From Proxy War to Proxy Peace | VENIK The U.S. and Russia are finally talking AI SUMMARY: The likelihood of direct peace talks between Russia and Ukraine remains low, but discussions between Russia and the US appear increasingly probable. This approach aligns with the perspective that the conflict is fundamentally between Washington and Moscow, with Ukraine caught in the middle. Russia’s security demands, outlined in its December 2021 proposals to NATO and the US, were previously dismissed but are now back on the table after years of war and substantial losses on both sides. Zelensky is being sidelined in these negotiations, despite efforts to prevent it. His legal status is uncertain, as his presidential term ended in May 2024, and he has delayed elections citing the war. However, the US is pushing for elections, with General Kellogg emphasizing their importance for democracy, even without a ceasefire. This suggests Washington may pressure Ukraine into a settlement by allowing the war to continue rather than negotiating a ceasefire. Putin has also expressed skepticism about engaging with Zelensky, particularly given the Ukrainian leader’s 2022 executive order banning negotiations with Russia. Even if talks were possible, any agreement could be legally challenged due to Zelensky’s ambiguous position. If elections proceed, Zelensky’s chances of winning are slim, and losing would leave him vulnerable, making his personal exit strategy a crucial factor in Ukraine’s future. The US, having used Ukraine as a proxy in the war, is now positioned to act as a proxy for peace. Early 2022 peace talks between Russia and Ukraine were disrupted by the US and UK, and a direct meeting between Putin and Zelensky would likely yield little. Instead, Trump and Putin are expected to negotiate a settlement, which Zelensky would be pressured to accept. Trump’s administration has already engaged in direct talks with Russia, signaling a shift from previous US policy. Any peace deal must account for Ukraine’s internal political realities, including opposition from nationalist factions and oligarchs, who depend on maintaining control. If these groups reject an agreement, another coup in Kiev is possible. Corruption remains a persistent issue, and securing funds for Ukraine’s reconstruction will be crucial to ensuring stability, with US and EU taxpayers likely footing the bill. For Trump, Ukraine is a political issue rather than a national priority. His administration previously cut most foreign aid, except to Israel and Egypt, and Ukraine’s fate is unlikely to be a top concern for American voters. While Ukraine once entertained the idea of a ceasefire, recent developments—including Trump’s election, reduced aid, intensified Russian offensives, pressure to hold elections, and rising desertion rates in the Ukrainian military—have increased doubts about its viability. Freezing the conflict now would likely work against Ukraine, allowing Russia to consolidate its position while Kiev struggles to rearm and rebuild.

@jpchapela I am not sure what you're responding to. I think you got your responses mixed up. Mexico's sanctions against Russia?

The Art of the Gaza Deal

This piece completely misses the bigger picture. Trump and Putin have been communicating via intermediaries—like Orban—for many months, long before Trump even took office. The idea that they’d need some formal summit to start negotiations is naïve. Yes, Putin doesn’t *need* a peace deal in Ukraine right now—his military is advancing just fine, and Russia can take by force far more than what Washington would ever agree to in a settlement. But Ukraine isn’t the main game here. The real prize for Putin is the creation of a new global security framework to replace the defunct Soviet-era agreements the U.S. has been abandoning for decades. In this context, Trump is essential—not because of Ukraine, but because he's the only U.S. leader in decades willing to rethink America’s role in global security architecture. The piece also underestimates Trump’s leverage. It’s not just about tariffs or oil prices—it’s about the broader realignment of global power. Russia, China, and even Europe are all recalculating their positions in a world where Trump’s America may be less interventionist but more transactional. Putin doesn’t need Trump to end the war; he needs him to help reshape the post-Cold War order. Ukraine is just a minor subplot in a much larger strategic play.

The President has sufficient authority to ignore the injunction without any concern for the repercussions.

@GARETH026898360 Why do you need to see the plan? Other than just idle curiosity.

RT @LeanneSpurs: Downtown Philadelphia have begun the celebrations... #SuperBowlLIX #SBLIX

With the end of USAID, such “films” should dry up pretty quickly.

@gordon983913058 There will be no sharing of power - Russia will control what it annexed. I wouldn't say that Zelensky's opinion on the subject is entirely beside the point, but it almost is.

@Agotthelf you may need to use VPN. You can try

A BM-21 Grad multiple launch rocket system from a unit within Russia's "Sever" group of forces has been spotted with an armored cab and anti-drone protection for its launch rails.

UK Minister for Defence Procurement Maria Eagle has disclosed to the British Parliament that new types of unmanned surface vessels (USVs), designated **Wasp** and **Snapper**, have been specifically developed for Ukraine. According to Eagle, both platforms represent a "new unmanned maritime system" that was "rapidly developed" to support Ukraine’s naval capabilities. The system is currently undergoing final testing, with further details expected to be released in due course. A reference image provided shows the **Madfox** experimental USV, which has been tested by the Royal Navy, suggesting potential technological parallels with the newly developed vessels.

@Agotthelf All links are reachable from everywhere. It just takes a bit of effort.