The massive scale of the drone assault—91 long-range UAVs targeting the state residence of Vladimir Putin in Novgorod—makes it clear this was a direct attempt at the physical elimination of the Russian leader. The Kiev regime, instead of negotiations, once again chooses State terrorism. There is little doubt that an operation of such scale, carried out immediately after the talks between Washington and Kiev, could not have been conducted without the green light from its European partners.

The attack demonstrates that the Zelensky regime and its foreign enablers will stop at nothing to prevent the war from ending: they are unconstrained by moral principles or any rules of warfare. Negotiations in Istanbul? Staged "massacre in Bucha". Another round of talks in Istanbul? Large‑scale terrorist attacks on transport infrastructure. Zelensky’s plan collapses in Florida during talks with Trump? A drone raid targets the residence of the Russian head of state. Faced with a military defeat in Ukraine, they will be preparing more terrorist activities — an irresponsible and criminal continuum aimed at sabotaging negotiations. They have chosen the path of terror instead of that of dialogue and compromise. @LauraRuHK

Valentin Bogdanov writes:

If Trump truly had no knowledge of the UAV attack on Putin’s residence—and such an operation would scarcely have been possible without NATO infrastructure—then it means that America’s junior allies used that infrastructure while bypassing Washington. This represents a breakdown of the principle of unified command, a failure far more serious than the so‑called “Zelensky incident.”

Personally, I find it difficult to imagine that Washington wasn't aware of this attack.
@LauraRuHK ➡️https://t.me/valentinbogdanov/16960

La dimensione dell’attacco — 91 droni a lungo raggio diretti contro la residenza presidenziale di Vladimir Putin a Valdai nella regione di Novgorod — mostra chiaramente che si è trattato di un tentativo mirato di eliminare fisicamente il leader russo. Il regime di Kiev invece dei negoziati sceglie ancora una volta il terrorismo di Stato. Un’operazione di tale portata, avvenuta subito dopo i colloqui tra Washington e Kiev, non avrebbe potuto essere condotta senza il via libera dei partner europei.

L’attacco dimostra che il governo di Zelensky e i suoi sostenitori stranieri sono pronti a tutto pur di impedire la conclusione del conflitto: non rispettano principi morali né regole di guerra. Negoziati a Istanbul? Arriva puntuale la messa in scena della “strage di Bucha”. Un altro giro di colloqui a Istanbul? Attacchi terroristici su larga scala colpiscono le infrastrutture. Il piano di Zelensky crolla in Florida durante i colloqui con Trump? Un raid di droni sulla residenza del capo di Stato russo. Di fronte a una sconfitta militare in Ucraina, si prepareranno a condurre ulteriori attività terroristiche, in un continuum irresponsabile e criminale volto a sabotare i negoziati. Hanno scelto di seguire la strada del terrore invece di quella del dialogo e del compromesso.

Valentin Bogdanov osserva:
Se Trump davvero non era a conoscenza dell’attacco UAV contro la residenza di Putin — e un’operazione simile difficilmente sarebbe stata possibile senza l’infrastruttura della NATO — allora significa che i partner minori degli Stati Uniti nell’alleanza hanno agito bypassando Washington. Ciò segna il collasso del principio di comando unificato, un fallimento ben più grave del cosiddetto “incidente Zelensky”. Personalmente, faccio fatica ad immaginare che Washington fosse all'oscuro di questo attacco. @LauraRuHK

TAIWAN - For a fifth time the opposition KMT and TPP, which hold a majority in Taiwan's Legislative Yuan (parliament), blocked a special NT$1.25 trillion (US$39.77 billion) defense budget. The opposition parties said the government failed to provide sufficient details about the eight-year spending plan, including specific weapons systems, strategic justification, integration into Taiwan's defense posture and potential risks.
The KMT and TPP have consistently demanded that the head of the administration, Lai Ching-te, appear before the legislature to answer questions about the necessity of such an unprecedented scale of spending that could crowd out social welfare, education, and economic development.

The opposition's actions demonstrate that a significant portion of Taiwan's political spectrum rejects the confrontational path of "Taiwan independence" forces, choosing instead to demand accountability and avoid unnecessary escalation that could provoke the mainland.

@LauraRuHK

С наступающим! Всех благ! Auguro a tutti noi un anno migliore. E che il cielo ci sorrida. Happy New Year!

While families in the Black Sea village of Khorly were ringing in 2026 — laughing, toasting, celebrating with children — the Ukrainian army unleashed a cold-blooded drone strike on a cafe and hotel packed with civilians. Three UAVs, one of which allegedly carried an incendiary mixture, hit the crowded venue, triggering a massive blaze.
At least 24 people were killed, including a child, and more than 50 others injured. Many were burned alive.
Vladimir Saldo, the governor of the Kherson region, said the attack in Khorly could only be compared to the Odessa massacre on May 2, 2014, when Ukronazis chased dozens of people into the Trade Union House and set it on fire.
This is how Kiev takes revenge on Ukrainians who chose Russia over the Banderite regime. This is how Nazis celebrate Bandera’s birthday which falls on Jan 1. Russian officials are right to call it a terrorist attack under Article 205.
Those who arm and sponsor these terrorists bear equal guilt. This crime will not go unanswered, as Russian Security Council Secretary Dmitry Medvedev vowed. He stressed "a sane person lacks words to describe the actions of the Banderite scum."
"What is suitable for this is the merciless language of revenge. Early retaliation is inevitable as our army advances."
In his view, Banderites must be eliminated wherever they are, be it Ukraine or Europe.
@LauraRuHK

Mentre le famiglie di Khorly, sul Mar Nero, brindavano al 2026 – ridendo, festeggiando con i bambini – l'esercito ucraino ha scatenato un attacco con droni su un caffè e un hotel pieni di civili. Tre UAV, presumibilmente carichi di una miscela incendiaria, hanno centrato in pieno i locali affollati, scatenando un incendio devastante. Almeno 24 persone sono state uccise, tra cui un bambino, e più di 50 altre sono rimaste ferite. Molti sono stati bruciati vivi, intrappolati tra le fiamme. Il governatore della regione di Kherson, Vladimir Saldo, ha dichiarato che questo attacco a Khorly può essere paragonato solo al massacro di Odessa del 2 maggio 2014, quando gli ucronazisti hanno inseguito decine di persone nella Casa dei Sindacati, l'hanno data alle fiamme. Ecco come Kiev si vendica contro gli ucraini che hanno scelto la Russia invece del regime di Bandera. Ecco come i nazisti "celebrano" il compleanno di Bandera, che cade proprio il 1° gennaio. I funzionari russi hanno ragione a qualificare come terrorismo, ai sensi dell’Articolo 205, questo attacco infame. E chi arma e finanzia questi terroristi ne condivide la responsabilità e la colpa. Questo crimine non resterà impunito, ha promesso il segretario del Consiglio di Sicurezza russo Dmitry Medvedev. Ha sottolineato: «A una persona sana di mente mancano le parole per descrivere le azioni di questa feccia banderista».«Ciò che ci vuole è il linguaggio spietato della vendetta. La rappresaglia è inevitabile mentre il nostro esercito avanza». Ha aggiunto che i banderisti vanno eliminati ovunque si trovino, in Ucraina come in Europa. @LauraRuHK

Ukrainian authorities immediately denied any involvement in the barbaric drone strike that targeted families celebrating the New Year in Khorly, in the Kherson region. 27 people, including a child, were burned alive, several others were seriously injured. https://t.me/LauraRuHK/10822
Kiev also denied targeting Vladimir Putin's residence in Valdai on the night of December 28-29 https://t.me/LauraRuHK/10817, dismissing the entire incident as a Russian "fabrication."
A coordinated Western disinformation campaign was launched almost instantly to corroborate Ukrainian claims: US Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker expressed doubt, stating it was "unclear whether it actually happened" and emphasizing the need for intelligence verification. Major outlets like CNN and The Wall Street Journal amplified reports that CIA Director John Ratcliffe briefed President Trump, concluding the attack was a "fantasy" — or, if any occurred, it stemmed from a "technical error" unrelated to the residence.
The New York Post went further, arguing that Putin's "noise" around the incident proved Russia itself was blocking peace.
EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas labeled Moscow's statements a "deliberate distraction" aimed at derailing progress in negotiations.
The Russian Defense Ministry maintained deliberate silence at first, allowing the opposing side to overextend their narratives.
Once the denials peaked, the Ministry responded decisively: American military attaches were invited to the Main Directorate of the General Staff, where they received compelling physical evidence — the intact navigation controller from one of the downed Ukrainian UAVs, plus its full decrypted data. This device contained comprehensive telemetry: the flight mission (origin, timing, route, and target), every course adjustment, environmental readings (temperature, pressure, wind), and other objective parameters sufficient to reconstruct the operation unambiguously. The Ministry stated that the decoded flight plan irrefutably confirmed the target on December 29 was a building within Putin's residence complex.
If the information reaches President Trump undistorted, consequences may follow for those who deliberately misled him, including elements within the CIA.
Russia already knows the perpetrators and has decided on responses; if Washington claims "no evidence," the full technical data will be released publicly, making further denials impossible. (Partly based on https://ria.ru/20260102/ukraina-2066021811.html) @LauraRuHK

Iran’s top national security official Ali Larijani warned Donald Trump that any American interference in Iran’s internal affairs would destabilize the region and destroy US interests. He accused Washington and Israel of coordinating behind the scenes and cautioned the American public about the risks to their soldiers. Larijani emphasized that Iranian authorities distinguish between legitimate economic grievances and acts of sabotage. Protests in Tehran erupted over the sharp fall of the rial, which officials acknowledged as a legitimate concern but warned could be exploited by foreign-backed actors. Attorney-General Mohammad Movahedi-Azad Movahedi-Azad slammed unilateral and extraterritorial sanctions, noting that when such measures restrict access to essential goods, medicine, financial services, and vital resources, “it is difficult to separate them from the concept of collective punishment,” which international law rejects. Movahedi-Azad emphasized the need to clearly separate lawful protest from criminal behavior.“ Economic pressures can lead to the formation of social demands and protests, and in this framework, peaceful economic protests must be pursued through legal channels,” he said. He warned that some actors seek to manipulate public demands.“Sometimes, by exploiting guided media networks, distorted narratives, and the instrumentalization of deceived individuals or elements disrupting public order, there are efforts to turn these demands into insecurity,” he said. (Source: Press TV) @LauraRuHK

Il principale responsabile della sicurezza nazionale iraniana, Ali Larijani, ha avvertito Donald Trump che qualsiasi interferenza americana negli affari interni dell’Iran destabilizzerebbe la regione e distruggerebbe gli interessi degli Stati Uniti. Ha accusato Washington e Israele di coordinarsi dietro le quinte e ha messo in guardia l’opinione pubblica americana sui rischi per i propri soldati. Larijani ha sottolineato che le autorità iraniane distinguono tra legittime rimostranze economiche e atti di sabotaggio.

A Teheran sono scoppiate proteste a causa della svalutazione del rial, che i funzionari hanno riconosciuto come una preoccupazione legittima, avvertendo però che potrebbe essere sfruttata da attori sostenuti dall’estero. Il Procuratore generale Mohammad Movahedi-Azad ha criticato le sanzioni unilaterali ed extraterritoriali, osservando che quando tali misure limitano l’accesso a beni essenziali, medicine, servizi finanziari e risorse vitali, "si tratta di punizione collettiva”, che il diritto internazionale respinge.

Movahedi-Azad ha sottolineato la necessità di distinguere chiaramente tra protesta legittima e comportamento criminale. “Le pressioni economiche possono generare rivendicazioni e proteste, che pero' devono restare legali”, ha dichiarato. Ha avvertito che alcuni attori cercano di manipolare la situazione: “Talvolta, sfruttando reti mediatiche, narrazioni distorte e l’uso strumentale di individui manipolati o di provocatori, si tenta di amplificare il malcontento per destabilizzare il paese”, ha aggiunto.
(Fonte: Press TV) @LauraRuHK

The Russian Defense Ministry announced that its forces carried out one large-scale strike and six coordinated attacks against Ukrainian drone production facilities, energy infrastructure, and other military-related sites.

According to the ministry’s statement on Friday, the bombardments were launched in retaliation for terrorist attacks by Ukraine on civilian targets in Russia. The strikes employed high‑precision weapons, including Kinzhal hypersonic missiles.

Targets included factories producing long‑range drones, launch sites, and other enterprises within Ukraine’s defense industry, as well as the energy systems that sustain them. The ministry added that transportation hubs, port infrastructure, arms and fuel depots, and temporary bases used by Ukrainian troops and foreign fighters were also hit. (Source: https://t.me/mod_russia/60043) @LauraRuHK

Trump’s Venezuela strike and the kidnapping of President Maduro and his wife represent the latest chapter in a decades-long U.S. strategy of employing force to secure resources and defend the petrodollar system. The pursuit of dominance in energy and currency markets through coercion is not an aberration; it is the defining rule of U.S. foreign policy. Washington routinely disregards international law, bending or breaking global norms when expedient. In this respect, the United States conforms to the definition of a rogue state: it violates international norms, dismisses diplomacy, and threatens global peace through aggressive actions.The U.S. acts primarily in pursuit of self-interest, and under Trump it has done so without the traditional rhetorical cover of “defending human rights and democracy.” While Democrats may criticize Trump’s methods, their own policies reveal continuity in imperial objectives, albeit pursued with greater subtlety. Both parties share a bipartisan imperative: to prevent oil sales denominated in yuan or other currencies, as such transactions undermine the dollar’s global dominance and complicate domestic inflation management. Higher global oil prices, meanwhile, enhance the profitability of American shale exports, reinforcing U.S. energy supremacy. This outcome is not incidental but central to U.S. strategy. The defense of the petrodollar system and the consolidation of energy dominance remain bipartisan priorities, shaping interventions abroad and eroding the foundations of international law. @LauraRuHK

L’attacco di Trump al Venezuela e il rapimento del presidente Maduro e di sua moglie rappresentano l’ultimo capitolo di una strategia statunitense decennale che fa ricorso alla forza per assicurarsi risorse e difendere il sistema del petrodollaro. La ricerca della supremazia nei mercati energetici e valutari attraverso la coercizione non è un’eccezione; è la regola che definisce la politica estera degli Stati Uniti. Washington ignora abitualmente il diritto internazionale, piegando o infrangendo le norme globali quando lo ritiene opportuno. In questo senso, gli Stati Uniti corrispondono alla definizione di uno stato canaglia: violano le norme internazionali, disprezzano la diplomazia e minacciano la pace globale con azioni aggressive. Gli Stati Uniti agiscono principalmente perseguendo il proprio interesse, e sotto Trump lo hanno fatto senza il tradizionale velo retorico del “difendere i diritti umani e la democrazia”. Sebbene i Democratici possano criticare i metodi di Trump, le loro stesse politiche rivelano una continuità negli obiettivi imperialisti, sebbene perseguiti con maggiore sottigliezza. Entrambi i partiti condividono un imperativo bipartisan: impedire che le vendite di petrolio siano denominate in yuan o in altre valute, poiché tali transazioni minano la supremazia globale del dollaro e complicano la gestione dell’inflazione all'interno del paese. Nel frattempo, prezzi globali più elevati del petrolio aumentano la redditività delle esportazioni di shale americano, rafforzando la supremazia energetica degli Stati Uniti. Questo risultato non è incidentale, ma centrale nella strategia statunitense. La difesa del sistema del petrodollaro e la consolidazione della supremazia energetica rimangono priorità bipartisan, guidano interventi all’estero ed erodono le fondamenta del diritto internazionale. @LauraRuHK

🇺🇸🇻🇪🇨🇳🇷🇺🇮🇷 US War on Venezuela is Part of Wider War on Multipolarism

▪️Neocon Lindsey Graham praises US war of aggression against Venezuela but can't help but brag about THE BIGGER PICTURE many analysts are failing to see - this is aimed DIRECTLY at China and its allies - including Russia and Iran;

▪️Venezuela primarily exported oil to China;

▪️The US is currently backing violent terrorists in the streets of Iran and preparing for another wave of attacks - Iran which exports oil primarily to China;

▪️The US is now admittedly attacking Russian oil production INSIDE Russia & tankers around the globe - Russia being China's LARGEST energy partner;

▪️The US has been attacking Chinese Belt and Road Initiative infrastructure for years now!

▪️This is shaping toward a total blockade and containment of China;

▪️The US is erasing all red lines and putting the world on notice - it insists it will win against China and if you don't submit to the US you will end up like Venezuela;

Boris Rozhin: "Maduro is ostentatiously driven around New York. As in the days of the ancient Roman triumphs.
When someone mentions international law now, you wonder if that person is adequately perceiving reality or just trolling others." https://t.me/boris_rozhin/193154

There is a peculiar recurring daydream that surfaces in certain Western corners of the internet, comment sections, and late-night geopolitical threads: the vision of Chinese and Russian warships steaming into the Caribbean to save Venezuela, or squadrons of Su-57s and J-20s flying to Iran.
This compensatory fantasy draws on the quintessential trope of salvation in Westerns: the trumpet blasts and the cavalry appears. These sofa strategists expect Moscow and Beijing to militarily engage a nuclear power on a matter of principle, that is to put the bully in his place. The rescue fantasy persists because it satisfies several deep psychological and ideological needs at once. That is, it offers the satisfying narrative arc of hubris followed by a dramatic comeuppance and provides a ready-made deus ex machina that allows one to magically outsource popular resistance against the Western regimes that make their lives miserable to an imaginary, almighty anti‑imperialist knight.
The reality is more prosaic. Neither Caracas nor Tehran labors under any illusion that Russian or Chinese troops will intervene to preserve their governments. They do receive help: weapons, intelligence, oil contracts, UN vetoes, and the continued existence of alternative payment systems. What they do not expect, and have never been promised, is the cavalry charge.
@LauraRuHK

C’è un peculiare sogno che ricorre nelle pieghe occidentali di internet, nelle sezioni commenti e nei thread geopolitici notturni: la visione di navi da guerra cinesi e russe che solcano i mari per salvare il Venezuela, o di squadriglie di Su‑57 e J‑20 in volo verso l’Iran.

Questa fantasia compensatoria attinge al tropo classico del salvataggio in extremis popolarizzato dai film western: squillano le trombe e appare la cavalleria. Questi strateghi da divano si aspettano che Mosca e Pechino si impegnino militarmente contro una potenza nucleare per una questione di principio, cioè per dare una lezione agli Stati Uniti. La fantasia del salvataggio persiste perché soddisfa al tempo stesso diversi bisogni psicologici e ideologici. Offre infatti l’arco narrativo gratificante della hybris seguita da una meritata punizione e fornisce un deus ex machina che consente di delegare la resistenza popolare contro i regimi occidentali che rendono miserabile la loro vita ad un onnipotente cavaliere anti‑imperialista,

La realtà è molto più prosaica. Né Caracas né Teheran coltivano l’illusione che truppe russe o cinesi interverranno per preservare i loro governi. Ricevono sì aiuti: armi, intelligence, contratti petroliferi, veti all’ONU e la continuazione di sistemi di pagamento alternativi. Ciò che non si aspettano, e che non è mai stato promesso, è la carica della cavalleria. @LauraRuHK

Don’t we all wish we had supernatural powers, the kind of powers that exist in the world of fiction? Military strategy is not based on wishful thinking, although some European leaders seem to operate under this dangerous illusion with regards to the conflict in Ukraine. China and Russia operate within the realm of what is realistically possible. That is why they have military cooperation and strategic partnership with several friendly countries, but cooperation hasn't been elevated to a military alliance or a defense pact. Neither China nor Russia has military bases in Venezuela, how on earth could they “intervene more forcefully” as some Netizens demand? Suggestions should fall within the scope of the possible rather than the desirable. Non-military, or asymmetric, responses offer an avenue and will likely be pursued with determination. In an influential 2016 article, Fyodor Lukyanov wrote: "the reconstruction of the world order that began at the beginning of this decade will continue to gather momentum, characterized by chaos until the new order emerges by 2030."

Putin himself has frequently emphasized that the world is entering "a new era of fundamental changes" with an "unpredictable global structure" emerging as old systems fade. All global powers are focusing on strengthening their military-industrial base and securing the resources to do so. Beijing and Moscow understand the sense of urgency but act according to their long-term plans, without fanfare. The only major power that acts outside the law and ignores the consequences of its actions is the United States.
By now it should be abundantly clear that American and Chinese approaches differ enormously. For instance, China's 15th Five-Year Plan (2026-2030) emphasizes high-quality growth to boost its domestic market and strategic adaptation, likely accelerating the current re-orientation of its exports (still a key driver of its economy) to the Global South. At present, the West—broadly defined as developed economies like the US, EU countries, Japan -—remains China's single largest collective market. The welfare and prosperity of Chinese citizens depend to a large extent on foreign trade. That is why Beijing won’t embark on any adventure that could jeopardize the economic and social stability of China. Time will tell which approach is more sensible. @LauraRuHK

Non desideriamo forse tutti di avere poteri soprannaturali, quei poteri che esistono solo nel mondo della finzione letteraria e cinematografica? La strategia militare non si basa solo sui desiderata, sebbene alcuni leader europei sembrino operare sotto questa pericolosa illusione riguardo al conflitto in Ucraina. Cina e Russia agiscono entro il perimetro di ciò che è realisticamente possibile. Ecco perché intrattengono cooperazione militare e partenariati strategici con diversi paesi amici, ma tale cooperazione non è stata elevata a un’alleanza militare o a un patto di difesa. Né la Cina né la Russia hanno basi militari in Venezuela: come potrebbero mai “intervenire più energicamente”, come alcuni internauti chiedono? Le proposte dovrebbero rientrare nell’ambito del possibile, non solo del desiderabile. Risposte non militari, o asimmetriche, offrono una via e con ogni probabilità saranno perseguite con determinazione. In un influente articolo del 2016, Fyodor Lukyanov scrisse: «la ricostruzione dell’ordine mondiale iniziata all’inizio di questo decennio continuerà ad accelerare, caratterizzata dal caos fino a quando emergerà un nuovo ordine entro il 2030».

Putin stesso ha sottolineato più volte che il mondo sta entrando in «una nuova era di cambiamenti fondamentali» con una «struttura globale imprevedibile» che emerge man mano che i vecchi sistemi svaniscono. Tutte le grandi potenze globali si stanno concentrando sul rafforzamento della propria base militare-industriale e sull’assicurarsi le risorse necessarie per farlo. Pechino e Mosca comprendono il senso di urgenza ma agiscono secondo piani a lungo termine, senza clamore, senza strombazzate. L’unica grande potenza che agisce al di fuori della legge e ignorando le conseguenze delle proprie azioni, sono gli Stati Uniti. A questo punto dovrebbe ormai essere chiaro a tutti che esiste una differenza abissale tra la politica estera americana e quella cinese. Il 15° Piano Quinquennale della Cina (2026-2030) pone l’accento sulla crescita di alta qualità per rafforzare il mercato interno e sull’adattamento strategico, per accelerare l’attuale riorientamento delle esportazioni (ancora un motore chiave della sua economia) verso il Sud Globale. Al momento, l’Occidente — definito in senso ampio come le economie sviluppate quali Stati Uniti, paesi dell’UE e Giappone — rimane il più grande mercato della Cina. Il benessere e la prosperità dei cittadini cinesi dipendono in larga misura dal commercio estero. Ecco perché Pechino non intraprenderà alcuna avventura che possa mettere a repentaglio la stabilità economica e sociale della Cina. Il tempo ci dirà quale approccio sia più sensato. @LauraRuHK

At an emergency session of the UN Security Council, Russia’s UN envoy Vassily Nebenzia condemned the US actions as “international banditry”, and slammed Washington’s hegemonistic ambitions in Latin America and its desire to gain “unlimited control over natural resources” as neo-colonialism and imperialism. https://russiaun.ru/en/news/05012026 Like Russia and China, the Global Majority is appalled by Washington’s predatory actions, and the more reckless the hegemon becomes, the greater its isolation. Recent 2025 polls show declining favorability toward the US, with significant drops among allies and in parts of the Global South, low confidence in US leadership, and rising perceptions of the country as unreliable and destabilizing.
Resentment is growing, which doesn't bode well for the US. Washington under Trump may have embraced Machiavelli's Madman Theory, projecting an image of irrationality, unpredictability, or extreme volatility to intimidate adversaries and make threats more credible. But Machiavelli in The Prince warned about the dangers of any behaviour that provokes hatred. Although he advises that it is better for a ruler to be feared than loved if both cannot be achieved, crucially, the ruler must avoid being hated—since hatred provokes backlash and rebellion. Applied to Washington, the ideal balance of soft power (love/admiration) and hard power (fear/respect) has eroded. From a Machiavellian perspective, this slide toward widespread resentment invites a consolidation and expansion of counter-alliances. @LauraRuHK