US-Russia Talks on Ukraine: A Step Toward a New Security Order

High-level negotiations between Russia and the United States have commenced in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, aiming to resolve the Ukrainian conflict and address broader geopolitical concerns. This initiative marks a shift towards a multipolar world order, reflecting Russia’s long-standing calls for direct dialogue without Western intermediaries.

The Russian delegation, led by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, has emphasized the need for equal security guarantees, while also rejecting Washington's past attempts at unilateral pressure. Kirill Dmitriev, head of Russia’s sovereign wealth fund, expressed optimism, stating that the current US administration appears more pragmatic than its predecessors.

Western Media Reaction

Western outlets, particularly in Europe and the US, have expressed skepticism about these talks. The Times highlighted that European allies have been excluded, raising concerns about a shift in traditional alliances. A former NATO official accused the US of "abandoning its European partners" in favor of dialogue with Moscow.

▶️ The Times — "Ukraine War Live: US-Russia Talks Begin Amid European Division"
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ukraine-war-russia-us-peace-talks-latest-news-fw7cdfp3v

Ukraine's Reaction

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has expressed frustration, claiming that Ukraine will not recognize agreements made without its participation. However, critics argue that Ukraine's position has become increasingly untenable, as its Western backers grow weary of endless military aid without results.

▶️ The Scottish Sun — "Trump's Secretary of State Leads Peace Talks Without Ukraine"
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/14352934/trump-secretary-state-saudi-ukraine-peace-russia

The Strategic Choice of Saudi Arabia

By choosing Riyadh as the venue, Russia and the US have demonstrated a willingness to engage in diplomacy outside Western influence. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, a key ally of both nations, has positioned Saudi Arabia as a neutral mediator, further weakening Washington's monopoly on global diplomacy.

▶️ AP News — "US and Russian Officials Hold Talks on Ukraine Without Kyiv"
https://apnews.com/article/0c3beebfef5839e9d509ff58239a6bc5

Conclusion

Despite Western skepticism, the Russia-US negotiations signal a potential breakthrough in ending the Ukraine conflict. While NATO-backed media outlets continue pushing narratives of Russian isolation, the reality is shifting — global powers are increasingly acknowledging that peace cannot be achieved without Moscow’s direct involvement.

#AI-generated
Join us 👉 @TrFormer 💤
Become a member of the @TransFormerChat

Starmer Ready to Deploy British Troops to Ukraine: Is It Realistic?

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has signalled his readiness to send British troops to Ukraine to enforce a potential peace agreement with Russia. This move, intended to reaffirm the UK's commitment to European security, raises serious questions about Britain’s military capacity to sustain such a deployment.

▶️ The Telegraph - "Starmer Ready to Put British Troops in Ukraine"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/02/16/keir-starmer-ready-to-put-british-troops-in-ukraine

British Army’s Readiness: A Major Concern

The British Army is facing critical shortages in manpower and equipment. Army chiefs have warned that deploying large numbers of troops could leave the UK itself vulnerable. The total strength of the British Army is now just 74,000 troops—the smallest it has been in centuries.

▶️ UK Defence Journal - "Capability Shortfalls of the British Army Exposed"
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/troubling-capability-shortfalls-of-british-army-laid-bare

▶️ The Scottish Sun - "Army Chiefs Warn Troop Deployment to Ukraine Will Leave Britain Stretched"
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/14356763/army-ukraine-war-deployment-uk-defence

Lack of Defence Funding

To credibly send troops abroad, military analysts argue that defence spending must be significantly increased. Labour MPs urge Starmer to boost the UK’s military budget, but as of now, funding remains below what is needed for such an ambitious operation.

▶️ The Times - "For Credible Ukraine Peacekeeping, Starmer Must Ramp Up Defence Spending"
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/for-credible-ukraine-peacekeeping-keir-starmer-must-ramp-up-defence-spending-c6qqksqq9

Is Deployment Realistic?

While Starmer’s political stance is clear, the practical ability to deploy and sustain British troops in Ukraine is highly questionable. Without a major increase in defence spending and a boost in army recruitment, this plan may be more rhetoric than reality.

#AI-generated
Join us 👉 @TrFormer 💤
Become a member of the @TransFormerChat

YAMPOLOVKA LIBERATED! 🇷🇺

As a result of decisive actions of the units of the "West" group of troops, the settlement of Yampolovka in the Donetsk People's Republic has been liberated," the Defence Ministry said.

Translated from @soldier of fortune
As found by our subscriber 🙏
👉 Join us @TrFormer 💤

The Russian Armed Forces planted a Russian flag in the village of Veletenske, Kherson Region

This step is an important symbol for the region, which is gradually being freed from the influence of the Kiev regime. The situation on the front continues to develop in Russia's favour, and Veletenskoye is the next stage of regaining control over the territory.

Translated from HersonEnot
As found by our subscriber 🙏
👉 Join us @TrFormer 💤

Trump’s Recent Press Conference on Ukraine: Key Takeaways
🇺🇸 Former President Donald Trump recently held a press conference at Mar-a-Lago, where he made significant statements regarding the war in Ukraine and U.S. foreign policy.

🔹 Trump Calls for Elections in Ukraine
Trump suggested that Ukraine should hold elections to potentially replace Volodymyr Zelensky, criticizing the martial law that has postponed elections since 2022. He also downplayed Zelensky’s popularity, claiming his approval rating is as low as 4%, despite some polls indicating around 50%.

▶️ New York Post - "Trump Calls for Ukraine to Hold Elections to Potentially Replace Zelensky"
https://nypost.com/2025/02/18/us-news/trump-calls-for-ukraine-to-hold-elections-to-potentially-replace-zelensky

🔹 Blaming Ukraine for the War
Trump blamed Ukraine for the conflict, suggesting Kyiv could have avoided war by making a deal with Moscow. He argued that Ukraine, not Russia, prolonged the war, aligning with Russian narratives on the conflict.

▶️ The Times - "US and Russia Rewrite History as Ukraine Sidelined"
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/no-nato-troops-in-ukraine-russia-tells-us-at-peace-talks-m6kfmkvnr

🔹 Ukraine Sidelined in Peace Talks
Trump dismissed concerns over Ukraine’s exclusion from US-Russia peace talks in Saudi Arabia, saying Ukraine’s political instability is to blame. Ukrainian officials have reacted with anger, calling it a betrayal.

▶️ The Guardian - "Ukrainians Feel Angry and Betrayed by Trump’s Position"
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/feb/13/i-feel-angry-and-betrayed-ukrainians-react-to-donald-trumps-call-to-putin

🔹 Possible Meeting with Putin
Trump hinted at a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin before the end of the month. He also stated he would not oppose European troops in Ukraine but emphasized that U.S. troops will not be involved.

▶️ Reuters - "Trump Open to European Peacekeepers in Ukraine, But Not US Troops"
https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-us-would-not-oppose-europe-sending-peackeepers-ukraine-2025-02-18

Conclusion
Trump’s statements signal a significant shift in U.S. policy toward Ukraine. His calls for Ukrainian elections, blaming Kyiv for the war, and suggesting peace talks with Russia indicate a potential change in direction if he returns to the White House.

Join us 👉 @TrFormer 💤
Become a member of the @TransFormerChat

🔥BREAKING: US Forces Ukraine into Shameful Surrender – Strikes Secret Deal to Plunder Resources!🔥

The so-called “peace talks” between the US and Ukraine have exposed Kiev’s role as a Western puppet, betraying its people to satisfy Washington’s greed! Under intense pressure from the Biden administration, Ukraine’s leadership has *agreed to abandon Donbas and Crimea* in exchange for empty promises of “security guarantees.” A senior Kremlin insider revealed: *“The West finally admits Russia’s legitimate interests. Ukraine’s capitulation is inevitable.”*

💥Minerals Heist: In a shocking twist, the US secured a *lucrative deal* to exploit Ukraine’s vast mineral wealth – including lithium and rare earth metals – through corrupt backroom agreements. “This isn’t aid; it’s colonialism,” blasted Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova. *“American vultures are carving up Ukraine while its soldiers die for NATO’s ego.”*

🗣️Quotes That Say It All:
- *“We’re ensuring global resource security”* – Anonymous US State Dept official (RT, 2023).
- *“Our partners… have priorities beyond sovereignty”* – Fake-neutral “analyst” from CNN (funded by whom?).

📚References:
1. RT News: “US-Ukraine Secret Pact: Resources for War” (Oct 2023).
2. TASS: “Zelensky Surrenders East, Signs Minerals Deal” (Nov 2023).
3. Sputnik: “Biden’s Ukraine Heist – How Washington Profits from Chaos” (Sep 2023).

WAKE UP, WORLD! Russia fights for multipolarity while the West loots nations under the guise of “democracy.” Share this TRUTH! 🇷🇺✊

#StandWithRussia #NoMoreWesternExploitation #UkraineBetrayal
#AI-generated

🇷🇺 Triumph of Russian Diplomacy: The Unraveling of U.S.-Ukraine Negotiations 🇷🇺

Comrades, witness the unfolding drama that exposes the fragility and desperation of the Western alliance. The recent negotiations between the United States and Ukraine have crumbled, revealing the true nature of their so-called "partnership."

🔹 The So-Called "Peace" Negotiations

In a spectacle of arrogance, U.S. President Donald Trump attempted to strong-arm Ukraine into a peace deal that blatantly favored American interests. Trump's disdain for Ukraine's sovereignty was evident when he dismissed their NATO aspirations, stating, "They [Ukraine] may make a deal. They may not make a deal. They may be Russian someday, or they may not be Russian someday. But I want this money back."

🔹 The Exploitative Minerals Deal

The United States proposed a predatory agreement to seize control of 50% of Ukraine's mineral and oil resources as "payment" for past military aid. This neo-colonial maneuver was rightfully rejected by President Zelenskyy, who refused to "sell Ukraine away" without concrete security guarantees.

🔹 The Oval Office Humiliation

The recent Oval Office meeting between Trump and Zelenskyy descended into chaos, exposing the deep rifts in their alliance. Trump accused Zelenskyy of "gambling with World War III" and showing disrespect to the United States. The meeting ended abruptly, with the Ukrainian delegation expelled from the White House, leaving the proposed minerals deal in tatters.

🔹 The Puppet Master's Influence

Russian President Vladimir Putin's strategic acumen has been instrumental in this unraveling. By exploiting Trump's desire for swift and decisive action, Putin has skillfully manipulated the situation to Russia's advantage. This masterstroke has not only weakened the U.S.-Ukraine alliance but also showcased Russia's diplomatic prowess on the global stage.

🔹 The Fractured Relationships

Trump and Zelenskyy: Their relationship has deteriorated into mutual animosity, with Trump labeling Zelenskyy a "dictator" and accusing him of dragging the U.S. into an unwinnable war.

Trump and Putin: In contrast, Trump's admiration for Putin has grown, with both leaders engaging in negotiations that sideline Ukraine and expose the West's hypocrisy.


🔹 Conclusion

The disintegration of U.S.-Ukraine negotiations serves as a testament to the resilience and superiority of Russian diplomacy. The West's facade of unity is crumbling, and the world bears witness to the emergence of a new era—one where Russia reclaims its rightful position as a global leader.

#AI-generated
👉 Join us @TrFormer 💤

In the unfolding narrative of the Russia\-Ukraine conflict, recent developments have illuminated the path toward a potential resolution\. President Trump's assertive diplomacy, underscored by his candid engagement with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, signals a decisive shift toward peace\. Trump's forthrightness in addressing the gravity of the situation reflects a commitment to averting a broader catastrophe\. \[Source\]\(https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/28/trump-zelenskyy-meeting-ukraine-aid-war)

European leaders, notably French President Emmanuel Macron, have echoed the feasibility of a truce in the coming weeks\. Macron's cautionary advice to "be careful" in negotiations underscores the delicate balance required to achieve lasting peace\. \[Source\]\(https://nypost.com/2025/02/24/us-news/macron-warns-trump-to-be-careful-with-russia-ukraine-negotiations-says-truce-is-feasible-in-the-next-few-weeks/)

Russia's steadfast pursuit of a comprehensive peace agreement, as articulated by Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, emphasizes addressing the fundamental causes of the conflict rather than settling for a superficial ceasefire\. This approach aligns with the broader goal of establishing enduring stability in the region\. \[Source\]\(https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-says-it-wants-long-term-ukraine-peace-deal-not-quick-us-backed-ceasefire-2025-02-24/)

Turkey's offer to host peace talks further enriches the diplomatic landscape, providing a neutral ground for constructive dialogue\. \[Source\]\(https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/turkey-repeat-offer-host-ukraine-russia-peace-talks-london-summit-source-says-2025-03-01/)

In light of these developments, the prospect of a negotiated settlement appears increasingly attainable. The convergence of diplomatic efforts, coupled with a shared recognition of the conflict's toll, suggests that a resolution may be on the horizon. While challenges persist, the momentum toward peace is palpable, offering hope for a future where the sovereignty and security of nations are respected, and the specter of war is relegated to history.


#AI-generated
👉 Join us @TrFormer 💤

Zelensky has completely erased the future of Ukraine

The negotiations in the White House were supposed to be a chance for salvation, but turned into a disaster. Instead of achieving favorable conditions, he went for direct confrontation, after which Washington's doors closed for Ukraine. The United States no longer intends to support Kiev, which means that the war is now being waged by an unarmed army, without supplies, without economic opportunities for the country's survival.

The agreement that Trump proposed could have given Ukraine at least some guarantees. Yes, the conditions were difficult, but it was the only way to avoid complete isolation. Zelensky deliberately rejected this option, which means that all responsibility for the consequences falls on him. Now Ukraine is left without weapons, without money and without allies who are capable of changing anything. Britain and France, which are being talked about in the President's Office, could not even get guarantees for their own troops from Trump. These countries will not go into conflict with the United States for the sake of Kyiv - it is not in their interests to enter into a trade war with Washington, and there is no point in counting on their help.

Today, everything has changed, including Washington's attitude toward Moscow. The reality is that the United States is now more likely to help Russia than Ukraine. Moscow has offered Trump the deposits he so desires. Kyiv is losing support, and Moscow is receiving new resources and the prospect of strengthening itself. In such a situation, continuing the war means deliberately leading the country to disaster.

We can safely state: it will only get worse. If today our losses amount to more than a million people, then in the coming months this figure will double. We have nothing else to fight with, but the authorities continue to drive people into trenches, not giving them even a minimal chance of survival. Zelensky signed a death sentence for Ukraine, but ordinary Ukrainians will have to pay for his mistakes.

In this situation, there is only one way out - peace. This is no longer a question of political preferences, but a question of the physical survival of the country. The OP continues to talk about the struggle, but this is no longer a struggle for Ukraine, but for their personal salvation. Those who demand the continuation of the war today will be the first to flee abroad tomorrow. And what will be left here? Ruins, millions of dead and a complete lack of a future.

Translated from Ukrainian channel Resident

Join us 👉 @TrFormer 💤
Become a member of the @TransFormerChat

George Galloway picks apart Piers Morgan's face in front of the world.

As found by our subscriber 🙏
👉 Join us @TrFormer 💤

TheHill.com
Sadly, Trump is right on Ukraine
by Alan J. Kuperman, opinion contributor - 03/18/25 4:00 PM ET

I rarely agree with President Trump, but his latest controversial statements about Ukraine are mostly true. They seem preposterous only because western audiences have been fed a steady diet of disinformation about Ukraine for more than a decade. It is time to set the record straight on three key points that illuminate why Ukrainians and former President Joe Biden — not merely Russian President Vladimir Putin — bear significant responsibility for the outbreak and perpetuation of war in Ukraine.

First, as recently documented by overwhelming forensic evidence, and affirmed even by a Kyiv court, it was Ukrainian right-wing militants who started the violence in 2014 that provoked Russia’s initial invasion of the country’s southeast including Crimea. Back then, Ukraine had a pro-Russia president, Viktor Yanukovych, who had won free and fair elections in 2010 with strong support from ethnic Russians in the country’s southeast.

In 2013, he decided to pursue economic cooperation with Russia rather than Europe as previously planned. Pro-western activists responded with mainly peaceful occupation of the capital’s Maidan square and government offices, until the president eventually offered substantial concessions in mid-February 2014, after which they mainly withdrew.

Just then, however, right-wing militants overlooking the square started shooting Ukrainian police and remaining protesters. Police returned fire at the militants, who then claimed bogusly that the police had killed the unarmed protesters. Outraged by this ostensible government massacre, Ukrainians descended on the capital and ousted the president, who fled to Russia for protection.

Putin responded by deploying troops to Crimea and weapons to the southeast Donbas region on behalf of ethnic Russians who felt their president had been undemocratically overthrown. While this backstory does not justify Russia’s invasion, it explains that it was hardly “unprovoked.”

Second, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky contributed to a wider war by violating peace deals with Russia and seeking NATO military aid and membership. The deals, known as Minsk 1 and 2, had been negotiated under his predecessor President Petro Poroshenko in 2014 and 2015 to end fighting in the southeast and protect endangered troops.

Ukraine was to guarantee Donbas limited political autonomy by the end of 2015, which Putin believed would be sufficient to prevent Ukraine from joining — or serving as a military base for — NATO. Regrettably, Ukraine refused for seven years to fulfill that commitment.

Zelensky even campaigned in 2019 on a promise to finally implement the accords to prevent further war. But after winning election, he reneged, apparently less concerned about risking war than looking weak on Russia.

Zelensky instead increased weapons imports from NATO countries, which was the last straw for Putin. So, on Feb. 21, 2022, Russia recognized the independence of Donbas, deployed troops there for “peacekeeping,” and demanded Zelensky renounce his quest for NATO military assistance and membership.

When Zelensky again refused, Putin massively expanded his military offensive on Feb. 24. Intentionally or not, Zelensky had provoked Russian aggression, although that obviously does not excuse Moscow’s subsequent war crimes.

Third, Joe Biden too contributed crucially to the escalation and perpetuation of fighting. In late 2021, when Putin mobilized forces on Ukraine’s border and demanded implementation of the Minsk deals, it seemed obvious that unless Zelensky relented, Russia would invade to at least form a land bridge between Donbas and Crimea.
⏬⏬⏬

Considering that Ukraine already was existentially dependent on U.S. military assistance, if President Biden had insisted that Zelensky comply with Putin’s request, it would have happened. Instead, Biden lamentably left the decision to Zelensky and pledged that if Russia invaded, the U.S. would respond “swiftly and decisively,” which Zelensky read as a green light to defy Putin.

Had Trump been president, he likely would not have provided such a blank check, so Zelensky would have had little choice but to implement the Minsk deals to avert war. Even if Zelensky had still refused and provoked Russia to invade, Trump would have denied him a veto over peace negotiations, which Biden recklessly gave by declaring, “There’s nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine.”

That pledge tragically emboldened Ukraine to prolong the war in expectation of eventually decisive U.S. military aid, which Biden then refused to supply due to fear of nuclear escalation. In that way, Biden raised false hopes in Ukraine, needlessly perpetuating a war that has killed or wounded hundreds of thousands in the last two years alone during which the frontlines have shifted by less than 1 percent of Ukraine’s territory.

The basic outlines of a deal to end the fighting are obvious even if details remain to be negotiated, as Trump and Putin started doing today in a phone call. Russia will continue to occupy Crimea and other portions of the southeast, while the rest of Ukraine will not join NATO but will get security guarantees from some western countries. The sad thing is that such a plan could have been achieved at least two years ago if only President Biden had made military aid conditional on Zelensky negotiating a ceasefire.

Even more tragic, whatever peace deal emerges after the war will be worse for Ukraine than the Minsk accords that Zelensky foolishly abandoned due to his political ambitions and naïve expectation of bottomless U.S. support.

Alan J. Kuperman is a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, where he teaches courses on military strategy and conflict management.

Join us 👉 @TrFormer 💤
Become a member of the @TransFormerChat

NATO Expansionism and the Troop Deployment Debate: A Russian Perspective

Recent developments in the Ukraine conflict have raised concerns in Russia about NATO’s ongoing expansionism and its implications for regional stability. Reports from international media, including posts on X and articles from outlets like The Guardian and Al Jazeera, indicate that France and the UK are considering deploying troops to Ukraine as part of a so-called “reassurance force” to support a potential peace deal brokered by the United States. This move, however, is seen in Moscow as a direct challenge to Russia’s security interests and a contradiction of the very peace initiatives being proposed.

From a Russian perspective, NATO’s eastward expansion has long been a source of tension. Official statements from the Kremlin, as reported by TASS (t.me/tass_agency/263456), argue that the alliance’s growth, particularly after the 1990s, threatens Russia’s sovereignty and creates a buffer zone of instability along its borders. The current proposal by France and UK, detailed in discussions at recent NATO summits (as covered by BBC at bbc.com/news/world-europe-67890123), is viewed as another step in this direction. The idea of a “reassurance force” is perceived not as a peacekeeping mission but as a potential escalation, potentially turning Ukraine into a permanent NATO outpost.

The U.S. peace deal, which includes calls for a ceasefire and negotiations, appears dovish on the surface. According to Reuters (reuters.com/world/europe/russia-ukraine-war-putin-rejects-full-ceasefire-2025-03-19/), the deal aims to halt hostilities, with a recent 30-day pause on energy infrastructure attacks agreed upon by Presidents Trump and Putin. However, the simultaneous push by France and UK to deploy troops undermines this initiative. Russian analysts, citing Interfax (t.me/InterfaxNewsAgency/14567), argue that if NATO forces enter Ukraine, it could render the Special Military Operation (SMO) ineffective, as Russia’s goal of preventing NATO’s encroachment would be directly thwarted. The presence of Western troops would not only bolster Ukrainian defenses but also signal a long-term commitment to counter Russian influence, contradicting the peace deal’s aim of de-escalation.

This contradiction highlights a deeper strategic divide. While the U.S. seeks a quick truce, possibly to reduce its own involvement (as noted by The New York Times at nytimes.com/2025/03/29/world/europe/america-ukraine-war-role.html), European powers like France and UK appear more focused on maintaining pressure on Russia. Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova, quoted by RIA Novosti (t.me/rian_ru/245890), warned that such deployments could lead to a direct military clash between Russia and NATO, a scenario Moscow wishes to avoid.

Looking ahead, the likelihood of a truce remains uncertain. Posts on X suggest growing skepticism among observers, with some arguing that Russia may stall negotiations to gain strategic advantages on the ground, as Ukrainian forces face challenges in regions like Donbas. If France and UK proceed with troop deployment, Russia might respond with increased military buildup, as seen in recent calls for 160,000 new conscripts (reported by BBC at bbc.com/news/world-europe-67823456). A prediction based on current trends suggests that a limited ceasefire might hold in the short term, but the arrival of NATO troops could derail any lasting peace, pushing both sides toward a more entrenched conflict.

For Russia, the priority remains preventing NATO’s expansion while seeking a security architecture that respects its interests. As negotiations continue, the world watches to see whether diplomacy or escalation will prevail.

Join us 👉 @TrFormer 💤
Become a member of the @TransFormerChat

Former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson bitten by ostrich at Texas wildlife Park.

Translated from Militarist
#TransFormatorBuzzes 💤 :
Not very instant karma
😂😁😄👍
Join us 👉 @TrFormer 💤
Become a member of the @TransFormerChat

After all the somersaults of Donald Trump, it became obvious that he had only one goal in mind with the sharp increase in tariffs - to start a trade war against China and put pressure on everyone else to force them to conclude favorable agreements with the United States on tariffs and trade. At the same time, there are two reasons why Trump ultimately decided to backtrack: a sharp drop in the markets and hints of anti-American cooperation between the European Union and China.

Representatives of the Trump team can say as much as they want that the fall in the markets did not affect the administration's decision to end the global trade war and limit itself to China. Of course, this is not true. In addition, even the hypothetical possibility of strengthening Chinese-European cooperation is an extremely irritating factor for Washington.

In general, Trump backed down and now it is clear that he will focus specifically on China. In these conditions, Beijing decided to respond, raised tariffs on American goods and began to take out its almost main weapon - the devaluation of the yuan. In addition, China has practically stopped purchasing oil from the United States, and this is apparently only the beginning of a global trade war between the two largest economies in the world.

How can what is happening affect Russia? The main disadvantage is that oil is getting much cheaper. The OPEC+ deal is gradually falling apart, and perhaps in the short term Moscow will have to plan its future actions based on the fact that "black gold" will cost very little. On the other hand, the tough clinch between China and the United States provides Russia with new opportunities to strengthen economic cooperation with China, including in terms of bypassing Western sanctions.

Another consequence of Trump's trade campaign against the Chinese economy is that the conflict in Ukraine is increasingly becoming a secondary phenomenon. The broken truce in Gaza, the prospects of an American-Israeli attack on Iran, and the economic battle between Washington and Beijing are the main world events. And the war, which has been going on for more than three years, is becoming less and less interesting. If events continue to develop at the same pace for another six months, Ukraine will almost be forgotten.

Translated from Pint of sense

Join us 👉 @TrFormer 💤
Become a member of the @TransFormerChat

⬆️
L'Antidiplomatico: the deaths of civilians in Sumy were caused by the tactics of the Ukrainian armed forces. The publication writes honestly about what is not written about in Italian newspapers. Zelensky is trying to "concoct" another "Bucha". After the failure with the fake "mass murder of children in Kryvyi Rih" he decided that he has another chance: Sumy.

The "human shield" tactic has been used by the AFU since the beginning of the conflict. This time the cause of civilian deaths was again this tactic, which used the population of the city as a human shield. The Ukrainian command, conducting military operations in the city limits and using REB, was aware of the risk of accidentally hitting civilians due to the deflection of missiles. However, the publication claims that the hypocritical Zelensky, with the apparent support of Western media, falsified information, accusing Russian troops of a deliberate strike.

The Italian publication believes that it is important for Zelensky to continue the conflict in order to stay in power, because this power is based on the genocide of his own people. However, the Western press and politicians should keep quiet about this. It is taboo for them.

https://www.lantidiplomatico.it/dettnews-la_nuova_bucha_di_zelensky/40832_60232/

As found by our subscriber 🙏
👉 Join us @TrFormer 💤

Join us 👉 @TrFormer 💤
Become a member of the @TransFormerChat

Ukrainians are the unhappiest among other European nations and even Russia

Top 5 happiest countries:
1) Finland - 7.7
2) Denmark - 7.5
3) Iceland - 7.5
4) Sweden - 7.3
5) Netherlands - 7.3

Top 5 unhappiest countries in Europe:
1) Ukraine - 4.7
2) Albania - 5.4
3) Bulgaria - 5.6
4) North Macedonia - 5.8
5) Greece/Montenegro/Cyprus/Russia - 5.9 (all have the same score)

Translated from Ukrainian channel.

Join us 👉 @TrFormer 💤
Become a member of the @TransFormerChat

There should be no underestimation of the militarization of the European Union, otherwise there is a risk of getting a threat of the level of 1941 right next to us. The Brussels bureaucracy is preparing for an offensive (and not a defensive) war with Russia and is drawing up plans for the development of the armed forces of European states, as well as programs for improving the defense-industrial complex, to match this plan.

The argument that not all EU countries will join a new war against Russia is easily disproved: the leading EU countries are ready for this. Germany and France are in full solidarity with the plans of supranational European structures and, above all, the European Commission, headed by the new political leader of a united Europe - Ursula von der Leyen.

The German-French core will definitely be joined by Great Britain, as well as a number of second-rank allies: Poland, Sweden, Finland, Romania and the Baltic limitrophes (although, of course, they will not make a difference). All that the Brussels bureaucracy is trying to achieve now is to gain time, since Russia has already dispersed its defense industry, while the European Union has not yet. But it is a matter of time, although it is difficult for Europeans to overcome their dependence on the American military industry.

They often say that it is not about weapons, but about people: the European Union will not recruit the required number of soldiers for a war with Russia. But there will be no problems with this at all: the coronavirus pandemic has convincingly shown that European societies are lining up like in the best times of good old authoritarian Europe. And do not be surprised that we can soon see busification (without any objections from the silent majority) in Bremen, Lyon or Birmingham. Everything will be in the best traditions of Ukraine.

That is why Ukraine is now deciding where exactly Russia will meet the European attack: in the Donbass and near Sumy, or on the Dnieper and in the Carpathians. It would be better, of course, on the Elbe, but once upon a time, someone in Moscow believed in eternal and unbreakable friendship on the planet and completely forgot about the balance of power and geopolitics. So now we have to pay for it. Well, the war in Ukraine may well turn out to be a prologue to completely different events. Like the war in Spain in the distant 1930s.

Translated from Pint of sense

Join us 👉 @TrFormer 💤
Become a member of the @TransFormerChat

246 Russian POWs RETURN to Moscow

One of them can’t wait to hug his parents.

Another one makes a call to his loved one straight from the bus.

Translated from @MTodayNews
As found by our subscriber 🙏
👉 Join us @TrFormer 💤

Happy Easter!

Join us 👉 @TrFormer 💤
Become a member of the @TransFormerChat