Maybe the defeat of Russia IS the only option

For weeks some of the West's biggest brains who think stragetically on the world's major crises have been advocating a deal with Russia. If there is no deal of any kind then the war will go on for years, the economies of the world will be severely damaged and there will be starvation in the poorest countries. I tended to agree with this scenario because in the end most wars finish with a negotiated deal. Zelensky has been saying this for a long time. However unsavoury it seems, Putin has to be persuaded to stop the war but inevitably he will want something in return and that means he would be rewarded for his aggression. Unpalatable? Yes. Realistic? Unfortunately. But I'm coming round to the view that if Europe is to enjoy any kind of peace and stability for the next few generations, Putin cannot and must not be granted any concessions. If the Donbas region falls into Russian hands and Putin is allowed to annexe the territory and turn it into Russian motherland what will he do next? Would territorial concessions to Putin put him off seeking other gains elseswhere or would he be satisfied with what he has got? Putin is not a man to be satisfied with limited gains. He will want more. I was struck by the admirable comments made by Arturs Krisjanis Karins, prime minister of Latvia, in an interview with Politico. He said the defeat of Putin was the only option if Europe is to have a meaningful future. Ukraine must win, with the West's help, and Putin must lose. It's a strong and forceful argument and I believe he is probably right, although the consequences of a long war with thousands more casualties hardly bear thinking about. More importantly, thousands of Ukrainians have already sacrificed their lives to fight the Russians. What would it mean for their families and for the Ukrainian soldiers still defending their country every day if a deal was forced on the Kyiv government that entailed handing over parts of the country to the aggressors? Now that the EU has agreed to ban all shipments of oil from Russia by the end of the year - leaving only pipeline oil to go to Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic - Putin's war is going to bring more and more economic suffering to the Russian people. So now is not the time to talk about deals but to pile on the pressure on the Russian leader and to make him fear that he could actually lose this war.

Can we believe anything Sergey Lavrov says?

So now we know. Vladimir Putin is fit and well and raring to go and there is absolutely nothing wrong with him. This is thanks to Sergey Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, who has denied that his beloved leader is ill with cancer or anything else. He suggested we just look at the Russian leader to be convinced by his supreme health. Well actually Putin looks ghastly, pasty-faced, puffed-face, skin stretched like he has Botox every day, and a degree of instability when standing. So, sorry, Lavrov, I look at your leader and think this guy is not well. But Lavrov says otherwise. But of course whatever Lavrov says about anything has to be treated with a very large pinch of Siberian salt. Obviously he is not going to confirm that Putin is ill because he would get the chop instantly, but the way he dismissed reports/rumours that the Kremlin boss was nearing his end was so tyical of Lavrov. He likes to give the impression that he is a very superior being and that the rest of us are mere shrimps. It's a brave reporter who asks awkward questions of the Russian foreign minister but he poo poos everything anyway. William Burns, CIA director and the man who knows Putin better than most after years of diplomatic service in Moscow and as holder of the secret files on the puffy leader, has decribed him as cocky, cranky, aggrieved and insecure. That seems to sum up Putin very well. If he IS suffering from blood cancer as is being reported, then the whole combination is pretty alarming. Whatever Lavrov claims.

Private satellite companies spying for the US

One of America’s biggest intelligence agencies has recruited three commercial satellite companies to join operations to spy on Russian military activities in Ukraine. In a multi-billion dollar deal, the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) which has at least 50 of its own intelligence-gathering satellites, has teamed up with companies that have already been leading the field in exposing Russian actions in Ukraine including plundering of the country’s vital grain exports. Images from NRO and commercial satellites over Ukraine have played a crucial role in helping Kyiv plot counter-attacks against Russian troops and armour, and revealing to the world every action taken by Moscow’s invasion force since February 24. Maxar Technologies, one of the companies awarded a ten-year contract by the NRO worth $3.24 billion, produced satellite images this week which showed two Russian-flagged cargo ships loading up with plundered Ukrainian grain at the port of Sevastopol in Crimea. The ships, Matros Pozynich and Matros Koshka, were caught docked next to grain silos and filling their holds with the stolen crop before leaving the port. The two other US companies contracted by the NRO are BlackSky, based in Herndon, Virginia, and Planet in San Francisco. Images produced by Maxar Technologies, based in Westminster, Colorado, helped track the build-up of Russian forces on the border with Ukraine prior to the invasion on February 24 and have recently revealed the Russian offensive in the eastern Donbas region. All three companies operate fleets of satellites orbiting the Earth and have played an increasingly influential role in detecting Russian missile positions and troop movements, and the Pentagon and the NRO have relied on the commercial images as much as their own satellite assets. The commercial satellites are smaller and cheaper.The contract with the US spy agency underlines the way private companies and their success in exploiting the revolution in new technology have become a vital asset for the Pentagon. “The NRO has a longstanding strategy of buy what we can, build what we must,” Chris Scolese, NRO director, said.

The Ukraine war will drain Russia of a huge chunk of its weapon resources but Putin is smiling

Even the Pentagon is now estimating that the Russians have lost at least 1,000 tanks. That's an incredible statistic. All the signs are that Moscow is now having to raid its storage depots for museum-age T-62 tanks to try and fill in the gaps. But these old beasts which are 50-years-old will be sitting ducks for Ukrainian anti-tank units, armed with the best weapons the West can provide. At this rate Russia will be getting through their whole inventory of tanks if the war continues at this pace for the next year or so. Even so, the invasion force seems to be ploughing slowly on, grabbing villages and towns and land in eastern Ukraine, and destroying everything in their wake. Is this what Putin planned to do from the beginning, just destroy as much of Ukraine as possible to prove a point? A thousand tanks gone, but who cares, Putin seems to be saying. No one truly knows how many Russian soldiers have died but the Ukrainians claim it's now as high as 30,000. In three months! But unless the US agrees to send the really big stuff, heavy long-range multiple-launch rocket systems and the HIMARS artillery monster, the Russians are going to outgun the Ukrainians and continue their remorseless way into eastern Ukraine. I have a feeling that Putin is quite pleased the way things are going now, never mind the losses and the early disasters and the catastrophic loss of the Black Sea fleet flagship cruiser, Moskva. He is stealing Ukraine's grain harvest and preventing Kyiv from exporting grain and wheat by blockading the Black Sea ports. It's not looking good for Kyiv suddenly. Yes Putin is definitely smiling.

Is peace possible in Ukraine while Putin is in power?

Volodymir Zelensky said only diplomacy can end the war in Ukraine. Henry Kissinger caused a right royal rumpus when he said at Davos that a deal would have to include ceding some territory to Russia. Zelensky was furious and called Kissinger an appeaser. But whether you like Realpolitic or not, even Zelensky knows that if there is ever to be a peace deal there is absolutely no likelihood of Moscow agreeing to anything that involves reversing everything to the status quo ante the invasion - ie all Russian troops back in Russia like before February 24. So what exactly does Zelensky mean by diplomacy? He has made it clear that no peace deal could ever involve losing any part of Ukraine. He forgets of course that that has already happened when Russia annexed Crimea in 2014. Zelensky never mentions that. I am totally on his side: of course it would be terrible and a betrayal of the brave Ukrainians who have given up their lives to fight the Russians if some future peace deal did involve sacrificing land. But in reality how else could there ever be a so-called peace deal? What would be the end product of a negotiated settlement? Has Zelensky got a plan? The truth is if Zelensky has nothing to offer Moscow, then the war will go on for ever and as Kissinger pointed out this would be calamitous for the whole world, not just Ukraine. There are only three options: a negotiated end to the war, whatever that might mean, Russian defeat and humiliation or Ukraine defeat and subjugation. The third option would be catastrophic for Europe and for the world and would probably lead to further Russian invasions. The second option would take so long, given Putin's readiness to lose troops and tanks without the blink of an eye, that the war will be with us for decades. And humiliation for Putin in Ukraine might provoke him to do something dangerously stupid. Only the first option raises even a prospect of bringing the war to a close. I hope someone somewhere is drawing up a proposal right now.

Shooting carnage in US brings call for gun controls! Yeah right

Unfortunately Ted Cruz, Republican Texas senator, is not alone in the United States. His despicable comments about the latest mass shooting at a school - 19 kids killed and two teachers - in which he rejected any thought of depriving citizens of the right to buy and bear arms, even at the age of 18 (like the shooter at the Texas school) are shared by at least half the population. The US Constitution which was drawn up after the American civil war when citizen armies of the south and north needed arms to fight for the future governance of the country, is seen as the gold standard of America's way of life, never to be altered, changed or reformed. And the right to bear arms, the 2nd Amendment, is viewed as just as relevant today as it was deemed to be in 1787. Are you kidding me, Senator Cruz, 235 years later and you don't think the circumstances are any different today? This is a man who aspires to be a future president of the United States. God help all Americans. Every time there is a massacre at a school or grocery store or supermarket, hands are wrung and desperate appeals are made for something to change. Joe Biden did more wringing of hands than anyone but he didn't say he was going to ban the purchase of military-style assault rifles. So nothing will change. All politicians in the US talk about is tightening up on background checks before arms licences are issued. But this is so pathetic. So I'm afraid to say that thanks to people like Ted Cruz, all we can anticipate with absolute certainty is that in a few weeks or months there will be another slaughtering of children somewhere in America.

Henry Kissinger on Ukraine is, I'm afraid, absolutely right

Henry Kissinger is 98 but still one of the wisest men on the planet and what he says on Ukraine should be listened to by both sides in the war which is devastating not only Ukraine but also the world economy and the livelihood of the poorest people on this earth. He told the gathering of world leaders and officials in Davos that a peace deal must be negotiated as soon as possible and that the US-led western nations should stop dreaming about defeating the Russian army. Some leaders in the West are doing just that, believing that the best outcome in the war in Ukraine is for the Russians to be soundly defeated and sent packing back to their garrisons in Russia. But as Kissinger warns, a defeated and humiliated Russia would be a dangerous outcome because Vladimir Putin would seek to take revenge which could be calamitous for the planet. Russia cannot simply be ostracised from the rest of the world and never spoken to again. Despite the brutality and aggression and unprovoked invasion of another country's sovereignty, Russia is not going to go away. So it's important that instead of hoping for a massive defeat of the Russian forces, a deal has to be done. A deal which will inevitably involve giving up some Ukrainian territory. Kissinger is the oldest diplomat left on earth and this is what he believes must happen, and the sooner the better. It's the old Realpolitik at play. Kissinger knows what he is talking about and everyone should take note, especially Putin and President Zelensky. A deal of some sort has to be negotiated quickly before it's too late. Otherwise the war will go on for ever.

Biden said no to Ukraine but says yes to Taiwan

It was one of the first things Joe Biden said when Russia invaded Ukraine. He said no US troops would be sent to Ukraine to help them defend against Russian aggression. Ukraine, of course, is not a member of the Nato alliance. But now for the second time in a few months, Biden has said the US WOULD intervene militarily if China invaded Taiwan. Taiwan, of course, is not a member of the Nato alliance. So the obvious question is: if Biden is prepared to send troops, fighter jets and aircraft carrier strike groups to join in a war with China in the event of an attack on Taiwan, why was he not prepared to do the same to fight the Russians in Ukraine? Biden's comment in South Korea was in response to a direct question during a press conference about whether he would be prepared to help defend Taiwan. He said yes. No doubt at all. The White House immediately started to row back his comment, stating that what the president really meant was that the US supported the one-China policy but under US law would provide the means for Taiwan to defend itself in the event of an invasion by China. In other words, no boots on the ground. Just like Ukraine. But that's not what Biden said. No, sir. Certainly Beijing got the message and got all snotty-nosed about his remark. Perhaps Biden for once was being subtle, appearing to pledge full military support for Taiwan but really giving a warning to Beijing that it would face a nightmare in Taiwan, just like Russia is in Ukraine, because one way or the other the US would help to prevent or undermine any Chinese attempt to seize control of Taiwan. The billions of dollars of weapons being supplied to Ukraine should warn off China from doing a Putin and invading Taiwan, Biden is probably hoping. But the fact is, words mean everything, and both Beijing - and by the way President Zelensky of Ukraine - now know that the US would be prepared to send troops to Taiwan but not to Ukraine. Pretty well everyone in the White House will now be saying: "Oh God, will someone please stop the president from speaking off the cuff."

Russia's hypersonic missiles are hyper-inaccurate

Russia’s hypersonic missiles fired in Ukraine have “under-performed” and have proved to be inaccurate, the US military chief responsible for defending America against attack, has disclosed. The Russian air force has fired several Kinzhal (or Dagger) hypersonic ballistic missiles at targets in Ukraine, all of them aimed at buildings. The first missile capable of reaching more than five times the speed of sound (Mach 5) was launched in March by a MiG-31. General Glen VanHerck, commander of US Northern Command, told a Senate committee that the Russians “have had challenges with some of their hypersonic missiles as far as accuracy”. They had underformed, he told the Senate armed services strategic forces sub-committee. His disclosure that Russia’s so-called precision strikes had frequently failed to fulfil their proclaimed reputation for accuracy and reach is backed up by other senior Pentagon officials. One US defence official said: “We can’t understand why Russia has been using these advanced, costly weapons to hit buildings. The truth is they seem to be incapable of hitting moving targets and the missiles just hit the most obvious high building.” “This is why so many apartment blocks have been hit, not because the Russians have necessarily deliberately targeted them but because the weapons are so inaccurate,” the official said. It ‘s one of the reasons why there has been so much destruction of civilian as opposed to military property in Ukraine, US officials said. Around 1,500 Russian missiles have been fired since the war began on February 24 and most of them hit civilian areas, John Plumb, US assistant secretary of defence for space policy, said. The officials said it was the largest employment of missile systems since the Second World War.

Biden goes to South Korea but avoids the Demilitarised Zone

I'm not quite sure why Joe Biden is in Asia when there's a war going on in Ukraine. But I guess it was planned some time ago. China and North Korea are already making a fuss which is both wholly predictable and stupendously boring. Both these countries need to get a life, especially North Korea which at a time of its huge Covid crisis should be asking the world for help, not criticising the US president for daring to come into the region. But Biden has decided against playing with fire by heading for the infamous Demilitarised Zone which separates North from South Korea. Normally western leaders spend an hour at the DMZ, looking through the binoculars at North Korea and its huge flagpole on its side of the zone. When I went to the DMZ with Sir Geoffrey Howe years ago when he was foreign secretary I remember officials advising him not to make any sort of gesture, such as pointing at the border, in case it upset the North Koreans. Even a sneeze was interpreted then and probably still is today as a hostile sign. But Biden is playing safe by not going at all. Very wise in my view. Knowing his propensity for gaffes, he might say the wrong thing or remove his sunglasses in a gesture of defiance which could provoke the super-sensitive Kim Jong-un to launch something nasty. But actually the real reason why Biden is staying clear of the DMZ is that his predecessor made such a fuss about meeting Kim one step over the border. The Donald/Kim show was a golden moment in Trump's four-year term and Biden wouldn't want to have comparisons made. Joe Play-Safe Biden.

UN appeals to Putin's better nature!

If ever there was an oxymoron designed for the Russian leader it came in an appeal from the United Nations to Vladimir Putin. The peace and love organisation appealed to Putin's better nature to allow grain from Ukraine to be exported to the world to avoid starvation in many of the poorer countries. Judging by what Putin has done since he took power two decades ago, including annexing Crimea, invading Ukraine, occupying two provinces in Georgia, killing many of his opponents, sending spooks with Novichok nerve agent to assassinate his enemies etc etc etc, I don't think the man has anything remotely looking like a better nature. So the UN appeal to do the right thing and allow Ukraine to feed the world with its grain harvest will I assume be greeted with disdain. Putin will see the export of Ukrainian grain as a bargaining point to get what he wants from Kyiv. Like surrender. Would he dare do that, blackmail Kyiv and the West into surrendering in return for feeding the poor around the world? You bet he will. He has already blamed Ukraine and its western supporters for the grain crisis, claiming it's the sanctions which have caused the calamity, not the war. Putin has never shown sympathy nor compassion for anything. These two personality ingredients are not in his make-up. So I fear the grain shortage will be just another disaster facing the world and Putin couldn't care less.

Turkey puts spanner in the works

President Erdogan, the autocratic leader of Turkey, didn't get where he is today by being concessionary, understanding and amicable. What he wants he generally gets, never mind the wider consequences. So he is the only Nato leader who is opposing the entry of Finland and Sweden into the Nato alliance because he accuses these two countries of harbouring anti-Turkey Kurdish "terrorists". If they don't hand them over to the Turkish authorities, he, Erdogan, will stand in the way of Finland and Sweden joining the alliance. All big political decisions by Nato have to be unanimous, so he will stop this historic move, and Putin will be laughing. He loves it when Nato is divided. I imagine the US is on the line to Erdogan every minute of the day trying to persuade him to be a little bit flexible. But Erdogan doesn't do flexible. Despite pleas from Washington and the whole of Nato he went ahead and bought Russia's air-defence system, the S-400, which posed an immediate conflict of interest with Nato fighter aircraft, especially the US F-35 joint strike fighter which Turkey was in the process of buying. Erdogan refused to give in even though it meant Turkey would no longer be able to fly F-35s. Erdogan invaded northeast Syria despite appeals not to do so by Washington and went about forging a buffer zone to prevent Kurdish "terrorists" from entering Turkey from Syria. Of course every country and every leader has the right to make decisions in the interests of their nation. But the world is now in a critical state and the entry of Finland and Sweden into Nato will play a crucial part in hammering home the message which that enlightened Russian lieutenant-colonel gave on Russian TV yesterday, that the whole world is against Russia. If Erdogan stops Finland and Sweden doing what they each feel is vital to their future security, he will be doing Putin a huge favour and will undermine what until now has been a remarkable display of alliance unity.

Odesa next in Russia's sights

Mariupol has finally fallen. The city is basically destroyed, a pile of rubble, a place not fit for human habitation thanks to relentless shelling and bombing by the Russians, most of it indiscriminate. It is no longer a city but a mausoleum for the brave Ukrainian fighters who fought for three months to keep it from falling into Putin's hands. The last 264 o so Ukrainian fighters, many of them seriously wounded, were finally allowed to leave the steelworks where they had carried out their last stand, although their future is uncertain as they are now in Russian custody. The next target for Putin must be Odesa, the key port on the Black Sea which Ukraine has to hold because of its importance for the country's export trade. Odesa is roughly 1,000 kilometres by road from Mariupol, so Ukraine will have to make sure the route to the port is ambushed all the way along. The greatest threat will be posed by Russian cruise missiles on board diesel-electric submarines out in the Black Sea which are invulnerable to attack. Nato will have to supply the best-available air and sea defence systems to keep Odesa away from Putin's ambitious hands. Without Odesa Ukraine will starve and the rest of the world will be affected because of the vital export from Ukraine of sunflower oil and grain. Odesa has to be saved. It cannot go the way of Mariupol. If Odesa falls, Ukraine will effectively become a land-locked nation and Putin will win.

No more Big Macs in Moscow

Vladimir Putin has been dealt the ultimate blow for his war in Ukraine: McDonald's has finally decided to exit Russia for good, closing down all 850 outlets. No more Big Macs. The McDonald's sites were closed temporarily in March but now the Big Decision has been made to punish Putin with total closure of the lot for ever. I hope that all the Russian citizens who loved their Big Macs over the years will be mightily pissed off with their leader for being responsible for the end of their fast-food favourite. Putin and his henchmen have said in the past that Russia will be better and stronger for not having western companies, especially American ones, making money in the motherland. But since the first McDonald's was set up in Moscow in 1990, the Russian people unquestionably welcomed the arrival of the American fast-food giant, first because it guaranteed cheap food ready-to-eat and second because it meant the Cold War was over and Russians could start to embrace all the western goodies which had been denied them for decades. Now they know for sure that the Cold War, or something worse, is back and the only person they have to blame for this is Putin. Let the protests begin.

Finland and Sweden have given Putin a message: "Your threats don't scare us"

Vladimir Putin has always believed that if he threatens enough, people/nations/the whole western alliance will quake in their boots and be deterred from doing whatever they were hoping or planning to do. Never forget that Putin is a KGB man at heart, a security service gangster who cares not a jot for rules or international codes of behaviour. So if he threatens to use "necessary measures" or "appropriate retaliatory measures" etc to stop something happening he expects to be successful. But not anymore. He threatened Finland and Sweden that if they dared to join Nato it would be a grave mistake and they would seriously regret it. Putin clearly had "appropriate retaliatory measures" in mind. But both Finland and Sweden have effectively said to Putin: "Stuff you. We'll join Nato because we know it's in our security interests after you invaded Ukraine." Everything Putin hoped to achieve by invading Ukraine has failed. His invasion force has failed to take Ukraine, any of Ukraine, Nato has united more than ever before, alliance troops and armour have poured into eastern Europe, and now two other countries have said they want to join the alliance. His threats now make no difference. He still has his nuclear card but does anyone seriously believe Putin will launch a nuclear war against Nato. A war that will destroy everything he has worked so hard to acquire - his enormous wealth and properties and superyachts and girlfriends. No. So Putin's threats no longer work. The West is not afraid of him anymore. He is a busted flush. The historic decision by Finland and Sweden to join Nato is the final "up yours" gesture to demonstrate to Putin that his whole strategy has totally failed. Thank you Finland and Sweden for courageously standing up to the bully.

Is Putin terminally ill, terminally crazy or terminally paranoid?

Whether Vladimir Putin is seriously ill with cancer, as is being reported, or progressively becoming mad in his head, the one thing that is definitely true is that he is terminally paranoid. Like all the old Cold War Leviathans, Putin is convinced that the Western world is against him, that the US-led Nato alliance is plotting every day to attack and destroy Russia and that he has enemies on every street corner. He is a KGB man from the top of his head to the end of his stubby toes and he wakes up every morning believing that he is the only man in Russia who can save the motherland. It doesn't matter how many times successive western leaders have told him that we just want a quiet life and for everyone to get on in a peaceful world, he remains convinced that the western alliance is out to get him. It wasn't helped when Joe Biden as good as said that Putin should go. Of course Putin should go and Biden was right to say that a leader who ordered the invasion of his neighbour and kill thousands of people should not be in charge any longer. But for Putin it was confirmation that even Sleepy Joe was plotting to remove him. After nearly 80 days of war in Ukraine, with Finland and Sweden now moving to join Nato, and the West's heavy weapons pouring into Ukraine to batter the Russian invasion forces, Putin will be telling himself every day: "You see, I told you so." Paranoia has consumed him throughout his life and that is a very dangerous ingredient which could spell doom and disaster for the world in the months ahead.

Austin to Shoigu: "Come on, man, stop this....war."

The best bit of news today is that Lloyd Austin, US defence secretary, spoke on the phone to his Russian counterpart, Sergey Shoigu, and as far as I know neither one slammed the phone down on the other. The read-out of their phone call, the first since mid-February, ie before the February 24 Russian invasion of Ukraine, provided the barest amount of detail. Austin asked Shoigu for a ceasefire and then said it was important for the two of them to keep contact. The first request was no doubt pushed to one side by the veteran Shoigu, but the second one presumably met with a positive answer because Shoigu, despite his concrete face, knows full well that it's better for the world if the two of them stay in touch to make sure there are no miscalculations in the future as the war drags on. If Austin and Shoigu have a chat every now and again that's very good news. What I hope Austin, a former four-star general, was able to say to Shoigu, a Russian army general, was something ony fellow generals can talk about: the dangers of wars getting out of hand. There has been too much talk in recent weeks about the possibility of the war going nuclear. Austin and Shoigu know that this is crazy talk. Once the nuclear button has been pressed, annihilation follows. So I hope Austin said something like: "Hey, come on, man, this kind of talk is irresponsible. We are both nuclear powers and therefore have huge responsbilities for the whole world. So keep the rhetoric cool and for heaven's sake let's find a way out of this ....war." Shoigu of course will be mindful that whatever he says on the phone will be relaid to his Kremlin boss, but hopefully Austin came away with a little more hope than before he picked up the phone.

Gauntlet thrown down to Putin: take on Nato if you dare

The language is getting stronger and more dangerous between the US and Russia. First Lloyd Austin, US defence secretary, said the plan was to weaken the Russian military to prevent them planning further aggresion in the future and then he told Congress that Putin better not think about taking on Nato. He doesn't want to do that, Austin said. It's all tough rhetoric of course but somehow I don't think Putin will be deterred by such warnings because he knows that the western alliance will always be worried about Russia's huge nuclear weapons stockpile. It's the biggest deterrent of all. So Austin's warning to Putin is fine to remind the Russia leader that in a conventional war of any scale Russia would be defeated there remains the nuclear issue. Putin has already said that if he feels Russia is facing an existential threat, nuclear weapons would be used. Austin of course was not in any way saying that Nato would attack Russia, but what he was implying was that if Putin were to order his forces to attack a Nato country, he would seriously regret it. Again, that's fine. But Putin is clearly contemplating all kinds of future action. Avril Haines, director of US national intelligence, said as much to Congress yesterday. She said the intelligence community believed Putin might well extend his ambitions beyond Ukraine. If that were to include military offensives against, for example, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania, then there would indeed be a full-scale war between Nato and Russia, including nuclear. Austin's warning should have sent shivers down Putin's back. But I just don't think Putin cares or scares easily. He began this war in Ukraine to revive the Soviet empire and throw off the encroaching Nato boundaries. Will he risk taking on Nato? Absolutely.

The Russians can't fire missiles accurately

The one huge negative for the Russians in Ukraine is that as the weeks have gone by it is clear they can't shoot straight. Even precision-guided missiles and rockets have missed their targets and have ended up ploughing into apartment blocks. A senior Pentagon official said he believed that the Russians probably didn't mean to hit apartment blocks but their missile guidance systems were so useless they just hit anything that looked big and high. Who knows whether that is true but the fact is many apartment blocks and other civilian property has been struck with shells and missiles and either you believe the Russians are doing it deliberately because they want to kill civilians or they just fire blindly and hope to hit the right target. But precision missiles are supposed to be just that - precise and accurate. The weirdest thing the Russians have done is to fire several hypersonic missiles. On each occasion these super-expensive missiles travelling at more than five times the speed of sound were targeted at buildings. No one in the Pentagon understands why they did that when a normal air-launched bomb could have done the same damage. The answer seems to be that the Russian air force is hardly ever crossing the border into Ukraine to launch attacks. They launch their missiles and bombs from Russian airspace, or if they do need to fly over the border they carry out the bombing and then get the hell out of there because they are scared of being shot down. Many of them have been downed by Ukrainian anti-air missiles. In the Donbas region it's easier for them because it directly borders Russia, so the fighter pilots don't need to fly into Ukrainian airspace. It's very hands-off warfighting. It's the reason why the Russian fighter aircraft are not bombing the convoys of arms that come over the border from eastern Europe into western Ukraine every day. The Ukrainians are cunning of course, using different routes, but because the Russian fighter pilots are reluctant to spend time in UJkrainian airspace, it means the convoys are coming in almost with impunity. The Russians are also running short of precision-guided missiles but acording to the same US defence official they still have a lot of land-attack cruise missiles which can be fired from warships or submarines. These weapons pose the biggest threat to those convoys of Nato arms supplies. But they need to be accurate and so far they have been falling all over the place.

Arming Ukraine to "defeat" the Russians

From a steady, cautious start, the arming of Ukraine by the US and dozens of other countries has become a full-blown weapons bonanza that has transformed the ability of the Kyiv government to defend against and even potentially defeat the Russian invaders. The flow of weapons from heavy artillery, tanks and armoured vehicles to anti-tank and anti-air missiles, night-vision goggles, ammunition, helmets and protective clothing, has increased so rapidly that it has become the biggest military aid programme in modern times. Moscow has accused Nato and alliance partners of engaging in a proxy war against Russia but Kyiv's international supporters have continued to emphasise that the objective has always been to help Ukraine defend itself against a superior, aggressive and unlawful invasion force. The value of the arms production line to Ukraine as well economic and humanitarian aid, exceeds the total defence budget of the United Kingdom, currently 46 billion pounds. Leading the field in weapons supplies by a wide margin is the US, followed by Poland, Germany, the UK, Canada, Estonia, Latvia, Italy, France and Sweden, according to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, a think-tank in Germany which has been tracking funding for Ukraine. Even the US began cautiously, wary of provoking President Putin into escalating his war aims. But all caution has been dropped. The majority of weapons on the shopping list of President Zelensky, the Ukrainian leader, who updates it almost on a daily basis, have been provided. The US pledge of more than 4 billion dollars in military aid and a vast increase in arms supplies in the pipeline, includes more than 1,400 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, 5,500 Javelin anti-tank systems, 90 155mm M777 howitzers with 183,000 shells, 16 Mi-17 helicopters, 20 armoured personnel carriers, 50 million rounds of ammunition, laser-guided rockets, Phoenix Ghost tactical drones and more than 700 Switchblade killer drones. With such a heavyweight supply of arms, the US appears step by step to have moved towards a different objective: not just assisting Zelensky to protect his country's sovereignty but also to weaken Russia's military overall to prevent Putin from rearming in order to launch further offensives in the future. Lloyd Austin, the US defence secretary, was the first member of the Biden administration to voice this secondary objective in public. Europe, with the exception of the UK and the countries on Nato's eastern flank with the most to fear from Putin's ambitions, has been slower to match the Americans. However, as the war has continued, European countries have begun to catch up, not least Germany which overcame political and historical self-restraint to move from the supply of helmets to promises of artillery and other heavy weapons. Nearly all of Nato countries have supplied arms, despite some domestic reservations. Italy for example has faced a divided public on the question of sending arms to Ukraine and yet Rome has sent military vehicles and other equipment. The UK has stood out as one of the staunchest and most committed of arms suppliers, sending millions of pounds worth of weapons including anti-tank missiles, anti-air missile systems, armoured vehicles, night vision equipment and body armour. Hungary, with a leader still wedded to past Russian allegiances, has been reluctant to consider arming Ukraine. But other Nato nations in eastern Europe have leapt to the defence of Ukraine: for example, Poland has sent 240 T-72 tanks and the Czech Republic, several dozen T-72s. Elsewhere in the alliance, Canada has sent M777 towed howitzers. The Netherlands is also sending howitzers. France which was among European nations which initially reacted slowly warmed to the western campaign and is now in the process of sending 155mm Caesar howitzers that can fire shells at ranges of more than 25 miles. Last month Spain and Denmark promised to send more weapons to Ukraine, Portugal has sent 70 tonnes of weapons, ammunition, helmets and protective jackets, and Belgium has provided 200 anti-tank weapons and 5,000 automatic weapons.

Mark Esper reveals all about working at the Pentagon for Trump. So no job for him when Trump returns!

Being in Trump's cabinet was like being on the biggest rollercoaster in the world while knowing the mechanics oud break down at any moment. Enough has already been written in books and articles to tell us what it was like working for Trump. But noww we have Mark Esper's account. The former defence secretary who succeeded Jim Mattis, robust Marine Corps warrior, has written a memoir which caused quite a stir at the Pentagon when he sent his manuscript for checking. A few spicey paragraphs were removed much to his irritation but now the book is out and it's clear Esper found working as Trump's Pentagon boss was pretty much a daily nightmare. Trump wanted to send 250,000 troops to the Mexican border, remove all US troops from South Korea, stop sending extra troops to Poland and telling Ukraine to look fr military assistance from Germany not the US. Esper sat there listening to this stuff with growing alarm. Did Trump really mean it or was he dissing them all. Clearly he did mean it at the time. Poor Esper. He didn't know what to do or say, apart from advising agaist all of the above. When I read excerpts of his memoir I had only one thought in my mind. This man, and I mean Trump not Esper, could well be back in the White House in 2024 and once again we could be hearing of all his wild ideas. All the signs are that Trump will decide to stand for reelection and, unbelievably, he will be streets ahead of any other rivals in the Republican party. The Republican party has just not learnt the lessons of the four years of the Trump presidency. It is beyond comprehension.

Putin will announce defeat tomorrow at May 9 victory parade! If only

It is difficult to see how Vladimir Putin could find a formulation of words tomorrow at the Red Square end-of-the-Nazis celebration parade that could possibly include any sort of claim that Russia has won a famous victory in Ukraine. Even a Russian peasant planting potato seeds in his or her back garden must surely know by now that the great Russian "special military action" across the border has not gone as well as the Kremlin propaganda machine has been saying for the last few weeks. Especially if that peasant's son, let's say a 21-year-old conscript sent to fight his first war, has stopped writing home because he is dead. Putin will try to liken the war in Ukraine as a repeat of the Soviet fight against Nazism in the Second World War. But everyone, apart from Sergey Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister (is he still?), knows that is rubbish. So what can Putin say? I guess what he will say is that the brave and patriotic sons of the Russian motherland are engaged in a noble campaign to purge Ukraine of the western-loving regime in Kyiv and that Russia's Big Enemy, Nato, is involved in a conspiracy to annihilate Russia and all its people while helping the comic president of Ukraine to slaughter Russian soldiers.There will be no hint of peace in his speech. There will certainly be no hint of how the Russian forces have suffered a defeat. It will all be about glory glory glory. To the Motherland. Will he declare war against Ukraine and order a full mobilisation of all Russian males? Could he do that? If he does will that not tell the Russian people that his special military action has failed? If so, will the country be ready to rise up for their beloved leader and march in the hundreds of thousands into Ukraine? Since he ordered the invasion on February 24, Putin has been beset by a series of huge dilemmas as all his plans went awry. So the question is: how mad is he? Will he now go for broke and swamp Ukraine with a million fighting men? Whatever he decides we in the West know that Putin's big gamble is now a busted flush. It's over, Putin. Declare a victory if you really must but it's time to stop sending your soldiers to die as cannon fodder, let alone order your army and air force to kill hundreds if not thousands of Ukrainian civilians just for the sake of grabbing a stretch of land running down to Crimea. Unless Putin stops now, he will face years, if not decades, of insurgency and the ruination of Russia's economy. Ideally, in your speech tomorrow, Putin, just admit it. You've lost. If only.

The whys and wherefores of the attack on the Moskva

AFULLER VERSION OF YESTERDAY's BLOG: The vital intelligence role the US played in the devastating missile attack launched by Ukraine against Russia’s flagship cruiser in the Black Sea last month has been revealed for the first time. The guided-missile cruiser, Moskva, was hit by two Ukrainian truck-launched Neptune anti-ship missiles on April 13 and sank the following day with an estimated 200-250 crew members losing their lives. It was the most symbolic blow to President Putin’s war aims since the invasion on February 24. US intelligence identifying the Moskva as it sailed about 65 nautical miles off the coast of Ukraine south of Odesa was provided just hours before the attack, according to American sources. The revelation appeared to undermine previous statements that the US did not participate in the Moskva strike in any way. Officials had also denied the implication in a report in The Times last month that a US Navy P-8A Poseidon maritime surveillance aircraft flying over the Black Sea the same day as the attack may have had a role. US defence officials said it was a routine patrol along the coast off Romania. US sources familiar with the background to the strike told The Times last night that Ukraine had spotted a large Russian warship in the Black Sea, well within reach of the Neptune systems which have a maximum firing range of about 174 miles. Evidence of the warship had been provided by Turkey-supplied Bayraktar TB2 surveillance drones which had sent back images while flying at a high altitude near the Moskva. The drones were not targeted by the 11,490-ton Slava-class cruiser, despite its array of surface-to-air missiles, guns and close-in weapon systems. The US sources said the Ukrainian military wanted to be sure it was the Moskva which had posed a significant threat to Ukraine because of its armoury of 440-mile-range land-attack cruise missiles. That was when Kyiv used its special communications channel to the US military, seeking confirmation. “The Ukrainians are able to detect and track ships in the Black Sea with their own intelligence capabilities. But on that occasion they reached out to the US to confirm that it was the Moskva and we confirmed it,” the sources said. “But we were not involved in the decision to strike the ship nor were we involved in the operation itself. So it was not a situation where the Ukrainians said to us ‘we’re about to hit the Moskva and can you confirm it is the Moskva’. We confirmed it but they were going to do their own thing.,” the sources said. A US official added: “We do provide a range of intelligence about the threat posed to Ukraine from Russian ships in the Black Sea but we don’t provide target information on ships. They have their own capabilities. “We consider that intelligence we are giving is defensive in nature because the ships are close to Ukraine and pose a threat not just to the coastal cities but to the whole of Ukraine because of their long-range missiles. “On the question of the Moskva we didn’t provide specific target information, we were not involved in Ukraine’s decision to target the Moskva and we had no prior knowledge of Ukraine’s intent to strike the ship.” The official said he could not disclose how the presence of the cruiser had been confirmed by US intelligence. The Poseidon surveillance aircraft which has been flying regular sorties in the region as part of defensive measures to protect Nato members in eastern Europe is equipped with a range of search and tracking systems including an acoustic sensor that can identify the signature of a particular ship. Other US surveillance aircraft known to engage in regular patrols in the region include the long-range Global Hawk drone and the RC-135 Rivet Joint, both of which have extensive intelligence-gathering capabilities. Underlying the indirect role the US played in helping the Ukrainians identify the Moskva, John Kirby, Pentagon press secretary, said: “We did not provide Ukraine with specific targeting information for the Moskva. The Ukrainians have their own intelligence capabilities to track and target Russian naval vessels, as they did in this case.” A senior US defence official said: “We do provide a range of intelligence to help the Ukrainians understand the threat posed by Russian ships in the Black Sea and to help them prepare to defend against potential sea-based assaults. Many of the missiles fired at Ukraine have come from Russian ships in the Black Sea, and those ships could be used to support an assault on cities like Odesa.” The issue of the US providing intelligence for Ukraine’s defence against the Russian forces has become more controversial as the war has continued. This week the Pentagon had to intervene to deny reports that US intelligence had specifically helped the Ukrainians to target individual Russian generals who had come to the frontlines of the war to try and improve combat operations and logistic support. About a dozen generals are known to have been killed. American agencies “do not provide intelligence on the location of senior military leaders on the battlefield or participate in the targeting decisions of the Ukraine military,” Kirby said. “Ukraine combines information that we and other partners provide with the intel that they themselves are gathering and then they make their own decisions and they take their own actions,” he said.

US intelligence made the difference in attack on Moskva

The US was involved indirectly in the Ukrainian attack on the Moskva guided-missile cruiser, Russia’s Black Sea fleet flagship, last month, US officials have revealed for the first time. Since the devastating hit on the Moskva which sank two days later with the loss of an estimated 200 lives, the US has been careful to avoid any suggestion that a US Navy Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft over the Black Sea on the day of the attack had played any role in pinpointing the warship. US sources familiar with the intelligence background to the strike on the Moskva on April 12 told The Times last night: “The Ukrainians are able to detect and track ships in the Black Sea with their own intelligence capabilities. But on that occasion they reached out to the US to confirm that it was the Moskva and we confirmed it. “But we were not involved in the decision to strike the ship nor were we involved in the operation. So it was not a situation where the Ukrainians said to us ‘we’re about to hit the Moskva and can you confirm it is the Moskva’. We confirmed it but they were going to do their own thing. We can’t say how we confirmed it,” the sources said. A US official said: “We do provide a range of intelligence about the threat posed to Ukraine from Russian ships in the Black Sea but we don’t provide target information on ships. They have their own capabilities. “We consider that intelligence we are giving is defensive in nature because the ships are close to Ukraine and pose a threat not just to the coastal cities but to the whole of Ukraine because of their long-range missiles. “On the question of the Moskva we didn’t provide specific target information and we were not involved in Ukraine’s decision to target the Moskva and we had no prior knowledge. We do provide intelligence to help Ukraine defend itself against the threat posed by the ships in the Black Sea and sea-based assaults."

Russia's best tank goes up in smoke

Russia has for the first time lost one of its most advanced tanks, targeted by Ukrainian forces in Kharkiv in northeast Ukraine. Pictures have emerged of the damaged T-90M battle tank which is built with extra layers of armour and counter-measure systems designed to protect the vehicle from shells and missile attacks. The T-90M which costs about $4.5 million is regarded by the Russian army as its most survivable tank. The loss of one in Kharkiv will be a severe blow, akin, on a lower scale, to the sinking of the Moskva guided-missile cruiser attacked by two Ukrainian Neptune anti-ship missiles in the Black Sea last month. The Russian forces have lost more than 460 tanks since the invasion began on February 24. The Ukrainians claim the figure is more than 600 tanks. They have been ambushed by Ukrainian units armed with US Javelin, British NLAW and domestically-built anti-tank missiles as well as armed drones. However, the destruction of so many Russian tanks has involved the older-generation T-72s and T-64s which have been shown to be vulnerable to modern anti-tank missiles, particularly when targeted against the less-protected turret area of the armoured vehicles. The T-90M Proryv (Breakthrough) hit in the Kharkiv region was first spotted in eastern Ukraine on April 25, suggesting that the Russian defence ministry had held back the deployment of its best tank until it became clear the older-generation tanks were too vulnerable. The T-90M Proryv, the most updated version of the model and the one attacked by Ukrainian forces, has a turret with more armour plating. It is believed there are only about 20 of these updated T-90Ms. How many have been sent to Ukraine has not been disclosed. An image of the crippled tank was posted on Facebook by a Ukrainian journalist, Andriy Tsaplienko. “Here’s a fresh Russian tank. It’s hot, smoking hot,” he wrote. The successful strike on the T-90M was confirmed by the Ukrainian defence ministry. Russia has an even more advanced tank, the T-14 Armata, which was first displayed during the May 2015 Victory Day Parade in Moscow to celebrate the defeat of the Nazis in the Second World War. However, the Armata has made no appearance in Ukraine, even though the Russian military judge it to be a game-changing battle tank. Moscow may have decided it can ill-afford to lose such a prestigious tank.

The CIA is calling all disgruntled Russians

The CIA is trying to approach Russians disillusioned with President Putin by offering a secret channel for potential insider whistleblowers. The US intelligence agency has posted instructions in Russian on YouTube to help them make contact securely via the CIA's dark Web site. Although Moscow has blocked access to Facebook and other social media platforms to suppress news about the war in Ukraine, YouTube is still available. Russians prepared to air their views about the war and provide any information that could be useful to the CIA, are advised to download the Tor anonymity network browser or a virtual private network (VPN) to gain access to the dark Web site. The aim is to provide a channel for valuable information that can be passed on without the risk of being traced by Russia's internal security agency, the FSB. The ultimate hope is to glean intelligence from within the Russian government from officials who secretly oppose Putin and his war without daring to speak out. US intelligence sources said it was known that Russians opposed to the war were trying to contact the CIA. The new channel of communication launched this week was aimed at reaching these Russians to ensure they could contact the agency without leaving a digital footprint. The CIA initially set up a clandestine contact channel via the Tor browser in 2019 and called it their "onion service", Although other organisations, including national police forces, set up similar onion services to attract anonymous tip-offs, the CIA was believed to be the first intelligence agency to use the Tor browser service to gather information. It's also the first time the CIA has directly aimed at anti-Putin informants by writing the instructions to the secret channel in Russian. The CIA pledged that anyone contacting through the onion service method would be "secure, anonymous and untraceable". "Our global mission demands that individuals can access us securely from anywhere," the CIA said when the onion service was first set up three years ago. Tor which stands for the onion router, is a programme anyone can download to help strengthen user security online. It consists of a series of computers that bounce encrypted internet traffic through several chains of computers before the data arrives at the final destination. It's described as a multi-hopping network to ensure anonymity. Russians trying to make contact with the US intelligence agency by using the normal website address, www,cia,gov, would be instantly trackable by the FSB which has a sophisticated cyber department.

Sergey Lavrov sinks to a bottomless pit of abusive propaganda

Vladimir Putin's toady foreign minister Sergey Lavrov sinks further and further in the estimation of his fellow diplomats around the world. Once thought of as a charming, clever, astute representative of the Kremlin voice on the planet, he is now a risible figure only to be condemned. Neither he nor Putin can ever again be treated as worthy members of the international community. It would for example be an outrageous decision if Putin were to be invited to the G20 summit in Indonesia in June. Lavrov's latest remark to ruin whatever reputation he had left was to insult all Jewish people by saying that Adolf Hitler was partly Jewish, by implication suggesting that the Russian invasion of Ukraine was justified because President Zelensky was Jewish and the country needed to be rid of Nazism. It would be laughable if it wasn't so obscene. It really is difficult to imagine how anyone of any decency is going to be able to do business with, let alone have meaningful diplomatic relations, in the future with Putin, Lavrov and the others of the Kremlin inner circle which poses a huge challenge in the years ahead. Clearly it is better to have communications and relations with a country the size and importance of Russia, especially as it retains a vast stockpile of nuclear weapons. But with the invasion and brutal slaughter of Ukrainian civilians and destruction of private property, how could any western leader sit down with Putin or Lavrov and expect purposeful engagement? The way things are going now in Ukraine, Putin is going to continue the destruction until he can declare the annexation of the two states in the Donbas region in the east and then challenge the rest of the world to aquiesce, as it effectively did when he annexed Crimea in 2014. That would be just like when the West, led by British prime minister Neville Chamberlain, allowed Hitler to grab Sudetenland in western Czechoslvakia in return for world peace in 1938. Surely we can't repeat that abomination of an agreement?

Putin is in the process of destroying Russia's economy

Vladimir Putin is facing the biggest challenge of his long career at the top. The war in Ukraine is going badly but it's not that. Through his actions and decisions and aggression, he is single-handedly going to destroy the Russian economy because the whole of Europe is gearing itself up to end oil and gas imports from Russia. It make take a little time but it's going to happen because there is no way Europe or any other democratic part of the world is going to do business with Russia under Putin in the future. A ban on all oil and gas supplies from Russia would be catastrophic for Putin. He is already facing huge difficulties because the wholesale ban on selling high-technology goods to Russia means that the Russian oil and gas industries are being deprived of the vital components they need from the West to exploit the most advanced methods of drilling. Russia doesn't make these components themselves, so the industries upon which the Russian economy depends for its lifeblood will start to malfunction. As the Russian economy goes down the tubes, every Russian family is going to suffer and will surely ask themselves: "Whose fault is this?" Putin has total control over information in Russia, so he is telling the Russan people that it's the fault of the West and in particular Nato which wants to destroy the great motherland. But how much longer will the Russian people believe these lies? Unfortunately, Putin's propaganda machine has been helped by unwise remarks from certain western leaders, not least Lloyd Austin, the US defence secretary, who last week said Nato's aim was to weaken the Russian military for good, and Liz Truss, UK foreign secretary, who is going about saying how Britain is playing a big part in defeating Russia in Ukraine. Words can sometimes be more damaging than action.

The Russian casualty toll is staggering

If the Ukrainian leader is right and 23,000 Russian soldiers have been killed in the first 65 days of the war in Ukraine, it is beyond staggering. And what's more, at least a dozen Russian generals dead! As Nato top commanders and ex-commanders like to point out, that's a helluva lot more than the total number of American troops killed in Iraq and Afghhanistan since 9/11 - in other words, over 20 years. The actual figure is roughly 7,000 US troops, plus about 8,000 contractors, not all American. For every Russian family back home, the 23,000 deaths is an unbelievable tragedy. At what point in this Putin debacle will the Russian people rise up and condemn the actions of their president and demand an end to the war? And an end to the Putin regime. The staggering casualty statistics cannot be kept from the Russian public for ever. Russian mothers should by now be demanding to know what has happened to their sons. There was an outcry from mothers and wives when the Russian nuclear-powered submarine, Kursk, sank after an accident on board with the loss of all 118 crew members in August 2000. Where is the outcry now over the deaths in the war in Ukraine which has been so incompetently run by the Kremlin? Even if President Zelensky's figure of 23,000 is an exaggerated estimate, there is no doubt that the casualty toll has been enormous in a relatively short perid of time. Nato estimates are more in the region of 15,000. Putin at some stage in this war will have to be confronted by an angry Russian population demanding to know the truth. For everyone's sake, not least for the poor Ukrainians,let us hope it's soon and Putin has to fight for his political survival. And loses.