Posted originally on CTH on January 6, 2026 | Sundance
There is some good news within this announcement as Justin Trudeau’s former Deputy Prime Minister to Canada is well known to both President Donald Trump and North American political followers for a decade.
Chrystia Freeland was the former lead of the Canadian trade delegation when Trudeau realized he needed to try and offset the economic damage within the renegotiated NAFTA agreement known as the USMCA. Freeland was also the lead attack agent behind the debanking effort against Canadian truckers who opposed the vaccine mandate.
In addition to holding Ukraine roots, the ideology of Chrystia Freeland as a multinational globalist and promoter for the World Economic Forum’s ‘new world order’ is well documented.
VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY – “Today, I appointed Chrystia Freeland as an Advisor on Economic Development. Chrystia is highly skilled in these matters and has extensive experience in attracting investment and implementing economic transformations. Right now, Ukraine needs to strengthen its internal resilience – both for the sake of Ukraine’s recovery if diplomacy delivers results as swiftly as possible, and to reinforce our defense if, because of delays by our partners, it takes longer to bring this war to an end. I am grateful to everyone who is ready to support our state and our engagement with partners. Glory to Ukraine!”
Presumably this appointment is intended to assist Zelenskyy in gaining western banking investment in Ukraine, part of the 20-point plan that relates to economic recovery. However, the downside is this announcement undermines any motivation the Trump administration might have toward that same objective.
In reality, given the recent revelations about billions of laundered aid funds being skimmed by corrupt members of the Ukraine government, we can only imagine how much of the recovery funds would be apportioned to maintaining the life of indulgence the political leaders expect.
In response to the lucrative “voluntary” appointment, Chrystia Freeland has announced her resignation from Canadian government in order to avoid any conflict of interest as the skimming is organized.
Approved by British intelligence, MI6, and the greater British Commonwealth in accordance with the needs of the World Economic Forum and banking control managers, it is likely that Freeland will join a growing list of Ukraine Economic “Advisors.”
As Zelenskyy recently said about the opportunity for the EU to confiscate the Russian sovereign wealth fund, “just give me the money.”
Today, around 27 leaders, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte as well as the alliance’s top military officer, Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, will gather in Paris amid so-called Coalition of the Willing format. The objective will be to solidify the U.S. elements to provide the “security guarantees,” while Brussels organizes the financial structures that will be possible only because the USA will stand guard over their investment.
…. And, so it goes.
PARIS — U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner — U.S. President Donald Trump’s son-in-law — will travel to Paris and attend a meeting of Ukraine’s allies on Tuesday, an Elysée official told reporters on Monday.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio will not be there “for obvious reasons,” the official added, referring to the situation in Venezuela.
“We have strived to bring the Americans closer to us, never resigning ourselves to the U.S. abandoning Ukraine. We have succeeded in this exercise of reconvergence between Ukraine, Europe, and America,” the official stressed. (read more)
Who knows, maybe we get Greenland in exchange for providing Ukraine security.
Posted originally on CTH on January 6, 2026 | Sundance
President Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have noted that following the ouster of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela, the remaining government is being pressured to realign their positions and accept a change in direction. It is always tenuous when the leader of a hostile foreign government is removed.
The current approach by the Trump administration is to permit former Vice-President Delcy Rodríguez to continue operating the mechanisms within the country to retain near-term stability.The CIA assessedDelcy Rodriquez was the interim ruler who could keep order.
Prior to the removal of Maduro, Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, was asked by the Trump administration to provide a detailed summary of how she could form a functioning government, should she be assisted to power.
Machado’s response did not provide confidence that her strategy was comprehensive enough. Therefore, the Trump administration assessed the best interim approach would be to continue working with the remaining Maduro government officials, led by Delcy Rodriquez, while pressuring them to follow the instructions of the United States.
Various geopolitical powers, including many that attend Mar-a-Lago functions, want Maria Corina Machado installed quickly. President Trump and Secretary Rubio are being more measured in their approach. The powers that want Machado installed are now working on a media strategy. Sean Hannity is enlisted for the assist.
The issue is one of competency and chaos. President Trump and Secretary Rubio do not want to repeat the mistakes of the past (Bush/Powell, Iraq or Obama/Clinton, Libya). The Venezuela issue is entirely different from the Middle East, but the same type of chaos can reemerge if the transition from authoritarianism to representative democracy is not well managed.
The Sea Island attendees support a quick Machado installation. Trump/Rubio prefer to proceed with more caution, especially because someone is going to be on the hook for financial support to Venezuela, because the domestic rewards from any expanded oil revenue are at least 5 to 10 years away.
Changing the regime in Venezuela may break China’s ‘belt and road’ grip, but China’s money is going to need to be replaced with independent domestic economic wealth for the Venezuelan people. That process takes time.
Maria Corina Machado is supported by all the same networks who support Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Despite the twinkles in the eyes of senators within the Foreign Relations Committee, we don’t want Venezuela to become North America’s largest Somali daycare operation.
(WSJ) – […] Latin America analysts have previously cautioned, including during Trump’s first term, that Maduro’s ouster without a capable replacement would likely empower armed military factions, rival politicians and criminal groups within Venezuela as they fought for control, leading to a security crisis in the country.
[…] analysis by the Central Intelligence Agency was briefed to President Trump and shared with a small circle of senior administration officials, according to two of the people. It was a factor in Trump’s decision to back Maduro’s vice president instead of opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize winner María Corina Machado, some of the people said.
The assessment provides insight into Trump’s decision not to support the opposition’s bid for control of Venezuela following the brazen U.S. military operation to capture Maduro last week and bring him to the U.S. for trial. As in his first term, Trump was convinced that near-term stability in Venezuela could be maintained only if Maduro’s replacement had the support of the country’s armed forces and other elites.
Senior Trump administration officials commissioned the CIA to undertake the analytical assessment and debated it during discussions about day-after plans for Venezuela, the people said. The people familiar with the assessment said they were unsure of the precise date it was produced.
The report was briefed to Trump in recent weeks, according to two of the people.
The assessment didn’t describe how Maduro could lose power, or advocate for removing him, but attempted to gauge the domestic situation in Venezuela in the event that he did, people familiar with it said.
The intelligence report, the people said, cited Rodríguez and two other top Venezuelan regime figures as possible interim rulers who could keep order. The people familiar with the assessment didn’t identify the other two officials, but besides Rodríguez, the two most influential power brokers are Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello and Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino.
The two hard-liners, who command Venezuela’s police and military, could undo any efforts at a transition, according to former U.S. and Venezuelan officials. Both face U.S. criminal charges similar to those filed against Maduro and are unlikely to cooperate with Washington.
The report concluded that Edmundo González, widely seen as the actual winner of the 2024 election against Maduro, and Machado would struggle to gain legitimacy as leaders while facing resistance from pro-regime security services, drug-trafficking networks and political opponents. (more)
My grandpa, and later my father, used to say something at particular moments that generally annoyed me but turned out to be entirely accurate, much to my youthful angst… “Well, hang around a one-legged group long enough, and you’re eventually going to end up limping.”
Yup, I learned to hate that lesson because the truth of it was always annoying.
This is perhaps the first time in memory when I look forward to Donald J Trump getting out of the Mar-a-Lago bubble and back to Washington DC. Good grief, just typing that I can’t believe I’m saying it. Here’s why:
Having followed and written about the optimal solution approach within the Trump Doctrine, a process that assigns responsibility to regional actors, then exits while providing support but not direct involvement [the delegation metric of high-support/low-direction], perhaps that is unfolding again in the background. However, it seems like Trump is accepting the annoying Iran monkey problem on our behalf. [REF: How to Make The Monkey Jump]
To be clear in my personal position, charity begins at home. (1) I don’t want conflict with Iran, nor do I really care about their internal political struggles; most of my day-to-day contacts feel the same. (2) At the same time, yes, I can imagine a scenario where Venezuela represents a threat to our continental objectives and national security, but would prefer to see them isolated from the outside. Embargo them, stuff them inside an economic confinement zone (if needed), tell them why, then let the internal mess work itself out; most of my day-to-day contacts seem to feel the same.
Granting President Trump the long view of support; I mean, we don’t know what he is aware of; I sure hope all of this Iran stuff has a direct connection to American strategic interests.
Simultaneously, I can certainly see where deconflicting the USA, vis-a-vis Ukraine (literally London and the EU) from friction with Russia, has a strategic interest and factual bearing on the dollar-based trade system. Attention on the Ukraine vs Russia stuff does have direct, albeit complicated outcomes attached to the economic standing of the average American. Iran less so.
Pictured Center: a one-legged man.
Pictured Center: a one-legged man.
Looking at it from a geopolitically logical approach…. President Trump and Marco Rubio need Syria to remain stable.
Secretary Rubio has explained this aspect very well when he summarized the reason for President Trump lifting the sanctions against Syria. I get that part. But is this “locked and loaded” simply a brush back pitch against Iran to stop them from disrupting Trump’s Gaza objective. Maybe so, it does make sense; thus, we extend the benefit of doubt.
If Syria destabilizes the tenuous Israel/Gaza stuff gets more complicated. Iran can destabilize Syria. Therefore, putting pressure on the Iranian regime while simultaneously telling Israel to cool it over their Turkish opposition to the Gaza assist again does make sense.
Benjamin Netanyahu dislikes Recep Erdogan immensely and doesn’t trust him an inch. I get that part also, but Turkey is a weird place held together by Erdogan’s very specific brand of Muslim Brotherhood patriotism.
In very direct ways keeping Syria stable helps Turkey and by extension the EU.
If Syria erupts, the refugee exodus heads north, and cunning Erdogan – a tenuous NATO member seemingly never giving up on his Ottoman Empire rebuild – will play his “I can only absorb so much” card, thereby opening the gates for more authentic Islam travel further north into Europe.
[Our solid contacts in Istanbul have confirmed around 5 million Syrians have repatriated since President Ahmed al-Sharaa started his agenda to stabilize the region. The busy former al-Qaeda guy, 43-years-old, is also a bridge between Trump and Putin. So, there’s that.]
Keeping Syria stable also permits Trump’s Arab state coalition to deal with Gaza/Hamas in a constructive way. Trump told Netanyahu this publicly during the recent visit, essentially rebuking Israel’s justification for more IDF military action in Gaza. Again, President Trump is dancing through the minefield here with the long game to get us the f**k out of it, while Netanyahu is hugging Trump to pull the USA deeper into it.
If you understand the Iranian tentacles that still remain in Syria (see recent ISIS attacks), confronting Iran makes Israel very happy; however, it’s not Netanyahu’s happiness that stands behind Trump’s motive for the confrontation. Ultimately, the motive is Syria’s stability, Turkish Gaza support and the Arab money/engagement needed for the Mideast mess.
If our suspicions are correct, we should see Team Trump leaning toward Recep Erdogan, toward the Arab coalition and toward Syria at the same time he is managing Iran, managing Israel and managing a U.S. congress.
If the Ayatollahs are busy tamping down street protests, they are less likely to be poking Syria.
All of that is giving President Trump the maximum benefit of the doubt combined with the application of common sense.
♦ Meanwhile inside Russia, you might not hear about it from western media, but Ukraine and NATO are striking non-military targets, civilian areas, throughout Russia currently focusing heavy drone fire at Kazan, Russia’s third largest city.
STATE DEPT:“There have been drone attacks and explosions near the border with Ukraine, and in Moscow, Kazan, St. Petersburg, and other large cities.
Russian citizens are now very familiar with the sound of air raid sirens as increased drone attacks from Ukraine are extending into Russia. This noticeable increase in activity is happening in combination with U.S/Ukraine strategic discussions on an EU created ceasefire agreement.
The Rubio state department has now updated the Russia advisory summary warning all Americans of the danger in traveling throughout Russia.
The update is also timed with the increased drone attacks into Russia’s main population centers and is likely due to concern that Americans would be street targets for angered Russian nationalists.
If President Trump walks away from the EU/Ukraine peace agreement construct, Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin will likely increase retaliatory attacks against Ukraine by significant levels. One of my good contacts shared, “if Trump walks away, Kiev will now be leveled.”
Apparently, despite the incoming fire increasing, Putin is holding back his response to give Trump room to operate, while still carefully managing the Kremlin politics and striking into Ukraine to appease those in Russian government who want the full weight of the Russian military to come down hard on Zelenskyy.
Posted originally on CTH on January 1, 2026 | Sundance |
The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Ukraine did not target the personal residence of Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin, “according to U.S. officials.” However, Russia captured one of the drones intact and have said they were able to “extract a file containing a flight plan from the navigation unit” which they plan to share with the Trump administration through established channels. {LINK}
WSJ – WASHINGTON—U.S. national-security officials said Wednesday that Ukraine didn’t target Russian President Vladimir Putin or one of his residences in an alleged drone operation, challenging Moscow’s assertion that Kyiv sought to kill the Russian leader.
That conclusion is supported by a Central Intelligence Agency assessment that found no attempted attack against Putin had occurred, according to a U.S. official briefed on the intelligence. The CIA declined to comment.
The U.S. found that Ukraine had been seeking to strike a military target located in the same region as Putin’s country residence but not close by, the official said. (read more)
Who are we going to believe, Russian “special service” operations or anonymous “U.S. Intelligence Officials”?
Unfortunately, this question is no longer easy to answer given the history of the U.S. Intelligence Community, and yes, that includes the current embedded IC officials within the National Security Council, DNI and CIA even with Marco Rubio, Tulsi Gabbard and John Ratcliffe in position.
I would be very surprised if the U.S. Intelligence Community would be honest with President Trump on this issue if, and that is a big “if”, they even factually had any specific intelligence about it. [This WSJ narrative could be fake news]
Again, CTH will also assert the likelihood that Volodymyr Zelenskyy likely didn’t carry out the attack; everything about the timing of it during his meeting with President Trump just doesn’t fit. Instead, it is more likely British intelligence, specifically MI6 carried out the attack, timed specifically for the Trump/Zelenskyy meeting.
In context, there have been several attacks against Russia timed with negotiations. CTH has noted that each instance of closer agreement during Russia/Ukraine negotiations (Turkey) or U.S/Ukraine negotiations (Turkey and Paris) there have been attacks into Russia that seemed to carry a motive from an external third party.
U.S. media have said the attack on Putin may be a lie; however, with physical evidence from the defense operation, it is less likely Russia just made up the attack. At this moment in the conflict, Putin doesn’t need domestic propaganda.
CONTEXT: British intelligence previously confirmed their participation in the successful Ukraine drone attack against long-range Russian bombers. That operation, highly controversial at the time, was previously confirmed by President Trump saying the U.S. was not informed in advance.
The “coalition of the willing” has also expanded. Outside the Ukraine regime, the current group making up the “coalition of the willing” includes: the U.K, France, Germany, Canada and Australia. It is worth noting the additions are part of the British commonwealth (Canada, Australia).
Most observers note that Ukraine President Zelenskyy is not an independent actor in the warfare decisions as carried out from within Ukraine itself. In fact, British intelligence has now replaced U.S. intelligence for providing the majority of the satellite guidance systems, targeted systems and missile operations. German and French intelligence have been closely coordinating with the U.K. on behalf of European Union stakeholders.
Europe, specifically the British MI6 intelligence service, have recently espoused their #1 priority is to defeat Russia using the proxy that Ukraine provides.
The newly appointed head of MI6, Blaise Metreweli (pictured right), formerly known by her position as “Q”, is literally the granddaughter of factual Ukraine Nazi, Constantine Dobrowolski.
As head of MI6, Metreweli has specifically stated the U.K wants war with Russia. Metreweli’s entire family has Ukraine roots.
So, with full context applied it is entirely likely that both Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy are not lying. Putin was attacked, but Ukraine -as defined as Zelenskyy- didn’t do it.
The most likely scenario is that U.K intelligence elements inside Ukraine again used the opportunity of the Trump-Zelenskyy negotiation meeting to carry out the attack against Russian President Putin. The motive is obvious.
Beyond the ideological component, the economies of the U.K/EU are now increasingly dependent on their defense spending as was recognized with the severe contraction of the German economy in almost all sectors except those supported by defense spending.
An end to the Russia/Ukraine conflict is against the interests of the “coalition of the willing.” Additionally, an ancillary motive for both the U.K and U.S. group who support the EU effort is to keep President Trump bogged down.
I still strongly suspect the British did it, and the CIA doesn’t factually have any concrete intelligence to prove or dismiss this strongest motivational likelihood.
Posted originally on Dec 31, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
Sources in Ukraine state that Zelensky is trying to assassinate the top Russian generals in hopes of turning the army against Putin and to bring down Russia. I do not see any possible lasting peace arrangement and the refusal of Zelensky to let the Donbas separate is only supported by the hatred of Russians within the EU further guaranteeing that with the best intentions of Trump, this will never result in a long-standing peace accord. Europe will fall and unless the people purge the Neocons running NATO, their future will never be secure.
Posted originally on CTH on December 30, 2025 | Sundance
Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy appears on Fox News for an interview with Bret Baier. Within the interview Zelenskyy gives some context and details to the 20-point plan organized between him and the EU Leaders, currently being reviewed and modified by President Trump, Steve Witkoff, Marco Rubio and Jared Kushner.
The two remaining issues as described by Zelenskyy are the (1) security guarantees and (2) the territorial issue, Donbas control.
(1) Within the security guarantee proposal there are troubling signs. Zelenskyy describes it as a bilateral agreement between the USA and Ukraine, with similar constructs to the NATO alignment. A non-NATO pact between the U.S. and Ukraine that commits us to his defense if Russia would advance another attack. A 15-year guarantee committed in U.S. law through the U.S. House and Senate. This sounds troubling.
(2) On the territorial issue, regional control of the Donbas, Zelenskyy appears to be willing to cede territory but only under very limited circumstances. Zelenskyy wants a demilitarized zone under the term “a free economic zone” with specific rules.
Zelenskyy admits Ukraine cannot win the conflict against Russia without the United States involvement. Essentially without America, Russia would own the skies and be able to crush the Ukrainian army. WATCH:
Posted originally on CTH on December 30, 2025 | Sundance
During an impromptu press availability beside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President Trump responded to a question about a drone attack against the personal residence of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
President Trump noted that he was informed of the attack by President Putin during an early Monday phone call between the two leaders.
According to Russian media, confirmed by Russian foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Putin’s presidential residence in the Novgorod region, more than 400 kilometers (249 miles) northwest of Moscow, was targeted by 91 drones. Russia has vowed retaliation saying, “targets had already been selected.” President Trump’s response is prompted below:
Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has denied the accusation that Ukraine carried out this particular attack. The attack took place while Zelenskyy was in Florida meeting with President Trump.
In context, there have been several attacks against Russia timed with negotiations. CTH has noted that each instance of closer agreement during Russia/Ukraine negotiations (Turkey) or U.S/Ukraine negotiations (Turkey and Paris) there have been attacks into Russia that seemed to carry a motive from an external third party.
U.S. media have said the attack on Putin may be a lie; however, with physical evidence from the defense operation, it is less likely Russia just made up the attack. At this moment in the conflict, Putin doesn’t need domestic propaganda.
CONTEXT: British intelligence previously confirmed their participation in the successful Ukraine drone attack against long-range Russian bombers. That operation, highly controversial at the time, was previously confirmed by President Trump saying the U.S. was not informed in advance.
The “coalition of the willing” has also expanded. Outside the Ukraine regime, the current group making up the “coalition of the willing” includes: the U.K, France, Germany, Canada and Australia. It is worth noting the additions are all part of the British commonwealth (U.K, Canada, Australia).
Most observers note that Ukraine President Zelenskyy is not an independent actor in the warfare decisions as carried out from within Ukraine itself. In fact, British intelligence has now replaced U.S. intelligence for providing the majority of the satellite guidance systems, targeted systems and missile operations. German and French intelligence have been closely coordinating with the U.K. on behalf of European Union stakeholders.
Europe, specifically the British MI6 intelligence service, have recently espoused their #1 priority is to defeat Russia using the proxy that Ukraine provides.
So, with full context applied it is entirely likely that both Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy are not lying.
The most likely scenario is that U.K elements inside Ukraine again used the opportunity of the Trump-Zelenskyy negotiation meeting to carry out the attack against Russian President Putin. The motive is obvious.
Beyond the ideological component, the economies of the U.K/EU are now increasingly dependent on their defense spending as was recognized yesterday with the severe contraction of the German economy in almost all sectors except those supported by defense spending.
An end to the Russia/Ukraine conflict is against the interests of the “coalition of the willing.” Additionally, an ancillary motive for the U.S. group who support the EU effort is to keep President Trump bogged down.
(Bloomberg) — President Donald Trump’s campaign to end the war in Ukraine faced new complications on Monday when Vladimir Putin said he would revise his country’s negotiating position after the Russian leader claimed Ukrainian drones targeted his residence.
Putin told Trump of his decision in a call Monday, according to the Kremlin, even as Kyiv cast the Russian allegations as a fabrication aimed at derailing the peace process.
Trump addressed the dispute while speaking to reporters in Florida, saying that Putin had told him about the purported attack during their discussion. The US president, seeming to side with Putin, said he was “very angry.”
“It’s one thing to be offensive, because they’re offensive,” Trump told reporters in Florida. “It’s another thing to attack his house. It’s not the right time to do any of that.”
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has dismissed the Russian claims as a “new lie” and warned that Moscow could be using it as an excuse to prepare an attack on government buildings in Kyiv.
Putin said Moscow intends to work closely with the US on peace efforts but would reconsider a number of previously reached agreements, Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov told Russian newswires. Ushakov added that Putin assured Trump that Moscow would look to continue working with American partners to achieve peace and that the two leaders agreed to maintain their dialogue. (more)
Posted originally on CTH on December 29, 2025 | Sundance |
Following a series of FOIA lawsuits, memos from conversations between Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin and former US President George W. Bush have been released online by the National Security Archive. [Original Source Here]
I know it’s Christmas, but bookmark or review as time allows, because the content is very interesting and very important. As early as 2001 and 2008, President Putin clearly told President Bush of his opposition to Ukraine’s accession to NATO, along with other key positions.
Despite what popular media might say, these are NOT full transcripts. Rather, they are memos containing quotes from both leaders as they discuss geopolitical relations between the U.S. and Russia. [SOURCE HERE]
♦ June 16, 2001 – Memorandum of Conversation. Subject: Restricted Meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. [LINK HERE] In this first personal meeting at the Brno Castle in Slovenia Vladimir Putin and George W. Bush express respect for each other and desire to establish a close relationship. Putin tells Bush about his religious beliefs and the story of his cross that survived a fire at his dacha. In a short one-on-one meeting they cover all the most important issues of U.S.-Russian relations such as strategic stability, ABM treaty, nonproliferation, Iran, North Korea and NATO expansion. Bush tells his Russian counterpart that he believes Russia is part of the West and not an enemy, but raises a question about Putin’s treatment of a free press and military actions in Chechnya. Putin raises a question of Russian NATO membership and says Russia feels “left out.” [READ MEMO HERE]
♦ September 16, 2005: Document 2 – Memorandum of Conversation. Subject: Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation: [LINK HERE] Putin meets the U.S. President in the Oval Office for a plenary that covers mainly issues of nonproliferation and U.S.-Russian cooperation on Iran and North Korea. The conversation shows impressively close positions on Iran and North Korea, with Putin presenting himself as an eager and supportive partner. Bush tells Putin “we don’t need a lot of religious nuts with nuclear weapons” referring to Iran. Putin said that Ukraine’s accession to NATO would, in the long term, create a field of conflict between Russia and the United States, adding that internal divisions within Ukraine could lead to its fragmentation. [READ MEMO HERE]
♦ April 6, 2008 – Document 3: Memorandum of Conversation. Subject: Meeting with President of Russia [LINK HERE] This is the last meeting between Putin and Bush, taking place at Putin’s residence in Bocharov Ruchei in Sochi on the Black Sea. The tone is strikingly different from the early conversations, where both presidents pledged cooperation on all issues and expressed commitment to strong personal relationship. This meeting takes place right after the NATO summit in Bucharest where tensions flared about the U.S. campaign for an invitation to Georgia and Ukraine to join NATO. Turning to conversations in Bucharest, Putin states his strong opposition to NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia and says that Russia would be relying on anti-NATO forces in Ukraine and “creating problems” in Ukraine “all the time,” because it is concerned about “threat of military bases and new military systems being deployed in the proximity of Russia.” Surprisingly, in response, Bush expresses his admiration for the Russian president’s ability to present his case: “One of the things I admire about you is you weren’t afraid to say it to NATO. That’s very admirable. People listened carefully and had no doubt about your position. It was a good performance.” [READ MEMO HERE]
2001 – Putin raises a question of Russian NATO membership and says Russia feels “left out.”
As noted by The Islander (Via Twitter)– “The 2001 Memo That Should Have Ended the Cold War 2.0 and Instead Helped Write the Preface to Ukraine. There are documents that don’t merely record history, they expose it. This is one of them.
June 2001. A “restricted meeting” between President George W. Bush and President Vladimir Putin. Not a podium performance, not a television soundbite, not a speech crafted for domestic applause. A private conversation, the place where empires are supposed to speak plainly, where leaders test ideas that could reroute decades.
And what does the memo show?
Putin raises the idea that Russia could eventually join NATO. He says Russia feels “left out” by NATO enlargement. He points to an older fact most Western publics were never meant to internalize: the Soviet Union applied to join NATO in 1954. He argues the reasons for rejection no longer apply. He suggests, almost clinically, that perhaps Russia could be an ally — “European and multi-ethnic,” comparable in character to the United States.
Read that again slowly.
Because the propaganda version you’ve been fed for years requires amnesia: it requires you to believe Russia woke up one morning and decided to be “a threat,” as if geopolitics is a mood swing and security architecture is irrelevant.
But here is the declassified record: Russia was probing for an exit ramp. A pathway into a shared system. A new security architecture. A post–Cold War settlement that could have turned the 1990s from a hollow victory lap into a durable peace.
And it didn’t happen.
Not because it was impossible. Not because Russia “never wanted it.” Not because “the West tried everything.”
It didn’t happen because NATO, as an institution, does not know how to live without a frontier. It does not know how to justify itself without an adversary. It does not know how to maintain internal cohesion without a map that points east and says: there.
The 1954 Ghost: the offer the West never wanted to remember
The most important part of this memo is not the 2001 line, but the 1954 reference.
Because it collapses the morality play.
If the Soviet Union, a state the West defined as the existential enemy, floated the notion of joining NATO in 1954, that means something profound: the idea of Russia being inside the European security architecture is not a “Putin-era trick.” It is a recurring historical proposal, returning whenever Moscow believes there may be a rational way to avoid permanent confrontation.
And what happened then? It was refused.
Which is exactly the point: NATO was never simply a “defensive alliance.” Even in 1954, It was a structure. A protection racket. A way to organize Europe under an American strategic roof and to keep it there. If Russia enters that roof as an equal, the architecture changes. Budgets decrease, with less money for the MIC. Threat perceptions change. The entire postwar hierarchy changes.
So the West did what empires do when presented with a peace that would reduce their leverage:
It smiled, took notes, and kept moving.
“Join NATO” was never a plea, it was a test.
Some people still misunderstand the early Putin posture. They interpret it as naivete, or worse, submission.
Wrong.
This was not Russia begging to be absorbed. The consistent theme in contemporaneous accounts is conditionality, that Russia could consider joining if treated as an equal partner, but not as a defeated province invited into the emperor’s club after proving it can submit.
That distinction matters.
Because it reveals the real incompatibility: •Russia wanted a security system where it is a partner of European security, not an object to be managed. •The Atlantic system wanted Russia as a managed periphery, permanently “integrating,” permanently reforming, permanently conceding, never truly sovereign in security decisions.
You can’t fuse those visions. One side must yield.
So the Atlantic system chose the only thing it has ever really chosen, expansion.”
A quarter century has passed since that original outreach by Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin in 2001. It was rejected by President George W Bush and all presidents thereafter. In 2025, we are in the phase of consequence.
This public release just happened on December 23, 2025.
Perhaps, just perhaps, this release can change the conversation in the United States. Perhaps, just perhaps, President Trump, Secretary Rubio and Emissary Witkoff can reverse the course, and change the arc of history toward peace and a strategic alliance.
The timing of the release inspires hope, but the opposition to peace is extreme.
Posted originally on CTH on December 29, 2025 | Sundance
In addition to being the main economic engine in Europe, Germany is the epicenter of the European Union’s overall goal to chase the green energy agenda.
For the past several years Germany has been deconstructing their fossil fuel energy production and replacing it with far more expensive alternatives. This has led to large increases in overall energy prices, and downstream increases in manufacturing costs.
The consequences have been snowballing throughout 2025, while cheap competitive alternatives coming into the EU from China have compounded their problem. Recently a survey of major industries was conducted in Germany to determine the forecast for 2026, the results are not good.
Approximately half of the industrial sectors in Germany are anticipating job losses, cuts or layoffs this year.
22 out of 46 business associations are preparing to downsize their labor force. Only 9 of the 46 are expected to increase hiring.
At a top-line this looks bad. However, when you look at the sectors contracting versus the sectors stable or expanding, you suddenly realize there is a bigger geopolitical problem within the forecast.
Job losses are expected in auto manufacturing, the textile sector, wood and paper fabrication. Job gains are expected in aerospace, shipbuilding and defense production – i.e. the war machinery.
When the largest and most developed industrial economy in Europe is pinning its economic survival on war machinery, a particular momentum is created. It is never a good outcome for Europe when Germany becomes reliant on war to maintain employment.
Unfortunately, that economic forecast does provide context to the German position for continued Ukraine/Russia conflict. You might say that without a war, Germany could slip into a severe economic contraction; not good.
BERLIN, Dec 29 (Reuters) – A majority of German business associations expect job cuts in 2026 as the country’s economic crisis persists, with industry hit hardest by global protectionism and weak exports, a survey by the German Economic Institute IW showed on Monday.
Of 46 business associations surveyed, 22 anticipate workforce reductions next year. Only nine expect to increase hiring and 15 foresee stable employment levels.
[…] Some bright spots emerged in sectors benefiting from increased defense spending, including aerospace and shipbuilding. (read more)
We will keep watching with additional background context for the Ukraine/Russia negotiations.
Posted originally on Dec 29, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
Whether the car bomb is perfidious depends entirely on the method used to get the bomb to the general. Perfidy (Treachery) is strictly prohibited under Article 37 of the Geneva Conventions’ Additional Protocol I. Perfidy is defined as acts that invite the confidence of an adversary to make them believe they are entitled to, or are obliged to accord, protection under the rules of IHL, with the intent to betray that confidence.
Feigning surrender, feigning injury, feigning civilian status, or using the protective emblems of the Red Cross/Crescent to launch an attack. This is a war crime because it undermines the protections meant to safeguard vulnerable persons (like surrendering soldiers, the wounded, civilians) and erodes the minimal trust needed for IHL to function.
Ukrainian forces have been accused of carrying out assassinations of top Russian generals, including using methods like car bombs and remote-detonated explosives. For instance, Lt. Gen. Igor Kirillov was killed in December 2024 by a bomb hidden in an electric scooter Zelensky claims he has been assassinating Russians under the claim that they are responsible for war crimes. These operations are part of Ukraine’s strategy to weaken Russian military leadership and morale. However, these are outright war crimes.
If the bomber poses as a civilian driver, uses a civilian car with white flags, or in any way feigns a non-combatant or protected status to approach the general, this is perfidy. The act betrays the confidence the general would have that civilians are not directly participating in hostilities. This is a war crime.
Ukraine has been involved in a series of high-profile assassinations targeting senior Russian military officials during the ongoing conflict.
Notable Incidents
Date
General Name
Method of Assassination
Details
December 2024
Lt. Gen. Igor Kirillov
Bomb hidden in an electric scooter
Kirillov was killed outside his apartment in Moscow. Ukraine’s security service claimed responsibility.
April 2025
Lt. Gen. Yaroslav Moskalik
Explosive device in his car
Moskalik was killed by a bomb placed in his vehicle near his home. Ukraine’s President hinted at the operation.
December 2025
Lt. Gen. Fanil Sarvarov
Car bomb
Sarvarov was killed by a bomb detonated under his car in Moscow. Investigators suspect Ukrainian involvement.
These assassinations demonstrate Ukraine’s total disregard for the Geneva Convention as they are using spies posing as civilians to carry out war crimes in Moscow. There are traits that are common to authoritarians as Zelensky has silence any opposition in Ukraine. Historically, revolutionary or authoritarian socialist systems—especially Leninist and Marxist-Leninist ones—have consistently used censorship and repression to silence opposition. That pattern isn’t accidental; it flows from how those systems understand power, truth, and opposition.
The EU has become indistinguishable from the censorship advocated by Lenin and Marx. They are desperate to cling to their Marxist view of the world and in so doing, they are now even seeking to interfere in the United States imposing sanctions on any anyone who dares to disagree with their views of totalitarianism. Confidence is cracking. Capital is watching. And history suggests the capital flow will not favor those who confuse control with trust. In Leninist theory, socialism is not just a policy preference—it is a historical inevitability. Once a party claims to represent “the working class” or “the people,” then any opposition is not merely disagreement, it is redefined as counter-revolutionary, reactionary, or bourgeois sabotage. This is what is unfolding in the EU. They are desperate to retain power and they know they are losing their grip. When that takes place, any government historically seeks total control. This is unfolding in the EU before our very eyes. This is why they will defend Zelensky no matter what his does and they are ignoring the corruption perhaps because they are getting kick-backs on the side.
Vladimir Lenin explicitly argued that freedom of the press and pluralism were tools of class domination, not neutral liberties. From that standpoint, suppressing opposition is framed as defensive, not tyrannical.
Zelensky is a Neo-Nazi who may be Jewish, but like Soros, has pretended to be Christian even joking about confiscating assets of Jews and Russians on stage before becoming president. He married a Christian and his children are baptized. Jews that I have spoken with say he is no Jew. The Ukrainian government has acknowledged some of these assassinations, framing them as necessary responses to Russian aggression and war crimes. Europe is fully aware that Ukraine is a rogue nation-state and that this has been a deliberate war to destroy Russia. The solution applied in Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia was to divide them according to ethnicity. This war would NEVER have taken place if we simply allowed the people of the Donbas to choose as we did in Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia. Ah, but they were not Russians. They hate the Russian people for the sins of Stalin, yet they forgave Germans for the sins of Hitler and Italians for the since of Benito Mussolini.
Zelensky has called for nuclear war. This is why I have advocated exiting NATO ASAP, because they will create a false flag to start WWIII. The EU is collapsing and needs this war to retain absolute authoritarian power. This is also in part why VP Vances has warned that the UK and France do in fact pose a national security risk to the USA for they are desperate for war. MI6’s involvement in Ukraine, to the extent publicly acknowledged, is intelligence cooperation. They also have been providing targeting information. This is like someone hiring an assassin to kill their spouse and claim they did not pull the trigger.
Trump said on Sunday: “Well, I think the land — you’re talking about — some of that land has been taken. Some of that land is maybe up for grabs, but it may be taken over the next period of a number of months — and you’re better off making a deal now.”
Russian live in the Donbas. The Minsk Agreement was to allow them the human right to vote. After Ukrainians slaughtered Russian civilians burning them alive in Odessa, a city founded by Kathrine the Great, that is when the Donbas moved to separate. The Ukrainians HATE Russians and returning that land to Ukrainian will lead to ethnic cleansing but because they are Russians, the Western Press will never report the truth.
This, because the EU, the Neocons, and Ukrainians hate Russians, they will bring the world to the brink of total destruction. China will join with Ukraine because they know they will be next. Add to this, North Korea and Iran along with Pakistan. Nobody seems to be against war except some in the United States.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 