post writer in the Middle East is to copy-paste the press releases by anti-Iranian groups which were financed by the U.S. government? How else could one interpret that?