The US and Russia together drafted Ukraine's capitulation

From the Guardian, November 19, 2025:

"US and Russian officials draft plan to end Ukraine war based on capitulation from Kyiv

US and Russian officials have quietly drafted a new plan to end the war in Ukraine that would require Kyiv to surrender territory and severely limit the size of its military, it was reported on Wednesday as Russian drone and missile strikes killed at least 25 people in the city of Ternopil.

The draft plan, which was reportedly developed by Donald Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, and the Kremlin adviser Kirill Dmitriev, would force draconian measures on Ukraine that would give Russia unprecedented control over the country’s military and political sovereignty. The plan is likely to be viewed as surrender in Kyiv...

The Financial Times and Reuters reported that the proposal would require Ukraine to cede territory it controls in the east of the country and halve the size of its military, conditions that the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has in the past called non-starters. Other conditions include limiting US military assistance and categories of armaments used by the Ukrainian military.

The existence of the 28-point plan, which appears to be inspired by a similar proposal the Trump administration developed to end the war in Gaza, was first reported by Axios. The White House did not immediately respond to a Guardian request for more detail on the proposal.

Washington has repeatedly suggested that it is close to a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine, but the proposals have failed because they would have granted Russia most of its demands while requiring Kyiv to make painful concessions.

On Wednesday night, US secretary of state Marco Rubio appeared to respond to reports of the plan by saying that a durable peace would require “both sides to agree to difficult but necessary concessions.”

“That is why we are and will continue to develop a list of potential ideas for ending this war based on input from both sides of this conflict,” Rubio wrote on X.

The leaked reports came as Russia launched a massive attack in western Ukraine targeting several multi-storey buildings in the city of Ternopil, as well as energy facilities in Ivano-Frankivsk and Lviv. Russia is engaged in a systematic campaign to destroy Ukraine’s civilian power infrastructure ahead of winter...

 

The US army secretary, Daniel Driscoll, arrived in Kyiv on Wednesday to hold talks with Ukrainian officials and “discuss efforts to end the war,” the US Embassy said in a statement." 

He who controls Ukraine will control Europe

From the Obozrevatel:

""Whoever controls Ukraine controls Europe." Gritsak explained the old maxim in modern terms. Interview 

Orest Sokhar, November 20, 2025 

- I'd like to start with your thesis that "the fate of the world is being decided in Ukraine." In your opinion, what scenarios are on the table today? 

...I'll speak as a historian. There's a certain recurring pattern: whoever controls Ukraine controls Eastern Europe. And whoever controls Eastern Europe has a chance of becoming a European superpower, one that will dominate Europe and, accordingly, lay claim to the role of global superpower. We see the result of Bohdan Khmelnytsky's uprising, which began the decline of the Polish state and the rise of the Russian Empire. Essentially, the seizure of Ukraine paved the way for the transformation of the Russian Empire into a European state. 

Whoever controls Ukraine can have great ambitions. As someone said (I don't remember who), with Ukraine, Russia is the United States, and without Ukraine, it's Canada. Europe will understand this pattern. The second question is what it will do, because understanding and action are, you know, not the same thing. And here it's crucial whether Europe understands that Ukraine now represents an opportunity for Europe, that it is Ukraine that currently underpins Europe's security. This means that Europe must integrate Ukraine very quickly and must provide it with more intensive support.

If Europe has been a political and economic entity until now, it must now become a security space. And this cannot happen without Ukraine. Therefore, I say: the fate of Europe is now being decided in Ukraine. Europe can become a community capable of defending itself. Without resolving the issue of security, all other issues—political or economic—are of little use...  

- You once said that Russian history is an endless cycle of madness punctuated by brief intervals of clarity. What makes this crazy state so resilient?

I was quoting Dmitry Chizhevsky. The roots of this madness lie in autocracy. Autocracy isn't just a dirty word, it's a political system where the leader is accountable to no one. He concentrates his power single-handedly and can do whatever he pleases: send people to war, seize foreign territories. It makes no difference whether it's the Tsar of Moscow, the Russian Emperor, the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the USSR, or the President. If you remember, Aristotle in his "Politics" said that this is the worst type of monarchy and that tyrants should be killed, saying it even brings honor. Russia has never been able to modernize itself politically, although it tried several times—both in the 19th century and during Gorbachev's time—but it never succeeded. Whatever they did, as Chernomyrdin said, "they wanted the best, but it turned out as usual."..."

What Russian "negotiations" mean

Below is a resume of a stillborn US - Russian peace plan proposal that the USA tried to push on Ukraine last November:

UNIAN cited the opinion of analyst Mykhaylo Samus:

"It's clear the leak originated with Russia. This means it's a planned operation by Russian intelligence services at the highest level, designed to manipulate the information space to Russia's advantage. Russia, it turns out, is working for peace. They're holding some kind of negotiations with the United States. But Europe and Ukraine, well, they don't want peace at all... Unfortunately, the Americans are constantly falling for these so-called negotiations. Dmitriev will push the same ideas that Lavrov does. Only Lavrov is the bad cop, while Dmitriev is the good cop. And when Lavrov openly dumps Rubio and those Budapest meetings fall through, Dmitriev again tries to push some 28 points. Then he can make it 3,000 points, then two points..."

The expert recalled that on March 11, 2025, Ukraine signed a protocol with the United States agreeing to an immediate, unconditional ceasefire. 

"So, we don't need 28 points, we need one point: cease fire, and then we can talk about anything. And we know what the Russian side will talk about. Specifically, this nonsense of theirs, aimed at creating conditions for stalling and, of course, lifting sanctions against Russia in order to continue the war and destroy Ukraine.""

Kasparov: The West we respected is no more

From the Obozrevatel:

"The West that knew how to put dictators and terrorists in their place no longer exists 

Garry Kasparov, November 19, 2025

 

Decades of experience in the free world's interactions with terrorist dictatorships demonstrates that any weakness in their face almost certainly leads to defeat. A show of force at the earliest stages almost certainly forces dictators to retreat. 

 

If America had made it clear to the Kremlin from the outset that a full-scale invasion of Ukraine was unthinkable—and that such an attempt would result in an immediate response—the war simply would not have happened. Putin would not have risked a direct confrontation with NATO at that point. 

 

The West's cowardly, shameful, and immoral decision not to close the skies over Ukraine was a signal to Putin that it was time to move on. Had Biden said then that the appearance of even one Russian aircraft in Ukrainian skies would mean the destruction of Russian airfields, everything would have been over. 

 

Understanding the mood in Russia at the time, it's safe to say that if Russian pilots had seen NATO aircraft in the skies over Ukraine, they simply wouldn't have flown there. It's one thing to bomb Mariupol and shelters full of children with impunity. It's quite another to collide in mid-air with an F-35 that's about to shoot you down. 

 

Today's escalation is a direct result of the West's weakness and impotence. Putin's arrogance, his refusal to accept even Trump's favorable terms, is a consequence of the conviction that the West is weak, confused, and will cave in anyway. The West that knew how to put dictators and terrorists in their place no longer exists."

Sickening image

 

To me, this photo of deliberate and wanton destruction is sickening. It reminds me of Sept 11, 2001. In fact, it is from an Obozrevatel report of a Russian attack on Ternopol, Ukraine, on November 19, 2025. A residential building was hit, as Russia loves to do, and 33 people died, including children. But Americans do not rush to help its ally Ukraine the way Ukraine helped the USA after Sept 11.

Russia released the usual lying and gleeful statement they issue every time after killing a large number of Ukrainian civilians:

"In response to Kyiv's terrorist attacks on civilian targets in Russia, the Russian Armed Forces launched a massive strike using long-range air- and sea-based precision weapons, including Kinzhal missiles, and attack drones against military-industrial and energy facilities supporting their operations, as well as long-range UAV depots in western Ukraine. Ultimately, the strike's objectives were achieved, with all designated targets destroyed." 

Below are two of the victims: young David Dolinyak and his father Vitaly (source).

 

To the Global South: Russia's war in Ukraine is colonial

From Zmina:

"Russia’s aggression against Ukraine is a classic neo-colonial war for the enslavement of an entire people

18 November 2025, Serhiy Kyslytsya

On November 17–18, the third international conference, Crimea Global. Understanding Ukraine through the South brought together Ukrainian and international experts, journalists, human rights defenders, and cultural figures... Speaking at the Crimea Global conference, Ukrainian Deputy Foreign Minister Serhiy Kyslytsya warns that the world faces “Super-Yalta 2” unless it confronts Russia’s diplomatic manipulations. He reveals the ultimate irony: Russia, the champion of the border inviolability principle at the 1975 Helsinki Summit, is now the party violating it. More critically, he notes that the very foundations of the United Nations were conceived in Yalta, Crimea – a place that Russia uses today for colonial dominance.

ZMINA publishes his speech.

 

Good morning, esteemed colleagues, distinguished ambassadors.

[…] Despite nearly 12 years of temporary occupation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and almost four years of full-scale Russian aggression, the world has remained committed to supporting Ukraine’s aspirations to restore sovereignty and territorial integrity within internationally recognized borders.

It is important to us that interest in Ukraine resonates not only in Europe or North America – we are known and supported by countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America...

For Russia, Crimea is a resource, a resource for imperial ambitions, military power in the Black Sea and Mediterranean, a resource for seizing new territories and attempting to return to a 19th-century world where a state’s greatness is supposedly determined not by the dignified lives of its citizens or technological development, but by nuclear weapons and the capacity to enslave people.

That’s why I would like to emphasize: Russia’s war against Ukraine is not simply a war for territory. This is a classic neo-colonial war, where the world’s largest country by area is fighting not for kilometers, not even for thousands of kilometers, but for the enslavement of an entire people.

For the Kremlin, Ukrainians are a resource for restoring an imaginary empire and further subjugation of peoples who once belonged to the imperial core. This is the mentality of past centuries, the same mentality from which colonized peoples suffered for many centuries and against which they fought. 

The entire world understands that colonial empires are in the past, except for Russia...

The Kremlin also views its international partners as resources. We see how citizens of African, Asian, and Latin American states who come to Russia – as Ms. Iryna Mudra [Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine] mentioned – for education or work are recruited into the Russian army and defense sector. Those who manage to survive and are captured ask their governments to return them home. But it is better to prevent people from getting into such situations in the first place.

Hopefully, the media and experts who are here will bring home the truth to their citizens. Life is more valuable than money. Russia treats foreigners the same way it treats its own citizens—as expendable material...

Yalta was not only in 1945 a place of very dangerous agreements. I would like to remind you that in 1975, a summit was held in Helsinki, following which the Helsinki Final Act was signed.

One of the principles behind that treaty is the principle of the inviolability of borders. However, I would like to remind you that, in my opinion, it is no coincidence that the Helsinki summit was referred to as “Super-Yalta” by The New York Times in 1975. It will be a revelation for many of you that it was Moscow that insisted on the inclusion of the principle of the inviolability of borders in the Helsinki Final Act.

This is an evil irony. The inviolability of borders was championed by Moscow at a time when many Western countries opposed this principle being included in the Helsinki Final Act, when some countries were also indifferent to whether this principle should be in the document.

It was laid down by Moscow and later violated by Moscow, which once again demonstrates that Moscow cannot be trusted to adhere to its word, that what Moscow signs cannot be trusted, and that policies and actions must be based solely on a sober assessment of Moscow’s actions.

Helsinki became a symbolic city not only because the Final Act was signed there in 1975, but also because, in 2019, as demanded by many European countries, despite fierce resistance and protests from Ukraine and the Baltic states, the Russian Federation was readmitted to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

In a few weeks, an OSCEі ministerial-level summit will take place in Helsinki, and it is our duty to ensure that this meeting does not become Super-Yalta 2.

Therefore, I believe that the discussion that will unfold today at the [Crimea Global] conference should help politicians, experts, and journalists navigate the world of propaganda and fakes that dominate to this day. 

Thank you very much."

Ukraine must act alone to deprive Russia of oil revenue

From UNIAN:

"An effective strategy: no oil, no money 

Petro Oleshchuk, 11/17/25 

One of the latest hot topics in the media space is the horrific "betrayal" from a Bild article by the renowned Julian Röpke about Ukraine's "strategic defeat." To me, this is an example of "quality propaganda." That is, propaganda that conceals the author's desired message behind numerous, entirely legitimate points. While pointing to the legitimate problems facing the Ukrainian army and state, Röpke takes a rather strange tack. He claims that one of the problems is the waste of resources on long-range drones, "the effectiveness of which is overestimated." 

It's especially interesting to read all this against the backdrop of one of Ukraine's most successful operations against Russian oil exports. The SBU and the Security and Defense Forces struck the port of Novorossiysk, Russia's second-largest oil export hub. The results of this operation are already well known: the port virtually ceased operations, 2% of global oil transit capacity was destroyed, and global prices immediately responded. 

Several points are illustrative. Ukrainian drones "took out" a Russian S-400 air defense system, and then Ukrainian missiles "took out" a Russian terminal. In other words, all of this was accomplished using purely Ukrainian resources, beyond the control of any external "partners." 

And what's done once can be done a second time, and a third, and so on. It's clear that the Russians will fix everything. But if after that, another attack occurs, a third time, and so on, it will block oil exports through the Black Sea. Ukraine can do this. And that's exactly what it has demonstrated. 

And this is a story about excess profits, money for war, and so on. And here we come to the Ukrainian, European, and American understandings of the Russian-Ukrainian war, which, as experience shows, differ significantly. 

Was it possible to "remove" Russian refineries and terminals from 2022? Obviously, it would have been possible. But at that time, Ukraine didn't have the resources of its own. Its "Western partners" had them, but they weren't even willing to discuss it. 

For the "partners," the Russian-Ukrainian war was a means of weakening Russia and forcing it into new agreements and concessions at the hands of Ukraine. Ukrainians were to die on the front lines, holding back the Russian invasion, the Russians were to spend more and more resources, and, eventually, all of this had to end somewhere, somehow, after which there would be a new "reset" with the Russians... No one particularly cared what would happen to Ukraine. 

The main thing is not to give Ukraine too much leverage, because, God forbid, the Russians win. And then what? The collapse of the empire, a "geopolitical catastrophe," the fate of the nuclear arsenal... No, better to let them exhaust each other, for which purpose Ukraine will be provided limited aid. Limited in quantity, range, and capabilities. And most importantly, all this should not affect Russian oil exports...

Clearly, a real, rather than ostensible, disruption of Russian oil exports in 2022 would have created conditions for Russia to seek a way out of the war, despite the wishes of the Russian bunker psychopath. But this clearly wasn't part of the "Western partners'" plans. And it still isn't. 

The fact that Ukraine can effectively influence the global oil market clearly infuriates many in the West. For them, this is far more unpleasant than any Russian crimes, terrorist attacks, or genocide. Only a few states, geographically close to the Russian monster, take a different stance. Those further away continue their "cunning games" and manipulations. The goal is to weaken the Russians at the expense of the Ukrainians, and then "make friends" with Russia again on favorable terms, without incurring any risks in the form of fluctuating oil prices. In other words, Ukraine must return to the "rules of the game established by its partners," which, ultimately, should lead to capitulation and a "reset in relations" with the Russians. Indeed, only the lazy aren't talking about this "reset" now.

At the same time, it's clear that Ukraine must play by its own rules, not someone else's. It's simple: the only reason the Russians can continue their active aggression against Ukraine is that they still have a ton of money, mostly from oil, for which they have few export routes."

Russia killed the widow of the first Chernobyl victim

From Kyivpost, collage from UNIAN:

'A new tragedy caused once again by the Kremlin' — Widow of Chornobyl's first victim killed by Russian attack on Kyiv 39 years later

November 15, 2025 

 

(Updated:  November 16, 2025 1:29 pm)

 

by Sony Bandouil

  

Nataliia Khodemchuk, widow of Valerii Khodemchuk, the first victim of the 1986 Chornobyl disaster, died in Kyiv after suffering severe injuries in a mass overnight Russian attack on Nov. 14–15.

The State Agency for Exclusion Zone Management said Khodemchuk, 73, was critically wounded when a drone struck a residential building in the Troieshchyna district, completely burning her apartment.

She was taken to the Burn Center near the Chernihivska metro station, but doctors were unable to save her life.

Khodemchuk's death brings the total number of people killed in the Nov. 14 missile and drone attack on Kyiv to seven, with at least 36 others injured and damage reported across nine districts of the capital.

President Volodymyr Zelensky commented on Khodemchuk's death in a post on X on Nov. 15, calling it "a new tragedy caused once again by the Kremlin."

"Ukrainians who survived Chornobyl, who helped rebuild the country after that disaster, are once again facing danger — the terror of an aggressor state," Zelensky said.

"Ukraine needs support that saves lives: more air defense systems, more protective capabilities, and greater resolve from our partners. Only this can stop further Russian terror and give Ukrainian families the basic right to safety in their own homes."

The Chornobyl nuclear accident occurred on April 26, 1986, when Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union. The accident remains the most devastating nuclear disaster in the history of nuclear energy production in terms of civilian casualties to date.

Valerii Khodemchuk was immediately killed in the initial blast and is commemorated as the first victim of the disaster. His body was never found. A monument to Khodemchuk is built into the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant sarcophagus.

Nataliia Khodemchuk had spent many years preserving the memory of her husband, regularly visiting the Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant, the memorial dedicated to him, and his symbolic grave at Mytyn Cemetery.

The couple raised two children, and Khodemchuk leaves behind grandchildren. She left her family with photographs, stories, and recollections connected to the Chornobyl tragedy and the anniversary projects she took part in.

The World Health Organization estimates that approximately 4,000 people have died since the Chornobyl disaster due to acute radiation symptoms, thyroid cancer, or radiation-induced leukemia."

Why Russia keeps terrorizing Ukrainian civilians

From the Independent:

"Inside Putin’s campaign of terror in Kyiv: Why Russia keeps bombarding the capital 

Russia has amplified its attacks on Ukraine despite insistence it is open to peace talks

James C. Reynolds & Steffie Banatvala,

 

14 November 2025

Russia launched a blistering assault on Ukraine overnight, killing at least six people and injuring 35. Some 430 drones and 18 missiles targeted the country, Ukraine’s president said, calling the strikes a deliberate and calculated attack “aimed at causing maximum harm to people and civilian infrastructure”.

Ukraine’s air force said most of the drones and missiles were shot down, but officials said falling debris and fires damaged high-rise apartments, a school, a medical facility and administrative buildings across nine districts in the city of about three million.

"At that moment you don't know what to do first: save yourself, your child, or run to help people, because so many people were screaming and needed help," said Anastasia, 29, whose apartment block was hit.

The attacks came just two days after Russia’s foreign ministry indicated it was ready to resume direct talks with Ukraine on ending the war in Istanbul. An official told TASS the “ball is in Ukraine’s court”.

Russia continues to escalate its strikes on Ukraine while coordinating its messaging to present a show of good faith to the United States. Nearly four years since the invasion, the Kremlin maintains its maximalist designs on Ukraine...

Russia has waged a devastating aerial campaign against Ukraine since its all-out invasion of its neighbour nearly four years ago. US-led diplomatic efforts this year to stop the fighting have so far come to nothing...

Mariia Kalchenko said it was a miracle she survived after her building was hit. "I didn't hear anything, I just realised that my hair was on fire," the 46-year-old volunteer rescue dog handler said.

In the Odesa region, Russian drones struck a busy street on market day in Chornomorsk, killing two people and injuring 11 others, including a 19-month-old girl, regional military administration chief Oleh Kiper said.

Moscow denies targeting civilian areas, with the Russian Defense Ministry saying Friday it carried out an overnight strike on Ukraine's "military-industrial and energy facilities."

Analysts nevertheless accuse Russia of deliberately targeting civilian infrastructure in order to wound morale.

Natia Seskuria, an associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), said that the “systematic” targeting of civilian infrastructure was a “central element” of Russia’s strategy, “designed to terrorise the Ukrainian population and erode public morale”.

“The underlying calculation is that a war-weary society subjected to sustained attacks might exert pressure on the government to accept almost any settlement that promises an end to hostilities,” she told The Independent.

“Thus far, however, this strategy has proven ineffective, as Ukrainians have demonstrated remarkable resilience and determination in the face of ongoing aggression.”...

Keir Giles, a fellow of the Russia and Eurasia programme at Chatham House, told The Independent that Moscow’s attacks are designed to “cause the maximum possible misery and suffering among the civilian population”.

“That’s the principle we saw applied in Syria, in Chechnya and in countless others of Moscow’s wars dating back decades and centuries,” he said.

Mr Giles said Ukraine was “the victim of Russia’s attempts to demoralise its victims through inhumanity.

“That’s the reason for attacks on maternity hospitals, and nurseries, targeting the most vulnerable in society, as well as for the systematic torture and starvation of Ukrainian military and civilian captives – not for any objective purpose other than deliberate and demonstrative cruelty.”

These attacks continue despite Russia’s insistence that it is open to talks moving towards a ceasefire..." 

 

 

 

 

 

Defending your city is defending your own home

This post is based on Obozrevatel from Nov 14, 2025.

The man on the photo is Serhiy Vlasenko (35), a first responder in Kyiv, Ukraine. In the early morning of Nov 14, he was summoned to extinguish a fire in an apartment building after a massive Russian attack. It turned out that the burning apartment was his own home. Happily, residents had run to the shelters in time; but as you can see, the home, for all intends and purposes, does not exist anymore.

Grozev: Many Western politicians are Russia's useful idiots, and we journalists have to find proofs because prosecutors don't do their job

Translating from the Faktor:

"Hristo Grozev: Russian FSB uses politicians - useful idiots who go to Russia

14 November, 2025 

An excerpt from an interview with Bulgarian investigative journalist Hristo Grozev for UA. 

 

– How big is the scale of the FSB’s influence on European politicians? Is this at the level of some deputies, or does it go higher? So you and your colleagues from “Insider” are exposing this agent network — how far have they managed to get? 

 

– It can be said that we did not expect the FSB to have such a wide agent network, because this is not the service that should deal with this. This is a job for the SVR, a job for the GRU. The FSB is typically supposed to deal only with counterintelligence activities on the territory of Russia — to catch spies. And they have this fifth service, which, as an exception, has the right to deal with the former countries of the Soviet Union. It was this service that was given a mandate to deal with the near abroad during the FSB reforms. But, like any structure that exists without any control, that draws up its own budgets and wants to increase its own importance and relevance, and also to receive more money, the FSB quickly decided to expand the scope of its powers. And the fifth service began to deal not only with the near abroad, but also with the distant abroad.

 

They, of course, find all sorts of tricks to get such a mandate. For example, in the investigation we published about how the fifth service of the FSB was supervising deputies from the right-wing party in Germany — “Alternative for Germany”. What did they do? They found a Ukrainian whom they had recruited back in 2014-2015 — it’s Vladimir Serge, who appears quite often, at least until recently, on propaganda channels in Russia. And because he had German citizenship, it was he who became the right recruiter of deputies from the “Alternative for Germany” for the FSB. They find such tricks. And one of the tricks they also use — to invite or organize visits to Russia, to Crimea or to Donbas for such “useful idiots” from Western Europe, many of whom are politicians from far-right or far-left parties. And during their visits to Russia, they recruit them, and then they become their assets. Here are a few examples of how the FSB gets a share of the pie that should normally go to other services.

– Hristo, do we understand correctly that even after the start of the full-scale war, when the rhetoric in the West became quite aggressive towards the Russian government due to Putin’s actions, contacts between FSB curators and their wards from the Western political elite are still continuing? 

 

– Yes, that’s the scariest thing. In 90% of cases, the full-scale invasion of Ukraine did not lead to any awakening among these wards of Western politicians. They continue to come. We see that curators from the 5th service of the FSB invited and drove around the occupied territories about 12 people from Western Europe in July last year. We will also publish all these names. Unfortunately, it cannot be said that people who most likely received money from them — or at least some leverage — have realized that they should not work with them. They continue to do so.

 

– Will there be any real consequences for those involved in your investigations and what awaits them from the point of view of European or international law? Could this be interpreted as espionage or treason? Will there be criminal prosecutions? 

 

 – We hope there will be. And in my experience, all our investigations over the past 10 years have led to consequences, because prosecutors in different countries are ashamed that journalists are revealing and publishing what they should be dealing with. And we will continue to put pressure. 

 

In the case of Tatiana Zhdanok, there is an interesting point in Latvian law - that even if she was a spy until 2016, this does not count as espionage, but if she continued after 2016, it already leads to criminal liability. Therefore, it was important to find out whether she continued to communicate with people from the FSB after 2016. And we were able to prove that at least one communication took place - she asked for money and arranged a meeting. We can already see that those who were previously her ideological supporters in the European Parliament are now avoiding her - she has become unacceptable to them. This is at least some consequence. We can also see that Serge has also become unacceptable - he was even forced to resign from his post in the Bundestag. And a criminal investigation is already underway against him because he lied when obtaining German citizenship - he did not say that he also had Russian. We also published evidence of his Russian passport. So there are consequences. It's just sad that journalists have to deal with this, given that there are prosecutors' offices that receive money for it.

 

– Hristo, tell me, please — I understand that it is not customary to reveal plans and the exact number of people involved in future investigations — but how big is the volume? Should we expect more revelations and activities of the fifth service of the FSB and their colleagues in recruiting Western politicians? Will there be more series? 

 

– Yes, there will be. There will be at least two more series of this series. One will focus on what they did to Ukraine, because they were allocated a budget of billions to be able to recruit enough politicians in Ukraine before the start of the full-scale invasion. We know that they did not succeed, but there were attempts and they spent this money. We will reveal an approximate list of about ten politicians, journalists and, possibly, military personnel with whom they tried to establish contacts and recruit. And regarding Western politicians — the next part will be related to the “useful idiots”, the people who became conduits of Russian propaganda and who were curated by the fifth service. There are many Scandinavians there, many French, many Italians, and there are also Bulgarians — unfortunately. This will be one of the next episodes. 

 

– Hristo, allow me one last question. The popular joke says: “the turnout was botched.” Once you managed to expose the FSB’s plans, will there be consequences within the fifth service itself? Will heads roll, will there be resignations, or will the Russian special services simply not react externally and regroup quietly inside, without any purges? 

 

– Publicly, they will pretend that nothing has changed. They do not like — and Putin does not like — to admit that there were mistakes precisely in the service that is the basis of his legitimacy and popularity. Therefore, on the surface, everything will look great, but underneath — it is not. There will be investigations, there will be dismissals. According to our data, even after our investigations, including the investigation into the poisoning of Alexei Navalny, there were not only dismissals, but also numerous arrests of FSB employees for “the turnout was botched.” Now I think it will be the same."

The extent of political repressions in Russia

From Novaya Gazeta Europe:

""Can you get eight years in prison in Russia for social media posts about Bucha?" the former president of Estonia questioned

Answer: yes, and there are many such sentences. "Novaya Evropa" [Novaya Gazeta Europe - M. M.] recalls them

November 12, 2025 Natalia Glukhova 

Former Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves expressed doubt that anyone could be sent to prison in Russia for posts about Bucha in Ukraine and the actions of the Russian army in that city during the occupation. 

 

 "I doubt anyone got eight years for social media posts about Bucha. But we're used to lies," he wrote in response to a tweet from a Facebook user about two of his acquaintances receiving more than eight years in prison for comments about the occupation of Bucha. 

 

 OVD-Info responded by stating that 13 people had been sentenced to prison terms of eight years or more for media publications, comments, or videos about the war in Ukraine. Six of them were sentenced to prison under the "fake news" article specifically for their comments about Bucha. Another 25 people received such sentences in absentia.

Sergei Davidis, a member of the board of the Memorial Human Rights Center, also compiled a list of people who received prison sentences specifically for social media posts about Bucha. The human rights activist emphasized that this is an incomplete list, as it is not always clear which war crimes were the subject of the prison sentence.

Novaya Evropa recalls who was sentenced to prison terms, and when, for comments and reposts about the Russian army's atrocities in Bucha. 

 

People effectively sentenced to terms of eight years or more

Igor Yakunichev, a resident of the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug and YouTube blogger, was sentenced to 12 years in prison in September 2025 for anti-war publications, including several videos about the killings of civilians in the city of Bucha near Kyiv during the Russian occupation. He went on a hunger strike in pretrial detention. 

Dmitry Ivanov, a programmer and author of the popular Telegram channel "Protest MSU," received eight and a half years in a general regime penal colony, including for publications about crimes committed by Russian troops against civilians in Bucha and Mariupol.

Sergei Mikhailov, an Altai journalist and publisher of the newspaper Listok, was sentenced in August 2024 to eight years in prison for allegedly authorizing the publication of materials about Russian military actions in Ukraine, specifically in Bucha and Mariupol. 

Richard Rose, a resident of Kirov, was sentenced in September 2023 to eight years in prison for posts on VKontakte about the massacres of civilians in Bucha. 

Konstantin Seleznev, a Moscow retiree, was sentenced in January 2025 to eight years in prison for posts on VKontakte demanding that those responsible for the massacres in Bucha be brought to justice. 

Olga Menshikh, a nurse and civil activist, received an eight-year prison sentence in October 2024 for a post claiming that during the five-week occupation of Bucha, Russian troops killed dozens of civilians by shooting random passersby in the streets. 

People effectively sentenced to less than eight years in prison 

Igor Orlovsky, a resident of Krasnoyarsk, was sentenced to seven and a half years in prison in November 2023: security forces identified "fakes" in his comments about the attack on the drama theater in Mariupol, Bucha, and the actions of the Russian army in general. 

Roman Ivanov, a journalist from the Moscow region, was sentenced to seven years in a general regime penal colony in March 2024 for three social media posts about the war in Ukraine, one of which discussed the killing of civilians in Bucha. 

Andrey Lugovoy, an IT specialist and activist from Kaliningrad, was sentenced to six years in prison in September 2024 for a post about Bucha. 

Aleksandr Somryakov, a resident of Krasnodar, was sentenced to six years in prison in July 2023 for posts about the shelling of Ukrainian cities and for calling Russian military violence against Ukrainians in Bucha "a mass slaughter of civilians." 

Ruben Pogosyan, a resident of Karelia, was sentenced to six years in a maximum-security prison colony in April 2024 for five reposts, including those about Russian military crimes in Bucha. 

Sergey Nevorotin, a coach from the Tver region, was sentenced to six years in a minimum-security prison colony in December 2023 for, among other things, publishing videos titled "Bucha after the zombie invasion and mercenaries for money 2022." In September 2024, he was released from prison due to health reasons; he died in January 2025 after a long illness. 

Anna Bazhutova, a Moscow resident, was sentenced to five and a half years in prison in June 2024 for quoting the memories of Bucha residents on her Twitch channel. 

Andrei Etkeev, a resident of the Kirov region, was sentenced in November 2023 to five years in a general regime penal colony for reposting media reports on Odnoklassniki about Russian military crimes, including the killing of civilians in Bucha.

Vasily Melnikov, a resident of the Volgograd region, was sentenced to five years in prison in March 2024 for a comment on VKontakte about the killings of civilians in Bucha. 

 

Yuri Kokhovets, a Moscow resident, was sentenced to five years in prison during an appellate court hearing in September 2024 for participating in an interview with Radio Liberty, in which he discussed, among other things, the killings of civilians in Bucha. He was initially sentenced to forced labor. 

 

Alexander Glushkin, a former security guard at School No. 443 in the Frunzensky District of St. Petersburg, was sentenced to five years in prison in September 2025 for reposting about Bucha. 

 

 Dmitry Prozorov, a resident of Kirov and former security officer, was sentenced to five years in a general regime penal colony in February 2025 for comments about Bucha in the "Typical Kirov" community in 2022.

 

Vsevolod Korolev, a documentary filmmaker from St. Petersburg, was sentenced to three years in prison in March 2024 for reporting on mass killings in Bucha, Borodyanka, and the shelling in Donetsk. 

 

Winter Gregory Marcus Severin, a human rights activist from Cherepovets, was sentenced to three years in a general regime penal colony in January 2024 for commenting on the deaths of civilians in Bucha. 

 

Effectively sentenced to prison but later released

Ilya Yashin, a Russian politician, was sentenced to eight and a half years in a general regime penal colony in December 2022 for a livestream about Bucha. He was released on August 1, 2024, as part of an international prisoner exchange..."

Why negotiations with Putin are futile

From UNIAN:

""It's not working": A diplomat explained why it's futile to hope for negotiations with Putin 

Oleg Davygora, 11/13/25 

Negotiations with Russian leader Vladimir Putin will yield no results – he can only be persuaded by force, not persuasion. This opinion was expressed by diplomat and former Ukrainian Foreign Minister Volodymyr Ohryzko on Kyiv24. 

According to him, dialogue with a state waging a war of annihilation has no practical value. 

"Sometimes I wonder if this is subtle trolling on the part of some of our security partners, including the Americans, or if it's sheer ignorance. Let's imagine Zelenskyy and Putin sitting down at the negotiating table – is that some kind of major victory? Absolutely not," he said. 

The expert also emphasized that even if the Ukrainian and Russian leaders sat down at the same table, it "wouldn't change anything," as Putin cannot be persuaded to stop his aggression. 

"He can only be forced to do what the civilized world wants, not persuaded to please stop committing these atrocities. That won't work," Ohryzko emphasized." 

***

The same thing has been repeatedly pointed out by Israelis and their supporters - that it is to no avail to try to negotiate with people who are out to murder you; but nevertheless, the world keeps pushing both Israel and Ukraine into negotiations with, and concessions to, their genocidal enemies. 

Putin clones his office to hide his location

From Radio Free Europe:

"Where's Putin? How The Kremlin Hides His Location With Three Nearly Identical Offices

• By Yelizaveta Surnacheva, Andrei Soshnikov and Systema

November 11, 2025

In a report aired on October 11, 2020, a Russian state TV journalist breathlessly tells viewers what's in store: excerpts from his interview with President Vladimir Putin and news about the test of a hypersonic missile Moscow has been boasting about, among other things.

"After the interview, more work," the reporter says, repeating the Kremlin narrative that Putin labors nonstop to keep the country safe and strong. A tag in a corner of the screen says "Novo-Ogaryovo" -- the main presidential residence in the Moscow suburbs -- and the footage shows Putin heading for his office door and reaching for the handle.

And that's the giveaway: The placement of the door handle and a few other details reveal the footage was not filmed at Novo-Ogaryovo at all, an RFE/RL investigation has determined.

In fact, it was shot more than 1,500 kilometers to the south in an almost identical office at Bocharov Ruchei, a state residence in Sochi, on the Black Sea coast.

Systema, RFE/RL's Russian investigative unit, found there are not just one but two copies of Putin's office at Novo-Ogaryovo -- one in Sochi and the other at Valdai, roughly halfway between Moscow and St. Petersburg -- and that the Kremlin has been dishonest about the president's location hundreds of times in recent years.

In most cases established by Systema, meetings that ostensibly took place at Novo-Ogaryovo were actually filmed in Sochi or at Valdai, a lakeside town whose forested location Putin has favored since he launched the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which has led to Ukrainian drone attacks on military and industrial targets in Russia.

The investigation points to a highly secretive Kremlin that has misled the public about Putin's location on a regular basis for several years at least. It also adds to questions about the timing of the meetings and talks Putin's administration publicizes.

In an investigative report published in August, Systema revealed that at least five Kremlin meetings that ostensibly took place in April or May were actually filmed months earlier. Putin has continued that ruse this autumn: Since August, the Kremlin has released at least seven old videos of the president's meetings, passing them off as new, Systema found.

Among other methods, Systema made its findings about the three nearly identical offices by closely watching some 700 videos published by Putin's administration or shown on state TV and examining images posted on the Kremlin website.

Journalists also combed thorough reams of material including social media posts and leaked travel records describing plans and actual trips by people on the edges of Putin's entourage, such as security personnel and the state TV journalists who cover him.

The October 2020 report is a simple but stunning example.

In the Novo-Ogaryovo office, the handle on the door near Putin's desk is set slightly lower than a seam that separates wall panels on either side -- a fact that is clear from footage and photos of the room, including images from the company that laid the parquet floor.

But while the handle Putin reaches for as he leaves the office looks the same, it is set slightly higher than the wall seam -- a difference of a few centimeters, but nonetheless unmistakable. And what it means is that the interview was filmed in Sochi, not outside Moscow.

Among other details that reveal discrepancies between the location announced by the Kremlin and the actual location of numerous meetings purportedly held at Novo-Ogaryovo: the patterns on Putin's neckties, the shape of a TV stand, the hue of a tabletop, and the grain of a wooden document tray on the desk.

Systema corroborated findings about Putin's location in video footage by examining travel documents. For example, an August 2020 TV interview that the Kremlin said took place at Novo-Ogaryovo appeared to have actually been filmed in Sochi, judging by details including the door handle.

Sure enough, an e-ticket purchased by a travel agency with ties to the Kremlin and obtained by Systema indicated that the interviewer, Sergei Brilyov, flew from Sochi to Moscow on August 27, the day the interview aired on state television...

Separately, footage filmed in September 2020 was purportedly shot at Novo-Ogaryovo. But in an e-mail seen by Systema, a state TV producer asked a colleague to organize a trip to Sochi for prominent journalist Pavel Zarubin and several other TV crew members at that time.

Zarubin, a co-creator of a weekly news show on state-run Rossia-1 that focuses on Putin, has frequently traveled to Sochi and brought back footage that the Kremlin then represented as having been filmed at Novo-Ogaryovo, Systema found.

A leaked travel document and a short portion of one of Zarubin's shows revealed that a presidential security staffer involved in communications stayed a night in Sochi at a time when footage of Putin purportedly shot at Novo-Ogaryovo, but actually shot at Bocharov Ruchei, was filmed in October 2021.

In addition to the door handle, there are other differences between the office at Novo-Ogaryovo and the one at Bocharov Ruchei. The placement of a seam on the wall behind Putin's back is one; the legs of the TV stand are another..." 

 

 

 

 

 

In the surreal world of Lavrov's statements

From UNIAN:

"Lavrov: The Budapest summit was disrupted by "backroom reports" to Trump

Marta Gichko, 11/13/25 

...Moscow hopes to deter the US from taking actions that could further escalate the war in Ukraine, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated in an interview with the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera...

"We're counting on common sense and Washington to refrain from actions that could escalate the conflict to a new level," Lavrov stated. Furthermore, Lavrov explained why the Budapest summit was abruptly canceled after his conversation with Secretary of State Marco Rubio.  

"Trump received 'undercover (manipulative - UNIAN) reports,' after which the summit with Russia in Budapest did not take place," he stated. The Kremlin minister also noted that US President Donald Trump is "committed to finding a sustainable peaceful solution" and "seeks to understand Russia's position on Ukraine." According to Lavrov, Trump acknowledged that Russia's actions were partly a reaction to NATO expansion near its borders. "This is precisely what President Putin and Russia have been warning about for the past 20 years," he added...

The Russian Foreign Minister also made harsh comments about Europe, accusing it of thwarting peace initiatives: "Europe is sabotaging all peacekeeping efforts, imposing new sanctions, and preparing for a new major European war against Russia." He stated that Russia is ready to resume contacts with European countries only "when the Russophobic frenzy subsides." Lavrov's comments were initially part of an interview with the Italian daily Corriere della Sera. However, according to Reuters, the Italian newspaper declined to publish the interview."

AfD is shame for Germany

From the Politico:

"AfD leader says Putin poses no threat to Germany, warning instead of Poland

November 12, 202

By Nette Nöstlinger

BERLIN — A leader of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party said Russian President Vladimir Putin’s Russia doesn’t pose a threat to his country — but that Poland potentially does.

The comments, which echo Kremlin messaging, come at a time when centrist German politicians are increasingly warning that the AfD is using its rising influence to act as a mouthpiece for Putin inside Germany — a claim AfD leaders strongly deny.

Putin “hasn’t done anything to me,” Tino Chrupalla, the co-leader of the AfD, said on German public television. “I don’t see any danger to Germany from Russia at the moment.”

Chrupalla went on to insist that any country can potentially pose a threat to Germany.

“Take Poland, for example,” Chrupalla said, citing the country’s refusal to extradite a Ukrainian citizen German authorities suspect of sabotaging the Nord Stream gas pipelines in 2022. “Poland can also be a threat to us.”

German centrists are increasingly portraying the AfD as a party that represents Russian interests from inside Germany, with some going so far as to argue the Kremlin is taking advantage of the party’s access to official information for espionage.

Marc Henrichmann, the conservative chairman of the Bundestag’s intelligence oversight committee, said he believes that Russia is doing exactly this.

“Russia is naturally exerting its obvious influence in parliament, especially in the AfD, in order to spy and obtain sensitive information,” Henrichmann recently told German newspaper Handelsblatt. “The AfD is gratefully allowing itself to be used for this betrayal by Putin.”

Chrupalla has forcefully pushed back against those accusations.

“They accuse us of things they can never prove, and I find that perfidious,” he said during the talk show.

Chrupalla’s comments come as AfD leaders are enmeshed in an internal dispute over a group of party politicians who were planning a trip to Russia to attend an international conference of the BRICS countries in Sochi, Russia.

The AfD’s other co-leader, Alice Weidel — who has sought to polish the AfD’s image, rein in some of its most overt pro-Russian politicians and has sought closer relations to the Donald Trump administration in the U.S. — has attempted to stop the politicians from attending, signaling a growing rift inside her party over just how far support for Russia should go.

“We shouldn’t continue like this,” she told reporters in the Bundestag on Tuesday. “We can’t afford it, and we don’t want to.”"

***

Shame on the scum that elects these traitors!

The face of Putin's war

 From UNIAN:

"The ruins of Pokrovsk revealed the true face of Putin's war - WSJ 

Marta Gichko, 12.11.25 

By the time Russian troops outnumbered Ukrainian defenders in Pokrovsk, the city was already in ruins, and bodies littered the streets. This brutal battle demonstrates the Kremlin's true goal: not simply to seize Donbas, but to restore Russia's influence in Ukraine and restore Moscow's status as a great power, writes The Wall Street Journal. 

Despite the efforts of US President Donald Trump, who called on both sides to "stop the killing" and attempted to seek a territorial compromise, the White House peace initiative is stalling. As analysts note, Putin isn't bargaining over territory, but fighting over history, symbols, and the "restoration of the Russian Empire." 

"Trump is trying to solve the problem, but Putin is consulting Peter the Great, Ivan the Terrible, and Catherine the Great on his vision," William Courtney, a senior fellow at Rand and former US ambassador, wryly observed. "He thinks in imperial terms." 

Even before the full-scale invasion, Putin published an essay in which he claimed that Ukrainians and Russians were "one people" and that Ukraine itself was "Lenin's creation." On the eve of the invasion, he reiterated this in an address: 

"For us, Ukraine is not just a neighboring country; it is an integral part of our own history." 

For the Russian leader, who experienced the collapse of the USSR as "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century," the war is an attempt to rewrite history and restore Russia to its role as a power equal to America. 

"Putin is waging this war to reverse the results of the Cold War and restore Russia's status as a great power," explained military analyst Ruslan Pukhov.

Following the meeting between Trump and Putin in Alaska, Russian media portrayed the summit as a symbol of equality between the two superpowers. For the Kremlin, experts say, true success lies not in peace, but in recognition of Russia as a force dictating terms to others..." 

Trump's special relations with Orban

From the Obozrevatel:

"The US is preparing for war, Trump is giving Orbán a "respite," and Russia is setting conditions for ending its aggression against Ukraine. Interview with former Ambassador to the US Shamshur 

Roman Pryadun, 11/12/2025 

Oleh Shamshur, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Ukraine to the United States and France, shared his thoughts... in an exclusive interview with OBOZ.UA. 

- ...Trump's "personal" foreign policy once again revealed itself – a meeting at the White House with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. After which, the American leader, as if from a king's shoulder, announced: sanctions against Budapest will not be imposed for a year. Orbán can safely receive Russian energy resources, despite demanding the opposite from the EU. Yes, there is a caveat: Hungary must also purchase American gas, nuclear fuel, and certain technologies. What does Trump's decision mean for the US? Because it clearly benefits Budapest and Moscow: the oil is flowing, Orbán is happy, and so is Putin. But for Europe, it means a dilution of sanctions pressure. If Trump made an exception for Orbán today, tomorrow he will do the same for someone else he will be pleased with. 

Let's start with the logic of the visit itself. First, Orbán is undoubtedly pleased with the results. Yes, he didn't achieve his "maximum program," but he achieved his goal—the sanctions have been postponed. We'll see what happens in a year, but the fact itself is a political victory for him. 

When explaining the postponement, Trump stated that Hungary had reached a "dead end" and could not act differently. In other words, he effectively vindicated Orbán before Europe. And this already creates a sense of "most favored nation" treatment for Budapest from Washington. 

Next up is nuclear energy. We've already heard about the easing of sanctions that could have blocked the completion of the Hungarian nuclear power plant. However, Orbán has promised to buy American nuclear fuel. How this will be implemented remains to be seen, but Orbán's main goal now is to continue joint projects with Russia.

The political aspect is no less interesting. It's quite possible that Orbán was "whispering" his narratives on Ukraine to Trump. And, judging by some of Trump's statements after the meeting, these whispers fell on fertile ground. There is a certain commonality in their ideas about "settling" the war. It's possible that the topic of the "Budapest meetings" was raised again behind the scenes: the idea of ​​returning to the format that Orbán has long been trying to revive. He certainly brought home something that can be presented as a political victory. And, of course, he has something to report to "friend Volodymyr." After all, Trump seems to regard Orbán not just with understanding, but with a certain reverence.

– As for Russia... 

 Here, everything is clear: the easing of sanctions is "music to Putin's ears," as they say. But for the European Union, this story is another cold shower. Anyone in Brussels who seriously considers strategic autonomy has received further confirmation: Orbán is Moscow's Trojan horse. And that easing the sanctions regime, even as imperfect as it is, is a dangerous game. Trump's showering of compliments on Orbán came as a shock to Europeans. Because it seemed almost like a direct appeal: "Follow Orbán's example." After this, Brussels was once again convinced that Budapest is the problem, and that now there is a "protector" behind it, namely, Trump himself.

- And finally, the United States... 

My subjective opinion is that Trump isn't thrilled about this meeting, but he couldn't avoid it. Preparations dragged on for a long time. Clearly, there were debates within the administration. The tightening of sanctions could have happened at a time when oil prices allowed it with minimal risk to the American market. But despite everything, Trump went along with it not only for political reasons, but also for ideology. He likes Orbán: a conservative, anti-Brussels, "strongman." He's beloved among Trump's base. Therefore, Trump couldn't refuse him. It's telling that a meeting with a seemingly "minor" prime minister turned into an international event. This, in fact, is the main harm – political and symbolic.    

- More broadly, Trump has recently adopted a very active policy toward Moscow's allies. The leaders of five Central Asian states visited the White House for the first time. The Americans have noticeably intensified contacts with Minsk: Lukashenko is releasing hostages, Washington is easing sanctions, and there are promises to further lift restrictions. In some areas—Hungary, Belarus, and Central Asia—the US is actively expanding its influence among countries that were, until recently, in Moscow's orbit. Is this a coincidence or a deliberate strategy? 

As former Trump adviser John Bolton said, "Don't try to understand his foreign policy concept. He doesn't have one." Yes, formally speaking, a meeting with Central Asian leaders might seem like a strategic element. But we must be realistic: Trump's every strategy is a set of ad hoc agreements. He doesn't build systems; he bargains...

As for Belarus, if Trump is truly trying to initiate some kind of dialogue with Lukashenko, then, excuse me, it's complete nonsense. It's unclear why the US needs this. If the idea is to "pull Lukashenko away from Russia," then that's simply ridiculous. It's like back in the Obama era, when some people seriously thought Medvedev could be pulled away from Putin and exploited. Well, that's exactly the same story. Totally unrealistic.

Where could there be any pragmatic calculation here? Lukashenko is making demonstrative gestures—releasing political prisoners (though then immediately jailing others), and Trump will be able to say, "See, I can negotiate even with Belarus." So for him, this is a symbolic demonstration: I'm effective. 

One more thing. This could very well be part of Putin's game. He could very well use the Belarusian channel to push his signals to Trump. Like, "See, even Lukashenko says the same thing as us." And here again, a logical question arises: why do the Americans need this at all? After all, Trump can easily call Putin directly or even send his "emissary" Vitkoff—hugs, smiles, agreements. So, frankly, I don't see a rational explanation for this flirtation with Lukashenko.   

- Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov stated: "We are ready to meet with the Americans again, ready to negotiate an end to the conflict," as he calls it, "in Ukraine." But the "root causes" remain the same: "denazification" and all the rest. And another interesting detail – Anchorage. He says the agreements reached between Trump and Putin must be implemented. And Lavrov quotes: "The Americans assured us during Anchorage that they would ensure that Volodymyr Zelenskyy would not impede the peace process." So, it turns out that Trump allegedly promised them to essentially "break" Ukraine so that it would agree to Russia's terms, and they are waiting for that to happen.

I think, unfortunately, this assumption is not without foundation. Not "break," but at least influence. The US President wants "peace." He always has someone "bad": sometimes Zelensky, sometimes Putin, sometimes the other way around. It's a kind of "Trump swing." Therefore, what Lavrov said—about meetings, about Anchorage—all this shouldn't be dismissed. Obviously, it largely corresponds to what actually happened. Don't forget, after Alaska, Putin effectively "broke" Trump himself—and he emerged from the negotiations convinced that it wasn't simply necessary to stop the war, but to "address the global root causes." This is precisely what the Russians were counting on.  

Why is all this happening again now? We've seen it before: whenever Trump's temper flares or he enters a state of rage, Russia immediately throws something out there. Sometimes it's the idea of ​​mythical "economic projects," sometimes it's a "new bilateral meeting," sometimes it's Dmitriev, who's trying to "gently" test the waters. It's all a classic Russian "layered pie": pressure, a hint, and an attempt to defuse tension. And the effectiveness of this tactic shouldn't be underestimated, especially when it comes to influencing Trump."