Bernard Fall defined subversion in The Theory and Practice of Insurgency and Counterinsurgency:

When a country isbeing subverted it is not being outfought; it is being out-administered. Subversion is literally administration with a minus sign in front.

Trump and his surrogates are trying to subvert Ukraine.

“Four senior members of Donald Trump’s entourage have held secret discussions with some of Kyiv’s top political opponents to Volodymyr Zelenskyy, just as Washington aligns with Moscow in seeking to lever the Ukrainian president out of his job.” www.politico.eu/article/dona…

[image or embed]

— Shashank Joshi (@shashj.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 2:30 AM

From PoliticoEU:

KYIV — Four senior members of Donald Trump’s entourage have held secret discussions with some of Kyiv’s top political opponents to Volodymyr Zelenskyy, just as Washington aligns with Moscow in seeking to lever the Ukrainian president out of his job.

The senior Trump allies held talks with Ukrainian opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko, a remorselessly ambitious former prime minister, and senior members of the party of Petro Poroshenko, Zelenskyy’s immediate predecessor as president, according to three Ukrainian parliamentarians and a U.S. Republican foreign policy expert.

The discussions centered on whether Ukraine could hold quick presidential elections. These are being delayed in line with the country’s constitution because Ukraine remains under martial law. Critics of holding elections say they could be chaotic and play into Russia’s hands, with so many potential voters serving on the front lines or living abroad as refugees.

The Trump aides are confident that Zelenskyy would lose any vote due to war fatigue and public frustration over rampant corruption. Indeed, his poll ratings have been in decline for years, although they have picked up in the wake of last week’s Oval Office brawl, when the Ukrainian leader was shown the door after being berated by President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance. The most recent poll shows Zelenskyy still comfortably ahead in the race for the presidency.

The official line from the U.S. administration is that Trump is not interfering in Ukraine’s domestic politics. This week, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick denied his boss was “weighing into Ukrainian politics,” adding all that Trump wants is a partner for peace.

But the behavior of Trump and his officials suggests quite the opposite. Trump has accused Zelenskyy of being a “dictator without elections,” and hinted he would not be “around very long” if he didn’t do a deal with Russia. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has falsely accused Kyiv of canceling the election. (In response to the news in this article, Elon Musk tweeted: “Ukraine needs to hold an election. Zelensky would lose by a landslide.”)

But while the Trump camp may hope an election will sink Zelenskyy, he is still massively more popular than Tymoshenko and Poroshenko.

In a poll conducted by British pollster Survation this week after the blow-up at the White House, 44 percent said they would back Zelenskyy for the presidency.

His nearest rival, trailing him by more than 20 percentage points, is Valery Zaluzhny, a former army commander who is now Ukraine’s ambassador to Britain. Only 10 percent backed Poroshenko, who is known as the Chocolate King due to his confectionary empire. Tymoshenko garnered just 5.7 percent support.

The key to all of the plans under discussion via back channels is to hold presidential elections after a temporary ceasefire is agreed, but before full-scale peace negotiations get underway in earnest. The idea of an early presidential election is also being pushed by the Kremlin, which has wanted to be rid of Zelenskyy for years.

Both Tymoshenko and Poroshenko have publicly opposed holding elections before the fighting ends, as has Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko. Nonetheless, “Poroshenko’s people and Yulia, they’re all talking to Trump World, positioning themselves as people who would be easier to work with. And people who would consent to many of the things that Zelenskyy is not agreeing to,” a top Republican foreign policy expert told POLITICO, asking that his name be withheld so he could speak freely.

After publication of this story, the parties of both Tymoshenko and Poroshenko issued statements to defend their diplomatic activities. Tymoshenko said her team was negotiating “with all our allies who can help ensure a just peace as soon as possible.” She added it was currently impossible to hold elections.

The U.S. president’s Capitol Hill allies have also maintained a drum beat against Zelenskyy, with Republican Senator Lindsey Graham suggesting Ukraine would “need to get somebody new” unless Zelenskyy comes to see things the way Trump does.

All of that is prompting Zelenskyy’s domestic political opponents and even some former allies to pay court to Trump World to gain its blessing. “They’re positioning themselves as the best people to work with. And people who would consent to many of the things that Zelensky isn’t consenting to,” the Republican expert said.

“I believe Trump doesn’t care about whether Ukraine has elections or not. It’s Putin’s narrative, Putin’s goal. Trump is being used by Putin to impose elections on Ukraine with only one purpose, to undermine us from within. He wants to remove Zelenskyy because he is a symbol of our resistance. Putin understands that an election campaign during times of war will be destructive for our unity and for our stability,” he said.

Much more at the link!

If these two tried to oust Zelensky they’d be out the door quicker than you could say “Maidan.”

[image or embed]

— Euan MacDonald (@euanmacdonald.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 4:39 AM

One of the most likely Ukrainians to eventually succeed President Zelenskyy is, however, not on board with what the US is doing.

The new US admin is pushing for elections in Ukraine. Zaluzhnyi is the main contender against Zelensky

Here’s what Zaluzhnyi said today: “Washington is taking more and more steps toward the Kremlin regime at a time when Russia and the Axis of Evil are attempting to dismantle the global order”

— Tatarigami (@tatarigami.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 11:53 AM

I don’t think that elections will give them results they expect

— Tatarigami (@tatarigami.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 11:53 AM

What Zaluzhny says is probably true. But it’s seriously unwise & reckless for him to say it as a Ukrainian ambassador at this juncture. It could very well blow up the impending minerals deal & torpedo the resumption of aid & intelligence sharing, which Zelensky & allies have worked flat-out to get.

[image or embed]

— Shashank Joshi (@shashj.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 8:12 AM

But wait, there’s more. Today, Special Envoy LTG (ret) Keith Kellogg, during his speech at the Council on Foreign Relations, added insult to injury.

Keith Kellogg at @CFR_org this morning suggests that the US is engaged in “strategic overreach” in Ukraine, citing Paul Kennedy’s work on “imperial overstretch” that can potentially lead to the fall of a Great Power.

Kellogg says he had “ringside seat” for Zelenskyy Trump meeting: “What happened was two nation state leaders coming into a meeting with objectives that was clearly not in alignment with one another, and there was a disconnect publicly between the goals of the two administrations”

Kellogg: Trump recognizes that US needs to “reset relations with Russia” in order to secure US national security. “The continued isolation and lack of engagement with the Russians as the war in Ukraine continues is no longer a viable strategy.

In conversation with @margbrennan, Trump envoy Keith Kellogg says of US intelligence cutoff: “Very candidly, they brought it on themselves”

udible gasp in the room at @CFR_org after Kellogg said of intelligence cutoff: the Ukrainians “brought it on themselves”

Interesting that Kellogg has twice listed the advisors surrounding Trump as Rubio, Waltz, Bessent, Lutnick but omits Putin envoy Steve Witkoff. Finally when brought up by @margbrennan, he notes that at State: “Our offices are on the 7th floor, [Witkoff’s] are on the 5th floor.”

Kellogg on effect of US military aid and intelligence cutoff to Ukraine: “It’s like hitting a mule in the face with a two by four, you know. You got their attention.”

Kellogg on Ukraine cutoff: “It’s not like they didn’t know this was coming. They got a fair warning. I told them, and they were told last week as well.” Kellogg now comparing speaking to Ukrainian leaders like speaking to his two granddaughters who call him “Pop pop”.

Kellogg repeatedly describing Ukrainian and Russian demands as “term sheets.” “Do we have a term sheet from the Russians broadly, and do we have a term sheet from Ukrainians? The answer is yes and no.” Wants to understand the “kind of pressures we can apply.”

Here’s the video:

There is no daily address as President Zelenskyy was traveling today to the meeting of the European Council. Here’s the video of his arrival and his remarks to the press:

Europe faces a clear and present danger.

We must be able to defend ourselves and put Ukraine in a position of strength.

ReArmEurope will boost defence spending, strengthen our defence industrial base and push the private sector to invest ↓

europa.eu/!HDGvdG

[image or embed]

— Ursula von der Leyen (@vonderleyen.ec.europa.eu) March 6, 2025 at 6:43 AM

Today, we reaffirm our support for you, President Zelenskyy, and a just, lasting peace for Ukraine.

With our ReArm Europe plan, we will speed up delivery of the weapons and ammunition for Ukraine.

We’re making our entire continent safer.

[image or embed]

— Ursula von der Leyen (@vonderleyen.ec.europa.eu) March 6, 2025 at 8:27 AM

From The European Commission:

Thank you very much, dear António, for convening this extraordinary Council. In extraordinary times, we need special measures.

And thank you very much, dear Volodymyr, for coming here, because it is so important that we stand together.

This is a watershed moment for Europe. And it is also a watershed moment for Ukraine, as part of our European family. Europe faces a clear and present danger. And therefore, Europe has to be able to protect itself, to defend itself, as we have to put Ukraine in a position to protect itself, and to push for a lasting and just peace.

We want peace through strength. And this is the reason why I present today to the leaders, the ReArm Europe plan. The ReArm Europe plan provides up to EUR 800 billion for defence investment. It gives the Member States fiscal space to invest in defence. It gives the Member States the possibility to invest in the Ukrainian defence industry or to procure military capabilities that go right away to Ukraine. So it is to the benefit of rearming Europe – rearming the European Union but also arming Ukraine in its existential fight for its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

So, Volodymyr, thank you for coming. It is a very important moment to show that we stand by Ukraine for as long as it takes.

Georgia:

Day 99 of continuous protests!

Daily march arrives chanting: “Glory to Ukraine! Victory to Ukraine! Glory to Georgia! Until the end! Strength is in unity!” You also see 🇬🇪🇺🇦🇪🇺 colliding beautifully. #GeorgiaProtests

[image or embed]

— Marika Mikiashvili 🇬🇪🇺🇦🇪🇺 (@marikamikiashvili.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 1:02 PM

Tbilisi City Hall employee Ana Kamladze has been fired for participating in protests.

#TerrorinGeorgia

[image or embed]

— Publika.ge (@publikage.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 6:39 AM

A preliminary hearing is set for detained on protest-related charges: Tornike Goshadze, Nika Javakhishvili, Irakli Miminoshvili, Giorgi Giorgadze, Islam Aliev, Zviad Tsetskhladze, Vepkhia Kasradze, Vasil Kadzelashvili. Supporters are gathered, awaiting the hearing’s start.

[image or embed]

— Publika.ge (@publikage.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 4:00 AM

A pre-trial hearing is underway for 8 people arrested for participating in the #GeorgiaProtests: Tornike Goshadze, Nikoloz Javakhishvili, Irakli Miminoshvili, Giorgi Giorgadze, Islam Aliyev, Zviad Tsetskhladze, Vepkhia Kasradze and Vasil Kadzelashvili.

📷 Mindia Gabadze/Publika

[image or embed]

— Publika.ge (@publikage.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 6:32 AM

8 individuals arrested for participating in protests were greeted by their relatives as they were brought into the courtroom. They are accused of group violence and inciting violence. All of them deny the charges and say the accusations are politically motivated.

#TerrorinGeorgia

[image or embed]

— Publika.ge (@publikage.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 9:27 AM

Judge Davit Mgeliashvili upheld the preventive detention of eight people arrested for participating in protest rallies.

#TerrorinGeorgia
#GeorgiaProtests

[image or embed]

— Publika.ge (@publikage.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 12:22 PM

I remember reading back in 2022: in the Russian view, being Russian = being normal, while Ukrainian identity is deviation from normalcy. And Russians were shocked that anyone would fight back against becoming normal (read: Russian) again.

On why this war is a zero-sum game.

— Marika Mikiashvili 🇬🇪🇺🇦🇪🇺 (@marikamikiashvili.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 3:24 PM

Turkiye:

Good for Ukraine, vitally essential for Georgia. ✊🏻

[image or embed]

— Marika Mikiashvili 🇬🇪🇺🇦🇪🇺 (@marikamikiashvili.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 11:40 AM

The EU:

‘Europe sees rise in disinformation, attacks on media: report

The Council of Europe’s annual press freedom report highlighted violence against journalists, particularly in Ukraine and Georgia. The rise of disinformation also poses a threat.’
www.dw.com/en/europe-se…

[image or embed]

— ⚫️🐦‍⬛ 🇬🇪🇺🇦🇪🇺 (@theskyisnotblue.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 4:12 AM

From DW:

The Council of Europe said Wednesday it recorded 266 cases of physical attacks, intimidation, arrests, and reprisals against international journalists across Europe in 2024.

Its annual European Press Freedom Report 2024 compiled data from a coalition of 15 press freedom NGOs and journalist associations.

The report highlights growing acts of violence against journliasts, particularly in Ukraine and Georgia. Around 64% of recorded attacks took place in Russia and Russian-occupied territories in Ukraine.

The Council of Europe warned of continued risks for journalists covering Russia’s invasion.

Rising violence in Georgia

Georgia saw the sharpest decline in press freedom among the 46 countries analyzed.

While only one journalist was arrested in 2024, reports of physical attacks and intimidation tripled.

The report links the surge in violence in Georgia to widespread protests over controversial laws and the country’s European Union aspirations.

The majority of attacks on Georgian journalists occurred during such demonstrations.

Disinformation and state influence

The Council of Europe raised concerns over growing government control of the media, highlighting how political actors are influencing editorial policies and cutting funding. Italy and Slovakia were flagged as key examples.

It also reported a rise of disinformation, including AI-generated content, saying disinformation is manipulating public opinion and weakening independent journalism.

Oliver Money-Kyrle, Head of European Advocacy at the International Press Institute, emphasized the severity of the issue.

“The truth is that journalists across Europe have never faced graver threats — both individually and collectively—than they do in 2025,” he said.

More at the link!

⚡️Eutelsat in talks with EU to possibly replace Starlink in Ukraine, CEO confirms.

“Everyone is asking us today, ‘Can you replace the large number of terminals of Starlink in Ukraine,’ and we are looking at that,” Eutelsat CEO Eva Berneke told Bloomberg.

[image or embed]

— The Kyiv Independent (@kyivindependent.com) March 6, 2025 at 2:38 PM

From The Kyiv Independent:

French satellite operator Eutelsat Communications is in advanced talks with the European Union to possibly replace tech billionaire Elon Musk’s Starlink in Ukraine, Bloomberg reported on March 6.

“Everyone is asking us today, ‘Can you replace the large number of terminals of Starlink in Ukraine,’ and we are looking at that,” Eutelsat CEO Eva Berneke told Bloomberg.

Eutelsat, which already operates in Ukraine, has thousands of terminals deployed, although not all are connected to the network.

Starlink has played a vital role in Ukraine’s battlefield communications, with around 42,000 terminals providing service to the military, medical facilities, businesses, and aid organizations.

Berneke said the company is in discussions with suppliers to provide both military-grade and standard terminals and would need “a couple of months” to supply 40,000 units.

Concerns over Starlink’s availability escalated after the U.S. paused military aid to Ukraine on March 3. Reuters reported that U.S. officials have raised the possibility of restricting Ukraine’s access to Starlink.

Musk, who owns Starlink and has close ties to U.S. President Donald Trump, denied the intention to turn off the terminals.

Eutelsat’s proposal combines OneWeb’s low Earth orbit satellites, positioned around 1,200 kilometers (746 miles) above the surface, with its geostationary satellites at 35,000 kilometers (21,748 miles).

The dual-constellation approach could provide essential connectivity for Ukraine’s military, including for drone operations that have inflicted significant losses on Russian forces.

OneWeb already provides services to Ukraine through a German distributor, but scaling up would require European governments to approve procurement and integration plans.

The European Commission is assessing ways to help Ukraine secure satellite communications in case Starlink access is restricted, Politico reported on March 3.

NATO member states:

BREAKING: 🇸🇪 Sweden to deploy 6 to 8 JAS 39 #Gripen fighters to #Poland 🇵🇱 for Air Policing mission – on #NATO request. Protecting #Ukraine 🇺🇦 military aid logistics hub.

Gvmt press conf www.regeringen.se

[image or embed]

— GripenNews (@gripennews.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 5:13 AM

Two missions in Poland. Protecting logistics hub + Enhanced Air Policing mission.

— GripenNews (@gripennews.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 5:23 AM

France:

From The Associated Press:

PARIS (AP) — France will keep providing military intelligence to Ukraine after Washington announced it was freezing the sharing of information with Kyiv, French defense Minister Sebastien Lecornu said Thursday.

The U.S. said Wednesday it had paused its intelligence sharing with Ukraine, cutting off the flow of vital information that has helped the war-torn nation target Russian invaders, but Trump administration officials have said that positive talks between Washington and Kyiv mean it may only be a short suspension.

American intelligence is vital for Ukraine to track Russian troop movements and select targets.

Speaking to France Inter radio on Thursday, Lecornu said France is continuing its intelligence sharing.

“Our intelligence is sovereign,” Lecornu said. “We have intelligence that we allow Ukraine to benefit from.”

Lecornu’s office later said the sharing of intelligence with Ukraine is not a novelty but “a continuity of service.”

Lecornu added that following the US decision to suspend all military aid to Ukraine, French President Emmanuel Macron asked him to “accelerate the various French aid packages” to make up for the lack of American assistance.

Lecornu said that in the wake of the U.S. decision, shipments of Ukraine-bound aid departing from Poland had been suspended, adding however that “Ukrainians, unfortunately, have learned to fight this war for three years now and know how to stockpile.”

Macron is giving a televised address tonight, likely on defence and security

So here’s polling from this week on how French people see the war in Ukraine

First, 73% say the US isn’t an ally of France

🧵

[image or embed]

— Pascal (@pascallth.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 3:13 AM

76% are worried the war will spread to other countries near Russia

64% that it will spread to France

[image or embed]

— Pascal (@pascallth.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 3:15 AM

44% want to maintain current military aid to Ukraine

20% want to increase it

18% want it reduced

17% want it stopped

The last two have both lost support since the last time the question was asked

[image or embed]

— Pascal (@pascallth.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 3:19 AM

67% support sending troops to Ukraine to maintain a peace agreement

31% support sending troops to help Ukraine directly during the war

[image or embed]

— Pascal (@pascallth.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 3:20 AM

75% are against paying higher taxes to support Ukraine

[image or embed]

— Pascal (@pascallth.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 3:22 AM

70% support Ukraine’s entry into NATO (30% straight away)

66% support Ukraine joining the EU (31% straight away)

[image or embed]

— Pascal (@pascallth.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 3:24 AM

Finally, 59% blame Trump for the argument last Friday

8% blame Zelensky

19% both equally

[image or embed]

— Pascal (@pascallth.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 3:26 AM

The first six weeks of Trumpist rule have certainly had quite the impact on how democratic parties across Europe see the United States.

Especially notable: Center-right and mainstream conservative political leaders – like this French senator or CDU leader Merz in Germany – taking a hard line.

[image or embed]

— Thomas Zimmer (@thomaszimmer.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 12:21 PM

This complete sabotage of America’s standing in the (democratic) world is only one of many ways in which the Trumpist regime is damaging the country. There is also the economic self-sabotage. There is the unprecedented destruction of state capacity.

The only way to explain it: They really mean it.

— Thomas Zimmer (@thomaszimmer.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 12:26 PM

I’ve been getting this question a lot in interviews with international media: “They must see that this weakens America? Why are they doing it?”

Different MAGA factions will give slightly differing answers. But overall, they are doing it because they want regime change both at home and in the world.

— Thomas Zimmer (@thomaszimmer.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 12:32 PM

Norway:

🇳🇴 The Norwegian Parliament has agreed to increase aid to Ukraine by 50 billion Norwegian kroner ($4.6 billion) to 85 billion Norwegian kroner ($7.8 billion) in 2025.. www.nrk.no/norge/store_…

[image or embed]

— 🦋Special Kherson Cat🐈🇺🇦 (@specialkhersoncat.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 1:07 PM

The US:

These wacky ideas were in circulation last year. All front-line states meet the targets—“As part of the potential policy shift, the U.S. might not defend a fellow NATO member that is attacked if the country doesn’t meet the defense spending threshold” www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcn…

[image or embed]

— Shashank Joshi (@shashj.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 4:16 PM

From NBC: (emphasis mine)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump is considering a major change to the U.S.’ participation in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, according to three current and former senior U.S. officials and one congressional official.

Trump has discussed with aides the possibility of calibrating America’s NATO engagement in a way that favors members of the alliance that spend a set percentage of their gross domestic product on defense, the officials said.

As part of the potential policy shift, the U.S. might not defend a fellow NATO member that is attacked if the country doesn’t meet the defense spending threshold, the officials said. If Trump does make that change, it would mark a significant shift from a core tenet of the alliance known as Article 5, which says that an attack on any NATO country is an attack on all of them.

The president is similarly considering a policy change in which the U.S. may choose to prioritize military exercises with NATO members that are spending the set percentage of their GDPs on defense, the officials said. His administration has already signaled to America’s European allies that the U.S. could reduce its military presence in Europe, and one option now under consideration is to reposition some U.S. troops in the region so they are focused in or around NATO countries that have scaled their defense spending to meet the specific percentage of their GDPs, the officials said.

Asked about Trump considering making these changes to how the U.S. engages with NATO, a National Security Council official said in a written statement, “President Trump is committed to NATO and Article V.”

According to NATO’s most recent statistics, last year 23 NATO members’ defense spending exceeded 2% of their GDP. Five of those nations — Estonia, Greece, Latvia, Poland and the U.S. — spent more than 3% on defense. Poland had the highest percentage, dedicating 4.12% of its GDP to defense.

The potential shift in how the U.S. participates in NATO comes as Trump is pushing European allies to do more to aid Ukraine in its war with Russia and to play a major role in maintaining peace in the country if a deal to end the war is reached.

REPORTER: Are you gonna make it US policy that the US wouldn’t defend NATO countries that don’t pay their fair share?

TRUMP: Well, I think it’s common sense. If they don’t pay I’m not gonna defend them. No, I’m not gonna defend them.

[image or embed]

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) March 6, 2025 at 4:03 PM

Trump on NATO: “If the United States was in trouble and we called them. We said, ‘We got a problem, France.’ Do you think they’re gonna come and protect us? Hmm. They’re supposed to. I’m not so sure.” (Literally the only time NATO Article 5 was invoked was after 9/11 on behalf of the US.)

[image or embed]

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) March 6, 2025 at 4:04 PM

Trump’s statements regarding NATO and Article 5 are divorced from reality because they have nothing to do with reality. He has no intention of actually answering an Article 5 request should one be made regardless of whether the NATO member has met or exceeded the 2% funding threshold.

There are headlines out there indicating that Trump said today he hasn’t made a final decision on withdrawing Temporary Protected Status (TPS) to Ukrainian refugees in the US, which would be part of a larger across the board revocation of TPS for all refugees in the US. These headlines are misleading. Here’s what he actually said:

REPORTER: Are you considering revoking the TPS status for the more than 20,000 Ukrainians who live here in the US?

TRUMP: What are you saying?

REPORTER: TPS status.

TRUMP: On GPS?

[image or embed]

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) March 6, 2025 at 3:51 PM

He has no idea what TPS is/stands for. Which doesn’t really matter, because Stephen Miller does.

“It is a proxy war between two nuclear powers: the United States helping Ukraine, and Russia.” – Marco Rubio

It’s remarkable how they demand gratitude while simultaneously labeling us as a proxy. Why should we be grateful when, according to their own words,

[image or embed]

— Kate from Kharkiv (@kateinkharkiv.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 8:18 AM

they dragged us into a war that brought devastating consequences to our people? We are a proxy or owe you gratitude—make up your mind.

— Kate from Kharkiv (@kateinkharkiv.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 8:18 AM

If the Trump administration are capable of doing this to get Ukraine to the table, they are capable of doing it again if Ukraine doesn’t agree to whatever “peace” arrangement the US and Russia have decided on. Ukraine and its allies need to plan on that assumption.
www.axios.com/2025/03/05/u…

[image or embed]

— Ruth Deyermond (@ruthdeyermond.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 11:33 AM

If, as seems entirely possible at this point, the Trump admin tell Ukraine that they will do this and worse unless Ukraine agrees to cede territory and/or disarm and/or hold elections on Russia’s terms, Ukraine’s allies need to have put it in a position to defend itself.

— Ruth Deyermond (@ruthdeyermond.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 11:33 AM

Whatever flattering things European leaders need to say about or to Trump in order to buy time, they also need to work very quickly to put themselves in a position where they can support Ukraine now – and in the longer term defend their own states – without US assistance.

— Ruth Deyermond (@ruthdeyermond.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 11:33 AM

Policymakers are reluctant to say it – and no doubt also reluctant to believe it – but Europe and other democratic allies no longer have a trustworthy security partner in the US. The post-WW2 alliance with the US is gone and what remains of the West needs to move very quickly to secure itself.

— Ruth Deyermond (@ruthdeyermond.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 11:33 AM

I just want to make a tangential point here. I went to a Jesuit high school in the 1980s. There were, at most, a handful of students and priests who walked around all day with the ash crosses on their foreheads. Almost everyone washed them off shortly after Mass was over.

Back to Ukraine.

My piece for TIME:

“Ukraine has options. Europe is still in the game.

Ideas on how to mitigate the damage from Trump’s siding with Putin are boiling. As long as we, the people, want to keep our country we love, there is always a way forward.”
time.com/7265176/trum…

[image or embed]

— Illia Ponomarenko (@ioponomarenko.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 1:11 PM

From Time:

Yet Trump is making the same mistake as Vladimir Putin—grossly underestimating Ukraine as a sovereign nation determined to survive. And, as history keeps showing us, that is a terrible idea.

This is where Trump and Putin, two very different men with a Ukraine problem, collide with reality. Trump, much like Putin, sees Ukraine as an inconvenience, an obstacle, something that should be grateful to even have a seat at the table. Instead, to his visible frustration on Friday, he met a leader who wouldn’t grovel. The upshot was an unprecedented public spat between two wartime allies that saw Zelensky storm out of the White House before a minerals deal could be penned.

Putin made a similar blunder when he convinced himself that Ukraine was some kind of fake country, created by Vladimir Lenin as a clerical error. He expected a leisurely parade into Kyiv and instead walked straight into a nightmare of his own making—one where demoralized “peasants” from Russian jokes turned out to be one of the world’s best warfighters with an entire society fiercely backing them.

Now the Trump Administration is considering stripping legal status for 240,000 Ukrainians in the U.S. who fled the Russian invasion, potentially putting them on a fast track for deportation.

These are the moves of a U.S. President throwing a tantrum over Ukraine, trying to twist its arm like it’s some kind of personal colonial asset or Banana Republic. All with the expectation that Ukraine will just roll over and sign a “peace deal” with no security guarantees.

No negotiations, no discussions, no pesky Ukrainian democracy—just kiss the ring and get on with it.

Yet Trump is making the same mistake as Vladimir Putin—grossly underestimating Ukraine as a sovereign nation determined to survive. And, as history keeps showing us, that is a terrible idea.

This is where Trump and Putin, two very different men with a Ukraine problem, collide with reality. Trump, much like Putin, sees Ukraine as an inconvenience, an obstacle, something that should be grateful to even have a seat at the table. Instead, to his visible frustration on Friday, he met a leader who wouldn’t grovel. The upshot was an unprecedented public spat between two wartime allies that saw Zelensky storm out of the White House before a minerals deal could be penned.

Putin made a similar blunder when he convinced himself that Ukraine was some kind of fake country, created by Vladimir Lenin as a clerical error. He expected a leisurely parade into Kyiv and instead walked straight into a nightmare of his own making—one where demoralized “peasants” from Russian jokes turned out to be one of the world’s best warfighters with an entire society fiercely backing them.

Like Putin, Trump just doesn’t get Ukraine. His approach hasn’t weakened the Ukrainian President. If anything, it’s done the opposite. Even people who can’t stand Zelensky’s failures have given him credit for standing his ground. That’s because Trump’s approach isn’t just an insult to Zelensky but to Ukraine itself—its institution of national leadership. And if there’s one thing Ukrainians love more than anything, it’s proving arrogant world leaders wrong.

Trump doesn’t see the nation behind the name. Instead, his Administration is sending feelers out to opposition figures like Petro Poroshenko and Yulia Tymoshenko—both of whom only 6% to 10% voters say they would back. Neither has a realistic chance of leading Ukraine in free and fair elections—with Zelensky and war hero General Valeriy Zaluzhny the clear frontrunners.

If the idea is to find a more compliant Ukrainian leader, good luck with that. Putin tried the same thing with his long-time collaborator Viktor Medvedchuk, his pick for a puppet leader, before Medvedchuk was arrested on treason charges in April 2022.

That’s because—and this part is key—this war isn’t about Zelensky. It’s about the people. It’s about the 1 million men and women serving in Ukraine’s army, standing in trenches, dodging drones, evacuating the wounded, and keeping the front lines intact. It’s about the millions more who are keeping the country running, raising funds, developing new weapons, and refusing to break under relentless Russian bombardment.

History is full of examples of what happens when an army loses the will to fight—the Syrian regime’s collapse in December, the Russian front in World War I. That’s not happening here. Russia is advancing and inflicting heavy losses on Ukraine. But Ukraine is still standing because Ukrainians are still willing to pay the price for their survival. Yes, Western weapons help greatly—but weapons don’t fight wars. People do.

Which brings us back to Trump’s decision to pause military aid and intelligence sharing. It’s a terrible blow to the defenders of Ukraine.

But, again, it won’t force Ukraine to surrender any time soon or accept a peace deal without security guarantees. If there’s one thing this war has proven, it’s that Ukrainians are good at improvising when they have to. When Russian firepower became overwhelming, they introduced and mastered things like FPV drones and naval drones, which effectively revolutionized modern warfare.

Ukraine has options. Europe is still in the game. The country’s domestic weapons production is ramping up. Across Ukraine, small workshops—what some call the “shadow military-industrial complex”—are working 24/7 to keep the war effort going. Ideas on how to mitigate the damage from Trump’s siding with Putin are boiling.

As long as we the people want to keep our country we love, there is always a way forward.

More at the link.

“Ukraine’s war effort will not suddenly collapse despite the significant challenges a prolonged freeze would impose”
www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/ukra…

[image or embed]

— Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 12:48 PM

From Foreign Affairs:

Last week, the world witnessed a contentious, on-camera Oval Office confrontation between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, U.S. President Donald Trump, and U.S. Vice President JD Vance. What began as a relatively standard exchange quickly escalated into an unprecedented public dispute. Yet when stripped of emotion, these core disagreements have been clear for some time: Must Ukraine accept ending the war no matter the terms, or does it have the ability to influence them? Can it expect any long-term security commitments to guard against future Russian aggression, or does it have no option but to unconditionally halt its operations? And if Kyiv refuses to comply and the United States withdraws support—as the Trump administration has reportedly begun doing this week—can Ukraine survive on its own?

Even before the meeting, the White House had made clear its position: Ukraine has no leverage and therefore no ability to set conditions. Zelensky, of course, has firmly rejected this conclusion. For Ukrainians, ending the war is undoubtedly a welcome goal. And after three years of brutal fighting, previous strategies—including those pursued by prior administrations—have failed to open a clear path to peace. While Western assistance has been crucial to Ukraine’s survival, restrictions on the range and use of weapons have led to an infantry-centric war of attrition that has severely strained Ukrainian forces and offered no clear route to victory.

Yet Russia, too, has failed to achieve its objectives or to find a clear route to victory. Although its forces have made steady territorial gains through 2024 and the first months of 2025, its progress has been gruelingly slow and extremely costly, leaving it with few viable options for dramatically altering the situation in its favor. It is thus dismaying that the U.S. government has at times echoed Russian narratives—propaganda meant to distort perceptions of the war. This has led many in Kyiv, Washington, and other capitals to worry that U.S. policy could inadvertently offer a lifeline to the struggling aggressor in this war.

What is especially unfortunate about this risk is that Washington has the capacity to exert significant pressure on the Kremlin at the moment, potentially pushing it to accept reasonable terms for an armistice in the coming months. Kyiv has consistently expressed its interest in ending the war and achieving peace—but only under the right conditions. Today, Ukraine proposed a staged approach to a cease-fire, starting with an end to air and maritime hostilities. But a complete cease-fire forced on Ukraine at any necessary cost will not bring a sustainable end to the war—the prospect that was hinted at in the Oval Office confrontation, reflecting a preference for a bilateral U.S.-Russian agreement with which Ukraine is expected to simply comply.

Such an approach would reflect a fundamentally flawed understanding of the current balance of power in the war, making it both shortsighted and strategically unsound. It raises the risk of the worst possible scenario—not only failing to secure a lasting resolution but also setting the stage for the continuation of the war. Demanding unconditional acceptance of the terms pushed on Ukraine would mean that it would come on terms written in Moscow—for Ukraine, making it effectively capitulation. Kyiv would face a stark choice: capitulation or continuing to fight without its key ally. Yet the Ukrainian leadership, with the overwhelming support of the Ukrainian people, long ago decided that surrender was not an option, a commitment reinforced by the experience of the occupied territories: everywhere Russia has prevailed, terror, lawlessness, and destruction have followed.

Ukraine would thus be forced to brace itself for war without U.S. support. In any case, a withdrawal of that support might in the long run be the outcome of either path presented to Zelensky at the White House: accepting an effectively unconditional cease-fire without security guarantees, or losing U.S. military assistance immediately.

But even as the U.S. pauses military aid, Ukraine’s war effort will not suddenly collapse despite the significant challenges a prolonged freeze would impose. As long as strong European support continues, which seems even more likely after this week’s gathering of leaders from the continent in London, Putin will be able to achieve some tactical breakthroughs but will not reach his maximalist objectives. A U.S. government aligning with Russia in ways that actively undermine Ukraine’s fight would be a truly shocking development—one that would shatter trust in the United States and irreparably fracture the Western alliance. But Ukrainians, who know the awful cost of this war better than anyone, have no choice but to fight for their country’s survival.

More at the link.

How Ukraine Can Survive Without America washingtonmonthly.com/2025/03/06/h…

[image or embed]

— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 3:04 PM

From The Washington Monthly:

The last day of February 2025 will resound in history as America’s entrance onto the world stage as a rogue state. To be sure, the United States has written some inexcusable chapters in its foreign-policy record—Vietnam and Iraq being the most notorious—but never has the country’s government been so brazenly and boastfully on the side of dictatorship, aggression, and general indecency. Never has a gleeful thuggishness been so undisguised.

The treatment of Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky at the hands of Donald Trump and his principal henchman, J.D. Vance—as a guest of the White House, mind you—is unprecedented in this republic’s record. The only analog in modern diplomatic history was in 1939, when Czech president Emil Hácha was summoned to Berlin, where Adolf Hitler and his foreign minister, Joachim von Ribbentrop, threatened him in tag team fashion: hand over your country to us, or we will bomb it to rubble. The main difference between Trump’s and Vance’s behavior is that they demanded Zelensky deliver Ukraine to a third country, Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

That might appear to be the beginning of the end of Ukraine’s brave resistance against the neo-imperialism of Russia, just as Czechoslovakia, abandoned by Britain and France, disappeared into the darkness. But this is a potential illusion fostered by American parochialism, a self-centered and provincial view of the world that is held, above all, by right-wingers who believe the rest of the world only exists at our sufferance, but to some degree also by many liberals who oppose them. Wasn’t it Madeleine Albright who called the United States “the indispensable nation?” Further, “We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future?”

This unbecoming sense of self-importance has led to many failures. In reality, we didn’t “lose” China in the late 1940s because China was never ours to lose, just as the geopolitical dynamics of Vietnam and Iraq could not be altered by our faulty perception that what was in our alleged interest was in their peoples’ interest. Charles de Gaulle is reputed to have quipped that the graveyards are full of indispensable men; the same might be said of nations. Ukraine has other sources of survival than the United States.

As much as well-informed and thoughtful Americans might believe the preservation of Ukraine’s sovereignty is a national interest—and it is—then it is obvious that Ukraine’s independence is even more vital to the European Union. Preventing a hegemon from dominating Europe is important to the United States, but for Europe, the prospect of a vengeful and triumphant Russia sharing a thousand-mile border is an existential nightmare. Can Europe rise to the occasion?

Napoleon claimed that in war, the moral is to the physical as three is to one. To predict whether the governments of the various European states can summon the sustained will to provide the military and financial resources to help Ukraine successfully resist Russian aggression would be to engage in speculation—we just cannot know. For decades, U.S. presidents far better intentioned than Trump have asked, hectored, and begged the European members of NATO to increase their defense spending, with variable results. But just as the prospect of being hanged concentrates the mind, the expectation of a victorious Putin extorting Europe, with no Uncle Sam as a backstop, may disperse the fog of indecision in Berlin, Paris, and other capitals.

If their will is a question mark, the means to provide for Ukraine’s defense certainly exist. The EU’s nominal gross domestic product is roughly $20 trillion, roughly nine times greater than Russia’s. Its contributions to Ukraine thus far, particularly the economic assistance without which Kyiv could not keep the lights on, have totaled $145 billion, exceeding that of the United States.

Adding the economies of Britain (a significant contributor of military and economic aid to Ukraine) and Canada (the highest contributor of direct financial aid per capita among the G7 nations, which, because of Trump’s punitive tariffs, have no incentive to follow Washington’s irrational dictates) results in contributor states with a combined GDP of $26 trillion—roughly equivalent to that of the United States.

Of more immediate concern than the overall economic output of Europe is manufacturing potential. The EU’s manufacturing output is 15 percent of its economy compared to 11 percent for the United States; it has ample capacity to substitute for American war materiel should it decide to go all-in to supply Ukraine. Europe’s ability to produce defense articles is a more muddled story, but it should be able to defend Ukraine—again, provided the political will.

Some observers doubt this, believing that Europe simply cannot fill the gap left by the U.S. suspension of arms deliveries. They point out that Europe has far fewer high-end defense items like large surveillance aircraft. Its defense industry is less integrated than the United States and may have difficulty quickly gearing up without long-term contracts. This argument, however, mistakes the kind of war that is taking place.

Europeans lack the strategic intelligence assets of America, but that may be less of a handicap than it seems, given the frozen battle fronts and the Russian penchant for predictably using brute force rather than finesse. Intelligence that unmasks the Kremlin’s subtle machinations will have less utility than the sheer firepower of masses of traditional artillery whenever the Russian general staff, true to form, hurls whole battalions of Russian convicts or purchased North Korean cannon fodder at Ukrainian lines.

Several European nations produce howitzers firing the standard NATO 155 mm. round, a mainstay in the ferocious artillery battles in eastern and southern Ukraine. Their shell production last year was roughly equal to that of the U.S., and Rheinmetall, the continent’s premier shell producer, broke ground in early 2024 on a dedicated 155 mm. howitzer round facility.

America never considered sending F-35 stealth fighters to Kyiv and even took its time before delivering the F-16, a 50-year-old design. The M1 Abrams tank, which the Biden administration implied might be something beyond the capacity of the Ukrainians to employ and temporized too long before delivering, is a design of similar vintage as the F-16.

The French Rafale fighter, the Typhoon, used by five European militaries; as well as the Swedish Gripen, all currently in production, are roughly the F-16’s equal and easily a match for their Russian counterparts. The German Leopard II tank, whose diesel engine gives it greater range than the M1’s turbine and obviates the need to provide separate logistics to supply jet fuel to a ground vehicle, can easily fill in for the absence of American tanks.

What will Ukraine do without U.S.-supplied longer-range missiles such as the ATACMS, weapons ensuring that Russia can’t simply fight for years inside Ukraine without worrying about retaliation against targets inside Russia?  The Anglo-French Storm Shadow missile is one system that could fill that role; the British had long been ready to see it used but only received a green light from the Biden administration in November when the writing was already on the wall for a U.S. retrenchment from Ukraine.

America’s logistics capabilities, including long-range airlift, certainly overshadow Europe’s, which is why European armies have always had difficulty in out-of-area operations. But Ukraine is not out-of-area. War materiel, whether U.S. or European, has traveled by truck or train along commercial routes into Ukraine, so in this respect, at least, America’s absence will not be felt.

Given the relatively shallow economic rebound since the pandemic in the EU, and especially Germany’s recent manufacturing slowdown, a vigorous rearmament program would not only serve as Keynesian economic pump-priming but provide a project to focus energy and revive belief in Europe as a culture worth defending.

Politically embattled heads of government like Emanuel Macron may also just happen to find that nothing rallies electorates around their leaders like a genuine threat to their safety–if they themselves rise to the challenge. After all, departing Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s approval ratings, and that of his party, shot up from abysmal lows the instant he angrily retaliated against Trump’s tariff policy, which has to be seen along with the abandonment of Ukraine as a concerted strategy to benefit Moscow.

More at the link.

Kryvyi Rih:

UPD Kryvyi Rih. The death toll from the russian missile attack has risen to three, with 31 other civilians wounded, 14 of whom are in critical condition.

[image or embed]

— Iryna Voichuk (@irynavoichuk.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 1:16 AM

Kryvyi Rih after yesterday’s russian missile attack on the hotel.

At least 4 people died, and 31 others were injured.

[image or embed]

— Kate from Kharkiv (@kateinkharkiv.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 6:46 AM

⚡️ Update: Humanitarian workers from US, UK, and Ukraine checked into Kryvyi Rih hotel just before Russian strike, Zelensky says.

“They survived because they managed to escape their rooms,” President Volodymyr Zelensky said.

[image or embed]

— The Kyiv Independent (@kyivindependent.com) March 6, 2025 at 2:47 AM

From The Kyiv Independent:

Russian forces struck a hotel in Kryvyi Rih in Dnipropetrovsk Oblast with a missile on March 5, killing four people and injuring at least 32, including a child, Governor Serhii Lysak reported.

The missile struck the five-story hotel around 10 p.m. local time, killing a 53-year-old man. Lysak later reported that two men and a woman were killed in the attack, and a 43-year-old man died in the hospital the following morning.

At least 32 other people suffered injuries, including a child. Fourteen of the victims are in serious condition, Lysak said. Most of the wounded have been hospitalized.

“Just before the strike, volunteers from a humanitarian organization checked into the hotel – citizens of Ukraine, the U.S., and the U.K.,” President Volodymyr Zelensky said.

“They survived because they managed to escape their rooms.” Zelensky did not specify whether the volunteers suffered any injuries.

The missile strike also damaged 14 apartment buildings, a post office, almost two dozen cars, a cultural center, and 12 shops, the governor said.

Emergency crews are currently working on-scene to clear the rubble from the attack site. Ukraine’s State Emergency Service said that there may be additional victims under the rubble.

Kryvyi Rih, the hometown of President Volodymyr Zelensky, remains a frequent target of Russian missile attacks. With a population of about 660,000, it is the second-largest city in Dnipropetrovsk Oblast, located roughly 70 kilometers (40 miles) northwest of the nearest front line.

This is not a coincidence, just like it is not a coincidence that Putin and Russia keep targeting civilian targets in Kryvyih Rih.

Russian Telegram channels claim that the Russian Armed Forces have destroyed foreign mercenaries in a hotel in Kryvyi Rih.

[image or embed]

— WarTranslated (Dmitri) (@wartranslated.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 9:06 AM

As I was saying.

Sumy Oblast:

Two russian kamikaze drones attacked a Nova Poshta terminal in Sumy, causing a massive fire and killing a worker.

#UkrainianView

[image or embed]

— Iryna Voichuk (@irynavoichuk.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 4:19 AM

Slatyne, Kharkiv Oblast:

Early this morning, russian forces struck a house in the village of Slatyne in Kharkiv Oblast with an air bomb, killing a 51-year-old man and injuring his wife and son.

[image or embed]

— Iryna Voichuk (@irynavoichuk.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 2:27 AM

Odesa:

Odesa is under the russian drone attack tonight.
Drones caused damage to energy infrastructure and ignited fires in three private homes. The number of casualties is still being determined.

[image or embed]

— Kate from Kharkiv (@kateinkharkiv.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 5:28 PM

Kharkiv:

Russian drones have been over Kharkiv for over an hour now. They fly in and out of the city. There are occasional sounds of air defense.

At the same time, Kellogg addressed Ukrainians as farm animals today.

This world is absurd, I just don’t know how to cope anymore.

— Kate from Kharkiv (@kateinkharkiv.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 5:16 PM

Kharkiv, after a russian drone strike on the city last night.

[image or embed]

— Kate from Kharkiv (@kateinkharkiv.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 6:50 AM

The Pokrovsk front:

Spectacular work of the mortar crew of the 6th Battalion of the Azov Brigade near Pokrovsk.

[image or embed]

— WarTranslated (Dmitri) (@wartranslated.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 1:23 PM

Coordinated work of the 425th Separate Assault Regiment in the Peschane area, Pokrovsk direction of the front, Donetsk region.

[image or embed]

— WarTranslated (Dmitri) (@wartranslated.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 9:25 AM

Russian occupied Crimea:

Ukrainian UAVs are actively operating over occupied Crimea. Explosions and air defense activity reported in multiple areas. Strikes reported near Belbek airfield. Reports also suggest an attack on the airfield in Novofedorivka, with ongoing explosions in Saky.

[image or embed]

— NOELREPORTS (@noelreports.com) March 6, 2025 at 4:03 PM

That’s enough for tonight.

Your daily Patron!

There are no new Patron skeets or videos today. Here is some adjacent material.

Today’s Dog of War is not alone, but with a Cat of the Conflict. These are dog Flika and the kitty Rudi, who live with Myroslava’s in-laws. Usually, they live peacefully, although sometimes Rudi attacks Flika and kicks her off her couch.

[image or embed]

— Tim Mak (@timkmak.bsky.social) March 6, 2025 at 9:45 AM

Open thread!