The Ukrainians definitely should hit Moscow or St. Petersburg NOW. They are generally colder than Kyiv. Very importantly, Moscow residents have suffered little inconvenience from the war so far, and their attitude is extremely important to the government (which is why for a century or so Moscow has had the highest living standards in the USSR/Russia).
If the theory of victory is "remove Putin and the Russians will withdraw", then the political objective is regime change - and this makes a lot of sense. Remove the conforts of Muscovites to force them to do it themselves.
The awful part - that will undoubtedly most affect and likely kill those most vulnerable: the infirm, the young, the elderly, the disabled.
Making sure the bombing campaign is tightly tied to the political objective is key. Otherwise the Ukrainains will just be doing the same as the Russians, inflicting civilian misery and suffering, with an eye for an eye leaving them both blind.
Sorta. It's actually the reverse. Defeat Russia and Putin will fall. That's what happens everytime Russia loses a war. The way to win is for Europe to double its financial support of Ukraine and let Ukraine deploy the increment in assaulting every gas/oil depot in Russia and every high-end suburb of Moscow. The war could be over in 6 months.
The EU should also pass a law permanently banning any dealings with any Russian company employing veterans of this war. That may throw a wet blanket on recruitment, as well as worry the elites about social consequences of returning veterans finding limited employment opportunities.
Another major part of the problem being an authoritarian socioeconomic structure which kills-before-they’re-expressed-in-any-way-that-matters all ideas that would contradict the current form of patriotism propaganda.
That’s how it appears on my UK phone. Never seen this before. Will try another way. I wonder what triggered the censorship… Or if anyone else is seeing this. Anyway, apologies, not something I should be asking you about. Possibly a question for substack admin. V annoying though.
I heard one of the Finnish ministers a few months ago in a long interview. His opinion was that the problem was the Russian people in that they support the idea of empire, that until they decide that the price of empire is too much that Russia will not change.
We make a huge mistake in viewing Russia as a European country. It is not. The entire system, for centuries, has been an elite in Moscow exploiting the rest of the country. Until 1868, most of the population was slaves, and that mentality was perpetuated with collectivization. 20% of the country still doesn't have indoor plumbing. Moscow's GDP per capita is 3x the rest of the country's (whose GDP per capita is below China's average). The church is a tool of the state to suppress dissent. The political philosophy is Eurasianism.
Serfdom was actually abolished in 1861. But yes, collectivization effectively reinstated it. Peasants did not gain full citizenship until the 1970's.
It is easy to make the mistake of viewing Russia as a European country because the Russians are white (nominal) Christians speaking a language similar to Polish and Czech and carrying a lot of Swedish and Finnish DNA (often expressing itself in blue eyes and/or blond hair). The problem is the culture. But even that is complicated. For centuries there has been strong Western counterculture. Already in mid-19th century you can see mentions of Slavophiles and Westerners in Russian classical literature. And whenever Russian state desperately needs money, it presents its Western side to the West. I suspect that now Russia is getting more "Eurasian" because three decades after collapse of the USSR were the easiest ever for moving from Russia to the West, and millions of people with Western mentality (like myself) availed themselves of that opportunity (instead of trying thanklessly to Westernize Russia). There's only so much Eurasianism you can take before you want to get the Hell out of there... I must say it was really scary to hear Mamdani tout collectivism and denigrate individualism.
A first major threshold being the point when very many people decide that the price of empire is so great that they’ll communicate about it in public, even though the price of contradicting the current government’s patriotism propaganda is also very great. “Very many people” in this context meaning: so many that it’s such a big movement that the Russian state’s dissent suppression apparatus fails to suppress it.
It is hard to tell just what it would take to provoke the Russian people enough to demonstrate against Putin. It is difficult for me to imagine demonstrations in Moscow like those in Iran today. The level of suffering in Moscow, St Petersburg is nowhere near that in Tehran. Perhaps more likely is collusion among the oligarchs and the generals in a plot against Putin.
What kinds of events (which don’t involve the general population getting so unhappy that there are large-scale protests) would make Putin’s continued rule unbearable from the perspective of oligarchs and generals?
(No matter what happens to ordinary people, oligarchs and generals can expect that the important comforts like warmth, water, food, electricity, etc will always be available to them and their families, at least while the status quo continues. By contrast, I’d expect the possibility of regime change to be very scary until it looks inevitable. I’d expect them to move forward with a putsch or the like only after it looks like some kind of regime change is inevitable; then the analysis will shift, as a regime change that is controlled by someone they think they can trust is less scary than any other kind.)
I am in violent agreement with you. Moscow is the seat of exploitation of the current iteration of Russian serfdom. It is the only city that matters to the regime. It has one suburb where everyone who runs the country who has a family lives. Rublyovka. Ukraine should level it.
Thanks for this update from very cold Ukraine. I am hearing from friends that temperatures this morning in Kyiv are -17c!
Whether Ukraine should strike St. Petersburg and Moscow is indeed an important question. Why shouldn’t there be brutal retaliation against the capital of a country which has always wanted to subjugate Ukraine, from the occupation of 1919 to the Holodomor, the executed Renaissance and the current invasion ? For the first time in history Ukraine has the means to strike back and there must be a powerful temptation to do so.
Strikes against Moscow would also expose Trump’s contradictions.Reports of brutal repression are emerging this morning from Iran, and Trump has said that If this happens, he will hit the regime “very hard”. If he does, he can hardly blame Ukraine for acting likewise against Putin, whose war crimes he has never of course denounced.
The Ukrainians have never stooped to doing to Russia what Russia is doing to them, but in the absence of more robust support for their military campaign from their friends and allies, there must be limits to their forbearance.
Maybe. The people of Moscow have a very different view of war than the Russians - for now. They send the "undesirables" (prisoners, ethnic minorities and losers from economically depressed areas) to fight their imperialist war, while they make money off the war and sanctions (circumventing them is quite lucrative). Finally facing serious consequences may change their calculus (and Putin's - in order to avoid discontent in Moscow, he may come to an unspoken understanding with Ukraine to refrain from attacking critical civilian infrastructure).
Ultimately, the war will only be won when Putin decides to stop or is forced to do so by his inner circle. An attack on St. Petersburg or Moscow, or both, may change his (their) calculus. For the moment, nobody expects Ukraine to mirror Putin’s terror tactics but they will get a nasty shock if that happens. Then, and perhaps only then, will it become apparent to everyone , friend and foe alike, that Ukraine is deadly serious about the existential threat that is hanging over it.
I think they should hit Gazprom HQ in St. Pete - that's the only major elite group outside Moscow, and a few Flamingos should be able to bring that building down. But other than that, Moscow is undoubtedly a commercial/financial capital, besides political/military.
..but Petersburg does have a symbolic value for Putin because of his multiple associations with the city. And it would be a way of sending him a personal message after his numerous attacks on Zelenskyy's home town of Kryvyi Rih.
Andrew Pavelyev’s “Gazprom HQ” idea will meet that need, while it’s a justifiable target as a direct part of the economic engine of imperialistic warmaking.
It's the tallest building in Europe, and there's nothing else around. At night it should be mostly empty (definitely no tourists on the observation deck), and hitting it would definitely make a statement (apart from disrupting their operations). https://www.google.com/maps/@59.9883376,30.1748557,791m/data=!3m1!1e3
Very good to see that you are in Ukraine Phillips. You are absolutely right: most of us recliner-stationed petty officers have no idea how living with war actually feels.
Amongst the many solid points in this piece, your last paragraph about hitting Moscow and St. Petersburg is just what I wanted to comment. Von der Leyen just said that law is stronger than force. Russia shows on a nightly basis that terror is blind to the law. Therefore Ukraine should answer terror with terror.
Yes, Ukraine should start wrecking apartment buildings in Moscow and St. Petersburg every night. Sort targets by price per square meter descending, and work their way down the list. Force all those fortunate sons and daughters to spend their nights in the nearest metro station.
“Yes, Ukraine should start wrecking apartment buildings in Moscow and St. Petersburg every night.”
I disagree. Moral and legal aspects aside (intentionally targeting civilians and their apartment buildings is a war crime), Ukraine’s limited capabilities for causing explosions deep in Russia are better used on attacking Russia’s production of drones and missiles, and related logistics infrastructures.
Of course, practically all logistics infrastructures deep in Russia are dual-use. For example, if Ukraine is able to reduce the transport capacity of the Russian railway system —which is essentially important not only for military logistics but also for many civilian purposes— I would predict that that’ll be felt even in Moscow. If Ukraine is then also able to reduce the number of trucks that the Russian military has available for military logistics, as long as Russia prioritises military use of the remaining trucks over civilian uses, transport of civilian goods by truck will also be noticeably further affected.
On the moral aspect: when international conventions and law crumble before our eyes, why should we demand moral asymmetry from the Ukraine people?
On targeting logistics, yes that is in principle some of the strategic warfare methods that Phillips states as a war winning factor. However, given the arsenal asymmetry of the fighting parties, I have seen no evidence that all the hits on oil refineries, ammunition depots etc. has had any affect on the day-to-day fighting will or capability of Russia.
I assume that (so far) covert supplies, technical assistance, engineering etc. from China to Russia is in practical terms endless, just like their friendship. That assumption also applies to logistic material like trucks.
What is Ukraine producing of war material in mass? Lightweight UAVs. Again, show me the evidence that their oil refinery campaign has weakened Russias will and capability to persist fighting Ukraine. Those UAVs would in comparison wreak havoc on civilian building infrastructure.
I claim that demanding a continued moral and military assymetry from Ukraine is immoral in itself.
“why should we demand moral asymmetry from the Ukraine people”
We should not demand it.
But I doubly respect the Ukrainians because they are consistently maintaining the moral high ground even when it is emotionally difficult to do so.
Also, while we should not demand of the Ukrainians that they must conform to our ideas of morality, we should also not demand of them to forsake their own standards of morality and integrity just because we would like to see revenge enacted on Putin’s supporters. Especially not given that from a perspective of rational analysis, continuing on their current path is (at least in my opinion) very likely to be more effective for the Ukrainians’ objectives of minimizing their suffering and ending Russia’s attacks as quickly as possible.
Excellent points Norbert, thanks. Rhetorical: is the Ukraine moral high ground internal, their own free will and choice, or is it rather an applied attitude in order to not disrupt the arms and moral (yes) support from their supposed Western allies/ friends?
I must admit given the current developments, I see no other effective response than tit for tat. Answering terror with terror.
Every day I see what the Russians say on social media. Trying moral reasoning with them is ridiculous. They celebrate attacks on Ukrainian civilians. They revel in their own impunity. The only argument they'll understand is brute force.
I would expect that a severe economic crisis, if understood to be a direct consequence of Putin’s attempt at imperialism, would also be a very strong argument.
In World War II, the allied forces largely destroyed many German cities, and I think that contributed to how most of the German population was afterwards willing to turn away from nazi ideology. But I think that that worked only because the nazis were so absurdly evil (cf the concentration camps etc) that in spite of the bombings, the Western allies were still (afterwards, in retrospect) in comparison seen as having the moral high ground.
Even if as you write, the dominant voices on Russian social media are currently pro-cruelty, I would suggest that Ukraine needs to be seen in Russia as strong and capable of significant violence, and as impossible to conquer by military or any other means, but nevertheless in ways that will, when the opportunity for a change of the societal mood arises, be seen as “not outright cruel like Putin”.
I think that Ukraine should continue to go after everything that is related to the military industry, including in particular how it’s funded, while especially increasing attacks against everything that is related to military logistics. Russia’s economy is today very much centred around the military industry and the fossil energy+fuel industry. (And regardless of whether you agree that that still has some importance, those types of industries are from a war of law perspective legitimate targets in the current context.) If Ukraine can reduce how well those industries work to a significant extent, e.g. by 90%, that’ll IMO create enough of an economic crisis to make enough people in Moscow unhappy enough to make regime change feel inevitable, and then it’ll happen.
It produces more howitzers than all of NATO combined. It could ramp production of domestic cruise missiles and IRBMs if it had enough capital investment. Europe seems to be withholding this on purpose. Doesn't want Ukraine's defense industrial base as competition.
Thanks Perry, howitzers are tactical arms though, mainly to keep the zombies away on the front?
To me missile production seeems crazy hard, crazy expensive, with a timeline of decades not years. Yesterday UK made a deal with Ukraine on producing ballistic missiles though, think it was called Nightfall.
I wonder what the range will be. Also, it's 12 months just for the prototype. Presumably years until deployment. This confirms that the Brits just try to humor Trump when they talk about peace and serving as peacekeepers. They clearly expect the war to continue for years.
It's quite official actually, and ambitious, from gov.uk: "a 200kg warhead over a range of more than 500 kilometres"; "first three missiles within 12 months for test firings".
Yes, they expect the war to continue, and probably wonder how the hell Europe is ever going to catch up with Russian and Chinese missile output. At least ballistic missile orders are placed in the European market, it is quite the development, come to think of it.
Zelenskyy predicted that Western Europe would withhold support because they didn't want Ukraine competing with them industrially. It's in _Servant of the People_. Make no mistake, he expected this.
Russia's logistical capacity to receive anything from China or North Korea is in fact extremely narrow, running through a tiny straw, and not expandable. That straw is the Trans-Siberian Railroad. Ukraine should sever it.
I would also hit Lubyanka hard with missiles. During the day. That's Putin's most important power base. Killing a lot of them may make them reconsider their unlimited support.
On targeting Russia’s production of drones and missiles as you say, it seems the task is Sisyphean. Why? Continuous hardening and dispersion of production facilities, and the potential limitless flow of drones, missiles and corresponding parts from China.
I see the transport infrastructures for those flows of supplies from China as vulnerable in principle to precision bombs on bridges. (Admittedly, even if such precision bombs are supplied to the Ukrainians, getting them to where they need to explode must certainly be a major challenge in view of the huge distances involved.)
Agree, assuming goods are transported by rail, instead of cargo planes. As you can tell, I am pretty cynical when it comes to China supporting Russia in their warfare. I mean, Chinese FM has said that China can not afford peace in Ukraine.
You’re making a very good point that if the Trans-Manchurian rail transport link gets significantly disrupted, they may well turn to cargo planes for transporting those supplies which are currently transported by rail on that route. If they have sufficient airport capacity / if the Ukrainians don’t also succeed in disrupting that and/or the transport routes from the airports to where the supplies are intended to be used.
Russian cargo plane capacity has the following problems: (1) Russia can't build or repair planes, (2) they get blown up on the ground by Ukraine, as do the ATC towers, (3) they're running out of fuel as Ukraine destroys the refineries. Even apart from all that, they're very expensive compared to the railways.
If the railways can be cut, the logistics can't be replaced, not by Russia, not now.
You don't need to do this. Take out where the money comes from to generate those factories. Hit the oil/gas depots and keep them shut for 6 months and Russia's economy collapses and Moscow will look like Tehran.
I would expect that before long, cheap mass-produced drones will become available that would be given coordinates and which would then fly there, and find something that has the shape and size of a truck, and moves along a road with a speed that is typical of a truck — and then the drone destroys the truck. I would expect that in the not very distant future, such anti-truck drones will be available at a cost that is much less than the cost of replacing the truck.
I’d expect that if Ukraine was able to produce such anti-truck drones, they’d start by using them on the roads which lead from the nearest railway endpoint to key points on the front line, and at a later stage (if/when more such drones are available) on all roads that see significant amounts of military goods transported by trucks.
When my grandmother was heavily pregnant with my mother, she actually had to run to the nearest metro station under bombs. But then my grandfather's aircraft factory was evacuated to the Urals along with the employees and their families (the train actually had its own fighter cover - obviously, not all the way). So my mother barely missed being born in Moscow.
They now build new apartment buildings in Moscow at around $5,000 per square meter in Moscow. That's insane.
He worked at it. He may have been running one of the workshops (although that probably happened much later). So he was not drafted. Not that it was entirely safe - his brother also worked at some weapons factory and got electrocuted there.
And then there was another grandfather who "served" the entire war in the reserves (as a combat engineer)... Do you remember the ending of the Sound of Music? Von Trapp family actually just sailed to the US straight from Germany. But my two year old father indeed fled from the Nazis across a mountain pass right next to the highest peak in Europe, with a little help from professional mountain climbers.
No. It's wasteful strategy. Hitting an apartment building is poor use of ammunition and only upsets people.
Ukraine should destroy refineries, factories, and the electric power plants which supply them. If lights go out as a result, people will not blame Ukraine, people will blame Putin for not fixing the power plants.
Right now Putins strategy in Ukraine is to terrorize the civilian population to turn on the regime in Kyiv, by bombing both apartment buildings and power plants in -20 C. Ukraine should do the same. They have been attacking refineries and factories for a while now, but their weapons lack the necessary BOOM to inflict serious damage.
Today the war has lasted as long as the "Great Patriotic War". That's a dangerous milestone for Putin. At this stage Stalin's war with Hitler was officially over, and the Nazi Germany seized to exist. "We turned off the heat in half of Kyiv" just does not have the same ring to it.
One of the few consolations I have of living in the US these days is reading about Ukraine's pluck, courage and ingenuity in beating back the Russians. As Phillips has pointed out, it is, however, now standing alone, abandoned by the US and treated as a bastard step-child by European powers. Every minute of every day, its citizens brave death, terror, and disruption of their lives as they pin their hopes, now almost exclusively, on their own military, hoping to god that it continues to perform miracles on the battlefield. Russian greed, American indifference, and European pusillanimity stand in stark contrast to the stoic, and increasingly ascetic, Ukrainians, who are reminding us all what it means to be a virtuous nation. On another note, yesterday I participated in an anti-ICE rally in Mystic, CT. Among the many wonderful people I met was an American lawyer, who had recently returned from Ukraine, where he was volunteering his time to the war effort. God bless this particular American.
Of course, Oreshnik is inaccurate. It's not supposed to be accurate. Its only purpose is to deliver multiple nuclear warheads at intermediate distances (i.e. farther than short range missiles but closer than ICBMs), especially to Western Europe. So it really does not matter which end of the Whitehall or Champs-Élysées it hits, as long as it hits it at all.
That's a necessity at such distance. On a ballistic trajectory, distance is a function of speed. Of course, once you reach orbital speed, the distance is literally unlimited, as you can choose reentry point anywhere.
There was a comment above about what investments people could make to aid Ukraine.
I've made several small contributions to Come Back Alive. It's a good charity that directs aid where its needed most, or you can direct a contribution to a specific project they have. I figure I spend about a hundred a month on different media subscriptions, so why not contribute to a group I'm concerned about. It may not be much, but I'll bet I've contributed enough to outfit a company with warm winter socks. If you've ever washed winter clothing outdoors in the cold, it's not fun.
I've decided to make only contributions to charities that give aid directly to people in need. No more political contributions, or very few, until politicians do something to help those that need the help. That goes for both political parties. They both need to grow some. Check out Come Back Alive.
Democrats don’t have any power, so bear that in mind when you criticize “both sides”. When they did have power, they sent aid to Ukraine. There’s a Democratic Socialist mayor of New York who is rolling out free child care and bus service.
Republicans represent a tiny fraction of society - primarily the billionaires.
The best investment for Ukraine is to invest in its defense industrial base so they can win the war. A hand up, not a hand out. This is what I have done with MITS Capital.
I'm interested in the main theme of Ukraine doing so much suffering to the benefit of all of Europe and global democracies. Alliances and collective action works better than the law of the jungle. Unfortunately selfishness seems to be our strongest nature.
On a slightly related note, I listened to an unusually great conversation with well known security experts/authors from Denmark & Germany, Anders Puck Nielsen & Carlo Masala. If you start watching it you won't be able to stop. One of the many insights from Masala is that any peace treaty with RU will likely lead to most people wanting to cut back military spending and return to cheap Russian energy. Higher educated & politically engaged people are a minority of the population and are most likely to see the long term value of investing in mutual security.
Not sure if it is necessary to explain, but the advice from Masala suggests that any negotiated deal with RU better have military support front-loaded. Political support for arming UKR will likely fade.
It's within Trump's power and control to force a negotiated deal. It could even happen in 2026. I really don't see it happening but you can't say never. Trump would be very clever to turn on Putin from the perspective of his personal power and self-agrandizement. Unlikely, he appears intent on aligning with RU and far right in EU. The dark side he chose could work if enough far right parties come to power in western Europe. UKR survival as independent state is very much in play.
There has been no sign that Trump will align with Ukraine, but i never say never. If Europe manages to put UKR in advancing position, Trump might wish to take credit.
The Wall Street Journal has a story about Ukraine's Flamingo Missile (F5) made by Fire Point, that can travel 1,800 miles with a 2,500 payload. This is the missile Ukraine wants to deploy against russia's oil refineries, military bases and other critical targets. russia has targeted Fire Point's Ukrainian facilities and the firm has developed an ingenious way to ensure their survival in the midst of the war. “It’s like repairing a car that is traveling at 130 miles per hour, while being shot at. Ukrainians are developing the ability to do that.” Iryna Terekh, Fire Point's technical director:
Thank you for the update and stay safe. Again we cannot underestimate the
Trump Putin relationship. Trump will do NOTHING to hurt Putin. Whether it is worship or dependency or something else Trump is beholden to Putin. Therefore, the administration will come down hard on the Ukrainians and the Europeans for more aggressive direct attacks on Russia. Also no sanctions are coming, and if they do they will be carefully choreographed to accomplish nothing.
I would urge you to explore Russia's role in the Venezuelan attack. There is no way this was done without Putin's knowledge and probable approval. However the US handles Venezuelan oil, Russian oil trade, transport and financial gain will not be allowed to be harmed. There may be elaborate ruses to make it appear that the US blockade is stopping the flow of oil to Russian and its allies or the staged capture of meaningless ships, but in reality, Russia will not be affected. In interpreting every international action by the Trump administration, we must understand the full and complete collaboration between Trump and Putin. Through that lens, seemingly incomprehensible action will make sense, and it will be obvious what is being staged to deceive us.
Jessica Holliday shared this excellent piece on the russian long term influence campaign that involves Venezuela, Greenland and the Monroe Doctrine. In 2017, Ronald Lauder, a confidante of both tRUMP and lil' putin, told tRUMP he should buy Greenland. John Bolton dispatched Fiona Hill to talk to the Danish government but when the story was leaked to the Wall Street Journal, the discussions stopped. Lauder went on to invest millions in Greenland with the hopes it would provide the U.S. with more control. In 2019, the russians informally approached the U.S. with an offer: stay out of Ukraine and we'll step away from Venezuela. The russians invoked "The Monroe Doctrine", which they described as, "stay out of my backyard and we'll stay out of yours." Fiona Hill was a Senior WH Advisor on russia and she testified about this before a Congressional committee investigating tRUMP before his first impeachment. Thanks to Jessica Holliday for posting this article in a previous Phillips O'Brien Substack:
" So, no longer speak about 'aiding' Ukraine. The Ukrainians are aiding Europeans and Americans by fighting for their survival. We owe them our gratitude, not the other way around." I wish more Europeans thought this way but the reality is, the only nations that seem to understand this are Poland, Germany, the Nordic nations and the Baltic nations, all of whom are experiencing the "grey zone" effect as their undersea communication cables are cut, as drones shut down their commercial airports and as their power systems are attacked (Over 100,000 Berliners were without power due to sabotage last week).
If you didn't realize it before, Lindsay Graham is an odious, greasy, corrupt creature of Trump. Whether it's his sexual preferences or just about bribes, he doesn't want the public to know who he truly is. He was all for arming Ukraine when he could make money from those contracts or to attack Biden. He was also one of Trump's degenerate agents in the plot to steal the 2020 election. With friends like these, Ukraine doesn't need enemies.
The Ukrainians are right. Theirs is a struggle for survival as a people, a culture and a nation. Putin's Russia doesn't accept any of those three. It's also true that the rest of Europe is not in a struggle for survival. More immediately threatened are the Baltic states and Poland. That explains the positions of countries like France, Germany and Britain. People and politicians sympathize with Ukraine and offer help, but they are not engaged in a choice between life and death as peoples or countries.
Exhortations like yours can only do so much, as motivation depends on judgments of the imminence of danger and how great it is. That's simply human nature. Also, realistically, Russia is a third-rate power with an unimportant economy and little to show except oil and a nuclear arsenal. Unlike Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union was not defeated and demolished. The security state was left to rise again under Putin. But It has no prospect of playing an important role globally except through exporting criminals and laundering dirty money.
For all we know, the cynical calculation of some European countries could simply be that the greater the Russian losses in fighting Ukraine, the better for the rest of Europe as Russia is enfeebled even more. China matters far more for the world, and Trump's America is a rogue elephant currently running amok. Part of the reason Euopean countries try to conciliate Trump is to keep him on-side on Ukraine. Brave acts of European defiance of Trump can feel great but may be foolish.
Lindsay Graham has many faults but he is not a creature of Putin. He's a conventional Republican desperately seeking to stay on the right side of Trump in order to do what he can to help Ukraine.
A creature of Trump can also be subject to Russian blackmail. I have no idea whether allegations in this regard about Graham have a basis. It was remarkable how he changed from denouncing Trump to slavishly toeing the Trump line.
Russia and Ukraine fighting actually strengthens both of them militarily because of the experience gained and weapons built even with losses. A victorious Russia would be a greater threat now to Europe than in 2022.
Russia is very weak in its economy and finances. Yes, it has learned to make drones. That has not changed its strategic position or brought victory. Experience has not taught the Russian generals anything other than to give Putin false news and send hundreds of thousands of more troops to be slaughtered or wounded to gain a little patch of territory. Everyone thought Iran's regime was also permanent, but there's a point beyond which even in very repressive systems the mass of the people can't take any more. Russia isn't fighting for survival, unlike Ukraine. That also makes a difference.
This is part of the Eurasian plan that Putin is executing. Russia needs the military industrial base (which was core to that of the USSR) for the next assault on Northern Europe. Putin gave a speech on this in 2007.
From this perspective, it appears really foolish in the extreme that the West, including in particular Western European NATO countries, seems to be at best half-hearted when it comes to support for Ukraine’s attacks against Russia’s military industrial base. (Or am I missing something here?)
Thank you Phillips. One of the MANY questions I've had this week was what was Lindsay Graham doing slathering over trump on air force one last week. Clearly getting in the way of his own bill was one of them in exchange for being in djt's presence.
Moving along in "How The War Was Won", and the question of whether St. Petersburg or Moscow should be bombed, Page 163 .."Portal gave a defense of strategic bombing.....'The effects of bombing on morale depends, I believe, on the weight of the attack. Light attacks may well stimulate morale, but this can scarcely be said of attacks on the Coventry Model (https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Coventry-Blitz/)..........This result was achieved with a small fraction of the bomb load we hope to employ in 1943' Then on page 164 you follow with "It is interesting to see Portal giving this positive argument in favor of Civilian/morale bombing". My response, surely Ukranians feel that Russian cities should experience the same pain and suffering which Russia and Putin have inflicted upon them for so many years.
As a companion read by Contemporary Ukrainian Writers,, Andrey Kurkov, "Three Years on Fire, The Destruction of Ukraine" written as a journal during 2024.
The Ukrainians definitely should hit Moscow or St. Petersburg NOW. They are generally colder than Kyiv. Very importantly, Moscow residents have suffered little inconvenience from the war so far, and their attitude is extremely important to the government (which is why for a century or so Moscow has had the highest living standards in the USSR/Russia).
If the theory of victory is "remove Putin and the Russians will withdraw", then the political objective is regime change - and this makes a lot of sense. Remove the conforts of Muscovites to force them to do it themselves.
The awful part - that will undoubtedly most affect and likely kill those most vulnerable: the infirm, the young, the elderly, the disabled.
Making sure the bombing campaign is tightly tied to the political objective is key. Otherwise the Ukrainains will just be doing the same as the Russians, inflicting civilian misery and suffering, with an eye for an eye leaving them both blind.
Sorta. It's actually the reverse. Defeat Russia and Putin will fall. That's what happens everytime Russia loses a war. The way to win is for Europe to double its financial support of Ukraine and let Ukraine deploy the increment in assaulting every gas/oil depot in Russia and every high-end suburb of Moscow. The war could be over in 6 months.
The EU should also pass a law permanently banning any dealings with any Russian company employing veterans of this war. That may throw a wet blanket on recruitment, as well as worry the elites about social consequences of returning veterans finding limited employment opportunities.
A fatally flawed theory of victory. The problem isn't Putin, it's Russia.
It's Muscovy. The Muscovites look down on other parts of Russia. They need attitude adjustment. And Ukrainian bombardment may provide it.
Another major part of the problem being an authoritarian socioeconomic structure which kills-before-they’re-expressed-in-any-way-that-matters all ideas that would contradict the current form of patriotism propaganda.
That's the first I hear about any comments being age restricted.
I've just tried a browser in which I never went to any Substack (so it does not know my login), and I can still see this comment.
That’s how it appears on my UK phone. Never seen this before. Will try another way. I wonder what triggered the censorship… Or if anyone else is seeing this. Anyway, apologies, not something I should be asking you about. Possibly a question for substack admin. V annoying though.
I heard one of the Finnish ministers a few months ago in a long interview. His opinion was that the problem was the Russian people in that they support the idea of empire, that until they decide that the price of empire is too much that Russia will not change.
We make a huge mistake in viewing Russia as a European country. It is not. The entire system, for centuries, has been an elite in Moscow exploiting the rest of the country. Until 1868, most of the population was slaves, and that mentality was perpetuated with collectivization. 20% of the country still doesn't have indoor plumbing. Moscow's GDP per capita is 3x the rest of the country's (whose GDP per capita is below China's average). The church is a tool of the state to suppress dissent. The political philosophy is Eurasianism.
Serfdom was actually abolished in 1861. But yes, collectivization effectively reinstated it. Peasants did not gain full citizenship until the 1970's.
It is easy to make the mistake of viewing Russia as a European country because the Russians are white (nominal) Christians speaking a language similar to Polish and Czech and carrying a lot of Swedish and Finnish DNA (often expressing itself in blue eyes and/or blond hair). The problem is the culture. But even that is complicated. For centuries there has been strong Western counterculture. Already in mid-19th century you can see mentions of Slavophiles and Westerners in Russian classical literature. And whenever Russian state desperately needs money, it presents its Western side to the West. I suspect that now Russia is getting more "Eurasian" because three decades after collapse of the USSR were the easiest ever for moving from Russia to the West, and millions of people with Western mentality (like myself) availed themselves of that opportunity (instead of trying thanklessly to Westernize Russia). There's only so much Eurasianism you can take before you want to get the Hell out of there... I must say it was really scary to hear Mamdani tout collectivism and denigrate individualism.
A first major threshold being the point when very many people decide that the price of empire is so great that they’ll communicate about it in public, even though the price of contradicting the current government’s patriotism propaganda is also very great. “Very many people” in this context meaning: so many that it’s such a big movement that the Russian state’s dissent suppression apparatus fails to suppress it.
It is hard to tell just what it would take to provoke the Russian people enough to demonstrate against Putin. It is difficult for me to imagine demonstrations in Moscow like those in Iran today. The level of suffering in Moscow, St Petersburg is nowhere near that in Tehran. Perhaps more likely is collusion among the oligarchs and the generals in a plot against Putin.
What kinds of events (which don’t involve the general population getting so unhappy that there are large-scale protests) would make Putin’s continued rule unbearable from the perspective of oligarchs and generals?
(No matter what happens to ordinary people, oligarchs and generals can expect that the important comforts like warmth, water, food, electricity, etc will always be available to them and their families, at least while the status quo continues. By contrast, I’d expect the possibility of regime change to be very scary until it looks inevitable. I’d expect them to move forward with a putsch or the like only after it looks like some kind of regime change is inevitable; then the analysis will shift, as a regime change that is controlled by someone they think they can trust is less scary than any other kind.)
Even given (a) that their air campaign against refineries and war factories 'needs more', and (b) the Kremlin cares little about their human costs ?
Oh, the Kremlin WILL care if the upper middle class in Moscow becomes really unhappy. The last time that happened, the USSR collapsed.
I am in violent agreement with you. Moscow is the seat of exploitation of the current iteration of Russian serfdom. It is the only city that matters to the regime. It has one suburb where everyone who runs the country who has a family lives. Rublyovka. Ukraine should level it.
Yes, especially Rublyovka. That will get their attention.
That's why the USSR collapsed ?? Not because the brief Gorbachev flirtation with democracy exposed the costs and tolerated some dissent ?
His flirtation was in fact caused by widening discontent, which eventually spread to Moscow. And then it was game over.
I agree, Andrew
Thanks for this update from very cold Ukraine. I am hearing from friends that temperatures this morning in Kyiv are -17c!
Whether Ukraine should strike St. Petersburg and Moscow is indeed an important question. Why shouldn’t there be brutal retaliation against the capital of a country which has always wanted to subjugate Ukraine, from the occupation of 1919 to the Holodomor, the executed Renaissance and the current invasion ? For the first time in history Ukraine has the means to strike back and there must be a powerful temptation to do so.
Strikes against Moscow would also expose Trump’s contradictions.Reports of brutal repression are emerging this morning from Iran, and Trump has said that If this happens, he will hit the regime “very hard”. If he does, he can hardly blame Ukraine for acting likewise against Putin, whose war crimes he has never of course denounced.
The Ukrainians have never stooped to doing to Russia what Russia is doing to them, but in the absence of more robust support for their military campaign from their friends and allies, there must be limits to their forbearance.
But will equally brutal retaliation help win the war? Seems to mirror the Luftwaffe's error of bombing London instead of the airfields.
Maybe. The people of Moscow have a very different view of war than the Russians - for now. They send the "undesirables" (prisoners, ethnic minorities and losers from economically depressed areas) to fight their imperialist war, while they make money off the war and sanctions (circumventing them is quite lucrative). Finally facing serious consequences may change their calculus (and Putin's - in order to avoid discontent in Moscow, he may come to an unspoken understanding with Ukraine to refrain from attacking critical civilian infrastructure).
Ultimately, the war will only be won when Putin decides to stop or is forced to do so by his inner circle. An attack on St. Petersburg or Moscow, or both, may change his (their) calculus. For the moment, nobody expects Ukraine to mirror Putin’s terror tactics but they will get a nasty shock if that happens. Then, and perhaps only then, will it become apparent to everyone , friend and foe alike, that Ukraine is deadly serious about the existential threat that is hanging over it.
Petersburg is unnecessary. It is a cultural capital. The political/military capital is Moscow.
I think they should hit Gazprom HQ in St. Pete - that's the only major elite group outside Moscow, and a few Flamingos should be able to bring that building down. But other than that, Moscow is undoubtedly a commercial/financial capital, besides political/military.
..but Petersburg does have a symbolic value for Putin because of his multiple associations with the city. And it would be a way of sending him a personal message after his numerous attacks on Zelenskyy's home town of Kryvyi Rih.
Andrew Pavelyev’s “Gazprom HQ” idea will meet that need, while it’s a justifiable target as a direct part of the economic engine of imperialistic warmaking.
It's the tallest building in Europe, and there's nothing else around. At night it should be mostly empty (definitely no tourists on the observation deck), and hitting it would definitely make a statement (apart from disrupting their operations). https://www.google.com/maps/@59.9883376,30.1748557,791m/data=!3m1!1e3
Very good to see that you are in Ukraine Phillips. You are absolutely right: most of us recliner-stationed petty officers have no idea how living with war actually feels.
Amongst the many solid points in this piece, your last paragraph about hitting Moscow and St. Petersburg is just what I wanted to comment. Von der Leyen just said that law is stronger than force. Russia shows on a nightly basis that terror is blind to the law. Therefore Ukraine should answer terror with terror.
Yes, Ukraine should start wrecking apartment buildings in Moscow and St. Petersburg every night. Sort targets by price per square meter descending, and work their way down the list. Force all those fortunate sons and daughters to spend their nights in the nearest metro station.
“Yes, Ukraine should start wrecking apartment buildings in Moscow and St. Petersburg every night.”
I disagree. Moral and legal aspects aside (intentionally targeting civilians and their apartment buildings is a war crime), Ukraine’s limited capabilities for causing explosions deep in Russia are better used on attacking Russia’s production of drones and missiles, and related logistics infrastructures.
Of course, practically all logistics infrastructures deep in Russia are dual-use. For example, if Ukraine is able to reduce the transport capacity of the Russian railway system —which is essentially important not only for military logistics but also for many civilian purposes— I would predict that that’ll be felt even in Moscow. If Ukraine is then also able to reduce the number of trucks that the Russian military has available for military logistics, as long as Russia prioritises military use of the remaining trucks over civilian uses, transport of civilian goods by truck will also be noticeably further affected.
On the moral aspect: when international conventions and law crumble before our eyes, why should we demand moral asymmetry from the Ukraine people?
On targeting logistics, yes that is in principle some of the strategic warfare methods that Phillips states as a war winning factor. However, given the arsenal asymmetry of the fighting parties, I have seen no evidence that all the hits on oil refineries, ammunition depots etc. has had any affect on the day-to-day fighting will or capability of Russia.
I assume that (so far) covert supplies, technical assistance, engineering etc. from China to Russia is in practical terms endless, just like their friendship. That assumption also applies to logistic material like trucks.
What is Ukraine producing of war material in mass? Lightweight UAVs. Again, show me the evidence that their oil refinery campaign has weakened Russias will and capability to persist fighting Ukraine. Those UAVs would in comparison wreak havoc on civilian building infrastructure.
I claim that demanding a continued moral and military assymetry from Ukraine is immoral in itself.
“why should we demand moral asymmetry from the Ukraine people”
We should not demand it.
But I doubly respect the Ukrainians because they are consistently maintaining the moral high ground even when it is emotionally difficult to do so.
Also, while we should not demand of the Ukrainians that they must conform to our ideas of morality, we should also not demand of them to forsake their own standards of morality and integrity just because we would like to see revenge enacted on Putin’s supporters. Especially not given that from a perspective of rational analysis, continuing on their current path is (at least in my opinion) very likely to be more effective for the Ukrainians’ objectives of minimizing their suffering and ending Russia’s attacks as quickly as possible.
Excellent points Norbert, thanks. Rhetorical: is the Ukraine moral high ground internal, their own free will and choice, or is it rather an applied attitude in order to not disrupt the arms and moral (yes) support from their supposed Western allies/ friends?
I must admit given the current developments, I see no other effective response than tit for tat. Answering terror with terror.
Every day I see what the Russians say on social media. Trying moral reasoning with them is ridiculous. They celebrate attacks on Ukrainian civilians. They revel in their own impunity. The only argument they'll understand is brute force.
I would expect that a severe economic crisis, if understood to be a direct consequence of Putin’s attempt at imperialism, would also be a very strong argument.
In World War II, the allied forces largely destroyed many German cities, and I think that contributed to how most of the German population was afterwards willing to turn away from nazi ideology. But I think that that worked only because the nazis were so absurdly evil (cf the concentration camps etc) that in spite of the bombings, the Western allies were still (afterwards, in retrospect) in comparison seen as having the moral high ground.
Even if as you write, the dominant voices on Russian social media are currently pro-cruelty, I would suggest that Ukraine needs to be seen in Russia as strong and capable of significant violence, and as impossible to conquer by military or any other means, but nevertheless in ways that will, when the opportunity for a change of the societal mood arises, be seen as “not outright cruel like Putin”.
I think that Ukraine should continue to go after everything that is related to the military industry, including in particular how it’s funded, while especially increasing attacks against everything that is related to military logistics. Russia’s economy is today very much centred around the military industry and the fossil energy+fuel industry. (And regardless of whether you agree that that still has some importance, those types of industries are from a war of law perspective legitimate targets in the current context.) If Ukraine can reduce how well those industries work to a significant extent, e.g. by 90%, that’ll IMO create enough of an economic crisis to make enough people in Moscow unhappy enough to make regime change feel inevitable, and then it’ll happen.
It produces more howitzers than all of NATO combined. It could ramp production of domestic cruise missiles and IRBMs if it had enough capital investment. Europe seems to be withholding this on purpose. Doesn't want Ukraine's defense industrial base as competition.
Thanks Perry, howitzers are tactical arms though, mainly to keep the zombies away on the front?
To me missile production seeems crazy hard, crazy expensive, with a timeline of decades not years. Yesterday UK made a deal with Ukraine on producing ballistic missiles though, think it was called Nightfall.
I wonder what the range will be. Also, it's 12 months just for the prototype. Presumably years until deployment. This confirms that the Brits just try to humor Trump when they talk about peace and serving as peacekeepers. They clearly expect the war to continue for years.
It's quite official actually, and ambitious, from gov.uk: "a 200kg warhead over a range of more than 500 kilometres"; "first three missiles within 12 months for test firings".
Yes, they expect the war to continue, and probably wonder how the hell Europe is ever going to catch up with Russian and Chinese missile output. At least ballistic missile orders are placed in the European market, it is quite the development, come to think of it.
Zelenskyy predicted that Western Europe would withhold support because they didn't want Ukraine competing with them industrially. It's in _Servant of the People_. Make no mistake, he expected this.
Russia's logistical capacity to receive anything from China or North Korea is in fact extremely narrow, running through a tiny straw, and not expandable. That straw is the Trans-Siberian Railroad. Ukraine should sever it.
I agree with you. Petersburg is a waste of time. As for Moscow, not the average citizen. Just take out Rublyovka.
I would also hit Lubyanka hard with missiles. During the day. That's Putin's most important power base. Killing a lot of them may make them reconsider their unlimited support.
On targeting Russia’s production of drones and missiles as you say, it seems the task is Sisyphean. Why? Continuous hardening and dispersion of production facilities, and the potential limitless flow of drones, missiles and corresponding parts from China.
I see the transport infrastructures for those flows of supplies from China as vulnerable in principle to precision bombs on bridges. (Admittedly, even if such precision bombs are supplied to the Ukrainians, getting them to where they need to explode must certainly be a major challenge in view of the huge distances involved.)
Agree, assuming goods are transported by rail, instead of cargo planes. As you can tell, I am pretty cynical when it comes to China supporting Russia in their warfare. I mean, Chinese FM has said that China can not afford peace in Ukraine.
You’re making a very good point that if the Trans-Manchurian rail transport link gets significantly disrupted, they may well turn to cargo planes for transporting those supplies which are currently transported by rail on that route. If they have sufficient airport capacity / if the Ukrainians don’t also succeed in disrupting that and/or the transport routes from the airports to where the supplies are intended to be used.
Russian cargo plane capacity has the following problems: (1) Russia can't build or repair planes, (2) they get blown up on the ground by Ukraine, as do the ATC towers, (3) they're running out of fuel as Ukraine destroys the refineries. Even apart from all that, they're very expensive compared to the railways.
If the railways can be cut, the logistics can't be replaced, not by Russia, not now.
You don't need to do this. Take out where the money comes from to generate those factories. Hit the oil/gas depots and keep them shut for 6 months and Russia's economy collapses and Moscow will look like Tehran.
hitting the number of trucks is not an easy do, the railways system is possible
“hitting the number of trucks is not an easy do”
I would expect that before long, cheap mass-produced drones will become available that would be given coordinates and which would then fly there, and find something that has the shape and size of a truck, and moves along a road with a speed that is typical of a truck — and then the drone destroys the truck. I would expect that in the not very distant future, such anti-truck drones will be available at a cost that is much less than the cost of replacing the truck.
I’d expect that if Ukraine was able to produce such anti-truck drones, they’d start by using them on the roads which lead from the nearest railway endpoint to key points on the front line, and at a later stage (if/when more such drones are available) on all roads that see significant amounts of military goods transported by trucks.
Russia's essentially out of trucks, they wouldn't be using donkeys on the front line if they had enough trucks. The railway is the capacity
When my grandmother was heavily pregnant with my mother, she actually had to run to the nearest metro station under bombs. But then my grandfather's aircraft factory was evacuated to the Urals along with the employees and their families (the train actually had its own fighter cover - obviously, not all the way). So my mother barely missed being born in Moscow.
They now build new apartment buildings in Moscow at around $5,000 per square meter in Moscow. That's insane.
That aircraft factory story sounds like a Substack on its own. Did your grandfather work at the factory, or run it?
He worked at it. He may have been running one of the workshops (although that probably happened much later). So he was not drafted. Not that it was entirely safe - his brother also worked at some weapons factory and got electrocuted there.
And then there was another grandfather who "served" the entire war in the reserves (as a combat engineer)... Do you remember the ending of the Sound of Music? Von Trapp family actually just sailed to the US straight from Germany. But my two year old father indeed fled from the Nazis across a mountain pass right next to the highest peak in Europe, with a little help from professional mountain climbers.
No. It's wasteful strategy. Hitting an apartment building is poor use of ammunition and only upsets people.
Ukraine should destroy refineries, factories, and the electric power plants which supply them. If lights go out as a result, people will not blame Ukraine, people will blame Putin for not fixing the power plants.
Right now Putins strategy in Ukraine is to terrorize the civilian population to turn on the regime in Kyiv, by bombing both apartment buildings and power plants in -20 C. Ukraine should do the same. They have been attacking refineries and factories for a while now, but their weapons lack the necessary BOOM to inflict serious damage.
Today the war has lasted as long as the "Great Patriotic War". That's a dangerous milestone for Putin. At this stage Stalin's war with Hitler was officially over, and the Nazi Germany seized to exist. "We turned off the heat in half of Kyiv" just does not have the same ring to it.
By the end of March, Russia's casualties will exceed Japan's from WWII.
Did not Japan lose over two million killed? Russia has so far lost just a quarter million or so KIA.
One of the few consolations I have of living in the US these days is reading about Ukraine's pluck, courage and ingenuity in beating back the Russians. As Phillips has pointed out, it is, however, now standing alone, abandoned by the US and treated as a bastard step-child by European powers. Every minute of every day, its citizens brave death, terror, and disruption of their lives as they pin their hopes, now almost exclusively, on their own military, hoping to god that it continues to perform miracles on the battlefield. Russian greed, American indifference, and European pusillanimity stand in stark contrast to the stoic, and increasingly ascetic, Ukrainians, who are reminding us all what it means to be a virtuous nation. On another note, yesterday I participated in an anti-ICE rally in Mystic, CT. Among the many wonderful people I met was an American lawyer, who had recently returned from Ukraine, where he was volunteering his time to the war effort. God bless this particular American.
the us is even throttling the purl system, the get paid up front at impossible mark ups, and still will not deliver
What is "a bastard step-child"? If one is a step-child of someone, clearly you are not that persons's "bastard"?
Of course, Oreshnik is inaccurate. It's not supposed to be accurate. Its only purpose is to deliver multiple nuclear warheads at intermediate distances (i.e. farther than short range missiles but closer than ICBMs), especially to Western Europe. So it really does not matter which end of the Whitehall or Champs-Élysées it hits, as long as it hits it at all.
not the least incoming at 13 thousand kilometers per hour.
That's a necessity at such distance. On a ballistic trajectory, distance is a function of speed. Of course, once you reach orbital speed, the distance is literally unlimited, as you can choose reentry point anywhere.
yes! If in addition the warheads is set to deliver nuclear air-bursts, how would European missile defenses actually defend against that?
Alaska has some interceptors that might work. Perhaps Israel has something too.
There was a comment above about what investments people could make to aid Ukraine.
I've made several small contributions to Come Back Alive. It's a good charity that directs aid where its needed most, or you can direct a contribution to a specific project they have. I figure I spend about a hundred a month on different media subscriptions, so why not contribute to a group I'm concerned about. It may not be much, but I'll bet I've contributed enough to outfit a company with warm winter socks. If you've ever washed winter clothing outdoors in the cold, it's not fun.
I've decided to make only contributions to charities that give aid directly to people in need. No more political contributions, or very few, until politicians do something to help those that need the help. That goes for both political parties. They both need to grow some. Check out Come Back Alive.
Democrats don’t have any power, so bear that in mind when you criticize “both sides”. When they did have power, they sent aid to Ukraine. There’s a Democratic Socialist mayor of New York who is rolling out free child care and bus service.
Republicans represent a tiny fraction of society - primarily the billionaires.
The best investment for Ukraine is to invest in its defense industrial base so they can win the war. A hand up, not a hand out. This is what I have done with MITS Capital.
I'm interested in the main theme of Ukraine doing so much suffering to the benefit of all of Europe and global democracies. Alliances and collective action works better than the law of the jungle. Unfortunately selfishness seems to be our strongest nature.
On a slightly related note, I listened to an unusually great conversation with well known security experts/authors from Denmark & Germany, Anders Puck Nielsen & Carlo Masala. If you start watching it you won't be able to stop. One of the many insights from Masala is that any peace treaty with RU will likely lead to most people wanting to cut back military spending and return to cheap Russian energy. Higher educated & politically engaged people are a minority of the population and are most likely to see the long term value of investing in mutual security.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8ZvKXjhHYM
Not sure if it is necessary to explain, but the advice from Masala suggests that any negotiated deal with RU better have military support front-loaded. Political support for arming UKR will likely fade.
I don't believe there will be any negotiated deal.
It's within Trump's power and control to force a negotiated deal. It could even happen in 2026. I really don't see it happening but you can't say never. Trump would be very clever to turn on Putin from the perspective of his personal power and self-agrandizement. Unlikely, he appears intent on aligning with RU and far right in EU. The dark side he chose could work if enough far right parties come to power in western Europe. UKR survival as independent state is very much in play.
This war is existential for both Ukraine and Putin. I don't think it is within Trump's power to force a coup in Russia.
Trump can crush Putin's war funding if he chooses. He could send decisive weapons to UKR. More so now than ever. Not holding breath.
Yes, he could. But that would still take a lot of time to work.
tRUMP will never turn on his benefactors of 40 years:
https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/03/05/craig-unger-trump-wont-betray-putin-after-40-years-of-russian-money/
https://newrepublic.com/article/165553/donald-trump-everything-vladimir-putin-wished-russian-asset
Slava Ukraini!
There has been no sign that Trump will align with Ukraine, but i never say never. If Europe manages to put UKR in advancing position, Trump might wish to take credit.
The Wall Street Journal has a story about Ukraine's Flamingo Missile (F5) made by Fire Point, that can travel 1,800 miles with a 2,500 payload. This is the missile Ukraine wants to deploy against russia's oil refineries, military bases and other critical targets. russia has targeted Fire Point's Ukrainian facilities and the firm has developed an ingenious way to ensure their survival in the midst of the war. “It’s like repairing a car that is traveling at 130 miles per hour, while being shot at. Ukrainians are developing the ability to do that.” Iryna Terekh, Fire Point's technical director:
https://www.wsj.com/world/inside-ukraines-quest-to-build-a-missile-to-strike-deep-in-russian-territory-c267df7a?st=58kuRf&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
Slava Ukraini!
The challenge is that Europe will not give Ukraine the money to make the missile at scale.
Any integrity that Lindsey Graham possessed was buried with John McCain.
No heat? Frozen pipes will bust when thawed. Misery beyond imagination times several million
Thank you for the update and stay safe. Again we cannot underestimate the
Trump Putin relationship. Trump will do NOTHING to hurt Putin. Whether it is worship or dependency or something else Trump is beholden to Putin. Therefore, the administration will come down hard on the Ukrainians and the Europeans for more aggressive direct attacks on Russia. Also no sanctions are coming, and if they do they will be carefully choreographed to accomplish nothing.
I would urge you to explore Russia's role in the Venezuelan attack. There is no way this was done without Putin's knowledge and probable approval. However the US handles Venezuelan oil, Russian oil trade, transport and financial gain will not be allowed to be harmed. There may be elaborate ruses to make it appear that the US blockade is stopping the flow of oil to Russian and its allies or the staged capture of meaningless ships, but in reality, Russia will not be affected. In interpreting every international action by the Trump administration, we must understand the full and complete collaboration between Trump and Putin. Through that lens, seemingly incomprehensible action will make sense, and it will be obvious what is being staged to deceive us.
Jessica Holliday shared this excellent piece on the russian long term influence campaign that involves Venezuela, Greenland and the Monroe Doctrine. In 2017, Ronald Lauder, a confidante of both tRUMP and lil' putin, told tRUMP he should buy Greenland. John Bolton dispatched Fiona Hill to talk to the Danish government but when the story was leaked to the Wall Street Journal, the discussions stopped. Lauder went on to invest millions in Greenland with the hopes it would provide the U.S. with more control. In 2019, the russians informally approached the U.S. with an offer: stay out of Ukraine and we'll step away from Venezuela. The russians invoked "The Monroe Doctrine", which they described as, "stay out of my backyard and we'll stay out of yours." Fiona Hill was a Senior WH Advisor on russia and she testified about this before a Congressional committee investigating tRUMP before his first impeachment. Thanks to Jessica Holliday for posting this article in a previous Phillips O'Brien Substack:
https://america2.news/the-russian-roots-of-trumps-venezuela-and-greenland-operations/
Slava Ukraini!
" So, no longer speak about 'aiding' Ukraine. The Ukrainians are aiding Europeans and Americans by fighting for their survival. We owe them our gratitude, not the other way around." I wish more Europeans thought this way but the reality is, the only nations that seem to understand this are Poland, Germany, the Nordic nations and the Baltic nations, all of whom are experiencing the "grey zone" effect as their undersea communication cables are cut, as drones shut down their commercial airports and as their power systems are attacked (Over 100,000 Berliners were without power due to sabotage last week).
Slava Ukraini!
If you didn't realize it before, Lindsay Graham is an odious, greasy, corrupt creature of Trump. Whether it's his sexual preferences or just about bribes, he doesn't want the public to know who he truly is. He was all for arming Ukraine when he could make money from those contracts or to attack Biden. He was also one of Trump's degenerate agents in the plot to steal the 2020 election. With friends like these, Ukraine doesn't need enemies.
The Ukrainians are right. Theirs is a struggle for survival as a people, a culture and a nation. Putin's Russia doesn't accept any of those three. It's also true that the rest of Europe is not in a struggle for survival. More immediately threatened are the Baltic states and Poland. That explains the positions of countries like France, Germany and Britain. People and politicians sympathize with Ukraine and offer help, but they are not engaged in a choice between life and death as peoples or countries.
Exhortations like yours can only do so much, as motivation depends on judgments of the imminence of danger and how great it is. That's simply human nature. Also, realistically, Russia is a third-rate power with an unimportant economy and little to show except oil and a nuclear arsenal. Unlike Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union was not defeated and demolished. The security state was left to rise again under Putin. But It has no prospect of playing an important role globally except through exporting criminals and laundering dirty money.
For all we know, the cynical calculation of some European countries could simply be that the greater the Russian losses in fighting Ukraine, the better for the rest of Europe as Russia is enfeebled even more. China matters far more for the world, and Trump's America is a rogue elephant currently running amok. Part of the reason Euopean countries try to conciliate Trump is to keep him on-side on Ukraine. Brave acts of European defiance of Trump can feel great but may be foolish.
Lindsay Graham has many faults but he is not a creature of Putin. He's a conventional Republican desperately seeking to stay on the right side of Trump in order to do what he can to help Ukraine.
A creature of Trump can also be subject to Russian blackmail. I have no idea whether allegations in this regard about Graham have a basis. It was remarkable how he changed from denouncing Trump to slavishly toeing the Trump line.
Russia and Ukraine fighting actually strengthens both of them militarily because of the experience gained and weapons built even with losses. A victorious Russia would be a greater threat now to Europe than in 2022.
Russia is very weak in its economy and finances. Yes, it has learned to make drones. That has not changed its strategic position or brought victory. Experience has not taught the Russian generals anything other than to give Putin false news and send hundreds of thousands of more troops to be slaughtered or wounded to gain a little patch of territory. Everyone thought Iran's regime was also permanent, but there's a point beyond which even in very repressive systems the mass of the people can't take any more. Russia isn't fighting for survival, unlike Ukraine. That also makes a difference.
This is part of the Eurasian plan that Putin is executing. Russia needs the military industrial base (which was core to that of the USSR) for the next assault on Northern Europe. Putin gave a speech on this in 2007.
From this perspective, it appears really foolish in the extreme that the West, including in particular Western European NATO countries, seems to be at best half-hearted when it comes to support for Ukraine’s attacks against Russia’s military industrial base. (Or am I missing something here?)
Thank you. Ukraine faces so many hardships, so many difficult decisions.
Thank you Phillips. One of the MANY questions I've had this week was what was Lindsay Graham doing slathering over trump on air force one last week. Clearly getting in the way of his own bill was one of them in exchange for being in djt's presence.
Moving along in "How The War Was Won", and the question of whether St. Petersburg or Moscow should be bombed, Page 163 .."Portal gave a defense of strategic bombing.....'The effects of bombing on morale depends, I believe, on the weight of the attack. Light attacks may well stimulate morale, but this can scarcely be said of attacks on the Coventry Model (https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Coventry-Blitz/)..........This result was achieved with a small fraction of the bomb load we hope to employ in 1943' Then on page 164 you follow with "It is interesting to see Portal giving this positive argument in favor of Civilian/morale bombing". My response, surely Ukranians feel that Russian cities should experience the same pain and suffering which Russia and Putin have inflicted upon them for so many years.
As a companion read by Contemporary Ukrainian Writers,, Andrey Kurkov, "Three Years on Fire, The Destruction of Ukraine" written as a journal during 2024.
Be safe Phillips.