Ukraine « nuclear-news

Report: Ukraine Fires British Storm Shadow Missiles Into Russia

The US closed its embassy in Kyiv citing ‘specific information of a potential significant air attack,’ signaling the US expects a Russian escalation

by Dave DeCamp November 20, 2024, https://news.antiwar.com/2024/11/20/report-ukraine-fires-british-storm-shadow-missiles-into-russia/

Ukraine fired at least 10 British-provided Storm Shadow missiles into Russia’s Kursk Oblast, The Wall Street Journal and several other media outlets reported on Wednesday.

Ukraine has used the Storm Shadow missiles, which have a range of up to 155 miles, in strikes on Crimea, but Wednesday’s attack, which targeted the Kursk Oblast, marks the first time Ukrainian forces fired them into the Russian mainland, another major escalation of the proxy war. So far, Russia hasn’t confirmed the use of Storm Shadows.

The US and the UK reportedly authorized Ukraine’s use of the Storm Shadows in strikes on Russian territory after President Biden gave the green light for Ukraine to use the ATACMS, US-made missiles with a range of about 190 miles. Ukraine launched ATACMS into Russia for the first time on Tuesday.

Both the Storm Shadows and ATACMS require intelligence from Western countries for Ukraine to fire them, meaning the US and NATO are now directly supporting long-range strikes on Russian territory. Earlier this year, a German military leak revealed British soldiers are “on the ground” in Ukraine helping Ukrainian forces fire Storm Shadows.

Moscow has made clear that NATO-supported long-range strikes inside Russia risk nuclear war. On Tuesday, in response to Biden authorizing the ATACMS strikes, Russian President Vladimir Putin formally updated Russia’s nuclear doctrine, which now considers an attack by a non-nuclear armed state that’s supported by a nuclear-armed power as a joint attack.

The US said on Wednesday that it was closing down its embassy in the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv, citing “specific information of a potential significant air attack,” signaling Washington is expecting Russia to escalate in response to the long-range strikes. Several other countries, including Italy and Greece, followed the US lead and shuttered their embassies.

While the long-range strikes risk nuclear escalation, US officials have admitted the capability is not expected to alter the course of the war. Ukraine only has a limited supply of the ATACMS and Storm Shadows.

November 23, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

On Way Out, Reckless Biden Allows Deep Russia Strikes

Biden staked his legacy on Ukraine. He was involved in the 2014 coup, in allegedly shady practices there with his son and then in provoking Russia to invade in 2022. He foolishly believed he would prevail in bringing down Putin with an economic, information and proxy ground war. [See: Biden Confirms Why the US Needed This War]

All three are now decisively lost as the U.S. — still under Biden — prepares for the end game. Biden’s only face saver is for Ukraine to get back some of its lost territory by trading for it with Russian territory it seized in Kursk this summer.

November 17, 2024 By Joe Lauria, Consortium News, https://consortiumnews.com/2024/11/17/on-way-out-reckless-biden-allows-deep-russia-strikes/

With his party decisively beat at the polls, the rejected president is gambling with regional security to preserve his ‘legacy’ and to saddle the incoming president, who wants to end the war, with a major new crisis, writes Joe Lauria.

As a parting shot to incoming U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, the defeated Joe Biden has defied the Pentagon by risking European and U.S. security with his decision announced Sunday to allow Ukraine to fire U.S. long-range missiles into Russian territory.

Just two months ago, in September, Biden had bowed to the realists in the Pentagon to oppose allowing long-range British Storm Shadow missiles from being fired by Ukraine deep into Russia out of fear it would lead to a direct NATO-Russia military confrontation with all that that entails.

Putin warned at the time in that British soldiers on the ground in Ukraine launching the British missiles into Russia with U.S. geostrategic support “will mean that NATO countries — the United States and European countries — are at war with Russia. And if this is the case, then, bearing in mind the change in the essence of the conflict, we will make appropriate decisions in response to the threats that will be posed to us.”

That was a clear warning that British and U.S. targets could be hit. Biden thus wisely backed off.

It was the second time that Biden had sided with the Pentagon against the neocons in his administration when it came to avoiding direct war with Russia.

The first time was in March 2022 when his neocon Secretary of State Antony Blinken stepped out of line to announce that the U.S. would give NATO-member Poland a “green light” to send Mig-29 fighter jets to Ukraine to enforce a no-fly zone against Russian aircraft.

Members of Congress and the media then piled the pressure on Biden to approve it until cooler heads at the U.S. Defense Department, the greatest purveyor of violence in history, stepped in to stop it.

Biden ultimately sided with the Pentagon, and he couldn’t be more explicit why. He opposed a NATO no-fly zone over Ukraine fighting Russian aircraft, he said, because “that’s called World War III, okay? Let’s get it straight here, guys. We will not fight the third world war in Ukraine.”

U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin at the time backed him up, saying:

“President Biden’s been clear that U.S. troops won’t fight Russia in Ukraine, and if you establish a no-fly zone, certainly in order to enforce that no-fly zone, you’ll have to engage Russian aircraft. And again, that would put us at war with Russia.”

But now Biden has reversed himself on his sensible positions and is defying the Pentagon to roll the dice that Russia’s warnings, repeated on Monday by Putin’s spokesman, won’t lead to nuclear conflict.

While he previously would not even authorize British long-range missile attacks into Russia in September, let alone U.S. ATACMS, on Sunday he authorized the ATACMS, risking Russia taking direct action against U.S. targets.

So what changed Biden’s addled mind?

An Undemocratic Democratic System

First, the undemocratic U.S. electoral system gave Biden the opportunity. His party was voted out of office on Nov. 5, but though the demos rejected Democrats in the White House they get to hang on in power for another 11 weeks, enough time to do considerable mischief to tie up the incoming administration that the people chose. (In a parliamentary system the new prime minister takes office on the next day and names the new cabinet well in advance of the election).

After one-term president George H.W. Bush lost to Bill Clinton in the 1992 election, Bush used those 11 weeks to invade Somalia, saddling Clinton with a foreign policy crisis that would bog him down and distract him from his agenda.

What’s happening now is something similar. Biden wants to undermine Trump’s effort to end the Ukraine war. The incoming vice president has floated the idea of Russia holding on to territory it has won in exchange for peace.

So he is authorizing U.S. soldiers to operate ATACMS missiles from Ukraine to beat back a 50,000-man Russian force seeking to take back all of that Russian territory. Part of that force, according to the Pentagon spokesman, is a contingent of at least 10,000 North Korean troops invited by Moscow, thus operating legally on pre-war Russian territory.

Yet the presence of these North Koreans has sent the Biden administration and its allied media into paroxysms of near insanity. The New York Times reported on Sunday:

“Officials said Mr. Biden was persuaded to make the change in part by the sheer audacity of Russia’s decision to throw North Korean troops at Ukrainian lines. He was also swayed, they said, by concerns that the Russian assault force would be able to overwhelm Ukrainian troops in Kursk if they were not allowed to defend themselves with long-range weapons.”

It is not like Biden doesn’t know the potentially grave consequences he is recklessly unleashing. He was already warned about the no-fly zone and said “that’s called World War III, okay?” He was then warned by the Pentagon against allowing the British missiles and acted like a responsible statesman.

But now, when it comes to his precious legacy, he doesn’t appear to give a damn about anything else. He was deprived of a second term (by traitors within his own party he no doubt thinks) and he will risk a NATO-Russia war to avoid the taint of utter defeat in Ukraine.

This is what he’s ignoring, according to the Times:

“Some of Mr. Biden’s advisers had seized on a recent U.S. intelligence assessment that warned that Mr. Putin could respond to the use of long-range ATACMS on Russian soil by directing the Russian military or its spy agencies to retaliate, potentially with lethal force, against the United States and its European allies.

The assessment warned of several possible Russian responses that included stepped-up acts of arson and sabotage targeting facilities in Europe, as well as potentially lethal attacks on U.S. and European military bases.”

Where it goes from there, nobody knows. Thanks, Joe.

November 22, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, Ukraine, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

High-Precision, Long-Range NATO Missiles Against Russia: Why Now?

Joe Quinn, Sott.net, Wed, 20 Nov 2024, https://www.sott.net/article/496207-High-Precision-Long-Range-NATO-Missiles-Against-Russia-Why-Now

Russia announced a change to its nuclear doctrine several months ago, where it can now respond with nuclear weapons to a non-nuclear attack on Russia by an enemy, either directly from enemy territory or from the territory of a third party. A notable caveat however is that such a response would only occur in the event that the attack “threatened the very existence of the Russian state”.

The changes were officially signed into law yesterday with the wording relevant to the conflict in Ukraine being “where the aggression creates a critical threat for the sovereignty and/or territorial integrity [of Belarus or the Russian Federation].

In this context, the Russians have also said that the use of nuclear weapons would also be permissible if an enemy attacked Russian forces in the context of the SMO in a way that definitively threatened the achievement of the objectives of the SMO.

In Sept. Putin said that NATO’s plan to allow Ukraine to use longer range Western precision weapons against Russian targets inside Russia would be evidence of direct NATO involvement in a war against Russia. And that Russia would respond appropriately.

Three days ago, “Biden” approved the use of longer range Western precision weapons against Russian targets inside Russia.

Two days ago, Ukraine fired 5 US-made longer range Western precision weapons (supersonic ATACMS ballistic missiles) at a military base 130kms into Southern Russia. According to the Russians, all 5 missiles were shot down, with one falling on the periphery of the missile base, starting a fire but doing no material or personnel damage.
While many have interpreted this attack as fulfilling the requirements for a Russian nuclear response, that is obviously not the case, for four reasons:

1) The attack did not, in any way, threaten the very existence of the Russian state

2) The attack did not, in any way, threaten the achievement of the objectives of the SMO.

3) The Biden admin has less than 2 months left in power.

4) Trump and his incoming team have made no secret of their intention to negotiate a near-future settlement to end the war in Ukraine.

What then, at this late stage, was the point in the ‘Biden’ admin authorizing the use of long range precision weapons against Russia and why do EU leaders continue to make repeated reference to EU citizens needing to prepare for a potential “war with Russia” and sending EU/NATO military forces to Ukraine, if there’s a reasonable chance of a peaceful settlement of the conflict under the Trump admin?

The problem is how any ‘settlement’ would play out.

First (see map) Russia will not settle for anything less than the four regions it has already incorporated into its territory (including the “demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine”). In addition, a demilitarized buffer zone (of some distance) would be necessary extending out from these regions and away from the Russian and Belarusian borders to the North.

NATO and EU nations would, undoubtedly, insist on militarily occupying (“peacekeepers”) the rest of Ukraine beyond these zones, but such a presence would create an uneasy, and potentially dangerous, peace for some time to come. Hence the talk of sending their military forces to Ukraine and possible/eventual ‘war with Russia’.

Of note in this respect is yesterday’s announcement that the ‘Biden’ admin will begin sending anti-personnel landmines to Ukraine to “blunt the advancement of Russian troops”. Interestingly, the mines are said to be “nonpersistent” design, meaning they become inactive within weeks of deployment. Why now? Russian troops have been advancing, in one form or another, for most of the war. Why would NATO/Ukraine want to deploy anti-personnel mines that last for only a few weeks?

Much like the use of precision long-range weapons, the use of “non-persistent” anti-personnel mines now is more likely to be part of a strategy for a negotiation settlement, than to effect any significant change on the current battlefield.

The point of authorizing (and using) both NATO long range precision weapons against Russia and anti-personnel mines now is in preparation for expected negotiations after Jan 6th.

By using these weapons and calling Russia’s ‘nuclear bluff’, (while also being careful not to push too far) NATO expects that Russia will be forced to accept them as a de facto (rather than theoretical) part of Ukraine/NATO’s arsenal against Russia, and thereby provide NATO with a more favorable basis for negotiations.

November 21, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Report: Biden Allows Ukraine To Strike Russia With Long-Range US Missiles

November 18, 2024 , By Dave DeCamp / Antiwar.com, https://news.antiwar.com/2024/11/17/report-biden-allows-ukraine-to-strike-russia-with-long-range-us-missiles/

The New York Times reported on Sunday that President Biden had authorized Ukraine’s use of long-range US-provided missiles in strikes on Russian territory, an escalation Moscow has made clear risks nuclear war.

US officials told the paper that Ukraine can now use Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS), which have a range of up to 190 miles, to strike Russian territory. The ATACMS are fired by US-made multiple rocket launch systems, including the HIMARS. Ukraine can only fire the HIMARS with coordinates provided by or confirmed by the US and its allies, meaning the US will now directly support strikes deep inside Russia.

The US officials said the ATACMS will likely initially be used to hit Russian troops fighting against Ukrainian forces in Russia’s Kursk Oblast. Ukraine and the US have also said North Korean troops are deployed in Kursk. The US has said the North Korean troops are engaged in combat, but that hasn’t been confirmed by Moscow.

Earlier this year, President Biden gave Ukraine the greenlight to strike Russian border regions with US-provided weapons, including shorter-range rockets fired by the HIMARS. A few months later, Ukraine launched its invasion of Kursk, and Ukrainian officials began pushing hard for the US to support longer-range strikes inside Russia.

In response to those calls and comments from Western officials supporting the idea, Russian President Vladimir Putin said if NATO supported long-range strikes in Russia, it would put the Western military alliance “at war with Russia.”

Putin then ordered changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine that lowered the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons. Under the new doctrine, an attack on Russia by a non-nuclear armed state that was supported by a nuclear power will be considered a joint attack.

The Kremlin said the changes to the nuclear doctrine were meant as a message to the West. “This is a message that warns these countries of the consequences should they participate in an attack on our country by various means, not necessarily nuclear,” said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.

The US appeared to back down on supporting long-range strikes in Russia, but now the Biden administration is looking to escalate the proxy war as much as possible for its last few months in power. President-elect Donald Trump campaigned on ending the proxy war, and the Biden team and officials in Ukraine fear he will just do that. However, some of Trump’s cabinet picks favor escalation in Ukraine, including his National Security Advisor, Rep. Mike Waltz (R-FL).

In a recent interview with NPR, Waltz was asked how Trump could end the war, and he suggested an escalation of sanctions and supporting long-range strikes in Russia.

“First and foremost, you would enforce the actual energy sanctions on Russia. Russia is essentially a gas station with nukes. Putin is selling more oil and gas now than he did prewar through China and Russia. And you couple that with unleashing our energy, lifting our LNG ban, and his economy and his war machine will dry up very quickly,” Waltz said. “So I think that will get Putin to the table. We have leverage, like taking the handcuffs off of the long-range weapons we provided Ukraine as well. And then, of course, I think we have plenty of leverage with Zelensky to get them to the table.”

November 20, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Ukraine, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Power Out at Ukraine Atomic Plants After Russian Missile Strikes

By Jonathan Tirone, November 17, 2024,
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/investing/2024/11/17/power-out-at-ukraine-atomic-plants-after-russian-missile-strikes/

(Bloomberg) — Ukraine powered down most of the remaining operational nuclear reactors under its control following a massive overnight Russian missile and drone attack.

Staff from the International Atomic Energy Agency stationed at plants in Ukraine reported that only two of nine reactors were generating electricity at full capacity on Sunday. Generation was dialed down to between 40% and 90% of capacity at the other units, according to a statement from the UN’s nuclear watchdog.

“The country’s energy infrastructure is extremely vulnerable, directly impacting nuclear safety and security,” said IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi. He added that inspectors are evaluating he full extent of the damage.

Russia launched one of its largest missile barrages against Ukraine on Sunday as the full-scale invasion of its neighbor nears the 1,000-day mark. About 120 cruise, ballistic and aeroballistic missiles and 90 drones were fired by Kremlin forces operating from bomber jets and ships, Ukraine’s air force said.

An IAEA team based at the Khmelnytskyy Nuclear Power Plant reported hearing a loud explosion, while others stationed at the Rivne site reported that high-voltage power lines were unavailable. Both facilities are in western Ukraine.

Ukraine has warned that air strikes against critical power substations could trigger an emergency at one of the three operating nuclear power plants still under Kyiv’s control.

Substations maintain stability by regulating high-voltage transmission on power grids. Unlike fossil fuel or renewable plants, nuclear generation needs a constant flow of electricity to keep safety systems running. Without it, fuel inside a reactor’s core risks overheating, potentially resulting in a dangerous release of radiation.

Ukraine has thousands of electricity substations. But at stake are ten crucial nodes linked to atomic power plants, whose destruction could plunge the country into darkness and provoke a radiological emergency, Ukraine’s Energy Minister German Galushchenko told Bloomberg News in a September interview.

“The IAEA teams visited seven substations – located outside the nuclear power plants across the country – in September and October to assess the damage from attacks in August, and will assess whether further visits are required following today’s military activities,” Grossi said on Sunday.

November 19, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | safety, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Biden Ramps Up Nuclear Brinkmanship On His Way Out The Door

Caitlin Johnstone, Nov 18, 2024, https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/biden-ramps-up-nuclear-brinkmanship?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=151801494&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

The New York Times reports that the Biden administration has authorized Ukraine to use US-supplied long-range missiles to strike Russian and North Korean military targets inside Russia — yet another dangerous escalation of nuclear brinkmanship in this horrific proxy war.

The Times correctly notes that authorizing Ukraine to use ATACMS, which have a range of about 190 miles, has long been a contentious issue in the Biden administration for fear of provoking military retaliations against the US from Russia. This reckless escalation has been authorized despite an acknowledgement from the anonymous US officials who spoke to The New York Times that they “do not expect the shift to fundamentally alter the course of the war.”

As Antiwar’s Dave DeCamp notes, Vladimir Putin said back in September that if NATO allows Ukraine to use western-supplied weapons for long-range strikes inside Russian territory, it would mean NATO countries “are at war with Russia.” This is about as unambiguous a threat as you’ll ever see.

NYT reports that Biden’s policy shift “comes two months before President-elect Donald J. Trump takes office, having vowed to limit further support for Ukraine.” And it is here worth noting that last week it was reported by The Telegraph that British PM Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron had been scheming to thwart any attempt by Trump to scale back US support for Ukraine by pushing Biden to authorize long-range missile strikes in Russian territory.

But it is also true that the day before the US election Mike Waltz, Trump’s next national security advisor, had himself endorsed the idea of authorizing long-range missile strikes into Russia with the goal of pressuring Moscow to end the war. His plan for disentangling the US from the conflict entails ramping up sanctions on Russia and “taking the handcuffs off the long-range weapons we provide Ukraine” in order to pressure Putin into eagerly accepting a peace deal.

So while this is being framed as an administration that’s more hawkish on Russia executing a maneuver that’s designed to hamstring the peacemongering of an incoming administration that’s less favorable to assisting Ukraine, in reality it may just be goal-assisting the next administration in a policy change it had planned on implementing anyway.

Either way, it’s insane. Putin ordered changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine in September in order to ward off these sorts of escalations by lowering the threshold at which nuclear weapons could be used to defend the Russian Federation, and they’re just barreling right past that bright red line like they barreled over the red lines which led to the invasion of Ukraine. And the fact that they’re adding yet another nuclear-armed state into the mix with North Korea is just more gravy for the nuclear brinkmanship pot roast.

At one point in 2022, US intelligence agencies reportedly assessed that the odds of Russia using a nuclear weapon in Ukraine was as high as fifty percent, but the Biden administration kept pushing forward with this proxy war anyway. These freaks are taking insane risks to advance agendas that stand to yield the slimmest of benefits even by their own assessments.

We are living in dark and dangerous times.

November 19, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, Ukraine, USA | Leave a comment

Biden Authorizes Ukrainian Long-Range Strikes Into Russia Using ATACMS Missiles – Reports

Ilya Tsukanov, 17 Nov 24, https://sputnikglobe.com/20241117/biden-authorizes-ukrainian-long-range-strikes-into-russia-using-atacms-missiles—reports-1120914282.html

The US and its allies spent months debating whether or not to give Ukraine the go-ahead to use its NATO-provided long-range strike systems to target Russia. In September, President Putin warned that allowing Kiev to use its Western long-range missiles on Russia would mean NATO’s direct participation in a war against the Russian Federation.

President Biden has signed off on the Ukrainian military’s use of US-made ATACMS missiles to try to help defend its faltering positions in Ukrainian-occupied areas of Russia’s Kursk region, the New York Times reported on Sunday, citing US officials apprized of the situation.

Officials told the newspaper that they “do not expect the shift” in policy “to fundamentally alter the course of the war” (NYT’s phrasing), and indicated that Biden could further authorize Kiev to use the weapons in directions besides Kursk in the future.

Washington reportedly expects the ATACMS to be used to strike troop concentrations, military equipment, logistics, ammunition depots and supply lines, all with the goal of “blunt[ing] the effectiveness” of the ongoing Russian military operation to clear Kursk of Ukrainian forces.

According to NYT’s information, some Pentagon officials opposed delivering the missile systems to Ukraine in the first place due to the US Army’s limited supply. Others reportedly expressed fears that their delivery and use could escalate the conflict and even prompt direct Russian retaliation against US and NATO forces – something President Putin has explicitly warned about.

The ATACMS go-ahead also appears to be connected to to the increasingly dire situation for Ukrainian forces across the front, with US officials said to have become “increasingly concerned” about the Ukrainian army being “stretched thin by simultaneous Russian assaults in the east, Kharkov and now Kursk.”

President-elect Trump’s statements about seeking to quickly end the conflict have also reportedly weighed in the outgoing administration’s decision, NYT said.

November 18, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Russia, Ukraine, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Putin Tells German Leader That Ukraine Peace Deal Possible

Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz for the first time in two years on Friday

by Kyle Anzalone November 15, 2024 https://news.antiwar.com/2024/11/15/putin-tells-german-leader-that-ukraine-peace-deal-possible/

Russian President Vladimir Putin held a phone call with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and offered to end the war in Ukraine. The Russian leader offered a deal similar to one proposed by Moscow in June.

On Friday, Scholz spoke with Putin for the first time in nearly two years. According to the Kremlin, “The Russian president noted that the Russian side has never refused and remains open to the resumption of the negotiations that were interrupted by the Kiev regime.” Adding, “Russia’s proposals are well known and outlined, in particular, in a June speech at the Russian Foreign Ministry.”

In that speech, Putin said that if Ukrainian forces withdrew from all Russian annexed territory, adopted a position of neutrality between NATO and Russia, agreed to denazification and demilitarization of the country, and the lifting of all Western sanctions on Moscow, then Russia would bring the war to an end.

Scholz’s spokesman said that the German and Russian leaders agreed to remain in contact. The official added that Scholz “condemned the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine and called on President Putin to end it and withdraw his troops.” He also told Putin, Berlin maintains “steadfast determination” to support Ukraine for “as long as is necessary.”

Throughout the Joe Biden administration, the West has refused to talk with Moscow about core national security issues. The refusal to negotiate throughout 2021, led Putin to invade Ukraine in the beginning of 2022. After the initial Russian invasion of Ukraine, a deal was nearly reached, but Kiev has been pushed away from negotiations by its Western backers.

After over two and a half years of war, Kiev is struggling to find the manpower to continue the fight while losing territory to the Russian military. Though NATO countries pledged to give Ukraine everything it needed to win the war, Washington has refused to provide Ukraine with advanced weapons and long-range missiles Kiev says it needs to achieve a victory.

November 18, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, Russia, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Claim Ukraine could develop nuclear weapons, fact checked

The report claims Ukraine could build an atomic bomb similar the ‘Fat man’ – the nuclear weapon used by the US in 1945.

Ukraine has denied reports it could acquire nuclear weapons within months following the
re-election of Donald Trump. The Ukrainian foreign ministry was responding
to an article in The Times, which cited a briefing document, prepared by a
non-government think-tank for the Ukrainian defence ministry.

The document outlines how Kyiv could develop a rudimentary atomic bomb if the US
withdraws its military assistance, but did not reveal if the Ukrainian
government was ever presented with the document. Foreign ministry
spokesperson Heorhii Tykhyi said on X: “Ukraine is committed to the NPT
[the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons]; we do not
possess, develop or intend to acquire nuclear weapons.

iNews 14th Nov 2024, https://inews.co.uk/news/world/ukraine-developing-nuclear-weapons-fact-check-3380640

November 17, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Witnesses describe alleged Ukrainian war crimes in Donbass city

https://www.rt.com/russia/607474-ugledar-war-crimes-report/ 11 Nov 24

Ukrainian troops were given carte blanche to harass and commit crimes against the Russian-speaking population in the southern Donbass city of Ugledar, a Moscow-backed investigative mission has alleged.

Human rights defender Maksim Grigoriev, who chairs an international body investigating suspected crimes of the Ukrainian government, previewed on Monday a new report which focuses on the events in Ugledar. Russian troops liberated the town in early October, allowing civilian access to its remaining residents.

Witnesses said they had faced mistreatment since the armed coup in Kiev in 2014. One woman explained how she could not receive justice for her son, who was killed in a fight with a Ukrainian volunteer battalion member in 2016.

The woman said her son had been a large, strong man who had been stabbed to death after trying to defend local girls from a group of drunken troops from the Aidar unit. The criminal case was clear-cut and resulted in a conviction, but the sentence allowed the killer to be released on parole, Grigoriev said. The perpetrator reportedly did not see the inside of a prison cell.

The case exemplified the bias against the Russian-speaking population which was facilitated by the government in Kiev, the investigator said. It also helps explain the scale of criminality which Ugledar residents have endured in recent years amid open hostility between Russia and Ukraine, he added.

Among other things, the Ukrainian military had a strategy of forcing people out of the city by shelling it and claiming that the attacks were coming from the Russian side, Grigoriev said. Some residents said they personally saw such attacks.

“The [town’s] mayor reported in 2022 that there was nobody here, even though there were some 3,000 people left,” one witness said. “They [Ukrainian troops] were riding outside of Ugledar… and firing at it with mortars to incite panic and make people leave as fast as possible.”

Another man said he witnessed a foreign reporter on a guided tour. It came during a lull, so a Ukrainian soldier accompanying the woman gave an order on his radio: “It’s too quiet, make some noise.” Firing started immediately, scaring the journalist and causing her to run for her life, the man recalled.

Ugledar was subjected to “total looting” by the Ukrainians, Grigoriev claimed. Some homes were stripped down, with faucets, electric sockets and even wall tiling taken by marauders, according to witnesses.

Stolen goods were allegedly moved to other places and sold, sometimes marketed as “goods from Donbass” – a euphemism to designate their criminal origin.

November 13, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Foreign Policy: NATO knows Ukraine is losing

Thu, 07 Nov 2024, https://www.sott.net/article/495948-Foreign-Policy-NATO-knows-Ukraine-is-losing

NATO is fully aware that Ukraine is slowly losing its conflict with Russia, with an especially difficult winter predicted to worsen the situation, Foreign Policy has reported.

Western officials are warning that a victory for Moscow,would solidify its influence in Europe and lead to a strengthened military presence near NATO’s borders, the influential US publication has claimed, in an article published on Wednesday.

Foreign Policy’s sources believe Russian President Vladimir Putin is taking advantage of uncertainty in Washington. Michael Bociurkiw – a lobbyist at NATO’s Atlantic Council adjunct – speaking from Ukraine, stated that the Kremlin has noticed a leadership “vacuum” in Kiev is “testing for soft tissue” in the West.

The strategy has reportedly been effective, he says, as missile strikes across Ukrainian cities have increased the possibility of winter power and heating shortages.

Moscow’s attacks on Ukrainian ports, according to officials, have also hurt Kiev’s logistics.

The report indicates that Ukraine’s losses are reshaping the strategic outlook in the US and Western Europe. It highlights that a Russian victory would be a major setback for Washington and NATO.

Moscow highlighted Kiev’s aspirations to join NATO as among the main reasons for launching its military operation against Ukraine in February 2022.

Ruth Deyermond, of King’s College London, told the outlet that a cease-fire would cause the Americans to lose face. “Ukraine losing would look to the rest of the world as if the US was losing to Russia… any scaling back of US support would also look as if the US had been forced to retreat by Russia,” she said.

Political shifts in the US could mean a reassessment of Washington’s aid to Ukraine, Foreign Policy added. Observers warn this may signal a weakened American footprint on the global stage.

Russia has intensified its strikes on Ukrainian military and energy facilities in recent months. In April, the Defense Ministry said they were a response to Kiev’s attempts to target Russian oil infrastructure, stressing that the targeted facilities support the Ukrainian defense industry, and that the strikes do not target civilians.

Comment: Ukraine was never anything more than a patsy battering-ram to try to weaken Russia. An eastern European Vietnam as it were. Except that it didn’t work.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes:

November 10, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Ukraine | Leave a comment

The Government-Media-Academia Misinformation Machine and “Ukraine’s Victory”

Russian and Eurasian Politics, by Gordonhahn, November 9, 2024

The U.S. government’s infiltration into mass media and academia may finally become exposed and its enormous misinformation and divisive effect on the American body politic perhaps diminished as a result of its massive overeach in a matter of war and peace – specifically the NATO-Russia Ukrainian War.

Those who comprise the government-media-academia complex have teams of researchers, access to government data, vast funding and other resources. They know or can learn the facts but choose to relay to the public fake realities. In short, what I describe below are not mistakes but intentional and well-worked out lies designed to manipulate the public contrary to its interests. If the reality were offered to the public, it would see how it runs counter to its interests and would seek policy changes.

This is what we heard from the flagship propaganda organ of said complex – the New York Times – in July as Russia’s offensive gained steam: „Russia is unlikely to make significant territorial gains in Ukraine in the coming months as its poorly trained forces struggle to break through Ukrainian defenses that are now reinforced with Western munitions, U.S. officials say“ (www.nytimes.com/2024/07/09/us/politics/russia-ukraine-nato.html). At the same time, the axis in the persons of such ‚observers‘ as former U.S. General David Patraeus and former US ambassador to Moscow Michael McFaul was feeding the American public quite the same line: that Ukraine was winning and would win (even as it said that Russia threatened all of Europe with military conquest).

There are alternative, if ostracized and little known sources for gathering real facts. Not to toot my own horn, but I noted in January 2024 on Glenn Diessen’s and Alexander Mercouris’s podcast that Russia would be very gradually increasing its territorial gains in hunting and ultimately defeating the Ukrainian armed forces: „There will be a very, very gradual acceleration, intensification of the offensive, the Russian…‚aggressive attrition‘ will gradually become more successful in that more and more territory will be taken each month, a few square kilometers more each month in the winter and spring, and then the big question becomes: Will Russia decide to turn that gradual succes into a major offensive…“ (https://youtu.be/P_MJi5H6HKU?si=rxRiaE0EglSgbclw, at the 1:00:45 mark).

In February 2024, I wrote: „This winter, with the demonstrated failure of the Ukrainian counteroffensive obvious by autumn, we have begun to witness Russian forces’ transition to attrit and advance across the entire front, except on the Krynki foothold on the southern Dniepr in Kherson. In November, Russian forces occupied an addition some 13 kilometers and tripled that result in December. We can expect in January a multiple of December’s 40+ kilometers, evidencing the second ‘advance’ aspect of ‘attrit and advance’.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………….Now, as Ukraine’s defense lines are dissolving and its forces are retreating to the Dnieper River, the propaganda complex’s deceptive narrative has come in grave danger of being utterly exposed. This and nothing else, except perhaps a command from Pennsylvania Ave. or Langley, the complex flagship New York Times is coming clean in order to cover its ass, albeit. And it demonstrates what I — a lone, unknown, fully ostracized researcher — was writing early this year.

The intellectual universe in the US is so spoiled that the NYT had to turn to a foreign institute to provide data for its belated, truth-telling, coming clean article. It cites Finnish mapper and analyst Pasi Paroinen. Citing Paroinen, the NYT admits now Russian forces have been making large gains for three months: „Half of Russia’s territorial gains in Ukraine so far this year were made in the past three months alone, according to Pasi Paroinen, a military expert with the Finland-based Black Bird Group.“ „In August, Ukraine’s defensive lines buckled, and Russia rapidly advanced 10 miles“ In October, Russia made its largest territorial gains since the summer of 2022, as Ukrainian lines buckled under sustained pressure. October’s gains amounted to “more than 160 square miles of land in Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region”(www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/10/31/world/europe/russia-gains-ukraine-maps.html). But the However, NYT nor any other US mainstream media source or expert mentioned Russia’s August gains.

Moreover, the NYT came clean on something even more important: the im pending, if not imminent collapse of the Ukrainian frontline defense and army: NYT reported in a different piece that „Ukraine has enough soldiers to fight for six to 12 more months, one official said. After that, he said, it will face a steep shortage” (https://archive.is/QgomM). Collapse can occur well before the ‚steep shortage.‘

The NYT article only cites Poinenen regarding Russian gains in Donetsk, but Russian gains are being made all along the front line from the north in Kharkiv to the south in Zaporozhe. Paroinen’s measurement of overall Russian gains so far in 2024 confirms my own expectation of gradually increasing Russian territorial gains:………………………………………………………………………………………..

Naturally, the NYT tries to cover up the fact that all during this period of mounting Russian gains until the last day in October, it as the rest of the U.S. and Western mass media told readers that there was a stalemate in Ukraine…………………………………………………

The NYT and other organs of the government-media-academia do one thing somewhat effectively: glossing over its presentation of fables over fact, covering its ass, its tracks and the dripping Ukrainian blood (not to mention that of Russians and others). Will Americans see state apparat and its media-academic complex now? https://gordonhahn.com/2024/11/09/the-government-media-academia-misinformation-machine-and-ukraines-victory/

November 10, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | media, Ukraine, USA | Leave a comment

Biden Team Wants To Rush Weapons Shipments to Ukraine Before Trump Inauguration

The administration wants to exhaust $6 billion in remaining military aid

by Dave DeCamp November 6, 2024. https://news.antiwar.com/2024/11/06/biden-team-wants-to-rush-weapons-shipments-to-ukraine-before-trump-inaguration/
—

The Biden administration is preparing to rush over $6 billion in military aid to Ukraine before Inauguration Day, POLITICO reported on Wednesday.

The report said the Biden team expects the incoming administration to end the weapons flow, as President-elect Donald Trump campaigned on ending the proxy war.

The Biden administration has $4.3 billion in military aid that can be pulled from existing US stockpiles, known as the Presidential Drawdown Authority. There is also $2.1 billion available in the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which provides money to put weapons under contract, meaning it takes longer to deliver.

Biden officials are unsure if they’ll be able to rush all the aid to Ukraine before January 20 since any military equipment they send must be replaced, and it’s unclear if production levels are high enough to ship so many weapons in such a short period of time.

“We have been sending whatever industry can produce each month, but the problem is you can only send these things as they are produced,” Mark Cancian, a former Pentagon budget official, told POLITICO. “The administration could dip into the stockpiles and send equipment more quickly, but it’s unclear the Pentagon would want to do that since it would affect its own readiness.”

Even if the weapons are sent from US military stockpiles, the actual delivery time could still take months, and Biden officials are worried the next administration could cancel them before they arrive in Ukraine.

November 9, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Ukraine, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

With Trump back in White House, can Ukraine opt for nuclear deterrence?

Experts say Ukraine is capable of producing nuclear weapons as a deterrent against Russia within years, but the political costs would be too high

by Oleg Sukhov, November 6, 2024

With the looming risk that U.S. President-elect Donald Trump may pull the plug on Washington’s support for Ukraine, Kyiv has flirted with the option of nuclear deterrence.

The prospect of such a scenario was raised weeks earlier when President Volodymyr Zelensky in October said he had told Trump during a September meeting in New York City that Ukraine would either join NATO or develop nuclear weapons.

Zelensky claimed that Trump had heard him and said that “it was a fair argument.”

He later walked back that statement, saying that Ukraine was not pursuing nuclear weapons.

However, Zelensky’s statement prompted speculation on whether a Ukrainian nuclear weapons program is realistic from technological and political standpoints.

Experts say that Ukraine is capable of producing at least a primitive nuclear weapon within years, although it would require considerable investment.

November 8, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Biden, Zelensky ponder face saving off ramp from failed US proxy war against Russia

Tho they’re loath to admit, Biden and Zelensky are likely preparing a face saving response to the inevitable end to the war which will return no captured territory to Kyiv.

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL, 6 Nov 24

For 33 months the Biden administration and its sycophantic media have been portraying the war raging in Ukraine as unprovoked Russian aggression that would be repelled.

The US and NATO allies have poured over $200 billion in weaponry, but not a single fighting soldier, for Ukraine to regain the Crimea and roughly 20% of Donbas and neighboring oblasts Russia has captured.

The US government and media narrative endlessly proclaimed a weakened Russia and weaponized Ukraine would turn the war in Ukraine’s favor.

No more. The reality of Ukraine’s inevitable collapse as a defensive fighting force is too stark to ignore. This became clear last week when the New York Times, a staunch media supporter of US/ Ukraine prospects against Russia, abruptly pivoted to truth telling.

In an article titled “Russia’s Swift March Forward in Ukraine’s East” the Times reports Ukraine’s defensive lines “buckled” and that its Kursk offensive in Russia has “weakened” Ukraine’s defenses in the much more vital Donbas. Furthermore “Russia’s attacks gradually weakened the Ukrainian army to the point where its troops are so stretched that they can no longer hold some of their positions.” Serious personnel shortages” and stretched defensive lines allow “Russia to quickly advance whenever it finds a weak spot.”

Tho they’re loath to admit, Biden and Zelensky are likely preparing a face saving response to the inevitable end to the war which will return no captured territory to Kyiv.

Zelensky can claim his that the loss of territory is due to the US and NATO refusing to provide the weaponry and support needed to repel Russia. He will pretend that his valiant defense in the absence of all out US/NATO support prevented Russia from conquering all of Western Ukraine. He will never concede the lost territory is part of sovereign Russia which keeps alive the dream of eventually unifying all of Ukraine. Of course, ending up with a shattered country having lost a quarter of its population, 20% of its most fertile land, hundreds of thousands dead and disabled does not bode well for Zelensky’s political future.

Once Ukraine capitulates and withdraws from Donbas, Biden, or Trump might have a tougher face saving sell. They’ll likely claim the $200 billion was well spent because it insured most of Ukraine remained free and stopped Russian’s inexorable march into Western Europe to recreate the Soviet Union. Of course nobody with an iota of political savvy will buy into that preposterous delusion.

Just like everybody else knows, both Volodymyr and Joe know the war is over…...

November 8, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries Next Entries »