Follow us on social

2022-10-10t080242z_1_lynxmpei990da_rtroptp_4_ukrain-dm-as3-scaled

Russia unleashes fury; Zelensky implores West for more help

Rocket attacks targeted key infrastructure deep in Ukraine today — this is the spiral of violence experts have been warning about.

Analysis | Europe

Russia unleashed dozens of missile strikes across Ukraine today in retaliation for the bombing on Saturday of part  of the 12-mile bridge connecting Crimea to Russia. 

In an address Sunday, President Vladimir Putin accused Ukraine of committing an act of terrorism. The Russian rockets hit infrastructure targets in a number of Ukrainian cities this morning, including Kyiv, Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia, and Dnipro. As of this writing, 11 people have been killed and 64 injured in the blasts.

George Beebe, director of Grand Strategy at the Quincy Institute, called the barrage of rockets “a major escalation in the war,” that was bound to “bring the world closer to a direct military collision between Russia and the United States.”

He said that Ukraine’s successful counter-offensives in the Donbas, “coupled with the attack on the Kerch Strait bridge in Crimea, have now prompted Putin to shift course,” which, on top of the major mobilization of reserves, includes this major retaliation deep into Ukraine, which threatens the country’s power grid and civilian population.

 “As a result, political pressure in Washington is likely to grow to provide Ukraine with the ability to respond,” he said. 

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been tweeting all morning about calls with world leaders to secure emergency assistance in the wake of the attacks. He said Russia is “trying to destroy us and wipe us off the face of the earth.”

“We've coordinated steps with President of Poland @AndrzejDuda,” he tweeted. “We will work on consolidating international support, strengthening Ukraine's defense capabilities, restoring the destroyed, as well as increasing Russia's isolation.”

In a tweet this morning, EU Commission president Ursula von der leyen said she was “shocked and appalled by the vicious attacks on Ukrainian cities,” adding that “we will stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes, with all the means we have.”

The State Department sent out a tweet around 9 a.m. this morning: “Our hearts are with the people of Ukraine on this awful day,” adding “Slava Ukrainie,” or “Glory to Ukraine,” the slogan of the Ukrainian resistance.

Beebe said today’s attacks only increased the urgency of pairing assistance to Ukraine with a diplomatic track. 

“President Biden is correct that the threat of a nuclear confrontation with Russia is real, and that the United States and Russia face their most dangerous moment since the Cuban missile crisis 60 years ago,” Beebe said this morning. “It is time for the United States to supplement its military support for Ukraine with a diplomatic track to manage this crisis before it spirals out of control.”

Unfortunately this message might be blunted by voices in the Beltway that are calling for a more militarized response to Russian aggression. (Ret.) Gen. Jack Keane, who chairs the board of the Institute for the Study of War (which has long  been providing media with battlefield maps and analysis on Ukraine), said this morning in a radio interview (WMAL Washington) that this is no time for talking

“We should be committed to sustaining their [Ukraine's] military advantage here as much as possible," he told the radio hosts. "They need, not surprisingly, more artillery, more rounds, more air defense, more tanks and fighting vehicles," he said, noting that Ukraine also wants longer range weapons (ATACMS). "They have a real opportunity here to regain the territory they lost. I don't think we should inhibit any chance for Ukrainians to retake their territory."

UPDATE: 12:00 p.m. EST:

French President Emmanuel Macron responded to the attacks across Ukraine today calling them a “profound change” in the war.

The “deliberate strikes by Russia over the whole of Ukraine’s territory and against civilians, it’s a profound change in the nature of this war,” he was quoted as saying in the Agence France-Presse, adding that he would convene his diplomatic and military advisers when he returned to Paris.


سيارات تحترق بعدCars burn after Russian missile strikes in central Kyiv on Monday. Photograph: Jalab Jaranic/Reuters
Analysis | Europe
POGO The Bunker
Top image credit: Project on Government Oversight

Bombers astray! Washington's priorities go off course

Military Industrial Complex

The Bunker appears originally at the Project on Government Oversight and is republished here with permission.


keep readingShow less
Trump Zelensky
Top photo credit: Joshua Sukoff / Shutterstock.com

Blob exploiting Trump's anger with Putin, risking return to Biden's war

Europe

Donald Trump’s recent outburst against Vladimir Putin — accusing the Russian leader of "throwing a pile of bullsh*t at us" and threatening devastating new sanctions — might be just another Trumpian tantrum.

The president is known for abrupt reversals. Or it could be a bargaining tactic ahead of potential Ukraine peace talks. But there’s a third, more troubling possibility: establishment Republican hawks and neoconservatives, who have been maneuvering to hijack Trump’s “America First” agenda since his return to office, may be exploiting his frustration with Putin to push for a prolonged confrontation with Russia.

Trump’s irritation is understandable. Ukraine has accepted his proposed ceasefire, but Putin has refused, making him, in Trump’s eyes, the main obstacle to ending the war.

Putin’s calculus is clear. As Ted Snider notes in the American Conservative, Russia is winning on the battlefield. In June, it captured more Ukrainian territory and now threatens critical Kyiv’s supply lines. Moscow also seized a key lithium deposit critical to securing Trump’s support for Ukraine. Meanwhile, Russian missile and drone strikes have intensified.

Putin seems convinced his key demands — Ukraine’s neutrality, territorial concessions in the Donbas and Crimea, and a downsized Ukrainian military — are more achievable through war than diplomacy.

Yet his strategy empowers the transatlantic “forever war” faction: leaders in Britain, France, Germany, and the EU, along with hawks in both main U.S. parties. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz claims that diplomacy with Russia is “exhausted.” Europe’s war party, convinced a Russian victory would inevitably lead to an attack on NATO (a suicidal prospect for Moscow), is willing to fight “to the last Ukrainian.” Meanwhile, U.S. hawks, including liberal interventionist Democrats, stoke Trump’s ego, framing failure to stand up to Putin’s defiance as a sign of weakness or appeasement.

Trump long resisted this pressure. Pragmatism told him Ukraine couldn’t win, and calling it “Biden’s war” was his way of distancing himself, seeking a quick exit to refocus on China, which he has depicted as Washington’s greater foreign threat. At least as important, U.S. involvement in the war in Ukraine has been unpopular with his MAGA base.

But his June strikes on Iran may signal a hawkish shift. By touting them as a decisive blow to Iran’s nuclear program (despite Tehran’s refusal so far to abandon uranium enrichment), Trump may be embracing a new approach to dealing with recalcitrant foreign powers: offer a deal, set a deadline, then unleash overwhelming force if rejected. The optics of “success” could tempt him to try something similar with Russia.

This pivot coincides with a media campaign against restraint advocates within the administration like Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon policy chief who has prioritized China over Ukraine and also provoked the opposition of pro-Israel neoconservatives by warning against war with Iran. POLITICO quoted unnamed officials attacking Colby for wanting the U.S. to “do less in the world.” Meanwhile, the conventional Republican hawk Marco Rubio’s influence grows as he combines the jobs of both secretary of state and national security adviser.

What Can Trump Actually Do to Russia?
 

Nuclear deterrence rules out direct military action — even Biden, far more invested in Ukraine than Trump, avoided that risk. Instead, Trump ally Sen.Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), another establishment Republican hawk, is pushing a 500% tariff on nations buying Russian hydrocarbons, aiming to sever Moscow from the global economy. Trump seems supportive, although the move’s feasibility and impact are doubtful.

China and India are key buyers of Russian oil. China alone imports 12.5 million barrels daily. Russia exports seven million barrels daily. China could absorb Russia’s entire output. Beijing has bluntly stated it “cannot afford” a Russian defeat, ensuring Moscow’s economic lifeline remains open.

The U.S., meanwhile, is ill-prepared for a tariff war with China. When Trump imposed 145% tariffs, Beijing retaliated by cutting off rare earth metals exports, vital to U.S. industry and defense. Trump backed down.

At the G-7 summit in Canada last month, the EU proposed lowering price caps on Russian oil from $60 a barrel to $45 a barrel as part of its 18th sanctions package against Russia. Trump rejected the proposal at the time but may be tempted to reconsider, given his suggestion that more sanctions may be needed. Even if Washington backs the measure now, however, it is unlikely to cripple Russia’s war machine.

Another strategy may involve isolating Russia by peeling away Moscow’s traditionally friendly neighbors. Here, Western mediation between Armenia and Azerbaijan isn’t about peace — if it were, pressure would target Baku, which has stalled agreements and threatened renewed war against Armenia. The real goal is to eject Russia from the South Caucasus and create a NATO-aligned energy corridor linking Turkey to Central Asia, bypassing both Russia and Iran to their detriment.

Central Asia itself is itself emerging as a new battleground. In May 2025, the EU has celebrated its first summit with Central Asian nations in Uzbekistan, with a heavy focus on developing the Middle Corridor, a route for transportation of energy and critical raw materials that would bypass Russia. In that context, the EU has committed €10 billion in support of the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route.

keep readingShow less
Syria sanctions
Top image credit: People line up to buy bread, after Syria's Bashar al-Assad was ousted, in Douma, on the outskirts of Damascus, Syria December 23, 2024. REUTERS/Zohra Bensemra

Lifting sanctions on Syria exposes their cruel intent

Middle East

On June 30, President Trump signed an executive order terminating the majority of U.S. sanctions on Syria. The move, which would have been unthinkable mere months ago, fulfilled a promise he made at an investment forum in Riyadh in May.“The sanctions were brutal and crippling,” he had declared to an audience of primarily Saudi businessmen. Lifting them, he said, will “give Syria a chance at greatness.”

The significance of this statement lies not solely in the relief that it will bring to the Syrian people. His remarks revealed an implicit but rarely admitted truth: sanctions — often presented as a peaceful alternative to war — have been harming the Syrian people all along.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.