Putin Recognizes Donbass Republics, Sends Russian Military to 'Denazify' Ukraine

[Niall]

Long report published by the NYT on Dec 30th:

'The Separation: Inside the Unraveling U.S.-Ukraine Partnership', by Adam Entous

(This is the NYT reporter who wrote 'The Secret History of the War in Ukraine' back in March 2025, revealing (admitting) the extent of US and other Western military involvement in Ukraine. The byline says "Adam Entous conducted more than 300 interviews over more than a year with government, military and intelligence officials in Ukraine, the United States," and a dozen other NATO countries. So this is to be read as 'the inside scoop on the RU-UKR War in 2025', but from the vantage point that 'UKR really can win, but Team Trump is retarding them'...)

Version on archive.is

Even as Mr. Trump bullied Mr. Zelensky, he seemed to coddle Mr. Putin. When the Russian stiff-armed peace proposals and accelerated bombing campaigns on Ukrainian cities, Mr. Trump would lash out on Truth Social and ask his aides, “Do we sanction their banks or do we sanction their energy infrastructure?” For months, he did neither.

But in secret, the Central Intelligence Agency and the U.S. military, with his blessing, supercharged a Ukrainian campaign of drone strikes on Russian oil facilities and tankers to hobble Mr. Putin’s war machine. [...]

In so many ways, the partnership was breaking apart. But there was a counternarrative, spooled out largely in secret. At its center was the C.I.A.

Where Mr. Hegseth had marginalized his Ukraine-supporting generals, the C.I.A. director, Mr. Ratcliffe, had consistently protected his own officers’ efforts for Ukraine. He kept the agency’s presence in the country at full strength; funding for its programs there even increased. When Mr. Trump ordered the March aid freeze, the U.S. military rushed to shut down all intelligence sharing. But when Mr. Ratcliffe explained the risk facing C.I.A. officers in Ukraine, the White House allowed the agency to keep sharing intelligence about Russian threats inside Ukraine.

Now, the agency honed a plan to at least buy time, to make it harder for the Russians to capitalize on the Ukrainians’ extraordinary moment of weakness.

One powerful tool finally employed by the Biden administration — supplying ATACMS and targeting intelligence for strikes inside Russia — had been effectively pulled from the table. But a parallel weapon had remained in place — permission for C.I.A. and military officers to share targeting intelligence and provide other assistance for Ukrainian drone strikes against crucial components of the Russian defense industrial base. These included factories manufacturing “energetics” — chemicals used in explosives — as well as petroleum-industry facilities. [...]

In June, beleaguered U.S. military officers met with their C.I.A. counterparts to help craft a more concerted Ukrainian campaign. It would focus exclusively on oil refineries and, instead of supply tanks, would target the refineries’ Achilles’ heel: A C.I.A. expert had identified a type of coupler that was so hard to replace or repair that a refinery would remain offline for weeks. (To avoid backlash, they would not supply weapons and other equipment that Mr. Vance’s allies wanted for other priorities.)

As the campaign began to show results, Mr. Ratcliffe discussed it with Mr. Trump. The president seemed to listen to him; they had a frequent Sunday tee time. According to U.S. officials, Mr. Trump praised America’s surreptitious role in these blows to Russia’s energy industry. They gave him deniability and leverage, he told Mr. Ratcliffe, as the Russian president continued to “jerk him off.”

The energy strikes would come to cost the Russian economy as much as $75 million a day, according to one U.S. intelligence estimate. The C.I.A. would also be authorized to assist with Ukrainian drone strikes on “shadow fleet” vessels in the Black Sea and the Mediterranean. Gas lines would start forming across Russia.

“We found something that is working,” a senior U.S. official said, then had to add, “How long, we don’t know.” [...]

 

[thorbiorn]

Some deaths gain attention and others do not

1 Jan, 2026 23:47
Moscow slams Western silence over New Year’s Eve massacre of civilians
Ignoring Ukrainian acts of “terrorism” is tantamount to “open complicity,” Russia’s UN mission in Geneva has said

Why should western leaders worry over people dying, when there among them are those that in their New Year speeches to their nations sermonize over "the war in Ukraine is our war"?

Nevertheless it seems the media do show concern in certain cases. The following is an example to illustrate the point. Very early on January 1st, there was a fire at a club in Switzerland where 40 young people died. 40 people is a lot, and there are some Biblical overtones to the number, but for local context in 2024 a Higher proportion of foreigners died in Swiss mountains and they give the number of 114.

The German Wiki has, and one can compare this to the indifference to other kinds of killing:

Further reactions followed from foreign heads of state and government, including Pope Leo XIV, French President Emmanuel Macron, King Charles III, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier,[25] Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and Austrian President Alexander Van der Bellen.

From neighboring France, a regional paper carried the story on their front page both today and yesterday:

The venue in the Swiss mountains was called Le Constellation. A constellation is a group of stars that carries a name to which a story or legend is typically attached. Constellations were used in ancient times for navigation and for keeping track of time and celestial events. Will there later in hindsight be a symbolic meaning to the Swiss tragedy?

If some European leaders prepare for more conflict or upheaval, minding some deaths, but not others, will the thread this year change heading, be forgotten, or end up similar to 'Civil War in Ukraine: Western Empire vs Russia', closed for further entries?

 

[Aeneas]

Very early on January 1st, there was a fire at a club in Switzerland where 40 young people died

One of the more absurd offers of help came from Israel, who of course wanted to show themselves to care about people and harvest some brownie points. The Swiss will likely be told to support Israel some more now that Israel has 'displayed to care' about an accident in Switzerland.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-offers-help-to-switzerland-after-deadly-ski-resort-blaze-kills-dozens/

Israel offers help to Switzerland after deadly ski resort blaze kills dozens​

Three Jewish people said missing; Herzog offers condolences, notes Israeli experience in dealing with disasters; authorities still identifying victims, cause of fire​

It is true that Israel has a lot of experience from Gaza in burning people alive. The images of Israel burning a hospital down where the patients and staff were seen burning to death, were vivid. Israel didn't use their 'expertise' to help the victims but instead worked on where else they could set things on fire.

 

[thorbiorn]

One of the more absurd offers of help came from Israel, who of course wanted to show themselves to care about people and harvest some brownie points. The Swiss will likely be told to support Israel some more now that Israel has 'displayed to care' about an accident in Switzerland.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-offers-help-to-switzerland-after-deadly-ski-resort-blaze-kills-dozens/

It is true that Israel has a lot of experience from Gaza in burning people alive. The images of Israel burning a hospital down where the patients and staff were seen burning to death, were vivid. Israel didn't use their 'expertise' to help the victims but instead worked on where else they could set things on fire.

A few of the absurdities and ironies are unlikely to pass by the attention of everyone.
In the meantime from the Jerusalem Post: FM says Israeli woman missing after fire at Swiss ski resort that killed 40 people:

Among them are citizens from around the world, including Italy, France, and Australia, as the club attracts many wealthy tourists from across Europe.

While those news capture headlines, PressTV not only reported about the Swiss fire, but also:
Death toll rises to 27 in Ukrainian strike on New Year’s party: Russia

[...]
Russian authorities report that the death toll from a Ukrainian drone strike at a New Year’s party in a café in the Kherson region has risen to at least 27 people.

In a statement released on Friday, Russia’s Investigative Committee noted that two children were killed in the attack, with five additional minors among the injured.

At least 100 civilians, including guests and staff, were present at the venue when the “terrorist act” occurred just before midnight on December 31 in the Black Sea coastal village of Khorly, according to the statement.

Multiple drones targeted the crowded café and a hotel, igniting a massive blaze, it added. At least one of the UAVs carried an incendiary mixture.

The agency also reported that investigators have recovered fragments of several drones at the scene. A criminal investigation into the act of terrorism has been initiated.

Over 26 forensic examinations, including medical, genetic, explosive, and fire safety analyses, have been ordered as part of the inquiry.

“All members of the Ukrainian military involved in this crime will be identified and brought to justice,” the agency stated.
[...]

Would the attack on the club in Kherson have been reported if the Swiss had not happened?

 

[Possibility of Being]

Response to Kiev’s attack on Putin’s residence will not be diplomatic – Moscow

Disclaimer: I have no idea if it has anything to do with reality, but a few rather serious people considered that possibility and hypothetically analysed it; and if true, it would shed some light on several otherwise confusing issues. For that reason, and also because so little attention has been given here to that outrageous attempted attack (compare it with Tfump's dripping ear, for example!), I think it well deserves being recorded here.

On December 29, Alexey Arestovich, in an interview by Alexandr Shelest and speaking most likely from the US, talked about that alleged attack. ("Alleged" because very little was known at that time.) He made several quite reasonable speculations, so even if not all may prove correct, I wouldn't dismiss his points out of hand.

The interview is in Russian, but turning on automatic translation works well enough. Arestovich himself summarised it in his TG message of Dec 30, so I'll use quotes from his own post, machine translated:

- Russian officials claim that at the time of the negotiations between Zelensky and Trump, Ukrainian drones attacked the residence of the Russian president.

What is called a residence in fact turns out to also be the facility from which the Russian nuclear forces are controlled.

In fact when on air, AA frequently emphasised that that's what "western taxi drivers say, but we don't believe them" - a phrase that has a big potential of becoming a meme.

If this is true, or if Russia will now conduct its policy based on this, then the framework for negotiations changes.
In that case, we can assume that the Kremlin will make Zelensky's removal from power a condition for peace.
His security guarantees may be revoked and the hunt may begin.

I doubt Russians would try to annihilate him but I can see how other powers may and then blame it on Putin. But at this point everything seems possible.

At the same time, the US has sufficient resources to verify whether there really was an attack on facility No. 1.

If we assume that Ukraine really did attack it, then this is a great day—the veil has been lifted.

In this case, a clear hypothesis emerges: with the support of Europe and the UK, Zelensky is working against Trump and Republican policy.

Seems quite right. More than once such a thought had crossed my mind.
Z never wanted peace, and not for peace he was put in his current position.

One can also assume the overall strategy behind these actions: to help Trump lose the midterm elections to Congress, and then work to bring down his approval rating.
If a Democrat wins the presidential election, it could mean a resumption of US aid and a return to the general policy of globalists in the West.

Well, let's remember that it was Obama (Dem) who introduced embargo on sending weapons to Ukraine, and it was Trump (Rep) who lifted it and resumed arming Ua straight away during his first term.

It is also very beneficial for Europeans if Ukraine continues to fight for another couple of years. They need to have time to prepare their armies and military programs while Russia is busy with Ukraine.

And all this time, Zelensky remains president.

Seems to be his biggest concern, but what he does comes not only from him. Perhaps that's one factor why he prefers to align with the Brits and EU hawks as they may loose some power if he is replaced with someone reasonable.

In any case, the possible announcement of a hunt for Zelensky secures his status as a national defender within the country and weakens any corruption scandals.

One reason it's neither going to be announced nor executed, I'd think.

If this is the logic, then the announced strike against target No. 1 in the Russian Federation is a powerful tactical move. In this case, it must be acknowledged that Zelensky is playing a very risky game with consequences that are difficult to predict.

Assuming it's true, I don't think it's going to be announced. Perhaps some future historians will be able to dissect the event.
What follows, is AA's musing on possible Ukraine future scenarios. In the interview itself, he talks more about the HQ hypothesis (first 30 min).

Anyway, the next day, on December 30, Vladimir Brovkin said the same: it was not Putin's residence that was the target. It was "a command and control strategic center".

Dr. Brovkin is a Russian-born American retired historian of Russia, a former Professor of Soviet History at Harvard University, and the author of numerous books on Russian History and politics.

From video description:

Who has attacked the so called Putin's residence. which is not a country residence but a command and control strategic center one of many with bunkers and all kinds of other facilities? Is that a Ukrainian or British operation? Is it a set up by the Russians? Who wants what at this juncture?

Has he gotten the idea from Arestovich? I don't know, but when asked in comments about his sources, he said:

There is a residence there but also 80 other buildings and a command and control center and a bunker. Arestovich mentioned it too. [From] The research I did on the Valday complex.

Again, if true, it would explain a few things, but bring another questions the same time:

- Very serious reaction on the part of the Russian authorities. It seems to be commonly known that Putin doesn't live there nor he spends there a lot of time, and frequently. It's about 400 km away from Moscow. A place, by the way, Stalin used to call "Lovushka", meaning a trap. It has changed a lot since then but it remains a fairly isolated location.
But, is it isolated enough to host the Nuclear Triade HQ (or one of a few)?

Putin's unusually serious New Year speech, including his face expression, would also point to something of much higher importance than himself. And that could only be the Triade, the fundamental line of defence of the RF.

- Would it be the reason it was Lavrov who made the initial public announcement and not the military authorities? To divert attention from the military aspect of the attack?

- Trump's comment on the news: "it was not the right time to do it, not the right time". Would he feel so strong about such an attack if it was aimed at Putin himself? Although he is no stranger to such acts, it seems more likely he'd rather gladly support, as he has been, such a massive attack on Russia's nuclear assets. Unless his closest friend BenjN would have asked for that. But would he?

- Putin's decree issued on Dec 30 on mobilization and special training for reservists to protect vital infrastructure facilities, as well as other critically important objects.


Who discussed the hypothesis, from what I came across:
- John Helmer, first on Dialogue Works 2 days ago and then with Dimitri Lascaris
- Larry C. Johnson with Nima, and with Glenn Diesen
- Peter Lavelle and George Szamuely of The Gaggle
I'm sure there are others, too.

Perhaps it's enough to start a discussion - if any is going to follow, that is.

 

[axj]

Perhaps it's enough to start a discussion - if any is going to follow, that is.

I think the strange part in this is that Russia is saying it was an attack on Putin's residence, as if it is the place where he actually lives most of the time. Why say that instead of "nuclear command and control center" which it seems to be primarily? Maybe the drones targeted specifically his house there? Was he there at the time?

 

[Possibility of Being]

I think the strange part in this is that Russia is saying it was an attack on Putin's residence, as if it is the place where he actually lives most of the time. Why say that instead of "nuclear command and control center" which it seems to be primarily? Maybe the drones targeted specifically his house there? Was he there at the time?

No VVP was not there at the time and the US intelligence knew it. Trump knew it.
A report on where the drones flew from and what was the target, as read from at least one of the drones that managed to reach Novgorod oblast', though still far enough from the target, was passed to the US military attaché in Moscow.

One quite likely reason is that admitting an attack on the Triade facility would not only reveal its whereabouts, but would also call for executing a nuclear response according to the Military doctrine of the Russian Federation in its latest version. Rightly or not, Russia tries to avoid that as long as possible. Thankfully, the attack failed. But someone is really pushing.
Again, if there is any truth to it.

 

[Voyageur]

Who discussed the hypothesis, from what I came across:
- John Helmer, first on Dialogue Works 2 days ago and then with Dimitri Lascaris

Have only viewed the one.
Interesting and, the stakes are extremely high based on the descriptions (18 hr. delay from Lavrov etc.).

Noticed John brings up Estonia and the Canadian military stationed there. I can't quite remember, yet with the last rounds of talks with Z (in Halifax), Carney rewarded Z with a pledge of 2.5 billion that is not his, with mention of drone technology of some sort.

 

[ApotheosisMMC.]

Disclaimer: I have no idea if it has anything to do with reality, but a few rather serious people considered that possibility and hypothetically analysed it; and if true, it would shed some light on several otherwise confusing issues. For that reason, and also because so little attention has been given here to that outrageous attempted attack (compare it with Tfump's dripping ear, for example!), I think it well deserves being recorded here.

On December 29, Alexey Arestovich, in an interview by Alexandr Shelest and speaking most likely from the US, talked about that alleged attack. ("Alleged" because very little was known at that time.) He made several quite reasonable speculations, so even if not all may prove correct, I wouldn't dismiss his points out of hand.

The interview is in Russian, but turning on automatic translation works well enough. Arestovich himself summarised it in his TG message of Dec 30, so I'll use quotes from his own post, machine translated:



In fact when on air, AA frequently emphasised that that's what "western taxi drivers say, but we don't believe them" - a phrase that has a big potential of becoming a meme.



I doubt Russians would try to annihilate him but I can see how other powers may and then blame it on Putin. But at this point everything seems possible.



Seems quite right. More than once such a thought had crossed my mind.
Z never wanted peace, and not for peace he was put in his current position.



Well, let's remember that it was Obama (Dem) who introduced embargo on sending weapons to Ukraine, and it was Trump (Rep) who lifted it and resumed arming Ua straight away during his first term.


Seems to be his biggest concern, but what he does comes not only from him. Perhaps that's one factor why he prefers to align with the Brits and EU hawks as they may loose some power if he is replaced with someone reasonable.



One reason it's neither going to be announced nor executed, I'd think.



Assuming it's true, I don't think it's going to be announced. Perhaps some future historians will be able to dissect the event.
What follows, is AA's musing on possible Ukraine future scenarios. In the interview itself, he talks more about the HQ hypothesis (first 30 min).

Anyway, the next day, on December 30, Vladimir Brovkin said the same: it was not Putin's residence that was the target. It was "a command and control strategic center".

Dr. Brovkin is a Russian-born American retired historian of Russia, a former Professor of Soviet History at Harvard University, and the author of numerous books on Russian History and politics.

From video description:


Has he gotten the idea from Arestovich? I don't know, but when asked in comments about his sources, he said:

Again, if true, it would explain a few things, but bring another questions the same time:

- Very serious reaction on the part of the Russian authorities. It seems to be commonly known that Putin doesn't live there nor he spends there a lot of time, and frequently. It's about 400 km away from Moscow. A place, by the way, Stalin used to call "Lovushka", meaning a trap. It has changed a lot since then but it remains a fairly isolated location.
But, is it isolated enough to host the Nuclear Triade HQ (or one of a few)?

Putin's unusually serious New Year speech, including his face expression, would also point to something of much higher importance than himself. And that could only be the Triade, the fundamental line of defence of the RF.

- Would it be the reason it was Lavrov who made the initial public announcement and not the military authorities? To divert attention from the military aspect of the attack?

- Trump's comment on the news: "it was not the right time to do it, not the right time". Would he feel so strong about such an attack if it was aimed at Putin himself? Although he is no stranger to such acts, it seems more likely he'd rather gladly support, as he has been, such a massive attack on Russia's nuclear assets. Unless his closest friend BenjN would have asked for that. But would he?

- Putin's decree issued on Dec 30 on mobilization and special training for reservists to protect vital infrastructure facilities, as well as other critically important objects.


Who discussed the hypothesis, from what I came across:
- John Helmer, first on Dialogue Works 2 days ago and then with Dimitri Lascaris
- Larry C. Johnson with Nima, and with Glenn Diesen
- Peter Lavelle and George Szamuely of The Gaggle
I'm sure there are others, too.

Perhaps it's enough to start a discussion - if any is going to follow, that is.

I also don't think it will escalate too much given Putin's past restraint, but the Russians do tend to carry out retaliatory attacks. Zelensky doesn't have to be the target; that's not necessary. The targets could be high-ranking officers involved in planning these attacks, which also includes foreign personnel linked to intelligence services and generals.

Brovkin points out that Putin is caught between appeasing his military and undermining the peace plan presented by the US, but I doubt they truly have much faith in the latter, and it all seems to be more for show.
In any case, with a couple of attacks, they could still get away with it without significantly destabilizing relations with the US, especially if there's a possibility that Russia, otherwise, will make a more direct accusation regarding foreign involvement.

 

[iamthatis]

I also don't think it will escalate too much given Putin's past restraint, but the Russians do tend to carry out retaliatory attacks. Zelensky doesn't have to be the target; that's not necessary. The targets could be high-ranking officers involved in planning these attacks, which also includes foreign personnel linked to intelligence services and generals.

Brovkin points out that Putin is caught between appeasing his military and undermining the peace plan presented by the US, but I doubt they truly have much faith in the latter, and it all seems to be more for show.
In any case, with a couple of attacks, they could still get away with it without significantly destabilizing relations with the US, especially if there's a possibility that Russia, otherwise, will make a more direct accusation regarding foreign involvement.

Yes, according to the Duran guys, Putin has said that Zelensky is an irrational and incompetent leader - which suits the Russians just fine. Plus, if he were removed, another creature would simply take his place.

 

[Nachtweide]

One of the more absurd offers of help came from Israel, who of course wanted to show themselves to care about people and harvest some brownie points. The Swiss will likely be told to support Israel some more now that Israel has 'displayed to care' about an accident in Switzerland.

I'm not sure, but it could be another connection. On X, I came across a post suggesting a connection to Israel. I found this connection strange.

Jüdische Verletzte und Vermisste beim Flammeninferno | Tachles

Short Summary KI​

A devastating fire broke out in the Le Constellation bar in Crans-Montana, Switzerland, during a New Year's Eve party on January 1, 2026 (around 1:30 a.m.). Approximately 40 people were killed, and over 115 others suffered injuries, many severe (including burns). The blaze, likely triggered by indoor pyrotechnics (e.g., sparklers on champagne bottles igniting flammable ceiling material), spread rapidly and caused panic. Authorities have explicitly ruled out any terrorist or antisemitic motive—it is being treated as a tragic accident. Investigations into the exact cause are ongoing.
Crans-Montana attracts a significant Jewish community, especially during holidays, leading to several Jewish individuals being among the injured and a few reported missing. A nearby Chabad prayer room Beit Yossef remained undamaged but temporarily inaccessible. Local Chabad representative Rabbi Yitzhak Levi Pevzner confirmed the impact on the community.
Israeli President Isaac Herzog expressed condolences on X (Twitter), offered solidarity, and spoke with Swiss President Guy Parmelin, providing assistance. A delegation from the Israeli aid organization ZAKA (specializing in disaster victim identification and recovery) was dispatched to support search efforts and aid affected families, particularly Jewish ones—this is standard for ZAKA in international incidents involving potential Jewish victims.
The "strange" perceived Israel connection stems from the local Jewish presence, affected community members, and Israel's natural outreach (condolences + specialized aid), highlighted in Jewish media reports (e.g., tachles.ch). There is no evidence of any targeted incident; it's a heartbreaking accident amid a diverse, international crowd. Switzerland is in national mourning.

 

[Cosmos]

Disclaimer: I have no idea if it has anything to do with reality, but a few rather serious people considered that possibility and hypothetically analysed it; and if true, it would shed some light on several otherwise confusing issues. For that reason, and also because so little attention has been given here to that outrageous attempted attack (compare it with Tfump's dripping ear, for example!), I think it well deserves being recorded here.

On December 29, Alexey Arestovich, in an interview by Alexandr Shelest and speaking most likely from the US, talked about that alleged attack. ("Alleged" because very little was known at that time.) He made several quite reasonable speculations, so even if not all may prove correct, I wouldn't dismiss his points out of hand.

The interview is in Russian, but turning on automatic translation works well enough. Arestovich himself summarised it in his TG message of Dec 30, so I'll use quotes from his own post, machine translated:



In fact when on air, AA frequently emphasised that that's what "western taxi drivers say, but we don't believe them" - a phrase that has a big potential of becoming a meme.



I doubt Russians would try to annihilate him but I can see how other powers may and then blame it on Putin. But at this point everything seems possible.



Seems quite right. More than once such a thought had crossed my mind.
Z never wanted peace, and not for peace he was put in his current position.



Well, let's remember that it was Obama (Dem) who introduced embargo on sending weapons to Ukraine, and it was Trump (Rep) who lifted it and resumed arming Ua straight away during his first term.


Seems to be his biggest concern, but what he does comes not only from him. Perhaps that's one factor why he prefers to align with the Brits and EU hawks as they may loose some power if he is replaced with someone reasonable.



One reason it's neither going to be announced nor executed, I'd think.



Assuming it's true, I don't think it's going to be announced. Perhaps some future historians will be able to dissect the event.
What follows, is AA's musing on possible Ukraine future scenarios. In the interview itself, he talks more about the HQ hypothesis (first 30 min).

Anyway, the next day, on December 30, Vladimir Brovkin said the same: it was not Putin's residence that was the target. It was "a command and control strategic center".

Dr. Brovkin is a Russian-born American retired historian of Russia, a former Professor of Soviet History at Harvard University, and the author of numerous books on Russian History and politics.

From video description:


Has he gotten the idea from Arestovich? I don't know, but when asked in comments about his sources, he said:

Again, if true, it would explain a few things, but bring another questions the same time:

- Very serious reaction on the part of the Russian authorities. It seems to be commonly known that Putin doesn't live there nor he spends there a lot of time, and frequently. It's about 400 km away from Moscow. A place, by the way, Stalin used to call "Lovushka", meaning a trap. It has changed a lot since then but it remains a fairly isolated location.
But, is it isolated enough to host the Nuclear Triade HQ (or one of a few)?

Putin's unusually serious New Year speech, including his face expression, would also point to something of much higher importance than himself. And that could only be the Triade, the fundamental line of defence of the RF.

- Would it be the reason it was Lavrov who made the initial public announcement and not the military authorities? To divert attention from the military aspect of the attack?

- Trump's comment on the news: "it was not the right time to do it, not the right time". Would he feel so strong about such an attack if it was aimed at Putin himself? Although he is no stranger to such acts, it seems more likely he'd rather gladly support, as he has been, such a massive attack on Russia's nuclear assets. Unless his closest friend BenjN would have asked for that. But would he?

- Putin's decree issued on Dec 30 on mobilization and special training for reservists to protect vital infrastructure facilities, as well as other critically important objects.


Who discussed the hypothesis, from what I came across:
- John Helmer, first on Dialogue Works 2 days ago and then with Dimitri Lascaris
- Larry C. Johnson with Nima, and with Glenn Diesen
- Peter Lavelle and George Szamuely of The Gaggle
I'm sure there are others, too.

Perhaps it's enough to start a discussion - if any is going to follow, that is.

Sounds like a reasonable theory to me. My bet would be on something like that. Also, what has happened now in Venezuela and what they possibly plan with Iran and the situation with Ukraine, likely, at least by now, could play into what Putin and company think and do. Although I think Zelensky himself is as much a puppet as anyone can be, so I don’t think he is really thinking and deciding on anything there.

One quite likely reason is that admitting an attack on the Triade facility would not only reveal its whereabouts, but would also call for executing a nuclear response according to the Military doctrine of the Russian Federation in its latest version. Rightly or not, Russia tries to avoid that as long as possible. Thankfully, the attack failed. But someone is really pushing.
Again, if there is any truth to it.

Likely. Putin isn’t dumb and will certainly try to not escalate any situation if at all possible. I also noticed how stern Putin seemed to look in his new years Adress and also that no official statements where issued on what Putin is doing or saying since the first of January:

This might just be a coincidence and nothing unusual but I have noticed that the official Kremlin page “hasn’t been updated“ in regards to what Putin is doing since the first of January:

News ∙ President ∙ Events ∙ President of Russia

en.kremlin.ru

It doesn‘t happen that often that nothing is listed on the events/things Putin is doing or participating in, for that many days. Usually there is almost no day in the year Putin isn’t doing something that is officially published there. He is a very busy man.

It could have a number of normal explanations such as the people updating it and/or Putin being on holiday since Christmas is celebrated later in Russia.

But it could IMO also be that Putin is doing things that are not officially published, possibly related to the global situation. I also noticed that he officially talked with Iran not that long ago and also what I subjectively thought was a rather stern looking Putin in his new years address.

Perhaps Putin knows that the road ahead might get hefty/difficult. I also noticed during one of Putin’s latest Q&A what seemed to me like him trying to restrain himself to get too emotional and say too much after he talked with and about soldiers.

I distinctly seem to remember that Putin was seen crying at a church also during Christmas season a couple of years ago, while not so long after that, he had no other choice than to start the SMO in Ukraine. In retrospect, I was speculating that Putin perhaps already knew what he had to do at that point and that’s why he had to cry.