Yves here. Your humble blogger had started a broader post, in part triggered by proof of Trump’s increasing power-madness, confirmed by a fresh, must-read New York Times interview, but found it required more internal processing of the events of the new year. But sadly there are plenty of pressing alternatives to discuss, such Russia’s latest rain of blows on Ukraine.
But to continue briefly with the introductory observation: Trump seems to genuine believe no one, including Russia, can constrain him, Putin appears to be digesting that Trump’s extreme need to dominate and his casualness about risk and violence requires even firmer shows of force. As we’ll soon discuss, the Oreshink attack in Lvov, which destroyed not just Ukraine’s but Europe’s largest gas depot occurred in parallel with strikes all over Ukraine, which are likely to be even more consequential.
But having introduced the Trump interview, these sections show that his disregard for the notion that there are constraints on his power:
In his conversation with The Times, Mr. Trump sounded more emboldened than ever. He cited the success of his strike on Iran’s nuclear program — he keeps a model of the B-2 bombers used in the mission on his desk; the speed with which he decapitated the Venezuelan government last weekend; and his designs on Greenland, which is controlled by Denmark, a NATO ally.
When asked what was his higher priority, obtaining Greenland or preserving NATO, Mr. Trump declined to answer directly, but acknowledged “it may be a choice.” He made clear that the trans-Atlantic alliance was essentially useless without the United States at its core.
Even as he characterized the norms of the post-World War II order as unnecessary burdens on a superpower, Mr. Trump was dismissive of the idea that the leader of China, Xi Jinping, or President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia could use similar logic to the detriment of the United States. On topic after topic, he made clear that in his mind, U.S. power is the determining factor — and that previous presidents have been too cautious to make use of it for political supremacy or national profit….
On the domestic front, Mr. Trump suggested that judges only have power to restrict his domestic policy agenda — from the deployment of the National Guard to the imposition of tariffs — “under certain circumstances.”
But he was already considering workarounds. He raised the possibility that if his tariffs issued under emergency authorities were struck down by the Supreme Court, he could repackage them as licensing fees. And Mr. Trump, who said he was elected to restore law and order, reiterated that he was willing to invoke the Insurrection Act and deploy the military inside the United States and federalize some National Guard units if he felt it was important to do so.
Now to the latest Russian pounding of Ukraine:
‼️🇺🇦 A total blackout in Kyiv and its suburbs: authorities don’t know when the power will be restored
▪️The moment of the power outage was caught on camera. There’s no electricity in the capital itself, as well as in the Borispol and partially in the Brovary districts.
▪️DTEK…— Zlatti71 (@Zlatti_71) January 9, 2026
massive attack by “Geran” on Kiev has begun. The first wave of approximately 30 drones is entering the city. In total, over a hundred attack drones are approaching the Kiev region. pic.twitter.com/EKr901dgbV
— Sprinter Press (@SprinterPress) January 8, 2026
Ukraine had the largest total underground storage system in Europe: 31 bcm across multiple facilities, with the Bilche-Volytsko-Uherske site being the single largest at over 17 bcm.
Russian Oreshniks wiped it out this evening. pic.twitter.com/X0o6FQTDyC
— ₦₳V𝚜𝚝é𝚟𝚊 🇷🇺 ᴢ (@Navsteva) January 8, 2026
Update 7:45 AM EST. From a post by Scott Ritter that went live after ours launched:
The use of the Oreshnik is always a major escalation not fully appreciated by those who casually encourage its employment. It is only the second time in history that an intermediate range nuclear-capable strategic missile has been used in combat (the first was the initial use of Oreshnik back on November 21, 2024.)
This time, the Oreshnik struck a target close to the Ukrainian-Polish border. The signal this attack sent to NATO nations is clear—Russia has the ability to strike NATO nations with impunity using non-nuclear conventional weaponry. NATO has no ability to defend against such an attack.
It was interesting that Russia opted to fire the Oreshnik from the Kaputin Yar missile test facility. Russia and Belarus recently announced that an Oreshnik-equipped brigade was put on combat duty at a base in Belarus. But the attack did not originate from this unit.
Russia has indicated that it is fielding additional Oreshnik-equipped brigades. Kapustin Yar is a location where the combat equipment of the Oreshnik missile system is married with the personnel operating it for the final training and technical preparation necessary before a unit can be deemed combat ready. The recent Oreshnik launch on Lvov may have been an operational training event repurposed for the purpose of sending a message to the west.
This was not a launch from a strategic asset that has been placed on combat duty.
This was an operational training event.
There is a difference.
Russia once again appears to be sending a message to the west that it seeks to limit escalation.
This time the camel got a bloody nose.
The next time—if there is a next time—the camel may not survive.
The wee problem is that Trump is incapable of recognizing when acts of force are carefully calibrated. And his team is such a bunch of rank amateurs that even if anyone at an operational level understood, the higher-ups would similarly be unwilling to listen.
Back to the original post:
Confirming the immediate impact on Lvov, Larry Johnson wrote:
Lvov deputy Igor Zinkevich reported that in the Lvov region, the stoves in the kitchen are barely burning, the boilers have gone out and won’t light up – there’s no gas pressure.
Though Oreshnik stole the show, the much larger attack on other Ukrainian cities was in reality far more devastating, with Kiev’s thermal power plants said to be violently hit by Russian strikes as various Ukrainian cities experienced major to total power outages.
💥— Large-scale missile-drone strikes on the energy infrastructure in Kiev have taken place, resulting in damage to 3 x Power Plants: TPP-4, TPP-5, and TPP-6.
Acc to local monitoring channels, up to 12 Ballistic Missiles, 25 x Caliber Cruise Missilies and around 200 x Drones took part in the attacks
After a wave of missile attacks, Kyiv is experiencing serious problems with electricity, water supply, and heating. There are communication outages. Problems on the railway have also begun, but they were already observed yesterday, they have just worsened now.
The even bigger story is the fact that Dnipro and Zaporozhye—both cities of nearly one million people, have reportedly been without power for days….
One Russian channel writes on the attacks on Dnipro and Krivoy Rog in particular:
A clearer picture is gradually emerging of the attacks in Dnepropetrovsk and Krivoy Rog. Judging by the nature of the damage, it’s no longer just about knocking out a generation, but rather about a targeted attack on distribution facilities.
At the current stage, it’s clear that Russia has managed to gradually, with relatively limited resources, create localized but persistent and noticeable power outages. Moreover, the change in approach and the redistribution of attack resources to a specific region disrupt (at least temporarily) DTEK’s usual maneuvering and backup schemes. For the central industrial region along the Dnieper, the existing mechanisms are gradually becoming insufficient.
Dnepropetrovsk is a good training ground in this regard. Due to its importance, the city has a complex, multi-redundant power grid designed precisely to bypass damage and redistribute flows. If prolonged outages can be achieved here, it means that the approach is working and can be scaled.
In the future, this opens up the possibility of turning energy attacks into a “on-demand” deployment tool – disconnecting specific regions without the need for massive fire campaigns, as has been the case, say, over the past three years.
The key question here is not whether this can be done, but the race for speed. On the one hand, there’s a well-honed mechanism for attacking power grid nodes, on the other hand, there’s emergency services that used to take a week or two to restore power. Who will be faster and more resilient in this confrontation will become clear soon.
“Military Chronicle”
BREAKING:
Another horrific video of “Oreshnik” hitting Lvov, Ukraine tonight pic.twitter.com/GFAD3Q1bM7
— Megatron (@Megatron_ron) January 8, 2026
And to more tweets:
Big fire illuminates night skies in Lviv region after Russian Oreshnik strike of Europe’s largest underground gas storage facility. I saw such skies as child in Western Ukraine after gas pipeline explosion dozens kilometers away. There are reports of big gas pressure drop in Lviv… pic.twitter.com/8ofd11pxpB
— Ivan Katchanovski (@I_Katchanovski) January 8, 2026
‼️🇷🇺 The Oreshnik IRBM strike on Lvov. Video shows the MIRV warhead (conventional) re-entering the atmosphere at Mach 15+. https://t.co/wRoEnS1hal pic.twitter.com/MtNzeM0DVw
— Spetsnaℤ 007 🇷🇺 (@Alex_Oloyede2) January 8, 2026
By Andrew Korybko, a Moscow-based American political analyst who specializes in the global systemic transition to multipolarity in the New Cold War. He has a PhD from MGIMO, which is under the umbrella of the Russian Foreign Ministry. Originally published at his website
These are Ukraine’s attempted assassination of Putin right before New Year’s, France and the UK’s official plans to deploy troops to Ukraine if a ceasefire is agreed to, and the US’ seizure of a Russian-flagged tanker in the Atlantic.
The Russian Defense Ministry confirmed on Friday morning that the Oreshniks were used for the second time ever after several were fired at targets in Lvov Region. Reports indicate that the Stryi gas field and gas storage facility were among those that were hit. The first time that the Oreshniks were used was in November 2024 after the US and UK allowed Ukraine to use their long-range missiles for strikes deep inside of Russia. Three recent provocations were arguably responsible for their second-ever use.
The confirmation above explicitly mentioned that Ukraine’s attempted large-scale attack against Putin’s residence in Russia’s Novgorod Region right before New Year’s was what prompted this retaliation. About that, it was assessed that “The CIA Is Manipulating Trump Against Putin” after he flipflopped from believing Putin’s claim that this attack was an assassination attempt to believing the CIA chief’s that it supposedly only targeted a nearby military site, so this can be interpreted as Putin’s retort to Trump.
Moving along, even though the Russian Defense Ministry didn’t mention any other recent provocations as being responsible for their country’s second-ever use of the Oreshniks, it can be reasonably argued that Putin probably had two others in mind too when he gave the authorization for this latest strike. These are France and the UK’s official plans to deploy troops to Ukraine if a ceasefire is agreed to as well as the US’ seizure of a Russian-flagged tanker in the Atlantic. Each are provocative in their own way.
Putin himself warned as recently as September that Russia would deem Western troops in Ukraine “legitimate targets for destruction.” Although “SVR Revealed That British & French Troops Are Already In Odessa” later that same month, that’s not comparable to the conventional deployment that those two committed to. Even more concerning, Witkoff backed their plans, thus possibly making Russia wonder whether the US might reverse its official position that Article 5 won’t extend to NATO troops in Ukraine.
As for the third provocation that Putin probably had in mind when he authorized Russia’s second-ever use of the Oreshniks, the US’ seizure of a Russian-flagged tanker in the Atlantic carried the painful optics of the first extraterritorially imposing its domestic law on the second. If Russia didn’t send a strong message afterwards, however indirect and asymmetrical, then the US might be emboldened to seize more of Russia’s “shadow fleet” elsewhere across the world including in the Baltic and Black Seas.
These last two admittedly speculative motives behind the latest Oreshnik strike explain why targets in Lvov Region were hit instead of others anywhere else across Ukraine. Russia arguably wanted to show France, the UK, and their shared US patron that it’s capable of swiftly hitting targets within NATO without detection if the need arises. This could occur if an unprecedented crisis follows the first two’s planned troop deployment to Ukraine or the US’ hypothetical seizure of more Russian ships does the same.
Putin is almost pathologically averse to escalating in Ukraine due to the risk that it could spiral out of control into World War III so it’s significant that he just authorized the second-ever use of the Oreshniks in spite of that. He didn’t even do this after Ukraine’s “Operation Spiderweb”, which Trump might have known about in advance, targeted Russia’s nuclear triad last summer. This shows how seriously he’s taking Ukraine’s attempted assassination of him and probably the other two provocations too.
So this FAFO thing works both ways I guess. Who knew?
“triggered by proof of Trump’s increasing power-madness”
Orson Wells staged Macbeth with fascist clothes. There could be a new production with an added Greek chorus: Trump is Macbeth and Lady Macbeth rolled into one + a sexual predator and a liberal topping of Faust. The Greek chorus would be his toadies Rubio, etc. singing rants like Steve Miller delivered recently.
Scary times.
Trump may be power mad but the Biden admin was too when they blew up Nordstream (and surely they did, whatever the details). These chicken hawk leaders are careless with violence having never personally felt its effects. You could say the same about Lyndon Johnson, who managed to stay out of WW2 and then 20 years later felt he had to prove his warrior manhood as a result.
And the earlier column about Trump’s rage at not getting the peace prize may be involved in the latest Russia events as well. For the sociopathic mind an easy rationalization is all that is needed for, say, the robber to kill that convenience store clerk for not turning over the money fast enough. Trump probably thinks he gave them (the Russians and other “adversaries”) a chance and now he will settle things.
Most of the country likely now realizes what a loose cannon we have in charge of our destiny. No more rationalizations on all sides with the media figures who defend Trump being the worst.
Your example is off point. You forget that the US got German consent for the destruction of Nordstream:
The german leader spoke like a man with a gun to his head. I don’t consider that consent in any normal usage of the term, and to me that example only reinforces the sense of imperial hubris in Biden.
That’s your projection. Scholz routinely looked uncomfortable at public events during his time in office. And even if he were, it could just as well be with the spectale of Biden letting the cat of of the bag about the plans, particulary since the Biden (I hate to be crude but it fits) dick-wagging undermined the attempt (presumably also part of the plan) to blame the blow-up on Russia.
I think the power relationship does preclude meaningful consent.
Wow, I don’t think I realized it was that explicit. Olaf Scholz agreed to blow up a big part of Merkel’s legacy.
Sorry for the length:
I too would have asked the question of Carolinian – where are the differences to the Biden “era”? What is worse, what the same, (what better) in comparison now.
Because the issue of German “consent” is way more complicated and goes back much further in time.
The above press conferences are no proof for serious consent by Germany.
Germans simply had nothing to oppose with.
I haven´t the slightest respect for the Scholz people.
But even they knew very well what opposing the Americans would mean.
There are enough sane in SPD/CDU/GREENS and the intelligence services to game out what would´ve happened if they had not gone along with Biden.
In how far the German top politicians in charge did assume that in the long run blowing up Nordstream would pay off – i.e. Russia destroyed – (Nordstream defunct being the smaller of two evils) – is a question posed only under immense pressure and when trying to justify the unjustifiable.
I don´t know how much dirt the US did have on Scholz. One explanation for his submissiveness in this very issue was the Cum-Ex scandal. We probably will never learn.
But before that:
– 2018/19 Trump threatened to sanction the German town where Nordstream would end. The German mayor actually asked Merkel for help. This was widely reported (of course because “Trump”).
-We know from the investigative committee in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the state affiliated with Nordstream, that most likely CIA were seen there inquiring about the facilities being completed. Including one alleged operative asking the question if that “thing” could still be stopped.
-When Trump´s Treasure Secretary, Steve Mnuchin, articulated the threats over Nordstream, it was then German Finance Minister Olaf Scholz under Merkel who offered the US purchase of LNG valueing I think 1B for the favour of letting Nordstream go ahead.
Of course Mnuchin rejected the offer but on the other hand nothing happened.
-Then in the summer 2021: Biden and Merkel agreed on ending Nordstream “if Putin attacked Ukraine”.
That we know from David Ignatius in the WaPo:
The secret planning that kept the White House a step ahead of Russia
May 26, 2022
https://archive.is/BFO96
“(…)
Germany was a reluctant but essential ally, and the Biden administration made a controversial decision last summer that was probably crucial in gaining German support against Russia. Biden gave Germany a pass on an initial round of sanctions against a company building the Nord Stream 2 pipeline in exchange for a pledge from Chancellor Angela Merkel that if Russia invaded, Nord Stream 2 would be scrapped. When the invasion came, Merkel was gone but her successor, Olaf Scholz, kept the promise.
(…)”
Considering Kissinger´s dictum “it´s bad to be an enemy of the US, but worse to be her ally” this is proof of how power politics works. The issue of really having a choice never arises. You try to bumble through without getting hurt too much.
And we know that the US since the 1970s had serious contentions over German-Soviet pipeline plans. Blinken wrote his thesis about this topic.
So the house of cards collapsing right now was fragile already many years ago and the process started well before. With Germany never having a real choice unless the elites would have broken the atlanticist “alliance” which is unthinkable.
Just as another final quip:
Noam Chomsky and Bill Fletcher had a discussion over Ukraine April 8th, 2022:
Fletcher was criticizing Chomsky´s focus on the US being the real bully in all this.
At one point Flechter is asking Chomsky “What am I missing here?”
And Chomsky unusually bluntly answeres: “What you´re missing is the nature of international affairs.”
And then briefly expands on the simple truism that the EU states are afraid of the US as a rogue superpower.
video excerpt TC: 29:20
“Noam Chomsky: A Left response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine
World-renowned linguist and analyst Noam Chomsky speaks with activist Bill Fletcher, Jr. about the geopolitical stakes of the war in Ukraine and how the left must respond.”
https://therealnews.com/noam-chomsky-a-left-response-to-the-russian-invasion-of-ukraine
Or via transcript:
“(…)
Bill Fletcher Jr.:
(…)So you’re attributing a lot to the role of the US, but every NATO country has a veto over the entry of another country into NATO. So despite what the United States was pushing, there were at least two NATO countries, Germany and France, that were against the introduction of Ukraine into NATO. Putin knew this. (…) So the question then is if Putin knew that there were vetos against Ukraine going into NATO, despite all of the hoopla from the United States, there’s something that’s missing here. (…) But what am I missing?
Noam Chomsky:
You’re missing the nature of international affairs. In international affairs, the fact of the matter is that the United States has overwhelming power. Other countries exist, they can do something, but when the United States lays down the law, they follow it. We know that, Russia certainly knows it. Take our actions. Take for example, our 60-year war against Cuba, including Kennedy’s terrorist war. Brutal, harsh, destructive sanctions, the entire world opposes them. Europe opposes them. Take a look at the United Nations vote. Last vote was 184 to two against them. United States and Israel. Israel’s a satellite, it has to vote with the United States.
So universal opposition, but universal adherence to them because they’re terrified of the United States. Other countries won’t violate US sanctions, even though they oppose them and hate them, because they understand international affairs. They understand that the United States is a violent, rogue state, we should do what it wants. Do I have to run through the history on that?
(…)”.
In all this there is not the slightest space to really choose between consent or opposition.
And the events since Venezuela are evidence in a most profound way. EU is completely powerless. As it always was. So one cannot speak of “consent”. It just never became so apparent as now.
Was there any serious questioning in Germany of the destruction of Nordstream, let alone upset about the implications? There is a saying in the law going back to Roman times, silence is consent.
I believe Wolfgang Streeck wrote a short article that described how discussion of the Nordstream incident within the German parliament was suppressed using some arcane legal justification about state security.
It may have been linked from here at NC, but alas I didn’t save that (just checked).
And thank you, AG, for this excellent commentary !
it is likely that, with the Nobel gone, Trump has lost any interest he may have had in brokering a peace.
I’m not convinced that hitting Ukraine in retaliation to US perfidy sends any sort of message to Trump. He still probably sees it as zero-risk for him.
Not true. If the Ukraine collapses and the Russians achieve all their aims, then all the blame for this would be pinned on Trump like he did with Biden and Afghanistan. The Neocons and the media would be blasting him constantly, even though they were the one pressing for this war. Trump would be hung out to dry and it would be a massive L for him. Can’t wait for this to happen.
And from the Russian ‘Military Chronicle,’ quoted above by Yves: “On the one hand, there’s a well-honed mechanism for attacking power grid nodes, on the other hand, there’s emergency services that used to take a week or two to restore power.”
Those emergency services can be double tapped in most cases if the Russians so choose, I’d imagine. So this is potentially the ‘lights out’ phase for Ukraine and matters could proceed rapidly from here.
It seems that the mayor Klitschko has asked citizens to evacuate Kiev, as the whole city is basically without electricity, heat and water and the emergency services can’t yet give a schedule for restoring the services even partially.
That quote is actually in the Simplicus article but my hoisting says it sounds sound.
So, arguably, Trump’s best move would be to keep the war going for the next three years so the hot potato gets handed off to the next Presidential Sucker.
Quite possibly a Democrat, thus making the loss in the Ukraine a twofer. Trump could brag about how he was “doing it right” and if only he’d have had a little more time the Ukraine would have finally won. Bigly.
Ukraine doesn’t have the population for three years at their attrition rate, so a million or so military-aged male Europeans will need to be volunteered for death (3 million for maiming) to make it last that long.
I am sure that will keep the guillotines away from the current EU leadership {/snark).
But that requires arithmetic to figure out which evidence suggests is too complex for the current administration, which argues it has made trillions in tariffs (they seem to have problems with numbers and counting)
Trump is reluctant to commit the US military to any sustained operations. He prefers the Hollywood-style special forces ops, or “shock and awe” B-2 bombing runs, which make great headlines but seldom win anything other than a press conference.
If Putin really wanted to send a message to Trump, he should send it in a language that Trump understands.
Deputize the Houthis and send some Russian special forces to the Gulf to seize a US-flagged tanker in a tit-for-tat move. Make sure to film the whole thing and upload it to YouTube. Hold a press conference and brag about it. Tell Trump that he can get his tanker back when the Russian-flagged tanker and any crew are released.
That would have the side benefit of not punishing the wrong folks. Although I do see how the destruction of Europe’s gas storage will send a message to Merz, Macron, and Starmer. Whether they care or not is another question.
The US has already released the two Russian citizens from that tanker. No idea about the other 26 crew members-
‘The vessel had a crew of 28 people, including two Russians, 17 Ukrainians, three Georgians and three citizens of India.’
https://www.rt.com/news/630753-us-tanker-crew-moscow/
That’s interesting, thanks for the update. Two thoughts:
1. Once again, Trump lied to the American people. I’m not sure if it was Karoline Leavitt or Blondi, but one of his minions got up in front of the press and promised that the crew would be prosecuted in a court of law. Presumably for breaking sanctions, or some such legal fiction. That he quietly backed down is notable, and yet another example of him lying. Returning the innocent crew members to their countries was the right thing to do, but it removes any legal fig leaf to justify the operation. What we’re left with is brazen theft/piracy. I wonder if the ship will be released, as well.
2. Neither Russia nor Georgia, nor Ukraine (nationalities of the other crew members) should be “thanking” kidnappers for releasing hostages. No comment would have been better.
“Deputize the Houthis and send some Russian special forces to the Gulf to seize a US-flagged tanker in a tit-for-tat move. Make sure to film the whole thing and upload it to YouTube. Hold a press conference and brag about it. Tell Trump that he can get his tanker back when the Russian-flagged tanker and any crew are released.”
Great idea, ChrisFromGA.
If the seizings continue long enough, each side would eventually own the other’s fleet.
Reflag, lather, rinse, and repeat.
Maybe move some oil in the meantime, but mostly play Grab A Ship….
I think Admiralty law can be a bit more complicated than that. I suspect an action taken in rem against the ship will follow.
As far as “tit for tat”, I doubt any US flag tankers are in the area but if they are most likely under charter by Military Sealift Command so intercepting military cargo brings a new dimension to it.
A message…
Which reminds. In the last century, the IRA fought a war against the British. And mostly lost.
Then they switched tactics and blew up a truck-bomb in the City of London. And did it again.
It was a message. They didn’t do much damage. But they spoke to the City. And the City responded. And spoke to the government. And the City said no, stop this now.
The UK sued for peace, the Good Friday Agreement. A centuries old war ended.
Fast forward to today – what is the message and who sends it to whom?
per Colonel Wilkerson, on Judge Nap, Russia has seized and continues to hold 12 US tankers/freighters and is more than willing to seize dozens more. The Russians are not advertising it, apparently, but frieght insurance rates are rapidly rising. Additionally, Russia is now sending nuclear submarines to the carribean for convoy protection – likely outfitted with hypersonic missiles, so we will be one mistake away from 1/3rd the US fleet being destroyed in a heartbeat with very high risk of a very negative outcome.
Sending Oreshnik to Lvov is a message to Banderites. They know that Russians won’t ever flatten Russian cities like Kiev and Odessa. If Russians are pressed too far and forced to do something extreme, it’s the Banderite capital that would get the “nuked”.
The neocons are already grousing about Trump not getting into boots on the ground in Caracas!
Trump probably won’t lose Kiev, that will happen to #48! Russia won’t get desired results until a few more years wear and tear on empire/NATO.
I’m somewhat dubious of the cause and effect suggested in Korybko’s article. That the Russians were looking for some way of responding to the attack on Putin’s residence (which Ukraine and the West continue to deny ever happened) is quite possible, but it’s likely that the attack would have happened in any case, because it clearly forms part of a coherent plan for de-energising Ukraine, and the target chosen seems to be one that the Oreshnik is particularly suited to attacking. To that extent, the linkage with the Ukrainian attack is political only.
Certainly, looking at the western media this morning (a reasonable proxy for elite opinion in most western countries) the attacks are dismissed, and largely reported in terms of civilian casualties and disruption (Le Monde has had a picture of a damaged apartment building on its website all day). National leaders are reported as angrily criticising the “unacceptable escalation” that this attack represents, according to a joint Macron/Starmer/Merz statement. There is no sign that whatever message the Russians may have been trying to pass has been received: indeed, the lessons drawn in the West is that the effort against Russia must be intensified. In any event, the pressures pushing the West (and especially Europeans) to continue the war are far more powerful than the hypothetical effects of one missile. Ending the war on Russian terms would be an apocalyptic political disaster compared with which almost anything else is preferable.
As for the other two speculative motives, the Europeans are already clear that they won’t deploy troops in Ukraine after the war without Russian consent, and in reality, as I’ve suggested, it has more to do with intra-European rivalries than the situation in Ukraine as such, and I doubt the Russians see it as a provocation. And for the tanker, well, possibly, but I don’t think the US or the West would try anything in the Black Sea. Ultimately, there’s no sign that the West understands the significance of this attack, or at least no sign that it can bring itself to do so.
The Russian Foreign Ministrry does not agree with your take. They have issued a pretty choleric statement about the France/German/UK “peacekeeping” plans.
I read it. It’s a statement. It’s what I would expect them to say. Such statements don’t necessarily reflect what governments actually feel.
I beg to differ. The language is unusually heated.
Aurelien: …the attack would have happened in any case, because it clearly forms part of a coherent plan for de-energising Ukraine...
Quite. As the largest gas storage facility on the European continent, this site was always on the agenda as a primary Oreshnik target once Russia had Oreshniks.
Aurelien: There is no sign that whatever message the Russians may have been trying to pass has been received … (regarding) the hypothetical effects of one missile.
Unfortunately. When the Oreshnik is framed as a threat it’s because it’s luridly ‘nuclear-capable’ (as if, forex, the Iskander wasn’t). The shocking thing — not that I am shocked any more — is the absolute incapability of the blockheads ‘leading’ the West to possess either technical understanding or sufficient imagination to grasp the possibility that Russian weapons systems technology in EW and missiles is now arguably a generation more advanced than the West’s
I believe Mr. Medvedev today referred the Oresnik strike as a “life-saving injection of haloperidol”. Apparently in the current international relations only “orderlies with huge fists” can tame the “dangerous psychos”.
Schizophrenics show most resistance when receiving their monthly depot injections!
Well, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced this indeed was a response to the Valdai strike. I guess the message was to the Banderistas – Russia just don’t care what “Europeans” do at this point. Just like the stripping Ukraine of the energy grid is a response to the “energy war”.
Russia is trying to drive in the point that Ukraine just can’t win, and each day they resist the terms of surrender will be worse. As will be the state of the Ukraine that will remain.
It was just a flesh wound…
I have a sneaking suspicion that Putin and the Russians are not signalling Trump.
Remember Putin’s words, on camera, along the lines of – US presidents come and go, but the Deep State continues to run the policy? If this is something that the Russian government believes, then presumably any signalling they did would be as much for this Deep State as for any US president. Hoping, or counting on, that the Deep State will prevent Trump from going off the deep end a la Martin Sheen’s character in “Dead Zone” (a future US President who single-handedly, and to the surprise of others in Washington, starts a nuclear war…except he is killed by the protagonist in the present).
I mean, I have to believe the Russian government, and Putin specifically, has the measure of Trump psychologically. He must have gone to Alaska in part to personally take a look at the man, and remember, Putin’s KGB work was mostly as a “curator” handling field agents and sources. And they certainly read everything in the New York Times and whatnot. To wit, the state-adjacent TV channels of late have been on a “Trump or no Trump, the US never changes” sort of a kick.
One may agree or disagree with this assessment of Trump’s capacity to single-handedly smash up all the china in the shop. But I have a feeling this Oreshnik show was more for the benefit of the people in the Pentagon. Now, it’s a different question whether anyone in the Deep State is paying attention – remember, some of these people have spent the last 25 years of their lives arguing that Russia is a “gas station with nuclear weapons”.
That is an astute point.
They are also, I think dealing with the chaos of loonies like Pete and Kash lurching around the offices and in public spewing nonsense.
I suppose it’s a bit like working for a previously dull company after the boss brings in his idiot brother-in-law right as the boss semi-retires.
I was puzzled as to why RU abruptly re-flagged the now-seized tanker (Bella1 to Marinera, abracadabra) while it was still at sea; hardly a standard maneuver and quite unusual for sluggish RU bureaucrats (the Ministry of Transport is a sleepy backwater by Moscow standards) to show an unexpected flash of initiative, especially during the holiday season.
My guess is that this was done on direct Kremlin orders as a test of the USA, to see who was really in charge of RU policy: Trump or the Deep State. A kind of loyalty test.
The answer is now clear.
It will be interesting to see how RU will respond if the USA tries this again with a bona fide RU-flagged tanker, let alone if the EU tries to prove its mettle by trying the same stunt in the Baltic Sea. I predict that RU-USA will both do their best to avoid repeating this kind of confrontation, whereas the EU might very well FA and FO.
The ship was sold to a Russian interest. The reflagging was legit. The Russian government told the US so yet it proceeded with the capture. From Larry Johnson’s website, quoting the Foreign Ministry:
https://substack.com/redirect/31940fbc-f527-424b-ab9c-f1e7a9f349a6?j=eyJ1IjoiYnpzOCJ9.MluqBz0Tlni3gAubnSfIpiNzrd1bo71PMIm5MOLrKhw
Quoth the Russian Foreign Ministry: Under these circumstances, the landing of American troops on a civilian ship on the high seas and its actual seizure, as well as the capture of the crew, cannot be interpreted as anything other than a gross violation of the fundamental principles and norms of international maritime law, as well as the freedom of navigation. This constitutes a significant infringement of the shipowner’s legitimate rights and interests.
Them there’s a LOT of words to use when the FM could have just said “piracy.”
Now for a fun thought experiment – since piracy is one of the bases for stopping and seizing vessels, would the Russians be within their rights to stop and seize the Mariner? Not to mention all the vessels that were complicit in pirating it?
Asking for a friend.
It is a strategic weapon and was used for a strategic reason, to disrupt US plans to make Europe dependent on expensive US natural gas. We will see if they have been able to permanently disrupt the operations of this storage which has some geological peculiarities concerning mudstone and siltstone. This place is integral to North to South distributions of gas in Eastern Europe.
Cannot wait to see Oreshnik used at sea and the results on surface ships above the rods. Remember the RS 26 is just the RS 24 with one less stage at the basic level, so savings increase with volume of production.
From a very simplistic and basic level, in the context of DT’s braggadocio, and continued provocations and reckless behavior from US/UK intelligence services – why hasn’t Russia or China responded opently with equal force? I understand the Oreshnik attacks may have been part of this, but I would guess that more and bigger retaliations might be coming.
As Scott Ritter mentioned recently, when a mad dog is roaming the streets, something must be done. An Atticus Finch is needed to “put a bullet in the head of the mad dog”.
However, as always, if the mad dog has nuclear weapons and has Nuclear First Strike policy, does one want to risk going after the mad dog? Maybe I’m too paranoid, but the likelihood of nuclear war here appears to escalate by the week, and it is arguably the highest it has ever been. Russia and China may have no alternative but to continue to act with extreme restraint so as not to trigger the mad dog. The US appears to be provoking a Samson Option or something, but again I hope it’s just my hypersensitivity.
The basic argument, which I share, is that an actual attack on any western target would be so traumatic for a West and its political class that have never experienced conventional attack in their lifetimes, that the potential results are impossible to predict, and could quite easily turn nasty or even terminal.
I’m not aware of any nuclear power that has a first strike doctrine. Anyway, it’s not something you would ever talk about, it’s something you do, insofar as, with second-strike assets everywhere, it’s actually possible.
Engaging in the same cultural reductionism as we do in the West viz the Slavs (Africans, Asians, …) are culturally stubborn to the point of blindness to their own self-interest… Russia, because of its historical relationship with Europe, understands that perhaps the most ideological, stubborn, and self righteous political culture, one that has successfully married persistence and self righteousness with efficiency, is that of the West. This is why Alexander Nevsky feared the Europeans, who wanted to take Russia’s soul, more than the Mongols, who were content with mammon.
I think this understanding of the West is what guides the Russian (and Chinese) delicate navigation of their geopolitical project to reduce the West down to size. They have a strong fear of the West because they understand that, as Mearshimer often says, the West can be utterly ruthless and will not quit until it fully destroys its enemies, any temporal agreements that might be reached. They also have a strong fear of the West’s ideological and self-righteous recklessness.
I don’t know why anyone would use the word pathological to describe an aversion to World War 3. Being casual and unconcerned about World War 3 is what seems pathological to me. Whether Trump is actually insane or is just putting forth the “Madman Theory” historically and intentionally displayed by US leaders, we are very fortunate to have a grown up in the room in the person of Putin at this dangerous junction of human history.
The problem for Putin and the rest of the human race is that normal considerations may not apply when it comes to Trump. President Trump sincerely seems like he wouldn’t mind taking down the rest of the planet with him if the alternative is not getting his way. This attitude, combined with his utter inexperience and political naivete makes a super dangerous combination. The comparison with Hitler is overused, but we again seem to have a situation where the leader is obviously driving the society into the ground and none of his underlings or anyone else seem to be able to make him see reason. Hitler’s own staff of course ultimately attempted to assassinate him out of desperation, but the attempt failed. I don’t like to think that the United States would need to resort to anything like that.
Putin’s careful and proportional retaliation in the hope of making subordinate US government personnel see sense is probably our best shot at getting out of this alive. Let’s all light a candle for him.
Putin is widely depicted as far more escalation averse than pretty much eveyone else in his government, including the General Staff, who have to have gamed out scenarios. Are you telling me all of his colleagues are suicidal?
There are degrees of response, particularly in going more forcefully against the grid than Putin has been willing to do, which does not amount to direct confrontation with NATO but instead pounding Ukraine into submission. And per John Helmer, the General Staff has been frustrated since the electric war started at Putin’s reluctance to hit the power supplies harder.
From Dmitri Lascaris w/Margaret Kimberly today:
The ‘Donroe Doctrine’ Is Global Hegemony On Steroids
It seems like the analysts can’t figure out what the Russians hit with the oreshnek.
https://www.youtube.com/live/fNelQl38FeE mercurous on Daniel Davis
what if those strikes were a demonstration to a third party who has received oreshneks from Russia?
Could Russia be assuring some third party of the targeting accuracy of these missiles?
Aside from trying to explain it to the Americans of course!
A demonstration showing that the first one was not a fluke, and that the technology is mature and ready for prime time. Some show off by firing a state-of-the-art missile, others by dropping special forces onto a rust bucket. Different target audience.