Putin’s success in Alaska is rapidly disappearing as European leaders make concerted efforts to generate support for Ukraine. A plan that appears to be working and will be further expanded upon after European leaders from the ‘coalition of the willing’ meet later this week in Paris.
It seems Europe’s leaders are working together to ‘manage’ President Trump not just to stop the war, but looking further ahead to winning the peace. Essentially, making sure that when fighting stops Ukraine is secure from any future Russian incursion. This long-term, strategic approach to diplomacy is at odds with both the Trump White House and Putin’s Kremlin, and it is a dangerous sign for Russia.
Europe’s strategic manoeuvres
In recent months, European leaders have carefully worked together to manoeuvre Trump towards a foreign policy that meets his domestic political goals, but still supports Ukraine. NATO’s three objectives are too:
- Ensure that dialogue with Trump continues, ensuring that access to US equipment continues and the NATO alliance is not compromised.
- Support Ukraine with sufficient equipment, training and intelligence that it can defeat Russia, forcing Putin to negotiate.
- Secure Ukraine after a ceasefire.
Managing the relationship with Trump
Maintaining a constructive dialogue with the Trump White House is a difficult task and Finnish Prime Minister Alexander Stubb provides a ‘masterclass’ in soft power using golf to build a relationship with Trump and influence him. In his public statements, Stubb clearly articulates the European position while praising Trump, reinforcing the importance of personal relationships in diplomacy.
Stubb is not alone, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and other key leaders massaging Trump’s ego to ensure that Europe can influence US policy. For example, key European leaders French President Emmanuel Macron, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, European Council President Antonio Costa and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen made sure that they were involved in the discussions between Trump and President Zelensky immediately after the Alaska summit. A presence designed to demonstrate support for Ukraine, and that made it harder to isolate Zelensky and bully concessions from him.
Support for Ukraine
Even before the Alaska meeting European leaders were guiding Trump, making sure to extract the best possible deal from him. Although Trump’s White House has stopped providing military equipment directly to Ukraine, Trump committed in July to support the Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List (PURL). A scheme that arms Ukraine by creating a funding pool and the financial mechanisms for NATO nations to fund Ukrainian weapons procurements from the US.
Notably, NATO nations can count donations to Ukraine against their commitments to increase defence spending to 3.5% of GDP by 2035. The effect is that NATO nations can work together efficiently to utilise America’s defence industry to deliver weapons to Ukraine. It is not as good as getting US equipment for free but it certainly improves Europe’s capacity to support Ukraine. By the middle of August, Germany Denmark, Norway, Netherlands and Sweden had already committed US $ 500 million each towards PURL. More recently Canada committed to PURL, and announced a US $ 680 million drone production scheme.
PURL’s role is to support Ukraine, Rutte stating in a NATO press release that “This is about getting Ukraine the equipment it urgently needs now to defend itself against Russian aggression. The aim of all Allied assistance to Ukraine is to bring the war to a just and lasting end, in support of President Trump’s peace efforts.” It is notable that in this statement Rutte makes sure to flatter Trump, another small example of a European leader diplomatically managing the US president.
Securing Ukraine after a ceasefire
This week NATO leaders meet to discuss long-term plans for securing and rebuilding Ukraine after the war. On 1 September, CBS discussed the meeting and reported that “European countries are drawing up “precise plans” for international military deployments in Ukraine as part of security guarantees that could be implemented if a peace agreement is struck to end the war sparked by Russia’s ongoing invasion.”
NATO’s planning indicates three noteworthy points, the first is that the alliance is taking a long-term approach to its strategy. This is not new, NATO’s peace support operations in the Balkans involved similar long-term planning. NATO’s experience of that operation and in Afghanistan mean that it has a good understanding of how difficult an operation supporting a ceasefire in Ukraine will be, and the commitment of force it will require.
Europe’s willingness to lead the process, including committing troops is the second key point. European and NATO leaders are not talking about fuzzy plans or ideas, instead they are using terms like “precise plans” that indicate their seriousness about making sure this intervention is successful.
The third point is that this planning indicates the US remains engaged. For instance, Financial Times recently quoted EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen saying “We have a clear road map and we had an agreement in the White House . . . and this work is going forward very well.” Trump, US Vice President Vance and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio have all gone ‘on the record’ stating that although America will not put soldiers in Ukraine, it will support a European led force. Vance stating “On this issue, we’re pretty aligned with President Zelenskyy. Even though we have some disagreements, we, of course, want to protect Ukraine’s territorial integrity. We don’t want Russia to conquer the entire country.”
The US does not need troops on the ground to help protect Ukraine. Intelligence, surveillance and targeting support are key elements of a successful coalition that the US could provide. Another option being discussed is US airpower, fighter aircraft to police the skies or bomber aircraft to back up the European ground force.
Ukraine’s strategy is to keep its options open
Even though the strategic landscape looks promising, Ukraine continues to mitigate the risk of losing European or US support by systematically developing its own ability to attack Russia. “We believe our best guarantee is not relying on somebody’s will to protect us, but rather our ability to protect ourselves,” Arsen Zhumadilov, leader of Ukraine’s defence procurement agency told Associated Press.
Ukraine’s strategic bombing campaign uses missiles and drones to target Russian oil infra-structure. The campaign is relatively successful reducing Russia’s income from oil exports and increasing the price of fuel in Russia. Notably, Ukraine has increased the number of attacks in the last month.
The Moscow Times reporting that “The drone attacks that began on August 2, 2025, have been different. Ukraine clearly has more drones now, and can send out attack swarms numerous enough to overwhelm Russia’s air defenses. Drones also have better navigational capabilities. Ukraine’s tactic this year has been to launch massive attacks on refineries and inflict maximum damage — up to and including shutdowns.” In August, Ukraine has damaged seven refineries including important export focussed refineries in Rostov and Krasnodar.
The campaign has encouraged the Ukrainian drone and missile industry to increase in size, scale and capability. This week Ukraine announced the new FP-5 ‘Flamingo’ cruise missile, that will be added to its already extensive range of drones and missiles. The new missile is large and is believed to carry a warhead with about ½ a tonne of explosive. Ukraine reports it can accurately hit targets up-to 3,000km away.
More importantly, Ukraine aims to produce the FP-5 in large numbers. Associated Press reporting that “Fire Point is producing roughly one Flamingo per day, and by October they hope to build capacity to make seven per day.” If the FP-5 is successful and produced in these numbers Ukraine will have a very damaging weapon to target Russian oil infrastructure. A large drone is only likely to cause minor, easily fixed damage but an FP-5 cruise missile with 450-500 kgs of high-explosive onboard could destroy a refinery.
Russia’s situation, its not good
Russia is caught in a difficult situation at strategic-level. Putin’s plan to manipulate Trump and split the US away from NATO does not appear to be working. In fact, Europe’s leaders appear to be winning the charm offensive, have set up a procurement system to access the US defence industrial base, and are committed to securing post-war peace. Further, the Russian economy is showing the first signs of economic problems. A situation exacerbated by Ukraine’s attacks on the oil industry, and if the current situation continues might soon face US economic sanctions.
At operational-level Russia has not made significant progress in the last 18 months. Russia can keep throwing manpower at Ukraine’s defences, almost indefinitely, but unless there is a significant break through this effort is wasted. Some commentators will argue that Russia is fighting an attritional strategy, aiming to deplete Ukraine’s reserves by relentlessly attacking. However, Ukraine’s ability to hold the line and quickly shut down penetrations counters this argument.
Further, Russia does not appear to have thought out its plan. For example, if it concentrates on capturing Donetsk its next step must be attacking Ukraine’s ‘Fortress Belt,’ the heavily defended cities and towns of Sloviansk, Kramatorsk, Druzhkivka and Kostyantynivka. Large urban areas, full of solidly constructed Cold War-era buildings, bomb shelters and reinforced factories located on a series of ridgelines that make them harder to attack. A nightmare battle that is probably beyond the capability of Russia’s army at this point in the war. The question is – Why?
Putin’s options are limited; his forces are not winning tactically, so are unlikely to achieve a victory that will shorten the war.
Russia’s next step? Hybrid operations?
In recent weeks, Russia appears to be adding more aggressive hybrid operations into its campaign to influence opinion. A recent Atlantic Council article, ‘Putin’s hybrid war against Europe continues to escalate’ summarises the situation as follows “While international attention focuses on faltering US-led efforts to broker a peace deal and end the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Kremlin’s broader hybrid war against Europe continues to escalate.”
Russia is alleged to have sponsored dozens of arson attacks since invading Ukraine in 2022. It is also alleged to be running a long-term programme jamming GPS in the Baltic. Operations that are probably designed to create fear in countries openly supporting Ukraine. On 1 September, a plane carrying Ursula von der Leyen, EU Commission President was forced to land without GPS navigation because its navigations systems were jammed. Von der Leyen is a staunch critic of Putin, and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Russian is not winning the war on the ground, or creating conditions for a diplomatic victory so hybrid operations will probably continue to increase as Russia runs out of options.
Conclusion
Russia and Ukraine continue to fight hard, on the ground and in the air but the end of the war is visible. Ukraine is far from defeated, continuing to soak up Russia’s attack and attriting its enemy. European leaders are carefully managing the Trump White House to create mechanisms to support Ukraine to defeat Russia and are preparing to secure a ceasefire.
Clearly, Europe is confident that Russia will be defeated and forced to accept a ceasefire on terms that include deployment of a force to secure the ceasefire. In coming weeks, we should see whether Putin realises his bluff is called, and if he changes his strategy.
Ben Morgan is a bored Gen Xer, a former Officer in NZDF and TDBs Military Blogger – his work is on substack
You’re probably need more than just a friendly golf game between two leaders to bring this conflict in favor of the west (NATO). Driving US ambitions to contain Russia and China both in the 1990s and today are not legitimate national security concerns, but rather the preservation of US “interests” abroad, within and along the borders of both nations in a manner the US itself would never tolerate another nation doing to it.
Washington’s goal is to prevent the formation of any cohesive, multipolar alliance that could effectively counter its hegemonic ambitions. By picking off nations one by one or a few at a time, the US hopes to maintain its dominance and prevent a unified front from ever materializing.
Regarding the war in Ukraine itself, despite recent comments by the Trump administration describing it as “Biden’s war,” or claiming, “President Zelenskyy of Ukraine can end the war with Russia almost immediately,” the war is, in fact, a product of US foreign policy spanning multiple presidential administrations, including President Trump’s first term in office.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-admin-approves-sale-anti-tank-weapons-ukraine/story?id=65989898
The US currently commands Ukraine’s armed forces, as revealed in a NYT article published earlier this year. Since 2014, the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has assumed control of and directs Ukraine’s intelligence services, the NYT also reported.
Thus, the conflict in Ukraine can only be ended when the US decides to do so or is forced to do so by Russia.
Understanding these basic first principles of US foreign policy regarding the conflict in Ukraine is essential in successfully navigating the propaganda the US and its client states are using to perform an attempted “division of labor” and “strategic sequencing.”
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/03/29/world/europe/us-ukraine-military-war-wiesbaden.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/25/world/europe/cia-ukraine-intelligence-russia-war.html
Since coming to office, the Trump administration itself has continued every conflict and confrontation inherited from the previous Biden administration in pursuit of global primacy including the US proxy war in Ukraine against Russia, a confrontation with Iran escalated to outright war this past June, and the continued expansion of America’s military footprint in the Asia-Pacific region along China’s periphery and even within its borders on the island province of Taiwan.
America’s policy regarding Russia specifically is described in detail in the 2019 RAND Corporation paper titled, “Extending Russia: Competing from Advantageous Ground.”
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR3000/RR3063/RAND_RR3063.pdf
In reality – the US simply sought time and space to prepare the next series of provocations – which it did – from 2011 onward dividing and destroying much of the Arab World including targeting Russian allies Libya and Syria, and the aforementioned successful toppling of the Ukrainian government in 2014, along with the US “pivot to Asia” which began under the Obama administration and continues to this day.
Interesting days at SCO meeting this week. China, India and Russia stood united in their desire for a multipolar world. The obvious “enemy” is the USA and associated vassals. Economically the USA cannot compete, as long as these nations are not driven apart by the US they have time on their side. I’m afraid we in Aotearoa are on the wrong side.
Yeah, hopefully the NZ folk playing toy soldiers in their bedroom with the door closed (like Ben) do not cause too much damage so woe can maintain relations with the mass of the world as the West collapses and devours itself. Of course getting its anglo-euro vassals behind a stars-and-stripes curtain is the entire point of every US action right now.
stephen lennon September 3, 2025 At 10:07 am
“….the war is, in fact, a product of US foreign policy spanning multiple presidential administrations, including President Trump’s first term in office.”
The war is, in fact, a product of Russian foreign policy spanning multiple Russian administrations, including the Soviet Union and Czarist Empire.
There ya’ go Stefph, fixed it for you.
Prison Of Nations
Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Prison_of_peoples
Prison of nations (Russian: тюрьма народов) is a phrase first used by Vladimir Lenin in 1914……
“The prison of nations” is a political metaphor popularized by Vladimir Lenin to describe the Russian Empire’s nationalist policies, where various peoples were incorporated into the empire. The phrase originates from Marquis de Custine’s observations of Russia in 1839 and Friedrich Engels’s writings, highlighting the idea of an empire as a coercive entity holding other nations against their will. While Lenin applied it to the Russian context, the concept can be understood more broadly to describe any imperial system or multi-ethnic state that suppresses national self-determination.
Stupid Tankie believes that Ukraine is the aggressor. These weirdos think Ukraine invaded Russia.
stephen lennon September 3, 2025 At 10:07 am
“….. the conflict in Ukraine can only be ended when the US decides to do so or is forced to do so by Russia.”
The truth is that when Russia invaded Ukraine in February ’22 The Yanks fled the scene, packed up their embassy and offered Zelensky a passenger seat on their plane departing the country. The Yanks, (and no one else for that matter) thought the Ukrainians would put up such a fierce resistance.
In revenge, the disgusting Russian imperialists are Gazarising Ukrainian cities.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_PVGKdlT4I
Hahahah, hilarious. Russia is building pipelines to supply the Chinese factories that will replace all industry left in Europe, while NATO shills like Ben crow about how Germany is destroying its state so comprehensively to try and help the zionist Zelensky kill as many Slavs as possible that all young men are to be conscripted and the welfare state is to be destroyed.
They already built a pipeline thru Mongolia from Siberia into China completed 2021 I believe this latest is a second pipeline delivering more hydrocarbon bcm
I’d note that nobody in the US and Europe is prepared to put boots on the ground in Ukraine. Ursula Fond of Lying proposed this and got rubbished. Ukraine with a million and a half casualties is running out of troops. Their press gangs can’t find victims as they’ve fled the country. All that are left are the inhabitants of the Banderite Galician heartland.
And with the U.K. at a point where they might have to get an IMF bail out, to function as a country, France is in a political nosedive, Germany in its third year of a recession, and Trump seemingly unwilling to continue to keep funding the war, it would bankrupt the EU to put boots on the ground. Time is running out for Ukraine.
IMO only the Ukrainians can ultimately end the war, and they will do so either willingly (be demanding peace from Zelenskyy) or unwillingly (by Russian defeat). The most recent poll shows the support in Ukraine for the war is now just 24% (vs 72% when is started) and 59% now want a peace deal ASAP. The people of Ukraine (who are tasked to fight this war and lay their lives on the line) will decide what happens, not Zelenskyy, Trump, or European leaders.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/693203/ukrainian-support-war-effort-collapses.aspx
If you ignore the will of the people long enough (especially because you are killing them), the people will take action to rectify the situation sooner or later whether anyone else likes it or not.
One would hope so, but the evil dictator of Ukraine has powerful allies.
The people the west are considering to replace him are even worse.
Let’s have a look at what being out manoeuvred looks like. Europe needs gas to survive economically. Russia has just signed an agreement at SCO to sell what gas used to go to Europe to China. Europe is now left with insufficient quantities of gas, mainly from the USA at four times the price. Good work Ursula and all the other faceless bureaucrats posing as leaders.
It’s not necessary to read Ben’s “whistling in the dark” stuff these days but easier and quicker to get the gist from the more informed replies.
Chucky Collins just visited Kiev, and mentioned some $58 millions given to the neoNazi scum in Ukraine. Meanwhile school lunches funds diminish, operations don’t get performed. NACT show their true colours.
We keep hearing that Russia is in a parlous situation. Yes and no. If it was a Western nation yes it would be in a parlous situation but it’s not, it’s a dictatorship. And in a dictatorship things only get parlous when you lose support of the group that supports you in suppressing the people. Which Putin hasn’t done yet it seems to me.
And ironically much of the economic hardship stems from cutting off Russian oil and gas imports. Talk about an own goal but some in Europe want to go all the way and get involved in this war. Stupid.
Adding to the growing list of stuff that Ben Morgan self censors, Donald Trump has just renamed the US Department Of Defence, The Department Of War.
Trump rebrands Department of Defense as Department of War
Bernd Debusmann JrBBC News, White House
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgr9r4qr0ppo
…..The Department of Defense (DoD) – which oversees the US armed services – is the successor to the War Department, which was first established as a cabinet-level agency in 1789 and existed until 1947.
The executive order says: “The name ‘Department of War’ conveys a stronger message of readiness and resolve compared to ‘Department of Defense,’ which emphasizes only defensive capabilities.””I think it’s a much more appropriate name, in light of where the world is right now,” Trump said in the Oval Office on Friday, adding that “it sends a message of victory”.
The order says Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth will be known as secretary of war. It instructs him to recommend and include legislative and executive actions to move towards a permanent renaming of the department.
Speaking during the signing, Hegseth said that “this name change is not just about renaming, it’s about restoring”, adding “words matter”.
“We’re going to go on offence, not just on defence. Maximum lethality, not tepid legality. Violent effect, not politically correct,” he said. “We’re going to raise up warriors, not just defenders.”
The Pentagon’s website changed to war.gov late on Friday, along with the headline ‘U.S. Department of War’…..
Maximum lethality, not tepid legality.
Pretty much sums it up. Meanwhile Ben Morgan is writing we must sign up to AUKUS and join the military build up in the Pacific to protect the rule of law.
Ben spreads so much hawkish pro-imperialist bullshit on this site he is gonna need a shovel.
I wonder how far this crawling to the US goes?
Will the NZDF be renamed as the NZWF?
Will Five Eyes be renamed Five War Eyes?
What about Ben’s bullshit that this huge military build up in the Pacific is about ‘deterrence’.
Both sides are prepping to fight a so called ‘Conventional war in the Pacific. ‘Deterrence’ is the same thing the Chinese leaders tell their people these preparations for war in the Pacific are.
‘Deterrence’, I thought that was what nuclear weapons were supposed to be for?
It’s all bullshit, neither side will be deterred.
From Russia with love https://www.bitchute.com/video/tFXG001UGLS7 ….. A Grishanov video from about 10 years ago.
It shows a young Putin taking the reins when the west had Russia on it’s knees and were gloating about their success and great ‘vision’ ….
But they never saw how Putin would first block their dismemberment of Russia, defeat them in Chechnya and Georgia ,,, and he’s well on the on the way to doing the same in Ukraine.
And now with China and Brics ,,, Putin has not only saved Russia ,,,, but together with Xi they offer the best hope for saving the world from the genocidal west.
Having Trump-tard as the mafia Don leading the ‘free world’ seals the deal for Russia & China ,,,, with the wests ‘democratic’ crime syndicate devolving into a true circus.
The violent western clown show has no show…… :0
Long live Russia and god bless Putin.
We call him papa Pu in my house …
Careful B, you’ll trigger Pat…
The continental plates are shifting.
Former enemies Russia and US become fremenies to drill and export Russian oil.
US turns on former friend, India alegedly for importing Russian oil.
The ‘Strategist’ picks up on the fact that the US has imposed harsher tariffs on it’s alleged friend, India; than its alleged enemies Russia and China:
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/china-will-keep-the-quad-together-lets-get-through-this-rough-patch-quickly/#
“….India helping Russia to earn revenue from oil exports is a real problem, but the US response is incongruous: tariffs on India are higher than those on Russia, and indeed higher than those on China, the main enabler of Moscow’s war effort.”
More than incongruous the US is pumping Russian oil like there is no tomorrow.
What are we to make of this?
More than a military system, imperialism is an economic system.
Henry Kissinger, framed it this way, “America has no permanent friends or enemies, only permanent interests”
George Orwell parodied the cynical shifting and reforming and breaking of imperialist alliances in his dystopian novel ‘1984’
“We are at War with Eurasia, we have always been at war with Eurasia.”
“We are at war with Eastasia, we have always been at war with Eastasia.”
From Google:
In the novel, the superstate of Oceania is locked in a perpetual war, but the enemy, whether Eurasia or Eastasia, constantly shifts, and the population is always told the current enemy has always been the enemy. This manipulation of the past serves to maintain social control, reinforce hatred for the enemy of the moment, and prevent citizens from developing a stable understanding of reality…
Comments are closed.