the DON JONES INDEX…
	GAINS POSTED in GREEN LOSSES POSTED in RED 8/14/25... 14,943.40 8/7/25... 14,932.77 6/27/13... 15,000.00
(THE DOW JONES INDEX: 8/14/25... 44,922.27; 8/7/25... 44,193.12; 6/27/13… 15,000.00)

LESSON for AUGUST 14th, 2025 – “T.A.S.S. (Trump always shoots straight/shit) or T.A.C.O.?”

In honor of (or, at least, recognition of) the first meeting between American and... er, not exactly Soviet – let’s just say Russian... heads of state slated for Friday at an American military base in Anchorage, Alaska, the Institute for the Study of War conducted an appraisal of how Mad Vlad’s military has been measuring up to expectations to date.

Using numerous charts, graphs and maps that we cannot reproduce (but with links to them on the ISW August 9^th report – ATTACHMENT “A”) – the Institute’s five researchers provided eighty nine takeaways from assorted military and civilian sources describing the progress of the war, to date, and at least attempting to predict the next move(s) of the combatants (and American observers) based on reports from observers... some directly, others by reference; some noted, others anonymous.

Some of the most significant findings included a consensus that Putin’s immediate objective is to remove the enemy from “unoccupied areas of Donetsk Oblast (the term for a “state” or “province”) inasmuch as a Trump TACO (ceasefire with no commitment to a final peace settlement) would “position Russian forces extremely well to renew their attacks on more favorable terms, having avoided a long and bloody struggle for the ground.”

Ukraine (and its European supporters) countered this particular demand with a statement that “full ceasefire in Ukraine must be implemented prior to territorial negotiations.”

Should negotiations fail, Russian sources say they are prepared to pursue further demands as previously stated... even those of an existential nature as will likely precipitate a nuclear World War Three.

Russian TV hosts and propagandists Vladimir Solovyov and Olga Skabeyeva repeatedly claimed in 2024 that the United States should return Alaska to Russia while Russian State Duma Chairperson Vyacheslav Volodin claimed in July 2022 that Russia would claim Alaska as its own if the United States froze foreign-based Russian assets.

While not delving into particulars, the ISW added that: “We utterly condemn Russian violations of the laws of armed conflict and the Geneva Conventions and crimes against humanity even though we do not describe them in these reports.” 

Claiming credit for the Trump/Putin summit, Time server (but not the publisher) Simon Shuster described his meeting with Alexander Lukashenko, the dictator of Belarus (ATTACHMENT ONE) also specifically referenced by the ISW as being lobbied (or threatened) to “further integrate Belarus into Russian-favorable frameworks.”

The dictator, Shuster reported, “holds the dubious honor of clinging to power longer than any other sitting leader by far, an astonishing 31 years without pause, which means most of the nine million people in his landlocked country have never known another ruler in their adult lives. His regime is also among the most repressive and isolated in the world, with terrible relations and almost no trade with four out of its five neighbors, and a near-total dependence on the fifth: Russia.”

Since the beginning of the war, Russia’s attempt to conquer Ukraine has relied on Belarus as a staging ground, a training base, and a source of supplies and ammunition. “Lukashenko has avoided sending his own troops to fight in that war. But Ukraine, like most of Europe, still sees him as an accomplice to Vladimir Putin in the worst act of aggression the continent has seen in 80 years.”

After assuring the White Russians (the vintage, name for Belarussians) that he would not be charging for the talk, Shuster agreed that the meeting would take place in Minsk, the capital.

“He’s friends with Putin. They talk regularly,” said John Coale, a former attorney to Trump. “And he has offered to give Putin messages from us. That’s a channel, okay? That’s very valuable.”

But not immediately... for much of the spring and summer, the effort sputtered and tensions rose. “Direct lines of contact between the two powers devolved into a muddle of nuclear threats, insults and ultimatums.”

All the while, reported Simon Shuster, Lukashenko “continued to deliver a very different message to the Americans: Putin wants peace, the dictator assured them, and he is ready to make concessions.

Having served his function as the go-between, Lukashenko seems ready to step aside. But his role in setting the stage for the summit reveals a lot about the perils of Trump’s latest diplomatic gambit. As Lukashenko explained when we finally met in Minsk, the whole thing could fall apart unless Trump behaves toward Putin with sufficient deference. Even if you can’t make sense of Putin, the dictator counseled, “treat him like a human being.”

The diplomatic victory, however modest, came in the first week of Trump’s second term, when the incoming administration was eager to find any signs of the winning streak he had promised the American people. Marco Rubio, then five days into his tenure as Secretary of State, ascribed the release of the prisoner to Trump’s leadership and, in a tweet, thanked Smith for facilitating it. In all caps, Rubio added, “PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH.”

Using every available avenue to Washington, Lukashenko dangled the prospect of peace in a way designed to get the attention of President Donald Trump: “If we make this deal,” he told his U.S. interlocutors, “they will bring you the Nobel Peace Prize on a platter.”

Perhaps unfortunately, perhaps not... the Cambodians jumped his shark.

On Lincoln’s birthday, Smith became the first senior official from the Trump administration to visit Minsk. Lukashenko greeted him at his palace near the city center, a “gargantuan pile of marble and gold festooned with pictures from the life of the dictator: snapshots of his childhood and his days as the director of a Soviet collective farm,” and, further, told Shuster that “Western Europe can get lost. Putin can disregard them. In this situation, if we reach a deal with the Americans, the Europeans won’t have any way out of it.” He raised the point again later in our interview. “Trump is right,” he said, “to make Europe bow.”

Trump’s special envoy to the peace talks in Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, has also argued that the Europeans should not have a seat at the table when the U.S. and Russia meet to agree an end to the war in Ukraine. On June 20, Kellogg led another delegation to Minsk, bringing along Coale and Smith. “Unlike their earlier meetings with Lukashenko, this one appeared on state TV in Belarus, where the anchors touted it as a major diplomatic breakthrough.”

The dictator also gifted Kellogg and his flakes a gift... fourteen KGB prisoners (including Sergei Tikhanovsky, the opposition leader who had tried to run against Lukashenko in the presidential elections of 2020 and was imprisoned two days into his campaign).

Coale recounted his story of opening the back door of the transport van and yelling: “You’re free! President Trump sent me to get you home!”

The offer, when it came, did not include Ukraine. Shuster added that Ukraine’s future could be decided over its head, without the participation of its leaders, who would be forced to acknowledge, at least implicitly, that the freedom and sovereignty for which their nation has been fighting must be subordinated to the will of larger powers. 

“Lukashenko does not see that as much of a problem. In his view, Ukraine already lost its sovereignty when it became dependent during the war on financial and military aid from the U.S. and Europe. If it’s not careful, he adds, it could lose Kyiv the same way it lost its eastern regions.”

All the deadlines and ultimatums that Trump had set for the peace deal, all the threats of tariffs and sanctions against Russia, “It's foolish. It’s all pure emotions,” Lukashenko continued. “And in politics, that’s not allowed.”

Perhaps the determining factor in Putin’s willingness to meet with Trump... albeit without that inconvenient Zelensekyy or any other meddling Euros... was that Russians still feel that Alaska is the most sympathetic outpost of America.

The “(r)emote US state” may not be an easy destination for either leader, but the choice of venue reflects the many factors at play,” opined Dan Sabbagh of the liberal Guardian U.K. (Aug. 11, ATTACHMENT TWO).

Perhaps the most significant is that Alaska is a safe place for the Russian leader to visit. “Putin is still wanted by the international criminal court, accused of war crimes in relation to the forced deportation of children from Ukraine to Russia in March 2023. There is an arrest warrant out, but neither Russia nor crucially the US recognise the court. Nor are there any unfriendly countries to overfly.”

Looking back to previous US/Russian summits like the Helsinki meeting in 2018 (wherein TACO Trump “declared that he trusted Putin more than his own intelligence agencies when it came to allegations of interference in the 2016 US election”) or, further back, the Reykjavik summit of 1986, where Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev discussed eliminating nuclear weapons, “but couldn’t quite agree.”

But in the 1990s when summit meetings between the two countries were more frequent, “Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin even met in Birmingham and Shropshire in 1998, a time when Russia had just joined what then became the G8 (now the G7).”

On Tuesday, another GUKster, Pjotr Sauer (ATTACHMENT THREE) attributed the scheduling of the meeting to Putin’s sentimental journey... when his jet touches down for the summit, now scheduled for Anchorage, the capital, “he will be greeted by traces of Russia’s former presence. From the wild, rugged shores of Baranof Island to Anchorage, the state’s largest city, Russian Orthodox churches with their distinctive onion-shaped domes still dot the landscape.”

Sauer’s history lesson begins in the mid-18th century, when merchants and adventurers pushed east across Siberia, spurred by the promise of lucrative sea otter pelts. By the 1780s, Catherine the Great had authorised the creation of the Russian-American Company, granting it a monopoly over trade and governance in the territory.

“Alexander Baranov, a hard-driving merchant, consolidated Russia’s hold on the region in the late 18th century, expanding settlements and ruthlessly suppressing resistance, most famously from the native Tlingit, who gave him the grim nickname “No Heart”.

“Russian Orthodox priests soon followed,” and, for them, the distinctive onion-domed churches.

But by the mid-19th century, the Russian empire “had come to see Alaska as more of a liability than an asset,” Sauer wrote “and began quietly seeking a buyer. In the wake of its humiliating defeat in the Crimean war, the territory had become a drain on St Petersburg’s finances, compounded by mounting fears over Britain’s expanding naval presence in the Pacific.”

Accordingly, the colony was sold in 1867 for $7.2M – an excessive sum to critics of SecState William H. Seward but, after the discovery of gold and oil, a bargain. A win-win at the time, the Alaska sale “opened a fleeting chapter of warmth between Russia and the US.”

So it was not particularly out-of-order for Anastasia Tenisheva of the Moscow Times to echo some estimations of the summit a “bridge between nations” (ATTACHMENT FOUR) after interviewing Alexandra Filippenko, “an independent Russian expert on American politics” who opined that: “Expectations seem to be inflated on both ends.

“Some,” Comade Filippenko speculated, “see the meeting as a disaster, while others hail it as an incredible breakthrough. The reality remains unclear — the meeting might not even happen, so it shouldn’t be dismissed either.”

Kremlin foreign policy adviser Yuri Ushakov called the choice of Alaska — the closest U.S. state to Russia, separated by the Bering Strait by less than 100 kilometers at its narrowest point — “quite logical” while Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy welcomed the prospect of hosting the summit, saying that “for centuries, Alaska has been a bridge between nations.”

The Russian press agency Tass took notice of the Russian stock market experienced its strongest rally since February following announcements that Presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump would hold a summit in Alaska. (ATTACHMENT FIVE)

The Moscow Exchange index, which tracks around 40 of Russia’s largest companies, has surged 8.3% since Thursday, adding roughly 465 billion rubles ($5.82 billion, according to spot foreign exchange market data published by Reuters) in market capitalization.

On Friday, it climbed to 2,996.4 points, reaching a level not seen since early April.

“The main optimism among traders is driven by the upcoming meeting of the Russian and U.S. presidents on August 15, with investors hoping for progress toward de-escalating the military conflict and potential easing of some sanctions,” said Vladimir Chernov, an analyst at Freedom Finance Global.

Stocks of companies hit hardest by sanctions have led the gains. “On Monday, shares of titanium giant VSMPO-AVISMA jumped 10%, steel corporation Severstal rose 4.4% and flag air carrier Aeroflot gained 3.3%.

“Gazprom’s shares have soared 16% over the past week, Novatek’s by 18% and Sovcomflot’s by nearly 9%, noted Alexei Antonov, head of investment consulting at Alor Broker.”

Critics... Yaroslav Kabakov, strategy director at Finam Investment Company among them... warned that “the current market euphoria may prove fragile.”

And, although Zelenskyy has not volubly condemned the talks, others suspect that TACO Trump “may be preparing to offer Putin a deal that sacrifices Ukraine’s interests and sovereignty.

“The symbolism of holding the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska is horrendous — as though designed to demonstrate that borders can change, land can be bought and sold,” said Sam Greene, professor of Russian politics at King’s College London who also noted the “fringe assertion from hardline Russian nationalists that Alaska should be returned to Russia.”

Dasha Litvinova of the Associated Press (August 11, ATTACHMENT SIX) provided a preliminary listing of Q&As about the summit – while there had been chatter that the big boss men might recline and relax in the resort chalets of the tundra, it now appears that the meeting will transpire at a military base in Anchorage.

Some of the A.P.’s more likely disclosures included whether Zelenskyy was going... no, as of Monday, with Bad Vlad saying “certain conditions need to be created” for it to happen, which were “still a long way off”... whether Alaska’s role in Russian history would help or hurt the process... hater Sam Greene of King’s College London saying on X the symbolism of Alaska as the site of a summit about Ukraine was “horrendous — as though designed to demonstrate that borders can change, land can be bought and sold”... and what the agenda would be (and who would set it)... the intransigeince of both Russia and Ukraine to the contrary, a buoyant Trump promised: “There’ll be some land swapping going on.”

Good stuff, not bad stuff, he promised, but added: “Also, some bad stuff for both.”

But only good stuff for him, unless the whole summit slides downwards in a glacial melt as it’s doing in Juneau – a few hundred miles south.

Maybe good stuff for Putin, too, since he’ll be performing for an increasingly restive populace and can blame his lack of progress on Ukraine and on the West. “Since last week,” the A.P. reported, “Putin spoke to Chinese leader Xi Jinping, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, as well as the leaders of South Africa, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Belarus and Kyrgyzstan... which may have suggested Putin perhaps, “wanted to brief Russia’s most important allies about a potential settlement, said pro-Kremlin analyst Sergei Markov.”

Or maybe he just wanted to convince them that if the talks failed and punitive tariffs were imposed, it was not his fault.

Time’s Solcyré Burga also published a “need to know” rundown of quirks and quiddities (ATTACHMENT SIX) as more or less corresponded with the A.P. plus the statement to CNN by Yury Ushakov, a Kremlin presidential aide, that Trump “has already been invited to a follow-up meeting in Russia.”

Also from Time (ATTACHMENT SEVEN) reporter Solcyré Burga explained that both Trump and Putin want Ukraine to give up land (which also means giving up people to the tender mercies of the KGB)... SecState Marco and envoy Witkoff allowing that Ukrainians in Russian majority areas would be a part of the “concessions” Kyiv would have to make...

Zelensky’s reply was that: “Any decisions made against us, any decisions made without Ukraine, are at the same time decisions against peace. They will bring nothing”...

“Ukraine appears to have the backing of the European Union. French President Emmanuel Macron, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal, and U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer all spoke with Zelensky on Saturday to share their support for Ukrainian sovereignty,” but Time did not say whether this included weaponry sales, giveaways or sending boots (or Bruno Maglis) on the ground to fight the Russians...

“Putin also called for Ukraine to give up its quest to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and for the West to lift sanctions, unfreeze “Russian sovereign assets that are currently being held in Europe,” as Reuters reported, and accept Russian consequence of “(o)ther former Soviet republics, including Georgia and Moldova” and, presumably after that, the “stans”, the Baltics and then, perhaps, former satellites like the Czechs, Slovaks, Slovenes, Yugoslavs, Poles and Hungarians (already on-again, off-again Putin puppets). Then on to Germany, the rest of the EU and the U.K. and... wrote Stanford University political science professor Michael McFaul on X... vindication for Russian nationalists who claim that losing Alaska, like Ukraine, “was a raw deal for Moscow that needs to be corrected.”

Time also noted that, in 2022, a billboard stating “Alaska is Ours,” was seen in the Russian town of Krasnoyarsk. Local officials then told the press that the billboard was part of a “private initiative.”

And, returning from the aspirational to the stated (as the A.P., above, ventured) Ukraine must “limit the size of its armed forces and recognize Russian as an official language along with Ukrainian.”

And hand over their ponies.

Time also quoted former Trump national security advisor John Bolton... and his moustache, too... who denounced the meeting as “...not quite as bad as Trump inviting the Taliban to Camp David to talk about the peace negotiations in Afghanistan, but it certainly reminds one of that.”

“The only better place for Putin than Alaska would be if the summit were being held in Moscow,” he told CNN.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Ak) said that while she saw the summit as a chance to “forge meaningful agreements,” she was also “wary” of Putin and his regime.

“Putin has no incentive to wind down the war right now,” Alexandra Prokopenko, a fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Centre told the Financial Times (ATTACHMENT EIGHT). “What matters to him is keeping Trump’s attention.”

Now, Trump has “voiced irritation” with Putin and the Russians being “very nice” while simultaneously attacking Ukraine and feeding Washington “a lot of bullshit”.

The Alaska meeting, which came out of it, is the result of both Putin and Trump “backing themselves into a corner,” said the busy, busy Greene (above).

“The fact that Putin is going to the US not as a prisoner, that he’s gone from a subject of frustration to someone welcomed, and that the meeting is happening without Ukrainians and Europeans — all of that is a diplomatic win,” he added.

Slowly, but surely, the Russians are also winning on the battlefield – seizing 502 sq km of Ukrainian territory in July, a rate similar to its advances in June and May and one of the highest in the past year, according to Black Bird Group, an open source intelligence agency monitoring the conflict.

DeepState, a war monitoring group with ties to the Ukrainian defence ministry, reported on Sunday that Russian forces had managed to advance nearly 7km in an area near the city of Pokrovsk, which Russian forces have attempted to surround for the past year – even as Russia’s economy “is weaker today than at any point in the last three years,” according to Janis Kluge, an expert on Russia’s economy with the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP).

Energy revenues have been down 20 per cent amid lowering oil prices, with Trump’s new tariffs on India adding to the pressure but, as T.A.C.O. happens, China remains a loyal customer.

Add to the Russian demands already listed above, Ukraine’s “demilitarisation” and “denazification” — a vague demand “that is essentially tantamount to Zelenskyy’s removal,” the F.T. opined... one way or another.

“Putin would like to divide the world into spheres of influence with Trump and Xi,” said Andrey Kolesnikov, a Moscow-based political analyst. “A new Yalta and a cold war — that’s just what he wants. He is eager to claim [Joseph] Stalin’s laurels,” Kolesnikov added.

Worldwide, CNBC reported that the TACO trade was thriving on Tuesday 8/8 (ATTACHMENT NINE) with Monday being “a culmination of quite a few deadlines the world has faced as it rides the rollercoaster of Trump’s tariff strategy.”

While this deadline might already be in force, (at present, yes in somewhere, no in others) the tariffs are not really set in stone. “Negotiations, of course, will keep happening,” CNBC expressed a cautious hope, “and (good, i.e. formerly allied) countries could see some reprieve.”

Remember, as CNBC’s Lim Hui Jie pointed out, Trump walked back on “Liberation Day” tariffs a week after all the pomp and ceremony in the Rose Garden; the July 9 deadline was pushed to Aug. 1, and then to Aug. 7. “Steep tariffs announced on China have been on hold, with the deadline of Aug. 12 expected to be postponed,” Lim pleaded, and so it has come to pass.

So, “while these might be the highest tariffs the world has seen since the Smoot-Hawley Act in the 1930s — are they here to stay?” he asked, sniffing and scratching. The answer... “Now, if you’d excuse me, the taco shop downstairs may be opening for business.”

It now behooves the DJI... with a little help from the machines at Google’s AI Overview... to explain the differences between tariffs and sanctions.

There are more than a few (ATTACHMENT TEN) but, in essence, “tariffs influence the price and quantity of imported goods for trade objectives, while sanctions are broader tools to pressure a country or entity for foreign policy or national security goals.”

While President Trump was planning his response and ripostes to Russia and ordering the National Guard into ostensibly crime-sodden Washington D.C. to roust the homeless from their bushes and their underpasses and send them... somewhere (see below)... President Zelenskyy was making his rounds of the Old World in person, by video and through social media posts... all of which restated his oft-stated demand that plans for Ukraine cannot be hatched by the USA and neo-USSR without Ukrainian consent (or, at least, consultation).

Djonald’s friends at Fox reported the Z-Man’s polite answer to European leaders... reminding them that the end of the war “must be fair, and I am grateful to everyone who stands with Ukraine and our people today for the sake of peace” which, he added (in a not-unsubtle reminder of Putin’s post-Uke imperialist ambitions) is defending the vital security interests of our European nations." (August 10, ATTACHMENT ELEVEN)

At home, bipartisan lawmakers introduced the Sanctioning Russia Act, which would impose a 500% tariff targeting the core of Russia’s economy — its oil and gas exports — if Moscow continues to resist peace efforts or escalates the conflict.

And, over there, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas told Reuters on Sunday that the U.S. has the power to force Russia to negotiate seriously. "Any deal between the U.S. and Russia must have Ukraine and the EU included, for it is a matter of Ukraine’s and the whole of Europe’s security," she added.

"The path to peace in Ukraine cannot be decided without Ukraine," leaders from Germany, France, Italy, Poland, Britain and Finland and EU Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen also said in a joint statement – followed by the heads of eight Nordic-Baltic nations, who also jointly reaffirmed their support for Ukraine.

The leaders of Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway and Sweden said they: "Reaffirm the principle that international borders must not be changed by force," while German Chancellor Friedrich Merz told local broadcaster ARD on Sunday that he assumed Zelenskyy would attend the summit between Trump and Putin. (DW, ATTACHMENT TWELVE)

US Vice President JD Vance, however, interrupted his holiday in the U.K. to recorded an interview with US conservative broadcaster Fox News - repeating that Washington plans to withdraw financially from supporting Ukraine, adding that Americans were done with the funding of “the Ukraine war business.”

“(I)f the Europeans want to step up and actually buy the weapons from American producers, we're OK with that, but we're not going to fund it ourselves anymore," Vance said.

Although Merz “assumed” that Americans... if not their President... opposed deciding “territorial questions” over the heads of Europeans and Americans, the German press added that NATO GenSec Mark Rutte had emphasized an “absolute need to acknowledge that Ukraine decides on its own future, that Ukraine has to be a sovereign nation, deciding on its own geopolitical future.”

But Vance said he did not think it would be productive for the Russian president to meet his Ukrainian counterpart before speaking with Trump as Putin launched more drones and missiles into Ukraine. He did, however, consent to visit U.K Foreign Secretary David Lammy and some of the Euros at Chevening, a country mansion in Kent traditionally used by the ForSec.

It was not clear what, if anything, had been agreed at Chevening, but Zelenskyy – ever positive - called the meeting “constructive”.

Speaking before the meeting in Alaska, the German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, said he hoped and assumed that Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, would also be involved.

Merz told the broadcaster ARD that Berlin was working closely with Washington to try to ensure Zelenskyy’s attendance at the talks. (Guardian U.K. ATTACHMENT THIRTEEN)

“We cannot accept in any case that territorial questions are discussed or even decided between Russia and America over the heads of Europeans and Ukrainians,” he said. “I assume that the American government sees it the same way.”

Brussel’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, echoed that sentiment.

“President Trump is right that Russia has to end its war against Ukraine. The US has the power to force Russia to negotiate seriously. Any deal between the US and Russia must have Ukraine and the EU included, for it is a matter of Ukraine’s and the whole of Europe’s security,” Kallas said.

The US vice-president, JD Vance, speaking a day after meeting the UK foreign minister, David Lammy, during his holiday in England, said Washington was working towards talks between Putin, Zelenskyy and Trump. But Vance said he did not think it would be productive for the Russian president to meet his Ukrainian counterpart before speaking with Trump.

Merz said he hoped for a breakthrough at the summit, despite lingering uncertainty of the attenders. “We hope that there will be a breakthrough on Friday,” he said. “Above all [we hope] that there will finally be a ceasefire and that there can be peace negotiations in Ukraine.”

Writing for “The Bulwark” (described as an American center-right news and opinion website launched in 2018 by Sarah Longwell, with the support of Bill Kristol and Charlie Sykes) Matt Johnson recapitulated relations between Trump and the Z-Man... dating back to the angry Oval Office “ambush” in February (where he told the Ukrainian President he “didn’t have the cards” and Veep Vance scolded him a “disrespectful”), through April (where Trump demanded compensation for military aid the United States had already provided and said future aid would be dependent upon how much Kyiv was willing to pay) to the dawning of a harsh reality last month when Djonald UnDeluded admitted that Putin is running out the clock by negotiating in bad faith. “I am disappointed in President Putin,” he said last month.

“My conversations with him are always very pleasant, and then the missiles go off that night.” (August 7^th, ATTACHMENT FOURTEEN)

“Had Trump and Vance listened to Zelensky instead of screaming at him in the Oval Office and kicking him out of the White House,” Johnson proclaimed, “they would have understood that Putin’s ostensible desire to negotiate was just a stalling tactic.”

Well, better late than never... as the saying goes... Johnson explaining the reality of territorial surrender in human terms – consigning millions of civilians to life under brutal Russian occupation. “This occupation has led to imprisonment, torture, rape, and death for thousands of Ukrainians; widespread child abductions; and a campaign of cultural eradication,” which Trump seems to be gradually realizing (though Vance, still, not at all) and Johnson added that Putin’s goal “has always been the eradication of Ukrainian statehood.”

As, of course, an opening step to further adventures.

“Those who have been making this argument for years were dismissed by Trump, Vance, and the rest of MAGA as “warmongers” and “neocons” dragging the country toward World War III,” Johnson wrote. “They were smeared as hollow “moralists” merely “pretending to fight for freedom and democracy abroad”; “globalists” guilty of squandering “all of America’s strength, blood, and treasure chasing monsters and phantoms overseas.”

Trump has now been forced to concede that “Russia is a much greater threat than he once believed,” Mister Johnson declared... now discovering “that his fantasies of ending the conflict in twenty-four hours were based on a fundamental misunderstanding of Putin’s war aims.”

Hostility to military support for Ukraine has long been a pillar of MAGA, and, Johnson added, “it has always been based on the same confusion that led Trump to waste months attempting to placate Putin.”

Now, the base itself is divided.

“While Trump’s sudden impatience with Putin is slightly encouraging,” the Bulwark concluded, “it only serves to highlight the tragic failure of his Ukraine policy.”

Vance and other members of the MAGA foreign policy brain trust may still regard arguments against Ukrainian surrender as “moralistic garbage,” but this doesn’t change the fact “that their own Ukraine policy has proven to be a disastrous failure.”

And Trump’s tariff policies... economic or retaliatory... remain muddled – a TACO for China, a tab for India. An anthology of tariff takeaways from USA Today (ATTACHMENT FIFTEEN) highlighted the President’s contention that only “radical leftist” courts and commoners would oppose... weighing the hyper-tariffed Indians and Canadians in with other less disfavored nations, the cumulative average is about 20% – “the highest in a century and up from 2.5% when Trump took office in January, the Atlantic Institute estimates.”

While some consumer goods are not yet more expensive due to retailers stockpiling them as soon as the prospects of tariffs began circulating, other global companies (from Marriott to Molson’s) as have reported earnings so far this quarter “are looking at a hit of around $15 billion to profits in 2025” (less of course, what can be recouped by price increases).

The Associated Press (8/8, ATTACHMENT SIXTEEN) tolled the bells of tariff tolls “just after midnight” a week ago tomorrow and also trolled Trump for saying that the EU, Japan and South Korea would also “invest hundreds of billions of dollars in the United States.

“I think the growth is going to be unprecedented,” Trump said Wednesday night as the witching hour approached.

Despite the uncertainty, the A.P. allowed, the President is confident that the onset of his tariffs “will provide clarity about the path for the world’s largest economy. Now that companies understand the direction the U.S. is headed, the Republican administration believes it can ramp up new investments and jump-start hiring in ways that can rebalance America as a manufacturing power.”

But skeptical e-con-mystics say the risk is that the American economy is steadily eroded.

“It’s going to be fine sand in the gears and slow things down,” said Brad Jensen, a professor at Georgetown University.

The malaise is global... coughing and sneezing in Germany where industrial production sagged 1.9% in June as Trump’s tariffs took hold... vomiting and purging in Switzerland and India where levies of 39% and 50% respectively have exporters saying that the sudden cost escalations are “simply not viable.”

Even people who worked with Trump during his first term are skeptical, the A.P. noted – singling out Paul Ryan, the Wisconsin Republican, the former House speaker.

“There’s no sort of rationale for this other than the president wanting to raise tariffs based upon his whims, his opinions,” Ryan told CNBC on Wednesday.

“There’s (only) one person who can afford to be cavalier about the uncertainty that he’s creating, and that’s Donald Trump,” said Rachel West, a senior fellow at The Century Foundation who worked in the Biden White House on labor policy. “The rest of Americans are already paying the price for that uncertainty.”

There are political, as well as personal prices to be paid.

As opposed to ceasing its imports of Russian fossil fuels, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi remained defiant and was reportedly seeking new strategic and military partners. He is scheduled to visit China for the first time in over seven years later this month, USA Today reported (ATTACHMENT SEVENTEEN) and the ominous Bhakt of the Times of India (8/9 ATTACHMENT EIGHTEEN) cited PM Modi’s charge that India “will never compromise on the interests of its farmers, dairy farmers and fishermen. I know that I will personally have to pay a heavy price. But I am ready for it.”

Mister Slayer also cited the coming pain and heartbreak as will hit French champagne, Brazilian açai berries (favored by the wealthy health cultists in America as a “delicious, refreshing and nutritious superfood”), Taiwanese chipmakers

Dubbing India the "Maharaja of Tariffs," US Donald Trump's minions are unloading on New Delhi amid growing signs that “beyond the trade dispute, the MAGA supremo is jettisoning stated US objective voiced by three previous presidents of supporting the rise of India as a counterweight to China.

“In scabrous remarks to reporters, Trump's trade counselor Peter Navarro on Thursday accused India of using US dollars to buy oil from Russia,” which in turn "uses those dollars from India to finance weapons to kill Ukrainians.”

The Slayer Peanut Gallery included posts contending that Trump’s real intention is to break BRICS by breaking its “B” and “I”, but also another that the fault was due to Modi’s incompetence.

A trio of Associated Press correspondents wrote that Trump’s tariffs could “scramble the economic trajectory of India, which until recently was seen as an alternative to China by American companies looking to relocate their manufacturing” and that China also buys oil from Russia, but it was not included in the order signed by the Republican president and, in fact, has just been granted a 90 day deferral on its other tariffs by Seńor TACO. (August 6^th, ATTACHMENT NINETEEN)

The Indian government on Wednesday called the additional tariffs “unfortunate.”

“We reiterate that these actions are unfair, unjustified and unreasonable,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Randhir Jaiswal said in a statement, adding that India would take all actions necessary to protect its interests.

Ajay Srivastava, a former Indian trade official, said the latest tariff places the country among the most heavily taxed U.S. trading partners and far above rivals such as China, Vietnam and Bangladesh.

“The tariffs are expected to make Indian goods far costlier with the potential to cut exports by around 40%-50% to the U.S.,” he said – calling Trump’s decision “hypocritical” because China bought more Russian oil than India did last year – yet “Washington avoids targeting Beijing because of China’s leverage over critical minerals which are vital for U.S. defense and technology.”

For its part, China dutifully said that it hoped “all those with a stake in the Russia-Ukraine war would play a role in the peace negotiations,” without specifically mentioning Zelenskyy and thus angering and embarrassing Bad Vlad.

At its daily press briefing on Tuesday, August 12, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian was asked about Trump and Putin's decision to hold a summit without inviting any representatives from Ukraine or the European Union (Newseek, ATTACHMENT TWENTY) and simply replied that China hoped “all parties concerned and stakeholders” would take part in the negotiation process reach an (unspecified) “fair, lasting and binding peace agreement acceptable to parties concerned at an early date."

Beyond the population and economic giants like India, China and (to a slightly lesser extent) Brazil, sovereignties great and small will now be tariffed at a “reciprocal” level of 15% plus or minus other duties as determined by Donnie. (GUK, ATTACHMENT TWENTY ONE) Rates range from 41% on war-torn Syria to 10% for the UK “and will be applied on top of the usual tariffs applying to products imported to the US.” The baseline rate for the EU is 15% with a few exceptions like Switzerland (39%), Canada (35%) and a few smaller states such as Tunisia, Moldova or Brunei,

Last Friday, the liberal Daily Kos called the Indian “slapping” unique because China “knew Trump (didn’t) have the cojones to go after them too.”

There is “close to zero chance” Putin will agree to a ceasefire due to Trump's threats of tariffs and sanctions on Russia, Eugene Rumer, a former U.S. intelligence analyst for Russia who directs the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Russia and Eurasia Program told the DK.

“Yep,” the Kosplayers said (ATTACHMENT TWENTY TWO)... Trump had “chickened out again.”

Throwing cold water on the peace process, Eugene Rumer, a former U.S. intelligence analyst for Russia who directs the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Russia and Eurasia Program said that there was a “close to zero chance” Putin would agree to a ceasefire due to Trump's threats of tariffs and sanctions even after the American President’s warning that the consequences of refusal would be “severe”.

Oil prices will likely rise, creating political problems for him before next year's U.S. midterm congressional elections while Glad Vlad... not having to worry about elections... would just coast through the summit, or any further gabfests, and just do as he always does – kill people. His own, Ukrainians – any others who get in the way... Improving relations between Russia and the United States will take time, Kremlin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov told the Russian TASS state news agency in remarks published a week ago Wednesday (Reuters, August 5^th, ATTACHMENT TWENTY THREE).

"There is, of course, inertia in this process," Peskov told TASS.

What may perhaps be more worrisome than any Ukrainian disagreements has been Trump’s dispatch of two nuclear submarines to be positioned in "the appropriate regions" in response to remarks by former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev.

Less ominous was his ultimatum to Putin to consent to a peace agreement by August 8^th... another half TACO – sanctions being imposed against India, but not the Chinese.

Probably not on the agenda of Friday’s summit, but of similar consequence to concerned Americans, were developments outside of Ukraine... some good, others not so.

The good... at least for Djonald Distracted, who has appeared more cheerful than ever, this past week... was the report that, after the Yanks brokered a cease-fire in the border dispute between Cambodia and Thailand, Khmer Rouge Prime Minister Hun Manet wrote the Norwegian Nobel Committee on August 7 – urging that Trump receive the 2005-6 Peace Prize.

“This nomination (would reflect) not only my appreciation but also the heartfelt gratitude of the people of Cambodia for his crucial role in restoring peace and stability.”

“It looks as if Cambodia is trying to thaw its icy ties with Washington,” Paul Chambers, a visiting fellow at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute in Singapore, told TIME (August 11, ATTACHMENT TWENTY FOUR)... a rapprochement, he added, as would mark a “significant shift” in Cambodian foreign policy.

Back in the days of Trump 1.0, the U.S. envoy to Cambodia at the time emphasized that Cambodia should repay hundreds of millions of dollars in loans from the 1970s, originally given as food aid to the Lon Nol government. Cambodia, however, has insistently refused to pay the loan, which has ballooned with interest in the intervening decades, citing the U.S.’s notorious legacy from its military operations in the country. “They brought bombs and dropped them on Cambodia and [now] demand Cambodian people to pay,” Hun Sen, Hun Manet’s father and then Prime Minister, said in 2017. 

In recent years, under both Trump’s and former President Joe Biden’s Administrations, Time looked back, “the U.S. has imposed sanctions and visa restrictions on Cambodia over its poor human rights record and corruption as it grew closer to China in its economy, development, diplomach and military.

More recently, however, Hun Manet—who took over the premiership from his autocratic father Hun Sen in 2023 and has an extensive Western education including from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point— prosecuted his border dispute with Thailand until Trump lowered his “Liberation Day” tariffs on both Cambodia from 36% to 19% after their cease-fire.

Asia watchers believe the Cambodians want an even lower levy... the ten percent imposed on the more favored of less favored nations... or even zero. The nomination, followed overtures to Oslo by Israel and Pakistan in what journalist and global affairs analyst Tom Nagorski described as “flattery diplomacy” in an essay for TIME last month and Chandarith Neak and Chhay Lim, academics at the Royal University of Phnom Penh, called a more diplomatic “strategic flexibility” in their April article for the Lowy Institute’s The Interpreter.

“Despite its alignment with China, Cambodia knows the geopolitical winds can shift quickly,” Sophal Ear, an associate professor of global political economy at Arizona State University told TIME. “Demonstrating openness to renewed U.S. engagement—especially through a figure like Trump—could yield future flexibility or leverage.”

Less positive for a President who has staunchly backed Israel in its campaign against what PM Bibi Netanyahu calls terrorism, earning his Nobel nomination... ludicrous on its face given the near-unanimous global condemnation of Israeli tactics in the MidEast war... has been the escalating and indiscriminate shootings of starving Gazans, including children, waiting in line at food distribution sites run by the US and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) as well the discriminatory stalking and murder of hostile journalists (including Al Jazeera’s Anas al-Sharif).

An investigation of IDF tactics by the liberal Guardian U.K. “appears to show a sustained Israeli pattern of firing on Palestinians seeking food” – GUK further substantiating its contentions by telling several personal stories from doctors, shooting survivors and the Red Cross... all implicating Prime Minister Netanyahu, the IDF and Israel itself of condoning or even espousing genocide. (August 9^th, ATTACHMENT TWENTY FIVE)

According to the UN, at least 1,373 Palestinians have been killed since 27 May while seeking food, with 859 killed in the vicinity of GHF sites and 514 along the routes of food convoys.

U.K. weapons expert Chris Cobb-Smith called the action “reckless and irresponsible”, adding: “There is no tactical reason to employ small-arms fire to that degree near crowds of non-combatants. It is utterly outrageous.”

Prof Nick Maynard, a consultant surgeon at Oxford university hospital currently practicing at the Nasser hospital in Khan Younis said the Israelis were targeting their fire on hungry civilians in the food lines “at particular body parts.”

He added: “The other night, we admitted four teenage boys, all of whom have been shot in the testicles.”

“They are shooting at us, I swear,” said 30-year-old Ameen Khalifa. “We come to get food for our lives, drenched in blood. We will die because we’re trying to get food.” About 170 Palestinians were injured that day, and 30 killed.

Khalifa survived, but not for long. His family said he was shot and killed in the same area two days later while trying to collect food.

“There is no arrangement, no order, no humanitarian conditions or anything that respects a human being,” Khalifa’s brother said in an interview from a camp for displaced people in Deir al-Balah, in central Gaza.

The Israeli military, however, released a video of an IDF spokesperson, Nadav Shoshani, standing near a GHF food site, saying: “The idea is to give aid directly to Gazan civilians and bypass Hamas’s hands … This is a new solution that brings aid directly to the people of Gaza … They have been going in and out peacefully …… They feel safe”.

Reviewing the Guardian’s findings, Adil Haque, a professor of law at Rutgers University, New Jersey, said: “These are grave breaches of the fourth Geneva convention as well as war crimes under customary international law and the ICC [international criminal court] statute. A soldier may argue that they acted reasonably to defend themselves or others. However, it is neither reasonable nor proportionate to fire on unarmed civilians at a distance.”

Bushra Khalidi, Oxfam’s policy lead for the Palestinian territories, who has family members trapped in Gaza, believes this is not a humanitarian system. “It’s a deadly scheme,” she said.

Earlier this week, Mike Huckabee (the US ambassador to Israel) called the GHF food distribution “phenomenal”, dismissing reports of IDF fire killing Palestinians as “nonsense”. He announced the possibility of opening 12 more food sites, and commencement of a 24 hour operation.

So... despite his Nobel nominations, things haven’t been “going Donald Trump’s way,” in the view of Jonathan Lemire, writing for the liberal Atlantic magazine (August 7, ATTACHMENT TWENTY SIX).

The President exploded like a Russian volcano when when CNBC’s Megan Cassella directly asked Trump about “TACO,” an acronym for “Trump always chickens out.”

During an otherwise routine Oval Office event, Trump sputtered angrily at Cassella, claiming that his shifting tariff timelines were “part of negotiations” and admonishing, “Don’t ever say what you said.” Subsequently, he called the query “the nastiest question” he’s ever gotten from a member of the press.

Prior to arranging the Alaskan summit with Putin, the clock had all but run out on “the two-week window that Trump gave Russia to reach a cease-fire with Ukraine.” TACO time... but we (and the world) will find out Friday whether he can fulfill his promise to end the war – or, at least, impose punitive sanctions on a leering, jeering Bad Vlad.

Another deadline... this one more, but not entirely, fulfilled was his promise to hike tariffs today (the 7^th) for 60 nations, with rates ranging from 10 to 41 percent. “This time, Trump appeared to relish declaring” that there would not be another TACO Thursday moment, writing on social media last night, “IT’S MIDNIGHT!!! BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN TARIFFS ARE NOW FLOWING INTO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!”

On the other hand, the economy has shown new signs of weakness, “with stubbornly high prices potentially set to rise again because of the tariffs and, most potently, a recent jobs report poor enough that Trump lashed out against the bureaucrat who compiled it; last week, he fired the Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner, claiming, without evidence, that the jobs numbers were bogus.” What Lemire called an “unprecedented act of petulance risks undermining Wall Street’s confidence in the economy and undercutting Trump’s campaign pledge to give the United States another economic “golden age.”

“Those geopolitical and economic headwinds have been joined by forceful political ones,” Lemire adds. “Since going out on August recess, Republican lawmakers have been heckled at town halls while trying to defend the president’s signature legislative accomplishment, the One Big Beautiful Bill. And some of those same Republicans, in a rare act of rebellion, have questioned Trump’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein matter, a scandal that the president, try as he may, simply has been unable to shake.”

After Trump said that his personal envoy, Steve Witkoff, had a productive meeting with Putin in Moscow, the U.S. president returned to his original plan to end the war: a summit. So it was voiced, and so it was done.

Also noted was the fact that Witkoff’s visit to Moscow came just days after he had been in Gaza to urge Netanyahu to ease a blockade and allow more aid and food to reach Palestinians... “(a)lthough Israel agreed this week to allow some more food in, the humanitarian crisis has not abated.”

Trump, who badly wants both conflicts to end, believes that Netanyahu is prolonging the war and has told advisers that he is wary of Israel’s new push to capture Gaza. Even so, Lemire said that “officials” had told him that Trump was “unlikely to break with Netanyahu in any meaningful way.”

Of course, Putin was also a Trump BFF. (So, for that matter, Lemire wrapped, was Jeffrey Epstein.)

So, after the US Court of International Trade in May ruled that Trump overstepped his legal authority to impose many of his sweeping tariffs on foreign goods and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard the Trump administration’s appeal (the panel of 11 judges voiced skepticism that the law gave Trump power to impose tariffs in the aggressive manner that his administration has unleashed them) POTUS exploded again – warning that “a 1929-style crash” was in the card if courts struck down his use of emergency powers to justify the sweeping tariffs. (CNN, August 8^th, ATTACHMENT TWENTY SEVEN)

“If a Radical Left Court ruled against us at this late date, in an attempt to bring down or disturb the largest amount of money, wealth creation and influence the U.S.A. has ever seen, it would be impossible to ever recover, or pay back, these massive sums of money and honor,” Trump said in a Truth Social post. “It would be 1929 all over again, a GREAT DEPRESSION!”

Critics... not only the usual left-wing Democrats but some financial professionals, too... dissented.

“If courts shoot down the tariffs, it would be complicated – but a huge positive,” Art Hogan, chief market strategist at B. Riley Wealth Management, told CNN. “There would be a massive celebration.”

Gregory Daco, chief economist at EY-Parthenon argued that if a court ruling forced Trump to slash tariff rates – and that’s a big if, CNN remarked, “because the president has other authorities he could turn to” – it wouldn’t be a negative at all.

“It would actually be stimulative,” Daco said.

Tariffs are “a shadow tax. Everyone on Wall Street knows that,” Hogan said.

Still, they can have an intimidating effect upon the tariffed.

Through the Sanctioning Russia Act, bipartisan lawmakers are preparing to impose a 500% tariff — an all-out signal to the Kremlin and its partners: de-escalate the war in Ukraine or face steep economic consequences — (Fox, ATTACHMENT TWENTY EIGHT)

The measure, crafted by Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and announced last Saturday morning, grants President Donald Trump “broad authority” to impose economic penalties on Russia as he prepares for Friday’s summit. 

“These colossal tariffs would target the heart of Russia’s economy — its oil and gas exports — if Moscow continues to defy peace efforts or escalate the conflict,” said the Fox. Specifically targeted are India, China (until turkey TACO’d until Thanksgiving) and... atop the already imposed punitive Bolsonaro retribution... Brazil.

In addition to the 500% tariffs authorized by the legislation, Trump has previously vowed to impose 100% secondary tariffs on any nation that maintains trade ties with Russia. It remains unclear whether he intends to pursue both measures simultaneously.

“Secondary tariffs are trade penalties aimed at third-party nations that maintain economic ties with a sanctioned country,” explained the Fox. “In this case, they serve as an indirect means of pressuring Russia by punishing its trading partners.”

CNN, a week ago, commissioned Nick Paton Walsh to analyze “(f)ive ways the Russia-Ukraine war could end.” They were...

1. Putin agrees to an unconditional ceasefire...

“Highly unlikely,” said Walsh.

2. Pragmatism and more talks...

The talks could agree on more talks later, chatter that seals in Russian gains when winter sets in, “freezing the front lines militarily and literally around October.” Russia can then fight again in 2026, use diplomacy to make these gains permanent or (because Ukraine still holds elections) question the legitimacy of Zelensky and even unseat him for a more pro-Russian candidate.

3. Ukraine somehow weathers the two years ahead...

“In this scenario, US and European military aid to Ukraine helps them minimize concessions on the front line in the coming months, and leads Putin to seek to talk, as his military have yet again failed to deliver.” Walsh calls this outcome “...the very best Ukraine can hope for.”

4. Catastrophe for Ukraine and NATO...

The worst would be that the summit “leaves Ukraine to fend for itself.” Even if Europe “does their utmost to back Kyiv”, but fails to tip the balance without American backup, and a “slow rout of Ukrainian forces in the flat, open terrain between the Donbass and the central cities of Dnipro, Zaporizhzhia and the capital” results in “the end of a sovereign Ukraine.”

5. Disaster for Putin: a repeat of the Soviets in Afghanistan

On the other hand, Russia blunders on... deserted by allies, unable to sell its oil to finance the war, and beset by a “toxic” opposition from high places and low... until the failure of its Afghan “war of choice” leads to regime change.

None of the options are good for Ukraine. Only one of them spells the actual defeat of Russia as a military power and threat to European security Walsh concludes, and “none of them can spring from Trump meeting Putin alone, without Ukraine becoming part of any deal later.” (ATTACHMENT TWENTY NINE)

(A sixth alternative must also be considered... if the summit collapses, the United States agrees with the Euros that Ukraine can become a NATOid, Mad Vlad may simply decide that if he cannot conquer the world, he might as well blow it up.)

This leads to a scenario hinted at by Newsweek (August 7, ATTACHMENT THIRTY) in which failue of the summit “has the potential to push both powers—and their leaders” (admittedly a couple of lunatics)—“to the brink.”

"The absence not just of arms control agreements, but the absence of existing channels of communication between Washington and Moscow means that there always remains a risk of an accident becoming an incident, becoming a conflict, becoming a nuclear conflict," said Thomas Countryman, a former U.S. assistant secretary of state and board chairman of the Arms Control Association.

"I think that the general misconception that the American public has is that the risk of nuclear war is so low that it can be ignored," Countryman said. "In fact, the Russians have the same capability to launch an attack on the United States as the U.S. has to launch an attack upon Russia."

"And while those risks may be low," he added, "they are probably higher than they have been at any time since the Cuban crisis of 1962."

While “both the U.S. and Russia retain a shared interest in nuclear risk reduction,” according to Alexander Chekov, lecturer at Moscow State Institute of International Relations' Department of International Relations and Foreign Policy, Chekov also told Newsweek that, should the arms control regime continue to crumble further, “the result would be decreased predictability in strategic relations and elevated risks between the two powers."

"Early nuclear strategists referred to nuclear brinkmanship essentially as a game of chicken," said Matthew Kroenig, vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council's Snowcroft Center for Strategy and Security. "The entire purpose is to raise the risk, to force the adversary to back down."

A pessimistic Vice President JD Vance said a negotiated settlement between Russia and Ukraine was unlikely to satisfy either side, and that any peace deal would likely leave both Moscow and Kyiv "unhappy." (USA Today, ATTACHMENT THIRTY ONE) while ever-optimistic President Trump said Russia and Ukraine were “close to a ceasefire deal that could end the three-and-a-half-year-old conflict, possibly requiring Ukraine to surrender significant territory.”

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, however, said on Saturday that Ukraine cannot violate its constitution on territorial issues, adding, "Ukrainians will not gift their land to the occupiers," after Trump again raised the idea of a "land swap" that would see Ukraine give up territory to Russia after his previous proposal drew pushback from European leaders and was rejected by Ukraine's president. (Also USA Today, ATTACHMENT THIRTY TWO)

Some of the moves will be good for Ukraine, Trump told reporters during an Aug. 11 news conference – “but some will be bad.”

By early Wednesday morning, the White House was “downplaying expectations” and shifting the tenor of the expectations to a “listening experience” that may or may not lead to another meeting, at which Zelenskyy would be present.

“On Monday, Trump said he may well know whether Putin is truly interested in reaching an agreement to end the war he started within just two minutes of sitting down with the Russian leader.” (Independent U.K., ATTACHMENT THIRTY THREE)

Speaking to reporters during a press conference in the White House briefing room, he said: “I may say, ‘lots of luck, keep fighting,’ or I may say we can make a deal...” but, if said deal involves the sort of “swapping” territory that Zelenskyy has already rejected, SecPress was already making the excuse that Trump “inherited this conflict,” which is “a very complex and complicated situation.”

Later yesterday. IUK’s Sam Kiley said that, “... from Trump’s perspective, the summit may be part of his drive for a Nobel Peace Prize by ending Putin’s war against Ukraine using his “art of the deal.”

Putin, however, is likely to prevail, Kiley said, “and his agenda is the art of the steal – specifically a massive grab of his neighbour’s land.”

Restating a history of the war – dating back to the 1994 deal “in which Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal in return for written guarantees from Russia, the US and the UK to respect Ukrainian sovereignty,” Kiley explained, Russia, twenty years later, “ignored those guarantees and invaded the Crimean Peninsula, claiming the land for itself and the right to protect Russian-speaking people in eastern Ukraine.” (ATTACHMENT THIRTY FOUR)

Thereafter, Putin sent his armies into eastern Ukraine to capture large areas of Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts (provinces) while the U.S.. Europe and the U.K. “did nothing to help or protect Ukraine, even banning lethal arms exports to the embattled nation.” This encouraged further military incursions in 2022 but Ukrainian resistence and “limited” weapons from the West turned the front lines into a “meat grinder” conflict of attrition.

See charts, graphs and maps depicting the conflict here

“Putin has repeatedly said that there is no nation called “Ukraine” and that its territory is naturally part of Russia,” Kiley advises. “His imperial ambitions are underpinned by Russia’s conquest of much of modern eastern Ukraine by Catherine the Great in the 18th century.

“The US president has weakened Ukraine by cutting military aid. The US had given about $114bn to Ukraine. That figure is now zero.”

Europe is now by far the biggest donor in terms of weapons, money, and other aid to Ukraine. In total, some €250bn has been pledged by the EU and UK.

The European mantra of “no talks about Ukraine without Ukraine” has been ignored by Trump and Putin. “The US is saying only that Zelensky and then European leaders will get a call from Trump after he’s finished talking to the Russian president.”

Consequently, “Poland, the Baltic states, Finland and others in Scandinavia are preparing their populations to withstand potential Russian incursions.”

And another British medium, the Guardian, also expressed skepticism about the summit... saying that Trump’s “swallowing Putin’s lies is a bigger threat to Ukraine than bombs.”

Dismissing Trump’s agenda as “a project of personal vanity”, GUK said that the collapse of his promises to end the war within days of returning to the White House is a rebuke to his self-image as the world’s master dealmaker.

Putin, too, miscalculated – expecting a short, sweet war but still believes in the inevitability of Ukrainian defeat “because any other scenario – even a ceasefire that allows him to hold territory captured so far – leaves the historic mission he set himself unfulfilled.” (ATTACHMENT THIRTY FIVE)

“The Alaska powwow is happening because Trump started setting ceasefire deadlines and threatening Moscow with sanctions,” declared GUK’s Rafael Behr. “Putin needed to offer some affectation of willingness to compromise. He calculated that the spectacle of a summit, combined with some artfully ambiguous signals around “land swaps”, would appeal to Trump’s confidence in his own charisma and his belief that a deal is there for the doing” and reinforcing the disinformation “wherein a devious, criminal Zelenskyy bamboozle(d) a senescent Joe Biden into throwing away heaps of US treasure on a crazy, losing bet.”

Trump, Behr posits, “doesn’t have to fall in a bromantic swoon at Putin’s feet to make the summit a success for Russia. The damage will be done if he emerges from negotiations parroting talking points from the Kremlin script. The fear among Ukraine’s European allies is that he will proudly outline a ceasefire proposal on terms that Zelenskyy cannot possibly accept – an unjust, unworkable partition of his country along lines drawn by the tyrant who invaded it. Putin will then claim that he tried to talk peace and only Ukrainian intransigence prolongs the war.”

Trump, said Behr, values only two kinds of deal... “those that make him richer, and those that allow him to luxuriate in the status of a great dealmaker. If he thinks such benefits are available by abandoning American allies and interests there is no reason to think he wouldn’t do it.”

Don Jones may or may not care... it’s hot in some places, wet in others but distractions will soon be at hand. The summer of (movie) sequels marches on, the NFL preseason games have begun and the gamblers, pollsters and ESPN/A.P. tabulators have chosen their top NCAA football picks... Texas on top, then Penn State. See the entire list as ATTACHMENT THIRTY SIX.

	IN the NEWS: AUGUST 7^th through AUGUST 13^th, 2025
Thursday, August 7, 2025 Dow: 43,936.15	Tariffs begin for 90 countries (or, say others, 70) spurred on by Trump’s newest sock puppet, Jay Cook of Apple. Critics say lack of infrastructure for American replacement may cause delays, drive up prices. With Russian summit planned, their oil customer India gets its rate doubled to 50% while small businesses in the US say they have no choice but to pass along the costs to consumers. Defenders say the short term pain will be worth the long term gain sure to come. Wars and wildfires further complicate lives here and overseas. T.A.C.O. on Ukraine presence at Russin summit and President Z gets a consolation prize – a meeting with and lecture by Veep Vance. In the MidEast, Israeli PM Netanyahu says he will force starving children to walk miles from Gaza City out into... somewhere different... so Israel can annex the territory and continue to kill at will, hoping to release the hostages (whose families are largely non-spportive). In the American West, wildfires grow, fed by temperatures that reach 117° in Phoenix – too hot for planes to fly. A United outage strands passengers in Houston. The air quality in the Upper Midwest said to equal smoking seven cigarettes per day. Citing cancer and cigarettes, gumment Prohibitionists prohibiting nicotine vaping in public while the NFL bans smelling salts that enable concussed players to return to the game.
Friday, August 8, 2025 Dow: 44,175.91	SecTreas. Scott Bessent says Trump’s tariffs will bring 399K to US Treasury as dreamers dream about how to spend it. T. names Stephen Mira (not Miller, but another, gentler housepet) to the open Fed, deregulates crypto for retirement pay and fires more FBI agents who searched his house on orders from superiors. Trump credits Himself for ending the Armenian/Azeri war and Cambodia nominates him for a Nobel Peace Prize. In other good news, the Montana bar killer is captured in the woods, Sean Duffy@ talks up Djonald UnEarthly’s plans for nuclear reactors on the moon while, down here, the DoDefense fires all known transgender military and yanks pensions from sinful veterans. Gov. Abbott (R-Tx) sends the FBI across state lines to hunt and capture runaway Democratic legislators who are holding up his gerrymandering plans that, Trump says, will give Republicans the five more seats they need to keep control in 2026. Techsperts say the jobholderrs most likely to be replaced by A.I. are historians because truth and history no longer matter in an age of deep fakery.
Saturday, August 9, 2025 Dow: Closed	Trumpster Peter Navarro now promises consumers that no inflation will result from tariffs – and if it does, it’s the fault of the dastardly Fed. The good news is that it’s going to be a great week for women. First MLB umpire Jen Pawol calls her first game as Braves defeat Marlins. The Boston Celtics hire the first two woman broadcasting team. And Space X brings tired but happy astronauts back after five months at the I.S.S. The bad news is a crime eruption as a shooter, possibly political, kills a cop and shoots holes in the CDC building near Atlanta’s Emory U. and then kills himself. Neighbors say he had “quirks”. The Fort Stewart shooter down south, a ways, is said to have retaliated against the other soldiers who bullied him for stuttering. A Florida man arrested for hanging a dog, beating girlfriend who protested; great white buffalo hunter is killed by his prey onS. African safari, two killers execute woman and stuff her into a plastic tote bag, three shot at New York Times Square gunfight, six more in Baltimore.
Sunday, August 10, 2025 Dow: Closed	It’s the 80^th anniversary of Nagasaki... forever slighted as that “other” nuclear holocaust. After Putin puppet Medvedev threatens nuke war on America, T.A.C.O. on Zelenskyy at Alaska summit and Volod says Vlad “playing” the President. Trump says of his former BFF: “I don’t know what happened to Putin.” (What happened is that he needs the war to keep up patriotic support at home and, besides, he really really likes killing people.) Bibi too... more hungry Gazans gunned down in food lines, including a Palestinian soccer star, while airdropped vittles fall on and crush a hungry boy. On Talkshow Sunday, ABC’s Martha Raddatz says Trump’s Alaska strategy is to “keep people guessing”; asks Z-man what his relationship to America is, and is told “I don’t know.” NATO Sec. Gen. Mark Rutte says Trump has said he supports NATO membership for Ukes and will now be “testing” Mad Vlad while some members speak out against “rewarding” Russia for invasion. Mustache Man turned Trump traitor John Bolton says Ukes appreciate American arms but really want access to military intel. Donnie made a mistake in tariffing India, the only valid intermediary with Moscow – starry eyed for Nobel after taking credit for ending wars between Azeri/Armenia, Congo/Rwanda, India and Pakistan and Thai/Cambodia – the latter nominating him for his prize, then begging for tariff relief. Split Roundtablers discuss firing BLS chief Erika McEntarfer; Sarah Isgur calls it a “dangerous” precedent as gumment rank and filers, discouraged, are slacking off or quitting; Chris Christie calls it not only dangerous but wrong, In the second session, former party chairs discuss 2028 (Donna Brazile says Vance is heir to the MAGA throne but Little Marco still possible, Reince Priebus says it’s all up to Trump before they get into a shouting match over which party is the deeper underwater. On “Face the Nation” diplomatic Uke ambassador Olga Markarova says Z-man is ready to meet anyone, anywhere, but “old methods from the last century” won’t work anymore. Busy, busy Rutte says Putin has no interest in peace, TACO re-enacting a 1938 Munich moment, dials back support for Ukes in NATO.
Monday, August 11, 2025 Dow: 43,975.04	Monsoon mess in Milwaukee brings 14” of rain, several deaths and over 600 rescues. A prison roof collapses in Nebraska and bicoastal heat brings 90’s to Maine and 105° to Portland (Oregon!). Crime stalks Mesa, Arizona where a bad dad kills baby for “crying too much” but in Washington, where TV experts say crime is down, Trump orders the National Guard to patrol neighborhoods- angering Mayor Bowser, who admits she can’t do anything but watch. “Weapons” wins at the box office with $70M and acid weaponized in Hawaii to burn the face off a victim. CDC shooter blame Covid vaxxes for making him “depressed” while three are killed at Target store in Austin. Target recalls sugar cookies with unwanted ingredient... wood chips. Lethal fake life jackets also recalled as are jars of Dollar General coffee with glass shards. There are more accidental tragedies... a steel plant in Pittsburgh explodes, killing one, injuring ten with more missing in the rubble. Concussed NFL player Norris now said to be recovering, but accidents sideline four more preseason ballers as well as WNBA star Caitlin Clark. And J. Lo is attacked by a bug at her concert in Kazakhstan.
Tuesday, August 12, 2025 Dow: 44,458.60	Hundreds of National Guardsman under Pete Hegseth and Pam Bondi storm into Washington D.C. to fight crime and round up the homeless in what President Trump calls an “apocalyptic” situation (even though actual crime stats are down). Where crime is up is at the CDC building in Atlanta where an anti-vaxxer shoots out 150 windows, but kills nobody except a responding policeman. The gunman at an Austin Target is said to have had “mental problems.” TACO Trump also pauses China tariffs for 90 days (causing Wall Street to soar) as he prepares for his Alaska summit (above) and appoints a new BLS chief Erwin John “E.J.” Antoni (a stalwart of the Heritage Foundation and Project 2025). Weather calms somewhat but smoke from Canadian wildfires still blankets the upper Midwest, causing high school football practices in Minnesota to be cancelled. Out in the Caribbean, Erin achieves tropical storm status with intimations it will become a major hurricane... path unknown.
Wednesday, August 13, 2025 Dow: 44,922.27	Steady inflation rate, positive vibes from the Fed and Trump’s 90 day TACO on China send the mariets soaring and investors dreaming of interest rate cuts. But the good news does not extend to Spirit Airlines and Kodak – both circling the drain of bankruptcy. AI start up Perplexity makes a daring $34B bid to take over Google Chrome, And the National Debt hits a record $37T. Active shooter klls three at Reno Casino, another guns down a mother walking her young to a school bus stop in Louisville – police note that there were other shootings at same site. Drunken maniac ttacks flight attendant and passengers on a Breeze flight, forcing a stopover in Colorado while scammers are using facebook to raid bank accounts of social media cultists. In legal but loathsome scams, nursing homes are illegally suing families and even friends of dead patients with bills that Medicare and Medicaid won’t pay, WalMart pays $5M settlement to overcharged customers and Trump takes aim at Smithsonian exhibits – purging anything “woke”. And a man is arrested for trying to smuggling 850 turtles to China in his socks! Small turtles, or big Sox!
@

THE DON JONES INDEX

CHART of CATEGORIES w/VALUE ADDED to EQUAL BASELINE of 15,000

(REFLECTING… approximately… DOW JONES INDEX of June 27, 2013)

Gains in indices as improved are noted in GREEN. Negative/harmful indices in RED as are their designation. (Note – some of the indices where the total went up created a realm where their value went down... and vice versa.) See a further explanation of categories HERE

ECONOMIC INDICES		(60%)
CATEGORY	VALUE	BASE	RESULTS by PERCENTAGE			SCORE		OUR SOURCES and COMMENTS
INCOME	(24%)	6/17/13 revised 1/1/22	LAST	CHANGE	NEXT	LAST WEEK	THIS WEEK	THE WEEK’S CLOSING STATS...
Wages (hrly. Per cap)	9%	1350 points	7/24/25	+0.32%	8/25	1,578.86	1,583.91	https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/wages   31.34
Median Inc. (yearly)	4%	600	7/24/25	+0.06%	8/7/25	748.96	749.44	http://www.usdebtclock.org/   44,031
Unempl. (BLS – in mi)	4%	600	7/24/25	+2.44%	8/25	542.87	542.87	http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000/ 4.2
Official (DC – in mi)	2%	300	7/24/25	+0.06%	8/7/25	222.78	222.65	http://www.usdebtclock.org/      7,036
Unofficl. (DC – in mi)	2%	300	7/24/25	+0.14%	8/7/25	248.99	248.65	http://www.usdebtclock.org/     13,909
Workforce Participation Number Percent	2%	300	7/24/25	+0.029% +0.011%	8/7/25	297.75	297.72	In 163,643 Out 103,551 Total: 267,194 61.245
WP % (ycharts)*	1%	150	7/24/25	-0.16%	8/25	150.47	150.47	https://ycharts.com/indicators/labor_force_participation_rate 62.20
OUTGO	(15%)
Total Inflation	7%	1050	7/24/25	+0.3%	8/25	933.04	931.17	http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm     +0.2
Food	2%	300	7/24/25	+0.3%	8/25	263.91	263.91	http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm     +0.0
Gasoline	2%	300	7/24/25	+1.0%	8/25	255.20	260.05	http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm    -1.9
Medical Costs	2%	300	7/24/25	+0.6%	8/25	276.14	273.93	http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm     +0.8
Shelter	2%	300	7/24/25	+0.2%	8/25	252.40	251.64	http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm     +0.3
WEALTH
Dow Jones Index	2%	300	7/24/25	+1.65%	8/7/25	335.96	341.50	https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/index/ 44,922.47
Home (Sales) (Valuation)	1% 1%	150 150	7/24/25	-2.41% +2.96%	8/25	121.44 286.03	121.44 286.03	https://www.nar.realtor/research-and-statistics Sales (M):  393.3 Valuations (K):  435.3
Millionaires (New Category)	1%	150	7/24/25	+0.063%	8/7/25	133.31	133.39	http://www.usdebtclock.org/    23,679
Paupers (New Category)	1%	150	7/24/25	+0.024%	8/7/25	132.97	133.00	http://www.usdebtclock.org/    37,351
GOVERNMENT	(10%)
Revenue (trilns.)	2%	300	7/24/25	+0.17%	8/7/25	444.53	445.30	http://www.usdebtclock.org/    5,226
Expenditures (tr.)	2%	300	7/24/25	+0.12%	8/7/25	285.89	285.53	http://www.usdebtclock.org/    7,235
National Debt tr.)	3%	450	7/24/25	+0.09%	8/7/25	361.41	361.09	http://www.usdebtclock.org/    37,232
Aggregate Debt (tr.)	3%	450	7/24/25	+0.16%	8/7/25	376.16	375.56	http://www.usdebtclock.org/    105,689
TRADE	(5%)
Foreign Debt (tr.)	2%	300	7/24/25	+0.24%	8/7/25	261.18	260.56	http://www.usdebtclock.org/    9,299
Exports (in billions)	1%	150	7/24/25	-0.61%	8/25	172.77	172.77	https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/current/index.html 277.3
Imports (in billions))	1%	150	7/24/25	+3.85%	8/25	161.12	161.12	https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/current/index.html 337.5
Trade Surplus/Deficit (blns.)	1%	150	7/24/25	+11.88%	8/25	330.21	330.21	https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/current/index.html 60.2
SOCIAL INDICES		(40%)
ACTS of MAN	(12%)
World Affairs	3%	450	7/24/25	-0.1%	8/7/25	472.89	472.42	Young American males find new tourist destination: Afghanistan! In nearby Kazakhstan, J. Lo’s final concert attacked by a bug. Colombian presidential candidate assassinated.
War and terrorism	2%	300	7/24/25	+0.5%	8/7/25	287.81	289.25	Trump (or someone/thing) ends wars between Azaris and Armenians, Congolese and Rwanda, India and Pakistan and Thailand/Cambodia for which the latter nominates him for Nobel Peace Prize. Israel kills five journalists including Al Jazeera’s Al-Sharif (whom they call a terrorist). Haiti now 90% controlled by gnngs.
Politics	3%	450	7/24/25	-0.2%	8/7/25	465.80	464.87	Trump EOs send military into Latin countries to hunt cartels, occupy DC - force the homeless to go away... somewhere... or go to prison. He replaces Erika McEntarfer with E. J. Antoni of the (Project 2025) Heritage Foundation, purges Smithsonian of “woke” (aka dark-skinned) exhibits and names first Kennedy Center honorees including Sylvester Stallone and K.I.S.S.. Feds redlight Alabama proposed gerrymandering but Texas proceeds apace.
Economics	3%	450	7/24/25	-0.1%	8/7/25	431.37	430.94	Trump greenlights converting 401K retirement accounts to crypto. Aide Peter Navarro denies tariffs cause inflation. National Debt reaches $37T. Debt drives Kodak and Spirit towards bankruptcy. Paramount buys UFC in time for 250^th at the White House, states are voting on bills to play the National Anthem in schools.
Crime	1%	150	7/24/25	+0.2%	8/7/25	212.32	212.74	Florida man hangs dog, beats girlfriend, Buffalo hunter killed on S. African safari, two men kill pregnant woman and stuff her into plastic tote bag, 3 shot at NY Times Square, 6 in Baltimore another at a Bad Bunny concert in Puerto Rico. Montana bar killer and Tennessee rail slayer captured. Investigators say Fort Stewart shooter was bullied for stuttering. Mail thefts by USPS increasing. Burglars stealing Labubu dolls.
ACTS of GOD	(6%)
Environment/Weather	3%	450	7/24/25	-0.2%	8/7/25	350.09	349.39	Multiple wildfires and extreme heat in West – Phoenix reaches 117°, mid 90’s in Maine and 105° in Portland (Oregon). Monsoon mess in Milwaukee... 14” rain. Prison roof blown off in Nebraska. “Glacial outburst in Alaska – but in Juneau, not affecting Anchorage summit.
Disasters	3%	450	7/24/25	+0.2%	8/7/25	409.45	410.27	Travel and transportation troubles include United outage stranding passengers in Houston. Teen wakes from coma after falling down a ravine and going 7 days without food. Tiffany Haddish buys groceries for homeless fire victims in L.A.
LIFESTYLE/JUSTICE INDEX		(15%)
Science, Tech, Education	4%	600	7/24/25	+0.2%	8/7/25	613.38	614.61	Meteorite crashes into house in @. @ Sean Duffy plans nuclear reactors on the moon, saying “the moon is complicated.” Space X brings astronauts back after 5 months at I.S.S.
Equality (econ/social)	4%	600	7/24/25	+0.4%	8/7/25	661.75	664.40	Jen Pawol becomes first female MLB umpire, Boston Celtics hire first female broadcasters, Adidas apologizes for fake Mexican tourist shoes (made in China).
Health	4%	600	7/24/25	-0.2%	8/7/25	425.15	424.30	Police say CDC shooter had a hatred of vaccines because they made him “depressed”. Fake children’s life jackets recalled, also Target sugar with wood chips and Dollar General coffee with glass chips. Nurse imposter treats thousands before arrest; conspiracy theorists say the Deep State is killing patriots with sunscreen.
Freedom and Justice	3%	450	7/24/25	-0.2%	8/7/25	486.45	485.48	Trump revenge and retaliation prosecutions for NY attorney Letitia James, @, @ and, after successful extortion of Brown and U. Cal, he threatens to confiscate Harvard patents
CULTURAL and MISCELLANEOUS INCIDENTS			(6%)
Cultural incidents	3%	450	7/24/25	-0.2%	8/7/25	568.29	567.15	NFL begins exhibition season with major injuries – tush push declared legal but smelling salts prohibited. NCAA predicts Texas #1 – see the rest of the Top 25 as Attachment Thirty Four, below. “Weapons” wins with $70M at B.O. while Freaky Friday Two @ RIP: Latin jazz bandleader Eddie Palmieri, Apollo Thirteen astronaut Jim Lovell, CIA man William Webster, keyboardist Bobby Whitlock, Danielle Spencer (“What’s Happening?”)
Miscellaneous incidents	4%	450	7/24/25	nc	8/7/25	540.16	540.16	Man arrested for smuggling 850 turtles into China. More radioactive wasps found in South Carolina; woman celebrates 114^th birthday with potato-themed party; Petunia, the hairless French bulldog wins world’s ugliest trophy.

The Don Jones Index for the week of August 7^th through August 13^th, 2025 was UP 10.63 points

The Don Jones Index is sponsored by the Coalition for a New Consensus: retired Congressman and Independent Presidential candidate Jack “Catfish” Parnell, Chairman; Brian Doohan, Administrator. The CNC denies, emphatically, allegations that the organization, as well as any of its officers (including former Congressman Parnell, environmentalist/America-Firster Austin Tillerman and cosmetics CEO Rayna Finch) and references to Parnell’s works, “Entropy and Renaissance” and “The Coming Kill-Off” are fictitious or, at best, mere pawns in the web-serial “Black Helicopters” – and promise swift, effective legal action against parties promulgating this and/or other such slanders.

Comments, complaints, donations (especially SUPERPAC donations) always welcome at feedme@generisis.com or: speak@donjonesindex.com.

ATTACHMENT ONE – FROM TIME

EXCLUSIVE: THE SECRET WHITE HOUSE BACKCHANNEL THAT PAVED THE WAY FOR TRUMP’S SUMMIT WITH PUTIN 

By Simon Shuster in Minsk

In arranging an interview with a head of state, the journalist typically makes the first move, sending a request to the press office and hoping somebody responds. Once in a while, when a president really wants to talk, the invitation might go in the other direction. But rarely have the overtures been as persistent as the ones that reached me this spring from the allies of Alexander Lukashenko, the dictator of Belarus.

It was not immediately clear what the intermediaries wanted. I had never been to Belarus or written much about it, though my coverage of its neighbors, Russia and Ukraine, had given me a grasp of Lukashenko’s story. In Europe he holds the dubious honor of clinging to power longer than any other sitting leader by far, an astonishing 31 years without pause, which means most of the nine million people in his landlocked country have never known another ruler in their adult lives. His regime is also among the most repressive and isolated in the world, with terrible relations and almost no trade with four out of its five neighbors, and a near-total dependence on the fifth: Russia.

In the memorable words of one expert on the region’s politics, Belarus functions as a “Russian balcony” overlooking Europe, a quaint metaphor that elides the way Russia has used this vantage to lob bombs, position nukes, and launch invasions. Since 2022, Russia’s attempt to conquer Ukraine has relied on Belarus as a staging ground, a training base, and a source of supplies and ammunition. Lukashenko has avoided sending his own troops to fight in that war. But Ukraine, like most of Europe, still sees him as an accomplice to Vladimir Putin in the worst act of aggression the continent has seen in 80 years.

So it was not an obvious decision for me to take a call in May from an official with Lukashenko’s government, who seemed a little out of practice in dealing with the Western media. A few minutes into our conversation, the official asked how much it would cost to arrange an interview with TIME, and he sounded perplexed to learn that the process could not involve any kind of bribe. “Just checking,” he said, “so we avoid any misunderstandings later on.” After a few more calls and messages, we agreed on the terms of an interview; it would take place in Minsk, the capital of Belarus, with no questions or topics left off the table. Only later, after several conversations with U.S. and European diplomats, did Lukashenko’s motives come into focus. 

Since the beginning of this year, the autocrat has pursued a confidential dialogue with the Trump administration, offering his services as a kind of Putin whisperer. He coached U.S. officials on how to keep talks with the Kremlin on track, and he gave them assurances that the Russians were ready to negotiate in good faith even as they continued their bombing raids against Ukraine. Using every available avenue to Washington, Lukashenko dangled the prospect of peace in a way designed to get the attention of President Donald Trump: “If we make this deal,” he told his U.S. interlocutors, “they will bring you the Nobel Peace Prize on a platter.”

The Americans played along. Within a month of Trump’s inauguration in January, U.S. officials made the first of at least five visits to Minsk to explore what Lukashenko could achieve. In the process, they eased the image of Belarus as a pariah state, won the release of several high-profile political prisoners, and opened a quiet backchannel to the Kremlin through Minsk.

In this context, Lukashenko’s desire for an interview with TIME made sense. What remained less clear to me was whether he is a peace broker acting on his own initiative, or a puppet in the hands of the Kremlin. The Americans also had their doubts. “We’re not naive,” says John Coale, a former attorney to Trump who has met with Lukashenko on behalf of the U.S. government several times this year. “He’s friends with Putin. They talk regularly,” Coale told me. “And he has offered to give Putin messages from us. That’s a channel, okay? That’s very valuable.”

The Americans have used that channel, he added, to push the idea of a summit between Putin and Trump. They hoped it would help break the impasse in the peace process by allowing Trump to reason with Putin face to face. As Coale put it, using a common nickname for Lukashenko, “A meeting has always been pushed to Luka to tell Putin.” 

For much of the spring and summer, the effort sputtered and tensions rose. Direct lines of contact between the two powers devolved into a muddle of nuclear threats, insults and ultimatums. By August, Trump began to impose steep tariffs on any country that buys Russian oil, and he pledged to increase the economic pain until Moscow accepts a ceasefire in Ukraine. Putin refused. His military was ready to advance “across the entire front,” he said, until they achieve victory for Russia.

All the while, Lukashenko continued to deliver a very different message to the Americans: Putin wants peace, the dictator assured them, and he is ready to make concessions. These signals nurtured hopes within the White House that a diplomatic breakthrough would soon be possible, and they helped prepare the ground for the U.S. and Russia to announce on Aug. 6 that their leaders would soon meet in person.

The war’s conclusion after more than three and a half years may now rest with the world’s two nuclear superpowers. Preparations for the talks are now underway, and they will offer a fresh chance to call a ceasefire. They could also give Putin a chance to prolong the war, as he has in recent months, by dragging out talks and buying the Russian military time to continue the conquest of Ukrainian land and the murder of its people. 

Having served his function as the go-between, Lukashenko seems ready to step aside. But his role in setting the stage for the summit reveals a lot about the perils of Trump’s latest diplomatic gambit. As Lukashenko explained when we finally met in Minsk, the whole thing could fall apart unless Trump behaves toward Putin with sufficient deference. “You’ve got to make it look good,” he told me. “In the name of peace, maybe you’ve got to be a little cunning and make some concessions. Even if you can’t make sense of Putin, treat him like a human being.” The story of the backchannel through Belarus, in other words, could become the preamble to Ukraine’s capitulation.

For an American traveler, the road to Belarus can be a pain. Sanctions from the U.S. and Europe have sealed the country off so tightly that Western airlines no longer fly there. The most direct route requires a flight to Lithuania, at the eastern edge of the NATO alliance, and then a long drive across that heavily guarded frontier into Belarus. Along the way, a traffic sign over the highway in Lithuania offers a warning to anyone heading east: “Minsk,” it says, “Occupied by the Kremlin.”

The first U.S. envoy to make this trip on behalf of the Trump administration was Christopher Smith, the State Department's deputy assistant secretary for Eastern Europe, who has overseen U.S. policy toward Belarus, Ukraine and other parts of the region since the summer of 2023. A career diplomat and fluent Russian speaker, Smith had never met with Lukashenko before his visit to Minsk early this year. Under the Biden Administration, he had implemented a U.S. policy toward Belarus that was often referred to as “maximum pressure.” It used sanctions to isolate Lukashenko’s economy and to punish him for siding with Russia in the war. By imposing such costs, the strategy sought to make him reconsider his alliance with Moscow.

It appeared to have the opposite effect. Cut off from commerce with the West, Belarus became ever more dependent on trade with Russia and, to a lesser extent, with China. The low point in Lukashenko’s standoff with the West came in the spring of 2023, when he asked the Kremlin to station nuclear missiles on the territory of Belarus. “I told my big brother, my friend,” Lukashenko recalls of that moment: “We need to return nuclear weapons to Belarus.” Putin obliged. 

By the end of last year, Smith and his colleagues at the State Department began preparing for a major shift in U.S. policy. Trump had promised during his campaign to improve relations with Putin and quickly end the war in Ukraine. Smith wanted to see how Belarus could help advance both objectives, and he reached out to Minsk through its mission to the United Nations in New York. Lukashenko seized the opportunity. “It’s my credo, a principle of mine,” Lukashenko says. “You’ve got to talk to everybody if you want normal relations, and if you don’t talk, then little by little you’re moving toward war.”

In order to draw in the Americans, Lukashenko made an opening gesture of good faith on January 26. He released an American woman, Anastassia Nuhfer, who had been held prisoner in Belarus for nearly five years. Smith negotiated her release in Washington with the Belarusian ambassador to the U.N., Valentin Rybakov. The State Department then arranged for a team from the U.S. embassy in Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania, to pick Nuhfer up at the border with Belarus and bring her back to the United States. 

The diplomatic victory, however modest, came in the first week of Trump’s second term, when the incoming administration was eager to find any signs of the winning streak he had promised the American people. Marco Rubio, then five days into his tenure as Secretary of State, ascribed the release of the prisoner to Trump’s leadership and, in a tweet, thanked Smith for facilitating it. In all caps, Rubio added, “PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH.”

About two weeks later, on February 12, Smith became the first senior official from the Trump administration to visit Minsk. Lukashenko greeted him at his palace near the city center, a gargantuan pile of marble and gold festooned with pictures from the life of the dictator: snapshots of his childhood and his days as the director of a Soviet collective farm, alongside portraits of him with world leaders like Bill Clinton, Vladimir Putin, Fidel Castro and Volodymyr Zelensky.

Over those first several hours of talks, the dictator laid down some ground rules for the resumption of the dialogue between the U.S. and Belarus. Referring to Smith, only half in jest, as an agent of the CIA, Lukashenko urged him never to try driving a wedge between Minsk and Moscow, because he would be wasting both of their time. “If you want to recruit me as your spy, don’t do it. It won’t work,” he recalls telling Smith. “They laughed about it for a long time, the Americans, their delegation. They said, ‘No, no, no. We don’t recruit presidents.’”

The second ground rule followed from the first. Lukashenko made clear that he would be coordinating with Putin at every step, and he would not make any decisions without the Kremlin’s approval. “We can talk about Russia, about Putin, about the war and so on, but fundamentally we do not make agreements with the Americans behind Russia’s back,” he says. “That’s a taboo.” 

The Americans agreed, and a couple of months later, Lukashenko got another visit from a U.S. delegation. It was led by Coale, Trump’s former lawyer and a fixture of the Washington political scene; Coale has been married for 46 years to the news anchor Greta Van Susteren, formerly of Fox News. In 2021, soon after the insurrection at the Capitol, Trump hired Coale to file a class-action lawsuit against Facebook and other social media companies for their decisions to ban Trump from their platforms. The litigation has worked out well for Trump. Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, agreed in January to pay $25 million in a settlement.

During his visit to Minsk in April, Coale was treated to a long and extravagant lunch at the presidential palace, featuring potato pancakes with sour cream and other national specialties. Lukashenko, a professed teetotaler, raised a toast of vodka and urged his American guest to drink. That night, he sent Coale home with several more political prisoners, including another American citizen.

Once again, Rubio celebrated the release on social media: “No president has done so much, so quickly, to keep Americans safe abroad.” At the U.S. embassy in Vilnius, Coale appeared in a video with the released American, Youras Ziankovich, who wore an American flag draped over his shoulders and thanked Trump for winning his freedom.

“It’s baby steps,” Coale told me afterward. “We’re just trying to calm everybody down and keep communicating. That’s a Trump thing. He’ll communicate with anybody. And the more you communicate, the better it gets.”

Kremlinologists have often observed Putin’s habit of being late, as though his disdain for the people he meets can be measured by the amount of time he keeps them waiting. (Queen Elizabeth: about 15 minutes; Pope Francis: nearly an hour; U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry: three hours.) Lukashenko, by contrast, arrived a bit early to our interview, and he seemed somewhat nervous as he walked through the door, perspiring around the forehead and wringing his hands.

He extended the right one for me to shake, then let me in on a little secret. His intelligence service had prepared a file about me, and he had studied it before our interview. This was one of Lukashenko’s favorite methods of breaking the ice; he said the same thing to Smith when they first met in February. 

The room set aside for our interview was a small library on the second floor of the palace, where his press team had set up spotlights to film our encounter. Otherwise, the space was dark. On a bookshelf stood the collected works of Alexander Dugin, the Russian imperialist thinker who is credited with building the ideological basis for the invasion of Ukraine. In another corner of the room, behind the bank of cameras, a large painting of Vladimir Lenin stood on an easel, and Lukashenko turned to it as we sat down.

It had graced the wall of his office back in the 1980s, he explained, when he served as a Communist Party functionary. In 1994, three years after the Soviet Union fell apart, he won the first presidential election ever held in Belarus—and the last one ever deemed free and fair by international observers. The ethos of his rule since then has been a kind of Soviet revivalism. The country still uses a lot of Soviet emblems and iconography. Its state security service is still known as the KGB, whose headquarters stands across from Dzerzhinsky Square, named after the sociopathic founder of the Soviet secret police.

“These days, of course, I’m far from being Soviet, but Soviet principles, the best ones, live inside me,” Lukashenko mused. “Why should I reject them? Just like the Americans do not reject their history, it’s the same with me. That’s why we have this friendship with Russia, the closest kind of cooperation.” 

The contrast could not have been starker with the path Ukraine had chosen after the fall of the Soviet Union. For at least two decades, it has tried to break with its Soviet past, release itself from Russia’s grip and chart the course of a European democracy. That path had led Putin to order the invasion of Ukraine, killing hundreds of thousands of its citizens and occupying about a fifth of its territory. But Lukashenko, perversely enough, put the blame on the Ukrainians for starting the war. “Zelensky understood that he lives next to Russia, this sleeping bear,” he said. “Why did he go and wake it up?” 

In his talks with the Americans, Lukashenko has pushed a similar line, arguing that Ukraine was at fault for causing all of the tensions between the U.S. and Russia. It would only be fair, he argued, for the peace talks between Trump and Putin to leave Zelensky on the sidelines, at least in their opening stage. “Putin wants to make a deal with you first and foremost,” Lukashenko said, habitually treating me as a stand-in for the United States. “Come to an agreement on the first day, and then invite Zelensky. That would look dignified.”

He felt the same way about the Europeans. “The question is with you, with America,” he told me. “Western Europe can get lost. Putin can disregard them. In this situation, if we reach a deal with the Americans, the Europeans won’t have any way out of it.” He raised the point again later in our interview. “Trump is right,” he said, “to make Europe bow.”

On this point, at least, Lukashenko’s position did not seem all that far from that of the White House. Trump’s special envoy to the peace talks in Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, has also argued that the Europeans should not have a seat at the table when the U.S. and Russia meet to agree an end to the war in Ukraine. At a gathering of diplomats and military officers from across the continent in February, he said there would be three parties to the peace talks: Russia and Ukraine, with the U.S. playing the role of a mediator. 

American diplomats would “take into consideration” the interests of the Europeans in these talks, Kellogg told them, but they would not allow any other parties to complicate the peace process. “What we don’t want to do is get into a large group discussion,” he said. “We are trying to end this in a short period of time.”

The highpoint of Lukashenko’s outreach to the White House took place on June 20, when Kellogg led another delegation to Minsk. The retired U.S. Army general brought along his colleagues, Coale and Smith, who had already made the same journey. Unlike their earlier meetings with Lukashenko, this one appeared on state TV in Belarus, where the anchors touted it as a major diplomatic breakthrough.

The tone seemed cordial enough. “With all the gold here,” Kellogg said as they sat down in Lukashenko’s office, “this looks a lot like Mar-a-Lago.” But, once the cameras were off, the tone abruptly shifted, and Lukashenko castigated Coale, who was seated directly to his right, for not doing more to influence Trump’s views about Ukraine and Russia.“You drink coffee with him,” Lukashenko boomed. “You’re the one who can set him straight!” 

According to one person familiar with their meeting, Kellogg also took a harder line than Lukashenko had come to expect from the Americans: “He basically said there’s no trust,” and Belarus needs to “do something very big” to demonstrate its good intentions.

Lukashenko did not disappoint. On their way out of Belarus, the American convoy stopped on a village road to rendezvous with a van driven by the KGB. In the back sat 14 prisoners, including one of the regime’s most valuable: Sergei Tikhanovsky, the opposition leader who had tried to run against Lukashenko in the presidential elections of 2020 and was imprisoned two days into his campaign. As the door of the van swung open, Coale says he was shocked to find the prisoners manacled and blindfolded, sitting with their heads between their knees. He recalls yelling at them: “You’re free! President Trump sent me to get you home!”

As the talks progressed throughout the spring, Lukashenko stayed in constant touch with Putin, passing along the latest requests and messages from the Americans. “I always did it faithfully,” he recalls. “They would sometimes ask me: Could you pass along this and that? And I would have a call with him every two or three days, sometimes the next day, and I would tell him.”

At the time, Trump was growing increasingly frustrated with Putin’s refusal to accept a ceasefire in Ukraine. His envoy to Russia, Steve Witkoff, visited Putin in March and, upon his return, publicly echoed many of Russia’s arguments about the war. He even suggested that the U.S. should allow Russia to keep all the land it has occupied. “The Russians are de facto in control of these territories,” Witkoff said in an interview with Tucker Carlson. “The question is: Will the world acknowledge that those are Russian territories?” After their meeting in Moscow, he added, “I don’t regard Putin as a bad guy.”

As he considered whether or not to attend, Putin sought the advice of his closest ally, and Lukashenko urged him to stay away. “I told him, there’s nothing for you to do there,” he recalls. “It looked like a bunch of posturing,” as though Zelensky were taunting Putin in Istanbul, daring him to show up for a duel at high noon. “That’s not how it’s done in politics,” Lukashenko says. 

The tone and format of the negotiations, at least in their initial phase, matter as much to the Russians as their substance, Lukashenko suggested. “You’ve got to do it carefully,” he told me. “Don’t dictate terms. Don’t bang your fist. Don’t insult Putin. Russia will not forgive him if he swallows such an insult.” Trump needs to understand, he continued, that Putin can tell him to “go to hell” if he feels disrespected. “He hasn’t done that yet,” Lukashenko said, “but he can do it.” The Americans, in other words, should be as concerned about protecting Putin’s fragile ego, his sense of pride and his approval ratings, as they are about protecting Ukrainian lives and territory.

Throughout the spring and summer, Lukashenko passed the same message to the Americans: “Putin is ready for peace negotiations. Just treat him with respect.” He repeated the same thing several times during the three hours we spent together. “Believe me,” Lukashenko said, “Putin wants peace. He really wants it.” Yet there has been nothing in Putin’s behavior to substantiate such a claim. Based on his actions, the opposite seemed to be true. Starting in the spring, Russia ramped up the intensity of its air raids against Ukraine, which reached a monthly record in July of 6,443 missiles and drones. 

In the east of Ukraine, Russian forces meanwhile continued to make plodding but significant advances, while the authorities in Kyiv grew more eager for a ceasefire, as did their constituents. The latest Gallup poll, published on Aug. 7, found that support among Ukrainians for continuing to fight until victory has hit a new low. More than two thirds now favor a negotiated end to the war as soon as possible.

About a week after our interview in Minsk, Trump sent Witkoff to Moscow for another round of talks with Putin. This time, the envoy appeared to make progress. Putin handed him a set of demands for ending the war in Ukraine, and the two sides agreed to hold a presidential summit to discuss it as soon as possible. The intended format of the talks matched up with Lukashenko's vision. According to the Kremlin, they would like to begin with a meeting between Trump and Putin, one on one. “We propose, first of all, to focus on preparing a bilateral meeting,” said Putin’s foreign policy adviser, Yuri Ushakov.

That arrangement looked humiliating for the Ukrainians. A pillar of their foreign policy has long been the maxim: “Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine.” Now, if the meeting between Putin and Trump goes ahead, Ukraine’s future could be decided over its head, without the participation of its leaders, who would be forced to acknowledge, at least implicitly, that the freedom and sovereignty for which their nation has been fighting must be subordinated to the will of larger powers. 

Lukashenko does not see that as much of a problem. In his view, Ukraine already lost its sovereignty when it became dependent during the war on financial and military aid from the U.S. and Europe. If it’s not careful, he adds, it could lose Kyiv the same way it lost its eastern regions. “It has already lost control of its territories. As of today, it has lost them.”

He admitted, however, that Russia may not be in a position to seize much more. “Putin understands what that would cost,” Lukashenko says. “The price of that victory would be high.” Despite all his bluster, he seemed to acknowledge that Russia’s position has also grown precarious in recent months. Its revenues from the sale of oil and gas, the lifeblood of its economy, collapsed by 28% in July. This marked the third consecutive month of declines as global oil prices have fallen. Since the start of the war, Russia has spent around 70% of its national rainy day fund, leaving it vulnerable to economic shocks.

“It seems to me that this war, this special military operation, has not gone the way he thought,” Lukashenko says. Does that mean Putin looks back on it all with regret? “Yes, I think so. I’m sure that he regrets a lot of things, a lot.”

And what concessions would he make to bring the war to an end? What would prevent Putin from starting another war once he has time to reconstitute his armies and rebuild his economy? 

Here Lukashenko grew more circumspect, as though such questions were not consequential enough to delay the peace process. For a start, he suggested, the Americans should formally recognize Russia’s claim to four regions of southern and eastern Ukraine, even though Russian forces are still far from conquering all of these regions. Trump should, in other words, do what his envoy Steve Witkoff seemed open to doing after his visit with Putin this spring. Such a move from the Americans, Lukashenko told me, would “probably” satisfy Putin’s imperial ambitions, and prevent him from trying to seize any more of Ukraine. 

Probably. That was as much as he could promise. Lukashenko’s role, as he saw it, was to find a way for Trump and Putin to get together and end the war. The details would be for them to figure out. “Everything now is in Donald’s hands,” he told me. “And he can screw it all up because of that character of his.” All the deadlines and ultimatums that Trump had set for the peace deal, all the threats of tariffs and sanctions against Russia, “It's foolish. It’s all pure emotions,” Lukashenko continued. “And in politics, that’s not allowed.”

As we stood to say goodbye, the dictator finally explained why he had been so eager to speak with me. His effort with Putin to arrange a peace on favorable terms for the Russians had made so much headway with the Americans. It helped win so much extra time for the Russian military to continue its summer offensive in Ukraine. But now, at the crucial moment, Trump had begun to take a harder line, threatening to impose tariffs on any country that buys Russian oil, starting with India and moving on to China and Turkey. “I hope you will shake up public opinion in the United States of America,” Lukashenko told me. “It’ll all work out. Just give Trump a push.”

As it turned out, Trump did not need any prompting from the public to proceed toward a summit with Putin. He may not have needed any advice from Belarus either. No matter how much Lukashenko may have wanted to seem like an honest broker, the sum of his messaging to all of Trump’s envoys, and to me, amounted to a lot of hype about the dangers of playing tough with Putin. He wanted us all to believe that the U.S., in dealing with the Kremlin, should adopt a tone of deference. But Trump already tried that at the start of this year. It did not bring Ukraine any closer to peace.

ATTACHMENT TWO – FROM

GUK

Mutual inconvenience: why Alaska for the Trump-Putin summit on Ukraine?

Remote US state is not an easy destination for either leader, but the choice of venue reflects the many factors at play

By Dan Sabbagh Mon 11 Aug 2025 02.30 EDT

It is unlikely that Vladimir Putin will arrive in Alaska on Friday to present Donald Trump with a territorial demand for the 49th state, sold by Tsar Alexander II to the US for $7.2m (£5.4m) in 1867. The Russian president, after all, has another land deal on his mind – to persuade Trump of the merits of swapping parts of Ukrainian territory in return for him perhaps agreeing to the ceasefire the US president so desperately wants, but does not know how to get.

Putin’s influential foreign affairs adviser, Yuri Ushakov, said Alaska was an “entirely logical” location for the summit, as if the hop across the Bering Strait that divides the countries is a simple trip. The gap between the US and Russian mainlands may be 55 miles, but it is roughly a nine-hour flight from Moscow to Anchorage, Alaska’s largest city. Even for Trump, travelling from Washington DC on Air Force One, it will be not much less than eight hours. Alaska is a location of mutual inconvenience, which indicates that other factors are at play.

The remote state is a long way from Ukraine and its European allies, and risks pushing both into the distant background. Though Trump seems open, in theory, to letting Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, attend, it is hard to imagine Putin being so welcoming. His prize, after all, are private talks with the occupant of the White House about sanctions, trade, the reach of Nato in Europe – negotiating tracks far beyond his latest proposals for dominating Ukraine.

Above all, Alaska is a safe place for the Russian leader to visit. Putin is still wanted by the international criminal court, accused of war crimes in relation to the forced deportation of children from Ukraine to Russia in March 2023. There is an arrest warrant out, but neither Russia nor crucially the US recognise the court. Nor are there any unfriendly countries to overfly. A trip around the top of the globe is unlikely to run into unexpected difficulties that might make travelling over the Black Sea to Istanbul in Turkey unattractive.

A casual recollection suggests US-Russia or, going back further, US-Soviet summits, have been held in cooler locations, loosely reflecting the two countries’ more northerly positions. Easily the most notable is Helsinki. It was in the Finnish capital in 2018, the last time Trump and Putin met while in office, that the US leader declared that he trusted Putin more than his own intelligence agencies when it came to allegations of interference in the 2016 US election.

Those with cold war memories will recall the Reykjavik summit of 1986, where Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev discussed eliminating nuclear weapons, but couldn’t quite agree. Gorbachev wanted Reagan to give up testing on the star wars missile defence initiative, but the then US president would not agree to do so and the summit broke up in failure. But in the 1990s when summit meetings between the two countries were more frequent, Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin even met in Birmingham and Shropshire in 1998, a time when Russia had just joined what then became the G8.

Today, however, nuclear disarmament and G8 cooperation are quaint messages from a different era – one in which the group is again the G7. The Alaska meeting is only the fourth US-Russia summit since 2010 and, while it remains possible that the discussions will lead to a ceasefire in Ukraine, there are few grounds for optimism when the war continues to be fought so bitterly on the frontlines and in the rear, with Russia repeatedly bombing Ukrainian cities, trying to force its democratic neighbour into submission.

 This article was amended on 11 August 2025. An earlier version said that Anchorage was the state capital of Alaska. In fact, that is Juneau.

ATTACHMENT THREE – FROM

GUK

Otter pelts, Orthodox priests and a $7.2m bargain: how Russia sold Alaska to the US

Tsar Alexander II sold oil-rich territory to the US in 1867. Will Friday’s high-stakes summit between Putin and Trump result in a warming of historic ties?

By Pjotr Sauer Tue 12 Aug 2025 06.46 EDT

Donald Trump appeared to confuse geography and history on Monday, saying on television that he planned to meet Vladimir Putin “in Russia” on Friday for their much-anticipated, high-stakes summit.

It was the latest in a series of verbal slip-ups by the US president – though had he made it a little over a century and a half earlier, it would have been true.

Alaska, with Novo-Arkhangelsk as its regional capital, remained part of the Russian empire under Tsar Alexander II until its sale to the US in 1867.

When Putin’s jet touches down in Alaska, he will be greeted by traces of Russia’s former presence. From the wild, rugged shores of Baranof Island to Anchorage, the state’s largest city, Russian Orthodox churches with their distinctive onion-shaped domes still dot the landscape.

Russia’s foothold in Alaska began not with armies, but fur. In the mid-18th century, merchants and adventurers pushed east across Siberia, spurred by the promise of lucrative sea otter pelts. By the 1780s, Catherine the Great had authorised the creation of the Russian-American Company, granting it a monopoly over trade and governance in the territory.

Alexander Baranov, a hard-driving merchant, consolidated Russia’s hold on the region in the late 18th century, expanding settlements and ruthlessly suppressing resistance, most famously from the native Tlingit, who gave him the grim nickname “No Heart”.

Russian Orthodox priests soon followed, establishing missions and building churches. In New Archangel (now Sitka), they raised St Michael’s Cathedral, its green dome rising against a backdrop of glaciers, still anchoring the town’s view more than 150 years later.

But by the mid-19th century, the Russian empire had come to see Alaska as more of a liability than an asset, and began quietly seeking a buyer. In the wake of its humiliating defeat in the Crimean war, the territory had become a drain on St Petersburg’s finances, compounded by mounting fears over Britain’s expanding naval presence in the Pacific.

In a letter to a friend in July 1867, Eduard de Stoeckl, the Russian envoy in Washington and chief negotiator of the sale, admitted: “My treaty has met with strong opposition … but this stems from the fact that no one at home has any idea of the true condition of our colonies. It was simply a matter of selling them, or watching them being taken from.”

The sale of Alaska emerged as a rare diplomatic win-win: for Russia, a way to recoup cash, gain a new, emerging ally across the Atlantic and sidestep a potential conflict with Britain; for the US, an opportunity to forestall European encroachment and assert its growing influence in the Pacific.

Still, when the Russian empire agreed the sale in 1867, few on either side of the Pacific saw it at first as an outright triumph.

In St Petersburg, it was viewed by some as the latest imperial humiliation. The colony, remote and costly to supply, had never been a jewel of the empire, yet the price – $7.2m – struck many as insultingly low.

The liberal paper Golos dismissed the transaction as “deeply angering all true Russians”.

“Is the nation’s sense of pride truly so unworthy of attention that it can be sacrificed for a mere six or seven million dollar[s],” the paper wrote.

Across the US, the secretary of state, William H Seward, who negotiated the treaty, was ridiculed for spending what critics saw as an unreasonable sum on a frozen wilderness. The New-York Daily Tribune dismissed the acquisition as “the nominal possession of impassable deserts of snow”.

“We may make a treaty with Russia,” its editorial complained, “but we cannot make a treaty with the North Wind or the Snow King.”

Others wondered if the price was suspiciously low, and whether Russia had simply palmed off a worthless scrap of territory. “Russia has sold us a sucked orange. Whatever may be the value of that territory and its outlying islands to us, it has ceased to be of any to Russia,” the New York World wrote on 1 April 1867.

Yet that perception would soon be dramatically overturned. The gold rushes of the late 19th century, and the discovery of oilfields decades later, transformed what had once been mocked as folly into one of the US’s most resource-rich territories – and one of history’s great bargains.

The cheap sale remained etched in Russian memory and has occasionally inspired fringe nationalist calls to reclaim Alaska. In 1974, when Americans protested against the low price the USSR paid for wheat, the Soviet trade official Vladimir Alkimov drily noted that Alaska had been sold for only $7m.

In 1867, the mood was different. For a short time, the Alaska sale opened a fleeting chapter of warmth between Russia and the US.

The New York Herald lauded in 1867 what looked like a potential new ally in Russia, writing: “The cession of Russian Alaska becomes a matter of great importance. It indicates the extent to which Russia is ready to carry out her entente cordiale with the United States,” the paper continued.

That warming of ties would culminate in 1871, when Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich led a naval squadron to New York, where he was greeted with military parades, gala receptions and civic honors.

When Trump and Putin meet in Alaska this week, the backdrop will be the prospect of a historic renewal of ties. For Kyiv, the hope is that this time such warmth will not come at the expense of its territory – and that the era of trading land like currency in great power deals is in the past.

ATTACHMENT FOUR – FROM

THE MOSCOW TIMES

‘Bridge Between Nations?’: Putin and Trump to Meet in Alaska Amid Concerns Over Ukraine’s Exclusion

By Anastasia Tenisheva

Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump are set to meet in Alaska on Friday to discuss possible steps toward ending the three-year war in Ukraine — notably excluding Kyiv from the talks.

While the world awaits the meeting, experts appear to be cautioning against placing too much hope in what it can achieve.

“At this point, we can only speculate,” Alexandra Filippenko, an independent Russian expert on American politics, told The Moscow Times.

“Expectations seem to be inflated on both ends. Some see the meeting as a disaster, while others hail it as an incredible breakthrough. The reality remains unclear — the meeting might not even happen, so it shouldn’t be dismissed either,” Filippenko said, referring to the ever-malleable relationship between the Russian and U.S. leaders.

The summit, set to take place after Trump’s ultimatum that Russia must make peace with Ukraine or face punishing new sanctions, will be held in Alaska, a former Russian territory sold to the U.S. in 1867 for $7.2 million (about $130 million today).

Kremlin foreign policy adviser Yuri Ushakov called the choice of Alaska — the closest U.S. state to Russia, separated by the Bering Strait by less than 100 kilometers at its narrowest point — “quite logical.”

“Russia and the U.S. are close neighbors, sharing a border,” Ushakov told reporters after Trump’s announcement. “It seems logical for our delegation to simply fly across the Bering Strait and for such an important and anticipated summit to take place in Alaska.”

Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy welcomed the prospect of hosting the summit, saying that “for centuries, Alaska has been a bridge between nations.”

“Today we remain a gateway for diplomacy, commerce and security in one of the most critical regions on earth,” Dunleavy said.

ATTACHMENT FIVE – FROM

TASS (via the MOSCOW TIMES)

'Everyone Is Anticipating a Breakthrough': Russian Stock Market Surges on News of Putin-Trump Alaska Summit

The Russian stock market experienced its strongest rally since February following announcements that Presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump will hold a summit in Alaska.

The Moscow Exchange index, which tracks around 40 of Russia’s largest companies, has surged 8.3% since Thursday, adding roughly 465 billion rubles ($5.82 billion, according to spot foreign exchange market data published by Reuters) in market capitalization.

On Friday, it climbed to 2,996.4 points, reaching a level not seen since early April.

“The main optimism among traders is driven by the upcoming meeting of the Russian and U.S. presidents on August 15, with investors hoping for progress toward de-escalating the military conflict and potential easing of some sanctions,” said Vladimir Chernov, an analyst at Freedom Finance Global.

Stocks of companies hit hardest by sanctions have led the gains. On Monday, shares of titanium giant VSMPO-AVISMA jumped 10%, steel corporation Severstal rose 4.4% and flag air carrier Aeroflot gained 3.3%.

Gazprom’s shares have soared 16% over the past week, Novatek’s by 18% and Sovcomflot’s by nearly 9%, noted Alexei Antonov, head of investment consulting at Alor Broker.

“Everyone is anticipating a breakthrough in Russia-U.S. relations and the start of resolving the Ukraine conflict,” he added.

However, the current market euphoria may prove fragile.

Yaroslav Kabakov, strategy director at Finam Investment Company, warned that “if the Alaska summit fails to deliver concrete results, or if the EU and Ukraine publicly criticize the outcome, the market risks a sharp downturn. Stocks that have surged purely on expectations will be especially vulnerable.”

Even in a best-case scenario, Antonov said it could take many months before companies like Gazprom and Novatek resume exporting gas at previous volumes and without steep price discounts.

For non-energy sectors, the situation could be even more precarious. Analysts at IFC Solid pointed out that a positive deal might drive oil prices below $60 per barrel by year-end, putting downward pressure on the shares of oil companies due to weaker commodity prices.

While the exact location has not yet been announced, The Alaska Landmine news outlet suggested the summit might take place at Alyeska Resort, a premier ski and mountain resort in the town of Girdwood near Anchorage. 

Hotel rooms at Alyeska are unavailable for booking on the days of and immediately before the scheduled summit, the outlet noted.

For many observers, the choice of Alaska signals that Trump — a former real estate mogul who famously promised to end the war on his first day in office — may be preparing to offer Putin a deal that sacrifices Ukraine’s interests and sovereignty.

“The symbolism of holding the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska is horrendous — as though designed to demonstrate that borders can change, land can be bought and sold,” said Sam Greene, professor of Russian politics at King’s College London, pointing to the occupied regions of Ukraine that Moscow demands be officially recognized as part of Russia.

Greene also noted the fringe assertion from hardline Russian nationalists that Alaska should be returned to Russia. 

Beyond its symbolic value, Alaska also offers a convenient and secure route for Putin to travel. The Russian leader is wanted by the International Criminal Court on war crimes charges related to the forced deportations of Ukrainian children, but the U.S. is not a state party to the ICC.

Whether Alaska will truly serve as a “bridge between nations” remains unclear, as Ukraine, at least for now, is not expected to have a seat at the summit table. 

A White House official said Trump was open to Kyiv joining talks with Putin on Friday. 

President Volodymyr Zelensky has already warned that "decisions without Ukraine" would not bring peace and ruled out ceding territory to Russia. 

“Ukraine is ready for real decisions that can bring peace. Any decisions that are against us, any decisions that are without Ukraine, are at the same time decisions against peace,” he said on social media.

European countries also said in a joint statement that "the path to peace in Ukraine cannot be decided without Ukraine” and that the only successful approach “combines active diplomacy, support to Ukraine and pressure on the Russian Federation to end their illegal war.”

After analyzing press leaks after last week’s meeting between Putin and U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff in Moscow, the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) said that the only consistent element in Putin’s reported demands is for Ukraine to withdraw from unoccupied areas of the Donetsk region — a concession that would dismantle Kyiv’s main defensive lines, with no guarantee Russia would halt its offensive.

According to Pavel Podvig, a Geneva-based independent analyst on Russia’s nuclear forces, experts who say the summit won't change anything make “good points.”

“For the Kremlin, it's not about territories. It's probably not even about Ukraine. It's about recognition. This is something the U.S. might deliver,” Podvig argued.

In addition to the war in Ukraine, Putin and Trump — who last met in 2019 at the G20 summit in Japan during Trump’s first term — could also discuss other bilateral issues like trade, business deals and restoring diplomatic ties.

Arctic security and development could also be on the table, with Alaska serving as a symbolically significant choice for the talks, said Ilya Shumanov of Arctida, an NGO specializing in expert analysis and investigations on the Russian Arctic.

But for now, expert Filippenko said the lead-up to the summit echoes what former Trump adviser Steve Bannon once described as the Trump administration’s “flood the zone” approach — overwhelming the public with a torrent of information and disinformation.

“Beyond the ‘flood the zone’ tactic, what’s clear is Donald Trump’s genuine desire to bring the conflict to a swift end — not out of idealism, but driven by financial motives and a wish to focus on trade with all countries, as well as on the Asia-Pacific region and his own continent, rather than Europe,” Filippenko told The Moscow Times.

“Beyond that, it’s all just speculation.”

ATTACHMENT SIX – FROM

THE A.P.

WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT THE PUTIN-TRUMP SUMMIT IN ALASKA

By  DASHA LITVINOVA Updated 2:12 PM EDT, August 11, 2025

The U.S.-Russia summit in Alaska is happening at a site where East meets West — quite literally — in a place familiar to both countries as a Cold War front line of missile defense, radar outposts and intelligence gathering.

Whether it can lead to a deal to produce peace in Ukraine more than 3 1/2 years after Moscow’s invasion remains to be seen.

Here’s what to know about the meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump, the first summit in four years:

When and where is it taking place?

The summit will take place Friday in Alaska, although where in the state is still unknown.

It will be Putin’s first trip to the United States since 2015, for the U.N. General Assembly in New York. Since the U.S. is not a member of the International Criminal Court, which in 2023 issued a warrant for Putin on war crimes accusations, it is under no obligation to arrest him.

Trump says he will meet Putin next Friday in Alaska

Zelenskyy rejects ceding Ukrainian territory, says Kyiv must be part of negotiations

Russia sticks to its tough stance ahead of a planned Putin-Trump summit

Is Zelenskyy going?

Both countries confirmed a meeting between only Putin and Trump, even though there were initial suggestions that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy might be part of it. But the Kremlin has long pushed back against Putin meeting Zelenskyy -– at least until a peace deal is reached by Russia and Ukraine and was ready to be signed.

Putin said last week he wasn’t against meeting Zelenskyy “but certain conditions need to be created” for it to happen and were “still a long way off.”

That raised fears about excluding Ukraine from negotiations. Ukrainian officials last week talked with European allies, who stressed that peace cannot be achieved without Kyiv’s involvement.

What’s Alaska’s role in Russian history?

It will be the first visit by a Russian leader to Alaska, even though it was part of the czarist empire until 1867, the state news agency Tass said.

Alaska was colonized by Russia starting from the 18th century until Czar Alexander II sold it to the United States in 1867 for $7.2 million. When it was found to contain vast resources, it was seen as a naïve deal that generated remorse and self-reproach.

After the USSR’s collapse, Alaska was a subject of nostalgia and jokes for Russians. One popular song in the 1990s went: “Don’t play the fool, America … give back our dear Alaska land.”

Sam Greene of King’s College London said on X the symbolism of Alaska as the site of a summit about Ukraine was “horrendous — as though designed to demonstrate that borders can change, land can be bought and sold.”

What’s the agenda?

Trump has appeared increasingly exasperated with Putin over Russia’s refusal to halt the bombardment of Ukrainian cities. Kyiv has agreed to a ceasefire, insisting on a truce as a first step toward peace.

Moscow presented ceasefire conditions that are nonstarters for Zelenskyy, such as withdrawing troops from the four regions Russia illegally annexed in 2022, halting mobilization efforts, or freezing Western arms deliveries. For a broader peace, Putin demands Kyiv cede the annexed regions, even though Russia doesn’t fully control them, and Crimea, renounce a bid to join NATO, limit the size of its armed forces and recognize Russian as an official language along with Ukrainian.

Zelenskyy insists any peace deals must include robust security guarantees for Ukraine to protect it from future Russian aggression.

Putin has warned Ukraine it will face tougher conditions for peace as Russian troops forge into other regions to build what he described as a “buffer zone.” Some observers suggested Russia could trade those recent gains for territory still under Ukrainian control in the four annexed regions annexed by Moscow.

Zelenskyy said Saturday that “Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier.”

But Trump said Monday: “There’ll be some land swapping going on. I know that through Russia and through conversations with everybody. To the good, for the good of Ukraine. Good stuff, not bad stuff. Also, some bad stuff for both.”

What are expectations?

Putin sees a meeting with Trump as a chance to cement Russia’s territorial gains, keep Ukraine out of NATO and prevent it from hosting any Western troops so Moscow can gradually pull the country back into its orbit.

He believes time is on his side as Ukrainian forces are struggling to stem Russian advances along the front line amid swarms of Moscow’s missiles and drones battering the country.

The meeting is a diplomatic coup for Putin, isolated since the invasion. The Kremlin sought to portray renewed U.S. contacts as two superpowers looking to resolve various global problems, with Ukraine being just one.

Ukraine and its European allies are concerned a summit without Kyiv could allow Putin to get Trump on his side and force Ukraine into concessions.

“Any decisions that are without Ukraine are at the same time decisions against peace,” Zelenskyy said. “They will not bring anything. These are dead decisions. They will never work.”

European officials echoed that.

“As we work towards a sustainable and just peace, international law is clear: All temporarily occupied territories belong to Ukraine,” European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said. “A sustainable peace also means that aggression cannot be rewarded.”

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said Sunday he believed Trump was “making sure that Putin is serious, and if he is not, then it will stop there.”

“If he is serious, then from Friday onwards, the process will continue. Ukraine getting involved, the Europeans being involved,” Rutte added.

Since last week, Putin spoke to Chinese leader Xi Jinping, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, as well as the leaders of South Africa, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Belarus and Kyrgyzstan, the Kremlin said.

That suggested Putin perhaps wanted to brief Russia’s most important allies about a potential settlement, said pro-Kremlin analyst Sergei Markov.

ATTACHMENT SEVEN – FROM

TIME

Trump Will Meet Putin in Alaska For Ukraine Talks Next Week. Here’s What You Need to Know

By Solcyré Burga

President Donald Trump will meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday to discuss a potential ceasefire in Ukraine, marking the first time the leaders of the two countries have held talks since 2021.

Trump claimed the conflict “could be solved very soon” as he announced the summit at the White House on Friday, on the deadline Trump had imposed on Putin to finalize a peace deal or face potential financial penalties.

But the prospect of the negotiations succeeding was quickly thrown into doubt after Trump suggested that Ukraine would have to cede territory to Russia as part of any peace deal.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky quickly and pointedly rejected any potential deal that would involve handing over Ukrainian territory. “The answer to Ukraine’s territorial question is already in the constitution of Ukraine,” he said in a Saturday video statement on Telegram. “Ukrainians will not gift their land to the occupier.”

Trump vowed to broker a peace deal to end the war in Ukraine within the first 24 hours of his second presidential term, and has previously expressed disappointment at Russia’s lack of movement towards peace as he continuously moves the ceasefire deadline forward.

Friday’s meeting will be the first time two sitting U.S. and Russian presidents have met since 2021—when then-President Joe Biden met the Russian leader in Geneva—and the first time Putin and Trump have met since 2019. It is also the first time in a decade that Putin has set foot in the U.S.

Yury Ushakov, a Kremlin presidential aide, told CNN that Trump has already been invited to a follow-up meeting in Russia.

Here’s what to know about the upcoming meeting in Alaska.

Both Trump and Putin want Ukraine to give up land (WHICH MEANS GIVING UP PEOPLE)

The success of a ceasefire deal hinges on Trump’s ability to convince Ukraine to agree to Putin’s list of demands, which involves Kyiv giving up large parts of its territory. “We’re going to get some back, and we’re going to get some switched,” the President said Friday at the White House. “There’ll be some swapping of territories to the betterment of both.”

The Trump Administration has long argued that Ukraine would have to give up land in exchange for peace. Speaking in March this year, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said it would be “very difficult for Ukraine in any reasonable time period to sort of force the Russians back all the way to where they were in 2014,” and called for Kyiv to make “concessions” to achieve peace.

Russian officials have reportedly presented U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff with a list of ceasefire demands that include Ukraine giving up the eastern Donbas region, most of which is already occupied by Russia, as well as Crimea, according to CNN. (The latter was transferred from Russia to Ukraine in 1954, but was later illegally annexed by Russia in 2014.)

Trump has not publicly confirmed the details of the potential deal, but Zelensky has outright rejected the notion that the country would allow Russia to take over any of its territory and spoken out against the idea of facilitating peace talks without the presence of Ukraine.

“Any decisions made against us, any decisions made without Ukraine, are at the same time decisions against peace. They will bring nothing,” Zelensky said in his video address.

Foreign Minister David Lammy and Vice President J.D. Vance are due to meet Ukrainian and European leaders in the U.K. on Saturday to discuss the peace negotiations, a British spokesperson told Reuters.

Thus far, Trump has not publicly remarked on Zelensky’s stance on the upcoming Alaska meeting. But the President previously criticized Zelensky for being stubborn in his position for a ceasefire deal and claimed he is “not ready for peace.”

Ukraine appears to have the backing of the European Union. French President Emmanuel Macron, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal, and U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer all spoke with Zelensky on Saturday to share their support for Ukrainian sovereignty and the end of the war. X31

“The Russians still refuse to stop the killings, still invest in the war, and still push the idea of ‘exchanging’ Ukrainian territory for Ukrainian territory, with consequences that guarantee nothing except more favorable positions for Russia to resume the war,” Zelensky said on X. “All our steps must bring us closer to a real end to the war, not its reconfiguration.”

But Putin wants more than land

The Kremlin’s demands extend beyond a desire for land. As part of any agreement, Putin has reportedly called for Ukraine to give up its quest to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a European and North American alliance of which the United States is a founding member. A similar demand was made by Russia in June last year during that round of peace negotiations.

NATO has been a strong supporter of Ukraine, supplying the smaller country with billions in military aid, weapons, and ammunition. Ukraine has been approved for NATO membership and is currently a “partner country.” Other former Soviet republics, including Georgia and Moldova, would also be affected by the peace deal pledge.

The Kremlin also asked for the lifting of Western sanctions, protection for Russian speakers in Ukraine, and a resolution to unfreeze the $300 billion in Russian sovereign assets that are currently being held in Europe, Reuters reports. The funds were frozen after the U.S. and other countries banned transactions with Russia’s central bank after the country invaded Ukraine in 2022.

Alaska is significant

The decision to hold a summit in Alaska has been criticized in part by some officials who are wary of welcoming Putin to the U.S. Former Trump national security advisor John Bolton denounced the meeting. “This is not quite as bad as Trump inviting the Taliban to Camp David to talk about the peace negotiations in Afghanistan, but it certainly reminds one of that, Bolton told CNN.

“The only better place for Putin than Alaska would be if the summit were being held in Moscow. So, the initial setup, I think, is a great victory for Putin,” he added.

Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said that while she saw the summit as a chance to “forge meaningful agreements.” She was also “wary of Putin and his regime. “I hope these discussions lead to genuine progress and help end the war on equitable terms,” she said in a post on X.

The “Last Frontier” state is also of historic significance to Russia, which sold the territory to the United States in 1867 for $7.2 million, despite its interest in the region’s wealth of natural resources.

The deal marked an end to Russian presence in North America.

Some Russian nationalists have reportedly called for the return of Alaska to Russia, experts say. “Trump has chosen to host Putin in a part of the former Russian Empire. Wonder if he knows that Russian nationalists claim that losing Alaska, like Ukraine, was a raw deal for Moscow that needs to be corrected,” wrote Stanford University political science professor Michael McFaul on X. In 2022, a billboard stating “Alaska is Ours,” was seen in the Russian town of Krasnoyarsk. Local officials then told the press that the billboard was part of a “private initiative.”

Meanwhile, Russia has remained firm in its military campaign against Ukraine despite such international pressure. Over the weekend, Russian drones continued their attacks on Ukraine, launching more than 45 drone strikes across Ukraine. At least two people died and another six were injured after a strike hit a minibus.

ATTACHMENT EIGHT – FROM

the FINANCIAL TIMES

What Vladimir Putin wants from Donald Trump at Alaska summit

Russian president secures first official invitation to US in almost two decades ahead of sanctions deadline

BY Anastasia Stognei in Berlin and Fabrice Deprez in Kyiv

Alaska, the venue set for Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump’s meeting on Friday, could hardly be more symbolic of the Kremlin’s view of the world.

Unlike Putin’s military seizure of about a fifth of Ukraine, Russia’s 19th-century sale of Alaska to the US under Emperor Alexander II was a peaceful transaction. Still, it serves as a reminder that national borders are not set in stone, and land can be a currency for statecraft.

Neither the battlefield balance nor budget strains are forcing the Russian president to scale back his maximalist territorial ambitions or consider unfavourable peace terms, according to analysts.

His focus instead is on keeping communication open with Trump, lest the US president’s frustrations with Moscow start to carry a cost. “Putin has no incentive to wind down the war right now,” said Alexandra Prokopenko, a fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Centre. “What matters to him is keeping Trump’s attention.”

On that front, Moscow was facing more risk. Trump, who came to office promising to end the war within 24 hours, has voiced irritation with Putin being “very nice” while simultaneously attacking Ukraine and feeding Washington “a lot of bullshit”. For the first time since taking office, Trump has begun enabling more significant transfers of weaponry to Kyiv, and threatening to apply tariffs on India for buying Russian oil.

But this impatient mood shifted almost overnight after US special envoy Steve Witkoff’s visit to Moscow last Wednesday — just two days before Trump’s ceasefire-or-sanctions deadline. Rather than more trouble for the Kremlin, what emerged was Putin’s first invitation to America to meet a US president since he saw George W Bush in 2007.

The Alaska meeting, which came out of it, is the result of both Putin and Trump “backing themselves into a corner,” said Sam Greene, a professor of Russian politics at King’s College London.

Putin, Greene said, was never going to announce the deal on Trump’s timeline, signalling weakness under pressure, and Trump was uneasy about the prospect of imposing sanctions that might ultimately prove ineffective and “appearing weak twice”.

“The fact that Putin is going to the US not as a prisoner, that he’s gone from a subject of frustration to someone welcomed, and that the meeting is happening without Ukrainians and Europeans — all of that is a diplomatic win,” Greene added.

The Trump-Putin meeting without Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy present — long a prize for the Kremlin — appeared to come without Russia making significant concessions on its core war goals. To Andrei Kozyrev, a former Russian foreign minister, it underlined that the meeting itself would be “a political gain for Putin”, coming “domestically and internationally without cost, unlike for his counterpart”.

For Ukrainian officials, the move to talks represents an attempt by Putin to achieve at least three distinct goals. Alyona Getmanchuk, the newly appointed head of Ukraine’s mission to Nato, said it was to emerge from isolation, avoid new sanctions, and to use Trump’s determination to end the war “in order to solve by diplomatic means the tasks he failed to complete by military means”.

The diplomatic frenzy is unfolding as Ukrainian forces have been facing increasing pressure in the east, with the Russian military now pushing to encircle several cities that have served as strategic strongholds for Ukrainian defenders.

Russia seized 502 sq km of Ukrainian territory in July, a rate similar to its advances in June and May and one of the highest in the past year, according to Black Bird Group, an open source intelligence agency monitoring the conflict.

DeepState, a war monitoring group with ties to the Ukrainian defence ministry, reported on Sunday that Russian forces had managed to advance nearly 7km in an area near the city of Pokrovsk, which Russian forces have attempted to surround for the past year.

On the economic front, Russia feels less confident as its energy revenues have been down 20 per cent year on year over the first seven months amid lowering oil prices, with Trump’s new tariffs on India adding to the pressure.

“Russia’s economy is weaker today than at any point in the last three years,” said Janis Kluge, an expert on Russia’s economy with the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP). But he said the situation was not serious enough to shift Putin’s stance on Ukraine.

“To Putin, the sanctions threats are a symptom of Trump’s frustration,” he added. “Putin is more concerned about Trump’s growing frustration than the impact of new sanctions.”

The full details of the Putin and Witkoff discussions have not been disclosed, but key elements emerged in US calls with European and Ukrainian counterparts and public statements, including the possibility of exchanging Ukrainian territory.

“There’ll be some swapping of territories, to the betterment of both,” Trump said. Immediately after the meeting, Moscow called Witkoff’s proposals “acceptable” but did not comment on Trump’s statements about a land swap.

Putin has repeatedly stated that his conditions for Ukraine remain unchanged. “They are not even conditions, but Russia’s goals,” he told Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko as the two sat on a bench in Valaam Monastery in northern Russia on August 1.

“The main goal is to eliminate the root causes of this crisis,” Putin added, citing his nearly 90-minute speech from last June, in which he listed his demands, interspersed with historical anecdotes.

They include Ukraine’s official renunciation of Nato membership and its non-nuclear status, its “demilitarisation” and “denazification” — a vague demand that is essentially tantamount to Zelenskyy’s removal.

He also said Ukraine had to “fully withdraw” its forces from four Ukrainian regions that Russia occupies only partly, but still decided to officially incorporate into its territory.

Putin “does not exclude” that Ukraine could “maintain sovereignty” over Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions provided it gives Russia access to Crimea through them. “Kyiv has to guarantee a servitut [a legal term for a right to use land],” he added.

The demand for Ukraine to pull back its troops from the Donetsk and Luhansk regions is “a negotiating trap”, said Volodymyr Fesenko, a Kyiv-based political analyst.

While polls have shown increasing exhaustion in Ukraine and support for a potential ceasefire, there remains overwhelming opposition to Ukraine bowing to Russian demands by pulling back from populated areas.

Almost three-quarters of Ukrainians polled in July by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology rejected a plan to end the war that would involve Ukraine ceding the entire Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions, renouncing Nato membership and accepting limitations on its army.

A slight majority of 54 per cent supported a plan in which the frontline would be frozen, Ukraine would receive security guarantees from the US and Europe, and sanctions on Russia would be gradually lifted.

With the Alaska summit approaching, both Zelenskyy and Putin have been working to shore up backing from their respective allies.

Ukrainian negotiators want Europe and the US to insist that negotiations only take place following a ceasefire or meaningful reduction in hostilities.

Putin for his part spoke on the phone with leaders of nine countries that Moscow considers friendly, including China’s Xi Jinping, and has hosted the United Arab Emirates president and India’s national security adviser at the Kremlin.

“There is no real alternative but to freeze the conflict along the current frontline. The post-Korean war stand-off is way more likely than lasting peace,” said Andrey Kolesnikov, a Moscow-based political analyst.

“Putin would like to divide the world into spheres of influence with Trump and Xi. A new Yalta and a cold war — that’s just what he wants. He is eager to claim [Joseph] Stalin’s laurels,” Kolesnikov added.

ATTACHMENT NINE – FROM

CNBC

Tariffs have come — but ‘TACO trade’ seems to be still on

By Lim Hui Jie Published Thu, Aug 7 20259:38 PM EDT Updated Fri, Aug 8 20252:21 AM EDT

Markets have still got that loving feeling despite U.S. tariffs coming into effect. On Thursday, President Donald Trump’s “reciprocal” tariffs hit dozens of countries, with those not named in the list subject to a 10% baseline levy.

Aug. 7 was a culmination of quite a few deadlines the world has faced as it rides the rollercoaster of Trump’s tariff strategy, and while this deadline might already be in force, the tariffs are not really set in stone. Negotiations, of course, will keep happening, and countries could see some reprieve.

Remember, Trump walked back on “Liberation Day” tariffs a week after all the pomp and ceremony in the Rose Garden, and the July 9 deadline was pushed to Aug. 1, and then to Aug. 7. Steep tariffs announced on China have been on hold, with the deadline of Aug. 12 expected to be postponed.

So, while these might be the highest tariffs the world has seen since the Smoot-Hawley Act in the 1930s — are they here to stay?

Now, if you’d excuse me, the taco shop downstairs may be opening for business.

ATTACHMENT TEN – FROM

DEFINITION: TARIFFS v. SANCTIONS

FROM GOOGLE AI OVERVIEW

Key Differences:

Feature	Tariffs	Sanctions
Nature	Taxes on imports	Restrictions on trade, finance, or other interactions
Primary Goal	Protect domestic industries or raise revenue	Influence behavior or punish wrongdoing
Scope	Typically applied to specific goods or categories of goods	Can be broad (entire sectors or countries) or targeted (individuals, companies)
Impact on Trade	Makes imports more expensive, potentially reducing trade	Can ban trade entirely or severely restrict it

In essence, tariffs influence the price and quantity of imported goods for trade objectives, while sanctions are broader tools to pressure a country or entity for foreign policy or national security goals. Tariffs can sometimes be part of broader sanctions. 

ATTACHMENT ELEVEN – FROM

FOX

Zelenskyy thanks NATO, European leaders for backing his push to join Trump‑Putin summit

Both the White House and the Kremlin have acknowledged Zelenskyy’s request to join the talks, though no formal invitation has been issued

By Amanda Macias August 10, 2025 3:56pm EDT

Fox News correspondent Lucas Tomlinson and former deputy national security advisor Victoria Coates discuss the upcoming Trump-Putin summit in Alaska as pressure to end the war in Ukraine increases on ‘Fox News Live.’ 

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Sunday thanked European leaders for backing his push to join this week’s U.S.–Russia summit, as Kyiv fears Washington and Moscow could strike a deal to end the war but in a way that undermines Ukraine’s sovereignty.

"The end of the war must be fair, and I am grateful to everyone who stands with Ukraine and our people today for the sake of peace in Ukraine, which is defending the vital security interests of our European nations," Zelenskyy said.

The leaders of Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Finland and the European Commission said in a joint statement that any diplomatic solution brokered between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin must protect the security interests of Ukraine and Europe.

"The U.S. has the power to force Russia to negotiate seriously," EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas told Reuters on Sunday. "Any deal between the U.S. and Russia must have Ukraine and the EU included, for it is a matter of Ukraine’s and the whole of Europe’s security," she added.

PUTIN ALLY WARNS 'TITANIC EFFORTS' ARE UNDERWAY TO SINK TRUMP SUMMIT OVER UKRAINE WAR

TRUMP HINTS AT RUSSIA-UKRAINE PEACE DEAL INCLUDING SWAPPED TERRITORIES

ZELENSKYY WON’T CEDE TERRITORY FOR PEACE DEAL AHEAD OF TRUMP‑PUTIN SUMMIT AS TRILATERAL MEETING TEASED

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said the upcoming summit "will be about testing Putin" and will serve as a measure of how serious the Russian leader is about "bringing this terrible war to an end."

Both the White House and the Kremlin have acknowledged Zelenskyy’s request to join the talks, though no formal invitation has been issued. Trump and Putin are scheduled to meet in Alaska on Aug. 15. If Zelenskyy were to take part, the meeting would mark the first between Putin and Zelenskyy since the start of Moscow's war.

SANCTIONING RUSSIA ACT THREATENS MOSCOW, ALLIES WITH 500% TARIFFS

The meeting, which Trump announced in a Truth Social post on Friday, comes on the heels of Washington's threats to impose steep tariffs on the Kremlin and its allies.

Trump has previously singled out countries like India and China—top buyers of discounted Russian crude — for undermining G7 price caps and weakening the impact of Western sanctions.

In response, bipartisan lawmakers introduced the Sanctioning Russia Act, which would impose a 500% tariff targeting the core of Russia’s economy — its oil and gas exports — if Moscow continues to resist peace efforts or escalates the conflict.

Meanwhile, a senior member of Putin’s inner circle warned that multiple countries are mounting "titanic efforts" to undermine the upcoming summit between the Russian leader and Trump.

"Undoubtedly, a number of countries interested in continuing the conflict will make titanic efforts to disrupt the planned meeting between President Putin and President Trump," wrote Russia's investment envoy, Kirill Dmitriev, in a Telegram post on Saturday, referencing the Kremlin's ongoing war in Ukraine.

While Dmitriev did not name specific countries, he warned that critics of the upcoming talks could seek to sabotage the summit through diplomatic maneuvers or disinformation through the media.

ATTACHMENT TWELVE – FROM

DW

EU, NATO chief back Ukraine ahead of Trump-Putin summit

European foreign ministers will hold a video call on Monday to discuss how to best support Ukraine ahead of a summit between the US and Russia.

European leaders continue to push to have Ukraine involved in the negotiations between the United States and Russia, ahead of talks between presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump.

Putin and Trump are to meet in the US state of Alaska on August 15 to try to bring an end to the three-year war.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has repeatedly stated a peace deal without his country's input would not be possible.

Europe has insisted that Kyiv and European powers should be part of any deal to end the conflict, with EU foreign ministers set to discuss the next steps for the bloc in a meeting by video link on Monday, together with their Ukrainian counterpart.

"The path to peace in Ukraine cannot be decided without Ukraine," leaders from Germany, France, Italy, Poland, Britain and Finland and EU Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen said in a joint statement.

The statement was followed by the heads of eight Nordic-Baltic nations, who also jointly reaffirmed their support for Ukraine.

The leaders of Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway and Sweden said they "Reaffirm the principle that international borders must not be changed by force." 

Expressing their belief that peace could only come through consistent pressure being put on the Russian Federation to halt its "unlawful" war, the Nordic-Baltic countries added that they would continue to uphold and impose restrictive measures against Russia.

Merz rebuffs idea of Ukraine ceding land to Russia

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz told local broadcaster ARD on Sunday he assumed Zelenskyy will attend the summit between Trump and Putin.

"We hope and assume that the government of Ukraine, that President Zelenskyy will be involved in this meeting," Merz said in an interview with ARD.

"We cannot accept in any case that territorial questions are discussed or even decided between Russia and America over the heads of Europeans and Ukrainians. I assume that the American government sees it the same way."

Kallas believes US must force Russia to end war

Meanwhile, top EU diplomat Kaja Kallas expressed her belief that the US should use its power to "force" Russia to bring an end to the war.

"President Trump is right that Russia has to end its war against Ukraine. The US has the power to force Russia to negotiate seriously. Any deal between the US and Russia must have Ukraine and the EU included, for it is a matter of Ukraine's and the whole of Europe's security," Kallas said.

Adding to the calls for Trump to exert his diplomatic powers, NATO head Mark Rutte told ABC's This Week broadcast that "Next Friday will be important because it will be about testing Putin, how serious he is on bringing this terrible war to an end."

However, unlike many European leaders, Rutte said it was a reality that "Russia is controlling some of Ukrainian territory" and suggested a future deal could acknowledge this.

Vance says US will stop financing weapons for Ukraine

Separately, US Vice President JD Vance used a recorded interview with US conservative broadcaster Fox News to repeat that Washington plans to withdraw financially from supporting Ukraine. 

"I think the president, and I certainly think that America, we're done with the funding of the Ukraine war business. We want to bring about a peaceful settlement to this thing," Vance said in the interview that was recorded several days ago. 

"But if the Europeans want to step up and actually buy the weapons from American producers, we're OK with that, but we're not going to fund it ourselves anymore," Vance said.

ATTACHMENT THIRTEEN – FROM

GUK

Europe’s leaders raise pressure on Trump to involve Ukraine in Putin talks

Move comes as Germany warns White House against any deal hatched ‘over heads of Europeans and Ukrainians’

Angela Giuffrida in Rome and agencies

Sun 10 Aug 2025 13.41 EDT

Europe’s leaders have raised the pressure on Donald Trump to involve Ukraine in a planned summit with Vladimir Putin, as Germany warned the White House against any deal hatched “over the heads of Europeans and Ukrainians”.

Speaking before a bilateral meeting expected to take place between the US and Russian leaders on Friday in Alaska, the German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, said he hoped and assumed that Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, would also be involved.

Merz told the broadcaster ARD that Berlin was working closely with Washington to try to ensure Zelenskyy’s attendance at the talks.

“We cannot accept in any case that territorial questions are discussed or even decided between Russia and America over the heads of Europeans and Ukrainians,” he said. “I assume that the American government sees it the same way.”

The secretary general of Nato, Mark Rutte, said the summit would be about testing Putin on how serious he was about “bringing this terrible war to an end.”.

In pointed remarks, Rutte added: “It will be, of course, about security guarantees, but also about the absolute need to acknowledge that Ukraine decides on its own future, that Ukraine has to be a sovereign nation, deciding on its own geopolitical future.”

Announcing there would be an emergency meeting of EU ministers for Monday, Brussel’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, echoed that sentiment.

“President Trump is right that Russia has to end its war against Ukraine. The US has the power to force Russia to negotiate seriously. Any deal between the US and Russia must have Ukraine and the EU included, for it is a matter of Ukraine’s and the whole of Europe’s security,” Kallas said.

The US vice-president, JD Vance, speaking a day after meeting the UK foreign minister, David Lammy, during his holiday in England, said Washington was working towards talks between Putin, Zelenskyy and Trump. But Vance said he did not think it would be productive for the Russian president to meet his Ukrainian counterpart before speaking with Trump.

“We’re at a point now where we’re trying to figure out, frankly, scheduling and things like that, around when these three leaders could sit down and discuss an end to this conflict,” he told Fox News.

As the diplomacy ramped up, there was no let-up in hostilities. Five people were killed in Russian shelling and drone attacks in Ukraine on Sunday, authorities said, while Russia said one person had been killed in a Ukrainian drone strike in its southern Saratov region.

On Saturday, two people died and 16 others were injured when a Russian drone hit a minibus in the suburbs of the Ukrainian city of Kherson, said the region’s governor, Oleksandr Prokudin. Two others died after a Russian drone struck their car in the Zaporizhzhia region, according to the regional governor.

On Saturday night, European leaders issued a coordinated statement that said the “path to peace” in Ukraine could not be decided without Kyiv. Welcoming Trump’s attempts to end the war, leaders from the UK, France, Italy, Germany, Poland and Finland, along with the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, emphasised that negotiations could only take place in the context of a ceasefire or reduction of hostilities.

It added: “Only an approach that combines active diplomacy, support to Ukraine and pressure on the Russian Federation to end their illegal war can succeed.”

On Sunday, Zelenskyy welcomed the support, saying on X: “The end of the war must be fair, and I am grateful to everyone who stands with Ukraine and our people today for the sake of peace in Ukraine, which is defending the vital security interests of our European nations.

“Ukraine values and fully supports the statement by President Macron, Prime Minister Meloni, Chancellor Merz, Prime Minister Tusk, Prime Minister Starmer, President Ursula von der Leyen, and President Stubb on peace for Ukraine.”

In a Telegram post on Saturday, Zelenskyy had said that any decisions made without Kyiv were “dead decisions” and “[would] never work”.

On the same day, at Chevening, a country mansion in Kent traditionally used by the foreign secretary, Lammy hosted Vance along with Ukrainian and European partners aimed at driving peace in Ukraine.

If the Trump-Putin summit goes ahead, it will be the first time a US president has met the Russian leader since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The last meeting Putin had with a US president was with Joe Biden in Geneva in June 2021.

Details of a potential deal have not been announced, but Trump said ending the war would involve “some swapping of territories to the betterment of both”, meaning Ukraine could be required to renounce significant parts of its territory.

Zelenskyy on Saturday stressed that Ukrainians would “not give up their land to occupiers”.

A European official confirmed a counterproposal was put forward by European representatives at the Chevening meeting but declined to provide details.

According to a report in the Wall Street Journal, the counterproposal included demands that a ceasefire must take place before any other steps were taken and that any territory exchange must be reciprocal, with firm security guarantees.

It was not clear what, if anything, had been agreed at Chevening, but Zelenskyy called the meeting constructive.

“All our arguments were heard,” he said in his evening address to Ukrainians. “The path to peace for Ukraine should be determined together and only together with Ukraine. This is [a] key principle.”

Merz said he hoped for a breakthrough at the summit, despite lingering uncertainty of the attenders. “We hope that there will be a breakthrough on Friday,” he said. “Above all [we hope] that there will finally be a ceasefire and that there can be peace negotiations in Ukraine.”

ATTACHMENT FOURTEEN – FROM

THE BULWARK

As Trump Evolves on Ukraine, MAGA Won’t Admit It Was Wrong

The president’s “peace” plan failed, and his former supporters are conspicuously quiet.

BY Matt Johnson Aug 07, 2025

AT THE BEGINNING OF DONALD TRUMP’S second term, MAGA was brimming with confidence about his ability to bring the war in Ukraine to an immediate conclusion. After repeatedly promising to end the war in “twenty-four hours” during the campaign, Trump revealed his plan for doing so: drastically scale back American support for Ukraine and force Kyiv to accept a terrible deal with Moscow. Trump believed he had all the leverage in negotiations—from the military aid Washington has provided Ukraine to his “great relationship” with Vladimir Putin. “You don’t have the cards right now,” he told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during an Oval Office ambush in February. “With us, you start having cards.”

Vice President JD Vance gave Zelensky a condescending lecture during the same meeting. “What makes America a good country is America engaging in diplomacy,” he said. Zelensky pointed out that Putin had a long record of breaking diplomatic agreements and asked what sort of diplomacy would succeed. Vance responded: “I’m talking about the kind of diplomacy that’s going to end the destruction of your country.” He said Zelensky’s question was “disrespectful” and fumed: “You should be thanking the president for trying to bring an end to this conflict.”

When Trump’s critics argued that standing up to Putin would end the war more quickly than preemptively capitulating to him, Vance dismissed this argument as “moralistic garbage.” He claimed that the United States “retains substantial leverage over both parties to the conflict.” He said, “We must pursue peace, and we must pursue it now. President Trump ran on this, he won on this, and he is right about this.”

Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie responded: “Amen. Thank goodness we have a President and Vice President who put America first and acknowledge what has always been the reality in Ukraine. We should pursue a peaceful and realistic outcome, not death, debt, and war.” The idea that only Trump was capable of recognizing “reality” and pursuing a “peaceful” outcome in Ukraine was an article of faith in MAGA.

Trump thought he could bypass Ukraine and the United States’ European allies to secure a deal with Russia right away. In February, Trump’s negotiating team met with Russian officials in Riyadh without preconditions—and without Ukraine. Meanwhile, Trump’s Ukraine envoy said Europe would play no role in negotiations. Two months and no progress later, Trump blamed Zelensky for starting the war. He demanded compensation for military aid the United States had already provided and said future aid would be dependent upon how much Kyiv was willing to pay. He told Ukraine to abandon any hope of joining NATO, agreed with Moscow that it should retain control over the territory (and millions of people) it occupies in eastern Ukraine, and toyed with easing sanctions. Trump even considered officially recognizing the Russian annexation of Crimea.

This conciliatory approach has failed. MAGA’s illusions about securing an easy peace in Ukraine have been shattered, and even Trump has been forced to admit that Putin is running out the clock by negotiating in bad faith. “I am disappointed in President Putin,” he said last month. “My conversations with him are always very pleasant, and then the missiles go off that night.” He now claims that his campaign promise to end the war in a single day was “sarcastic” and “figurative,” and says securing a ceasefire is “more difficult than people would have any idea.” Trump even admits that “we’re going to have to send more weapons.” He says Putin has “gone absolutely CRAZY” and concedes that “we get a lot of bullshit thrown at us by Putin.”

AFTER ALL THE SCOLDING LECTURES on how the Trump administration was going to elevate hard-nosed “realism” over “moralistic garbage” about defending Ukraine from Russian aggression and tyranny, it turns out that those who urged Trump to maintain robust support for Kyiv were right all along. As Trump underwent the excruciatingly slow process of realizing that Putin had no intention of pursuing peace, Moscow was dramatically intensifying its bombing campaign against Ukrainian civilians. In June, civilian casualties in Ukraine hit a three-year high. Moscow launched ten times more missile and drone strikes than it had in the same month a year earlier, and the recent bombing of an apartment block in Kyiv was the deadliest single attack on the city in a year. During a wave of airstrikes in April, Trump was reduced to pleading with Putin to end the assault on Ukrainian civilians, posting “Vladimir, STOP!” on Truth Social.

Does this sound like a president who has “leverage” over Putin, as Vance insisted earlier this year? Had Trump and Vance listened to Zelensky instead of screaming at him in the Oval Office and kicking him out of the White House, they would have understood that Putin’s ostensible desire to negotiate was just a stalling tactic. At every stage of the negotiations, Putin has refused to budge from maximalist demands which are obviously unacceptable to Kyiv, not to mention Ukraine’s European allies. Putin wants a pretext to continue fighting a war he believes he can win.

This strategy was on full display after June negotiations in Istanbul. Moscow demanded that Ukraine fully withdraw from four provinces in eastern Ukraine—including territory currently controlled by Ukraine—which would permanently consign millions of civilians to life under brutal Russian occupation. This occupation has led to imprisonment, torture, rape, and death for thousands of Ukrainians; widespread child abductions; and a campaign of cultural eradication. The withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from eastern Ukraine would also leave the rest of the country far more exposed to Russian attack—an attack that would almost certainly follow any ceasefire. Under the Russian “peace” plan, there would be severe limits on the size of Ukraine’s military, the weapons it can possess, and the alliances it can form. Moscow also wants control over the Ukrainian political system, including a ban on what it deems to be “nationalist” parties. Putin wants a disarmed, isolated, and politically compliant Ukraine because his goal has always been the eradication of Ukrainian statehood.

Those who have been making this argument for years were dismissed by Trump, Vance, and the rest of MAGA as “warmongers” and “neocons” dragging the country toward World War III. They were smeared as hollow “moralists” who were merely “pretending to fight for freedom and democracy abroad.” They were “globalists” guilty of squandering “all of America’s strength, blood, and treasure chasing monsters and phantoms overseas.” They did “more damage to America than Russia and China could ever have dreamed,” which is why Trump claims that the “enemy within” is a more serious threat than either country. As he put it: “Our foreign policy establishment keeps trying to pull the world into conflict with a nuclear-armed Russia based on the lie that Russia represents our greatest threat. But the greatest threat to Western civilization today is not Russia. It’s probably, more than anything else, ourselves.”

Trump has been forced to concede that Russia is a much greater threat than he once believed. He is discovering that his fantasies of ending the conflict in twenty-four hours were based on a fundamental misunderstanding of Putin’s war aims.

Trump thought Putin was desperately searching for a way to end the war as quickly as possible, but this was never the case. Putin has reoriented the entire Russian economy toward war production. He has used the war as an excuse to step up his attacks on political opposition and consolidate power. The Russian educational system has become increasingly focused on propagandizing and training the next generation of soldiers. These are all clear indicators that Putin will not be satisfied with the territory he has already stolen in eastern Ukraine—his obsession with abolishing Ukrainian sovereignty remains the primary driver of the war, and it’s a war he has no desire to stop.

HOSTILITY TO MILITARY SUPPORT for Ukraine has long been a pillar of MAGA, and it has always been based on the same confusion that led Trump to waste months attempting to placate Putin. After Putin launched his full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Trump’s future Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declared that the “war and suffering could have easily been avoided if [the] Biden Admin/NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns.” Tucker Carlson frequently blames the United States and NATO for the war, and he hosted a credulous and fawning interview with Putin last year. Key members of the Silicon Valley wing of MAGA, such as David Sacks and Elon Musk, spent years decrying American involvement in the war and arguing that Trump alone could fix it. “President Trump has always understood the conflict in Ukraine better than anyone in Washington,” Sacks declared in February. “Every bleeding-heart liberal I talk to about the Russia-Ukraine war wants to keep feeding bodies into the meat grinder forever,” Musk said a couple of days later. He continued: “They have no plan for success. Superficial empathy, not real empathy.”

The past seven months have demonstrated that Trump’s understanding of the war in Ukraine was cartoonishly superficial and his “plan for success” was to surrender as much as possible as quickly as possible. Yet the MAGA foreign policy luminaries who insisted that Trump would be a great peacemaker in Ukraine aren’t lining up to admit their mistakes. After all those lectures about the importance of diplomacy and saving lives, you’d think they would be capable of some self-criticism now that the war has entered an even more brutal and dangerous phase. If Vance, Massie, Gabbard, Sacks, or Musk have admitted that they were disastrously wrong about Ukraine, I must have missed it. If they have expressed any contrition as missiles and drones rained down on Ukrainian cities and led to unprecedented civilian casualties, they must have done so privately.

While Trump’s sudden impatience with Putin is slightly encouraging, it only serves to highlight the tragic failure of his Ukraine policy. Zelensky and many others were warning Trump to take a hard line on Putin right from the start, but he instead chose to waste seven months on a fruitless campaign of appeasement. The result is that Putin has been emboldened, relations with the United States’ closest allies have hit a multi-decade low, and Ukraine is in a weaker position to defend itself. Trump entered office with significant leverage that he could have used to compel Putin to rethink the war. He could have urged Congress to authorize a new military aid package for Ukraine and shown Putin that the American commitment to Kyiv wouldn’t waver. Instead of begging Putin to “STOP!” on social media, he could have increased Ukraine’s stockpile of Patriot missiles. Instead of threatening sanctions against an economy that Putin has spent many years sanction-proofing, Trump could have given Ukraine the resources necessary to hit Russia where it really hurts: on the battlefield.

But instead of using this immense leverage, Trump squandered it. He listened to advisors like Vance, who once declared, “I don’t really care what happens to Ukraine one way or the other.” He deluded himself into believing that he could end the war overnight—a belief that was reinforced by the sycophants surrounding him and his make-believe friendship with Putin. He showed the world what an “America First” foreign policy looks like in practice—attacks on allies, capitulation to dictators, and the abandonment of any remaining pretense that the United States will support and defend democracy around the world.

Vance and other members of the MAGA foreign policy brain trust may still regard such arguments as “moralistic garbage,” but this doesn’t change the fact that their own Ukraine policy has proven to be a disastrous failure.

ATTACHMENT FIFTEEN – FROM

USA TODAY

Trump's tariffs take effect Thursday

President Donald Trump's higher tariff rates of 10% to 50% on dozens of trading partners kicked in Thursday, testing his strategy for shrinking U.S. trade deficits without massive disruptions to global supply chains, higher inflation and stiff retaliation from trading partners. U.S. Customs and Border Protection began collecting the higher tariffs at 12:01 a.m. ET after weeks of suspense over Trump's final tariff rates and frantic negotiations with major trading partners that sought to lower them. Meanwhile, costs from Trump's tariff war are mounting for a wide swath of companies, including bellwethers Caterpillar, Marriott, Molson Coors and Yum Brands. USA TODAY breaks down the tariffs.

President Trump’s new tariffs take effect, targeting dozens of US trading partners

David Lawder and Andrea Shalal

Reuters

President Donald Trump's higher tariff rates of 10% to 50% on dozens of trading partners kicked in on Aug. 7, testing his strategy for shrinking U.S. trade deficits without massive disruptions to global supply chains, higher inflation, and stiff retaliation from trading partners.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency began collecting the higher tariffs at 12:01 a.m. ET after weeks of suspense over Trump's final tariff rates and frantic negotiations with major trading partners that sought to lower them.

Goods loaded onto U.S.-bound vessels and in transit before the midnight deadline can enter at lower prior tariff rates before Oct. 5, according to a CBP notice to shippers issued this week. Imports from many countries had previously been subject to a baseline 10% import duty after Trump paused higher rates announced in early April.

But since then, Trump has frequently modified his tariff plan, slapping some countries with much higher rates, including 50% for goods from Brazil, 39% from Switzerland, 35% from Canada and 25% from India. He announced on Aug. 6 a separate, 25% tariff on Indian goods to be imposed in 21 days over the South Asian country's purchases of Russian oil.

"RECIPROCAL TARIFFS TAKE EFFECT AT MIDNIGHT TONIGHT!," Trump said on Truth Social just ahead of the deadline. "BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, LARGELY FROM COUNTRIES THAT HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THE UNITED STATES FOR MANY YEARS, LAUGHING ALL THE WAY, WILL START FLOWING INTO THE USA. THE ONLY THING THAT CAN STOP AMERICA'S GREATNESS WOULD BE A RADICAL LEFT COURT THAT WANTS TO SEE OUR COUNTRY FAIL!"

Eight major trading partners accounting for about 40% of U.S. trade flows have reached framework deals for trade and investment concessions to Trump, including the European Union, Japan, and South Korea, reducing their base tariff rates to 15%.

Britain won a 10% rate, while Vietnam, Indonesia, Pakistan, and the Philippines secured rate reductions to 19% or 20%.

"For those countries, it's less-bad news," said William Reinsch, a senior fellow and trade expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

"There'll be some supply chain rearrangement. There'll be a new equilibrium. Prices here will go up, but it'll take a while for that to show up in a major way," Reinsch said.

Countries with punishingly high duties, such as India and Canada, "will continue to scramble around trying to fix this," he added.

Trump's order has specified that any goods determined to have been transshipped from a third country to evade higher U.S. tariffs will be subject to an additional 40% import duty, but his administration has released few details on how these goods would be identified or the provision enforced.

Trump's July 31 tariff order imposed duties above 10% on 67 trading partners, while the rate was kept at 10% for those not listed. These import taxes are one part of a multilayered tariff strategy that includes national security-based sectoral tariffs on semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, autos, steel, aluminum, copper, lumber, and other goods.

Trump said on Aug. 6 that the microchip duties could reach 100%.

China is on a separate tariff track and will face a potential tariff increase on Aug. 12 unless Trump approves an extension of a prior truce after talks last week in Sweden. He has said he may impose additional tariffs on China's purchases of Russian oil as he seeks to pressure Moscow into ending its war in Ukraine.

Revenues, price hikes

Guitars, bagels and booze: How Canadians became reluctant warriors in Trump tariff fight

Trump has touted the vast increase in federal revenues from his import tax collections, which are ultimately paid by companies importing the goods and consumers of end products.

The higher rates will add to the total, which reached a record $27 billion in June. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said that U.S. tariff revenues could top $300 billion a year.

The move will drive average U.S. tariff rates to around 20%, the highest in a century and up from 2.5% when Trump took office in January, the Atlantic Institute estimates. Commerce Department data released last week showed more evidence that tariffs began driving up U.S. prices in June, including for home furnishings and durable household equipment, recreational goods, and motor vehicles.

Costs from Trump's tariff war are mounting for a wide swath of companies, including bellwethers Caterpillar, Marriott, Molson Coors, and Yum Brands. All told, global companies that have reported earnings so far this quarter are looking at a hit of around $15 billion to profits in 2025, Reuters' global tariff tracker shows.

'America's big case': What happens next in the court battle over Trump's tariffs?

ATTACHMENT SIXTEEN – FROM

THE A.P.

By  JOSH BOAK Updated 1:53 AM EDT, August 8, 2025

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump began imposing higher import taxes on dozens of countries Thursday just as the economic fallout of his monthslong tariff threats has begun to cause visible damage to the U.S. economy.

Just after midnight, goods from more than 60 countries and the European Union became subject to tariff rates of 10% or higher. Products from the EU, Japan and South Korea are taxed at 15%, while imports from Taiwan, Vietnam and Bangladesh are taxed at 20%. Trump also expects the EU, Japan and South Korea to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in the United States.

“I think the growth is going to be unprecedented,” Trump said Wednesday. He said the U.S. was “taking in hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs,” but did not provide a specific figure for revenues because “we don’t even know what the final number is” regarding the rates.

Despite the uncertainty, the White House is confident that the onset of his tariffs will provide clarity about the path for the world’s largest economy. Now that companies understand the direction the U.S. is headed, the Republican administration believes it can ramp up new investments and jump-start hiring in ways that can rebalance America as a manufacturing power.

So far, however, there are signs of self-inflicted wounds to the U.S. as companies and consumers brace for the impact of the new taxes.

Risk of economic erosion

Hiring began to stall, inflationary pressures crept upward and home values in key markets started to decline after the initial tariff rollout in April, said John Silvia, CEO of Dynamic Economic Strategy.

“A less productive economy requires fewer workers,” Silvia said. “But there is more, the higher tariff prices lower workers’ real wages. The economy has become less productive, and firms cannot pay the same real wages as before. Actions have consequences.”

Many economists say the risk is that the American economy is steadily eroded.

“It’s going to be fine sand in the gears and slow things down,” said Brad Jensen, a professor at Georgetown University.

Trump has promoted the tariffs as a way to reduce America’s persistent trade deficit. But importers tried to avoid the taxes by bringing in more goods before the tariffs took effect. As a result, the $582.7 billion trade imbalance for the first half of the year was 38% higher than in 2024. Total construction spending has dropped 2.9% over the past year.

The economic pain is not confined to the U.S.

Germany, which sends 10% of its exports to the U.S. market, saw industrial production sag 1.9% in June as Trump’s earlier rounds of tariffs took hold. “The new tariffs will clearly weigh on economic growth,” said Carsten Brzeski, global chief of macro for ING bank.

Dismay in India and Switzerland

The lead-up to Thursday fit the slapdash nature of Trump’s tariffs, which have been rolled out, walked back, delayed, increased, imposed by letter and renegotiated.

Trump on Wednesday announced additional 25% tariffs to be imposed on India because of its purchases of Russian oil, bringing its total import taxes to 50%.

A leading group of Indian exporters said that will affect nearly 55% of the country’s outbound shipments to America and force exporters to lose long-standing clients.

“Absorbing this sudden cost escalation is simply not viable. Margins are already thin,” S.C. Ralhan, president of the Federation of Indian Export Organizations, said in a statement.

The Swiss executive branch, the Federal Council, was expected to meet Thursday after President Karin Keller-Sutter and other Swiss officials returned from a hastily arranged trip to Washington in a failed bid to avert a 39% U.S. tariffs on Swiss goods.

Import taxes are still coming on pharmaceutical drugs, and Trump announced 100% tariffs on computer chips. That could leave the U.S. economy in a place of suspended animation as it awaits the impact.

Stock market remains solid

The president’s use of a 1977 law to declare an economic emergency to impose the tariffs is under a legal challenge. Even people who worked with Trump during his first term are skeptical, such as Paul Ryan, the Wisconsin Republican who was House speaker.

“There’s no sort of rationale for this other than the president wanting to raise tariffs based upon his whims, his opinions,” Ryan told CNBC on Wednesday.

Trump is aware of the risk that courts could overturn his tariffs. In a Truth Social tweet, he said, “THE ONLY THING THAT CAN STOP AMERICA’S GREATNESS WOULD BE A RADICAL LEFT COURT THAT WANTS TO SEE OUR COUNTRY FAIL!”

The stock market has been solid during the tariff drama, with the S&P 500 index climbing more than 25% from its April low. The market’s rebound and the income tax cuts in Trump’s tax and spending measure signed into law on July 4 have given the White House confidence that economic growth is bound to accelerate in the coming months.

On the global financial markets, indexes rose across much of Europe and Asia, while stocks were slipping on Wall Street.

But ING’s Brzeski warned: “While financial markets seem to have grown numb to tariff announcements, let’s not forget that their adverse effects on economies will gradually unfold over time.”

Trump foresees an economic boom. American voters and the rest of the world wait, nervously.

“There’s one person who can afford to be cavalier about the uncertainty that he’s creating, and that’s Donald Trump,” said Rachel West, a senior fellow at The Century Foundation who worked in the Biden White House on labor policy. “The rest of Americans are already paying the price for that uncertainty.”

___

Follow the AP’s coverage of President Donald Trump at https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump.

@INSERT

17 15X62 X62 FROM USA TODAY

Trump doubles India's tariffs to 50% as penalty for importing Russian oil

U.S.-India ties are facing their most serious crisis in years after talks with India failed to produce a trade agreement.

By Joey Garrison

WASHINGTON − President Donald Trump signed an executive order imposing an additional 25% tariff on imports from India as a penalty for the country importing oil from Russia.

The additional levy would double India's U.S. tariff rate to 50% following a previously announced 25% tariff set to go into effect Aug. 7 under a separate order Trump issued last week.

Trump's Aug. 6 move marks the first time the president has deployed so-called "secondary tariffs" on Russian trading partners that he threatened if Russian President Vladimir Putin did not agree to a ceasefire to end his country's war in Ukraine. The additional 25% Indian tariff goes into effect in 21 days under the order.

More: In historic move, Trump escalates trade battles with sweeping new tariffs around the worldThe action, which could further complicate U.S.-Indian relations, comes shortly after Reuters reported that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi would visit China for the first time in over seven years later this month.

U.S.-India ties are facing their most serious crisis in years after talks with India failed to produce a trade agreement.

More: Trump to add 25% tariff to Indian imports. Which everyday goods could be impacted?

Trump has turned increasingly critical of Putin for continuing his country’s military assault on Ukraine while expressing openness to a ceasefire to Trump in their private discussions.

Trump on July 29 announced a 10-day deadline for Russia to agree to a ceasefire by Aug. 8 or face tariffs and sanctions.

Guitars, bagels and booze: How Canadians became reluctant warriors in Trump tariff fight

In historic move, Trump escalates trade battles with sweeping new tariffs around the world

Wait a bluegrass-pickin’ minute: Canadians are making Old-Fashioneds without Kentucky bourbon?

How much profit is the U.S. making from tariffs?

Judges question whether Trump tariffs are authorized by emergency powers

A sign of the tariff era? Automakers are importing fewer cars under $30K, study says

White House envoy Steve Witkoff met Aug. 6 with Putin in Moscow in a final effort by the Trump administration to convince the Russian leader to end fighting in Ukraine ahead of the deadline.

Trump afterward called the meeting "highly productive," adding in a social media post that, "Everyone agrees this War must come to a close, and we will work towards that in the days and weeks to come."

Still, it was not immediately clear whether Russia demonstrated enough progress toward peace for Trump to hold off on the penalties he's threatened.

18 16X61 X61 FROM TIMES of INDIA

By Bhakt Slayer

·

· Donald Trump Tariffs News Live Updates: Trump warns of '1929-style Great Depression' if court rules against tariffs

THE TIMES OF INDIA | Aug 09, 2025, 19:13:34 IST

Donald Trump Tariffs News Live Updates: Trump warns of '1929-style Great Depression' if court rules against tariffs

Donald Trump Tariffs News Live Updates: After imposing a 50% tariff on India, US President Donald Trump has indicated that no further trade negotiations between the two countries would take place unless the tariff matter is resolved. Asked about more trade negotiations between India and the US, Trump said, "No, not until we get it resolved."

PM Narendra Modi has taken a defiant stance to Trump’s tariff threats, saying that the interests of the agriculture and dairy sector will not be compromised. “For us, the interests of farmers are our top priority. India will never compromise on the interests of its farmers, dairy farmers and fishermen. I know that I will personally have to pay a heavy price. But I am ready for it,” he has said without naming Trump or the US. Which way are the India-US trade ties headed? Track TOI’s live coverage for the latest on Donald Trump’s tariff war, impact on India and more:

19:13 (IST) Aug 09

New tariff on 'transshipped' goods mystifies importers

As President Donald Trump’s global tariffs take effect, confusion is mounting over how the rules apply to goods assembled in one country using parts from another. While each country now has its own tariff rate, the policy also adds a 40% penalty for goods “transshipped” to avoid higher duties, even though such mislabeling is already illegal. Industry groups say the measure seems to legalize, but tax, a banned practice, and fear it could be used to impose higher tariffs on all products containing Chinese components, regardless of where they are assembled.

18:14 (IST) Aug 09

Champagne growers hope for US tariff shift

Champagne producers warn that President Donald Trump’s new tariffs on European goods, including up to 15% on EU products, will hurt sales to the US, their largest export market. While growers like Christine Sevillano say the US accounts for a significant of their revenue, many hope ongoing EU-US trade talks could spare the sector from the new duties.

16:12 (IST) Aug 09

Açai berry producers are concerned as Donald Trump imposes tariffs on Brazil's exports

In July, US President Donald Trump imposed a 50% tariff on Brazilian exports, sparking concern among acai producers, particularly in the Amazon region. The US, the largest importer of Brazil’s 70,000-ton annual acai output, now faces likely price hikes for acai products, while Brazilian producers fear a domestic oversupply that could sharply lower local prices. Smaller producers in Pará state say they are already feeling the impact as unsold stock grows, and even major exporters like São Paulo-based Acai Tropicalia Mix report steep losses, with US buyers suspending orders and negotiations.

The tariffs, Trump says, are linked to the trial of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who faces charges over an alleged coup attempt to cling to power after losing to current President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. While some Brazilian exports have been exempted, acai berries remain subject to the higher duty. Brazil’s industry ministry has not confirmed whether acai will be discussed in ongoing trade negotiations with US officials, leaving the country’s acai sector in limbo.

15:57 (IST) Aug 09

'Emperor of Maladies' v 'Maharaja of Tariffs'

Dubbing India the "Maharaja of Tariffs," US Donald Trump's minions are unloading on New Delhi amid growing signs that beyond the trade dispute, the MAGA supremo is jettisoning stated US objective voiced by three previous presidents of supporting the rise of India as a counterweight to China.

In scabrous remarks to reporters, Trump's trade counselor Peter Navarro on Thursday accused India of using US dollars to buy oil from Russia, which in turn "uses those dollars from India to finance weapons to kill Ukrainians and American taxpayers are being asked to pay for weapons to defend Ukraine from Russian weapons bought with US dollars from India."

15:56 (IST) Aug 09

Why Trump's tariffs could be disaster for Brazil's acai industry, American consumers

When US President Donald Trump imposed tariffs of 50 per cent on Brazilian exports in July, acai producer Ailson Ferreira Moreira felt immediately concerned.

After all, who was going to eat all of that Amazon berry, globally famous as a delicious, refreshing and nutritious superfood, if American consumers suddenly could no longer afford it?

As the main importer of the Brazilian berry, prices of acai smoothies and bowls look certain to go up in the United States.

“The acai that's all produced here ... If only people here eat it, it's going to be a lot of acai, right?” Moreira told The Associated Press outside of Belem, an Amazon city of 1.4 million residents that will host this year's UN climate summit COP30 climate summit in November. “If there's too much acai here, people won't be able to eat it all and the price will drop.”

15:34 (IST) Aug 09

Donald Trump's 100% tariff likely to shift more Taiwan's semiconductor industry to US

A proposed 100% US tariff on semiconductor imports could push Taiwan’s chipmakers to expand production in the US, shifting from incentive-based policies to punitive measures, experts warn, potentially raising costs across the semiconductor supply chain and consumer electronics.

20:56 (IST) Aug 08

'1929 all over again, Great Depression': Trump warns courts - is US tariff war about to hit legal wall?

US President Donald Trump on Friday issued a warning to American courts, urging them not to undermine the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) - a Cold War-era law he has invoked to justify imposing tariffs on several countries, including a 50 per cent tariff on India.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump claimed tariffs were driving unprecedented economic gains.

PEANUT GALLERY

Bhakt Slayer1 day ago

Why was only India singled out for high tariffs????? Because of Modi's incompetence. He is a BIG FAILURE in diplomacy.

Raj Tm 1 day ago

'Hardened stance' appears to be for the domestic audience. Klm

Klm Dehradun 1 day ago

Trump is a bull to be caught by the horns. His real intention is to break BRICS. So he target India and Brazil to break BRICS. But we should not fall to his pressure. Heard that India is leaving QUAD. Modi is going to China very soon and Putin is visiting India very soon as well. Trump is an empty vessel which make much noise. Just leave him alone and give him a silent treatment. He will U-turn by himself

19 17X66 FROM AP NEWS%

A U.S. India trade expert describes how the relationship is souring over President Donald Trump’s 25% tariffs and Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s plan to continuing buying Russian oil.

By  JOSH BOAK, RAJESH ROY and FATIMA HUSSEIN

Updated 10:38 PM EDT, August 6, 2025

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump signed an executive order Wednesday to place an additional 25% tariff on India for its purchases of Russian oil, bringing the combined tariffs imposed by the United States on its ally to 50%.

The tariffs would go into effect 21 days after the signing of the order, meaning that both India and Russia might have time to negotiate with the administration on the import taxes.

Trump’s moves could scramble the economic trajectory of India, which until recently was seen as an alternative to China by American companies looking to relocate their manufacturing. China also buys oil from Russia, but it was not included in the order signed by the Republican president.

As part of a negotiating period with Beijing, Trump has placed 30% tariffs on goods from China, a rate that is smaller than the combined import taxes with which he has threatened New Delhi.

Trump had previewed for reporters Tuesday that the tariffs would be coming. During an event in the Oval Office Wednesday with Apple CEO Tim Cook, Trump affirmed the 50% tariff number, not giving a specific answer as to whether additional tariffs on India would be dropped if there were a deal between Russia and Ukraine.

Trump announces 25% tariff on India starting Aug. 1

China defends oil deals with Russia and Iran in US trade talks

India indicates it will keep buying Russian oil despite Trump's threats

“We’ll determine that later,” Trump said. “But right now they’re paying a 50% tariff.”

The White House said Wednesday that Trump could meet in person with Russian President Vladimir Putin as soon as next week as he seeks to broker an end to the war.

The Indian government on Wednesday called the additional tariffs “unfortunate.”

“We reiterate that these actions are unfair, unjustified and unreasonable,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Randhir Jaiswal said in a statement, adding that India would take all actions necessary to protect its interests.

Jaiswal said India has already made its stand clear that the country’s imports were based on market factors and were part of an overall objective of ensuring energy security for its 1.4 billion people.

Ajay Srivastava, a former Indian trade official, said the latest tariff places the country among the most heavily taxed U.S. trading partners and far above rivals such as China, Vietnam and Bangladesh.

“The tariffs are expected to make Indian goods far costlier with the potential to cut exports by around 40%-50% to the U.S.,” he said.

Srivastava said Trump’s decision was “hypocritical” because China bought more Russian oil than India did last year.

“Washington avoids targeting Beijing because of China’s leverage over critical minerals which are vital for U.S. defense and technology,” he said.

In 2024, the U.S. ran a $45.8 billion trade deficit in goods with India, meaning America imported more from India than it exported, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. American consumers and businesses buy pharmaceutical drugs, precious stones and textiles and apparel from India, among other goods.

As the world’s largest country, India represented a way for the U.S. to counter China’s influence in Asia. But India has not supported the Ukraine-related sanctions by the U.S. and its allies on Moscow even as India’s leaders have maintained that they want peace.

The U.S. and China are currently in negotiations on trade, with Washington imposing a 30% tariff on Chinese goods and facing a 10% retaliatory tax from Beijing on American products.

The planned tariffs on India contradict past efforts by the Biden administration and other nations in the Group of Seven leading industrialized nations that encouraged India to buy cheap Russian oil through a price cap imposed in 2022. The nations collectively capped Russian oil a $60 per barrel at a time when prices in the market were meaningfully higher.

The intent was to deprive the Kremlin of revenue to fund its war in Ukraine, forcing the Russian government either to sell its oil at a discount or divert money for a costly alternative shipping network.

The price cap was rolled out to equal parts skepticism and hopefulness that the policy would stave off Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

The cap has required shipping and insurance companies to refuse to handle oil shipments above the cap, though Russia has been able to evade the cap by shipping oil on a “shadow fleet” of old vessels using insurers and trading companies located in countries that are not enforcing sanctions.

20 18X68 from NEWSWEEK.COM

China Reacts to Trump, Putin Meeting Without Ukraine, EU

By Shane Croucher Published Aug 12, 2025 at 6:48 AM EDT Updated Aug 12, 2025 at 9:12 AM EDT

China said it hopes all those with a stake in the Russia-Ukraine war would play a role in the peace negotiations, as U.S. President Donald Trump prepares for a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday.

Why It Matters

China is a vital strategic partner of Russia's and, as the dominant and larger partner, holds influence over Moscow's decision-making.

While China has said it plays no role in Russia's war in Ukraine, Beijing has provided Russia with a major economic lifeline through large-scale oil purchases, helping Moscow to circumvent Western sanctions.

What To Know

The Trump-Putin summit will discuss the control of land in Ukraine, swathes of which Russia has seized during the course of its full-scale invasion, launched in February 2022. Trump is trying to broker an end to the war.

Kyiv and its European allies have urged Trump not to agree to any concessions of Ukrainian land to Russia, saying such decisions are Ukraine's alone to make, and warned against what they said is rewarding Moscow's illegal aggression.

At a daily press briefing on Tuesday, August 12, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian was asked about Trump and Putin's decision to hold a summit without inviting any representatives from Ukraine or the European Union.

"China supports all efforts conducive to the peaceful settlement of the crisis, and is glad to see Russia and the U.S. keep in contact, improve their relations and advance the political settlement of the Ukraine crisis," Lin said.

"We hope all parties concerned and stakeholders will take part in the negotiation process in due course and reach a fair, lasting and binding peace agreement acceptable to parties concerned at an early date."

21X67 FROM GUK

Dozens more countries face higher levies on exports to US as new Trump tariffs come into effect

Donald Trump’s latest wave of ‘reciprocal’ rates were in place as of a minute past midnight Washington time on Thursday

·

Lisa O’Carroll

Thu 7 Aug 2025 00.00 EDT

Dozens of countries face higher levies on their exports to the US now that Donald Trump’s latest wave of country-specific tariffs has come into force.

The sweeping “reciprocal” rates announced by the White House a week ago – just before a previous 1 August deadline was due to elapse – were in place as of a minute past midnight Washington time on Thursday.

Just before midnight, Trump claimed on social media that billions of dollars would start flowing into the US as a result of the tariffs.

However, while the customs duties make countries’ exports more expensive and less competitive, they are payable on import and usually passed on to the customer.

“The only thing that can stop America’s greatness would be a radical left court that wants to see our country fail,” the president wrote in capital letters, referencing an ongoing case in the US court of appeals which is considering whether he exceeded his authority in imposing the “reciprocal” tariffs.

The rates range from 41% on war-torn Syria to 10% for the UK and will be applied on top of the usual tariffs applying to products imported to the US.

This means that while Brazil’s “reciprocal” level is 10%, its total rate is 50% after an executive order imposed a 40% additional levy from Wednesday linked to the prosecution of the country’s former president Jair Bolsonaro.

The EU is the only trading partner where its baseline rate – set at 15% after a framework deal – will include previous tariffs. It means, for example, cheeses that are normally hit with import duties of 14.9% will be taxed at 15% and not 29.9%.

Since the announcement late on Thursday last week, governments around the world have been racing to try to reach deals to avert border taxes they fear could deter investors and result in job losses.

The Swiss president, Karin Keller-Sutter, was in Washington on Tuesday for two days of meetings with senior Trump administration officials to try to reverse a 39% levy that blindsided the government when it was unveiled.

The Swiss government were set to hold an “extraordinary meeting” on Thursday, following the return of officials from Washington

Meanwhile, India’s 25% tariff rate could rise to a total of 50% after Trump signed an executive order on Wednesday imposing an additional levy in retaliation for the country’s purchase of oil from Russia. Delhi has 21 days to respond. Trump has threatened to use the same tactic on other countries that supply Russia.

Trump first unveiled the raft of country-specific rates on 2 April, a date he called “liberation day”, claiming the rest of the world had looted the US for decades.

After a 90-day pause brought in a week later and another four-week truce announced on 7 July, he confirmed the new set of rates last Friday.

Some trading partners secured reductions via negotiations or by striking deals, including the UK, Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines, Japan, South Korea, Pakistan and the EU.

Other countries are negotiating tariffs not covered by last week’s announcement. Canada has been hit with a total rate of 35% that came in last Friday, while Mexico avoided an increase from its 25% rate on the same date after it was granted a 90-day extension. China faces a 30% rate while negotiations continue before its separate 12 August deadline for higher rates.

On Wednesday, Trump also warned that the US would impose a tariff of about 100% on semiconductor chips imported from countries not producing in America or planning to do so.

The headline and text of this article were amended on 7 August 2025 to add clarity on who pays for tariffs.

See the full list of Trump tariff rates here

X70 DUPE 42 trump celebrates above

X71 TACO DAY

22 20X71 FROM THE DAILY KOS

Russian stuff blowing up: It's deadline day and Trump goes TACO again

by quaoar Friday, August 08, 2025 at 1:02:53p EDT

Today was supposed to be the day that Trump announced crippling secondary sanctions designed to bring Russia’s oil economy to its knees.

Did it happen? India got slapped earlier, but China knew Trump doesn’t have the cojones to go after them too.

And remember those reports about how Trump was insisting that Putin meet with Zelenskyy? Yea, that was fantasy as well.

And now Trump is all giddy about striking a ceasefire deal that would stab Ukraine in the back — because Trump can’t help but think he can still make a deal with Putin.

The tough talk was all horse shit.

So what happened? Well, Trump was just winging it and didn’t consider how it might play out. Pretty typical.

Oil prices will likely rise, creating political problems for him before next year's U.S. midterm congressional elections. The tariffs would also complicate the administration's efforts to secure trade deals with China and India.

For his part, Putin has signaled that Russia is prepared to weather any new economic hardship imposed by the U.S. and its allies.

There is “close to zero chance” Putin will agree to a ceasefire due to Trump's threats of tariffs and sanctions on Russia, said Eugene Rumer, a former U.S. intelligence analyst for Russia who directs the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Russia and Eurasia Program.

"Theoretically if you cut off Indian and Chinese purchases of oil that would be a very heavy blow to the Russian economy and to the war effort. But that isn't going to happen," he said, adding that the Chinese have signaled they will keep buying Russia’s oil.

Yep. He chickened out again.

23 21X02 FROM REUTERS

Improving Russia-US relations will take time, Kremlin tells TASS

By Reuters

August 5, 2025 11:45 PM EDTUpdated August 5, 2025

Aug 6 (Reuters) - Improving relations between Russia and the United States will take time, Kremlin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov told the Russian TASS state news agency in remarks published on Wednesday.

"There is, of course, inertia in this process," Peskov told TASS, referring to the prolonged absence of a meeting between Russia's President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump.

TASS reported that for the first time in modern Russian history more than six months have passed since a new U.S. president's inauguration without a summit with the Russian leader.

U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff is expected in Moscow on Wednesday to meet with Russian leadership in yet another diplomatic effort by Washington to bring the war in Ukraine to an end.

Russia-U.S. ties have been marked by escalating tensions in recent weeks, with Trump saying he had ordered two nuclear submarines to be positioned in "the appropriate regions" in response to remarks by former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev.

Trump has also issued an ultimatum to Putin, demanding a ceasefire in the war that Russia started, with a full-scale invasion on Ukraine in February 2022, and a formal peace agreement by Aug. 8.

Trump threatened to hit Russia with new sanctions and impose 100% tariffs on countries that buy its oil - of which the biggest are China and India - unless Putin agrees to a ceasefire in the war.

24 22X from Time

Cambodia Nominated Trump for a Nobel. It Has Its Eyes on Another Prize

By Chad de Guzman August 11. 2025

Donald Trump received another Nobel Peace Prize nomination last week, this time from Cambodia, after the U.S. recently helped to broker a cease-fire after a border dispute flared up between the Southeast Asian nation and its neighbor Thailand.

“This is but one example of President Trump’s exceptional achievements in de-escalating tensions in some of the world's most volatile regions,” Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet wrote in a letter to the Norwegian Nobel Committee on August 7. “This nomination reflects not only my appreciation but also the heartfelt gratitude of the people of Cambodia for his crucial role in restoring peace and stability.”

It’s the latest example—following earlier Nobel nominations from Israel and Pakistan—of what journalist and global affairs analyst Tom Nagorski described as “flattery diplomacy” in an essay for TIME last month.

But it’s a particularly remarkable move coming from a country that’s previously professed a “friendship [that] transcends time and space” with the U.S.’s geopolitical rival China.

Why Cambodia Matters to the U.S.-China Rivalry

“It looks as if Cambodia is trying to thaw its icy ties with Washington,” Paul Chambers, a visiting fellow at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute in Singapore, tells TIME. Such a rapprochement, he adds, would mark a “significant shift” in Cambodian foreign policy.

Here’s what to know.

U.S.-Cambodia relations up to now

Days before Trump entered the White House for the first time in 2017, Cambodia canceled the “Angkor Sentinel” joint military exercise with the U.S. that it had held for seven straight years. While the cancellation was attributed to the ruling party’s preparation for local elections, it nonetheless marked the start of bilateral bitterness between Trump and the Southeast Asian nation. 

Weeks later, the U.S. envoy to Cambodia at the time emphasized that Cambodia should repay hundreds of millions of dollars in loans from the 1970s, originally given as food aid to the Lon Nol government. Cambodia, however, has insistently refused to pay the loan, which has ballooned with interest in the intervening decades, citing the U.S.’s notorious legacy from its military operations in the country. “They brought bombs and dropped them on Cambodia and [now] demand Cambodian people to pay,” Hun Sen, Hun Manet’s father and then Prime Minister, said in 2017. 

In recent years, under both Trump’s and former President Joe Biden’s Administrations, the U.S. has imposed sanctions and visa restrictions on Cambodia over its poor human rights record and corruption.

At the same time, Cambodia has grown closer to China—its top trading partner, greatest investor in infrastructure and development, and increasingly a key military cooperator.

“Strategic flexibility”

Observers, however, have noted that Cambodia has begun to recalibrate its international ties. While it certainly has not turned away from China, it has opened up toward a new era of relations with the U.S.

The shift hasn’t come out of nowhere. Under Hun Manet—who took over the premiership from his autocratic father Hun Sen in 2023 and has an extensive Western education including from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point—Cambodia proposed in February to reinstate the canceled Angkor Sentinel exercises. And Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is expected to visit Cambodia’s controversial Ream Naval Base later this year.

But for Cambodia, embracing Trump as a peacemaker has proven key to the recalibration process.

As Cambodia’s border dispute with Thailand was escalating, countries around the world were vying for Trump’s attention to get a trade deal or lowered tariff rate before his previously announced “Liberation Day” levies were set to kick back in. Both Cambodia and Thailand were set to face a 36% rate, but after their cease-fire was announced so was a new rate of 19%.

Raksmey Him, executive director of the Cambodian Center for Regional Studies, tells TIME that the episode—and Nobel hype that followed—served to make Cambodia “relevant” to Trump.

Sophal Ear, an associate professor of global political economy at Arizona State University, described the Nobel nomination as a “low-cost, high-visibility gesture” that “allows the government to signal goodwill without making real concessions.”

Chambers says that Cambodia is looking toward Washington for more trade, aid, cooperation, and investment as an opportunity to “escape from a dependency on China.”

Chandarith Neak and Chhay Lim, academics at the Royal University of Phnom Penh, called it a policy of “strategic flexibility” to “diversify dependencies,” in an April article for the Lowy Institute’s The Interpreter.

“Despite its alignment with China, Cambodia knows the geopolitical winds can shift quickly,” Ear tells TIME. “Demonstrating openness to renewed U.S. engagement—especially through a figure like Trump—could yield future flexibility or leverage.” That could come in the form, Ear says, of trade and tariff preferences, military cooperation, and even a “diplomatic softening” of U.S. rhetoric, such as on human-rights and corruption issues, about Cambodia.

2523X FROM GUK

‘A deadly scheme’: Palestinians face indiscriminate gunfire at food sites

Bullets taken from patients treated at Nasser hospital who were shot near GHF aid sites

Investigation based on visual evidence, bullets, medical records and testimony appears to show sustained pattern of Israeli shootings

By Manisha Ganguly Sat 9 Aug 2025 10.42 EDT

Ehab Nuor, a 23-year-old barber, lies flat on the sand behind entangled metal, hiding from heavy machine-gun fire, as hundreds of Palestinians scramble away, carrying backpacks in which they had hoped to collect food.

Nuor has come under fire from the Israeli military near food distribution centres on more than 10 occasions.

A Guardian investigation analysing visual evidence, bullets, medical data and patterns of injuries from two hospitals, as well as interviews with medical organisations and surgeons, across approximately 50 days of food distribution, appears to show a sustained Israeli pattern of firing on Palestinians seeking food.

The Guardian studied more than 30 videos of gunfire near food distribution sites run by the US and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF). More than 2,000 Palestinians were injured during the 48 days investigated, mostly by gunshots.

In the footage, machine-gun fire can be heard on at least 11 days near the food distribution sites. Bullet casings recovered from patients, and patterns of fire analysed by weapons experts, suggest they were Israeli munitions.

Palestinians, like Nuor, who travel to GHF sites have come under systematic and indiscriminate Israeli gunfire.

Doctors at Nasser hospital in Khan Younis and the Red Cross field hospital in Rafah described treating an unprecedented number of gunshot wounds. Almost all responsive patients arriving at Nasser hospital say they were shot by the Israeli military while trying to reach a food distribution site.

The gunfire at us was random – Mohammed Sleiman Abu Lebda

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said the casualty numbers were higher than the combined number of patients they had treated during mass-casualty incidents over the entire previous year. In data seen by the Guardian, more than 100 of these patients were declared dead on arrival.

Just last week, Nuor dodged bullets again: “This is how we get flour in Gaza. We just want to live – enough is enough.” In one video, an Israeli tank is clearly visible, and gunshots can be heard.

According to the UN, at least 1,373 Palestinians have been killed since 27 May while seeking food, with 859 killed in the vicinity of GHF sites and 514 along the routes of food convoys.

The bullets on the road

A long road runs near the GHF food site in northern Rafah, where crowds gather that are so large they can be seen from space.

It is here that Palestinians trying to get food have come under intense fire.

One clip from July shows the bullets hitting the sand as a row of Palestinians hide.

“The gunfire at us was random,” said Mohammed Sleiman Abu Lebda, 20, covered in bandages and watching the video on his phone from a hospital bed. He said he had been waiting for two hours at the distribution site when the Israeli military opened fire on the crowd.

The man beside him was torn apart, his remains carried away in the bag he had brought to collect flour, Lebda said.

Of the 21 days of shootings at food distribution sites in June in which about 2,000 Palestinians were injured, the Israeli military acknowledged opening fire on “suspects” or firing “warning shots” on eight occasions, but repeatedly denied targeting civilians. In some of these cases, it said it was aware of reports of injuries, and seven cases were “under review”. In several cases, the GHF denied there had been “an incident” in the immediate vicinity of its sites.

The British weapons expert Chris Cobb-Smith, commenting on the footage in which gunshots pepper the sand, said the action was “reckless and irresponsible”, adding: “There is no tactical reason to employ small-arms fire to that degree near crowds of non-combatants. It is utterly outrageous.”

Trevor Ball, an American weapons expert, said: “If this is intended as warning shots, it is an unsafe practice. Aiming that close to people creates a significant risk of harm or death. Bullets can ricochet, as well as have their trajectory affected by the wind and other non-human, as well as human, factors. These risks increase with distance.”

Images of eight bullets removed from people shot near GHF sites were shared with the Guardian by doctors from Nasser hospital.

The weapons experts analysed two of the bullets, using measurements.

Ball said: “These bullets are consistent with 7.62x51mm, a standard IDF [Israel Defense Forces] calibre. The other is .50 cal, which is used by IDF machine guns, and some Hamas sniper rifles.”

Cobb-Smith found the same calibres and concurred with Ball. He added it was difficult to be specific about the calibre of the other six bullets and attribute them without exact measurements, but that they were all high-velocity rounds, implying probable military issue.

‘A deadly scheme’

Prof Nick Maynard, a consultant surgeon at Oxford university hospital, has been visiting Gaza since 2010, and has completed three missions to Nasser hospital in Khan Younis since the start of the war. Speaking between surgeries, he said that since the GHF sites opened he had predominantly seen gunshot wounds.

The clustering of similar injuries … suggests this is a targeting activity at particular body parts – Prof. Nick Maynard

Maynard said he had seen a clustering of similar injuries that coincided with the days when food was distributed – between six and 12 patients coming in with the same injuries – gunshots to the neck, head or arms. “The clustering of similar injuries in one day suggests this is a targeting activity at particular body parts.”

He added: “The other night, we admitted four teenage boys, all of whom have been shot in the testicles.”

Another surgeon at Nasser, Goher Rahbour, described treating an unusually high number of mass-casualty incidents, mostly young boys returning from GHF sites: “100% of the time, [they said] it’s from the Israeli forces.”

In Rafah, the 60-bed Red Cross field hospital received more than 2,200 patients from more than 21 separate mass-casualty incidents – those with more than 30 injured people at once – between 27 May, when the GHF sites opened, and 26 June, according to hospital admission records seen by the Guardian.

‘They are shooting at us’

The Israeli military has claimed Hamas is stealing aid, despite the European Commission finding no reports of this. At the end of May, the Israeli government promised to lift its siege of Gaza so the GHF could set up its centres. Veteran aid groups were denied entry.

From the start, the GHF distribution was violent, with more than 400 Palestinians injured in the first week alone, and more than 30 patients dead on arrival at the ICRC field hospital. The first food distribution site was in a zone in west Rafah flagged by Israel for evacuation. To collect food, Palestinians had to defy the orders.

Four days later, in June, sporadic machine-gun fire was heard near the GHF site in the early morning hours.

Ameen Khalifa and other Palestinians face gunfire at GHF site – video

“They are shooting at us, I swear,” said 30-year-old Ameen Khalifa. “We come to get food for our lives, drenched in blood. We will die because we’re trying to get food.” About 170 Palestinians were injured that day, and 30 killed.

Khalifa survived, but not for long. His family said he was shot and killed in the same area two days later while trying to collect food.

“There is no arrangement, no order, no humanitarian conditions or anything that respects a human being,” Khalifa’s brother said in an interview from a camp for displaced people in Deir al-Balah, in central Gaza.

Israel’s military admitted firing “warning shots” toward individuals who approached its forces, and the GHF said food was handed out that day without incident.

'It's better not to go': Ahmad Zeidan says Palestinians should avoid Israeli food sites – video

Ahmad Zeidan, a young boy, had queued to collect food from 7pm the previous night with his mother and sister, after receiving word of the distribution from the Israeli military. He claimed the Israeli military opened fire. His mother was killed.

“I advise people not to go [to the food sites]. Damn this aid … Either we get them while maintaining our dignity, or we don’t want them. My mother is gone,” he cried outside Nasser hospital while waiting to collect her body.

The IDF said its forces had opened fire on a group of people they viewed as a threat but denied targeting civilians, adding that it was investigating the events. The GHF said the incident occurred in an area beyond their secure distribution site and control.

Ehab Nuor visited four food sites run by the GHF in June and July, and faced gunfire near all four. All of these sites were within areas the IDF designated for evacuation, placing Palestinians in direct danger.

Between 16 and 20 June, as the world focused on the war between Israel and Iran, the shootings intensified, injuring 600 Palestinians near food sites.

Videos show floodlights cutting through the dark around GHF sites, as an endless stream of Palestinians carry away white flour bags and gunshots ring out. Other videos show Palestinians huddled outside the perimeter of a GHF site, with gunshots audible.

Ball said machine guns were widely issued to IDF infantry and mounted on vehicles. By comparison, Hamas had some machine guns and captured IDF weapons but these were rarely seen except on ceremonial occasions.

All survivors and patients treated by doctors said they had come under Israeli fire.

The Israeli military released a video of an IDF spokesperson, Nadav Shoshani, standing near a GHF food site, saying: “The idea is to give aid directly to Gazan civilians and bypass Hamas’s hands … This is a new solution that brings aid directly to the people of Gaza … They have been going in and out peacefully …… They feel safe”.

IDF Lt Col Nadav Shoshani near GHF site – captions added at source

But the evidence analysed indicates otherwise.

Under international humanitarian law, those involved in aid delivery and those backing its operations have a duty to ensure humanitarian assistance is provided safely, impartially, and without exposing civilians to additional risk, including ensuring safe access.

These are grave breaches of the fourth Geneva convention – Prof. Adil Haque, Rutgers University

Reviewing the Guardian’s findings, Adil Haque, a professor of law at Rutgers University, New Jersey, said: “These are grave breaches of the fourth Geneva convention as well as war crimes under customary international law and the ICC [international criminal court] statute. A soldier may argue that they acted reasonably to defend themselves or others. However, it is neither reasonable nor proportionate to fire on unarmed civilians at a distance.”

Bushra Khalidi, Oxfam’s policy lead for the Palestinian territories, who has family members trapped in Gaza, believes this is not a humanitarian system. “It’s a deadly scheme,” she said.

Recent reports indicated that some members of the Israeli military had been ordered to open fire on civilians collecting food, while US contractors said their colleagues had fired live ammunition at Palestinians collecting food in Gaza.

An IDF spokesperson told the Guardian: “The IDF unequivocally denies the false allegation that it deliberately targets Palestinian civilians. The army’s binding orders prohibit forces operating in the area from intentionally firing at minors. The IDF operates according to international law and upholds the highest ethical standards in its operations.”

The IDF said it operated near the new distribution areas to “facilitate the aid efforts while continuing IDF operational activity in the Gaza Strip”, but did not confirm details of the review into incidents of civilian harm. It said that after an examination by its southern command, “instructions [were] issued to field forces following lessons learned”. It added that IDF forces had conducted “learning processes aimed at improving the operational response … and minimising possible friction between the population and the IDF” and this had been achieved through “the installation of fences, signage placement, the opening of additional routes, and other measures”.

A GHF spokesperson accused the Guardian of aiding a terrorist organisation and said: “The false and exaggerated statistics used in these reports seem to directly align with the Hamas-controlled Gaza health ministry … GHF has communicated to the UN and other humanitarian groups that we remain flexible and willing to sit down and address their concerns to find a path forward to collaborate and coordinate to securely deliver the maximum amount of aid possible.”

Earlier this week, the US ambassador to Israel called the GHF food distribution “phenomenal”, dismissing reports of IDF fire killing Palestinians as “nonsense”. He announced the possibility of opening 12 more food sites, and commencement of a 24 hour operation.

For Nuor, there is no respite. He now starves in a tent along with his family.

Additional reporting by Hoda Osman and Zarifa Abou Quora

2624X86 82FROM THE ATLANTIC

Things Aren’t Going Donald Trump’s Way

He hasn’t ended the wars in Ukraine and Gaza. His economy looks shaky. And then there’s Jeffrey Epstein.

By Jonathan Lemire August 7, 2025

Donald Trump has almost certainly complained more about journalists than any of his predecessors have, maybe more than all of them combined. So when Trump deemed a query “the nastiest question” he’s ever gotten from a member of the press, it was notable.

The moment came in May, when CNBC’s Megan Cassella asked Trump about “TACO,” an acronym for “Trump always chickens out.” The phrase had gained popularity in the financial sector as a derisive shorthand for the president’s penchant for backing down from his tariff threats. During an otherwise routine Oval Office event, Trump sputtered angrily at Cassella, claiming that his shifting tariff timelines were “part of negotiations” and admonishing, “Don’t ever say what you said.”

Trump’s appetite for confrontation is being tested again this week, with the arrival of two of the most important self-imposed deadlines of his second term, related to the tariffs and the conflict in Ukraine. Both present fraught decisions for Trump, and they come at a time when he faces a confluence of crises. A president who, less than a year ago, staged a historic political comeback and moved to quickly conquer Washington and the world now confronts more obstacles than at any point since his inauguration. Some of his central campaign promises—that he would end the wars in Ukraine and Gaza and boost the economy—are in peril. And for the first time in his 200 days back in office, the White House has begun to worry about members of the president’s own party defying him.

Tomorrow, the clock runs out on the two-week window that Trump gave Russia to reach a cease-fire with Ukraine. The president has been upset by his inability to end the war. Without an agreement, he has said, he will impose sanctions on Russia. But doing so would represent the first time in his decade in politics that he has truly punished President Vladimir Putin. Trump likewise has grown exasperated with Israel’s prosecution of the war in the Gaza Strip, a conflict that could soon escalate; Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyhu said today that his military plans to fully occupy the famine-plagued Strip.

Tom Nichols: Putin’s still in charge

The other deadline is Trump’s latest vow on tariffs, which go into effect today for 60 nations, with rates ranging from 10 to 41 percent. This time, Trump appeared to relish declaring that there would not be another TACO moment, writing on social media last night, “IT’S MIDNIGHT!!! BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN TARIFFS ARE NOW FLOWING INTO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!” Since the panic triggered by Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff announcement in April, Wall Street has learned to shrug off Trump’s scattershot statements. But the economy has shown new signs of weakness, with stubbornly high prices potentially set to rise again because of the tariffs and, most potently, a recent jobs report poor enough that Trump lashed out against the bureaucrat who compiled it; last week, he fired the Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner, claiming, without evidence, that the jobs numbers were bogus. That unprecedented act of petulance risks undermining Wall Street’s confidence in the economy and undercutting Trump’s campaign pledge to give the United States another economic “golden age.”

Those geopolitical and economic headwinds have been joined by forceful political ones. Since going out on August recess, Republican lawmakers have been heckled at town halls while trying to defend the president’s signature legislative accomplishment, the One Big Beautiful Bill. And some of those same Republicans, in a rare act of rebellion, have questioned Trump’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein matter, a scandal that the president, try as he may, simply has been unable to shake.

The mood in the White House has darkened in the past month, as the president’s challenges have grown deeper. The ongoing Russia-Ukraine war has become intensely frustrating for Trump, two White House officials and a close outside adviser told me. The president had truly believed that his relationship with Putin would bring about a quick end to the conflict. But instead, Putin has taken advantage of Trump’s deference to him and has openly defied the president—“embarrassed him,” one of the officials told me—by ignoring his calls for a cease-fire and ratcheting up his strikes on Ukrainian cities. Trump has sharply criticized his Russian counterpart in recent weeks as he’s mulled what to do.

Yesterday, Trump said that his personal envoy, Steve Witkoff, had a productive meeting with Putin in Moscow, leading the U.S. president to return to his original plan to end the war: a summit. A third White House official told me that Trump has informed European leaders that he wants to meet with Putin as soon as next week in a new effort to get a cease-fire. A Kremlin spokesperson accepted the White House offer but said its details needed to be finalized. Trump also told European leaders that he would potentially have a subsequent meeting with both Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, but the Kremlin did not immediately agree to that.

One of the officials told me that Trump is still considering how and whether to directly punish Putin if Moscow doesn’t hit tomorrow’s deadline. The U.S. does little trade with Russia, so direct levies would be useless, and the West Wing is divided as to the merits of slapping secondary sanctions on nations that do business with Moscow. Trump signed off on sanctioning India this week because, the official told me, he was already annoyed at the lack of progress on a trade deal with Delhi. But he is far more leery of sanctioning China—another major economic partner of Russia’s—for fear of upending ongoing trade negotiations with Beijing.

Witkoff’s visit to Moscow came just days after he had been in Gaza to urge Netanyahu to ease a blockade and allow more aid and food to reach Palestinians. Although Israel agreed this week to allow some more food in, the humanitarian crisis has not abated. Trump, who badly wants the conflict to end, believes that Netanyahu is prolonging the war and has told advisers that he is wary of Israel’s new push to capture Gaza. Even so, officials told me, Trump is unlikely to break with Netanyahu in any meaningful way.

Any president, of course, can be vexed by events outside his nation’s borders. Trump’s superpower at home has long been to command intense loyalty from fellow Republicans. Yet that power might be hitting its limit. He was able to pressure the GOP to pass his One Big Beautiful Bill last month, but some Republicans, seeing its shaky poll numbers, have already tried to distance themselves from it; Senator Josh Hawley, for instance, has said he wants to roll back some of the Medicaid cuts that the bill, which he voted for, included. And lawmakers who are trying to defend the bill are facing voter anger. Representative Mike Flood was loudly heckled by a hostile crowd at a town hall in his Nebraska district on Monday. One of the White House officials told me that the West Wing has told House leadership to advise Republican members against holding too many in-person town halls.

Then there is Epstein. Trump has desperately wished the story away. He feels deeply betrayed by his MAGA supporters who believed him when he intimated during the campaign that something was nefarious about the government’s handling of the case, and who now have a hard time believing him when he says their suspicions are actually bogus. The president has snapped at reporters asking about Epstein, told House Speaker Mike Johnson to send Congress home early to avoid a vote on whether to release the Epstein files, and sued his on-again, off-again friend Rupert Murdoch for $10 billion after The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump had sent Epstein a lewd birthday card in 2003. Murdoch hasn’t backed down. Neither have a number of MAGA luminaries and Republican lawmakers who keep demanding to see the files.

Trump’s own efforts to manage the story have only fed it. His account of why he and Epstein had a falling-out two decades ago has shifted multiple times. One of the White House officials and the outside ally told me that advisers have told Trump repeatedly to stop saying he has the right to pardon Epstein’s former partner Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence for sex trafficking and related offenses, to avoid drawing more attention to his previous friendship with Epstein. Despite hopes that the story would dissipate over the August recess, the White House is preparing for Trump to take more heat from Republicans in the weeks ahead.

Some Trump allies still believe that the president, even as a lame duck, will keep Republicans in line. “Having survived Russiagate, Hillary Clinton, two impeachments, four trials designed to put him in jail, and two assassination attempts,” former House Speaker Newt Gingrich told me, “it’s unlikely the current situation will be much of a problem.”

The White House also pushed back against the idea that Trump is in a perilous moment. “Only the media industrial complex and panicans would mischaracterize this as a challenging time. They simply haven’t learned anything after covering President Trump for the last 10 years,” the spokesperson Steven Cheung told me in a statement. “The successes of the first 200 days have been unprecedented and exactly what Americans voted for, which is why this country has never been hotter.”

But others in the party sense signs of trouble. “He’s spending the political capital he’s accumulated for a decade,” Alex Conant, a GOP strategist who worked in President George W. Bush’s White House and on then-Senator Marco Rubio’s presidential campaign, told me. “Below the surface of the Republican Party, there’s an intense battle brewing over what a post-Trump GOP looks like. And that surfaces on issues like Israel, the debt, and Epstein. How Trump navigates that fight over the remainder of his presidency will be a big test.”

There was a time, years ago, when August could be counted as a slow news month in Washington. That’s now a distant memory, in no small part because the current president has an insatiable need to be in the news cycle. In August 2017, while Trump was vacationing at his golf club in New Jersey, I asked one of his senior aides why Trump had declared that he would deliver “fire and fury” on North Korea. The aide told me that Trump was looking to intimidate Pyongyang—but that he was also annoyed that he hadn’t been the central storyline on cable news. The bellicose rhetoric worked: Suddenly, Trump had changed the news cycle.

Read: The desperation of Donald Trump’s posts

In this particular summer of his discontent, Trump is again trying to regain control of the political narrative. But his efforts have been more haphazard and less effective: a threat to strip Rosie O’Donnell of her citizenship, a revival of the “Russia hoax,” an announcement of a new White House ballroom, even a walk on the West Wing roof. None of those things changed the news cycle; instead, they only reinforced that, at least to some extent, he is at the mercy of events outside his control.

Trump has long believed that he can create his own truth, often by telling the same falsehood over and over again. He seems to be trying that tactic again too, especially with the economy. Trump’s response to the disastrous July jobs report was to assert, with no evidence, that the Bureau of Labor Statistics had incorrectly reported the statistics to hurt him politically—and then fire the commissioner. That sent a chill through the markets and the business world, which need reliable statistics to function, and sparked fears that Trump will try to bend other government data to his whims.

When it comes to his own political standing, Trump is also trying to create his own reality, seeming to will away the challenges he faces. In an interview with CNBC on Tuesday, he insisted that he has “the best poll numbers I’ve ever had,” claiming that his approval was north of 70 percent. But that number represented his approval among Republicans, the interviewer told him. In fact, his overall approval rating is hovering at just about 40 percent. When corrected, all Trump could do was call the whole thing “fake.”

2725 X84 X84 FROM CNN

Trump warns of another Great Depression if court strikes down tariffs

By Matt Egan Updated Aug 8, 2025

Even though President Donald Trump often argues the US economy is booming under his watch, he warned Friday of a 1929-style crash if courts strike down his use of emergency powers to justify sweeping tariffs.

“If a Radical Left Court ruled against us at this late date, in an attempt to bring down or disturb the largest amount of money, wealth creation and influence the U.S.A. has ever seen, it would be impossible to ever recover, or pay back, these massive sums of money and honor,” Trump said in a Truth Social post. “It would be 1929 all over again, a GREAT DEPRESSION!”

The US Court of International Trade in May ruled that Trump overstepped his legal authority to impose many of his sweeping tariffs on foreign goods. Last week, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard the Trump administration’s appeal, and the panel of 11 judges voiced skepticism that the law gave Trump power to impose tariffs in the aggressive manner that his administration has unleashed them. The appeals court judges have yet to issue their ruling on the case, which is expected to be appealed to the Supreme Court.

Trump on Friday warned that a ruling against his emergency powers would be a “judicial tragedy” the United States would have “no way” of recovering from.

“If they were going to rule against the wealth, strength, and power of America, they should have done so LONG AGO, at the beginning of the case,” Trump said.

The comments stunned some observers, in part because it’s unusual for a sitting US president to warn of economic catastrophe – but also because Trump’s tariffs have been largely viewed as a risk to the US economy.

“If courts shoot down the tariffs, it would be complicated – but a huge positive,” Art Hogan, chief market strategist at B. Riley Wealth Management, told CNN. “There would be a massive celebration.”

Trump correctly noted that tariff revenue has skyrocketed this year because of his unprecedented trade policy. However, Gregory Daco, chief economist at EY-Parthenon, said the new tariff revenue of roughly $70 billion to $80 billion over last year is a “drop in the bucket” of the nearly $7 trillion the federal government spent last year.

“The view that returning the custom duties would lead to a depression is largely misguided,” Daco said in a phone interview. “It’s not going to make or break much.”

Daco argued that if a court ruling forced Trump to slash tariff rates – and that’s a big if because the president has other authorities he could turn to – it wouldn’t be a negative at all.

“It would actually be stimulative,” Daco said.

During Trump’s Friday post on Truth Social, he also credited his trade strategy with boosting the US stock market.

“Tariffs are having a huge positive impact on the Stock Market,” Trump said. “Almost every day, new records are set.”

While it’s true that US stocks have surged to all-time highs this summer, analysts say tariff revenue is not a factor.

“That’s unambiguously backwards,” Hogan said of the argument that tariffs are lifting stocks. “The trade war, when it started, caused one of the steepest market downturns since the 1990s.”

The market recovery only began when Trump on April 9 paused his alarmingly-high tariffs.

“The only thing the market is celebrating is that we’re seeing tariff frameworks that are better than worst-case scenarios,” Hogan said. “The investment community gets the joke: These tariffs will slow growth and they’re being paid by consumers. This is a shadow tax. Everyone on Wall Street knows that.”

2826X81 X81 FROM FOX

Sanctioning Russia Act threatens Moscow, allies with 500% tariffs

The bipartisan legislation comes as Russia’s war in Ukraine stretches into its 3rd year and 5th month

By Amanda Macias  Published August 8, 2025 8:00am EDT

Through the Sanctioning Russia Act, bipartisan lawmakers are preparing to impose a 500% tariff — an all-out signal to the Kremlin and its partners: de-escalate the war in Ukraine or face steep economic consequences.

The measure, crafted by Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), grants President Donald Trump broad authority to impose economic penalties on Russia. 

These colossal tariffs would target the heart of Russia’s economy — its oil and gas exports — if Moscow continues to defy peace efforts or escalate the conflict.

The bipartisan legislation comes as Russia’s war in Ukraine stretches into its third year and fifth month, with the Kremlin showing no signs of abandoning its ambition to dismantle Ukrainian sovereignty and resurrect the influence of the former Soviet empire.

The legislation permits 500% secondary tariffs on imports from countries that continue doing business with Russia — most notably China, Brazil and India.

Secondary tariffs are trade penalties aimed at third-party nations that maintain economic ties with a sanctioned country. In this case, they serve as an indirect means of pressuring Russia by punishing its trading partners.

The proposed measure comes as Washington seeks additional ways to further isolate Moscow’s economy. 

Trump has previously singled out countries like India and China — the top purchasers of discounted Russian crude — for undermining G7 price caps and blunting the impact of Western sanctions. 

Additionally, the Sanctioning Russia Act authorizes Trump to raise tariffs on Russian imports to the U.S. by up to 500% — though bilateral trade has sharply declined since the Kremlin’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

In the wake of the Kremlin’s unprovoked war in Ukraine, the U.S. and European Union unleashed a war chest of coordinated sanctions aimed at crippling the Russian economy. 

In addition to the 500% tariffs authorized by the legislation, Trump has previously vowed to impose 100% secondary tariffs on any nation that maintains trade ties with Russia. It remains unclear whether he intends to pursue both measures simultaneously.

The Kremlin said Thursday that Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed to hold a meeting with Trump and potentially Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy "in the coming days." The meeting would mark the first between Putin and Zelenskyy since the start of Moscow's war.

2927X03 FROM CNN

Five ways the Russia-Ukraine war could end

Analysis by Nick Paton Walsh Aug 7, 2025

Kyiv, Ukraine — 

A Trump-Putin meeting has been floated by both sides for some time. So why might either side want it to happen now?

US President Donald Trump wants to bring the force of his personality to bear on forging a deal, believing that six months of intransigence from Moscow might be overcome by meeting the Kremlin head face to face. He seems still to cling to the idea the Kremlin can be cajoled into stopping the war, despite his Russian counterpart recently suggesting the maximalist position that the Russian and Ukrainian people are one, and wherever a Russian soldier steps is Russia.

Russian leader Vladimir Putin wants to buy time, having already rejected a European, US and Ukrainian unconditional ceasefire proposal in May, offering instead two unilateral, short and inconsequential pauses. His forces are surging ahead on the front lines in a summer offensive that might bring him close enough to his goals that negotiations in the fall are over a very different status quo in the war.

If the two men do meet, one apparent American objective is a trilateral summit with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to discuss an end to the war – the very summit format Russia rejected in Istanbul in May. The Russian purpose is likely to allow Putin to drag Trump back into the orbit of Moscow’s narrative.

Still, a summit – floated before, delayed before – may happen this time, and it raises the question of how the war might end. Here are five possible scenarios:

1. Putin agrees to an unconditional ceasefire

Highly unlikely. It’s improbable that Putin would agree to a ceasefire in which the front lines stay as they are – the United States, Europe and Ukraine already demanded such a pause in May, under the threat of sanctions, and Russia rejected it. Trump backed away from sanctions, preferring low-level talks in Istanbul which went nowhere. A 30-day ceasefire earlier this year against energy infrastructure met with limited adherence or success.

The Kremlin is currently turning incremental gains on the front line into strategic advantages and would see no point in stopping this progress now, as it reaches its height. Not even the threat of secondary sanctions against China and India – who appear resistant to US pressure – will change that immediate military calculus for the remainder of the summer. Until October, at least, Putin will want to fight because he is winning.

2. Pragmatism and more talks

The talks could agree on more talks later, that seal in Russian gains when winter sets in, freezing the front lines militarily and literally around October. Putin may have taken the eastern towns of Pokrovsk, Kostiantynivka and Kupiansk by then, giving him a solid position to sit the winter out and regroup. Russia can then fight again in 2026, or use diplomacy to make these gains permanent. Putin might also raise the specter of elections in Ukraine – delayed because of the war, and briefly a Trump talking point – to question the legitimacy of Zelensky and even unseat him for a more pro-Russian candidate.

3. Ukraine somehow weathers the two years ahead

In this scenario, US and European military aid to Ukraine helps them minimize concessions on the front line in the coming months, and leads Putin to seek to talk, as his military have yet again failed to deliver. Pokrovsk may fall and other eastern Ukrainian strongholds may be threatened, but Ukraine could see the Russian advance slow, as it has before, and the Kremlin could even feel the bite of sanctions and an overheating economy.

European powers have already formulated advanced plans for a “reassurance force” to be deployed to Ukraine as part of security guarantees. These tens of thousands of European NATO troops could sit around Kyiv and other major cities, providing logistical and intelligence help to Ukraine as it rebuilds, and create a sufficient deterrent that Moscow decides to leave the front lines as they are. This is the very best Ukraine can hope for.

And if Putin does not stop and diplomacy fails? The next options are not as clean:

4. Catastrophe for Ukraine and NATO

Putin could correctly see the cracks in Western unity after a summit with Trump that improves US-Russian relations but leaves Ukraine to fend for itself. Europe could do their utmost to back Kyiv, but fail to tip the balance without American backup. Putin could see small gains in the east of Ukraine transform into the slow rout of Ukrainian forces in the flat, open terrain between the Donbass and the central cities of Dnipro, Zaporizhzhia and the capital. Ukrainian defenses could prove weak, and Kyiv’s military manpower crisis turns into a political disaster when Zelensky demands wider mobilization to prop up the country’s defense.

Kyiv’s safety looks in peril again. Putin’s forces move forwards. Europe’s powers assess it would be better to fight Russia in Ukraine than later inside actual European Union territory. But Europe’s leaders ultimately lack the political mandate to join a war for land inside Ukraine. Putin moves forward. NATO fails to deliver a unified response. This is Europe’s nightmare, but is already the end of a sovereign Ukraine.

5. Disaster for Putin: a repeat of the Soviets in Afghanistan

Russia could blunder on, expending thousands of soldiers’ lives a week, for relatively small gains, and seeing sanctions erode his alliance with China, and revenue from India. Moscow’s sovereign wealth fund financial reserves could ebb, and its revenues dip. Dissent among the Moscow elite could rise at how the Kremlin has dismissed diplomatic off-ramps in its war of choice, in favor of military doggedness and an unsustainable proxy conflict with NATO. Trump becomes a lame duck, and the US focus after the mid-term elections returns to traditional foreign policy norms of opposing Moscow and its backer Beijing.

In this scenario, the Kremlin could meet a moment where its resistance to the banal inconveniences of reality, and the economic hardship of its own people, turns toxic. Similar poor political calculus sustained the Soviets’ ultimately fruitless occupation of Afghanistan in another war of choice. Similar moments of unexpected Kremlin weakness have already emerged in the Ukraine war, as when Putin’s confidante, Yevgeny Prigozhin, appears to have stumbled into leading a shortlived revolt on the capital.

Putin is strong on the surface, until he appears frail, and then he might be exposed as critically weak. It’s happened before to both an expansionist Soviet Russia, and Putin. The problem with this scenario is it remains the best hope of Western strategists who can neither entertain NATO’s full entry into the war to help Ukraine win, nor Kyiv’s ability to push Moscow back militarily.

None of the options are good for Ukraine. Only one of them spells the actual defeat of Russia as a military power and threat to European security. And none of them can spring from Trump meeting Putin alone, without Ukraine becoming part of any deal later.

3028X51NEWSWEEK

Trump and Putin Are Flexing Their Way Toward a Nuclear Stand-Off

By Tom O'Connor

Senior Writer, Foreign Policy & Deputy Editor, National Security and Foreign Policy

Published Aug 06, 2025 at 11:32 AM EDT Updated Aug 07, 2025 at 3:29 AM EDT

President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, long considered potential partners in their mutual quest to improve bilateral ties, are now on course for a showdown over stalled Ukraine talks that has the potential to push both powers—and their leaders—to the brink.

And as the two sides openly tout their nuclear capabilities ahead of a looming Friday deadline for peace talks imposed by the White House on the Kremlin, the erosion of longstanding arms control measures and channels of communication add a new element of risk to an already volatile situation.

"The problem with the heated rhetoric is that rhetoric sometimes turns into action in unpredictable ways, and that's what ought to concern us," Thomas Countryman, board chairman of the Arms Control Association and former U.S. assistant secretary of state for international security and nonproliferation, told Newsweek.

He argued that that the recent threats exchanged between Trump and Putin's ally, Deputy Security Council Chair Dmitry Medvedev, even the U.S. leader's order to deploy nuclear submarines, had yet to cross the threshold of a new step toward crisis but did add further uncertainty with potentially dangerous consequences.

"The absence not just of arms control agreements, but the absence of existing channels of communication between Washington and Moscow means that there always remains a risk of an accident becoming an incident, becoming a conflict, becoming a nuclear conflict," Countryman said.

Such a risk, while "low," he said, has risen to perhaps its greatest level since one of the most infamous nuclear-fueled stand-offs between Washington and Moscow.

"I think that the general misconception that the American public has is that the risk of nuclear war is so low that it can be ignored," Countryman said. "In fact, the Russians have the same capability to launch an attack on the United States as the U.S. has to launch an attack upon Russia."

"And while those risks may be low," he added, "they are probably higher than they have been at any time since the Cuban crisis of 1962."

A Call to Arms

The 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis marked one of the first instances in which the U.S. and the Soviet Union ultimately agreed to walk back their forward-deployed capabilities under threat of total war. Moscow agreed to pull back missiles deployed to communist-led Cuba, while Washington quietly withdrew its own weapons deployed to NATO ally Turkey.

Iran Threatens 'Graveyard' for Trump's New Peace Deal

· Trump Envoy Slammed for 'Damaging Incompetence' Over Putin Talks

· How NATO Is Using Creative Accounting to Meet Trump's Spending Demands

· How 'Trump Bridge' May Soon Reshape Warzone Bordering Russia, Iran, Turkey

The next year came the Limited Test Ban Treaty, the first-ever agreement among nuclear powers to restrict nuclear testing, followed by the landmark 1968 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and further U.S.-USSR talks that produced the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty and, just months before the collapse of the Soviet Union, the first Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I) in 1991.

While the multilateral Limited Test Ban Treaty was later expanded into the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and both Washington and Moscow remain parties to the NPT, bilateral arms control deals have almost entirely collapsed. The U.S. withdrew from the ABM in 2001 and the INF in 2019, while Russia announced its suspension of START I's successor, New START, in February 2023.

Though the U.S. and Russia continue to respect the limits set out by New START, the deal is set to expire altogether in February 2026 unless new action is taken.

"Clearly the rollback of arms control agreements is extremely unhelpful," Mallory Stewart, executive vice president of The Council on Strategic Risks and former U.S. assistant secretary for the Bureau of Arms Control, Deterrence, and Stability, told Newsweek.

"Arms Control is intended in large part to prevent misunderstanding, miscalculation, and unintentional escalation—the exact risks that are exacerbated during heightened tensions," Stewart said. "New START—when it was being implemented—helped prevent the destabilization of the U.S.-Russia relationship in many ways."

Trump's Arsenal

While Trump's order on August 1 to send "two nuclear submarines" to "the appropriate regions" did not necessarily constitute an added threat to the Kremlin—U.S. submarines have the capability to strike Russia from afar—the president does have other measures he could take that Stewart argued could raise the stakes for Putin.

"If Trump really wanted to threaten Russia, he could impose new sanctions; he could put direct tariffs on Russia (right now there are only secondary tariffs); or he could designate Russia a state sponsor of terrorism," Stewart said. "Trump could throw his full support behind Ukraine; he could reinforce extended deterrence alliances against Russia; and he could support Ukraine's membership in NATO."

"I'm not saying he should do all of this," she added, "but he hasn't done any of it."

Former NATO Deputy Secretary-General Rose Gottemoeller told Newsweek that "the current war of nuclear words between Moscow and Washington" amounted to "street theater."

Gottemoeller, who is also a former U.S. undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, also pointed out how the military situation has developed over the past decades in a way that European allies were becoming more immune to Moscow's front-line threats to the continent.

"In the 1980s, we were concerned about Soviet deployments of intermediate-range missiles, the SS-20, because they posed a fundamentally new threat to our European allies: short warning attack on their capitals," Gottemoeller, now a lecturer at Stanford University's Institute for International Studies and research fellow at the Hoover Institute, said.

"Nowadays, there are so many missile threats to European capitals from the Russian side—including naval missiles and the missiles that Putin has already deployed in Belarus—that we are somewhat inured to them," Gottemoeller said.

And while she noted that NATO nations remained vulnerable to Russian threats, she argued that the war in Ukraine had also begun to raise awareness of the need for more robust security among members of the U.S.-led alliance in Europe.

"Of course," Gottemoeller said, "the NATO allies are still weak on integrated air and missile defense, but the war in Ukraine is bringing home to European capitals that they need to be able to defend themselves against all kinds of missiles—including cruise missiles and attack drones that are being exchanged on a daily basis between Russia and Ukraine."

Putin's Options

Putin has long framed his foreign policy against deteriorating arms control and NATO expansion in Eastern Europe. Both trends have been a mainstay of his messaging since coming to power a quarter of a century ago and have featured heavily in his justification for waging war in Ukraine.

As such, Dmitry Stefanovich, research fellow at the Russian Academy of Sciences' Center for International Security, argues that if the U.S. were to embark on concerted military moves in Europe, even "symbolic," then "Russia has plenty of options to react in kind."

Such measures include, according to Stefanovich, increasing patrols of Russia's nuclear triad assets, namely missile submarines, road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and heavy bombers. The aerial component, he argued, could also be carried out near U.S. borders and potentially in joint patrols with China.

"If the situation will continue to degrade, Russian Strategic Rocket Forces might even carry out ICBM test launches from the deployment areas," Stefanovich told Newsweek, whereas "normally those take place from the designated test ranges, Plesetsk and Kapustin Yar."

Based on the Russian Foreign Ministry's statement Monday that it would no longer abide by a self-imposed moratorium on deploying platforms once banned by the INF, Stefanovich also predicted that "we will definitely see activation of new missile units with INF-range weapons of different types."

"However, the scope and tempo of such deployments can be very different depending on the overall strategic environment," Stefanovich said. "And if there will be more and more U.S. INF-range weapons appearing near Russian borders, Russia will respond with a measure announced long ago: move sea-based hypersonic weapon platforms closer to the U.S. coasts."

But when it comes to U.S. leverage against Russia over the war in Ukraine, he argued that "the most important U.S. and NATO contribution" to Kyiv's war effort has been the provision of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) and targeting data, platforms which are already active.

He argued "there is also not much that the U.S. can provide" to Kyiv in terms of weaponry, as "the stockpiles are almost depleted, and the biggest challenge lies in the extreme lack of manpower on the Ukrainian side."

Still, with threats now being exchanged at higher levels and greater tempos, he warned that the U.S. and Russia risked normalizing such nuclear-fueled rhetoric, laying the groundwork for the kind of crisis that both sides are in reality seeking to avoid.

"There is a very real threat of an even bigger crisis, and…no one wants this crisis," Stefanovich said, "but the logic of action and reaction cycles without normal diplomatic and military-to-military communications, not to mention near-absence of arms control mechanisms, can make it kind of a default scenario."

Alexander Chekov, lecturer at Moscow State Institute of International Relations' Department of International Relations and Foreign Policy of Russia, pointed out how "both the U.S. and Russia retain a shared interest in nuclear risk reduction, as demonstrated by their continued exchange of information on sea- and land-based missile launches in accordance with the 1988 Ballistic Missile Launch Notification Agreement" and continued adherence to New START's stockpile limits.

Yet he argued such norms had already given way to a new build-up that threatened to further degrade mutual reassurances and visibility for both sides.

"These surviving norms reflect a mutual desire to maintain some restraint in the ongoing arms race," Chekov told Newsweek. "However, should the arms control regime continue to crumble further, the result would be decreased predictability in strategic relations and elevated risks between the two powers."

MAD By Design

Since the debut Soviet nuclear test occurred in 1949, just four years after the U.S. dropped the first atomic bomb during World War II, the unofficial rule of nuclear warfare has been "mutually assured destruction," or MAD.

The Cuban Missile Crisis is just one example of Washington and Moscow resorting to nuclear threats to avoid a kinetic confrontation. When the Soviet Union considered intervention a decade later in the 1973 Arab-Israeli Yom Kippur War, the U.S. placed its nuclear forces on worldwide alert, sparking another crisis that ultimately resolved with a ceasefire.

Matthew Kroenig, vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council's Snowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, thus argues that the U.S. should "relearn some of those lessons of nuclear brinkmanship from the Cold War, and thank goodness Trump seems to understand them instinctively."

Kroenig, who is also a former U.S. defense and intelligence official now serving on the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States, pointed out that such moves were not being taken in a vacuum, but rather as part of a dual strategy consisting of both military threats and diplomatic engagement, underlined by the visit to Russia on Wednesday by Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, to meet with Putin.

"I think in general, a pressure and engagement strategy works pretty well," Kroenig told Newsweek. "And this is what the United States has done over the years with other countries."

"And essentially the message is, so long as you continue on this path, it's contrary to our interest, in this case, engaging in a war in Ukraine, we're going to make life difficult for you with nuclear threats, more assistance to Ukraine, sanctions, etc.," Kroenig said. "But if you're willing to come to the table and negotiate, then we're here and we're willing, and we're waiting."

Kroenig acknowledged that such tactics carry with them inherent risks of inadvertent escalation, perhaps especially at a time when he felt that the U.S. and Russia were facing "the end of negotiated arms control limits for the first time since the 1970s, which will mean a loss of transparency."

At the same time, he argued, that was precisely the point.

"If these moves were completely safe, they wouldn't put any pressure on Putin at all," Kroenig said. "But the fact that they are dangerous is what's supposed to make Putin think twice. So, I don't see imminent nuclear war, but I think it's raising the risk."

"Early nuclear strategists referred to nuclear brinkmanship essentially as a game of chicken," he added. "The entire purpose is to raise the risk, to force the adversary to back down."

X04

3129X04 FROM USA TODAY

Vance says Ukraine peace deal unlikely to satisfy either side

By Nandita Bose

Vice President JD Vance said a negotiated settlement between Russia and Ukraine was unlikely to satisfy either side, and that any peace deal will likely leave both Moscow and Kyiv "unhappy."

He said the U.S. is aiming for a settlement both countries can accept.

"It's not going to make anybody super happy. Both the Russians and the Ukrainians, probably, at the end of the day, are going to be unhappy with it," he said on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures" with Maria Bartiromo.

President Donald Trump said on Friday he will meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin on August 15 in Alaska to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine.

Trump said Russia and Ukraine were close to a ceasefire deal that could end the three-and-a-half-year-old conflict, possibly requiring Ukraine to surrender significant territory.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, however, said on Saturday that Ukraine cannot violate its constitution on territorial issues, adding, "Ukrainians will not gift their land to the occupiers."

In the Fox News interview recorded last week, Vance said the United States was working to schedule talks between Putin, Zelenskyy and Trump, but he did not think it would be productive for Putin to meet with Zelenskyy before speaking with Trump.

"We're at a point now where we're trying to figure out, frankly, scheduling and things like that, around when these three leaders could sit down and discuss an end to this conflict," he said.

(Reporting by Nandita Bose in Washington Editing by Deepa Babington and Matthew Lewis)

3230X91 from USA TODAY

Trump pushes Ukraine to agree to 'land swap' with Russia ahead of Putin summit

President Donald Trump laid out expectations for a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, where he said he hoped to 'feel out' the leader's willingness to end the Ukraine war.

By Francesca Chambers

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump again raised the idea of a "land swap" that would see Ukraine give up territory to Russia after his previous proposal drew pushback from European leaders and was rejected by Ukraine's president.

Trump said he was "a little bothered" by Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's assertion over the weekend that it would violate his country's constitution to cede territory to Moscow that Russia captured in its unprovoked invasion.

"He's got approval to go into a war and kill everybody, but he needs approval to do a land swap? Because there'll be some landswapping going on. I know that through Russia and through conversations with everybody," Trump told reporters during an Aug. 11 news conference.

He said some of the moves will be good for Ukraine – but some will be bad.

"It's very complex, because you have lines that are very uneven," Trump declared. "There will be some swapping. There will be some changes in land, and the word that they will use is, they make changes. We're going to change the lines, the battlelines."

Trump made the comments as he laid out his expectations for a summit this week with Vladimir Putin, where he said he hoped to "feel out" the Russian leader's willingness to reach an agreement to end the war.

The conflict began in 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine. Russia currently controls roughly 20% of Ukraine.

The administration has not shared additional details on the format for Trump's summit with Putin beyond the fact that it's scheduled for Aug. 15 in Alaska, a territory the United States purchased from Russia in 1867.

"This is really a feel-out meeting, a little bit. And President Putin invited me to get involved," Trump told reporters.

Trump said he planned to call Zelenskyy, who is not expected to attend, and European leaders immediately after the meeting and tell them what Putin offered.

"I'm not going to make a deal. It's not up to me to make a deal," Trump declared.

Trump says he'll push Putin to end Ukraine war

The sanctions that Trump said he'd be putting on Putin if a deal was not reached by Aug. 8 also appeared to be on hold as the leaders prepared for their in-person meeting. Trump made an example out of India, hiking tariffs on the country's products to 50% for buying Russian oil, ahead of the sanctions deadline.

Trump acknowledged at a news conference that he's been disappointed by Putin in the past but said he feels obligated to try to solve the war.

The president said he thought it was "respectful" of Putin to come to the United States rather than holding the summit in Russia or another country. "I think we'll have constructive conversations," Trump said.

Trump suggested that the simple act of confronting Putin to his face could persuade the Russian leader, repeating claims that the war wouldn't have started if he were president when it began.

"I'm going in to speak to Vladimir Putin, and I'm going to be telling him, 'you've got to end this war. You've got to end it,'" Trump said. "He wasn't going to mess with me. This war would have never happened."

Alluding to previous claims that the Ukraine could have prevented Putin from invading, Trump said: "I get along with Zelenskyy, but you know I disagree with what he's done, very, very severely disagree. This is a war that should have never happened, wouldn't have happened."

Trump said he would like Putin and Zelenskyy to meet next, possibly with him. Yet, he also said he could walk away from the war after his talk with Putin if he believes there's no hope for a settlement.

"I'm going to go and see the parameters. Now I may leave, and say, 'good luck,' and that will be the end. I may say, 'this is not going to be settled,'" Trump said.

Trump said during an Aug. 8 White House event that "some swapping of territories" would be taking place. "We’re looking at swapping. We’re going to get some back," he said.

Zelenskyy said in a thread on X the following day that the war can't be ended without Ukraine's approval: "The answer to the Ukrainian territorial question already is in the Constitution of Ukraine. No one will deviate from this—and no one will be able to. Ukrainians will not gift their land to the occupier."

3331X FROM IUK

White House downplays expectations for Trump-Putin meeting, calling it just a step toward peace

Trump and Putin will meet in Anchorage on Friday

Trump says he will know if Putin is ready to make Ukraine peace deal within two minutes

By Andrew Feinberg in Washington, D.C. Wednesday 13 August 2025 07:45 BST

More than 200 days after Donald Trump’s self-imposed deadline to end Russia’s war against Ukraine on the first day of his second term, the White House is quietly acknowledging that his upcoming summit with Russian president Vladimir Putin isn’t likely to result in a ceasefire.

The president and his Russian counterpart are set to meet Friday for a hastily arranged sit-down in Alaska, giving Putin the honor of being welcomed onto American territory by an American president and bringing an end to the international isolation he has faced since launching the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

On Monday, Trump said he may well know whether Putin is truly interested in reaching an agreement to end the war he started within just two minutes of sitting down with the Russian leader.

Speaking to reporters during a press conference in the White House briefing room, he said: “I may say, ‘lots of luck, keep fighting,’ or I may say we can make a deal.”

That deal, according to Trump, could involve swapping parcels of land between Russian and Ukrainian control in exchange for peace. It’s an idea that has also been broached by NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte as well. But Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has rejected such an option on multiple occasions.

Recommended

· Ukraine-Russia war latest: Zelensky warns Putin will launch new war from land gained in Trump deal

· Putin calls North Korea’s Kim to promise ‘closer contact’ ahead of Trump summit

· Mapped: What parts of Ukraine does Russia control as Trump suggests land swap for peace?

A White House official who spoke to Politico ahead of the summit said Putin, who met with Trump envoy Steve Witkoff last week, asked for the meeting with the president and suggested a solution to the conflict. However, White House officials are now saying that the meeting might not mean a concrete deal for peace.

Also Recommended

· Everything we know as Trump meets with European leaders and Zelensky for emergency virtual summit

· Trump’s Alaskan summit with Putin is high stakes – why is it not just a sideshow?

· Trump suggests both Ukraine and Russia will have to give up land for peace

· Starmer set to speak to Trump alongside European leaders ahead of Putin meeting

“It may not be a viable plan, but there was something on paper, which shows progress,” the official said.

The official added that Trump saw Putin’s willingness to meet as “progress” and is willing to “hear him out,” while a second White House official said Trump would use the meeting to “gauge how serious Putin is about peace.”

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt similarly appeared to lower expectations when she was asked about Trump’s outlook on the sit-down, calling it “a listening exercise for the President” and acknowledging that Zelensky’s absence would make it difficult if not impossible for any real solution to the conflict to emerge from the bilateral talks.

“Look, only one party that's involved in this war is going to be present, and so this is for the President to go and to get ... a more firm and better understanding of of how we can hopefully bring this war to an end,” she said.

“The President inherited this conflict, and he is determined to end it. And it's a very complex and complicated situation.”

Leavitt also added that Trump “ hopes in the future there can be a trilateral meeting” between him, Putin and Zelensky to “finally bring this conflict to an end” while claiming that Trump has “really used every lever” and “taken every measure to to achieve peace through a diplomatic solution.”

“I think the President of the United States getting in the room with the President of Russia, sitting face to face, rather than speaking over the telephone, will give this president the best indication of how to end this war and where this is headed,” she said.

And…

3432X FROM IUK

How Russia’s war on Ukraine led to crucial Trump-Putin summit - and why the stakes are so high

World affairs editor Sam Kiley looks what all sides want and what hopes there are for a ceasefire, ahead of what could be a pivotal meeting on the Ukraine war

Wednesday 13 August 2025 15:01 BST

Donald Trump is meeting Vladimir Putin in Alaska in what the US president has said may be little more than a “look see”, but in truth may prove an encounter that defines Europe -and global security - for decades.

From Trump’s perspective, the summit may be part of his drive for a Nobel Peace Prize by ending Putin’s war against Ukraine using the “art of the deal”. Putin, however, is likely to prevail and his agenda is the art of the steal – specifically a massive grab of his neighbour’s land.

Missing from the meeting is the country most affected – Ukraine itself. Led by Volodymyr Zelensky, it has held out against the Kremlin for 11 years.

Trump, Putin, and many others (including parts of the media) seem to think that Ukraine’s future can be decided by the two nuclear powers and then presented to Kyiv as a done deal.

Europe, the region most affected by what happens in Ukraine, has worked hard to underline that that is neither true nor sensible – while simultaneously keeping the mercurial US president “on side” when every indication is that he’s firmly in Russia’s camp.

Recommended

· Ukraine-Russia war latest: Zelensky warns Putin will launch new war from land gained in Trump deal

· Mapped: What parts of Ukraine does Russia control as Trump suggests land swap for peace?

· Things to know about Alaska ahead of Friday’s Trump-Putin summit

Here’s how things currently stand.

How Russia and Ukraine ended up at war in 2022

In 1994, Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal in return for written guarantees from Russia, the US and the UK to respect Ukrainian sovereignty.

Twenty years later, Russia ignored those guarantees and invaded the Crimean Peninsula, claiming the land for itself and the right to protect Russian-speaking people in eastern Ukraine.

Putin annexed Crimea illegally, sponsoring “rebels” and sending troops into eastern Ukraine to capture large areas of Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts (provinces).

The US, Europe and the UK did nothing to help or protect Ukraine, even banning lethal arms exports to the embattled nation.

In 2022, the Russian president went one step further and launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. He was stunned that it stalled and then failed. Limited weapons supplies from the US and UK helped partisans and Ukrainian forces hold the Russians back and then turn them around.

Ferocious fighting turned the front lines into a “meat grinder” conflict of attrition, with the exception of summer 2022, where Ukraine managed to recapture large areas of territory.

Three years on and Russia now holds almost all of Luhansk oblast, much of Donetsk, a significant area of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, and all of Crimea.

Still fighting determinedly, Ukraine has a toehold inside Russian territory in Kursk and has been conducting punishing attacks deep into Russian territory.

In response, Russia has stepped up drone and missile attacks across Ukraine, often launching 500 in a single night.

In the Black Sea, Russia’s navy has been driven out by Ukraine, which doesn’t have a navy to speak of, using special forces and drone attacks.

What Russia wants

Putin has repeatedly said that there is no nation called “Ukraine” and that its territory is naturally part of Russia. His imperial ambitions are underpinned by Russia’s conquest of much of modern eastern Ukraine by Catherine the Great in the 18th century.

But above all, the Russian president is driven by a colonel’s Soviet mentality that led to Moscow’s attempts to annihilate the Ukrainian language, history and culture.

As a condition of a ceasefire of any kind, Russia has demanded that Ukraine withdraw its forces from territories Moscow claims as its own, including the entirety of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson oblasts.

In a memorandum circulated at the Istanbul talks in March, Russia insisted a 30-day ceasefire would only take effect once Ukraine had fully pulled back from these four regions.

Russia also insists that Ukraine formally recognise all of Crimea and the four annexed oblasts as Russian territory in any future peace treaty.

This “international legal recognition” would enshrine Russia’s gains, obliging Kyiv to abandon any claim on those lands and to lift sanctions against Russia as part of a comprehensive settlement.

Moscow also insists that Ukraine amend its constitution to enshrine permanent neutrality. This means giving up on its constitutionally mandated effort to join Nato.

Ukraine must also be left vulnerable, with the banning of third-party foreign military bases from its territory, a ban on Western arms deliveries, and the prohibition of “neo-Nazi ideology,” which Russia uses to justify a forced “denazification” of Ukrainian society.

Longer term, Putin has demanded that the Russian language should have equal status with Ukrainian as an official language.

In return, Ukraine will get no guarantee that Russia’s ambitions will stop at the five regions it has already taken as part of a ceasefire.

What Trump is trying to achieve

The US had been supporting Ukraine but was quick to turn on Zelensky, drop military aid, cut civilian support, weaken intelligence sharing, to swing firmly behind Putin in supporting Russian demands long before talks were even close to starting.

Trump’s latest pitch is that Ukraine should accept territorial losses. Some kind of a “land swap” has been mooted, but this is Ukrainian territory for Ukrainian territory. This is ahead of a ceasefire, let alone a long-term peace.

This could mean Ukraine would cede the remaining parts of Donetsk that it still controls in exchange for Russia freezing its lines in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson.

Trump has also said there would be no US element to any future force to guarantee a longer-term peace deal in Ukraine.

The US president has weakened Ukraine by cutting military aid. The US had given about $114bn to Ukraine. That figure is now zero.

Trump now insists that Ukraine and its allies purchase weapons from the US. He has also forced a minerals deal on Ukraine that swaps profits from resources for arms.

What Ukraine is hoping will happen

Constitutionally, Zelensky can make no territorial concessions as part of a ceasefire. He would need a nationwide referendum to do so.

He also cannot abandon Ukraine’s attempts to join Nato as this has been enshrined in Ukrainian law since 2019. He’d need a referendum to change this.

Kyiv demands a full and unconditional ceasefire as the only basis for genuine negotiations and rejects any proposal that would require it to abandon its ambitions.

It sees Russian demands that Ukraine become neutral as “an attack on its sovereignty”.

Ukraine also insists on binding security guarantees from its Western partners, covering political, financial, military and diplomatic support.

And how does Europe fit into all this?

Slow to respond to Russia’s invasion, Europe is now by far the biggest donor in terms of weapons, money, and other aid to Ukraine. In total, some €250bn has been pledged by the EU and UK.

The European mantra of “no talks about Ukraine without Ukraine” has been ignored by Trump and Putin. The US is saying only that Zelensky and then European leaders will get a call from Trump after he’s finished talking to the Russian president.

Europe insists that only Ukraine make decisions on territorial changes, its long-term neutrality and all other sovereign issues.

By threatening the viability of Nato itself, Trump has forced Europe into huge increases in military spending towards a target of 5 per cent of GDP.

Poland, the Baltic states, Finland and others in Scandinavia are preparing their populations to withstand potential Russian incursions.

See charts, graphs and maps here

3533X FROM GUK

Trump swallowing Putin’s lies is a bigger threat to Ukraine than bombs

In Alaska the Russian leader will claim to want peace, but only on his terms – and play on the president’s desperation to ‘make a deal’ quickly

By Rafael Behr Wed 13 Aug 2025 01.00 EDT

Wars do not have to be won. Total victories loom largest in the popular imagination because those are the stories nations always tell to sustain patriotic feeling. The fuller version of history is written in stalemates.

That is worth remembering when Donald Trump meets Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday. Both leaders have incentives to pretend that Ukraine’s fate can be settled decisively without any Ukrainians at the negotiating table. That doesn’t make it so.

For the US president, this is a project of personal vanity. He promised to end the war within days of returning to the White House. The persistence of hostilities seven months after his inauguration is a rebuke to his self-image as the world’s master dealmaker.

Putin also once thought the war could be concluded swiftly. He launched his all-out invasion in February 2022 expecting Kyiv to fall within weeks. When Ukrainian resistance thwarted that plan, the Russian president switched to a long game of attrition, relying on superior troop numbers and aerial bombardment to degrade Ukraine’s viability as a sovereign state. Russia’s industrial base and public opinion have been fired up for perpetual war. Kremlin propagandists boast of the nation’s limitless military stamina, while Russian commanders keep promising to break through enemy lines and initiate the long-awaited capitulation.

Russia is ‘making movements’ that indicate it is preparing for a new offensive, Zelenskyy says – as it happened

Putin has to believe in the inevitability of Ukrainian defeat because any other scenario – even a ceasefire that allows him to hold territory captured so far – leaves the historic mission he set himself unfulfilled. He will harbour a vengeful grievance for as long as Volodymyr Zelenskyy is president of a country that is free to arm itself and pursue an independent policy of integration with other European democracies.

Any border or treaty that prevents the Kremlin dictating Ukraine’s strategic orientation is illegitimate in Putin’s eyes. That won’t prevent him signing bits of paper as a tactical expedient. The Russian president recognises that he has tested his American counterpart’s patience. He has lost ground to Zelenskyy in the competition to shape Trump’s explanation for why the war persists when he has called for peace.

The Ukrainian president has bounced back from his televised humiliation in the White House in February, when he was harangued for ingratitude and blamed for inciting the invasion of his own country. Deft diplomacy, underwritten by Nato leaders pledging to pay Kyiv’s military bills, bought a sliver of recognition from Trump that maybe things were more complicated than previously thought; that Putin was prone to “bullshit”; that his professed interest in peace was contradicted by the volume of bombs he kept dropping on Ukrainian civilians.

The Alaska powwow is happening because Trump started setting ceasefire deadlines and threatening Moscow with sanctions. Putin needed to offer some affectation of willingness to compromise. He calculated that the spectacle of a summit, combined with some artfully ambiguous signals around “land swaps”, would appeal to Trump’s confidence in his own charisma and his belief that a deal is there for the doing.

Putin will use the encounter to frame the conflict in terms that chime with Trump’s warped and historically illiterate reading of the story. It is the version in which a devious, criminal Zelenskyy bamboozles a senescent Joe Biden into throwing away heaps of US treasure on a crazy, losing bet. The war is nearly won anyway, Putin will say. Ukraine cannot prevail, but can sucker its allies into throwing good money after bad. He will outline a future of lucrative commercial relations between two great powers whose potential friendship has been sabotaged by a roguish European province that hardly even counts as a proper country. He will make grotesque territorial claims, covering places not yet conquered by Russian troops, and present this as the bare minimum of a reasonable allocation of land to Moscow. He will insist on Ukrainian “demilitarisation” – in effect guaranteeing the country’s vulnerability to some future incursion – and call it essential for the sake of Russian security. We know these are the demands because Putin has been making them for months. He restated them earlier this month.

Trump doesn’t have to fall in a bromantic swoon at Putin’s feet to make the summit a success for Russia. The damage will be done if he emerges from negotiations parroting talking points from the Kremlin script. The fear among Ukraine’s European allies is that he will proudly outline a ceasefire proposal on terms that Zelenskyy cannot possibly accept – an unjust, unworkable partition of his country along lines drawn by the tyrant who invaded it. Putin will then claim that he tried to talk peace and only Ukrainian intransigence prolongs the war.

Less bleak scenarios are conceivable. Trump’s newfound scepticism about Putin might withstand corrosion by flattery. The Russian leader’s confidence in an imminent battlefield breakthrough might prove misplaced – a symptom of the brittle, authoritarian ego that only gives audience to sycophants bearing good tidings. He might be overestimating Russia’s economic resilience against sanctions. He might one day find ordinary Russians losing the will to sacrifice a generation of young men for a goal of national redemption that keeps receding over the horizon.

When the domestic economic and political incentives change, Putin will get serious about a ceasefire. The task of Ukraine’s allies is to hasten that moment by sustaining maximum military aid to Kyiv and financial pressure on Moscow. Even then, a settlement would realistically leave some Ukrainian land under de facto permanent Russian occupation, behind heavily fortified lines. It will be a stalemate backed with sufficient deterrents to turn a hot war cold. It could end up looking something like the demilitarised zone on the Korean peninsula, separating two sides that are technically still at war, although the armistice was signed in 1953.

For now, the challenge for Zelenskyy and his allies is handling a US president who talks about war and peace in terms detached from any moral, historical or strategic context. Trump draws no meaningful distinction between a settlement that allows Ukraine to thrive as an independent state and one that satisfies the appetite of a Russian president bent on conquest. He values two kinds of deal – those that make him richer, and those that allow him to luxuriate in the status of a great dealmaker. If he thinks such benefits are available by abandoning American allies and interests there is no reason to think he wouldn’t do it.

That will be Putin’s aim in Alaska. He has no intention of ending the war just because the White House demands it, but he knows he must pretend to want peace. And he knows his best hope of defeating Ukraine is to manipulate Trump into bullying Kyiv towards capitulation, while imagining that his own humiliation at Kremlin hands is some kind of personal victory.

· Rafael Behr is a Guardian columnist

3634X92 FROM ESPN

Texas ranked No. 1 in preseason AP Top 25 for first time

By the Associated Press

Aug 11, 2025, 12:07 PM ET

For the first time, Texas will open a college football season ranked No. 1 in The Associated Press Top 25.

The Longhorns hardly have a mandate in the poll released Monday: They edged out Penn State by just five points in the closest preseason vote since 1998.

Texas received 25 first-place votes and 1,552 points to give the Southeastern Conference the preseason No. 1 team for a record fifth straight year. The Nittany Lions got 23 first-place votes and 1,547 points for their highest preseason ranking since they were No. 1 to open the 1997 season.

Associated Press Preseason Top 25

The top 25 teams in the AP preseason poll, released Monday.

1. Texas (25)

2. Penn State (23)

3. Ohio State (11)

4. Clemson (4)

5. Georgia (1)

6. Notre Dame

7. Oregon (1)

8. Alabama

9. LSU

10. Miami

11. Arizona State

12. Illinois

13. South Carolina

14. Michigan

15. Florida

16. SMU

17. Kansas State

18. Oklahoma

19. Texas A&M

20. Indiana

21. Mississippi

22. Iowa State

23. Texas Tech

24. Tennessee

25. Boise State

First-place votes in parenthesis

ATTACHMENT “A” – FROM the INSTITUTE for the STUDY of WAR (ISW)

Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, August 9, 2025

Angelica Evans, Anna Harvey, Daria Novikov, Jennie Olmsted, and Frederick W. Kagan

August 9, 2025, 6:45 pm ET

Click here to see ISW’s interactive map of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This map is updated daily alongside the static maps present in this report.

Click here to see ISW's interactive map of Ukraine's offensive in Kursk Oblast.

Click here to see ISW’s 3D control of terrain topographic map of Ukraine. Use of a computer (not a mobile device) is strongly recommended for using this data-heavy tool.

Click here to access ISW’s archive of interactive time-lapse maps of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. These maps complement the static control-of-terrain map that ISW produces daily by showing a dynamic frontline. ISW will update this time-lapse map archive monthly.

Note: The data cut-off for this product was 1:00 pm ET on August 9. ISW will cover subsequent reports in the August 10 Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment.

The Trump Administration has described Russian President Vladimir Putin's reported demands for a ceasefire in Ukraine in four different ways since August 6. The exact details of Putin's position remain unclear. German outlet BILD reported on August 9 that US Special Envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff misunderstood Putin's demand for Ukraine to withdraw from the remainder of Zaporizhia and Kherson oblasts, in addition to the remainder of Donetsk Oblast, as an offer for Russia to withdraw from occupied Zaporizhia and Kherson oblasts during the August 6 Putin-Witkoff meeting.[1] BILD reported that Witkoff also misunderstood Putin's proposal for an energy infrastructure and long-range strikes ceasefire, and that Witkoff interpreted Putin's offer as a general ceasefire that would curtail frontline military activity. The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported that European officials familiar with the conversation and call stated that US President Donald Trump, presumably after being briefed by Witkoff, told Ukrainian and European officials on August 6 that Putin would withdraw from occupied Zaporizhia and Kherson oblasts in exchange for Ukraine ceding unoccupied areas of Donetsk Oblast.[2] The officials told WSJ that Witkoff walked back Trump's statement during a call with European officials on August 7 and stated that Russia would "both withdraw and freeze" the frontline, presumably referring to Zaporizhia and Kherson oblasts. European officials reportedly asked Witkoff to further clarify Putin's demand during a call on August 8, and Witkoff stated that the "only offer" on the table was for Ukraine to unilaterally withdraw from Donetsk Oblast in exchange for a ceasefire. Ukrainian outlet Kyiv Independent reported that a source in Ukraine's Presidential Office briefed on the Putin-Witkoff meeting, presumably by Witkoff himself, stated that Putin also offered to withdraw from northeastern Kharkiv and Sumy oblasts as a "sign of goodwill" in exchange for Ukraine ceding the remainder of unoccupied Donetsk Oblast.[3] The source stated that Putin reportedly told Witkoff that Putin would be willing to freeze the frontline in Zaporizhia and Kherson oblasts. Bloomberg reported on August 8 that unnamed sources stated that Putin demanded that Ukraine withdraw from the entirety of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts and concede occupied Crimea to Russia in exchange for freezing the frontline in Kherson and Zaporizhia oblasts and beginning negotiations on a ceasefire agreement.[4] It remains unclear, based on Western reporting, if Putin ever truly offered to withdraw from occupied Zaporizhia and Kherson oblasts. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky rejected Putin's demand.[5]

The only element of Putin's reported position common to all reports is Putin's continued demand for Ukraine to withdraw from unoccupied areas of Donetsk Oblast — a major Ukrainian concession. Conceding to such a demand would force Ukraine to abandon its "fortress belt," the main fortified defensive line in Donetsk Oblast since 2014 — with no guarantee that fighting will not resume.[6] Ukraine's fortress belt stymied Russian advances in Donetsk Oblast in 2014 and 2022 and is still impeding Russia's efforts to seize the remainder of Donetsk Oblast in 2025, as ISW has recently described. The fortress belt is a significant obstacle to Russia's current path of advance westward in Ukraine, and surrendering the remainder of Donetsk Oblast as the prerequisite of a ceasefire with no commitment to a final peace settlement would position Russian forces extremely well to renew their attacks on more favorable terms, having avoided a long and bloody struggle for the ground.[7]

Ukrainian and European officials reportedly presented a counterproposal to US officials on August 9 as European officials continue to issue statements of support for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. WSJ reported on August 9 that Ukraine and European leaders proposed a counteroffer to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s demands for Ukrainian territorial concessions as a precondition to ceasefire during a meeting with US Vice President JD Vance in the United Kingdom (UK) on August 9.[8] WSJ reported that the counteroffer stipulates that a full ceasefire in Ukraine must be implemented prior to territorial negotiations, in accordance with US President Donald Trump’s previously articulated preferred timeline for an end to Russia’s war against Ukraine.[9] WSJ reported that the counteroffer also states that territorial exchanges should be conducted in a reciprocal manner and that Ukraine must receive robust security guarantees in exchange for any Ukrainian territorial concessions to prevent future Russian aggression against Ukraine. WSJ reported that Finnish President Alexander Stubb presented the Ukrainian-European counterproposal to Trump during a phone call on August 9. European leaders, including UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron, Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna, Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kęstutis Budrys, Latvian Foreign Minister Baiba Braze, and Romanian Foreign Minister Toiu Oana, expressed support for Ukraine’s efforts to achieve a just and lasting resolution to Russia’s war on August 9.[10]

Russian officials welcomed the announcement that US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin will meet in Alaska on August 15 and referenced Russian narratives about Russia's historical claims to Alaska. Russian Presidential Aide Yuriy Ushakov claimed that Alaska is a logical meeting place due to the fact that the United States and Russia are close neighbors across the Bering Strait and economic interests in Alaska and the Arctic region.[11] Leading Russian negotiator and Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) CEO Kirill Dmitriev, who attended the August 6 meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US Special Envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff, described Alaska on August 9 as "a Russian-born American" and claimed that Alaska reflects the ties between the United States and Russia.[12] Dmitriev also noted Alaska's historic ties to the Russian Orthodox Church and Russia's past military and economic presence in Alaska.[13] Russian officials and state media have previously claimed that the United States should return Alaska to Russia. Russian Security Council Deputy Chairperson Dmitry Medvedev claimed in January 2024 that Russia has been waiting for the United States to return Alaska "any day" in response to a US Department of State statement to the contrary.[14] Russian TV hosts and propagandists Vladimir Solovyov and Olga Skabeyeva repeatedly claimed in 2024 that the United States should return Alaska to Russia.[15] Russian State Duma Chairperson Vyacheslav Volodin claimed in July 2022 that Russia would claim Alaska as its own if the United States froze foreign-based Russian assets.[16] Russian state media outlet RT claimed in October 2018 that Russia should demand Alaska back from the United States after the United States withdrew from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty.[17]

Ukraine continues its long-range drone strike campaign against Russian military and defense industrial base (DIB) facilities. Ukraine's Security Service (SBU) reported on August 9 that it conducted a drone strike against a Russian Shahed drone warehouse in Kzyl Yul, Republic of Tatarstan and that the drone strike started a fire at the warehouse.[18] The SBU stated that Russia stored Shahed drones and related foreign-sourced components at the facility. Kzyl Yul is located roughly 43 kilometers from the Alabuga Special Economic Zone (SEZ) near Yelabuga, Republic of Tatarstan, where Russia has based a large-scale Shahed drone production facility.[19] Ukrainian outlets Suspilne and Militarnyi reported that sources within Ukraine's Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) stated that GUR conducted a sabotage operation in Afipsky, Krasnodar Krai on August 8, causing two explosions near a checkpoint on the Russian 90th Anti-Aircraft Missile Brigade's (49th Combined Arms Army [CAA], Southern Military District [SMD]) base.[20]

Russian milbloggers claimed that the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) replaced Northern Grouping of Forces and Leningrad Military District (LMD) Commander Colonel General Alexander Lapin with Chief of Staff of the Russian Ground Forces Colonel General Yevgeny Nikiforov. Several Russian milbloggers claimed on August 8 that the Russian military command appointed Nikiforov as the new commander of the Russian Northern Grouping of Forces, replacing Lapin, who has held the position since Fall 2024.[21] Russian milbloggers have been highly critical of Lapin for Russia’s failure to establish a buffer zone in northern Sumy and Kharkiv oblasts.[22] Nikiforov has reportedly been overseeing Russia's response to the August 2025 Ukrainian incursion into Kursk Oblast and subsequent Russian offensive into northern Sumy Oblast alongside Lapin since mid-August 2024.[23] A Kremlin insider source claimed that Russian Deputy Defense Minister Yunus-Bek Yevkurov is a close ally of Nikiforov and likely had a role in Nikiforov’s appointment.[24] Neither Russian state media nor the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) has yet confirmed Nikiforov's appointment, and Lapin's next assignment remains unclear.

Key Takeaways:

· The Trump Administration has described Russian President Vladimir Putin's reported demands for a ceasefire in Ukraine in four different ways since August 6. The exact details of Putin's position remain unclear.

· The only element of Putin's reported position common to all reports is Putin's continued demand for Ukraine to withdraw from unoccupied areas of Donetsk Oblast — a major Ukrainian concession.

· Ukrainian and European officials reportedly presented a counterproposal to US officials on August 9 as European officials continue to issue statements of support for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity.

· Russian officials welcomed the announcement that US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin will meet in Alaska on August 15 and referenced Russian narratives about Russia's historical claims to Alaska.

· Ukraine continues its long-range drone strike campaign against Russian military and defense industrial base (DIB) facilities.

· Russian milbloggers claimed that the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) replaced Northern Grouping of Forces and Leningrad Military District (LMD) Commander Colonel General Alexander Lapin with Chief of Staff of the Russian Ground Forces Colonel General Yevgeny Nikiforov.

· Ukrainian forces advanced near Kupyansk.

We do not report in detail on Russian war crimes because these activities are well-covered in Western media and do not directly affect the military operations we are assessing and forecasting. We will continue to evaluate and report on the effects of these criminal activities on the Ukrainian military and the Ukrainian population and specifically on combat in Ukrainian urban areas. We utterly condemn Russian violations of the laws of armed conflict and the Geneva Conventions and crimes against humanity even though we do not describe them in these reports. 

· Ukrainian Operations in the Russian Federation

· Russian Supporting Effort – Northern Axis

· Russian Main Effort – Eastern Ukraine (comprised of three subordinate main efforts)

· Russian Subordinate Main Effort #1 – Push Ukrainian forces back from the international border with Belgorod Oblast and approach to within tube artillery range of Kharkiv City

· Russian Subordinate Main Effort #2 – Capture the remainder of Luhansk Oblast and push westward into eastern Kharkiv Oblast and encircle northern Donetsk Oblast

· Russian Subordinate Main Effort #3 – Capture the entirety of Donetsk Oblast, the claimed territory of Russia’s proxies in Donbas, and possibly advance into Dnipropetrovsk Oblast

· Russian Supporting Effort – Southern Axis

· Russian Air, Missile, and Drone Campaign

· Significant Activity in Belarus

Ukrainian Operations in the Russian Federation

Fighting continued in unspecified areas of Kursk Oblast on August 8 and 9, but there were no advances.[25]

Russian milbloggers claimed that Ukrainian forces attempted to cross the border near Malev, Bryansk Oblast (southwest of Bryansk City) on August 9.[26]

Russian sources claimed on August 9 that Ukrainian forces attacked toward Tetkino and near Novyi Put (both southwest of Glushkovo) and near Demidovka (northwest of Belgorod City).[27]

Russian Supporting Effort – Northern Axis (Russian objective: Create defensible buffer zones in northern Ukraine along the international border and approach to within tube artillery range of Sumy City)

Fighting continued in northern Sumy Oblast on August 9.

Unconfirmed claims: A Russian milblogger reportedly affiliated with the Russian Northern Group of Forces claimed on August 9 that Ukrainian forces crossed into Kursk Oblast near Novokostyantynivka (north of Sumy City) and that Russian forces retreated from Stepne (northwest of Sumy City) and Novokostyantynivka.[28] A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian forces advanced in Yunakivka (northeast of Sumy City).[29]

Russian forces attacked in northern Sumy Oblast, including north of Sumy City near Kindrativka, Andriivka, and Oleksiivka and toward Novokostyantynivka and northeast of Sumy City near Yunakivka, on August 8 and 9.[30] A Russian milblogger claimed that Ukrainian forces counterattacked in Yunakivka.[31]

Order of Battle: Elements of the Russian 51st Airborne (VDV) Regiment (106th VDV Division) are reportedly operating in Sadky (northeast of Sumy City).[32] Elements of the Russian 11th Separate VDV Brigade and 234th VDV Regiment (76th VDV Division) reportedly relieved the 83rd Separate VDV Brigade in the Sumy direction.[33] Additional elements of the 76th VDV Division are reportedly operating in Yunakivka.[34] Elements of the 40th Naval Infantry Brigade (Pacific Fleet) are reportedly operating near Kostyantynivka (north of Sumy City).[35] Elements of the Russian 1427th Motorized Rifle Regiment (formed during the 2022 partial reserve call up) are reportedly operating in northern Sumy Oblast.[36] Drone operators of the pro-Russian Chechen Akhmat Spetsnaz Aida Detachment are reportedly striking Ukrainian positions in the Sumy direction.[37]

Russian Main Effort – Eastern Ukraine

Russian Subordinate Main Effort #1 – Kharkiv Oblast (Russian objective: Push Ukrainian forces back from the international border with Belgorod Oblast and approach to within tube artillery range of Kharkiv City)

Russian forces continued offensive operations in northern Kharkiv Oblast on August 9 but did not make confirmed advances.

Unconfirmed claims: Russian milbloggers claimed on August 9 that Russian forces advanced in Vovchansk and near Vovchansky Khutoryi, Ohirtseve, and Hatyshche (all northeast of Kharkiv City) and near Lypsti (north of Kharkiv City).[38]

Russian forces attacked northeast of Kharkiv City near Vovchansk on August 8 and 9.[39] A Russian milblogger claimed on August 8 that Ukrainian forces counterattacked near Synelnykove (northeast of Kharkiv City).[40]

A Russian milblogger reportedly affiliated with the Russian Northern Group of Forces claimed on August 9 that Russian forces are struggling to maintain positions and advance near Vovchansk, and that Russian forces recently retreated in some areas.[41]

Neither Ukrainian nor Russian sources reported ground activity in the Velykyi Burluk direction on August 9.

Russian Subordinate Main Effort #2 – Luhansk Oblast (Russian objective: Capture the remainder of Luhansk Oblast and push westward into eastern Kharkiv Oblast and northern Donetsk Oblast)

Ukrainian forces recently advanced in the Kupyansk direction.

Assessed Ukrainian advances: Geolocated footage published on August 8 indicates that Ukrainian forces recently retook and advanced southwest of Kindrashivka (north of Kupyansk).[42]

Unconfirmed claims: A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian forces seized a railway station northeast of Kupyansk.[43]

Russian forces attacked near Kupyansk itself; west of Kupyansk near Sobolivka; northwest of Kupyansk near Myrove and toward Kovalivka; north of Kupyansk near Holubivka; and northeast of Kupyansk toward Kolodyazne, Petro-Ivanivka, and Novovasylivka on August 8 and 9.[44]

Order of Battle: Elements of the Russian 352nd Motorized Rifle Regiment (11th Army Corps [AC], Leningrad Military District [LMD]) are reportedly operating near Stepova Novoselivka (southwest of Kupyansk).[45] Drone operators of the 68th Motorized Rifle Division (6th Combined Arms Army [CAA], LMD) are reportedly striking Ukrainian positions near Kupyansk with fiber optic Groza Leska drones.[46]

Russian forces attacked northeast of Borova toward Nova Kruhlyakivka and southeast of Borova near Hrekivka and Olhivka on August 8 and 9 but did not advance.[47]

Russian forces continued offensive operations in the Lyman direction on August 9 but did not make confirmed advances.

Unconfirmed claims: Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces advanced within southern Karpivka (north of Lyman) and up to the northern outskirts of Serednie (northwest of Lyman).[48]

Russian forces attacked northwest of Lyman near Serednie and Shandryholove; north of Lyman near Karpivka and Ridkodub and toward Stavky; northeast of Lyman near Kolodyazi and Yampolivka; east of Lyman near Zarichne, Dibrova, and Torske; and southeast of Lyman toward Yampil and in the Serebryanske forest area on August 8 and 9.[49] A Russian milblogger claimed that Ukrainian forces counterattacked near Torske.[50]

Russian Subordinate Main Effort #3 – Donetsk Oblast (Russian objective: Capture the entirety of Donetsk Oblast, the claimed territory of Russia’s proxies in Donbas, and possibly advance into Dnipropetrovsk Oblast)

Russian forces continued offensive operations in the Siversk direction on August 9 but did not make confirmed advances.

Unconfirmed claims: A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian forces advanced from Dibrova (northeast of Siversk) toward Serebryanka (south of Dibrova).[51]

Russian forces attacked northeast of Siversk near Hryhorivka and Serebryanka; east of Siversk near Verkhnokamyanske; southeast of Siversk near Vyimka; and southwest of Siversk near Pereizne and Fedorivka on August 8 and 9.[52]

Russian forces continued offensive operations near Chasiv Yar itself on August 8 and 9 but did not advance.[53]

Ukrainian 11th Army Corps Spokesperson Lieutenant Colonel Dmytro Zaporozhets refuted claims that Russian forces seized Chasiv Yar and stated that Ukrainian forces still maintain positions in a majority of the settlement.[54] Zaporozhets stated that Ukrainian shelling is preventing Russian forces from attacking toward Kostyantynivka from the Chasiv Yar direction.

Russian forces continued offensive operations in the Toretsk direction on August 9 but did not make confirmed advances.

Unconfirmed claims: The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) claimed that Russian forces seized Yablunivka (northwest of Toretsk), and Russian Defense Minister Andrei Belousov credited elements of the Russian 20th Motorized Rifle Division (8th CAA, SMD) with seizing the settlement.[55] Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces also seized Shcherbynivka.[56] Another milblogger, however, claimed that while elements of the 150th Motorized Rifle Division (8th CAA) advanced in northern Shcherbynivka, other milbloggers' claims that Russian forces seized the settlement are premature.[57] A Russian milblogger claimed that elements of the 6th Motorized Rifle Division (3rd Army Corps [AC]) advanced into southern Oleksandro-Shultyne (north of Toretsk).[58] A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian sabotage and reconnaissance groups advanced to the Kleban Byk reservoir (northwest of Toretsk), although the milblogger claimed that Ukrainian forces maintain positions east of the reservoir.[59]

Russian forces attacked near Toretsk itself; north of Toretsk near Bila Hora, Oleskandro-Shultyne, and Dyliivka; west of Toretsk near Shcherbynivka; and northwest of Toretsk near Poltavka, Rusyn Yar, Pleshchiivka, and Katerynivka and toward Stepanivka on August 8 and 9.[60]

The chief of staff of a Ukrainian unmanned systems battalion operating in the Toretsk direction reported that Russian forces changed their tactics in the battalion's area of responsibility (AOR) after suffering massive armored vehicle losses, presumably referring to Russian armored vehicle losses in 2024.[61] The chief of staff reported that Russian forces currently primarily use armored vehicles as a disposable way to transport infantry to the frontline and typically do not expect the vehicles to return. The chief of staff reported that Russian forces attack in small fire teams and are using unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs).

Order of Battle: Elements of the Russian 103rd Motorized Rifle Regiment (150th Motorized Rifle Division, 8th Combined Arms Army, Southern Military District) are reportedly operating near the Kleban Byk reservoir.[62]

Russian forces continued offensive operations in the Pokrovsk direction on August 9 but did not make confirmed advances.

Unconfirmed claims: A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian sabotage and reconnaissance groups are operating near Dobropillya (north of Pokrovsk).[63]

Russian forces attacked near Pokrovsk itself; north of Pokrovsk near Rodynske; northeast of Pokrovsk near Nove Shakhove, Dorozhne, Sukhetske, Zatyshok, Boikivka, Volodymyrivka, Chervonyi Lyman, Novoekonomichne, and Myrolyubivka; east of Pokrovsk near Myrnohrad; southeast of Pokrovsk near Lysivka and Sukhyi Yar; south of Pokrovsk near Novoukrainka; and southwest of Pokrovsk near Zvirove, Udachne, Kotlyne, and Molodetske on August 8 and 9.[64] Russian milbloggers claimed that Ukrainian forces counterattacked from the Tsentralna Mine in central Myrnohrad and near Chunyshyne and Novopavlivka (both immediately south of Pokrovsk).[65] Another Russian milblogger claimed that Chunyshyne is a contested "gray zone."[66]

Ukrainian Dnipro Grouping of Forces Spokesperson Lieutenant Colonel Viktor Trehubov stated on August 9 that Russian forces have a manpower advantage in the Pokrovsk direction.[67] The spokesperson of a Ukrainian brigade operating in the Pokrovsk direction noted that units of the Russian Rubikon Center for Advanced Unmanned Technologies are disrupting Ukrainian logistics in the area.[68] The spokesperson stated that Rubikon units are training and improving other drone units in the area and forming new tactical drone groups near Pokrovsk. The commander of a Ukrainian drone unit operating in the Pokrovsk direction stated that Russian forces have intensified attacks near Pokrovsk.[69]

Russian forces continued offensive operations in the Novopavlivka direction on August 9 but did not advance.

Russian forces attacked toward Novopavlivka itself; southeast of Novopavlivka near Dachne and Zelenyi Kut; south of Novopavlivka near Filiya; and southwest of Novopavlivka near Zaporizhzhia, Zelenyi Hai, and Tovste on August 8 and 9.[70] A Russian milblogger claimed that Ukrainian forces counterattacked toward Dachne.[71]

Order of Battle: Elements of the Russian 56th Spetsnaz Battalion (51st CAA, formerly 1st Donetsk People's Republic Army Corps [DNR AC], SMD) are reportedly operating near Novopavlivka.[72] Elements of the 74th Motorized Rifle Brigade (41st CAA, Central Military District [CMD]) are reportedly operating in the Dnipropetrovsk (Novopavlivka) direction.[73]

Russian forces continued offensive operations in the Velykomykhailivka direction on August 9 but did not make confirmed advances.

Unconfirmed claims: A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian forces advanced one kilometer toward Komyshuvakha (southeast of Velykomykhailivka).[74]

Russian forces attacked northeast of Velykomykhailivka toward Andriivka-Klevtsove, east of Velykomykhailivka near Oleksandrohrad and Voskresenka, and southeast of Velykomykhailivka near Maliivka, Sichneve, Vilne Pole, and Komyshuvakha on August 8 and 9.[75]

Order of Battle: Elements of the Russian 36th Motorized Rifle Brigade (29th CAA, Eastern Military District [EMD]) are reportedly operating near Andriivka-Klevtsove.[76]

Russian Supporting Effort – Southern Axis (Russian objective: Maintain frontline positions, secure rear areas against Ukrainian strikes, and advance within tube artillery range of Zaporizhzhia City)

Russian forces continued offensive operations in eastern Zaporizhia Oblast on August 9 but did not make confirmed advances.

Unconfirmed claims: A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian forces advanced near Temyrivka (northeast of Hulyaipole).[77]

Russian forces attacked northeast of Hulyaipole near Temyrivka, Olhivske, Novopil, and Novoukrainka and east of Hulyaipole near Malynivka on August 8 and 9.[78]

Order of Battle: Drone operators of the Russian 14th Spetsnaz Brigade (Russian General Staff's Main Directorate [GRU]) are reportedly striking Ukrainian positions near Olhivske, Poltavka (northeast of Hulyaipole), and Zelenyi Hai (east of Hulyaipole).[79] Drone operators of the Russian 57th Motorized Rifle Brigade (5th Combined Arms Army [CAA], Eastern Military District [EMD]) are reportedly striking Ukrainian positions in Zaporizhia Oblast.[80]

Russian forces continued offensive operations in western Zaporizhia Oblast on August 9 but did not make confirmed advances.

Unconfirmed claims: Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces advanced near Stepnohirsk (west of Orikhiv).[81]

Russian forces attacked southeast of Orikhiv toward Novodanylivka and west of Orikhiv near Kamyanske and Stepnohirsk and toward Novoandriivka on August 8 and 9.[82] A Russian milblogger claimed that Ukrainian forces counterattacked near Kamyanske and Plavni (west of Orikhiv).[83]

Order of Battle: Drone operators of the 291st Motorized Rifle Regiment (42nd Motorized Rifle Division, 58th CAA, Southern Military District [SMD]) are reportedly striking Ukrainian positions toward Orikhiv.[84] Drone operators of the 247th Airborne (VDV) Regiment (7th VDV Division) are reportedly striking Ukrainian positions near Stepnohirsk.[85]

Russian forces continued attacks in the Kherson direction on August 9 but did not advance.[86]

Ukrainian officials reported on August 9 that a Russian drone struck a civilian bus near Kherson City, killing two civilians.[87]

Russian Air, Missile, and Drone Campaign (Russian Objective: Target Ukrainian military and civilian infrastructure in the rear and on the frontline)

Russian forces conducted a series of drone and missile strikes against Ukraine overnight on August 8 to 9. The Ukrainian Air Force reported that Russia launched 47 Shahed-type strike and decoy drones and two Iskander-K cruise missiles from Kursk City; Millerovo, Rostov Oblast; Shatalovo, Smolensk Oblast; and occupied Zaporizhia Oblast.[88] The Ukrainian Air Force reported that Russian forces targeted frontline areas in Chernihiv, Sumy, Kharkiv, and Donetsk oblasts with drones and Dnipro City with cruise missiles. The Ukrainian Air Force reported that Ukrainian forces downed 16 drones and one Iskander-K cruise missile and that 31 Russian drones struck 15 locations in Ukraine. Ukrainian officials reported that Russian strikes damaged residential infrastructure in Kharkiv Oblast. Zolochiv City Military Administration Head Viktor Kovalenko told Ukrainian outlet Suspilne on August 9 that at least three Russian jet-engine drones, likely Geran-3s, struck a former hospital building in Zolochiv (northwest of Kharkiv City).[89]

Significant activity in Belarus (Russian efforts to increase its military presence in Belarus and further integrate Belarus into Russian-favorable frameworks)

Nothing significant to report.

Note: ISW does not receive any classified material from any source, uses only publicly available information, and draws extensively on Russian, Ukrainian, and Western reporting and social media as well as commercially available satellite imagery and other geospatial data as the basis for these reports. References to all sources used are provided in the endnotes of each update.

[1] https://www.bild dot de/politik/ausland-und-internationales/friedlicher-rueckzug-hat-trumps-mann-putin-falsch-verstanden-6895de301174f91cb081eb54

[2] https://www.wsj.com/world/ukraine-and-europe-counter-putins-cease-fire-proposal-6a16133c?st=XtqGt5&reflink=article_copyURL_

[3] https://kyivindependent.com/exclusive-putin-to-demand-ukraine-cede-new-territory-in-alaska-peace-plan-us-likely-to-agree-kyiv-to-reject/

[4] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-8-2025

[5] https://t.me/V_Zelenskiy_official/15575 ; https://suspilne dot media/1086707-zelenskij-vikluciv-bud-aki-teritorialni-postupki-rosii/; https://www.president dot gov.ua/news/vidpovid-na-ukrayinske-teritorialne-pitannya-ye-vzhe-v-konst-99445

[6] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-8-2025

[7] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-8-2025

[8] https://www.wsj.com/world/ukraine-and-europe-counter-putins-cease-fire-proposal-6a16133c?st=XtqGt5&reflink=article_copyURL_

[9] https://isw.pub/UkrWar052125; https://isw.pub/UkrWar050925

[10] https://x.com/EmmanuelMacron/status/1954201798484381980; https://x.com/Tsahkna/status/1954088534106616063 ; https://x.com/Braze_Baiba/status/1954103784453349728 ; https://x.com/BudrysKestutis/status/1954111017673216350; https://x.com/oana_toiu/status/1954255014169563570; https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-call-with-president-zelenskyy-of-ukraine-9-august-2025

[11] https://t.me/tass_agency/330036 ; http://kremlin dot ru/events/president/news/77745; https://t.me/news_kremlin/6121; https://t.me/tass_agency/330038

[12] https://t.me/tass_agency/330048 ; https://x.com/kadmitriev/status/1953940768952893899

[13] https://x.com/kadmitriev/status/1953940768952893899; https://x.com/kadmitriev/status/1954177766267420898 ; https://x.com/kadmitriev/status/1954148333406019993

[14] https://x.com/MedvedevRussiaE/status/1749520810933404072

[15] https://www.newsweek.com/vladimir-solovyov-calls-alaskas-return-russia-2006979 ; https://www.newsweek.com/russian-state-tv-us-threat-alaska-1931298

[16] https://alaskapublic.org/news/2022-07-06/putins-aide-threatens-to-claim-back-alaska-in-response-to-us-sanctions

[17] https://www.rt dot com/russia/442754-us-russia-inf-alaska/

[18] https://ssu.gov dot ua/novyny/bezpilotnyky-sbu-vrazyly-terminal-zberihannia-shakhediv-u-tatarstani; https://t.me/SBUkr/1552

[19] https://isw.pub/UkrWar122724; https://isw.pub/UkrWar062825

[20] https://suspilne dot media/1086555-gur-atakuvalo-zenitno-raketnu-brigadu-rf-u-krasnodarskomu-krai-dzerela/; https://militarnyi dot com/en/news/diu-attacked-russian-anti-aircraft-missile-brigade-in-krasnodar-territory/

[21] https://t.me/pograni4nik_iz_ada/11777 ; https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/66550 ; https://t.me/milinfolive/154390 https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-november-26-2024 ; https://t.me/RVvoenkor/97363

[22] https://t.me/akashevarova/8124 ; https://t.me/severnnyi/4772 ; https://t.me/severnnyi/4773  https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-6-2025

[23] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-12-2024

[24] https://t.me/arbat/2133

[25] https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27625; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599

[26] https://t.me/RVvoenkor/97392; https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/66567; https://t.me/DnevnikDesantnika/32261; https://t.me/dva_majors/77104 ; https://t.me/yurasumy/24281

[27] https://t.me/tass_agency/330035; https://t.me/severnnyi/4774 ; https://t.me/motopatriot78/40264

[28] https://t.me/severnnyi/4777 ; https://t.me/severnnyi/4774

[29] https://t.me/wargonzo/28362

[30] https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27625; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599; https://t.me/DnevnikDesantnika/32256; https://t.me/wargonzo/28362; https://t.me/severnnyi/4774; https://t.me/DnevnikDesantnika/32256

[31] https://t.me/motopatriot78/40253

[32] https://t.me/severnnyi/4774

[33] https://t.me/severnnyi/4774

[34] https://t.me/motopatriot78/40253

[35] https://t.me/severnnyi/4774

[36] https://t.me/severnnyi/4774

[37] https://t.me/RKadyrov_95/5894

[38] https://t.me/wargonzo/28362; https://t.me/motopatriot78/40293 ; https://t.me/DnevnikDesantnika/32235

[39] https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27625; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599; https://t.me/Khortytsky_wind/15308; https://t.me/tass_agency/330045

[40] https://t.me/DnevnikDesantnika/32235

[41] https://t.me/severnnyi/4774

[42] https://x.com/RoadtoMars9/status/1953931316077932656; https://t.me/mangustzzzz/983

[43] https://t.me/wargonzo/28362

[44] https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27625; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599; https://t.me/Khortytsky_wind/15308; https://t.me/wargonzo/28362

[45] https://t.me/motopatriot78/40301; https://t.me/motopatriot78/40247

[46] https://t.me/RVvoenkor/97387

[47] https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599; https://t.me/Khortytsky_wind/15308

[48] https://t.me/motopatriot78/40246; https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/66546

[49] https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27625; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599; https://t.me/Khortytsky_wind/15308; https://t.me/motopatriot78/40246; https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/66546; https://t.me/DnevnikDesantnika/32234; https://t.me/wargonzo/28362; https://t.me/tass_agency/330057

[50] https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/66546

[51] https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/66544

[52] https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27625 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599 ; https://t.me/Khortytsky_wind/15308 ; https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/66544

[53] https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27625 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599 ; https://t.me/Khortytsky_wind/15308

[54] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnsq2tu2Oo0; https://armyinform dot com.ua/2025/08/09/chasiv-yar-perebuvaye-pid-povnym-vognevym-kontrolem-syl-oborony/

[55] https://t.me/tass_agency/330124 ; https://t.me/mod_russia/55393 ; https://t.me/mod_russia/55397

[56] https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/66556

[57] https://t.me/motopatriot78/40295 ; https://t.me/motopatriot78/40296 ; https://t.me/motopatriot78/40269

[58] https://t.me/motopatriot78/40285

[59] https://t.me/motopatriot78/40277 ; https://t.me/motopatriot78/40297

[60] https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27625 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599 ; https://t.me/Khortytsky_wind/15308 ; https://t.me/motopatriot78/40286

[61] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFO62_O-gpw ; https://armyinform dot com.ua/2025/08/09/odnorazove-bronetaksi-vorog-pislya-velykyh-vtrat-zminyv-taktyku-zastosuvannya-tehniky/

[62] https://t.me/motopatriot78/40247 ; https://t.me/motopatriot78/40301

[63] https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/66543

[64] https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27625 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599 ; https://t.me/Khortytsky_wind/15308 ; https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/66539 ; https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/66543 ; https://t.me/wargonzo/28362

[65] https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/66539 ; https://t.me/rusich_army/25116

[66] https://t.me/DnevnikDesantnika/32231

[67] https://armyinform.com dot ua/2025/08/09/evolyucziya-navpaky-na-pokrovskomu-napryamku-rosiyany-vidmovylysya-vid-pryamohodinnya/

[68] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WY8sDvZdWEA ; https://armyinform.com dot ua/2025/08/08/bagato-fantastychnyh-vkydiv-na-pokrovskomu-napryamku-vorog-bye-po-logistyczi-i-psyhologiyi/

[69] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFO62_O-gpw ; https://armyinform.com dot ua/2025/08/09/yakshho-pide-na-shturm-50-50-yakshho-ni-100-dvohsotyj-boyecz-pro-vybir-yakyj-stoyit-pered-okupantom/

[70] https://t.me/Khortytsky_wind/15308 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602

[71] https://t.me/motopatriot78/40249

[72] https://t.me/nm_dnr/14162

[73] https://t.me/dva_majors/77087

[74] https://t.me/voin_dv/16389

[75] https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27625 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599 ; https://t.me/Khortytsky_wind/15308 ; https://t.me/wargonzo/28362

[76] https://t.me/voin_dv/16389

[77] https://t.me/wargonzo/28362  

[78] https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27625 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599 ; https://t.me/Khortytsky_wind/15308

[79] https://t.me/voin_dv/16386

[80] https://t.me/voin_dv/16394

[81] https://t.me/rusich_army/25112 ; https://t.me/motopatriot78/40280 ; https://t.me/vrogov/21426 ; https://ria dot ru/20250808/rogov-2034177081.html

[82] https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27625 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602 ; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599 ; https://www.facebook.com/OperationalCommandSouth/posts/pfbid02TmNnZbA3NGqWPFdh8DkNtTy1FSgWjoo2iKmR5v5cBtnpV2RLqdsoGPKXLXgpeDyTl?__cft__[0]=AZW3jpOB5rQOvE9y3UxiDOHdU3m7ZRL-zNT1XcVknC9I5jeyuKeEmI8t-MceMyUjHT1uxvDMxcEFygTMor3o1JlcC3vAZai3AUop07PMtG_NOk5qniBCQpDl3KHG51WnDt8oE4dJSaZyzlrXpPsMVFA_fo71Y36yxHAOmsmI3MwFVW8M-G-hYa4z2egmEPca-bQ&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R ;

[83] https://t.me/motopatriot78/40280

[84] https://t.me/RVvoenkor/97411

[85] https://t.me/russian_airborne/11039; https://t.me/motopatriot78/40289

[86] https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27625; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27602; https://t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/27599; https://www.facebook.com//p/19vrJbPojC/

[87] https://t.me/SJTF_Odes/12824; https://t.me/SJTF_Odes/12824

[88] https://t.me/kpszsu/40130

[89] https://suspilne dot media/kharkiv/1086691-reaktivni-gerani-vdarili-u-kolisnu-likarnu-v-zolocevi-de-planuvali-zrobiti-reabilitacijnij-centr-kerivnik-sva/

See charts, graphs and maps here.