❌

Reading view

Trump & the Rrrrussians

Given the vitriol gushing out of corporate media over the purchase of about two weeks’ worth of Russian diesel fuel, we just might be watching the beginning of the endgame in Ukraine.

Join us on Telegram, X, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

By Patrick LAWRENCE

Given the gush of vitriol and condemnation since Oct. 9, when Donald Trump announced his deal to import 5 million metric tons of Russian diesel, roughly 37 million barrels, one would think the president had surrendered the United States’ sovereignty to the Kremlin, or handed over the Ukrainians to the Russian army, or rankly betrayed the Europeans or altogether renounced what we picturesquely call Western civilization.

This is, indeed, what we read daily in the corporate press these days and what we are supposed to think. It is 2016 redux, it seems. Another round of Russiagate may not be far off, given 16 House Democrats have introduced a Prohibit Corrupt Russia Oil Deals Act and 12 senators now attack the diesel accord as “a gift to our adversary.”

If there is one thing essential to recall about those dreary years it is that the wobbly-from-the-first Russiagate edifice, the whole of it, was made of mis– and disinformation, hyperbole, innuendo, extravagant abuses of office and propaganda incessantly disseminated in corporate media.

It was, in short, the Deep State’s attempt to scuttle any effort to advance beyond the poisonous Russophobia it had spent a decade cultivating (taking my date from Vladimir Putin’s era-defining speech to the Munich Security Conference in 2007).

It is the same again as Trump tries once more to end the war in Ukraine and refashion East–West relations, a project the old “MICIMATT”— the military-industrial, congressional, intelligence, media, academic and think tank blob — simply cannot abide.

Let us listen to this new round of rubbish with the recent past in mind.

“Donald Trump, meet Neville Chamberlain.” That is Tom Friedman, writing in The New York Times last week under the headline, “Trump’s Democracy–for–Diesel Deal Shames Us All.”

“When future students search online for ‘sellout,’ ‘appeaser’ or ‘traitor to his country’s core values,’” Friedman elaborates, “their two pictures will come up first, side by side.” There is no matching our Tom when it comes to overdrawn historical reference dressed up as intellectual gravitas.

Harold Meyerson, writing in The American Prospect Tuesday under the headline, “Why Putin Is Now Our Ally,” is unhappy that Americans are not angrier and more contemptuous than they appear to be in response to Trump’s latest démarche to Russia.

“We’ve grown so inured to Trump’s outrages,” he writes, “that his alliance with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s neo–Tsarist imperialist regime hasn’t yet stoked the level of horror and rage it deserves.”

Putin’s neo–Tsarist imperialist regime. We’re back to this, are we?

We’re also back to the good old Trump–Putin “bromance” bit, it seems, as in “Trump’s man-crush on the Russian dictator has been well documented and need not be recounted in all its unctuous detail.”

This bizarre suggestion of homophilia repeats a tiresome trope from the Russiagate years — never in the slightest documented, for the record — and this time comes from Tom Nichols, a neoliberal hack of long standing. Writing Oct. 18 in The Atlantic, Nichols wants us to see matters this way:

“Donald Trump has now abandoned pretense and is openly aiding the Kremlin in its war against a friend and partner of the U.S. The American commander in chief has abandoned the Western order, the most successful — and powerful — security arrangement in human history.”

Are we clear on all this? The corrupt, Nazi-infested regime in Kiev is America’s friend and partner, simple as that.

The Western order as we have it is the finest thing humanity has ever managed, and Donald J. Trump has forsaken this finest-ever order.

All because the Trumpster signed an agreement whereby the United States will purchase, all in, about two weeks’ worth of Russian diesel fuel.

Paranoia strikes deep, as should be plain to all as the imperium proceeds into its self-inflicted decline. Into the pages of The Atlantic it will creep whenever the topic is “Putin’s Russia” (as against “Russia”).

Trump’s ‘Simple’ Decision

How to account for this outpouring of nitwittery from all these pseuds? Why so suddenly does the world seem to be coming to an end? These are our questions.

Trump II has proven disastrously worse than Trump I, to state the obvious. He had a few good ideas the first time around: end the wars of adventure, bring the soldiers home, decommission NATO, a new détente with Moscow.

This time — and you have to credit the Trumpster for this, strange as it is to credit him with anything — he has only one. He still wants to restore relations with Russia to a working order of some kind, and this must begin with ending the war the Biden regime provoked very quickly after Trump was voted out of office.

Trump is a Manhattan property man for whom everything is transactional, we have to remember. Exploring “deals” does not figure at the higher end of statecraft — certainly not given all that is at issue between Russia and the West — but this is a question of method, not purpose. Let us not get lost in the former while losing sight of the latter.

Peaceful, constructive relations with Russia, based on an enduring settlement of benefit to all sides, are a good thing altogether to be welcomed, however often Americans and West Europeans are told any such eventuality would amount to the horror of horrors.

As everyone thinking about this has remarked, Trump’s immediate intent in striking his diesel deal is to get prices down as best he can before the midterm elections and to pretend the price crisis has causes other than the U.S.–Israeli assault on Iran.

I’m for setting the politics aside. A few days’ worth of diesel — all that can possibly arrive from Russian refineries before Nov. 3 — won’t make any difference, and Trump cannot but know this.

My mind goes to a remark Trump made on Truth Social, his digital bullhorn, at the beginning of this week in response to all the shrieking and shouting that followed his Oct. 9 announcement:

“My decision on Russia is a very simple one. I am in the process of negotiating Peace in the war between Russia and Ukraine, and don’t want to do anything that will drive, foolishly, Russia away from the bargaining table.”

It is important to read this together with other things the Trump regime has got up to lately. While the United States is in plausible-denial mode, Kiev reports that it has disrupted some of the early-warning satellite intelligence vital to Ukraine’s defenses.

Elon Musk, apparently after consultation with the White House, has restricted Ukraine’s use of Starshield, the military-grade version of the Starlink communications system.

These are day-to-day lifelines. So is the Prioritized Ukraine Requirement List, the arrangement whereby the United States sells arms to the Europeans, who send them on to Ukraine. To date the volume of shipments through the P.U.R.L. channel has come to $7 billion. Trump is reportedly threatening to end the program.

Atop all this he has suspended implementation of a sanctions bill he signed into law only a month ago. Concurrently, the Witkoff–Kushner duo presented Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian dictator, with a new settlement proposal that reads to me like a condensed version of the very creditable 28–point plan they presented a year ago next month.

Something is afoot, it seems to me. I see a thought-through strategy in all this. I see renewed determination on Trump’s part.

Trump is out of the closet at last — and perfectly accurate — as he asserts that Zelensky is the principal impediment to a settlement accord and, so, should be either removed from office or forced to accept defeat and recognize Russia’s legitimate interests.

Trump’s new push to bring the Ukraine crisis to a close, to be clear on this point, is not a betrayal of the Ukrainian people. It is just the opposite.

There are a lot of reasons to question how far Trump will get either in ending the war or restoring relations with Russia to a livable détente. But if he maintains the present momentum, we may be watching the beginning of the endgame in Ukraine.

This is a “may,” conditional verb required. But it is this prospect that has all the warmongers in the MICIMATT complex in a dither.

Strange it will be if a president so wrong about so much manages to achieve the peace he is after. But maybe the Tom Friedmans and the Tom Nichols and the rest of their kind are useful as a mirror.

Maybe the extent of their panic is a measure of the Trumpster’s chances of success this time around.

  •  

Zelensky 'maybe not such a big humanitarian as Putin,' he quips as Ukraine's relations with Trump unravel

The president made the comment in an interview with ABC News two days after U.S. Envoy Steve Witkoff praised Vladimir Putin as "a humanitarian." Hours later, Russia struck Kyiv with ballistic missiles and cluster munitions.

  •  

In U.S. Gas Talks With Kremlin, Hidden Financing for Alaska Project Emerges

Interviews and documents show a Russian energy giant secretly funded a U.S. firm. The deal has been discussed in talks to end the war in Ukraine.

© Daniel Acker/Bloomberg

Oil drilling rigs in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. The Polar LNG plan called for the company to tap into the giant load of natural gas available in the state’s northern reaches.
  •  

Ukraine now fights two enemies. One is America

Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky (L) looks on during a bilateral meeting with US President Donald Trump on the sidelines of the 81st United Nations General Assembly in New York, on 22 September 2026. (Photo: Brendan SMIALOWSKI / AFP/Eastnews)

On 18 October, President Zelenskyy accused Donald Trump of trying to pressure Ukraine into capitulating to Russia.

Asked by NBC whether Ukraine could win the war without the US, he answered: "Without United States support it's very difficult. But if United States will support Putin, it's historic mistake and big tragedy.... If the United States officially will take the side of Russia, if these two countries will be together, of course we will not prevail and we will not be able to stand."

He said Ukraine hopes Trump will be on its side, or at least "in the middle," and that he will "change his decisions" on Russia, as "it's all mistakes, it will not help us, and it will not help United States." In an interview with NBC's Meet the Press, when asked whether Trump is still an ally of Ukraine, Zelenskyy said: "I hope so." Not a definitive yes, but a weak maybe.

As diplomacy goes, statements do not come much stronger than this. What triggered them?

Probably the sum of all things. We all remember Trump and Vance humiliating Zelenskyy in the White House on 28 February 2025. Trump told the Ukrainian President that he was "gambling with" a third world war. Zelenskyy was told to come back "when he is ready for peace". Most will also remember that the USA enacted the decision to halt its aid to Ukraine across two separate, sweeping actions taken during the first months of the second Trump administration in early 2025. Presently, it is only delivering military aid decided by former President Biden.

Some might have forgotten that Trump called Zelenskyy a "dictator without elections," suggested Ukraine started the war, and pushed a "peace plan" whose original 28-point draft gave Russia terms more favorable than what Moscow sought at the 2022 Istanbul talks.

After 640 days in office, Trump's disdain for Ukraine and admiration for Russia seem to grow by the day, and his kakistocracy—government by the least qualified—keeps undermining Ukraine's defense. In less than two weeks:

  • 9 October: the administration imposed new sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC), an institution crucial for holding Putin and the Kremlin accountable for their atrocities in Ukraine.
  • The same day, Trump lifted sanctions on Russian diesel exports, effectively helping fund Russia's wars.
  • 10 October: Trump said of the elected president of a country fighting off Russia's full-scale invasion: "It's time for Ukraine to get a new president."
  • 11 October: Trump declared on Truth Social an "energy ceasefire" between Russia and Ukraine that bound only Ukraine. Zelenskyy said it was "news to him."
  • 14 October: SpaceX restricted Starshield, the classified, military-grade version of Starlink; Reuters reported on 15 October that the order came from the White House, undermining Ukraine's ability to defend itself against Russian jet-powered drones and strike Russian forces in occupied territory.
  • 15 October: the US suspended critical intelligence sharing for three days, Zelenskyy said on 18 October, leaving Ukraine without warnings of Russian ballistic missile launches against its citizens and energy infrastructure.
  • 16 October: two days before they were due to take effect, Trump waived the sanctions, restrictions and tariffs on Russia required by the Graham Act, calling it in the US national interest, and put nearly all of the congressional sanctions package on hold.
  • 18 October: the administration reportedly proposed that Europe resume buying Russian gas to help "entice Russia to end the war in Ukraine." Europe balked.
  • 19 October: it emerged that the US is delaying Patriots procured by allies under NATO's Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL), leaving Ukraine short of defenses against Russian ballistic missiles. Ukrainian officials say the shipment is stalled because Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has not signed the transfer documents on his desk.
  • 19 October: Trump said that "Xi Jinping has been very fair on Ukraine. He hasn't been very much involved. Same with Russia. They haven't been nearly what they could've been," ignoring that Russia is waging an unjust, unprovoked and genocidal war against Ukraine.
  • The same day, Trump claimed Zelenskyy targets Russian refineries knowing the attacks are seriously hurting world diesel markets, including in the US, and that he "doesn't want to end this war, and probably never did."
  • Talking to reporters outside the White House, Trump said Zelenskyy should get someone else to negotiate on Ukraine's behalf, and that he is willing to meet Putin and Xi to discuss the war, without the Ukrainian president. Kyiv fears Washington might decide Ukraine's future without it.
  • 20 October: Vice President JD Vance said Ukraine should not join NATO and should stop striking Russian energy. He refused to call Ukraine a US "ally," downgrading it to a "partner": "We don't have a formal alliance... they're not in NATO... we're going to work together on some things, but also we're going to be opposite on some things, too."
  • 21 October: after four and a half years of genocidal full-scale war and amid persistent Russian air strikes on Ukrainians, US special envoy Steve Witkoff praised Putin as a "humanitarian," echoing Trump's claim that Russia had restrained itself.
  • The same day, Trump said the end of the war is closer than ever. He may step up efforts to coerce Ukraine into a deal by the end of 2026, The Atlantic reports, with Ukraine's prospects shaped by the US midterms and possible Trump-Putin-Xi talks in November.

Less than two weeks, summarized.

USA EU Van Der Leyen Trump
Explore further

Europe now faces two strategic adversaries: Russia and the United States

This is how Trump's administration talks about, and acts towards, the victim of an unjustified, unprovoked and horrendous war. Trump's USA (TUSA) is siding with autocracy against democracy and the rules-based world order. It talks about America's former allies in a similar manner: derogatory and disrespectful. None of the above is the word or deed of an ally.

When one chooses to see the world as it is, Zelenskyy's statements become both necessary and important. This is not only about Ukraine's self-respect and survival. Once we acknowledge the realities—that Europe is in an undeclared war with Russia at a moment when the USA has chosen to become a strategic adversary—we stand better prepared to defend ourselves: to accept that our present security system does not work and new solutions are urgently needed, and that diplomacy alone does not work and military force is essential to protect freedom, democracy and international law.

More than a year ago, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz warned that Europe is "not at war, but no longer at peace either" with Russia. Other heads of state have echoed him. NATO has since shifted from a peacetime alliance to one focused on urgent wartime readiness. Unfortunately, the process started years too late.

By seeing the world as it is, European leaders might reach the long-overdue conclusion that Russia's wars in Ukraine and Europe can only be stopped by a demonstration of strength: an alliance willing and capable of using military force to stop Russia. The alliance Russia fears isn't NATO. It's a coalition that will actually fight.

zelenskyy in france
Explore further

The alliance Russia fears isn’t NATO. It’s a coalition that will actually fight.

European courage and action are urgently needed. Ukraine is exposed to a two-front war, defending itself against both Russia and TUSA, and their attacks are increasing in scale and scope. Both Moscow and Washington want to end the war this year and are ramping up their assaults on Ukraine accordingly.

Irrespective of one's view of Ukraine, it is commonly understood that it is stopping Russia from advancing and increasing its border with NATO and the EU. Ukraine is defending European values and principles, ensuring the rest of us can continue living in something resembling peace. The consequences of its defeat would be truly devastating.

There can be no European strategic autonomy without Ukraine. There can be no European security and stability without Ukraine. Europe can never become a Great Power without Ukraine. And neither Russia nor the USA want Europe to achieve any of the above.

It is time to act according to the present-day realities and face down Europe's two strategic adversaries. In the worst case, Ukraine's destiny might be decided in November already.

Hans Petter Midttun
Hans Petter Midttun, independent analyst on hybrid warfare, Non-Resident Fellow at the Centre for Defense Strategies, board member of the Ukrainian Institute for Security and Law of the Sea, former Defense Attaché of Norway to Ukraine, and officer (R) of the Norwegian Armed Forces. 

Editor's note. The opinions expressed in our Opinion section belong to their authors. Euromaidan Press' editorial team may or may not share them.

Submit an opinion to Euromaidan Press

  •  
❌