For Russia, the threats and challenges posed by the Republicans in the long run are significant
Under President Vladimir Putin, we as a country, society and state have grown to the point where we almost don't care who wins in America. And this is good, because the loss of political independence is when the fate of a country depends on the results of elections in another state. That was the case in the 1990s and the first half of the 2000s.
Now, thank God, it is not so.
Nevertheless, the importance of the results of the US elections cannot be overestimated. Let us discuss them in a personal context.
Peace through force.
The policy of pressure and ultimatums
With a white-toothed smile on his face
In his last presidential term, Donald Trump, according to experts and journalists, crossed many bright red lines[1]. Of course, many of them concern Russia. Back in 2016, in his campaign rhetoric, Trump repeatedly announced plans to “get along” with Russia. Later, the 45th, anniversary, President of the United States said he would consider recognizing Crimea as part of Russia. Everyone remembers how such statements ended: with investigations into “ties to Moscow.”
During the first Trump five-year period, the leaders of the two powers, Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump met six times. And the first meeting between the two presidents in Helsinki on July 16, 2018 caused a wide resonance in the United States. American politicians harshly criticized Trump, accusing him of “betrayal,” and they called the results of the meeting itself humiliating for the United States[2].
Meanwhile, in that five-year period, the U.S. continued to concoct sanctions and tried to push Russia out of energy markets, using a lever called “Europe” among other things.
Therefore, to expect that Donald Trump's election victory is akin in the long run to a weakening of the sanctions regime against Russia is naive. It is not in the interests of the individuals, pressure groups and corporations that brought Trump and J.D. Vance to power today.
As a reminder, key donors to Trump's campaign include major military-industrial complex manufacturers such as Lockheed Martin (U.S. military-industrial corporation specializing in aircraft, aerospace, shipbuilding, postal automation and airport infrastructure and logistics), Northtrop Grumman (aeronautics, defense systems, intelligence systems, space systems), Raytheon (production of radar, communications systems, other military electronics; technical and software for intelligence collection and analysis), and Raytheon (production of intelligence, communications systems, and other military electronics). Its vice president Dee Vance's team includes Silicon Valley's main lobbyists in Washington, the Pentagon and the intelligence community. And then there's the space-faring Elon Musk, in short, all those interested in maintaining US power and economic dominance in the world[3].
Thus, behind the Trump-Vance team is the military-industrial lobby, for whom war is a business. Therefore, the “World War III” project is unlikely to “lie on the shelf” and even less likely to be canceled. Although the path to a multipolar world based on common sense - may well be more likely and shorter.
The main fix-idea of Trump and his team is to weaken China, undermine its leadership ambitions and eliminate it as a competitor. Russia is an objective obstacle and threat in accomplishing this task. Waging a hybrid war on two fronts may not be feasible for the United States - and then there is North Korea and Iran, and the crisis with the Israeli war in the Middle East. There are opinions that the United States of America can change its priorities on Ukraine and, having overloaded the responsibility for the course of things there - on Europe, concentrate on real internal MAGA-problems and a systemic external challenge - China[4].
It is China that the Republicans see as the systemic challenge and the main threat to their economic dominance of the US in the world. It is easy to predict that the principal negotiating point for the U.S. on Ukraine is Russia's non-participation in the Chinese anti-American coalition, just as our principal negotiating point with the U.S. is Ukraine's non-participation in NATO and its demilitarization.
It's a complicated arrangement.
There should be no illusions and inflated expectations from Trump's arrival with respect to the U.S. towards Russia. Recall - how back in 2023, speaking at a rally of his supporters in Texas, Trump rejected the claims of “some idiot ‘ that he was ’soft on Russia”, recalling that it was he who approved the delivery of Javelin anti-tank systems to Kiev. “I gave them (Ukrainians) hundreds and hundreds of Javelins (Javeline anti-tank missile systems) at a time when (previous U.S. President Barack) Obama was sending them pillows...”[5].
Back in the summer of 2024, Mike Pompeo (ex-CIA director and head of the State Department under Trump) voiced the outlines of Trump's “peace plan” for Ukraine. In short: lift all restrictions on pumping weapons into Ukraine so that Russia will immediately agree to peace. The terms of peace are:
- Ukraine in NATO
- Crimea is demilitarized
- LBS remains as it is, but the US and allies will never recognize the change of borders, as it was with the Baltics of the USSR times, and will wait for the new 1991.
- Ukraine is being rebuilt at the expense of frozen Russian funds (essentially reparations)[6].
For these “joys” we get small sanctions pluses - mainly weakening of personal sanctions on the elite.
That is the principle of “double ultimatum”, where RUSSIA CANNOT WIN, and UKRAINE CANNOT LOSE!
This was in the summer of 2024. And immediately after November 5, the outlines of proposals for ending the war in Ukraine that come from Trump's entourage began to be thrown in via the US media. They are roughly as follows:
- Stopping the war on the current front line with the creation of some sort of demilitarized separation zone.
- Actual recognition of the transition of the current controlled territories of the DNR, LNR, Zaporizhzhya and Kherson regions (without Kherson, Zaporizhzhya and western Donbass) under Russian control without legally recognizing them as belonging to Russia.
- Postponing Ukraine's accession to NATO for 20 years (which, however, will not prevent the U.S. from continuing to pump Ukraine with weapons to deter a possible Russian attack).
- Continued arming of Ukraine after the cessation of hostilities.
In general, these conditions are favorable to the U.S. and Ukraine. They will allow to buy time, get a respite for rearmament and renew the war at any convenient moment, with even more NATO involvement[7].
In strategy, Trump intends to shift more responsibility to the Europeans, coercing and incentivizing their additional involvement in the Ukrainian conflict. His team's position is roughly as follows - “we can provide training and other support, but the gun barrels will be European.... We will not send American men and women to keep the peace in Ukraine. Nor will we pay for it. Let the Poles, Germans, British and French do it.”
This proposal essentially echoes comments made by Vice President-elect J.D. Vance. In an interview he gave in September, he suggested that the final agreement between Ukraine and Russia could include a demilitarized zone, “heavily fortified so the Russians don't invade again”. On the other hand, Vance continued, Russia would retain the captured land and be assured of Ukraine's neutrality[8].
And Ilon Musk's man, Mario Navfal, star of his social network X (formerly Twitter), stated in general that under Trump's Plan, “European troops would run a buffer zone between Russia and Ukraine.” By the way, this message was commented on by guru Musk himself: "The senseless killings will soon stop. The time for instigators-speculators is over"[9].
To do this, Washington will support the course of militarization of Europe, as this is in the interests of the American military-industrial complex, and will also allow to further deepen the contradictions between Russia and the EU, solving the Europeans' opportunities for economic development and strengthening geopolitical subjectivity.
This is how Donald Trump, with a smile on his face and clenched fists behind his back, enters the role of the 47th President of the United States. It's not the first time he's played a role: it's not without reason that he was twice nominated for an Emmy Award for comically played roles of himself in TV series and feature films.
Trump's team - who and what they are
A few touches on some of the personalities of the new Republican configuration of power in the US - as Peter Thiel and Eric Schmidt, Ilon Musk and Tucker Carlson define the new face of US politics. The answer to the question of where and who will lead the U.S. under the Trump administration lies in understanding who these people are.
The incoming team, judging by the announced appointments, can be roughly divided into two groups - the “revenge/Trump supporters” and the “long-will” people - but both fit the definition of “MAGA-imperialists of America”. Unlike the “dim” and sometimes anecdotal Democrat-Bidenists - Trump's people are solidly bright individuals. Whether they will work together as a team united by a single MAGA-mission - we'll see.
Let's emphasize right away. From our point of view, TRUMP is the TRUMPlin to power for the new imperialists personified by Vice President Vance.
And yet at first it is about Donald Trump himself - the 47th President of the United States.
Undoubtedly, he is a colorful personality and a great, indeed historic, American politician.
By style, he is an RR-president. One only has to think of his first presidential race and the trucker caps peppered across the country.
Each of his victorious campaigns is an attempt to stand out from the rest of the candidates, always sounding an almost negative assessment of the functioning government. As a result, his image is that of a kind of radical leader who can achieve quick results by his own efforts, resorting to the most effective means (remember his promise to complete the SWO overnight?).
And in 2024, a characteristic feature of Trump's campaign was his systematic assertion of his own closeness to citizens. He often emphasized that he was experiencing the same difficulties as ordinary citizens.
A huge plus for Trump is his ability to respond to any attack against himself with media brilliance and immediacy. The way he behaved during and after the first assassination attempt - just beautiful! And remember his reaction to Joe Biden's words to Trump voters that they were “garbage.” In response - a large-scale campaign under the slogan “Trump on a garbage truck”, and Biden's phrase goes viral, while lowering the rating of its author. The images of Trump riding a garbage truck resonated widely with his target audience, who took it as a symbol of solidarity with “ordinary Americans.”
Trump has the amazing gift of seeking power without asking himself: “Why, for what purpose, and what to achieve?”. Winning and power as status is his life's goal and passion.
Also, the 2024 campaign is of course revenge for previous humiliations and defeats. Musk and Ravasmami will help him drain the “Washington swamp”. Nevertheless - we can assume that Trump before the election as a candidate and Trump after the election as president will be two different Trump's.
On the nature of Trump's decision-making, his former adviser Robert O'Brien says he will pursue a policy of unpredictability where “theRussians won't know what we're going to do. But at the same time, we're going to talk to them kindly... It's a lot easier to listen when someone speaks calmly, like a friend, not lecturing, just saying, don't do this, because if you do, there's going to be war, “ he explained[10].
Yes, Trump will be the oldest president in U.S. history when he is inaugurated at the age of 78.
However, it is under him that the Deep State is launching the project of a descent from the American political Olympus of gerontocracy. Under the Democrats, this was supposed to be done evolutionarily from within.
The new team of Republicans gathering around Trump and his vice-president is likely to radically sweep away the “old men” (but not the older ones). And the institutions, including various lobby groups and think tanks, that have been accustomed for decades will be swept from the political arena under the slogan “old people don't belong here”. From now on, they are their own think tanks.
These incoming “political youngsters” (again, it is not always a question of age) are ambitious, risky and aggressive enough, the “newcomers” seek to “bend” the world to suit themselves.
And the first among them is future vice president J.D. Vance.
Vance is the answer to the question WHO'S COMING?
Dee Vance is the most promising representative of the New Right in the United States. He is an example of a project politician. A man who did not make himself (self made man), but was selected and created as a politician by deep state interests. His story is somewhat similar to the story of the hero of the movie “The Firm” based on the novel by John Grisham - there, we remind you, the dossier on the hero, his selection and career advancement were carried out by former CIA agents.
James David Vance, who is more often referred to by his initials J. D. (J.D.), was born on August 2, 1984, in Middletown, Ohio. At the time of the election in November 2024, he will be 40 years old, so the oldest President of the United States Vance will be the third youngest Vice-President of the United States.
At birth, he was given the name James Donald Bowman. His parents, Donald Bowman and Beverly Vance, divorced when their son was six years old.
Vance's mother worked as a nurse, however, with a predilection: because of taking some drugs, she developed a drug addiction. Therefore, the boy spent his childhood at his grandmother.
This did not prevent him from maintaining good relations with his mother, and even promised to celebrate a decade of her sobriety in 2025 in the White House.
Vance is a Catholic.
He is a right-wing conservative.
Traditional family values are no stranger to him.
After graduating from Middletown High School in 2003, Vance served in the U.S. Marine Corps. He was in the Army for four years, and in 2005 he was deployed to Iraq as a war correspondent: he did not participate in combat.
"When I joined the Marine Corps, I did it partly because I wasn't ready for adulthood. I didn't know how to do anything ... Now I knew exactly what I wanted out of life and how to accomplish it ... The Marine Corps taught me to give my best for the greater good,” Vance later wrote about his service[11].
After leaving the service, Vance enrolled at Ohio State University and graduated with honors in 2009 with a bachelor's degree in philosophy and political science. He then worked on the staff of Ohio Republican Senator Bob Shuler, followed by a stint on the staff of Senator John Cornyn
Vance is a graduate of Yale. There he was noticed: in 2011, the famous businessman Peter Thiel, speaking with a report at Yale Law School, drew attention to the “brave Marine” and took him under his wing.
Vance's career went sharply upward.
The figure of Peter Thiel is worth a closer look, for here is the answer to the question - who is the future Vice President of the United States Dee Vance, for whom he works, who and where will lead his team.
Thiel is the answer to the question WHAT IS COMING?
It was Peter Thiel - billionaire (personal fortune - about $8 billion), the largest venture capital investor in the US IT sector, owner and developer of the global payment system Pal Pay - who became the main operator of the “JD Vance project”.
In 2015, Vance moved to the venture capital firm Mithril Capital Management, co-founded by Peter Thiel, who calls himself a “white crow” for having almost single-handedly backed Trump in Silicon Valley since 2016. Along the way, let's note - Thiel is a libertarian and openly gay who specifically flew to Europe (Vienna) to register his marriage to a man there.
Under the mentorship of Thiel and Co. at Mithril Capital, Vance quickly rose to a management position. Even then, not only Peter Thiel, but also big businessmen such as Eric Schmidt and Marc Andreessen supported his projects financially.
In 2016, it was Thiel who introduced Vance to Trump, and in July 2021, at a Republican Party convention, Vance announced his plans to run for the U.S. Senate from Ohio. His candidacy was supported by Donald Trump himself, and the main sponsor of the election campaign ... was Peter Thiel, who allocated for these purposes 10 million dollars.
The Financial Times published an article titled “How Peter Thiel and Silicon Valley financed the sudden rise of Jay Dee Vance.”[12]. It states that Narya Capital, founded by Vance in 2020, received about $100 million from Thiel and his cronies, including former Google executive Eric Schmidt and prominent venture capitalists Mark Andriessen and Scott Dorsey. The PayPal co-founder's influence has plagued Vance's career, bringing him millions of dollars to launch Narya before funding a successful campaign for a U.S. Senate seat in 2022.
Thiel also helped fund a project to create autonomous “floating states” in international waters where they would be free of all laws and regulations - one of the reasons he's been called “the epitome of techno-libertarianism.”
But the most interesting other thing is Peter Thiel's connection to the US intelligence community and the Pentagon.
Peter Thiel is the creator of the Palantir system (2004): software for data analysis. His main customers are military organizations, intelligence agencies, investment banks and hedge funds.
For the first few years, the main customer of Peter Thiel's company was the CIA. In 2005, the firm received its first funding from the CIA's specialized non-profit venture fund in the amount of $2 million; by that time Thiel's investments in the company exceeded $30 million. In the same year, the CIA signed its first contract with Palantir. In 2007, the company opened an office in Fairfax, a suburb of Washington, D.C., where the CIA is headquartered. The capital office was headed by former intelligence officer David Warne.
Until 2008, the CIA was essentially the only (!) customer of the company, and only with its authorization Palantir software began to be implemented in other U.S. intelligence agencies and Pentagon structures.
In 2004, Til invited Alex Karp, a fellow Stanford Law School student, to the position of CEO. Here are excerpts from the February 2024 edition of Time: “Early in the morning of June 1, 2022, Alex Karp, CEO of the analytical company Palantir Technologies, crossed the border between Poland and Ukraine on foot, accompanied by five colleagues. A pair of beat-up Toyota Land Cruisers waited on the other side. The next day, Karp was escorted to the fortified bunker of the presidential palace and became the first executive of a major Western company to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky since February 24, 2022. Over a cup of espresso, Karp told Zelensky that he is ready to open an office in Kiev and use Palantir's data and artificial intelligence software to support Ukraine's defense. In Ukraine, Karp says, he saw an opportunity to fulfill Palantir's mission to “protect the West” and at the same time “scare the hell out of our enemies”[13].
Peter Thiel's company, Palantir, was so interested in demonstrating its capabilities that it provided them to Ukraine for free.
Today, on a global level, Palantir has contracts with the CIA, defense agencies of the US, UK, etc. The company's revenue in 2023 reached $2.23 bln, net income - $210 mln. The company has six projects in Ukraine.
And another thing... In February 2023, the French publication Lʼm_2BC↩Express reported that the Ukrainian military uses mobile intelligence centers Skykit at the front. This is a new development of Palantir, which was officially presented only in January 2023. The Ukrainian Armed Forces had Skykit earlier, according to the publication. The complex consists of a large suitcase with batteries, two built-in monitors, a laptop, a Quadcopter drone, an antenna, a Trailcam Nano camera and Meta-Constellation software. This allows it to connect to up to 40 satellites.
Of course, Palantir is far from the only big tech company, overseen by people from Trump and Vance's team, that is helping the Ukrainian military and the Kiev junta. Giants like Microsoft, Amazon, Google and Starlink are working with Ukraine against Russia.
Some American publications half-jokingly predict: in the coming months, several more members of the PayPal mafia will determine the direction of US technology policy for the next four years. One can only wonder if they don't want to take over and ruin everything. “Or maybe they'll get bored and move to a floating state in international waters where there are no laws and never have been”[14].
But back to Ukraine.
Back in December 2022, at that time the Head of British Military Intelligence, General Jim Hockenhull, concerning the events in Ukraine stated the following:
- The conflict in Ukraine can be seen as the first digital war,
- Virtually every Ukrainian and every phone became a sensor, a resource and a source of information for Western intelligence services.
- The technical basis of this war was civilian Internet networks and the Grouping of satellites (in fact, there are only 70 NATO devices and more than 400 commercial devices), which allowed the Ukrainian military to expand the capabilities of situational awareness and intelligence.
And this same expert, by the way, was one of the first to declare Russia's military buildup near Ukraine's borders. And how did they find out...?
Keeping Peter Thiel's Palantir in mind, let us emphasize that now in Trump's dream team is Ilon Musk, about whom everything is already known - including the fact that his Starlink is widely used by the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
Another prominent representative of the “gray cardinals of Dee Vance” on Trump's team is former Google CEO - multi-billionaire Eric Schmidt.
As of today, he's the Silicon Valley war lobby's top man in charge.
Here's a snippet from his sensational 2024 interview at Stanford University, "Absolutely - the battle between the U.S. and China for knowledge superiority will escalate into war... I worked for the U.S. Department of Defense for seven years to change the way our military is run. They even gave me a medal for it. Our idea was to do two things. One, use AI for robotic warfare. And two, to lower the cost of robots so that $500 drones could destroy $5 million tanks..."[15].
It was Eric Schmidt, along with Mark Milley - then Chairman of the U.S. Army Joint Chiefs of Staff - who in 2023 wrote an article about robots and AI in warfare, the introduction of which they believe is bringing about “the most significant fundamental change in the nature of warfare in history.”
Their same duo wrote in August 2024 that U.S. forces "are unable to fight effectively in an environment in which they cannot capitalize on the element of surprise. Airplanes, ships, and tanks are not equipped to defend against the onslaught of drones. The military has yet to master artificial intelligence. The Pentagon has almost no initiatives to correct these shortcomings, and its current efforts are too slow to materialize. Meanwhile, the Russian military has deployed many AI-equipped drones in Ukraine"[16].
We thank the experts for the high assessment of the Russian military potential, but we note that such masters will clearly not sit idly by. Therefore, it is worth waiting for new AI projects in the near future, in the second coming of Trump.
After all, the development and implementation of AI in the military is a new Manhattan project led by the team of Vance, Schmidt, Musk and Thiel.
Recall that artificial intelligence is a breakthrough dual-use technology. The military component of AI technologies is evolving very rapidly. AI is believed to be the third revolutionary innovation in military after the invention of gunpowder and nuclear weapons.
That's why, when JD Vance appeared on the political horizon on Trump's team, analysts amicably declared that America's “deep state” had decided on the person who would soon be running the US.
Concluding the primary analysis of the results of the November 5 vote, we note what may seem paradoxical, but only at first glance - everyone was satisfied with the results of the U.S. elections:
- Biden: they took me out and lost;
- Harris: I made history and jumped off in time;
- Trump: revenge and victory achieved, I'm in power - which is actually the main thing; and enough;
- Vance: the essentials are now just beginning;
- Deep State: everything is going according to plan.
In the 2024 elections between Democrats and Republicans, the transnational oligarchy of the Deep State - the demiurges and masters of the United States - did not put its eggs in one basket, but created a “win-win electoral construction” - having agreed with all the main actors, distributed them in two sectors, shifting, however, to a large extent to Trump, or rather to the team of the new imperialists Dee Vance, who are gaining momentum. In this Republican sector of the basket, Deep State initially bet on the Trump-Vance track, and not Trump as such, whose presidency as a basic platform for global transit was cemented on November 5.
One could say that the emerging Trump team is very grasping, yet detachedly cynical, and, importantly, professional.
What to expect from the new Trump America
Before he even took office, Trump began building his America. Naturally, he will offer a real political scrap as a foundation.
Thus, 53-year-old Mark Rubio, a former rival in the 2016 Republican elections, has been proposed as Secretary of State. “Little Marco”, as Trump called him then, favors the earliest possible peaceful resolution of the conflict in Ukraine. Rubio, by the way, like the new National Security Advisor Mike Waltz or the new US Permanent Representative to the UN Elise Stefanik, condemned the Russian special operation and argued that Vladimir Putin must be stopped. There was also criticism of Biden for being too slow to send aid, or for sending too little. But Trump, according to experts, would now prefer to come to an agreement with Russia (albeit to the detriment of Ukraine). Therefore, the team today echoed that the conflict “must come to an end” (we must understand that not a victory for Ukraine?). In the House of Representatives, Walz even voted against additional aid to Kiev and said that the “era of bearer checks” is over.
And what about Russia?
At a recent Valdai Club meeting, Vladimir Putin called Donald Trump a “courageous man,” citing his behavior during the assassination attempt in July. The Russian president also suggested that the Republican was hounded during his first term: "He was afraid to make a move. But with that support now, will Trump be afraid to make moves? And how independent will they be for the 47th leader of the United States?
Let's emphasize: inflicting a “strategic defeat” on Russia has been the basic platform of Western policy toward us for decades. It is a platform enshrined doctrinally in the U.S. National Security Strategy, resolutions and NATO and other documents.
This strategy will be implemented no matter what administration is in the White House. The change of Democrats to Republicans after the elections in November 2024, will only lead to a change in tactical and operational methods of implementation of the strategy.
More on this in a moment.
The distinctive feature of the Democrats' tactics is that in relation to Russia they realize the concept of “distributed force”, the essence of which is the accumulation of damage in a single country through long-term systemic hybrid impact from outside and inside in the style of “a thousand cuts”, and in the end - overstretching, weakening and destruction of sovereign Russia.
This strategy requires significant resources - material, human, communication, distributed in time and space and (sic!) quality network management of the complex-complex system of “Overextending and Unbalanced Russia” - with which the Democrats have big problems. Conditionally, it is a concept of deep all-pervasive proxy war of hybrid type - Deep war in the style of soft power. Their genre is “gradual and widespread, and in the end...all at once.”
The Republicans, and especially those who follow Trump - Vance, Thiel, Schmidt, Musk and others, will implement a different tactic - the concept of “concentration” or CONcentration of Power, the essence of which is the gathering and powerful directed application of force at the right time and place - this is Global war in the style of Power. Their genre is “on pause and not immediately, but in place, powerfully and with assurance”
In order to accumulate power, the Republican administration and the Deep State sector behind them from the MIC corporations, Silicon Valley, as well as the Pentagon and the intelligence community are likely to take a pause of 4-5 years, during which, under the cover of Trump's “peacekeeping” platform “I will finish, not start wars”, the American MIC will be rebooted.
It will be rebooted and restarted on the basis of the latest modern technologies, including AI and robotics - the corresponding financial and scientific-technological groundwork has already been prepared. This concept requires concentration of will, ambition and professionalism for effective coordination of the military and civilian sectors - something the Trump-Vance MAGA-imperialist team has no shortage of.
If the Democrats' concept of Russia, China, Iran, et al. - is an evolutionary - from outside and inside - accumulation of damage in the target state-opponent, and in the end the reset/degradation of its qualitative foundations and deprivation of its subjectivity, the Republicans' concept is a delayed but guaranteed destruction of the enemy.
Let me repeat in conclusion - conventionally, in terms of style, the Democrat team are “ultra-globalists”, and the Republican team are globalists-“imperialists”. But both are children of the Deep State. And their task is the same - to ensure US hegemony over the world. Methods and approaches may differ, but that is not the point.
Both of them are not our partners, but rather our adversaries.
We should proceed from this and build our policy towards the US.
It should be understood and we should conclude that for Russia the threats and challenges coming from the Republicans in the future are very significant.
And the main thing is that for Russia the winning solution will come from within, not from outside. In order to resist and win in this existential confrontation with the West, we need to “not be led” by the sketches, inroads, etc., of the “plans-initiatives” of the West. “plans-initiatives” of the West for us, but to become whole, sovereign, collected and strong It is worth thinking about: it is possible to defeat Evil by ‘becoming more evil than evil’. That is the shortcut. Or “becoming kinder” - but it is a long way ... But we remember that Good always defeats Evil. Let's win!
[1] Thomas L. Friedman. Trump Had It Easy the First Time. The New York Times, Nov. 12, 2024 //
[2] Jared Yates Sexton. That was treason, Donald Trump. We all saw it. The Globe And Mail. July 17, 2018 //
[3] Note that in his last winning campaign, Trump told his donors, “I don't want your money.” Trump noted that his campaign was “self-funded.” That said, it was still not without serious infusions of outside money.
[4] Antun Rocha. Analyzing Trump's maxims and Putin's relentlessness. What if Russia doesn't want to negotiate at all? Advance (Croatia) November 13, 2024 //
[5]Trump credited with starting arms deliveries to Ukraine. RIA-Novosti. 26.03.2023 //
[6] David J. Urban and Mike Pompeo. A Trump Peace Plan for Ukraine. WSJ. July 25, 2024 //
[7] Denis Baturin. Ukraine. Waiting for Trump... International Life, 08.11.2024 // [8] Alexander Ward.
[8] Alexander Ward. Trump Promised to End the War in Ukraine. Now He Must Decide How. WSJ, Nov. 6, 2024 //
[9] Cited from: “Pool #3”, message of November 8, 2024 //.
[10] Belov A. “Cowboy” diplomacy, or Trump Harris is not sweeter. //
[11] Cited from: https://lenta.ru/articles/2024/11/08/kto-takoy-dzheyms-vens/?ysclid=m3hpno43sn710048428
[12] https://www.ft.com/content/408fb864-5831-4b1d-beef-fd1966b3beed
[13] https://time.com/6691662/ai-ukraine-war-palantir/
[14] Adam Clark Estes. Trump's techno-libertarian dream team goes to Washington. Vox, Nov 11, 2024 //
[15]https://ya.ru/video/preview/11042788019290086763?text=интервью%20эрика%20шмидта&path=yandex_search&parent-reqid=1731615765314501-8081918079857325516-balancer-l7leveler-kubr-yp-sas-218-BAL&from_type=vast
[16] Mark A. Milley and Eric Schmidt. America Isn't Ready for the Wars of the Future. Foreign Affairs, August 5, 2024 //
Note: This article is purely personal viewpoint of the author. The author is grateful to Oleg Yanovsky and Tamara Vinogradova for their advice and assistance.
Photo: REUTERS/ Joshua Roberts
Source - Zavtra . Andrei Ilnitsky