By John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

As they study the record of the US negotiations for an end to the Iran war, Russian and Chinese intelligence reporters have recently concluded that President Vladimir Putin should now refocus his talks strategy on Vice President JD Vance; ignore Steven Witkoff and Jared Kushner, discredited by their performance in Israel and Iran; and put an end to the role with the Americans of Kirill Dmitriev.

Russian sources with direct knowledge say the Chinese assessment of Dmitriev, leaked through Hong Kong and Singapore, is even more scathing than Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s. His  private condemnation of Dmitriev’s performance has surfaced in publicly expressed scepticism towards the trust-in-Trump (TiT) interpretation of the Anchorage Formula which Dmitriev promotes. https://johnhelmer.net/?s=Anchorage+Formula 

The trust-in-Trump line was put on display on Sunday (June 14) when Putin claimed to be the first foreign leader to telegraph Trump with 80^th birthday wishes,  and an hour later elaborate in Putin’s fluent English over the telephone with Trump for forty-five minutes.

According to Putin’s spokesman Yury Ushakov, Putin “highlighted the exceptional character traits of the man he was honouring – traits that contribute to his success both as a person and as a politician. Donald Trump was touched by the remarks and thanked Vladimir Putin, noting that he was the first foreign leader to call him at the White House… I will even let you in on a secret: Donald Trump is not entirely thrilled by the number 80, as he is full of energy and vigour.”   

Asked by a knowing Russian journalist if Putin had sent “birthday gifts” to Trump, Ushakov said no on the line, yes below the line: “No gifts were sent but, as I have already said, the greetings were quite warm and reflective of the relations between the two presidents.”  

“Relations between the two presidents” mean the bribery schemes through which Dmitriev, Witkoff and Kushner have been negotiating their version of the Anchorage Formula since the presidents’ summit meeting in Anchorage, Alaska, last August. They have included a scheme  to convert the $300 billion of Russia’s frozen Central Bank foreign currency assets into a fund for investment in the Ukraine and in the new Russian territories – a fund to be co-managed by nominees of Dmitriev, Witkoff and Kushner.

The consensus of Russia’s Security Council, however, including the General Staff, military intelligence chief Admiral Igor Kostyukov, deputy Council chairman and former president Dmitry Medvedev, and Foreign Minister Lavrov is that the bribery schemes have come, will come to nothing.  

In the assessments of foreign officials to whom these Russians have confided – the Hong Kong and Singapore sources now claim – the trust-in-Trump (TiT) strategy has failed because Trump cannot deliver the US security guarantee for Russia in Europe. The alternative is the Vanchorage strategy at the White House, which, the sources expect, will gain in domestic strength after the Congressional elections in November, and in the race for the presidential succession to follow.  

Likewise, the announcements of the memorandum of understanding for the staged end-of-war with Iran —  initialled by US and Iran officials, scheduled for official signing on Friday —  reveal that the Iranians and Americans have tacitly agreed it will be Vance, not Trump’s men, Witkoff and Kushner, who is now relied upon to finalize the terms during the 60-day ceasefire stage.

Vance signalled he is taking this lead in a seven-and-a-half minute briefing  televised by CBS on Monday. This is the Vanchorage Formula he agreed with Trump during the birthday celebration at the White House over the weekend.  Vance agrees on the concession terms between the two sides; Trump has accepted the risk of deal failure but is claiming the public credit for deal success. Trump, in the Vanchorage Formula, is also responsible for pacifying the regime in Tel Aviv and the Jewish community in Washington.

“We certainly expect the Israelis will be a participant in this process,” Vance told CBS. “But we think it’s going to be good for them. It’s going to be good for us. It’s going to be good for the Gulf Coast coalition…and if the Iranians comply with their end of the bargain, it’s going to be good for Iran.”

According to the confidential sources, the European leaders who promise continuity in the war against Russia “see and understand Russia and Putin’s system far better than Dmitriev and Putin can acknowledge,  and so they are hitting at it. Putin’s best chance now is to follow the Iranian lead on military escalation and Vance’s lead on negotiation.”

(more…)

by Editor - Monday, June 15th, 2026
No Comments »

By John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

On Sunday afternoon, just before he began to eat what his calendar  called a “family dinner”, President Donald Trump believed he had ended his and Israel’s year-long war against Iran. He told the global oil and betting markets: “I hereby fully authorize the toll free opening of the Strait of Hormuz, and, simultaneously herewith, authorize the immediate removal of the United States Naval blockade. Ships of the World, start your engines. Let the oil flow!”  

An hour later Trump, as he was digesting what he and his heirs, Eric and Donald Jr., had been eating, he celebrated himself: “Many presidents have tried to make Peace with Iran, and all have failed before me. The Leaders of the Region have, for the first time, found a President who can help them achieve real Peace. With the opening of the Strait upon the signing of the Deal on Friday, for purposes of mine removal, oil will flow on both ends again for the Region, and the World!”  

Iran’s Supreme National Security Council issued its own celebration of “complet[ing] its superiority over the American-Zionist enemy…the war and military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon, will end immediately and permanently starting tonight. In addition, the naval blockade against Iran will be ended immediately and completely. The signing of the MoU will officially take place on Friday (19 June). Negotiations for a final agreement will be postponed until after the other side’s commitments are implemented in accordance with the MoU.”  

Trump was also celebrating his 80th birthday at the White House with Stephen Miller, JD Vance, Peter Hegseth, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe.

At that moment, across the Atlantic, operation orders were under way from British Prime Minister Keir Starmer for his military forces to attack a Russian crude oil cargo in the English Channel. The tanker Smyrtos was en route from Ust-Luga, where it had loaded just over  100,000 tonnes of oil, to Port Said, Egypt,  and then to the Indian port of Sikka.   The boarding of the Smyrtos took place in the early hours of Sunday morning, local time. Watch the video record from the UK Defense Ministry.  

“This operation delivers yet another blow to Russia,” announced Starmer, “and reminds those fueling Putin’s war in Ukraine that they cannot hide.”  

Starmer followed not long after with his congratulations to Trump for the “[Iran] breakthrough…attention must now turn to fully implementing the memorandum of understanding to ensure the Strait [of Hormuz] reopens and remains fully and permanently open…We are clear that toll-free freedom of navigation must now be restored in the strait of Hormuz to begin easing the severe economic impacts that have been felt for several months.”  

Neither Starmer nor Trump — nor the other European leaders whom Trump will be meeting at  Evian and Versailles later this week — intend to lift their war on the high seas against Russia,  and against everyone who buys Russian oil. For them, there is no memorandum of understanding – no Anchorage formula, as the Kremlin calls it  – for pausing, let alone ending the war against Russia in Europe, in India, in China.  

Not even after multi-million dollar bribes have been paid by the Indian Ambani family, nor after India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi meets Trump for forty-five minutes next Wednesday (June 17). The Sikka oil terminal, on the Gujarat coast of India, to which the Smyrtos was heading before the British took it, belongs to the Indian Reliance Industries group owned by Mukesh Ambani and his sons.   The Smyrtos oil cargo had been ordered by them at the same time as the Ambanis have been paying protection money in Washington to the Trump family,    and buying influence with the White House deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller.

Not even after the promises of more multi-million dollar bribes from the Russians, nor after the birthday telephone call President Vladimir Putin held on Sunday evening, Moscow time, with Trump. Putin’s chief bribe arranger with the Trump family, Kirill Dmitriev, broke the news by a tweet, getting ahead of the Kremlin spokesman’s public disclosure by an hour.     

“Our president also sent a congratulatory message, in which he noted the exceptional character traits of the honouree that have contributed to his success as a person and as a politician. Donald Trump was touched by these words, expressed his gratitude, and noted that Vladimir Putin was the first foreign leader to call him at the White House,” Yury Ushakov, Putin’s foreign affairs spokesman, announced, according to the Kremlin communiqué.  

Ushakov added an irony: “The Russian President did not send any gifts to mark the US President’s 80th birthday. But, as I have already said, the congratulatory message was very warm, reflecting the nature of the relationship between the two presidents.”  

Steven Witkoff and Jared Kushner “will come back to Russia in the near future”, Ushakov also revealed.

In the new podcast with Dimitri Lascaris, taped at 5 pm Washington time on Saturday, we conclude that so long as Dmitriev negotiates with Witkoff and Kushner on Putin’s direction, there will be no escalation of Russian military operations on the Ukraine battlefield and no end to the NATO war.  

by Editor - Sunday, June 14th, 2026
No Comments »

By John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

Rulers often declare official holidays to celebrate what they require those they rule to forget – battlefield defeats, acts of surrender, crimes of treason.

Long weekends under a warm summer sun are best for forgetfulness. And so it has been for Russia Day, as the annual June 12 public holiday is known officially. The temperature in Moscow on Friday reached 30 C and there was no rain.

Boris Yeltsin first introduced the Day in 1992 to celebrate himself and whitewash the crimes he had begun to commit against the country. Those crimes included the vote-rigging, bribery, and fraud with which he arranged his election to the presidency of the Russian Congress of People’s Deputies with a majority of 50.52% on May 29, 1990.   Two weeks later, on June 12, 1990, Yeltsin pushed through the Congress vote to commence the secession of Russia from the Soviet Union. The vote was 907 in favour; 13 against; 10 abstentions.  

In an earlier, linked vote that day, 704 to 201, the deputies voted to preserve “Soviet Socialist” in the title of the Russian Federation. “We didn’t declare ourselves a separate government from the USSR,” said Ruslan Khasbulatov, the Congress deputy chairman. “We think our Russian fate should be within the framework of the USSR.”  

But Yeltsin turned the deputies’ votes into their opposite. When they resisted, he took decree-rule presidential powers in the election of June 12, 1991, with 58.6%.  When the deputies continued to resist and began an impeachment process against Yeltsin, he dissolved parliament, fired on the building, killing and wounding at least 600. That was between September 21 and October 4, 1993.  Two months and a week later. on December 12, 1993, Yeltsin arranged a national referendum vote of 58.4%, with a turnout of 54.4% — both rigged – to approve a constitution replacing parliamentary rule with his own.

Russia doesn’t have state holidays in September and October. In November, the official celebration of the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 has been abolished on November 7, and replaced on November 4 by National Unity Day.   

In Friday’s celebration, there was no mention of Yeltsin or the wars, foreign and domestic,  against Russian democracy, socialism, and communism.  

President Vladimir Putin held a meeting with junior rankers of the army. “I wanted to meet with you specifically, specifically today, on Russia Day,” the President said, “because you are the people who – like other personnel involved in the special military operation (I will speak about this further) – are directly involved in defending our Motherland, defending our Fatherland, defending Russia. Russia Day is your day… This has been true at all times: during Peter the Great’s reign, when his grenadiers fought for the Motherland, and during Suvorov’s [1730-1800] and Kutuzov’s [1745-1813] times, and through all military conflicts. It has always been true and it remains true today. On the same note, I would like to underline the crucial task that our assault units – you and your brothers-in-arms – are handling right now.”  

Former President Dmitry Medvedev celebrated publicly by identifying the enemies whom Russian forces “are handling right now”. In a solemn ceremony Medvedev fed pictures of German chancellor Merz, European Commission President von der Leyen, and British Prime Minister Starmer into a shredding machine, then stepped back, placed his hands in his suit pockets, and smiled.   President Trump’s photograph was not fed into the shredder.

The Levada polling organization of Moscow – officially designated a foreign agent for taking US grant and contract money – has ignored Yeltsin and Russia Day in its public opinion surveys for several years. In 2023 50% of Russians polled by Levada said they felt negative towards Yeltsin; 35% neutral; just 6% said they were positive.  

This year, reporting on the decline in public confidence in the future direction of the country and the worsening standard of living, Levada announced its own loyalty vote. “We are not supporters of this rather vulgar economic determinism, supposedly Marxism-Leninism,” according to Alexei Levinson, a department head at Levada. “The history of our country and a number of similar countries says that the combination of the state as an apparatus of violence (Marx) and the organized propaganda apparatus (Lenin) as a factor of history has always been stronger than the so-called material conditions of the masses.”   

Well, that’s alright then, or it isn’t.

(more…)

by Editor - Friday, June 12th, 2026
No Comments »

By John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

Last week President Vladimir Putin said he believes war propaganda in the media of our time  began with Joseph Goebbels.

“As far as the statements by European politicians about their preparations for a war against Russia are concerned,” Putin said on May 29, “that is nonsense. They are allegedly doing this in connection with Russia’s aggressive plans with respect to Western European countries. It is a lie. It is a gross, blatant lie. And as Goebbels once said: the more unbelievable the lie, the quicker people will believe it. These are the very standards guiding Western politicians and mass media in their day-to-day operations…”

Russian journalists, the President added — “as representatives of the media, you are probably ashamed of your colleagues.”

In fact, Goebbels didn’t say in 1941 what Putin attributed to him. Adolf Hitler came closer in Mein Kampf in 1925: “…in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie…”   This was Hitler’s theory of voter psychology, not his strategy of information warfare.

Also, Goebbels didn’t acknowledge that in the German war in Europe, lying big, lying often, was his and Hitler’s policy. Instead, he said it was Winston Churchill’s technique. “The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.”   

They were talking about newspapers and radio as mass media. In Putin’s remarks last week, he was including television. Putin does not himself listen to or watch such internet media as podcasts, Telegram and Twitter; instead, he reads compilations and excerpts prepared in staff briefing papers.  

But US, British and NATO info-warfighters against Russia are using podcasts as their new media weapon. They have also mobilized the Artificial Intelligence (AI) search engines to ensure that these repeat and reinforce the message that Putin’s truth-telling is itself a lie. A survey this week of AI responses to the question, What evidence is there of loss of confidence in Putin? produced only two Russian opinion polling sources; the rest of the evidence was from NATO-funded and directed English-language media. In short, propaganda.

AI investigation of the sources of loss of confidence in Putin identify only two Russian opinion polling sources – Levada Centre and Russian Public Opinion Research Centre (VTsIOM). The rest of the purported evidence gathered by Grok,  ChatGPT,  and Deep Seek  comes from anti-Russian media, such as Meduza (USAID), Le Monde, Moscow Times (Dutch Foreign Ministry), and Ukrainian media.

This is no accident. All the media, including the AI databases of the media, have been captured by NATO’s cognitive warfare campaign.

“NATO,” reported Steen Sondergaard in a December 2025 paper,  “stands on the threshold of advanced disruptive technologies affecting cognition and human life, both during war and peacetime. Understanding the socio-cognitive technical context and integrating emerging disruptive technologies (EDTs) is crucial for NATO’s decision making superiority. NATO must therefore invest in S&T [NATO Science & Technology Organization] to defend Allies against Cognitive Warfare.”   

The warfare weapons identified by the research funded by this NATO branch include testing of repetition of what were once called big and little lies, re-formulated as rhetorical patterns, memes, headlines, tweets, and fake news across the internet and social media. “We wanted to see,” announced a Cambridge University study of 2019, “if we could pre-emptively debunk, or ‘pre-bunk’, fake news by exposing people to a weak dose of the methods used to create and spread disinformation, so they have a better understanding of how they might be deceived. This is a version of what psychologists call ‘inoculation theory’, with our game working like a psychological vaccination.’”  

Measured success in this testing has had a blowback effect, though. The “vaccination” works to discredit all media, including NATO propaganda. “Efforts to tackle false information through fact-checking or media literacy initiatives increases the public’s skepticism toward ‘fake news’. However, they also breed distrust in genuine, fact-based news sources, a new study using online survey experiments in the US, Poland and Hong Kong shows.”  

Another of the blowback effects has been discovered very recently by US researchers of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. They have analyzed 98 popular political podcasts and 4,654 of the guests they featured over a13-month period and over 10,000  hours  of  podcast  transcripts  which  correspond to the podcast episodes these guests were featured on.  They report that podcast hosts and their guests build audiences by polarizing rather than bridging differences of interpretation and opinion on political topics. Bridging on podcasts, they report, works by narrowing the range of topics and limiting the viewpoints which are cued by hosts for discussion with guests.

“While we did not analyze the emotional valence and tenor of these conversations,” the researchers have concluded, “it is of note that research indicates that cross-partisan discussions  which  center  around  topics  of  known agreement tend to reduce affective polarization. It is possible that bridging individuals are able  to  sustain  rapport  with  those  of  different  ideological bents and possibly decrease affective polarization because they avoid discussing  contentious  issues.”

This is academic jargon meaning that on the current NATO cognitive warfare battlefield, podcasters inviting guests to disagree with one another don’t bridge the differences of interpretation of their guests or of their audiences. Instead, they avoid these differences — and thus reinforce the fight between NATO and Russia. Podcast audience grows by polarization; it shrinks by co-existence.

A NATO warfighting veteran comments: “As for the sides, I believe they are all, essentially, on the same side. No one wants things to change (as in someone ‘wins’ the war). There’s too much money in keeping the ball rolling. It’s infotainment and subversion, until someone shows up saying ‘difficult’  things like ‘read’, ‘think’ and so on. Then it should be time for the arguing to start. But that doesn’t happen on the podcasts, so I’ve stopped watching them. Besides what I see on technical subjects, I’ve simply stopped watching, while my reading has steadily increased.”

(more…)

by Editor - Friday, June 12th, 2026
No Comments »

By John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

Roman Abramovich — the oligarch whom President Vladimir Putin has publicly declared to be “trustworthy and honourable”  and sent to Kiev last month to negotiate war terms  — has what is known on police blotters as FORM.

That is a long list of previous offences; dishonesty, deception, bribery, and extortion as method; destruction of rivals and self-enrichment as goals. In short, Abramovich’s career is one of a familiar and predictable type. Artless and wordless in the way big guns and big sums of money talk.  

Russian public opinion polls confirm this is how most Russians think of him and other Russian oligarchs. So does this blotter of Abramovich’s business methods stretching back to 2003.  

 When Abramovich faced the longest court trial he is ever likely to face – Berezovsky v Abramovich, [2012] EWHC 2463 (Comm)   — the UK High Court judge ruled that as plaintiff Berezovsky was so unbelievable and dishonest, she didn’t have to judge whether defendant Abramovich matched him; the onus of proof being on the plaintiff, and his proofs having failed, the judgement of the court went to the defendant. That was not a vindication of Abramovich’s trustworthiness and honour.

His form at the negotiations he arranged between Putin and Zelensky in Istanbul in March-April of 2022, turned out to be failure for Putin and for himself, as this report indicates,  and also this one.   Abramovich’s form didn’t improve in last month’s negotiations in Kiev. Nicked again.   

The second oligarch representative Putin runs as his negotiator for US guarantees of Russia’s security in Europe and an end to NATO’s permanent war is Kirill Dmitriev. He too enjoys what Putin calls trustworthiness and honourableness. These qualities, and Putin’s confidence in them, haven’t improved his form in the American negotiations. This is the blotter on Dmitriev.  

Dmitriev was educated with high American university degrees;  Abramovich was educated in the Russian school of hard knocks.  But the latter has learned two special skills the former lacks – how to control vanity in decision-making and,  when his mind is made up,  how to keep his mouth shut. Trust and honour aside, Russian women prefer the reticent Abramovich face to the goggle eyes and fish lips of Dmitriev. So too, the Ukrainians: according to the Financial Times chief reporters for Russia and the Ukraine, Abramovich is “the only Russian [the Kiev regime] will tolerate. He gets along with everyone.”  

In the present war what does this count for?

The failures of both Abramovich and Dmitriev at Putin’s direction have begun to trigger an intense debate in Moscow over what changes in strategy Putin should now make. This is the crisis in confidence which is explained in the new podcast with Nima Alkhorshid. This was  aired on Tuesday afternoon, Moscow time. Click to view or listen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVN6F-3rZlM

How to restore escalation control for Russia and credibility for Putin is the singular problem to be solved  now. “We must start with unmistakable signals from Putin that he is recovering both,” a Moscow source in a position to know responds. “Dmitry Peskov retires, [Yury] Ushakov also. [GRU chief Admiral Igor] Kostyukov should be promoted and tested in a public political role; [Central Bank Governor Elvira] Nabiullina must be removed by her announcement that she intends to retire ahead of next June, starting her succession now; and after September 21 [Duma election results announced] a new cabinet of national unity should be formed with confidence-building figures like Dmitry Rogozin  and Mikhail Delyagin.”

(more…)

by Editor - Wednesday, June 10th, 2026
No Comments »

By John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

There was a map of the world on the wall of the Billy Mitchell Room of the Arctic Warrior Events Centre. That’s where President Donald Trump met President Vladimir Putin at Elmendorf Richardson Airbase in Anchorage, Alaska, on August 15, 2025.

On the map, the world was flat. Crisscrossing it were lines marked at the bottom with the title of the map, TRIPP. That stands for “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity”. When Trump pointed it out, Putin thought he was joking.

Putin thought that what was said during the two and a half hours of their conversation was an agreement Trump would stick to. The Kremlin has called it the Anchorage Formula. The White House has never used the term.    

Putin repeated it last Friday (June 5). Trump had agreed that he and the US would be the “genuine guarantor” of Russia’s long-term security in Europe, Putin said. “Reliable guarantors are always helpful, but why the US administration and President Trump are being denied that role is beyond me.”  

Putin was replying to Vladimir Zelensky in a letter published the day before (June 4). “We have heard,” wrote Zelensky, “that you [Putin] were promised in Alaska the resolution of certain issues concerning Ukraine and Europe. But you can see for yourself that Ukrainian and European issues are not decided in Anchorage.”  

Putin insisted he believes in Trump’s security guarantee. “Overall, I want to thank Donald for that effort – it was certainly useful. But there is still room for improvement. The work needs to continue.” The Kremlin report has added that what followed was parenthetical “(Applause.)”   

There is still no certainty about what was on the wall of the Billy Mitchell Room in Anchorage.

The TRIPP lines crisscrossing the world map around Russia are no Trump joke, though. They are certain, and on May 26, this was confirmed by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio in documents he signed in Yerevan, Armenia.

 “First, the Secretary and Foreign Minister announced a bilateral framework agreement on the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP). This is a crucial accomplishment towards realizing the prosperous future envisioned in the historic commitments made on August 8, 2025, at the White House. The United States and Armenia are now one step closer to establishing unimpeded, multimodal transit connectivity within the region while respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Armenia.The text also describes the contours of the TRIPP Development Company (TDC), a joint venture between the United States and Armenia intended to support trade, transport, and economic development while enhancing international, inter-state, and intra-state transportation connectivity. The United States is also working closely with the Armenian government on a TRIPP engineering survey. The United States remains committed to expanding global trade, peace, stability, and prosperity in the region.”

“Additionally, the Secretary and Foreign Minister signed the Charter on a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership between the Republic of Armenia and the United States, and the United States of America-Republic of Armenia Framework for Securing of Supply in the Mining and Processing of Critical Minerals and Rare Earths. With these developments, the United States and Armenia demonstrate their joint commitment to expanding the bilateral relationship and continue to fulfill the promises made in the Memoranda of Understanding signed by President Trump and Prime Minister Pashinyan on August 8, 2025.”      

The TRIPP line on the map is also an American security tripwire around Russia, Trump announced two days later (May 28).   

“Soon,” Trump tweeted, “the United States and Armenia will break ground together on the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity, which will transform the South Caucasus, and help our wonderful American Energy Companies gain access from Central Asia all the way to the United States. For these reasons, Nikol has my COMPLETE and TOTAL Endorsement for Re-Election on June 7, 2026. With Nikol’s help, we will bring the United States, Armenia, the South Caucasus, and Central Asia to greater heights than ever before.”  

On June 7, Prime Minister Pashinyan’s party won the Armenian parliamentary election with almost 50% of votes cast.   The two pro-Russian parties of Samvel Karapetyan  and Robert Kocharyan  polled together just 33%. The Anglo-American media accused Russia of election interference, but not Trump.  The outcome is that Pashinyan will have seven seats less than he controlled before the election but still “a comfortable majority…For Moscow, the election turned into a geopolitical battlefield as it sought to protect its waning influence in the South Caucasus. The Kremlin likely assessed that it could not remove Pashinyan from power. It therefore focused on reducing his party’s gains and casting doubt on the legitimacy of his victory.”  

Putin’s cautions to Armenia have been ignored. “We would like to ask our Armenian colleagues to decide on their development path as soon as possible,” Putin said last week. “We have no objections. We will maintain good relations with Armenia no matter what development path it chooses to follow.”  A week earlier Putin had sounded tougher: “We would be forced, in certain areas –and indeed, by and large – to scale back almost all of our cooperation with Armenia in the economic sphere related to integration processes…There would also be a reduction in trade in services, tourism, transport services, and other sectors…workers from Armenia would become subject to the requirements that apply to migrants from CIS countries…We would also have to restore the permit procedure for Armenian road carriers. This would be unavoidable; it is a separate and highly complex area of cooperation.In addition, rail freight tariffs would have to be adjusted from the current domestic Russian rates – which are currently applied to Armenian carriers – to the tariffs applied to other CIS countries. And, obviously, energy prices would rise.”

Putin then sent Pashinyan a card for his birthday.  Trump’s birthday present proved to be what Pashinyan wanted, and at the poll Trump has defeated Putin.

He is now extending the TRIPP further south in the US-Israeli war for regime change in Tehran and the extinction of the Islamic republic in the Middle East. “Final negotiations on ‘Peace’ are proceeding,” Trump tweeted, “subject to ignorance or stupidity getting in its way. The Blockade will remain in place, and in full force and effect, until a ‘Final Deal’ is reached.  

According to Russia’s Foreign Minister, the Anchorage Formula – that is, Trump’s guarantee of Russia’s security in Europe – doesn’t exist. “I very much hope,” Sergei Lavrov said in Moscow on Monday (June 8), “that the experience of previous failures, when the West refused to fulfill its own supported agreements, will not be repeated in relation to the agreement in Alaska. But so far, unfortunately, our American partners have not shown any interest in this.”  

(more…)

by Editor - Tuesday, June 9th, 2026
No Comments »

By John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

Last week, the Supreme Commander in Chief of the Russian Armed Forces, Vladimir Putin, revealed two military secrets of his strategy for achieving Russia’s war aims on the Ukraine battlefield. They involve weapons he has fired in the past.  

The first was the launch of the Oreshnik missile (lead image) at a Kiev region target, Belaya Tserkov (Bila Tserkva), on May 24; the second was the launch at Kiev of the oligarch Roman Abramovich (lead image).

The missile and the money bag.

US and NATO intelligence estimates indicate there are at least a half-dozen Oreshniks in the current Russian military inventory, with the production line adding a new one every two months.  In addition to Abramovich,  there is one other oligarch weapon which Putin regards, he says himself,   as “trustworthy and honourable”:  that is Kirill Dmitriev representing the Russian oligarchs in collective talks with President Donald Trump’s representatives.  

The third military secret Putin has now revealed is that his confidence is unshaken in the success of these weapons despite the record of their repeated failure.

“I will share a major state military secret with you,” Putin told a group of journalists on June 4 about the latest Oreshnik strike: “we simply struck locations where it was possible to observe the results. This applies to Belaya Tserkov and, even more so, to the DPR [Donetsk People’s Republic] area within the main fortified zone. Afterwards, our drones flew into the structure we hit, and we meticulously observed how the separating warheads were dispersed, calculating everything to the millimetre. This is crucial for us to make future decisions on the full-scale employment of the Oreshnik against designated targets, including urban areas.”   

The second of his secrets Putin revealed the next day (June 5) to a business group at the plenary session of the St Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF).  “Three weeks ago [May 13], a representative of our business community contacted me with a matter. I have been acquainted with this individual for a considerable time; although we do not maintain close ties, I regard him as trustworthy and honourable. He called me and said: ‘Mr President, I am being invited to Kiev.’ I responded: ‘Well, by all means, go ahead; how does this concern me?’ He replied: ‘I felt it was imperative to inform you, as the discussion will likely involve issues pertinent to relations between our two countries.’”

“I advised him: ‘Listen, I cannot dispatch you in any official capacity; such matters should be the remit of qualified professionals from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Defence, and other relevant services – much as occurred during our negotiations in Istanbul. Therefore, I cannot sanction any official action on your part.’ He replied: ‘I merely wished to inform you of this invitation. I would go, listen, and subsequently report back to you on the discussions.’ I replied: ‘“I cannot prevent you; feel free to go.’”

“He travelled to Kiev, where he met with the individual, the author of that letter, at his residence, not at Valdai. Upon his return, I convened with him. Amidst the less substantive elements, the salient point was this: Mr Zelensky was requesting a meeting. I remarked: ‘I have never declined such requests. However, to convene merely for the sake of empty dialogue, as we say – I am well familiar with that…”

“Thus, I stated: ‘I see no merit in such a meeting.’ The sole objective, from the Ukrainian perspective, is to impede the progress of our Armed Forces, nothing more. We require agreements that endure not for mere months, not for half a year, but for a significant historical period. Let the specialists deliberate, devise solutions, and only thereafter can we convene, attend – as I mentioned – the signing of pertinent documents, or even append our signatures ourselves. However, a solution must first be formulated.”

“Now, to the most critical point, which the audience, particularly the Russian audience, will comprehend. This occurred, I believe, on May 21, and on May 22, Ukrainian forces executed a heinous terrorist attack on a college dormitory in the Lugansk People’s Republic, resulting in the tragic loss of children, adolescents. This constitutes a grievous crime. There were no military installations nearby, nor were there any military vehicles in the vicinity.  That morning, I contacted this – shall we say – colleague who had journeyed to Kiev and asked: ‘What does this signify?’ They ask for a meeting whilst perpetrating such horrendous crimes as the murder of children. What is the implication of this? He responded: ‘I am at a loss for an explanation. They are contacting me once more; I will speak with them and subsequently apprise you and keep you informed.’ I replied: ‘Very well.’ I have not communicated with him since.”  

After two days Vladimir Zelensky announced:  “Abramovich, he came to Kiev. He said…‘I have a message direct to you, and I want to get message and take message from you and to give it to Putin.’ But he said it has to be silently, without any kind of public messages. I said, ‘Look,  it’s your choice…He came and he wanted to give me the message that they are ready to, that they want to fi—that they want to understand what we are ready to do…we spoke about any kind of compromises. I said, of all the compromises, after ceasefire, ceasefire is the biggest compromise from our side to your side…When he got message from me, he said…he will go directly to Putin. I said, ‘Okay, I am ready to meet… and we spoke about outcomes, what can be, and etc.,…after that we’ve got messages that they are ready for meeting only if Ukraine will do what they decided in Anchorage. But it’s terrible what they speak about…You can’t make decisions without us, about us.  It’s unacceptable, and it will not bring peace.”  

Abramovich told the Financial Times: “Though Abramovich’s role has become less prominent since Russia began negotiating directly with the US last year, he remains involved in prisoner exchanges and other bilateral talks with Ukraine, including on aspects of a stalled US-led peace plan, according to people close to him. ‘He is needed because he is the only Russian they will tolerate. He gets along with everyone,’ one of the people said.”  

In the current propaganda war, Comcast’s SkyNews is an American drone; the Financial Times is an Anglo-Japanese missile; Zelensky is one of their multiple warheads.  This is how the separating warheads were dispersed, calculating everything to the millimetre.

(more…)

by Editor - Sunday, June 7th, 2026
No Comments »

By John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

It’s a brave king who fights on after losing his arms and his legs.

It’s a foolish king who asks his army and his people to believe in the certainty of swift victory and then requires them to pay the costs of attrition.

Or is it the other way round — the lionheart who promises blitzkrieg and instead gets protracted and permanent war; the fool who keeps fighting after his adversary has cut off his limbs?

President Vladimir Putin’s Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, his Central Bank Governor Elvira Nabiullina, and his special negotiator with the Trump administration Kirill Dmitriev are telling him that it’s now too late, too long, too expensive for the special military operation on the Ukraine battlefield. They say he must either cut the war short by armistice on the enemy’s terms; or the Russian people must pay for the attrition by mobilization of the young, by taxation of the poorest, and by cutting the budget deficit with the destruction of demand, real income, and investment in economic growth.

In response, the General Staff and Admiral Igor Kostyukov, head of military intelligence, tell Putin that if he gives the word, they will unleash such a continuous salvo as to remove the Kiev leadership; cut all power, water, telecommunications, and transport so that the Ukrainian state can no longer function; drive the Ukrainian forts and forces from the Donbass; and compel an armistice on Russian terms in just three months’ time.

Putin’s answer is to agree to both with a combination of half measures – half from the first faction; half from the second. This is neither brave nor foolish. There won’t be a word for it until the evening of September 20, when the votes are tallied and published for the elections to the State Duma.

In the meantime, in the new podcast with Jamarl Thomas we discuss the four strategic mistakes  arising from these half-measures, as Russian sources now acknowledge them — and the strategic outcome they make inevitable:

Strategic mistake No.1 — neither by attrition nor by decapitation, can Russia win its war aims – demilitarization of the territory to the Polish and Romanian borders; and denazification of the regime from Kiev and Lvov to Rzeszów.  This is because the US and NATO intend to keep up the permanent war on Russia. Replacing the limits on land forces, artillery, armour, rockets and missiles of the Istanbul draft treaty of April 2022, the combination of Ukrainian, American and European development of drone numbers, surge capacities, range, and firepower were not even counted for limitation then. They cannot be counted now because they extend across all of the NATO states.

Strategic mistake No. 2 – winning the hearts and minds of Ukrainian voters may be achievable by Russian military operations but they don’t count.  The Kiev regime will sacrifice them at the front or across the border, repressing whoever and whatever  opposition remains. Killing them or exiling them has made, will make,  no difference to the sustainability of the regime. The cuts in direct US financing for the war by the Trump administration have been and will be offset by NATO financing, weapons co-production, and integration of Ukrainian warfighters in NATO commands, bases and plans. American and European hearts and minds can also be won over but they are now equally impotent at changing the warfighting policies of regimes from Greece to Finland, Ireland to Estonia.

Strategic mistake No. 3 — de-nazification is a myth for Americans, Europeans and Japanese.  Even if Vladimir Zelensky were replaced by Andrei Biletsky, the Azov commander, or Kirill Budanov,  the current presidential office head and former GUR chief, the US and NATO don’t care if they are fascist, any more than they cared ninety years ago that Adolph Hitler was fascist. The target was then, is now, and will remain for another hundred years of war — Russia.  

This, by the way, is the reason Poland and Israel will put up with the current glorification of the Banderite executioners of hundreds of thousands of Poles and millions of Jews during World War II.  

Strategic mistake No. 4 — Putin is now in command of the destruction of the Russian economy for the benefit of the financial sector and the resource export sector – that’s  to say, the commercial and state banks, the Central Bank, and the oligarchs. The outcome is a budget deficit which can only be funded by state borrowing, windfall profit taxation, or by cuts to social welfare,  industry and regional support; and protected by the repression of the critics and their means of communicating through the internet. When the alternative is mobilization and militarization of the economy, Putin believes he can preserve political equilibrium.

Strategic outcome — this is permanent war at high profitability for the oligarch-controlled economy without industrial recovery, plus corruption and intensifying repression;  a pause for Russian rearmament without the financial means to match the escalation of US and NATO capacities. In this future, President Xi Jinping, Putin’s strategic friend, is not unhappy; Iran, North Korea, and Cuba, Russia’s strategic allies, must fight on — almost alone.

“I believe this is mostly correct,” a military source in a position to know comments, “except that making Ukraine unfit for anything except bare subsistence existence has not yet been tried; nor has going after the likes of Biletsky. They [Banderites] are not that hardy, not at the top, and not at the bottom.”

Another Moscow source, also in a position to know, says: “The question has been asked: so what if we have Sarmat, Zircon, Oreshnik? So what? There is no answer. Only that we should talk to the Americans and the Americans alone because they are our equal. But the Americans have cancelled everything and stopped talking a decade back.  Faced with this reality, there is only one choice and that is to fight on until a compromise can be reached. My understanding is [Putin] wants an end to war before the Duma elections and declare some victory. Otherwise he will lose.”

Click to view or listen to the podcast, first broadcast on Thursday.

(more…)

by Editor - Thursday, June 4th, 2026
No Comments »

By John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

Bringing the war home was a powerful slogan of the American anti-war movement in the decade between 1965 and 1975,  as the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Army advanced towards their victory, forcing the White House to armistice terms in Paris in January 1973, and then to evacuation of Saigon in April 1975.

There is no anti-war movement in the streets of the US today. Instead, there are podcasts inside Americans’ desktops, telephones, and earplugs.  

The US Army hasn’t begun cracking up as it once did on the battlefields of Hué, the Mekong Delta, and Saigon.  The anti-US armies continue to advance – Russian forces across the Ukrainian battlefield, Iranian forces from the Hormuz Strait across the Arab sheikhdoms to targets inside Israel.

The politics for winning, losing, pausing, then resuming the 100-year war which the US aims to fight against the century-old enemies – Russians, Chinese, Arabs, Iranians, and the banana republicans of Central and South America – remain the same.  Expressed in the Washington language of the present,  this is the politics of the Fall budget review and the November midterm elections.

In the new podcast with Nima Alkhorshid, the discussion focuses on the dynamics of war financing and electioneering for President Donald Trump and for President Vladimir Putin. To answer the question of what happens next in the false ceasefire and pseudo-peace negotiations in the Middle East and in Europe, we focus on money and votes – and what Trump, Putin and their political rivals think they must do to stop the loss of public confidence in their leadership, and in their own futures.

Click to view or listen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVcXeOl-LSw

(more…)

by Editor - Wednesday, June 3rd, 2026
No Comments »

By John Helmer, Moscow
  @bears_with

Tehran Times spoke with John Helmer, a veteran journalist and geopolitical analyst based in Moscow, to assess the implications of the conflict for U.S. policy toward Iran, the role of domestic political calculations in Washington, and shifting regional alignments. In this interview, Helmer examines coercive diplomacy, regional security dynamics, and the limits of U.S. strategy.

The full text of the interview follows.

(more…)

by Editor - Tuesday, June 2nd, 2026
No Comments »