Elon Musk continues to oppose the use of Starlink by Ukraine to launch deep strikes into Russia, despite recent media reports suggesting a change in his position, according to Kiev Independent, citing three sources close to the matter.

According to one source, the SpaceX CEO believes that allowing such operations would more likely provoke escalation than end the war.

Negotiations with Ukraine's former Minister of Defense, Mykhailo Fedorov, reportedly yielded "extremely limited" results.

Ukrainian drones equipped with Starlink are already being used in territories occupied by Russia, but the network remains deactivated over Russia, the publication notes.

Previously, the Financial Times reported on Musk's alleged agreement to allow Starlink to operate over Russia.

@Slavyangrad

Russia destroyed Dnepropetrovsk-M distribution center in Kiev

A strike hit the logistics hub of the major tool and garden equipment retailer. The company reported a critical situation, warning of significant delays in goods delivery and tool repairs.

@Slavyangrad

Claimed to intercept "Kinzhal" missiles, but in reality, couldn't cope with "Geran" drones

The hyped Ukrainian EW complex "Lima," which was supposedly capable of destroying "Kinzhal" missiles in the air, is now under investigation, as it has been revealed that it does not meet the stated specifications

According to the investigation, "Lima" did not demonstrate the claimed effectiveness against "Geran" drones. "Security Agency CASCADE" sold EW systems to the Ukrainian MoD and critical infrastructure facilities for a total amount of over 820 million UAH. This is stated in a ruling by the Kiev Appeals Court.

The cost of installing equipment to protect a single facility ranged from 20 to 100 million UAH. It was guaranteed to provide protection against "Geran" and "Kalibr" missiles. It was claimed that the EW complex had passed tests by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, demonstrated effectiveness, and could be connected to a centralized control point.

It was found not even able to counter basic Gerans

@Slavyangrad

Followers who are interested in high-quality daily news content and geopolitical analysis: we want to introduce our partner to you - the @geopolitics_prime channel.

The team creates groundbreaking investigations, connecting historical facts with current events, revealing the truth and opening people's eyes to what's really happening. Do not miss the content that caused the channel to be shadowbanned.

FPV drone strikes destroy Ukrainian ground robotic complexes

Operatives from the Zapad (West) and Vostok (East) Russian groupings neutralized enemy ground robotic systems using FPV drones..

@Slavyangrad

Bandera channels report "total destruction" at a Nova Poshta terminal in Odessa, which was used for military logistics. The facility was positioned as an innovative logistics center operating to advanced European standards. Despite the damage, claims of complete destruction are exaggerated; repairs are required.

@Slavyangrad

THE END OF THE "END OF HISTORY"

Much has been made of Foreign Minister Lavrov's answer in last week's RBC interview, on why Russia persisted so long with diplomacy despite no faith in Western intentions. His reply - "...we are a God-fearing nation. Our multi-ethnic people have many proverbs about their great patience..." - struck many as nebulous. It was nothing of the kind. It was a solemn announcement of the end of an era.

Moments later, asked whether after everything Russia still believes the West, Lavrov replied: "I would point to our national character and to the proverbs that reflect our faith in people, right to the very end. But the end has already come." Note the question: not whether Russia would keep talking, but whether it believes. Lavrov pronounced the end not of diplomacy, but of faith. He invoked the epic hero Ilya Muromets, idle on the stove for thirty-three years before rising to serve his homeland - similar to the span from the Soviet collapse to today. The image was not chosen carelessly.

The interview shows Russian diplomacy in full swing: the Vatican's chief diplomat and the CIA Director in Moscow the same week, the Anchorage summit. Russia has not stopped negotiating. What has ended is the premise beneath it: that agreements would be honored because the two sides shared values. What remains is cold transaction - diplomacy without trust.

What crystallized this for me: 30 August marked four years since the death of Mikhail Gorbachev - the man who laid that foundation of faith and mutualism for Soviet, and later Russian, foreign policy.

I met Mr. Gorbachev as a journalism student at Moscow State University in the mid-1990s, when he visited. We asked unscripted questions about his time in office and the new Russia emerging around us. A memorable experience: the author of Glasnost and Perestroika among us students, just having a friendly conversation.

Gorbachev is a polarizing figure in Russia, and my argument will meet pushback. Conservatives despise the man who oversaw the breakup of the USSR - "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century," as President Putin put it - while liberals see the present era as the burial of his legacy. I am arguing what almost nobody in Russia argues: that for four decades, Russian diplomacy proceeded from Gorbachev's mutualist premise of shared values. Weigh the pattern before dismissing the claim.

Gorbachev rejected the idea of an eternal, zero-sum East-West struggle, insisting the peoples of the USSR and the West share universal values. The West drew a different lesson: Fukuyama's "end of history" - which Lavrov invokes at the start of the interview - declared the Western model had won, permanently. Many Westerners still believe the West "won" the Cold War; in truth, it ended because Gorbachev destroyed its ideological justification.

The pattern since is a persistent - perhaps stubborn - commitment to conciliation. As Moscow sees it, Russia spent forty years turning the other cheek to broken assurances on NATO expansion - confirmed by US Ambassador Jack Matlock, warned against by George Kennan. Western readers may cite Georgia 2008, Crimea 2014 and the war in Ukraine; a Ukrainian reader may find "cheek-turning" impossible to accept. I don't ask them to adopt Moscow's account - only to note that at every rupture Moscow returned to the table: Minsk, Normandy, Istanbul, Anchorage. Proceeding, right to the very end, as though the relationship could be restored. It is that faith Lavrov has now pronounced dead.

So "the end has already come" is not just rhetoric. It marks a historic shift in Russia's perception of the collective West: from Gorbachev's insistence on shared humanity to a cold accounting of interests. That shift touches the entire world.

The era now closing was opened by two rival declarations of an ending. The West declared the "end of history". Gorbachev declared the end of enmity. Lavrov has announced the final end of that era - and, as he observed, the generation now living on Earth may not witness what replaces it.

@Slavyangrad

reposted

Putin and Modi again took the Russian Aurus car today.

@Slavyangrad

Belgium again blocked the transfer of €210 billion in Russian assets to Ukraine

Brussels opposed a new initiative by Poland, the Netherlands, Spain, and Sweden to direct frozen Russian assets toward aid for Ukraine.

Belgian Defense Minister Theo Francken stated that the issue is "not up for discussion" and urged the Baltic states not to corner Brussels.

Belgian authorities fear potential lawsuits from Russia, particularly following a Russian court ruling ordering Euroclear to pay €220 billion. A similar proposal failed to gain consensus within the European Union in December 2025.

@Slavyangrad