Putin wants NATO troops removed from Eastern Europe: the Baltics, Poland, Czech Republic etc
Trump is likely to agree to withdrawal from the Baltics, wires FT 1/
Still seems implausible to me, but Politico takes it seriously and even runs the numbers.
The U.S. has 80,000 troops in Europe - 25% more than before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine 2/
In my view, 80,000 troops is negligible—roughly the size of two Ukrainian army corps or 10-15 brigades. Russia has 200 brigades, Ukraine over 100.
The Russians are combat ready. Are NATO? They are trained, people say, but for a different type of war 3/
In Ukraine, brigades that are trained, but haven’t been in actual combat sometimes are almost decimated in the first several fights. It is key to have officers and sergeants who have experienced the Russian style warfare for a brigade to survive and be effective 4/
Moreover, if Ukraine falls, Russia could quickly expand to 300 brigades by mobilizing the occupied territories. How would 80,000 U.S. troops change that equation? 5/
Politico writes that while NATO plans to reduce U.S. military assets, Europe expected to field 20,000-45,000 troops, just half of the U.S. presence 6/
NATO planning 100,000-troop rapid response force within 10 days, 500,000 within 6 months, but this won’t be enough, in my view 7/
You might object and say that Russia will never dare to attack NATO. Nuclear deterrence and what not. Well trained troops that will destroy Russia within days
Do you actually believe this? 8/
This logic is based on the hope that Russia will not attack the Baltics. Not a strategy or evidence, but hope!
Will NATO start a nuclear war if Russia moves 20 brigades in Latvia? No! NATO will negotiate! 9/
Will NATO rapid response force be able to get Russian bridges out of the Baltics if they move in there in a day? I don’t think so. 10/
As one defense and military Israeli expert told me yesterday - Europe is so fu…ked. They have no idea how unready they are. I agree with him.
Lavrov: We don’t agree to stop attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure because we never attacked it.
Zelensky must be constrained so he doesn’t attack us.
Also, the U.S. and Russian differences are small, the U.S. wants to get peace. 0/
Lavrov: Russia and the U.S. have agreed to narrow their differences on international affairs and economic relations, as well as their mutual desire to find concrete solutions. 1/
Lavrov: Russia has felt the full determination of the U.S. to move forward. 2/
The U.S. and Russia agreed in Saudi Arabia to continue to agree, but agreed on absolutely nothing, except to establish a mechanism to facilitate agreement. Yes, I am serious. It is a big nothing.
Specifically, 1/
The State department says that the sprites agreed to
1. Establish a consultation mechanism to address irritants to our bilateral relationship with the objective of taking steps necessary to normalize the operation of our respective diplomatic missions
(I though that was it) 2/
2. Appoint respective high-level teams to begin working on a path to ending the conflict in Ukraine as soon as possible in a way that is enduring, sustainable, and acceptable to all sides
(I thought the teams were already appointed and present in Saudi Arabia at the talks) 3/
Russia says it recognizes Ukraine’s sovereign right to join the EU. What a sudden change!
Asked if Ukraine could one day join the European Union, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said: "This is the sovereign right of any country," Reuters 1/
This is of course a far cry from saying Ukraine in NATO is ok for Russia. But it is a meaningful change. It is for the first time, in my memory, Russia acknowledges sovereignty of Ukraine 2/
Recall that Russia invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea in 2014 after Ukrainian people pushed for a trade agreement with the EU. Not even the EU membership, just a EU trade agreement 3/
I am stunned by how quickly checks and balances in the U.S. have collapsed. It’s as if they never existed-just a handful of people can seize control of the executive and ignore the courts
In Ukraine, that wouldn’t stand. If the judiciary failed, people would be in the streets /
Was the world’s most famous democracy always this fragile, surviving only on the hope that its leader wouldn’t turn authoritarian? Where are the real institutions to stop a takeover? /
I may be wrong - I clearly don’t fully understand U.S. democracy, and my take might be too superficial.
That said, I believe the U.S. needs a shake-up. Many of Trump’s actions, despite the controversy, strike me as necessary disruptions /