via ZeroHedge

A fresh report in Financial Times has revealed that during US-Russia talks in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday, Moscow demanded that NATO and American forces are withdrawn from eastern Europe as a condition for “normalizing relations.”

Sources in Romania’s government revealed the request, which was rejected by the team led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. But NATO countries along the alliance’s so-called Eastern flank are still worried: “Cristian Diaconescu, the Romanian president’s chief of staff and adviser for defense and national security, said on Wednesday that the US delegation had rejected Moscow’s demand, but that there were no guarantees that Washington would not eventually make this concession to Vladimir Putin,” FT reports.

This concern was expressed to FT as follows:

“As far as I understand, the situation can change from hour to hour or from day to day,” Diaconescu told Antena3 television, in a reference to US President Donald Trump’s scathing criticism of the Ukrainian leader and his concessions made to Russia even before talks began.
Diaconescu stressed that the Russian delegation to the talks in Riyadh earlier this week “failed to convince the Americans” on a Nato withdrawal and that further visits by the leaders of the UK and France to Washington next week would seek to persuade Trump not to give in to this demand.

No real details on specifically what the Russians requested as a condition for fully restoring and improving US relations has been revealed by the US side. However, staff at each of their respective embassies are being restored. Read more.

Michael McFaul on the negotiations between Russia and the US: Trump offered Russia a lot

1. Part of the territory of Ukraine.
2. Partial withdrawal of US troops from Europe.
3. Non-membership of Ukraine in NATO.
4. Lifting of sanctions.
5. No American soldiers in Ukraine.

And Putin offered nothing in return.

The Russians are saying that this is not the correct analysis. Russia offered a lot in return:

Russia ceases military actions and does not take Odessa, Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, Nikolaev, Sumy, Chernigov, Kirovograd, Kyiv, by military means. These are huge concessions, the Russians claim. Colossal.

On the other hand, French and British peace plan for Ukraine will be discussed in Washington during the visit of the leaders of France and Britain to the United States in a few days.

1. The deployment of 30 thousand NATO troops from Europe in the largest cities of Ukraine and its ports.
2. The deployment of an additional large batch of US aircraft in Ukraine.
3. The deployment of US missiles in Ukraine.
4. All this after the signing of a peace agreement between Ukraine and Russia.

Based on this, will Russia sign a peace agreement?

But meanwhile Trump wants to cut Pentagon spending, perhaps by 40%. The Washington Post writes about it. This reflects the near bankruptcy of the US.

But European leaders will be against it. Watch the drama unfolding!

By Michael Every of Rabobank via ZeroHedge

The US-Russia Ukraine War ceasefire talks in the Saudi capital yesterday are causing a chain Riyadh-tion.

Russia made no concessions at all. Indeed, NBC news cites Western intelligence and congressional sources stating that President Vladimir Putin is not interested in a peace deal and instead seeks to gain full control of Ukraine, because “He thinks he’s winning.”

By contrast, rumors are flying of what the US may have conceded: Ukraine’s NATO membership is off the table; a potential Ukrainian election may be on it; and some fear the reduction of US forces in Europe, crystalising the latter’s sudden existential concern over who now defends it. It remains to be seen what is true.

Yet as pointed out in the Grand Macro Strategy report, realist US statecraft is hardly new. For example, in WW2 President F.D. Roosevelt forced UK PM Churchill to exchange British bases for mothballed WW1-era US destroyers, made the UK pay for US goods until it couldn’t continue, then switched to Lend-Lease with terms preventing Britain from ever re-emerging as an imperial power, reinforced by the US forcing sterling to become convertible again too soon post-WW2, and making it remove its Imperial Preference tariffs.

However, there is now an echo of Nixon going to China for some, and Molotov-Ribbentrop for others. Indeed, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov underlined “high interest” in lifting US-Russia economic barriers, while Secretary of State Rubio stated peace in Ukraine would “unlock” opportunities for cooperation and “some pretty unique, potentially historic economic partnerships.” Which grand strategy logic argues will not involve Europe, not even via cheaper Russian gas, as the market –understanding only macro strategy– prices for it regardless.

Europe is of course outraged, but both France’s Macron and Germany’s Scholz had meetings with Putin without Ukraine present as late as 2022, and Germany regularly worked round it before that. Moreover, it was Macron who told Politico in late 2023 that Europe must resist pressure to become “America’s followers” and the “great risk” Europe faces is getting “caught up in crises that are not ours.”

Regardless, as the talks ended yesterday, rumours flew that Europe would announce a €700bn aid package for Ukraine, which may occur at another emergency EU+UK summit to be held today. If so, we are talking serious money, but equally serious questions arise:

• How many years is this over? The time value of money is existential when geopolitics is this raw.
• How will the money be used? Ukraine is already producing as much war materiel as it can, and Europe has refused to shift to a war economy since February 2022.
• Is €700bn to flow to the EU to create a defence industrial base? If so, where? It needs economies of scale, but that does not allow the entire EU a windfall. And how will the EU not see higher inflation given physical constraints on its capital stock and human capital?
• Is €700bn to buy US arms and support the US defence industrial complex? The same bottleneck and inflation issues arise there, as well as EU-US trade/capital out/inflows.

These are huge issues of economic statecraft and Grand Macro Strategy for Europe (and the US). However, clearly the EU can back Ukraine fully if it chooses to: it will just have to reorder its political-economy, military, and financial markets to do so.

Indeed, the Financial Times op-ed page today is literally begging Europe to do exactly that. [ . . . ]

Others may: Turkey, NATO’s second-largest military force even if not invited to Monday’s EU summit, has announced it also supports Ukraine’s territorial integrity. Will it act on that with Europe? If so, how? And what’s the quid pro quo, if any?

Muddying the waters further, President Trump has reiterated he will impose 25% (or higher) tariffs on autos and chips from as soon as 2 April – the former hitting Germany in particular. The market is again taking the view that a week is a long time in politics, and April is a lifetime away. It is – things could be far worse by then.

Meanwhile, a US federal judge has given DOGE the greenlight to continue digging into the government’s systems and books – though how much money is actually being saved remains to be seen: one figure is just $50bn, which is a rounding error in the larger scheme of things.

And geopolitics: don’t think if Europe is being told to spend 5% of GDP on defence that Australia, and even New Zealand, won’t be told to do their bit to contribute towards the US defense of the Indo-Pacific too.

Rubio said it, so it must be true? We want to believe it, so it must be true?

What actual evidence is there the US intends to do this?

Even as Rubio lies through his teeth to buy time because the US is out of arms/ammo to send Ukraine, he and the rest of the Trump administration is talking about NATO members expanding funding up to 5% of GDP from 2% – NATO, a gun pressed to Russia’s head causing this conflict IN THE FIRST PLACE!

The US is also desperately trying to expand its military industrial base precisely so it can win the next time it wages proxy war against adversaries like Russia.

The US is also openly continuing to pursue an identical conflict with Russia’s ally, China.

Rubio offering peace and partnership with Russia? He can barely say it with a straight face.

Wake. Up.

Follow The New Atlas on Telegram: https://t.me/brianlovethailand

VID_20250218_165633_827.mp4

The first thing to remember is that the US is basically bankrupt. It cannot sustain the war in Ukraine anymore. The emperor has no clothes.

The US, in the name of Trump, is willing to sacrifice the European theater of confrontation in order to save itself, as it can afford to do. But for the Europeans living next to Russia the confrontation is close home. They remember the Soviet Union’s shadow over Europe for 70 years and see the present situation ominously resembling that past as well. And Europe is not bankrupt like the US. They want guarantees that Russia is not going to slice one piece after another, swallowing more territory.

It was the US who instigated the war in Ukraine (remember Nuland serving cookies while saying f’ the EU?). Now, as so often in the past, the US cuts it’s loses, wants its investment in Russia back and throws the UE under the bus, while Putin cheers (“they will wag their tails at the feet of Trump”). But surprise! For the first time since WWII, the EU stands its ground. They demand divorce.

Macron leads the Anti-Trump Coalition. He is convening a second summit. This time, countries that were not at the first meeting in Paris are invited. Including Canada. Formally, the Ukrainian crisis is discussed. But in fact, it is a confrontation with Trump.

Macron gives Trump an ultimatum: continue the war against Russia or else.

The question is: is this entire coalition weaker than the United States? But if Macron manages to organize everyone against Trump, then the price of confrontation may be so high for Trump that he may meet Macron and all of Europe halfway.

And this will block US-Russia negotiations on peace in Ukraine. And this is exactly what Macron and the European party are trying to achieve.

by By Pepe Escobar via https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/02/11/keep-on-trumpin/
Either Ukraine surrenders unconditionally – or the war show must go on. Meanwhile, let’s Keep on Trumpin’.

Mr. Disco Inferno has reverted to his default mode of throwing tantrum after tantrum because nearly everybody in West Asia and beyond is sayin’ NO to the Gaza Riviera Resort and Casino scam.
Here’s a partial pile-up:
Egypt: the Palestinians will not be ethnic cleansed here, or in Jordan, or anywhere else.
Saudi Arabia: We will not normalize with Israel before there is a sovereign Palestinian state.
Turkey, via Sultan Erdogan: No power can remove Palestinians from their “eternal” homeland.
Arab League: this is a “complete detachment from reality.”
Hamas: there will be no more ceasefire violations.
Iran, via Leader Khamenei: we will NOT negotiate anything with you.
And this is just the beginning.
Russia, via Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov: “Washington’s attempts to give Moscow ultimatums or to demonstrate the alleged ‘big favor’ in exchange for unacceptable U.S. demands are doomed to failure in the dialogue with Russia.”
So we should expect Mr. Disco Inferno to go totally ballistic in the next few days, literally burning the [geopolitical] dancefloor: “Burning, burning (Disco Infernoooooo) / burning burning / burn that mother down”.

Now gimme $500 billion in rare earth metals

Mr. Disco Inferno has stated that under his Gaza Riviera scheme, Palestinians would have no right of return after they are expelled because “they are going to have much better housing.” That will signify the normalization of ethnic cleansing under a Nakba 2.0 on steroids – billed as a “humanitarian” real estate development opportunity in a “phenomenal location”.
It’s no wonder that even feeble Arab vassals of the Empire of Chaos had to reject it. Not to mention that would Nakba 2.0 be implemented, Palestinian armed resistance will go sky-high, with instrumental input by a rejuvenated Hezbollah.
The Trump Gaza Riviera Resort and Casino scheme is essentially reviving an Israeli Ministry of Intelligence deportation framework detailed as early as in October 13, 2023 – and leaked by the Israeli news magazine Calcalist 11 days later.
At the time, the plan called to deport the people of Gaza to north Sinai, after totally “clearing” Gaza and installing them on tent cities in a “closed security zone” within Egypt. This plan was at least partly implemented.
Then, in May 2024, Netanyahu’s office came up with an even more detailed four-step plan which started with – what else – “demolition”. Trump has used the exact terminology to describe Gaza.
The Israeli plan included setting up “Hamas-free zones supervised by an UAE-led coalition; designing “new cities” from scratch; and if everything went swell, rinse and repeat in Lebanon, Syria and Yemen. We may be on stage 1 of this plan.
Gaza is in fact the toxic blueprint for a much larger and insidious NATO project, encompassing vast tracts of West Asia, as Israel all the way through has been weaponized by U.S. and UK; Turkey continued to supply it with Azeri oil from the BTC pipeline; and Arab “leadership” has behaved like eunuchs – at least until the announcement of Gaza Riviera.
Compared to the upgraded Forever Wars chapter in West Asia, the Forever Wars chapter in Ukraine is a much tougher proposition.
Mr. Disco Inferno’s much hyped “peace” plan for Ukraine was actually put on hold, as he decided to send his special envoy, retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg to the Munich Security Conference to feel the pulse of the NATO vassals.
Translation: let’s cut a deal on all those rare earth metals. The sweaty sweatshirt actor in Kiev is ready to give up all available Ukrainian land and resources to save himself. Problem is the absolute majority of those rare earth metals are in Novorossiya, and already in the possession of Russia.
Mr. Disco Inferno did not beat around the bush:
“They have very valuable lands in terms of rare earth metals, oil and gas. I want our money to be protected, we are spending hundreds of billions of dollars. And they may make a deal, they may not. They may become Russian someday, they may not become Russian. But we will have all this money, and I say I want it back. I said I want the equivalent of, say, $500 billion in rare earth metals. And they basically agreed to do that. So at least we don’t feel like fools.”
U.S.-Russia relations “on the verge of rupture”
Kellogg is dismissed in Moscow’s circles of power as “a representative of the U.S. industrial-military complex” and more bluntly, as the proverbial imperial asset: a militarily illiterate Cold War-style general with zero knowledge of geopolitics. Whenever he opens his mouth in public, that is duly confirmed.
Moreover his daughter, Megan Mobbs, is the president of the RT Weatherman Foundation, which since the start of the war in 2022 runs a logistical hub on the border with Romania to evacuate wounded and killed American mercenaries to a medical center in Germany, as well as to deliver different firms of “aid” to Ukraine.
In January 2023, her foundation sponsored Kellogg’s trip to Ukraine, after which he called the U.S. Senate to “provide Ukraine with the weapons it needs to defeat Russia’s military, implement strict accountability measures for that military assistance, and do it now.”
The mood in informed Moscow is that a potential U.S.-Russia negotiation will have less than zero effect on the current plans of Russia’s General Staff. On the battlefield, Russian forces continue to advance and consolidate what is defined as a “road net” – former Ukrainian supply routes -, preparing for better weather in Spring which will potentialize even more their advantage on air power and drones.
Once again it was Ryabkov who laid down the line on what Moscow expects from Trump 2.0:
“The first step towards normalizing bilateral relations, meaning negotiations based on the principles of mutual respect and equality, should be taken by the United States. We are open to dialogue, ready to negotiate in a tough bargaining mode, taking into account the realities ‘on the ground’ and our national interests, predetermined by history and geography. So the decisions and choice are up to Trump and his team.”
The problem is the Empire of Chaos does not do “mutual respect and equality”; it is exceptionalist by definition. The Empire of Chaos does not do “dialog”: it’s always “my way or the highway”. And the memory-impaired Empire of Chaos dismisses both “history and geography”.
After detailing how “relations between Moscow and Washington are balancing on the verge of rupture”; how Russia “sees no practical changes” in the U.S.’s Ukrainian policy; how Moscow and Washington “have not yet agreed on high-level contacts”; and how Moscow “does not expect its relations with Washington to get much better” under Trump 2.0, Ryabkov, as a clincher, in fact already painted the Big Picture ahead:
“Washington’s attempts to give Moscow ultimatums or to demonstrate the alleged ‘big favor’ in exchange for unacceptable U.S. demands are doomed to failure in the dialogue with Russia.”
Neither Trump nor Kellogg seem to have gotten the message.
Not to mention that the CIA is feeding them a comet of stupidities when it comes to the state of the Russian economy.
Russia’s economy grew by 4.1% in 2024. Energy and raw materials continue to be sold across the Global Majority and bring in a lot of revenue which now stays in Russia, because transferring capital out is nearly impossible. So now all profits are invested across Russia, which was not the case before the start of the SMO nearly 3 years ago.
The war may be far away from Moscow – over 1,000 km. But the Russian economy as a whole can now be characterized largely as a war economy. The revival of the arms industry generated a lot of jobs in several provinces and in fact redistributed the flow of money within Russia.
All the bombast coming from Trump, the inanities coming from Kellogg and the massive P.R. to come out of the Munich Security Conference won’t alter facts on the battlefield. There will be no two-bit “ceasefire”. Either Ukraine surrenders unconditionally – or the [war] show must go on. Meanwhile, let’s Keep on Trumpin’.
Original article: Strategic Culture Foundation

by Claudiu Secara

In an RT article today, Fyodor Lukyanov makes some hyper-optimistic assertions.

“In many ways, Vance’s critique of the Europeans echoed the same accusations that the settlers of the New World leveled at the Old Continent centuries ago: tyranny, hypocrisy, and parasitism. The rejection of European political traditions laid the ideological foundation for the American state three hundred years ago. Now that dispute over what constitutes real democracy has evolved from an internal American debate into a transatlantic one – and its outcome will shape the future.

Yet the most crucial element of Vance’s speech goes beyond personalities or ideological rifts. It reflects a fundamental shift in global politics. The key question today is whether the Cold War should finally end within the framework of the 20th century or whether it should continue indefinitely. Western Europe insists on the latter – not because of any grand strategy, but because it has failed to integrate its former adversaries peacefully. The US, on the other hand, appears ready to move on.”

Is he naive or plain stupid, or more likely double hypocritical?

There was a time when the new nation of the US had a point. It was all of that, a revolutionary young nation rejecting European feudal tyranny, hypocrisy, and parasitism. The aspiring empire of Russia could have said the same about the feudal Europe. As the upstarts, they both hated and envied European snobbery, arrogance and superiority. And then we had two Wars, not so much World Wars as anti-European wars. Both the US and Russia were drooling at seeing Europe cut down to size, devastated and reduced to a supplicant role.

After WWII, the immensity of the Soviet empire dwarfed not only the leading European countries but even the whole continent. Germany was divided, and at 60 million, the western part was diminished to a quarter of the size of Soviet Union. Looting of German assets by both sides, the Americans and the Soviets, was rampant but hidden from the public. The conscience of the world was even spared knowledge of the rape of some 2 million German women by the occupying American forces. Add to that the Soviets’ free hand over the easten lands.

Now, here we go again. It is the hypocrisy of the same allies that claim Europe is at a dead end, as they try once more to settle their overreached interests at the expense of the battered Europeans.

But a strange thing has happened. Once a divided, quarreling gaggle of small nations, Europe has changed little by little, almost imperceptibly, into the European Union, a union of some 450 million people which suddenly dwarfs the two superpowers, even when combined. Europe is now a superpower on its own.

Has anybody noticed that? Both the US and Russia talk about Europe from a nineteenth-century mindset, like a little dog to be kicked around. They lecture the Europeans as to why they are not up to their own standards and their interests. Both the US and Russia take this superior position, talking about their armies as if all we have to compare is how many tanks or nukes one has. But their economies are in shambles – and that is not what worries them?

It is interesting to note that the Cold War and the post-Cold War economic self-mutilation inflicted by the US and Russia on each other resulted in the emergence of two incontestable winners, outside of their plan. China is the top winner, followed by the European Union. Little considered as a viable entity, the EU is an economic and demographic contender vastly better positioned vis-a-vis both the US and Russia.

This comes as such a surprise to the former adversaries that they are now in a frenzy to close ranks and talk about friendship against their very close former friends. They just discovered how much damage they inflicted on themselves and how far they have fallen behind both China and the EU.

Can they, in a nefarious new alliance, succeed in stabbing the Europeans in the back for the third time?

My money is on Europe this time. The new gambit is just not quite possible. Too late. A third time game of a European war is not going to work. Europe doesn’t need to go to actual hot war. All it needs to do is to keep the two superpowers at a distance in terms of economic separation. Divorce. Neither one of them has the human resources to compete economically, with China, definitely, but neither with old Europe. Europe doesn’t even need the energy resources from either one of the rivals. The eastern Mediterranean is full of gas and oil, and so is the nearby north Africa, never mind the Middle East.

All that the EU needs is to stand up to the hypocrisy of both former superpowers. For Russia, any claim to sovereignty by another small neighbor, like Moldova or Georgia, is labeled “Nazi”. But their own sovereignty is sacrosant, just because they are Mother Russia. Same goes for the US. One day it’s about Woke ideology, another day about democracy. But in fact, they both are lusting imperial bloodsuckers.

Enough. Let’s have a new, revived Europe at one pole and ancient China at the other. Ultimately, it is not about Ukraine. It is about the overreach by two empires, at times naked and at times surreptitious, over other peoples’ lives and lands.