Posted originally on CTH on December 9, 2025 | Sundance
President Trump sat down for an extensive interview with Dasha Burns of Politico. Despite the ideological outlook of Politico, the interview itself was remarkably absent of combative antagonism. The result is a good review of the current positions of President Trump as they relate to the rest of the world.
The Ukraine-Russia conflict is the immediate issue that is discussed within the interview. President Trump answers some direct questions about who is currently most responsible for continuing the conflict and is asked his opinion directly on Ukraine not holding elections.
President Trump notes Russian President Vladimir Putin is in the strongest position within the conflict and carries the strongest leverage into any ceasefire negotiations. Trump also frames the need for the bloodshed to end with a much greater sense of urgency than any of the EU leaders or Zelenskyy. Additionally sharing the opinion that Ukraine needs to have an election to showcase the will of the Ukrainian people in the leadership of Volodymyr Zelenskyy. WATCH:
Yesterday, Ukraine President Volodymr Zelenskyy traveled to London to meet with British PM Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and French President Emmanuel Macron.
As expected, part of the Zelenskyy meeting with the “coalition of the willing” included a briefing by Ukraine negotiator Rustem Umerov, the secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, who held detailed consultations for three days last week in Miami with Trump’s envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.
President Zelenskyy then departed London traveling with his media entourage to Brussels for the next round of discussions with the European Union stakeholders, financiers and politicians. During the trip Zelenskyy told his media stenographers, “Under our laws, under international law — and under moral law — we have no right to give anything away. That is what we are fighting for.”
The U.K, France and Germany support Zelenskyy’s position that he is not going to concede any territory to the Russian Federation, specifically the 30% of the Donbas area in Eastern Ukraine currently at the heart of the physical conflict.
The 30% issue surrounds the Donetsk region in Ukraine, which includes the cities of Kramatorsk and Sloviansk. Russia is currently pushing deep into fortified Ukraine resistance in this region with a population of around 100,000. Zelenskyy claims losing this area would allow Putin to invade the Dnipropetrovsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kharkiv regions.
Historically, this Donbas area was part of a brutal long-term Ukraine civil war between the pro-Russia eastern Ukrainian citizens and the pro-EU western aligned Ukrainian army. Russia’s current position is for Ukraine to cede the entire Donbas to Russia as part of the ceasefire agreement, or Russia will continue forward conflict military operations until successful.
Seeing things through the pragmatic prism of inevitability, President Trump’s view appears to be that this Donbas area will be lost to Russia one way or the other. So, the best scenario to stop the killing is for Ukraine to give up this territory as part of the ceasefire terms. Zelenskyy, with support of the EU, France, Germany and U.K says a firm “no.”
Politico reports that Zelenskyy said in August of this year “it would take Russia four-years to fully occupy the Donbas,” subsequently a lot of killing would take place during this process. President Trump is trying to stop the brutal “killing” part of that dynamic by getting the negotiation to the point of concession, but the EU team view any land area concession as positive affirmation for Russia to continue threatening Europe.
♦ On the ‘Security Guarantee‘ issue, this is where a quagmire is presented by European leaders.
From a pragmatic standpoint a European demilitarized zone, stood up and supported by EU military forces would appear to be the best solution. However, the “coalition of the willing” say they are willing to put security troops into Ukraine, but only if the USA will defend them if attacked by Russia. In essence, quasi-NATO forces on a non-NATO country, that if attacked would draw the entirety of NATO into the conflict, including the United States.
The U.K, France, Germany and EU Commission want a security structure similar to NATO for Ukraine that legally binds the United States to defend their interests if the ceasefire does not hold. President Trump has rejected this construct as yet another way for Europe to pull the U.S into a conflict zone that is not in our vital national security interests.
The ceasefire proposal structured by Trump, Witkoff and Kushner – seemingly supported by Russia, does not permit Ukraine to join NATO; however, EU membership is entirely up to the EU and people of Ukraine to decide. If Ukraine joins the EU, then EU forces alone should provide the security guarantee, not NATO which includes the U.S. and Canada.
(Washington Post) […] Zelensky said Ukraine will not surrender its territory in the eastern Donbas region — not to hasten peace talks, not to satisfy Washington’s push for compromise and not under pressure from Moscow’s continuing military onslaught.
Ukraine and Europe have insisted that a ceasefire be declared along current battle lines, but Russia has refused. Putin has claimed, illegally, to have annexed four entire regions of Ukraine (in addition to Crimea, which Russia seized in 2014) — far more territory than his military forces have been able to occupy.
Some Ukrainian officials held out hope that the negotiations could still bear fruit.
The proposal “is closer to be doable for Ukraine, but not easy and not finished,” said a senior Ukrainian official familiar with recent discussions, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly. (read more)
President Zelenskyy, whose term in office has long expired, departed London with his EU media entourage heading to Brussels. The collective group is trying to figure out how to keep America tied to their stakeholder interests in Ukraine.
The European leaders are manufacturing a construct that is not supported by the vast majority of the citizens within the EU, even within Ukraine itself. Meanwhile back in the USA, congress (House and Senate majorities) supports the position of Ukraine and the EU against the interests of President Trump and the voting majority.
There are trillions at stake.
The ruling class is supporting Zelenskyy, while the killing of the non-ruling class continues on the fields of Ukraine.
Posted originally on CTH on December 8, 2025 | Sundance
Following three days of negotiations in Florida (Thur, Fri, Sat) between President Trump emissaries Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, and Ukraine emissaries Rustem Umierov and Andrii Hnatov, the group then held a 2-hour phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
No substantial progress was reported. However, military officials Umierov and Hnatov then flew to meet Zelenskyy in London where French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz are assembled to discuss alternatives to ending the conflict.
Starmer, Macron and Merz form the core of the “coalition of the willing,” an EU group who have unilaterally proclaimed they were willing to send the military of the U.K, France and Germany into Ukraine so long as President Trump would backstop their troops with promises of U.S. intervention if things went badly. Trump would not make that commitment.
Zelenskyy Inc, Macron, Starmer and Merz do not want to end the proxy fight against Russia. Together with the EU leadership of NATO, the coalition of the willing want to retain the conflict. However, the problem for the four leaders is that without strong USA support, the citizens of their EU countries will rise up against them.
Even with NATO missiles and transferred technological assistance, they ultimately need the American military in order to ensure Putin doesn’t squish them. President Trump wants the proxy war to end – loggerheads are reached.
Russian President Vladimir Putin does not seem to be paying too much attention to the bureaucratic speeches and instead is continuing forward advancement [SEE HERE] to secure the territory in Ukraine with or without a negotiated settlement.
The Russian Federation has presented its terms; the Russian terms for cessation are known; the rest is up to the EU, NATO, USA and Ukraine to work out.
At this point the problem is over-talking and FUBAR, or, well, a typically European situation. So, Putin keeps going, more Ukraine troops are killed, while Putin awaits the endless conversations that he predicted would result in more endless conversations. To be fair, Putin’s cold approach appears to be a mostly accurate interpretation of what he expected.
ZELENSKYY – “In recent days, representatives of Ukraine held substantive discussions with envoys of the US President – and now National Security and Defence Council Secretary Rustem Umierov and Chief of the General Staff Andrii Hnatov are en route to Europe. I expect detailed information from them on everything that was said to the American envoys in Moscow, and on the nuances the Americans are prepared to modify in negotiations with us and with the Russians.” (link)
By my count in the past two weeks, Witkoff and Kushner have spent nine days in direct all-day negotiations with various Ukraine officials from various institutions of Zelenskyy’s government, with a one-day trip to Moscow sandwiched between them. Yet, western media continually proclaim the U.S. delegation of Kushner and Witkoff are ignoring the Ukrainians.
This is what I call the ‘paralysis of analysis’, or the part of every negotiation where things get so granular in detail that the larger objective is lost.
While the Ukraine team argues about whether a creek or a railroad track should determine the current point of conflict, another 250 Ukrainian soldiers have their limbs torn from their bodies and lie dead in the mud. Today they will meet in London to argue over telephone pole ownership, while another battalion is fed to the meat grinder.
CNN frames a narrative that President Trump is unsympathetic and frustrated with Zelenskyy:
(VIA CNN) – […] Trump criticized Zelensky on Sunday after talks between US and Ukrainian negotiators over the weekend in Miami ended with unresolved questions over security guarantees, territorial issues and continued concern that the US proposal tilts in Russia’s favor.
“We’ve been speaking to [Russian] President [Vladimir] Putin and we’ve been speaking to Ukrainian leaders, including… President Zelensky, and I have to say that I’m a little bit disappointed that President Zelensky hasn’t yet read the proposal, that was as of a few hours ago,” Trump said. (more)
President Trump is reviewing the issue through the prism of “hours” because he knows that as each hour passes that’s more dead young men…. And FOR WHAT?
Meanwhile, Volodymyr Zelenskyy is traveling around Europe stopping for tea and crumpets with Macron, Starmer and Merz in London today. Think about the upside-down priorities here.
Bread and Circuses – With Servants Patiently Waiting (Dec 6, 2025)
In addition to setting the priorities for the United States focus, the report details the Trump administration perspective on the world as broken down into specific regions. The report is a brutally honest review of the current state of geopolitical benefits, risks and threats as they pertain to vital U.S. interests.
In addition to outlining a critically renewed focus on the Western Hemisphere, the Trump administration also notes the practical position of Europe, as it pertains to NATO and dependency on the U.S.A.
In a brutally honest review of the situation, the Trump administration notes Europe is increasingly losing their own identity. The fear the Europeans express about being vulnerable to Russian strength is hypocritical, in the sense that in practical outcomes the EU is purposefully weakening itself and simultaneously demanding assistance against their own weakness.
[PAGE 25] – American officials have become used to thinking about European problems in terms of insufficient military spending and economic stagnation. There is truth to this, but Europe’s real problems are even deeper.
Continental Europe has been losing share of global GDP—down from 25 percent in 1990 to 14 percent today—partly owing to national and transnational regulations that undermine creativity and industriousness. But this economic decline is eclipsed by the real and more stark prospect of civilizational erasure.
The larger issues facing Europe include activities of the European Union and other transnational bodies that undermine political liberty and sovereignty, migration policies that are transforming the continent and creating strife, censorship of free speech and suppression of political opposition, cratering birthrates, and loss of national identities and self-confidence.
Should present trends continue, the continent will be unrecognizable in 20 years or less. As such, it is far from obvious whether certain European countries will have economies and militaries strong enough to remain reliable allies. Many of these nations are currently doubling down on their present path. We want Europe to remain European, to regain its civilizational self-confidence, and to abandon its failed focus on regulatory suffocation.
This lack of self-confidence is most evident in Europe’s relationship with Russia.
European allies enjoy a significant hard power advantage over Russia by almost every measure, save nuclear weapons. As a result of Russia’s war in Ukraine, European relations with Russia are now deeply attenuated, and many Europeans regard Russia as an existential threat.
Managing European relations with Russia will require significant U.S. diplomatic engagement, both to reestablish conditions of strategic stability across the Eurasian landmass, and to mitigate the risk of conflict between Russia and European states.
It is a core interest of the United States to negotiate an expeditious cessation of hostilities in Ukraine, in order to stabilize European economies, prevent unintended escalation or expansion of the war, and reestablish strategic stability with Russia, as well as to enable the post-hostilities reconstruction of Ukraine to enable its survival as a viable state.
The Ukraine War has had the perverse effect of increasing Europe’s, especially Germany’s, external dependencies. Today, German chemical companies are building some of the world’s largest processing plants in China, using Russian gas that they cannot obtain at home.
The Trump Administration finds itself at odds with European officials who hold unrealistic expectations for the war perched in unstable minority governments, many of which trample on basic principles of democracy to suppress opposition. A large European majority wants peace, yet that desire is not translated into policy, in large measure because of those governments’ subversion of democratic processes. This is strategically important to the United States precisely because European states cannot reform themselves if they are trapped in political crisis.
Yet Europe remains strategically and culturally vital to the United States. Transatlantic trade remains one of the pillars of the global economy and of American prosperity. European sectors from manufacturing to technology to energy remain among the world’s most robust. Europe is home to cutting-edge scientific research and world-leading cultural institutions. Not only can we not afford to write Europe off—doing so would be self-defeating for what this strategy aims to achieve.
American diplomacy should continue to stand up for genuine democracy, freedom of expression, and unapologetic celebrations of European nations’ individual character and history. America encourages its political allies in Europe to promote this revival of spirit, and the growing influence of patriotic European parties indeed gives cause for great optimism.
Our goal should be to help Europe correct its current trajectory. We will need a strong Europe to help us successfully compete, and to work in concert with us to prevent any adversary from dominating Europe.
America is, understandably, sentimentally attached to the European continent — and, of course, to Britain and Ireland. The character of these countries is also strategically important because we count upon creative, capable, confident, democratic allies to establish conditions of stability and security. We want to work with aligned countries that want to restore their former greatness. (continue reading)
Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin does not see a strong Europe; instead, he sees a continent destroying itself and creating vulnerabilities that can easily be exploited.
President Trump is attempting to stop the inevitable conclusion, the outcome created throughout history, when a strong nation state is positioned right next to a vulnerable, fat, lazy and weak-minded coalition of states.
Europe would be wise to listen to President Trump now, because the American people are not willing to put our blood on the line again to protect the EU – ultimately from itself.
Posted originally on CTH on December 6, 2025 | Sundance
If we read between the lines in the latest update from President Trump emissary Steve Witkoff, we can clearly see the negotiations have entered into that critical phase where payments to all of the stakeholders will determine a successful outcome.
Pragmatic people have long predicted the ultimate solution to the bloodshed will only be determined once western interests get to the point where negotiators propose a long-term plan for continued financial benefit. Too many people, “stakeholders” are making money from the conflict.
From a western perspective, support for the Ukraine conflict is based on money. Therefore, the solution to the conflict requires a system where the western opportunity for financial benefit continues.
Written in polite diplomatic terms, the continued payments are identified as “the prosperity agenda which aims to support Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction, joint U.S.–Ukraine economic initiatives, and long-term recovery projects.” This is codespeak for the U.S. Senate and EU will retain a financial mechanism to exploit for personal benefit.
From the language it appears that Witkoff and Kusher are confident they can construct a financial reward system for western banks, investors, politicians and Ukraine officials that will retain the benefits of war without the ancillary ingredient of bloodshed.
If the U.S. delegation can pull this off, then Russia can gain the territory they want, corrupt Ukraine officials can keep skimming investment money, the EU can retain the power it wants to extract financial payments, American politicians can use the “long-term recovery projects” for money laundering and quasi-public/private investment banks can benefit from the exploitation of Ukraine resources.
Again, from a ‘western geopolitical perspective’, the territorial issues, security guarantees, EU membership status and the position of NATO are downstream details once the larger payment system is organized. Put another way, they are down to the stuff that really matters, the money.
STEVE WITKOFF – Readout of Meeting Between Special Envoy for Peace Steven Witkoff, Jared Kushner, Ukrainian Secretary of National Security and Defense Council Rustem Umerov, and Chief of General Staff General Andriy Hnatov
Over two days, Special Envoy for Peace Steven Witkoff and Jared Kushner met with Ukrainian Secretary of National Security and Defense Council Rustem Umerov and Chief of General Staff General Andriy Hnatov for constructive discussions on advancing a credible pathway toward a durable and just peace in Ukraine.
Today, the group had their sixth meeting over the past two weeks. Secretary Umerov reaffirmed that Ukraine’s priority is securing a settlement that protects its independence and sovereignty, ensures the safety of Ukrainians, and provides a stable foundation for a prosperous democratic future.
The participants discussed the results of recent meeting of the American side with the Russians and steps that could lead to ending this war. The American and Ukrainians also agreed on the framework of security arrangements and discussed necessary deterrence capabilities to sustain a lasting peace.
Both parties agreed that real progress toward any agreement depends on Russia’s readiness to show serious commitment to long-term peace, including steps toward de-escalation and cessation of killings.
Parties also separately reviewed the future prosperity agenda which aims to support Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction, joint U.S.–Ukraine economic initiatives, and long-term recovery projects.
American and Ukrainian parties underscored that an end to the war and credible steps toward ceasefire and de-escalation are necessary to prevent renewed aggression and to enable Ukraine’s comprehensive redevelopment plan, designed to make the nation stronger and more prosperous than before the war.
Parties will reconvene tomorrow to continue advancing the discussions.” (source)
From the Russian side of the equation the war is about ideology, national security and proactive defeat of western, mostly American, encroachment and influence. From the western side, the EU support for Ukraine was less ideological and more financially motivated.
Russia and Ukraine have paid a high price in the larger proxy war. Russia has won the physical fight. Hopefully soon the financial terms will be accepted by the western stakeholders and combat operations can cease.
Ukraine President Zelenskyy will get a nice villa in Europe and a reasonable mansion in the USA. The cocktail parties will continue with crustless cucumber sandwiches and white wine spritzers, while the ladies go shopping and the men get manicures while talking about which of their favorites will replace Zelenskyy.
Posted originally on CTH on December 3, 2025 | Sundance
Secretary of State and National Security Advisor Marco Rubio appears on Fox News for an extensive interview about current events. Within the interview Secretary Rubio discusses the current status of immigration vetting and the pause therein.
Additionally, Rubio outlines the current state of the U.S. operation in/around Venezuela and the ongoing negotiations with Ukraine and Russia to end the conflict in Eastern Europe. WATCH:
Posted originally on CTH on December 3, 2025 | Sundance
President Trump was asked about the Witkoff and Kusher trip to Moscow, Russia as negotiations for an end to the conflict are ongoing. President Trump noted he had not yet heard from the emissary duo, as he is spending time with media, answering questions and being the most transparent administration in history [Video Here].
In the contextual background, Russian Presidential Aide Yury Ushakov and Special Presidential Representative for Investment and Economic Cooperation with Foreign Countries, CEO of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), Kirill Dmitriev spent time walking through Moscow center city with Trump Emissaries Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. This is before the meeting with Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin.
This move is typical Putin. It’s not a negative per se’, but rather an emphatic narrative contrast intended to draw attention to a Russian/American dichotomy.
This optical presentation was likely coordinated via Yury Ushakov and Steve Witkoff. The optical message is psychological targeting; the city of Moscow -structural order, cleanliness, visual and representative Christmas holiday festival spirit- contrast and compared to the city of Washington DC, chaos, conflict and lack of social cohesion.
Traditional American intelligence review would be angered by what would be deemed psy-op manipulation; however, the reality of the situation doesn’t diminish just because the intent is to emphasize the contrast.
In reality, the Russian system of social cohesion generates these visible outcomes, and yes, there is an authoritarian mechanism that mandates the mechanics of what is inherently visible. The debate, which never takes place, regards the overall outcome, the value in the experience as contrast against the two systems.
Yes, despite our unwillingness to admit benefit, there is value in government setting social rules, enforcing cultural compliance standards, demanding self-respect, patriotism and the lack of visible vulgarity. Yes, if govt enforces a rules-based order, it will be naturally oppressive to those who are non-compliant – perhaps to those who prefer vulgarity. However, it is not as simple as dismissing the value when contrast against the outcomes.
THE UNSPOKEN MESSAGE: President Trump has to put national guard troops on the ground in Washington DC to retain lawful order, to control the thugs and enhance the safety and security (domestic tranquility) of the region. President Putin does not need to put the Russian army on the streets to control the thugs or generate the same outcome; Putin’s effort has a cultural outcome.
As the ‘West’ continues to destroy itself (Russian perspective), its culture, its moral decency – and by extension its identity – the position of Russia is to keep out these vulgar influences that devalue the national sense of self-respect.
From the position of the Russian standard, social indecency is not going to be permitted, and if it takes oppressive govt control mechanisms to enforce national cultural standards, if it takes govt to mandate self-discipline, then so be it.
That’s the larger message from Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin, and it is a cold, unwavering and deliberate approach that appears hard, callous and dictatorial to the ‘West’, because in many ways, it is exactly that.
Taking part in the meeting on the Russian side were Presidential Aide Yury Ushakov, and Special Presidential Representative for Investment and Economic Cooperation with Foreign Countries, CEO of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), Kirill Dmitriev.
On the American side, the meeting was attended by Special Envoy of the President of the United States of America Steve Witkoff ,together with entrepreneur, investor, and founder of Affinity Partners Jared Kushner.
Ushakov is to Witkoff as Dmitriev is to Kushner. However, I will say very directly -and this might not please a lot of Trump critics- that Jared Kushner is the key influence agent in this negotiation.
Despite what people might criticize him for, Mr. Jared Kushner has a remarkable level of self-discipline and an emotionless face that would immediately earn the respect of any Russian opposition. When you know how Russians think about strength, you realize the mental component is their focus. When the Russian delegation looks upon Kushner, they see self-control, strength, limited words and ultimately that translates to power.
If there is a hard 10% needed to get to the finish line of negotiations, it will be Kushner who penetrates that difficult part. If Ukraine is to achieve an outcome that leaves them with self-respect in the final product, it will be Jared Kushner who delivers that for them.
Additionally, Russian President Vladimir Putin is happy, because he is in a strong position having just won control of the city of Pokrovsk in Ukraine (Donbas region), saying the now-secured area is a key base for Moscow’s ongoing military advance. Ukrainian resistance is falling, as the stronghold for the best units of the Ukraine military has now collapsed.
Posted originally on CTH on December 1, 2025 | Sundance
On Sunday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Trump emissaries Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner met with the Ukraine negotiating team in Florida to further discuss acceptable terms for a broader ceasefire and end to the war.
Still trying to recover from corruption charges against his senior presidential team, Volodymyr Zelenskyy was not at the talks. Instead, the Ukraine delegation was led by State Security Council Secretary Rustem Umerov, while Zelenskyy went to Paris for an emotional support session with Emmanuel Macron.
Secretary Rubio and Secretary Umerov spoke before and after their 5-hour negotiation session. Secretary Rubio emphasized the main topic as securing the long-term future of Ukraine both from a security position and from an economic prosperity position.
This state security aspect comes as the Ukraine delegation is facing pressure to accept, they will lose most -if not all- of the Donbas region to Russia. “The end goal is obviously not just the end of the war. Obviously, that’s central and fundamental,” Rubio said. “It’s also about securing an end to the war that leaves Ukraine sovereign and independent and with an opportunity at real prosperity.”
In better-than-expected news, the EU is now saying they will not comply with any removal of sanctions against Russia. If the U.S-Russia and Ukraine work out a negotiated settlement that permits legal or economic relief for Vladimir Putin, the European Union will not agree and will instead make up their own decision on the issues.
Europe is holding this position as a threat, because President Trump is not fully consulting with them on all the granular details. However, this is the type of threat that is exactly beneficial to what appears to be the long-term strategy of Trump.
If Europe refuses to remove sanctions or legal threats against Russia, but the U.S. negotiates the removal of U.S treasury and financial sanctions against Russia, then the Europeans have chosen to stay behind the locked door of economic benefit. More than two-thirds of the world does not participate in the sanctions at all.
If Europe and Canada continue blacklisting Russia, the U.S-Russia energy development program gains exclusive benefits to Trump, Putin and other allies like Mohammed bin Salmon (Saudi Arabia), ASEAN nations and even Japan.
In very practical terms, someone like Viktor Orban (Hungary) would like nothing more than to violate ongoing Brussels sanctions against Russia, and as a consequence create a fracture point for European Union exit.
In practical terms, what would this look like? Well, the entire world would have lower energy prices, lower oil and natural gas prices, and lower gasoline prices by big margins. Meanwhile, Europe would have a massive disparity in their much higher energy costs – likely double the rest of the world. Think about the ramifications. Hungary, Georgia, Montenegro, and Serbia with 50% lower prices on gasoline and electricity than the EU. lolol It would be funny.
Unfortunately, with this in mind I find the EU threats hollow. As soon as the U.S-Russia-Ukraine work out a peace and security agreement, Europe will comply with whatever terms are negotiated for Russia. Failure to do so only isolates the Europeans and will create a problem amid their collective mindsets.
(Via Axios) Negotiations between the U.S. and Ukraine on Sunday focused on where the de facto border with Russia would be drawn under a peace deal, two Ukrainian officials tell Axios. They described the five-hour meeting as “difficult” and “intense,” but productive.
Why it matters: Russian President Vladimir Putin — who’s expected to meet with President Trump’s envoy on Tuesday — insists Russia won’t stop until it controls the entire Donbas region in eastern Ukraine.
After an hour in a wider format, the meeting narrowed to three officials from each side — with the line of territorial control virtually the only issue discussed, according to the two Ukrainian officials.
On the U.S. side were Witkoff, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Trump’s adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner. The Ukrainian side was represented by national security adviser Rustem Umerov, military chief of staff Gen. Andrii Hnatov and deputy head of military intelligence Vadym Skibitskyi.
After the talks with their teams ended, Umerov held another one-on-one meeting with Witkoff. Umerov then called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to brief him on the talks.
“It was intense but not negative. We really appreciate serious U.S. engagement. Our position is that we have to make everything to help U.S. succeed without losing our country and preventing another aggression from happening,” one of the Ukrainian officials wrote to Axios after the meeting.
Between the lines: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky had wanted to discuss territory directly with Trump, but Trump said he’d only meet Zelensky or Putin again once a deal is close.
Umerov is expected to meet Zelensky in Paris on Monday and give him a more detailed report about the negotiations, Ukrainian officials say.
Witkoff plans to depart for Moscow on Monday and meet Putin on Tuesday.
“The main question is where the Russians stand and if their intentions are real. Let’s see what Witkoff brings from Moscow,” a Ukrainian official said. (more)
Posted originally on Nov 24, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
I warned those who called me in to draft a peace plan that Kalls (The EU’s female version of Lindsey Olin Graham) and Zelensky are not interested in peace and will sabotage any effort whatsoever to create peace. Zelensky on Monday insisted that any peace plan to end the war must include a recognition of the “aggressor” paying the price, in light of Russia triggering the conflict by invading Ukraine in 2022. Of course, he wants all the Russian frozen money for himself and his corrupt supporter in the EU and his cronies who suspended all elections for him and themselves. He said:
“The aggressor must pay fully for the war he started, and this is why decisions on Russian assets are essential.”
Zelensky in a video address to the Swedish parliament on Monday, arguing that an agreement on the use of frozen Russian assets is a crucial element to any proposal. He does not care about the Ukrainian people. He does NOT want the end of the war for then he no longer has the excuse to remain as an unelected president.
I reiterate my recommendation that the USA EXIT NATO and get the hell out of Europe for there is absolutely no way they will ever accept peace with Russia. I have stressed this in my meetings and we must be concerned about Americans FIRST, not this vendetta Ukraine has against the Russian people. That will never be resolved any more than the hatred between Iran and Israel.
Ukraine will self-destruct. They will never accept peace no matter what. This is not some dispassionate swap of I will you Boardwalk for Park Place. The Donbas has a right to separate. They are ethnically Russian and they will NEVER be free of the hatred of the Ukrainian Nazis.
Our computer has provided a long-term forecast that is unprecedented. I have never seen the computer go FLAT LINE on a country as it has on Ukraine. This is one of the most significant and worrying geopolitical questions of our time. The risk of a nuclear conflict arising from the war in Ukraine cannot be dismissed out of hand. This risk is higher than it has been in decades, and the potential consequences are catastrophic.
It’s crucial to understand that this is not a single risk, but a cascade of potential scenarios. Russia’s stated doctrine allows for the use of nuclear weapons in response to:
A nuclear attack on Russia or its allies.
An attack with conventional weapons when “the very existence of the state is threatened.”
This is precisely the objective of NATO and the EU – the conquest of Russia. The critical point lies in the phrase “existence of the state.” Russia is well aware that this is NOT a war for Ukraine, this is a war against NATO. This idea that Russia must surrender everything would only invite a third coup in Russia and we would surely end up with a hardliner. A conventional defeat in Ukraine would be be interpreted by the Kremlin as such an existential threat. China told to Kallas’ face that they were NOTprepared to see Russia lose because they know that they would be next.
The Kallas/EU/NATO counter proposal to me warrants a complete abandonment of NATO by the USA. We MUST get out ASAP!!!! Their plan states:
All references to NATO non-expansion, one of the US plan’s requirements, have been completely removed.
Ukraine’s Armed Forces will be capped at 800,000 personnel. The US plan proposed a limit of 600,000.
Ukraine may join NATO if all members reach a consensus. The requirement to enshrine NATO rejection in Ukraine’s Constitution is removed, as is the demand that NATO amend its statutes to bar Ukraine.
This Demonstrated that there is NO interest whatsoever in a lasting peace.
The risk is not of a sudden, unprovoked nuclear strike, but of a conflict escalating through a series of steps cannot be dismissed at this point. Tactical vs. Strategic Use:
A “limited” tactical nuclear weapon (or demonstration strike) might be used on a military target in Ukraine to:
Shock Ukraine and its allies into submission.
Break a Ukrainian battlefield breakthrough that threatens a catastrophic Russian defeat (e.g., the collapse of frontline forces).
Signal Russia’s absolute commitment and shatter Western resolve.
Accident or Miscalculation:
The intense conventional warfare, with strikes deep inside Russian-occupied territory and attacks on Russian military assets (like the Black Sea Fleet), increases the chance of an incident that could spiral out of control. Kallas has been advocating the total destruction of the Russian shadow fleet under the theory that would collapse the Russian economy. Of course, she directs Ukraine to do it pretending this is not NATO or the EU. They just provide the gun and tell Zelensky to pull the trigger.
With Zelensky deliberately attaching Russian energy assets with the intent of destroying their econom is a direct threat against Russia itself and that certainly falls within their definition to use nuclear weapons. Such a strike that intentionally or accidentally kills high-level Russian officials or causes mass casualties on Russian soil would trigger a disproportionate response.
Involving NATO Directly:
If a Russian strike (conventional or nuclear) were to spill over onto NATO territory (e.g., in Poland or Romania), even by accident, it would invoke Article 5 and would answer the prayers of Kallas and and launch a direct NATO-Russia conflict, which would carry an immense nuclear risk.
Russia’s Warning are Twisted by the Press as threats
Russian officials have repeatedly warned the West that they are courting nuclear war. They know the truth that this has been orchestrated by the NATO and the Neocons who has usurped American Foreign Policy and the dishonesty pf German Chancellor Merkle negotiating the Minsk Agreement with no intent of allowing the Donbas to separate as she admitted it was to buy time for NATO to train a Ukrainian army to wage war on Russia. threats since the invasion began. Russia’s warning are taken by the press as threats rather than warnings that the European leaders are courting the destruction of Europe. The Neocons and NATO present this to the press as a form of coercion designed to deter deeper Western involvement. The Western Press is not concerned with war, but is cheering it on.
Factors That Mitigate the Risk
Massive Retaliation and Deterrence:
The United States and NATO have made it explicitly clear that any use of nuclear weapons by Russia would have “catastrophic consequences.” While they have not detailed the response, the implied threat is a conventional or even nuclear counter-strike. This creates a powerful deterrent.
The laughable claim that any tactical nuclear weapon would achieve militarily in Ukraine would contaminate territory Russia hopes to control, alienate key partners like China and India, and likely unite the West rather than break it. This is absurd since China already is preparing for World War III and has 50%+ of the total wheat reserves that the West does not, and contaminating the territory of Ukraine, which is the breadbasket for the EU, would undering NATO and Russia has no such interest in occupying Ukraine. Their goal has been to protect the Russians in the Donbas.
International Condemnation:
The other laughable claim that a nuclear strike would turn Russia into a global pariah overnight. China, which has a “no first use” policy, would likely be forced to distance itself significantly. China knows that World War III is coming and said to Kallas’ face that they were NOT prepared to allow Russia to lose because they would be next.
Risk of a Russia Coup:
The decision to use a nuclear weapon rests solely with Putin. The Russian military chain of command is tightly controlled, reducing the risk of an unauthorized launch, but raising the risk of a single decision-maker’s miscalculation. Any attempt to embarrass Putin risks a coup and his replacement with a real harliner who is fully aware that NATO and the EU are behind this war and they do not want any lasting peace.
Putin is a calculated actor, not a suicidal one like the Neocons or NATO, and understands the existential risks for Russia and the world. But he must defend Russia for this is an existential threat for the total destruction of Russia.
However, nearly all agree intelligence agencies acknowledge that the risk of nuclear war is at its highest point since the Cuban Missile Crisis. It is no longer a theoretical academic discussion but a active part of military and political planning in Western capitals.
The risk is not static. It fluctuates with the fortunes of war. A major Ukrainian success or a perceived desperation in the Kremlin would cause the risk to spike.
Conclusion
The risk of nuclear war over Ukraine is a real and present danger, and given the actors like Kallas, Zelensky, and the Neocon running NATO, this has become an imminent likelihood rather than just a theatrical discussion. What is clear is that nuclear weapons are no longer a deterrent. NATO keeps telling leaders Russia will never push the button so they can invade and take Russia in days if not weeks.
The primary risk is one of escalation through miscalculation. by NATO, Kallas (the EU Lindsey Graham) that they can utterly destroy Russia with no nuclear weapons. The West is walking a fine line waging war against Russia while pretending they are not directly involved,
Posted originally on CTH on November 23, 2025 | Sundance
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent appears on Meet the Press to debate Kirsten Welker’s formatted corporate media talking points. The source of most American division is found in the behavior of the media.
Video and Transcript Below:
[TRANSCRIPT] – KRISTEN WELKER: And joining me now is Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. Secretary Bessent, welcome back to Meet the Press.
Good to see you this morning, Senator.
SEN. MARK WARNER (D-VA), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE VICE CHAIR: Good morning, Martha.
RADDATZ: What is your reaction to this peace proposal that is on the table?
WARNER: My reaction is it’s awful. It would make Neville Chamberlain’s giving in to Hitler outside of World War II looks strong in comparison. The fact that this was almost a series of Russian talking points, would require Ukraine to give the — totality of the Donbas, parts they still control, cut back their military forces going forward, never be able to join NATO.
This would be a complete capitulation. And it’s why I think you’re hearing from Congress, both sides, people pushing back. And, obviously, the Europeans feel like they’ve been totally left high and dry.
MARTHA RADDATZ, ABC “THIS WEEK” CO-ANCHOR: You’ve heard the deadline from President Trump, but then him saying that’s not — there’s room for negotiation here, it seems like. So, what do you think happens after today (ph)?
WARNER: I think what happens — it feels like this was a plan that they took almost entirely from the Russians, did no consultation with Congress, no consultation with the Europeans, obviously didn’t read in Zelenskyy and the Ukrainians, and now they’re getting ferocious pushback. So, one more time, Trump is changing his deadline.
Of course, how he picked Thanksgiving to start with, I have no idea. But now it — even with this — some of this back and forth that it’s not really an American plan, or isn’t an American plan, this is the kind of chaos that, unfortunately, represents so much of the Trump foreign policy.
RADDATZ: So, what do you think President Zelenskyy should do? He’s been through this before. It’s kind of back and forth with this White House. They support you. They pull it back. Do you think all of this, this proposal, which seems to heavily favor Russia, is that just a starting point again?
WARNER: Well, I would hope — I would hope so. Again, the Ukrainians have performed magnificently in the field. And they are reinventing the nature of warfare in terms of use — use of drones. To have this proposal forced upon them, I think as Zelenskyy said, Ukrainian dignity versus giving up a partner, I would hope the president would not be so weak as to try to force this plan on the Ukrainian and our other allies. It would, I think, send not only a horrible signal for Europe, but the person who’s watching this probably the most closely is President Xi in China. And if the Americans are willing to throw in their towel so much like this on Ukraine, you can bet that Xi is thinking, this gives him a clearer path in terms of taking Taiwan.
RADDATZ: But what does Zelenskyy do here? If on Thursday the president says, I’m telling you right now, take what we’ve got on the table and — and there will probably be some changes, or we’re done. What — what does Zelenskyy do, just hope that Europe rises and helps him out?
WARNER: Well, let’s — let’s, again, you have overwhelming support still for Ukraine. The last Ukraine aid package had 80 percent of the Congress. I think the president is seeing this one-sided plan kind of blow up in his face with pushback from the Ukrainians, from the Europeans, from members of Congress of his own party. And my hope is, he’ll come back and be a bit more reasonable.
RADDATZ: I want to turn to Venezuela. We’re all watching that this week. What can you tell us about what you think happens now. We’ve got this massive buildup. We’ve got this massive show of force. We have airline who aren’t — that aren’t flying there because of all the activity and the military activity right now.
Do you expect something more to happen?
WARNER: Well, historically, the United States’ intervention in Central America or South America has not always rolled out the way we’d hope. Maduro was a bad guy, frankly, under Biden. When the Venezuelan people voted in overwhelming numbers, Biden should have put more pressure on getting Maduro out then. It was a mistake.
But now, to have this much armed forces, we have not been briefed on any military action that would have been authorized. He keeps putting the word out that maybe he has authorized, maybe he’s not. We are trying to get the answer on that. But there is a real question. You know, to take this big a fleet, bring our largest aircraft carrier, put them there to further blow up boats that they claim have drugs on them, frankly they could have interdicted some of those boats and shown the world that there were drugs.
In terms of Venezuela, the legal opinion about the drug run — drug running doesn’t touch Venezuela at all. So, the president would have to come back and brief us.
RADDATZ: Trump says he’ll be speaking with Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. Do you think that is a good idea? And what can you say to him?
WARNER: Because I think the notion that Trump says he’ll talk to anyone, I think that is — I’m not going to critique him on that, if there’s a way to push Maduro out. Remember, our government and fifty other governments, almost all of Western Europe, don’t recognize the Maduro government as legitimate. But it does not feel like there is an organized plan. And coming down again, America only, without any of our other allies in South America or Central America again seems not the right approach to me.
RADDATZ: What could happen short of a show of force? When you have that massive a show of force, it’s almost like, you’re in a position where you have to do something or you might look weak. Short of Maduro saying, OK, I’ll leave, then what does he do?
WARNER: Well, again, that’s the million-dollar question. And as you know, when you’ve got this many forces down there, and you can’t keep the carrier positioned there forever, you also have the chance of an accident happening or a conflict between the Venezuelan air force or some of our planes that might —
RADDATZ: Do you think he wants to go to war with Venezuela? Do you think he wants (INAUDIBLE) —
WARNER: I don’t know. I don’t know. I think he is trying to put outside pressure on Maduro. But by doing it in this kind of America only approach, again without giving any sign to, I think, even his — the Republicans on The Hill what his plans are, I’m not sure is the right way to do foreign policy. You couple this Venezuela misadventure with this desertion of Ukraine and this is not making America safer, and it’s sure not putting America first.
RADDATZ: Thanks very much for joining us, Senator. Always appreciate it.
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 