Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

Astute observers can read between the lines, and discern Russia’s displeasure with [Trump] too...

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s first press conference of the year in late January touched upon a lot of topics, importantly including the Europeans’ plot to subvert Trump’s Ukrainian peace plan.

According to him, the UK “is speaking increasingly more often on behalf of the EU” and therefore plays a leading role in these efforts, “which boil down to one thing – an immediate ceasefire complemented with legal security guarantees for Ukraine. The question is what these security guarantees concern.”

As Lavrov sees it, the purpose is “the preservation of the current Nazi regime”, which “will never legally recognise Crimea, Novorossiya and Donbass as Russia…And a ceasefire along the current line of contact, following which ‘the West will help,’ is unacceptable to us because they will build bases there.” In that scenario, “[France and the UK] will deploy a multinational force in Ukraine, build a network of military hubs (bases) there… and pump more weapons into Ukraine to create threats for the Russian Federation.”

Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

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

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

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

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

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

Russia’s Burevestnik Missile Test Was Actually A De-Escalation Measure. Its real purpose is to get the US to reconsider its impending escalations against Russia by reminding it of the strategic costs that this could entail.

Trump slammed Russia’s test of its unlimited-range nuclear-powered Burevestnik missile by describing it as inappropriate and urging Putin to end the Ukrainian Conflict instead. The aforesaid test follows Putin’s warning that Trump’s potential transfer of longer-range Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine would provoke a “downright staggering” response from Russia. That in turn came right after a supposedly planned test of Russia’s nuclear triad coinciding with Trump canceling their Budapest Summit.

The sequence of events that Russia initiated amidst the breakdown of talks with the US, for which Zelensky claimed credit while Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov suggested that joint EU-Ukrainian pressure was responsible, is understandable if analyzed in context. To begin with, there hasn’t yet been any tangible progress on extending the New START upon its expiry in February, which risks further worsening Russian-US tensions since it’s the last remaining strategic arms control pact between them.

In connection with that, Trump remains committed to developing what he calls the “Golden Dome” missile defense system, which his advisors arguably believe would give the US a strategic edge over Russia by enabling it to intercept more second strikes in the scenario of a nuclear war. This imperative explains why Bush Jr. pulled out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2001 shortly after 9/11 and all subsequent presidents retained his policy course of developing this infrastructure at home and abroad.

Leo Hohmann
LeoHohman.com

The dirty little secret of the U.S.-funded war in Ukraine is that thousands of Orthodox Christians are being persecuted by the Zelensky regime

The U.S. is essentially facilitating the persecution of Christians in Ukraine by supporting the Kiev government, which has been mercilessly cracking down on the nation’s ancient Orthodox Christian community.

American journalist Tucker Carlson recently exposed the crimes against the Orthodox in Ukraine in an interview with a former Ukrainian MP, Vadim Novinsky, released on Friday.

This is something I have reported on in the past, and it’s good so see someone with an audience as large as Tucker Carlson’s now finally reporting it. Most of the mainstream has totally ignored this story. Carlson said:

💬 “Every day, churches and temples are seized by soldiers with machine guns who come in, throw out priests, beat believers, children, old people, women… It is happening all over Ukraine. I think very few Americans understand the degree to which the Ukrainian government under [Vladimir] Zelensky has persecuted the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.”

Arina Korshunova
Oriental Review

Economic consequences of sanctions policy | The EU sanctions against Russia, which began in 2022 and reached the 18th package by June 2025, have led to significant economic difficulties for Europe itself. As von der Leyen notes, sanctions have reduced Russia’s oil and gas revenues by almost 80% compared to pre-war levels, and inflation in Russia exceeds 10%. However, Russia has adapted by redirecting its trade toward China, with bilateral trade reaching $240 billion in 2024, and other BRICS partners, such as India, which increased its imports of Russian oil from 2% to 20% since 2022.

At the same time, the sanctions have boomeranged on Europe. The energy crisis caused by the refusal of Russian supplies (previously accounting for 45% of the EU’s gas and 50% of coal) has led to a 40% increase in energy prices since 2022. This has undermined the competitiveness of European industry, especially in Germany, where jobs have been lost. Inflation in the EU in 2025 reached 5%, increasing pressure on households and businesses. According to the World Bank, EU GDP growth remains sluggish (1-2% per year), while Russia’s economy, despite sanctions, is growing at 3.2%.

Strategic Culture Foundation Editorial
Strategic Culture Foundation

The trouble is, these effete, elite Europeans are running the risk of starting a nuclear world war with their puny games.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and other European leaders are desperately playing with fire in a bid to sabotage diplomatic efforts to end the Ukraine conflict. It’s a nefarious role with a long history.

This week, Merz caused a storm (by the way, his grandfather was a Nazi Stormtrooper) when he publicly declared that Germany was henceforth giving permission to Ukraine to fire long-range missiles at pre-war Russian territory.

The chancellor, who only took up the office three weeks ago on May 6, also indicated that he was considering approval for the supply of German-made Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine. The Taurus has a range of 500 kilometers and thus could hit the Russian capital, Moscow.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

Step by step, Trump is turning “Sleepy Joe Biden’s War” into his own, exactly as Steve Bannon warned him not to do.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s revelation that the West removed all restrictions on the range of the weapons that they supplied to Ukraine brought about a feeling of déjà vu from late last year. Russia warned them against doing this at the time, the moment of truth finally arrived once they defied it, and then Putin climbed the escalation ladder by authoring the use of a hitherto top-secret hypersonic medium-range Oreshnik missile against Ukraine. History might therefore be about to repeat itself.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov described the West’s reported decision as “quite dangerous”, while Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov assessed that it was evidently “made quite some time ago and kept under wraps”, which aligns with what Merz himself later claimed when clarifying his comments. Nevertheless, this policy has yet to result in any strategically significant attacks, let alone reshape the conflict’s dynamics in Ukraine’s favor. If that changes, however, then Russia might drop more Oreshniks.

This could happen even in the absence of those two scenario triggers. Trump ominously posted on Tuesday that “What Vladimir Putin doesn’t realize is that if it weren’t for me, lots of really bad things would have already happened to Russia, and I mean REALLY BAD. He’s playing with fire!”. This follows his post about how “[Putin] has gone absolutely CRAZY!”, which was analyzed here as proof of him being maliciously misinformed by his trusted advisors and/or him creating the pretext for US escalation.

It’s therefore clear that Trump is preparing for the possibility that peace talks might soon collapse, in advance of which he’s trying to spin a self-serving narrative. By denigrating Putin as “crazy” and implying that “bad things..REALLY BAD” might soon happen to Russia, Trump is signaling tacit approval of forthcoming Ukrainian provocations. Other than the use of long-range American missiles against strategic targets, this could take the form of a nationwide assassination-terrorism campaign.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

For whatever one might think about the morality of Russia’s decision-making process, it was the regional military governor who irresponsibly assembled this legitimate target in Sumy, which he then surrounded with de facto human shields in a failed attempt to deter Russia.

Ukraine accused Russia of committing a war crime after Palm Sunday’s missile strike on Sumy. Kiev’s claim that Russia targeted churchgoers was echoed by Trump’s Envoy to Ukraine Keith Kellogg, but the Russian Defense Ministry insisted that it targeted “a meeting of the command staff of the Seversk operational-tactical group”, which Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov later added was attended by NATO servicemen. Trump also chimed in and said that “I was told they (Russia) made a mistake, it was terrible.”

A debate is therefore raging over whether this was a war crime like Ukraine claimed, a terrible mistake like Trump alleged, or a legitimate strike like Russia insists. In the order that these explanations were shared, Ukraine’s is aimed at further rallying the West to apply more pressure upon Trump to pull the US out of its talks with Russia. Claiming that Russia deliberately targeted churchgoers on Palm Sunday is meant to make it more difficult for these talks to continue and for Trump to one day meet Putin again.

As for Trump’s explanation of events, he wasn’t going to discredit himself by denying that it took place, but he also didn’t want to fall into Ukraine’s trap of lending credence to its war crime claim. That’s why he instead opted for the middle ground of acknowledging what happened but attributing it to some vague “mistake” by Russia such as a wayward missile or faulty intelligence. Trump can’t approve of any Russian strike that causes civilian casualties, but he also won’t let such ruin their ongoing talks either.

And finally, Russia’s explanation maintains the country’s integrity by insisting that the targets were legitimate, though it also accounts for the reported civilian casualties by mentioning how Ukraine employs de facto human shields by illegally deploying military assets in civilian areas. While critics might scoff at this version, it is lent credence by the mayor of nearby Konotop declaring on video that the regional military governor “organized an award ceremony for the soldiers of the 117th brigade” that day.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

The possible end of the Ukrainian Conflict sometime later this year and the political agreement that’ll accompany it will play the greatest roles in determining the New Cold War’s strategic dynamics in the coming future.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov gave a year-end interview with TASS where he touched upon the most important developments from the past year that’ll likely shape events in 2025.

From the get-go, he rejected Trump’s reported plans to freeze the conflict, delay Ukraine’s membership in NATO, and deploy Western peacekeepers there and reminded everyone of the terms that Putin declared for ending the special operation. Russia also requires legally binding agreements that address the root of the conflict.

Lavrov expressed skepticism that there’ll be any improvement in bilateral relations under Trump since he’ll have to “swim against the current” as he phrased it in the sense of having to overcome the bipartisan consensus on containing Russia via Ukraine. On that topic, he’s equally skeptical of Zelensky’s recent admission that Ukraine is unable to reconquer its lost territories, pointing to that goal’s continued inclusion in Kiev’s “Victory Plan” as evidence that his words haven’t translated into actions.

Moving along, Lavrov was also asked about the West’s policy of orchestrating Color Revolutions, particularly in Georgia. He responded by condemning the false dilemma that they’ve placed that country into whereby it’s either considered to be with the West or against it. He also reaffirmed that Russia is determined to normalize relations with Georgia to the extent that Tbilisi is ready. Observers should keep an eye on this diplomatic track since it could have far-reaching consequences if any progress is made.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

If Putin hopes to reach a deal with Erdogan on Syria, then it’ll require keeping up the pretense (however unbelievable it is to objective observers) that Turkiye no longer backs terrorists, thus accounting for Lavrov’s diplomatic assessment of events there.

Lavrov’s interview with Tucker mostly saw him elaborate on Russia’s stance towards the proxy war with NATO in Ukraine, which built upon what he shared during his earlier and more concise interview with Newsweek in early October that was analyzed here at the time.

He was also importantly asked about the latest events in Syria, the assessment of which hasn’t received much international media attention, at least not yet. The present piece will therefore review and interpret what he said about that.

He began by describing the Astana process between his country, Iran, and Turkiye as being driven by the need to contain US-backed Kurdish separatist threats in Syria before expressing hope that he’ll meet with his counterparts over the weekend during the Doha Forum to discuss the latest developments.

Lavrov then said he’d also like to “discuss the need to come back to strict implementation of the deals on Idlib area, because Idlib de-escalation zone was the place from where the terrorists moved to take Aleppo.” According to him, Turkiye must continue separating Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) from the non-terrorist opposition, and he also wants the M5 highway between Damascus and Aleppo reopened after that group just captured its northern half over the past week.