Streetwise Professor

Today marks the beginning of the 5th year of Putin’s “Special Military Operation.” Special, indeed.

The special needs military operation is more like it. (NB: “special needs” is a euphemism that replaced the previous euphemism, “retarded.” The old once canceled but now reemerging euphemism fits in place of the new one with regards to Putin’s military misadventure).

Putin appears in no mood to call the whole thing off, despite the fact that at best the campaign is stuck and at worst is actually in retrograde, with casualties allegedly now exceeding recruitment rates. Indeed, he is doubling down on his rhetoric and making moves that suggest he fears that his public’s patience is finally wearing thin.

Putin continues to cast the war as an existential one for Russia: “Russia is fighting for its future, for independence, for truth, and justice.” His remarks on Defender of the Fatherland Day are delusional: “Your competent and courageous actions, your personal bravery and determination helped to carefully plan and brilliantly execute offensive operations by our troops in the most intense sectors and directions.”

Brilliant in what universe? Competence is nowhere to be found. Especially in the Kremlin.

And Putin makes it clear, as if there was ever any doubt, that he is the Tsar of Projection–not of power, but psychological:

“They did not manage to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia on the battlefield, so the enemy is relying on individual and mass terror: this includes shelling cities, sabotaging infrastructure, and assassination attempts on government and military officials,” he told an audience of FSB officials.

All of which Russia has done in Ukraine, and on a far greater scale.

And paranoia, too

“There is an absolute need to defeat Russia. They are looking for any way, anything at all. They will push themselves to some extreme point, and then they will regret it,” he said.

And more delusion. Putin order the FSB to “strengthen the anti-terrorist protection of energy and transport infrastructure and public gathering places, provide maximum coverage for critical facilities, and, if necessary, equip them with additional security measures.”

This allegedly in response to the continuing Ukrainian attacks on Russian energy infrastructure, and specifically oil assets. This includes a recent attack at an important facility on the Druzhba pipeline.

But note: Ukraine carries out these attacks with drones and missiles, which the FSB can do fuck all to stop. This rather pathetic gesture is effectively a confession that Russia’s vaunted air defenses can also do fuck all against them. If the VKS can’t defend Russian airspace, how are spooks going to?

Perhaps the most interesting and revealing development is Russia’s intensifying Internet crackdown, including most notably a throttling of Telegram, due to the app’s alleged use in terrorist attacks in Russia and by Ukraine and the West.

What’s particularly striking about this is that Russian troops rely heavily on Telegram for battlefield communications–due in large part to the shambolic nature of Russian communications gear and infrastructure (a glaring defect that was supposed to be fixed after 2008 but obviously was not). When added to the loss of the use of Starlink terminals–which the Russian military laughably denied using for their own comms, claiming instead that they just used them to spoof the Ukrainians–the already balky and disjointed efforts on the frontlines will be even less coordinated, responsive, and effective.

So what does this imply? It implies that Putin is more than willing to sacrifice military effectiveness (such as it is)–and soldiers’ lives–to strengthen his control over the domestic information space.

And why would he do that? Well, by far the most likely explanation is that he fears growing public discontent with the war, its cost, and the glaring disconnect between what Putin says about the war and the ugly reality on the ground. Not only is Telegram an important means by which Russian troops communicate with each other, it is the primary channel by which the troops share glimpses of how the war is going, how it is fought, and the gruesome toll it is taking.

If uncensored, it is also a means by which Russians can communicate with one another, not just about the war, but about economic and social conditions that are clearly deteriorating. This is a necessary (though not sufficient) condition to undercut preference falsification. Since this falsification is an autocrat’s best friend, the risk of its unraveling is an existential threat to Putin.

Hence, he wants to put communications through the government “MAX” app–which is mandatory on all smartphones sold in Russia, and which is surveilled by the state.

Maybe Russia can resurrect Max Headroom to do PSAs. Perhaps Putin has tasked the FSB to look into the “blipverts” that featured on Max’s show. Could be just what he needs.

These measures are not those of a confident man, any more than Europe’s current censorship mania signals its civilizational confidence. Instead, they are palpable signs of Putin’s fear that the unwavering domestic support for his not so excellent adventure in Ukraine is not so unwavering and might cascade into another Russian moment a la 1905 or 1917 or 1991.

I guess if you want to be optimistic, you could view this as Putin preparing Russia for a peace/ceasefire deal in Ukraine that falls far short of the objectives he laid out, and which would make the toll in blood and treasure of the last 4 years seem completely in vain. Limiting the backlash would require an even tighter grip on the populace.

But regardless, it is a clear sign that Putin has decided that his heretofore unchallenged hold over the Russian populace is slipping as the war grinds on without success, and he must take even greater control over the information space.

Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is the most catastrophic self-inflicted debacle of the post-WWII world, and ranks highly among the great debacles of all history. He has succeeded in killing and mutilating over a million Russians. He has gutted the economy for years and probably decades to come. He has made Russia a pariah state increasingly dependent on a mercenary China, and his justification that the world is ganging up on Russia has become a self-fulfilling prophecy rather than a description of past reality.

And for what? To conquer a country even more dysfunctional than his own. And he can’t even accomplish that.

Well it looks like the latest outbreak of Trump-y-steria is abating. Smelling salt, rubber sheet, adult diaper, and fainting couch salesmen hardest hit.

The source of the outbreak was, of course, Greenland. Trump made a series of blood curdling threats–curdling Euro blood, anyway. Greenland is vital to American security. Sell it to me or we invade.

The end is nigh! Nato is dead! America is a rogue state! We must surrender to China! (Tell how that is supposed to help, exactly). (Macron has been the surrenderer in chief, which I guess makes sense).

(Macron rocked Davos in aviators. Presumably because his wife rocked him upside the head again).

Scott Bessent joined in smacking around Macron for his poseur act on Greenland:

“If this is all President Macron has to do when the European, when the French budget, is in shambles, I would suggest that he focuses on other things for the French people,” Bessent said.

Then shortly after Trump torched the assembled “elite” in a Davos speech, thereby further amplifying the hysteria (as hard as that is to believe), he and Nato head Mark Rutte announced an agreement on a “framework” for Greenland. In essence, the US will gain control over relatively small parts of the island, including sites for the “Golden Dome” missile shield as well as locations for other installations that allow the US to project power into the Arctic, and crucially to constrain Chinese and Russian access there. Further, the US will obtain access to mineral resources–and China will not.

In other words, everything Trump wanted. And the price: zero.

The Art of the Deal. When will the bedwetters actually read the book?

The outcome suggests the process went something like this. Trump asked for these things, in private, sometime back. The Danes demurred. Trump asked more insistently, and publicly. The Danes continued to refuse, and the rest of the European sob sisters leapt to Denmark’s side. So Trump started to threaten publicly, and turned the threats to 11. After stalwart declarations of Never!, the Danes and the rest of the Euros folded.

Of course the usual idiots are saying “TACO” because Trump didn’t carry through on his threats. No, morons. He didn’t carry through on his threats because he didn’t have to. They worked.

They could have spared the world the drama if they had just played ball. But with them behaving like recalcitrant mules, sitting on their haunches and braying loudly, Trump felt compelled to hit them between the eyes with a 2×4. To get their attention. Which he clearly did.

The Euros have acted like the injured party throughout this contretemps. But it takes two to disagree. There would have been no threat to Nato if the Danes and Europeans had been more cooperative earlier this year, or back in 2019 when Trump first indicated that he views Greenland as vital to US security, and that Europe cannot be relied on to provide that security. (How could he ever get that idea?)

The Euros have shamelessly shirked on their sworn collective security obligations for decades. Giving in on Greenland would be a reasonable gesture of contrition and gratitude. But no. They fought their benefactor, ungrateful bastards that they are.

So Trump had to prove that the old adage (attributed to Al Capone) is true: “You can get much further with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone.” But it came to that because of the Europeans.

The Euro deployment to Greenland was performative idiocy that was totally counterproductive. It no doubt infuriated Trump. Further it showed the exact opposite of what they intended. It didn’t show their ability to defend Greenland. It showed their utter incapacity to do so.

The UK sent a troop. Not troops. One officer. The Germans sent a token deployment–for a couple of days. They had to fly a Polish commercial jet to get there. Just how, exactly, could Europe sustain any deployment, no matter how small, to defend against the Russians or whomever? Without the US, they would be starving and frozen within a few days.

And it was clear that their rhetoric at the time suggested that they were showing solidarity with Denmark and would defend the island against . . . the US. Which has defended them for 80 years.

Denmark and many Euros dismissed Trump’s warnings about growing Chinese penetration into the Arctic. “No Chinese ships have been there.”

Really? Tell Danish intelligence.

Here's the report. Definitely worth a read.https://t.co/BCos5u1X0N

— streetwiseprof (@streetwiseprof) January 22, 2026

And the Chinese are crying.

Look who's crying. Tells you all you need to know.

Cry more. Please. https://t.co/GPgZhHtz0o

— streetwiseprof (@streetwiseprof) January 22, 2026

If they didn’t care about Greenland, they wouldn’t be.

The Arctic has become the cockpit for great power rivalry. Greenland occupies the central location in that great power rivalry. This is especially true in a world of ballistic missiles with trajectories over the Arctic, and with more open water in the Arctic. Its strategic importance to the US is manifest.

Note that the US seized Greenland in the immediate aftermath of the German invasion of Denmark. It played a vital role in the war, not just as an important air base used in the Battle of the Atlantic, but as a location of weather stations that were vital throughout the war, including notably the weather forecast on which the D-Day invasion hinged. The Germans attempted to infiltrate Greenland on multiple times.

Greenland’s strategic importance to the US is greater now than it was then. And since in protecting itself the US also defends Europe, and since Europe cannot secure Greenland like the US can, it is in Europe’s interest to give the US a free hand there. Their recalcitrance and belligerency is self-defeating. They have been slitting their throats to spite Trump.

I’ve been saying “Europe.” I’ve left out Canada. That is a grave oversight. American suzerainty over Greenland bolsters Canadian security more than any other nation’s, given that nation’s huge Arctic coastline.

Yet despite this, Canada’s smarmy, execrable PM Mark Carney pledged his nation to defend Greenland . . . against the US. He (as noted in a prior post) outdid even Macron in toadying up to China pour epater les Americains. And he capped it off with a supercilious speech in Davos which declared the death of the Rule Based Order and called for a coalition of “middling nations” to operate in opposition to the great powers–and pointedly the US.

Of course, he received nothing but hosannas for his rhetoric–empty though it was.

For one thing, yes, the New World Order is now the Dead World Order, but Trump didn’t kill it. He’s just been delivering an acerbic obituary, and moving forcefully to position the US in a Westphalian world contending with revisionist powers. For another, the idea that the middling nations are able, let alone willing, to be a counterweight is farcical.

What the hell is the EU but a coalition of middling nations (and piddling ones)? Its primary characteristics are weakness and indecision. They have not contributed to Nato anywhere near commensurately with their population or economic weight due to free rider problems–which will not go away.

And Canada is the most egregious free rider of all. The once proud and powerful Canadian military, which was stalwart during both World Wars, is now a complete joke.

I have obtained highly classified footage. https://t.co/ySe0ncV05S pic.twitter.com/LtYnQVh16x

— streetwiseprof (@streetwiseprof) January 20, 2026

In sum, all this drama over Greenland was completely unnecessary. And rather than being the victims of American bullying, they brought it on themselves. If they had acted in their own interests, rather than behaving like ungrateful brats hanging on to their glory days and resenting their (self-inflicted) power deficit with the US, the same result would have been achieved, to the benefit of both sides, minus the hysteria.

No sooner did I post the piece on European idiocy on Greenland did I see this, a European apparatchik amping the foolery to eleven:

If the US annexes Greenland we must confiscate all US bases in Europe, says Austria's NATO enlargement committee chairman Fehlinger.

"If you take Greenland, you have to leave". pic.twitter.com/LJcwMVf5O2

— Mariska den Eelden ???? (@eeldenden) January 6, 2026

But until, I dunno, a minute ago you were freaked that the US was not committing enough to European defense against the Russians. Now, if we do something that will actually help you against the Russians, you will make it almost impossible to assist you against the Russians.

Makes total sense!

Cutting of their nose to spite their face doesn’t even cut it. Cutting off their goolies to spite their future is more like it. Generously assuming they actually have goolies, of course.

Then no sooner did I recover from the laughing fit caused by that post, I see this:

NOW – Starmer says a declaration of intent has been signed, stating that in the event of a peace deal, there will be a "deployment of forces to Ukraine," the UK and France will "establish military hubs" and "build protected facilities for weapons and military equipment." pic.twitter.com/VF44VZ72xJ

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) January 6, 2026

In other words, stationing troops where they have no risk of getting shot and no ability to shoot at the Russians to deter them. Stunning and brave! That’ll teach them Rooskies!

And this:

German Chancellor Merz:

Germany will accept responsibility for the security of Ukraine and for the continent as a whole. pic.twitter.com/6FqIcLWvBU

— Clash Report (@clashreport) January 6, 2026

With what army, Fritz? And when? 2035? 2045? Because you sure ain’t up to it now.

These are not serious people. Yet they take themselves oh-so-seriously, and are deeply offended when we don’t.

In what is becoming a winter ritual, Trump renewed his demands–and that’s what they are–that Denmark cede Greenland to the US. Or else.

This has set off hysteria among the hysterics that rule the EU.

Fresh from his Venezuela adventure, the US president shows no sign of backing down on Arctic island. https://t.co/o21EGufoIC pic.twitter.com/sPcjp5mtVe

— Financial Times (@FT) January 6, 2026

In fact, it’s existential! Especially in light of Maduro’s participation in Delta (Force’s) infrequent flyer program.

Donald Trump’s rationale for decapitating Venezuela’s government is fueling concerns among European officials that they could soon face an existential dilemma over Greenland https://t.co/x1v9EplHFu

— Bloomberg (@business) January 6, 2026

The fact that Trump is back to making demands means that negotiations have gone nowhere. This is insane, given that Trump’s willingness to pay should massively exceed Denmark’s reservation price–if Denmark was acting rationally, rather than emotionally.

This whole panic attack is particularly bizarre when viewed against the broader picture of US-European relations. The Europeans are also freaking out over Trump’s shifting the burden of defending Europe against Russia. But Trump’s purpose in obtaining Greenland is directed expressly against Russia (and China too). That is, a US acquisition of Greenland would strengthen European security vis a vis Russia.

That alone should make Europe grateful–and more than willing to accept Trump’s offer.

It is particularly ironic that Denmark claims that Trump seizing Denmark would destroy Nato. Denmark’s refusal to sell weakens Nato. A sale would strengthen it.

So just who is being the bad ally here?

Furthermore, Greenland is a large financial burden for Denmark, and it is getting worse.

Greenland’s public finances are pressured after a “surprisingly sharp deterioration” last year, Denmark’s central bank said https://t.co/45zyhcji6Q

— Bloomberg (@business) January 6, 2026

A smart government would jump at the chance to offload such a burden.

Even ideology favors a sale. After all, the Euros are all angst-y about the sins of their colonial past. Greenland is actually one of the last remaining relics of that past. A sale would take that off their consciences.

But despite all of these factors that should lead the Danes (and Euros) to shout “SOLD!” like a old-time pit trader during a frenzied close, they wail and gnash their teeth over the existential threat that losing Greenland to an ally would create.

So what explains their self-destructive behavior? The most obvious explanation is a deadly sin–pride. And the pride of of bedraggled, enervated continent that once dominated the earth, but is now (by its own admission) utterly dependent on the Americans for its security. The Americans, of all people!

You know it eats at them. Daily. A particularly egregious example:

No help? Not even from these men? https://t.co/RheIqQKHb0 pic.twitter.com/yhv7jsI4wg

— streetwiseprof (@streetwiseprof) January 4, 2026

Yet these ungrateful bastards expect the US to defend them, while simultaneously refusing to make a simple deal that would enhance their defense.

Foolish pride is the only explanation.

But that does present a business opportunity for an economically moribund continent. They can start a new website–OnlyFools. The audience would be huge.

Unless you are still sleeping off your New Year’s excesses, you’ll know that in the early hours of 3 January 2026 the US military opened a can of industrial strength whup ass on Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro. Delta (not the airline), along with a sprinkling of “law enforcement” intended to continue the charade that this is about drugs, swooped in and snatched Maduro and his better half (hey, anyone has to be better, right?), and spirited them off to face criminal charges in the US. Maduro therefore takes the early lead in the FAFO Man of the Year competition.

Venezuelans were shocked.

How Trump’s strikes shocked Venezuela’s capital https://t.co/5wdmTZ1mOf

— Financial Times (@FT) January 3, 2026

China dijo estar “profundamente conmocionada” por los ataques militares de EE.UU. contra Venezuela y por la captura del presidente Nicolás Maduro. https://t.co/Ehtdxxr2Fq

— Bloomberg (@business) January 3, 2026

Pretty much everybody–including everybody we don’t like and who don’t like us–are shocked. Er, that’s exactly the point of all this. Venezuela is not really about Venezuela. It is about Venezuela providing the Chinese, Russians, and Iranians (and their puppets, like Hezbollah) a Western Hemisphere outpost that directly threatens US interests.

I’m sure it’s a total coinky-dink that Delta decided to pay a visit right when Maduro was hosting a high-level Chinese delegation, right?

And the only people having a worse day than Maduro and his lot right now are the Cuban junta.

Next!

Militarily the operation again demonstrated the matchless competence of US forces, special operations forces in particular. The most impressive part to me is the operational security. No leaks. Complete surprise. A bolt from the blue–or the inky black of night, to be more accurate. I guess Hegseth wasn’t on Signal or something. (NB for the slow: that’s not a shot at Hegseth. That’s a shot at those who are always taking shots at Hegseth).

So everyone should be not just shocked, but awed.

Looking back I wonder if Trump’s 3AM Truth Social post telling Iran the US was locked and loaded was not part of a deception operation. It surely distracted attention away from Venezuela right when Maduro was about to go down.

This does raise the question of whether this type of operation is scalable/applicable to Iran. Given the far greater operational challenges posed in Iran, I have my doubts. But–and perhaps this is the most important thing–the mullahs have to be asking the same question. The Maduro operation demonstrates American capability but most crucially it demonstrates American (specifically Trump’s) will (which can exploit a wide variety of kinetic capabilities in addition to those that ruined Maduro’s day). So the mullahs are basically in the situation of the hapless bank robber in Dirty Harry’s sights:

In his press conference this morning, Trump answered the most immediate question: with Maduro gone, who will run Venezuela? Answer: the US. Exactly how this will work remains to be seen, but no doubt the planning has been in place since at least the time the boat strikes began in September 2025.

In the longer term, the likely answer is opposition leader Maria Corina Machado. Again looking back, the operation to spirit her from the country to “attend the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony” in December now looks like part of the overall operation. Once she was out of the country, she could wait in the wings until, well, today (or at least the near future) and form a new government. The ceremony provided the pretext to get her out. (No doubt the Norwegian pantywaists are wailing that they are complicit in Maduro’s overthrow. Cry more). (It is interesting that this operation had a patina of plausible deniability because it was run by ex-US special operators. It was arguably the most challenging part of this whole endeavor, and direct US involvement would have been a bigger tip).

So the boat strikes, the tanker seizures, Machado’s exfiltration, and all the other events of the past 5 months or so were part of an escalating campaign that culminated this morning. This was not a hasty Trump brain flash. It has been in the works probably since inauguration day.

Which raises the question: has something similar been in the works regarding Iran since 1/20/25?

And of course, there is the issue of the Venezuelan oil industry, which the warm collectivist embrace of Chavez and Maduro destroyed over the last two decades plus. Well, Trump answered that question too:

All your (oil) bases are belong to us. https://t.co/tKyamuuSCD

— streetwiseprof (@streetwiseprof) January 3, 2026

It will be interesting to see what Chevron stock in particular does when the market opens. And also CNPC and Sinopec.

Maduro and his wife have been indicted, again to provide the cover and justification for what is in fact an act of realpolitik. But no doubt the Trump DOJ will leverage the criminal prosecution of Maduro to target some other Trump bêtes noires, specifically Venezuelan gangs like Tren de Aragua that have infiltrated the US.

And finally, my condolences to Bernie Sanders, AOC, Hizzoner Mamdani, most of the rest of the Democratic Party, Sean Penn, Danny Glover, and all of you other idiots who have lionized Maduro and Chavismo. I know you are having a bad day.

But I frolic in your salty tears.

OK. The Moscow story.

In the mid-2010s I taught in the commodity trading program at the Hochschule Luzern (with the class held in Lugano). One of my students was a Russian working for Rusal’s trading arm in Zug. His managers (a New Zealander and a Canadian) wanted to expose Rusal’s marketing people to western business concepts, and had created a set of classes in Moscow to do so. The student recommended that they hire me to give one of the lectures. I agreed to do one on pricing. Very basic stuff, focused on elasticity of demand and its determinants, and how that information could inform their pricing decisions.

So off I go to Moscow. It was a close thing because Hurricane Harvey had hit several days before my scheduled departure, and Intercontinental Airport only opened on that day. I was on one of the first flights out.

Going back to December 2016, I had been helping a reporter for one of the last independent Russian news organizations, RBC, on a story on the supposed sale of a 10 percent stake in Rosneft to the Qatar Investment Authority and notably Glencore. Putin and Sechin had been touting the participation of Glencore in particular as evidence of western acceptance of Russia as an investment opportunity. It was a big deal to them.

Digging into the details, I determined that the deal was a sham. Glencore was basically a straw buyer, and retained no risk. The reporter ran several stories quoting me on this, that is, basically me calling Putin and Sechin liars.

When I was in Moscow for the Rusal class in early-September 2017, the Qatar/Glencore/Rosneft deal blew up, to be replaced by a sale of a stake in the Russian oil company to the heretofore virtually unknown Chinese company CEFC. The reporter messaged me for comment, and again I was quoted, basically calling bullshit on that deal too. (Here’s my blog post on that deal).

(Interestingly, Hunter Biden was mixed up with CEFC, and the head of the company was eventually jailed by the CCP).

That story came out on the morning I was leaving Moscow. I was admittedly a little nervous while waiting in the border control line, but made it through no problem and then grabbed a copy of RBC while heading to the gate.

Here’s the paper:

The reporter had told me that Putin (a) gets all his news from newspapers, and (b) RBC is always at the top of his pile because it’s the only non-propaganda outlet in Russia. So I had this vision of Putin at breakfast reading the front page article and saying to one of his flunkies: “Кто этот Пирронг?” (“Who is this Pirrong?”). I shared that vision with the reporter via WhatsApp.

His reply: “Oh, he knows who you are.”

First off, a Happy New Year to all of you who visited SWP in 2025, and before. The site is nearing its 20th anniversary–anybody out there who started visiting in 2006? 2007? A special shout out to you, but thanks to all who have read me over the years.

SWP did not start as a Russia-oriented blog. To the contrary. I initially intended it to focus on subjects at least tangential to my academic research in commodities and financial market structure. I have done that, especially during the Financial Crisis era, but pretty early on my interest in the economics of institutions and the resource curse caused me to follow Russian events and to write extensively on the subject over the years. As of today, there are 1,426 posts with the tagline “Russia.”

As a result, I have been a close observer of most of the Putin years. Indeed, the main catalyst for associating Russia with the resource curse was the Khodorkovsky saga, which preceded the blog by a couple of years.

Despite recent aspersions on X that I am a Putin fanboi (due to the fact that I have been a realist about Ukraine’s prospects), if you have the endurance to scroll through my Putin posts over the years you’ll see that I have been harshly critical. So much so, in fact, that when I went to Russia in 2017 my family freaked out, thinking that I would be bound for Chita after setting foot in Moscow. (There’s a story about that trip–I’ll retell it in a future post).

Which brings us to the news of the day. Putin claims that Ukraine attempted a drone attack on his residence. Ukraine denies. According to today’s news, the CIA has briefed Trump that no such attack occurred.

I seriously doubt that it did, if only because it would be a colossally stupid move by Ukraine.

It would be stupid because the probability of success would be zero to multiple digits and even a failure would torpedo Ukraine’s/Zelensky’s already fraught relationship with the notoriously volatile Trump.

Why an almost certain failure? Well, for one thing, Putin claimed an attack on one of his residences. Which one? He has many all over the vast expanse of Russia. He is notoriously secretive, allegedly even having duplicate rooms in each so that when he is filmed (e.g., sitting across a table from Gerasimov) there is no idea of which of them he was in, let alone where he is now. So the odds of hitting where he actually is are infinitesimal.

Moreover, these “residences” are actually massive palaces, and drone strikes would do little more than chip some masonry and maybe make the chandeliers sway a bit even if Ukraine got lucky and he happened to be in one at the time they struck. And they are all equipped with bunkers! Furthermore, they arguably have the densest air defenses of any site in Russia. (From that perspective, they are one of Ukraine’s biggest assets, because they divert AA resources from other strategic targets).

Insofar as the politics are concerned, Trump would surely view a strike as a deliberate Ukrainian attempt to derail a peace agreement. Trump would take this as a personal affront and he would likely respond by telling Ukraine–“you’re on your own! Good luck.” Except he’d probably leave off the “good luck.” (A NYT article from yesterday quotes a source saying that Trump called Zelensky a “motherfucker.” He clearly intensely dislikes him, for many reasons, not least Zelensky’s role in Trump’s first impeachment).

Also consider the source of the story–Putin. Highly reliable! I jest.

Now, to be fair, the source of the denial–Ukraine–is not particularly credible either. After all, it has steadfastly denied involvement in blowing up Nordstream, although there is considerable evidence that it did. Nor is the CIA’s validation of Ukraine’s position definitive, given its track record of twisting intelligence to advance its objectives.

But even rating ex ante credibility as a push, the Ukrainian denial is far more credible than Putin’s allegation.

And by making the extremely dubious and inflammatory allegation, Putin is all but telling Trump he is not going to make a deal. The NYT article also claims that Trump has complained that Putin has been “jerking him off” by claiming to be interested in a deal then refusing to budge on his maximalist terms.

This allegation is arguably the jerking off of all jerking offs. And Trump is clearly pissed, posting on Truth Social a NY Post article headlined that Putin is the obstacle to peace in Ukraine.

Which is no doubt what Putin intended.

In his New Year address to Russia, Putin promised “victory” in 2026. It is quite likely that despite the havoc that the war is inflicting on Russia, and how much it is devastating the nation’s future, from Putin’s perspective his future depends on continuing the war. Stunts like the “attack ‘bluster'” are Putin’s way of tying himself to the mast to avoid chasing after the siren song of peace.

Which is an inauspicious beginning to a new year. It portends that the beat–and the killing–will go on in 2026, and perhaps beyond, barring Putin’s exit (which will have to be the result of some happy accident, not Ukrainian wet work). So though it’s all fine and dandy for me to wish you all a happy new year, such wishes are futile for those swept up in the death carnival that is Ukraine and Russia.

The Eurotwerp meltdown continues.

I blame global warming.

Actually, we all know it’s Trump’s fault.

This German Budestag member is emblematic of the hysteria.

For the first time since WWII, the US is not on our side in Europe. It has sided with the aggressor against UKR and EUR security, seeking to mediate with Russia. The US no longer sees itself as NATO’s leader and treats Europe as a strategic target.
https://t.co/O9X0owL5pr

— Norbert Röttgen (@n_roettgen) December 13, 2025

Such complete bilge. The basic idea is that by forcing Europe to accept reality, the US is siding with the aggressor. Here’s the way the NYT article that Rottgen links to (and is quoted in) puts it:

The future of Ukraine is at the heart of the debate. Mr. Trump is pressing for a settlement to the war on largely Russian terms, and the Europeans see Ukraine as crucial to their own security and are encouraging Kyiv to fight for a better deal.

So, what “better” terms are feasible, actually? We repeatedly hear about “we can’t let Putin win,” the implication being that any end state that does not restore the pre-2014 borders is a grave threat to European security.

OK. Riddle me this: how do you plan to get there? How many Ukrainians will die while Kyiv “fight[s] for a better deal”–that it has no chance of getting? What are the odds that continuing to fight will produce an end result that is worse for European security than what Trump is proposing?

Saying that only the impossible is acceptable and that the US is betraying you by failing to go along is exactly why Trump–and Rubio, and Vance, and virtually all of the administration, and most Americans generally–have had it with you clowns.

In this vein is an article from the FT.

On the one hand, Europe is petrified by the prospects of a Russian invasion–prospects that are completely delusional given the wretched Russian military performance in Ukraine. On the other hand, somehow “strategic stabilisation with Russia” is unacceptable. Er, stabilization would reduce the already de minimis prospects for a Russian invasion of Europe even further. Cold War-esque stasis would be a great outcome for Europe.

That this stasis would involve Russian rule over a blasted, mine- and UXO-strewn, depopulated slice of Ukraine hundreds of miles from the core of the EU is irrelevant. Russian control of a devastated shi!thole (Donbas) has zero implications for Nato. And BTW, Russia already controls 80+ percent of it. Extending the war increases the likelihood it will take more of Ukraine than the Donbas.

In other words, there is no scenario on a set of positive measure that dominates what a cosmically unjust but actually achievable deal in Ukraine would achieve. Indeed, every alternative realistic scenario is worse. For the US. For Ukraine. And for Europe. But they are too idiotic to understand.

Real life often boils down to choosing the least bad option. This is a reality that Europe fails to grasp.

Europe also fails to acknowledge the fact that by letting Russia fuel it, Europe has fueled Russia’s aggression by more than it has supported Ukraine. From the time of Putin’s first incursion in 2014 through 2022, Europe spent between €750 billion and €1 trillion on Russian oil, gas, and coal. Since the 2022 invasion, those expenditures have dropped, but still total around €80 billion. (Some estimates are higher–that’s from ChatGPT). In contrast, European military assistance to Ukraine amounts to a mere €66 billion.

NB: Trump attacked European reliance on Russian energy during his first term. The European (specifically German) response? Supercilious smirking:

Who’s smirking now, bitches? You were warned, but you made your choices. And now you squeal about being forcefully reminded of it. Too bad. Cry more.

Europe complains of having deals done over its head. Er, this is happening because it (again mulishly defying Trump warnings) so underinvested in the military that it is so short on hard power that everything is over its head.

But boys can dream!

I want a EU that strikes fear in Hearts of our enemies
A EU built by Steel & AI
A EU with a heart of Iron 5.0
A EU that lets your fire rise pic.twitter.com/oeqdmcz5B8

— Gunther Fehlinger-Jahn (@GunterFehlinger) December 13, 2025

And I want a super yacht crewed by the Swedish Bikini Team.

My odds are way better than Gunther’s.

An article in Politico (unintentionally) admits what is really going on here:

Hard-right and far-right politicians now lead the polls in France, the U.K. and even Germany. 

Here’s how the power of populist hardliners differs across European countries ? 

? https://t.co/Qdds7Xr6Yy pic.twitter.com/O3zGfyybAL

— POLITICOEurope (@POLITICOEurope) December 12, 2025

The European ruling class is besieged. The peasants are revolting, and the ruling class is channeling its Wizard of Id:

All the while mouthing pieties about “democracy,” the ruling class is doing everything possible to squelch government by the people, from suppressing speech to cracking down on non-ruling class parties. It is deeply insecure, with good reason.

And by speaking bluntly, the Trump National Security Strategy stokes those insecurities. Indeed, the panicked and hysterical European “elite” reaction (which is what you get from X or the media) betrays their sense of weakness and fear. In their hearts, they know he’s right, but to admit it would be a confession of abject failure.

That dying (on purpose) continent, Europe, is in some ways analogous to an octopus, extending its multiple, tentacled arms everywhere. In other ways, however, it is not analogous to that charming species, because its conduct is baleful.

This week saw two prime examples: the fining of X for violation of the EU’s Dystopian Services Act–sorry, sorry, Digital Services Act (DSA)–and its efforts to derail a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia.

Americans from Musk and Trump to ordinary X users expressed outrage at the EU’s fine because it is part of an effort to censor Americans. The Eurocrats and their media acolytes haughtily respond: “Our continent. Our rules. Follow them or else!”

That’s an acceptable response to some things. For example, if the EU wants to inflict retarded bottle caps on its citizens (subjects would be more accurate), go for it!

But the impact of many, many EU rules is not limited to “their” continent. The DSA is one example of one that impacts people throughout the world. What the EU has demanded of X, and has apparently achieved with Meta and others, is the censorship of everyone’s speech, regardless of whether they live in Paris, France, or Paris, Texas. “Local” regulation of a global service has a global impact.

I could go on and on about extraterritorial EU rules. Those relating to “sustainability” and environmental standards for agricultural product supply chains are another.

And there are a lot of rules. A lot. The EU passes an average of 7 acts every single day.

As bad as the DSA and the like are, they are not nearly as sinister as the EU’s meddling in the American efforts to end the war in Ukraine. Here, led by Macron and Merz, and aided by a Brit pining to rejoin the EU (Starmer), the Europeans are cajoling Zelensky to reject the peace deal Trump is trying to broker. The main string they are pulling is the term involving territorial concessions. After meeting with them, Zelensky announced that such concessions were unacceptable. Meaning that any deal is impossible.

The main argument of the Europeans, and their American co-conspirators like the execrable Mike Pompeo, is “we can’t let Putin win!” If he wins, it’s Munich 1938 all over again and Putin will be emboldened to take the rest of Ukraine before beginning an unstoppable march to the Channel!

Implicit in all this is the apparent belief that somehow the Russians can be pushed back to the pre-2022, and indeed, pre-2014 borders. This belief is beyond delusional.

Ukraine is barely holding on defensively. The prospects for reversing Russian gains are nil.

The Europeans and Zelensky keep on yammering about more weapons. Weapons are not the issue. Bodies are.

Ukraine is at a severe manpower disadvantage relative to Russia. Its prewar population was less than a fourth of Russia’s. And as X interlocutor Yan Naroditsky helpfully demonstrates, its already shriveled military age cohorts have been reduced by more than 30 percent by emigration.

This a snapshot. pic.twitter.com/pdMbJCrNbe

— Yan Naroditsky (@yann140573) December 8, 2025

His dreams of being Erich von Manstein being frustrated, Putin has instead decided to emulate Erich von Falkenhayn and employ a strategy to bleed Ukraine white. And he is succeeding. And his odds of success were always greater than Falkenhayn’s because the manpower imbalance in 2025 is greatly more favorable to him than it was to the latter in 1916.

According to Substacker Sarcastosaurus (whom you should definitely follow to get a far more sobering and realistic take on the war) Ukraine is now recruiting the literally insane from asylums. Many of the Russian advances that you read about occur because Ukraine has no troops to hold some portions of the line.

Compounding this is the criminal stupidity of the Ukrainian command. In a military blunder deja vu all over again, the attempt to hold territory in Myrnohrad and Pokrovsk has resulted in the encirclement of Ukrainian troops. Attempts to break out and break in have failed, meaning these men of a naval infantry unit are likely doomed.

The side weaker in manpower should always choose troops over terrain. Always. Again and again, Syrsky does the opposite. And since he does this with Zelensky’s knowledge and approval, the Ukrainian president is ultimately responsible.

Why? And why is Zelensky so obdurate about a peace settlement that would sacrifice territory? It has happened so often and for so long that charitable explanations–and even incompetence would be charitable–don’t work. The only one left is that he wants the war to continue in order to remain in power–and to keep his fingers in the till.

A cynical desire to have the war continue is also the best explanation of the Europeans’ undermining of Trump’s attempts to end the war. I have little regard for their intelligence, but even they cannot be so stupid as not to recognize that their ostensible objective of kicking Putin back into Russia’s 1991 (2013) borders is utterly unachievable by Ukraine alone. And they know they are not going to put Franz or Pierre on the front line to achieve this. So extending the war means that Ukrainians will continue to die while losing territory rather than gaining it.

In this war of attrition, Putin has made it clear that he is willing to make the human and financial sacrifices necessary to take all of the Donbas. So the best territorial end state emerging from the European “strategy” is the same as what would result if Trump’s proposal is implemented. And the human cost-a cost Ukraine cannot afford-of the European strategy would be vastly higher.

I say “best” because who’s to say that Putin will stop at the borders of the Donbas? Especially since there is a serious possibility that such an outcome would be the result of a Ukrainian collapse, leaving the rest of the country open for conquest. A deal makes it more likely that Putin will stop, at least for now, at the borders of Donbas.

But Putin will use a deal to gather up strength for a renewed war! the Europeans et al say. Maybe. But Ukraine can also use the time bought by a deal to consolidate its defenses–and maybe even attract people back to the country to defend it. Both sides can benefit from a hiatus, but Ukraine needs it far more than Russia.

Macron–he of the 11 to 20 percent approval rating–says that Europe has a lot of cards to play. Yeah, Manny? Other than jokers, what’s in your hand? I call.

Get this: he says “the Russian economy is beginning to experience difficulties.” Beginning! After a war that in a few weeks will have lasted longer than WWII did for the USSR. And again, Putin has demonstrated that he is willing to cram down the economic cost on a (typically apathetic) Russian populace.

These people can only be described as evil. Their willingness to sacrifice countless lives for a fantasy is nothing less than evil.

But they’re our superiors, dontcha know. Their world, their rules, right? Coming from a collection of nations hell bent on committing suicide, and doing a damn good job of it, that is unacceptable.

The latest installment of Operation Undermine came over the weekend, with a WaPo story claiming that the US double tapped one of the Venezuelan drug boats, killing two individuals who had survived the first strike. An illegal order! A war crime! Illegal orders! (With the implication to whoever carried them out should be subject to military justice).

Today the White House said yeah, we did it–and it was legal. This was presumably based on an internal legal finding. So a matter of legal contention, and certainly not so clearcut for the trigger pullers on tap two to overcome the presumption that the order was legal.

Not surprisingly, those calling for SecWar Hegseth’s head conveniently ignore the Obama administration’s rather, shall we say, expansive, claims regarding its authority to whack people–including “collateral damage.” “Obama Administration Claims Unchecked Authority to Kill Americans Outside of Combat Zones.” As the ACLU put it: “The Obama administration today argued before a federal court that it should have unreviewable authority to kill Americans the executive branch has unilaterally determined to pose a threat.”

Kill Americans deemed by the executive branch to be terrorists. So a fortiori that logic would certainly extend to non-American drug runners designated by the USG as members of a terrorist organization.

The ACLU (more properly, the plaintiff Nasser Al-Aulaqi) lost. It lost because the judge accepted the administration’s argument that the case raised “political issues” and was not justiciable. The ACLU did not appeal.

And there the matter has rested for 14 years. Meaning that the precedents set by the Obama administration provide a huge amount of room to cover the boat strikes–including a double tap.

No doubt if the Venezuela strikes are brought to court, some Obama (or Biden) appointed judge will just like that decide that they are indeed reviewable, and matters for the judiciary rather than for the political branches.

There are also historical precedents. In the aftermath of the Battle of the Bismarck Sea in 1943, American and Australian planes and PT boats killed survivors–probably hundreds of them–from the transports and destroyers that skip bombing B-25s had sunk.

During the Battle of the Bismarck Sea in WWII US planes and PT boats machine gunned survivors of transports sunk by skip bombing attacks.https://t.co/IkhltGEFy8 pic.twitter.com/3cUWmJqYzG

— streetwiseprof (@streetwiseprof) November 30, 2025

Medal of Honor winning “Mush” Morton, commander of the submarine USS Wahoo, also order the klling survivors of a ship he had sunk.

The US justified both actions, claiming that the survivors posed a continuing threat. In the Bismarck Sea, the US argued that survivors that made it to Lae, New Guinea (their destination before the B-25s jumped them) would be able to join the troops fighting Americans there. (As had happened with Japanese whose ships had been sunk near Guadalcanal).

In any event, the Venezuelan boat strikes too are “political questions.” Yes, this has led to a typical DC tempest. But I am guessing that it will be largely confined to the Beltway and the media. The victims here are hardly appealing. Certainly less appealing than the 16 year old son of Awlaki, the American Obama droned. I would wager that most Americans are on board (so to speak!) with wasting drug boats and their crews, and are not too fussed about the means.

The issues here are also too legalistic for most Americans to care. You bomb a speedboat because you intend to destroy it, and crucially, to kill its crew. If you have the legal right to do so–to kill–it makes little common sense to argue that you have to do so with the first shot, and no second shots are allowed. So there’s little or no room for incremental outrage. If the strikes outrage you because you think killing is unjustified here, fine–the double tap shouldn’t add to your outrage. If the first bomb/shot doesn’t outrage you, follow ons shouldn’t either.

And what are the alternatives? The most straightforward one is to let them drown or become shark food. That’s better?

Another is to rescue them–which could put US personnel at risk, and which the US is under no obligation to do. And capturing them would result in something akin to the Gitmo legal circus–which is one reason why the Obama administration found a kill them all, let Allah sort them out strategy appealing. (NB: conceivably the SEALs could have captured Osama during the raid on his compound in Pakistan, but they were under orders to kill him–and did).

A remaining option is to hope their compadres would pick them up . . . which would result in a situation similar to the Bismarck Sea. In fact, a totally understandable tactic would be to let them swim, hope that rescuers arrived, and then whack the rescuers. So be careful what you ask for!

The main reason that the political calculus favors the administration here is that Maduro’s Venezuela is a very malign actor that gets no sympathy from Americans. Drugs are just one item in a long list of particulars. Maduro vectoring gang bangers to the United States is another. (It is no coincidence, comrade, that Venezuelans were one of Trump’s first and foremost targets).

But most importantly, if you list all of America’s biggest enemies/adversaries–Russia, China, Iran, Cuba, Hezbollah, drug cartels–Venezuela is their friend. And these involve more than mere expressions of undying fraternal love: Venezuela has received arms from Russia and Iran, massive financial support from China, has historically been a financial and energy lifeline to Cuba in exchange for Cuban muscle to oppress Venezuelans and protect Maduro, and facilitates Hezbollah operations in the Americas. (Riddle me this: Why is Hezbollah operating in the Americas?). From time to time Venezuela has hosted Russian nuclear capable bombers and combat ships.

So this is the execrable regime that the execrable Mark Kelly, Elissa Slotkin, et al, are de facto supporting. As if their subversion campaign was not odious enough, to exploit the US’s actions against an enemy to advance that campaign is particularly disgusting.

And seizing on Trump’s anti-Venezuela campaign is particularly dishonest and hypocritical for those who also claim to be ardent supporters of Ukraine because of Russia, and who claim that Trump is Putin’s plaything. Trump is going after Russia’s main ally in the Americas. Maduro is begging Putin for help. If their harsh anti-Russian stance was principled, they would cheer what Trump is doing.

They are doing the opposite. This demonstrates how unprincipled they are.

Since opposing Trump is their one and only objective, we get Orwellian Oceania Has Always Been At War With Eastasia about faces, and Russia’s deep relationship with Venezuela gets ignored by strident anti-Russians.

Indeed, if you look back the first Trump administration, the political and media left that now freaks out about Trump going after Venezuela/Maduro criticized him for not confronting Venezuela. Back then, when Russian bombers landed in Venezuela the establishment was aghast and demanded action. Back then, too, they fretted over Venezuela’s abetting Hezbollah operations. Not to mention their criticism of Maduro’s anti-democratic actions.

In short, all the “ethics” advanced here are purely situational and partisan. Trump is to be excoriated for giving Putin too much in Ukraine because giving anything to such an evil man is wrong. Trump is also to be excoriated for attempting to take down that selfsame evil man’s most important ally in our own hemisphere.

And the means that they are employing to achieve their partisan ends–undermining the military, and the chain of command in particular–are beyond disgusting. The current frenzy over the double tap cannot be separated from the campaign of the Seditious Six to stir fear, uncertainty, and doubt in the military. The frenzy is just a convenient weapon in that campaign. It is instrumental, not principled.

A military cannot function with FUD. Patton frequently invoked Kipling’s “the unforgiving minute.” Every minute-second, really-matters in combat situations. Soldiers, sailors, and Marines who waste that unforgiving minute wrestling with doubts about the legitimacy of their orders are putting themselves, their comrades, and their missions at risk. Yes, there are edge cases, but the subversion of Kelly’s Antiheroes spreads far beyond such cases, as their their cynical exploitation of killing Venezuelan drug runners clearly demonstrates.