This discussion with host Nima Alkhorshid focused on the prospects for a deal being done between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin to define a new security architecture for Europe.

But that is not the real novelty of the show.  Rather it is to be found in the final minutes of our discussion in which I expressed my discomfort with Musk’s support for the Alternativ fuer Deutschland in the forthcoming German elections. And I do this without reference to their being ‘ultra-right. It is because the AfD were the political movement which first promoted the idea, now widely accepted among German politicians, that they bear no collective responsibility or guilt for the crimes of the Hitler generation.  Regrettably, this has allowed certifiable idiots like the Foreign Affairs minister Annabela Baerbock to stand on a soapbox and moralize against Moscows’s alleged aggression and misdeeds while German tanks rolled into the Kursk province of the Russian Federation.  No, German politics is still not ‘normal’ and the AfD will take the country further away from decency.

At the same time, I raise the question of collective responsibility of the American people for not taking action to stop the unconscionable military assistance to Israel provided by Biden and likely to be continued by Trump that enables the genocide.

Time is here for frank talk.

Translation below into German (Andreas Mylaeus)

„Dialogue Works“-Ausgabe vom 3. Januar

In dieser Diskussion mit Gastgeber Nima Alkhorshid ging es um die Aussichten auf eine Einigung zwischen Donald Trump und Wladimir Putin über eine neue Sicherheitsarchitektur für Europa.

Aber das ist nicht die eigentliche Neuheit der Sendung. Sie findet sich vielmehr in den letzten Minuten unserer Diskussion, in denen ich mein Unbehagen über Musks Unterstützung für die Alternative für Deutschland bei den bevorstehenden deutschen Wahlen zum Ausdruck gebracht habe. Und ich tue dies, ohne darauf hinzuweisen, dass sie „ultrarechts“ sind. Sondern weil die AfD die politische Bewegung war, die als erste die Idee propagierte, dass die deutsche Politik keine kollektive Verantwortung oder Schuld für die Verbrechen der Hitler-Generation trage, eine Idee, die heute unter deutschen Politikern weit verbreitet ist. Bedauerlicherweise hat dies dazu geführt, dass sich nachweislich schwachsinnige Personen wie die Außenministerin Annalena Baerbock auf eine Rednerbühne stellen und gegen die angebliche Aggression und die Missetaten Moskaus moralisieren können, während deutsche Panzer in die Provinz Kursk der Russischen Föderation einrollen. Nein, die deutsche Politik ist immer noch nicht „normal“, und die AfD wird das Land weiter vom Anstand entfernen.

Gleichzeitig stelle ich die Frage nach der kollektiven Verantwortung des amerikanischen Volkes, das nicht aktiv wird, um die skrupellose Militärhilfe für Israel zu stoppen, die von Biden bereitgestellt wurde und wahrscheinlich von Trump fortgesetzt wird und den Völkermord ermöglicht.

Es ist an der Zeit, offen zu reden.

Transcript submitted by a reader

NewsX: 0:00
On New Year’s Day, Russia launched a drone strike on Kiev, killing two and injuring six while damaging buildings in two districts, including a residential building. President Zelenskyy confirmed Russia’s actions, emphasising that even on New Year’s Eve, Russia’s focus was solely on harming Ukraine. In a related development, Russian gas exports through a Soviet-era pipeline running across Ukraine were halted on New Year’s Day. This marks the end of Moscow’s decades-long dominance over Europe’s energy markets. Gazprom, Russia’s state-owned company, confirmed the stoppage at 5 o’clock GMT after Ukraine refused to renew the gas transit agreement.

0:38
While this was widely anticipated, experts suggest that the suspension will not affect European Union gas prices in contrast to the sharp price hikes experienced in 2022 when Russia’s reduced gas supply triggered an energy crisis. First we’re going to be joined by our correspondent Aditya Wadwan. Aditya, I’d like to bring back to the strikes themselves that we saw over the New Year’s period. We know two people have died, six people have been injured. What else do you know?

NewsX correspondent Waghwan: 1:07
Well Josh, absolutely as you rightly pointed out, Russia retaliated to the Ukrainian drone strikes that took place in the Russian city of Kazan, you know, I mean, you know, I mean Russia launched the series of missiles and drones and you know the first explosion was heard at around 3 AM in Kiev and the second explosion was heard around 8 AM in the morning. So, you know, this is you know, this seems to be an unending war, you know, the war has been going on for quite some time now since 2022, the last year Ukraine war started and there has been no stopping since then, you know.

On the other side, if you see, you know, let’s put this into perspective, you know, Russian president, on one hand Russian president Vladimir Putin says that he’s ready to make compromises on the Ukraine war on the position of strength and not on weakness. But on the other hand, the other side, Russia is retaliating, is attacking Ukrainian cities again and again. And you know, so this needs to be seen as to how this entire scenario is, you know, going forward.

It is not clear as of now that after Donald Trump takes office as a US President on 20th January, whether this war will stop or not. So this needs to be seen, George. As we mentioned, the result of this, what has happened is that the Ukraine has stopped the flow or the gas supply to the European this will make really impact Russia’s position as a monopoly and energy supplier to the European also this needs to be seen yes George back to you in the studios.

2:45
Thank you Aditya I’m going to bring it back to the gas flow and I’m going to go to Gilbert Doctorow, a Russian affairs expert who joins us now. Gilbert Doctorow, in terms of the impact that this could have on Russia, we’ve seen, of course, that Zelensky has hailed it as a defeat for Moscow, but what will the impact be felt in Russia and what could be the financial impact?

Doctorow: 3:10
Well, the impact on Russia is likely to be negligible. To put a dollar sign next to this action, Russia has been supplying six and a half billion dollars per year in gas via the Ukrainian pipelines. That will now be zero.

At the same time, Ukraine will lose its transit fees, which have been one billion dollars per year. So both sides will be taking a cut. But I think the Ukrainian economy is vastly weaker than the Russian economy. The Russian economy, just to give you an example, Russia has imposed on itself a deprivation of export sales for its military equipment, for all of its tanks and artillery and whatever else that is purchased by India, by many countries around the world, because this equipment is needed for Russia’s continuing the military action in Ukraine. Russia has been by–

NewsX: 4:15
Sorry, Gilbert, to interrupt. I want to bring it back though to the impact that has been there on Russian businesses. We’ve seen of course that many Western companies have taken business away from Russia even though some are still operating on a smaller scale, but there must be some impact on this. It can’t be nothing. We’re looking at many, many businesses that have stopped trading with Russia. Experts have said that Russia in their current state can’t carry out a continued war for more than maybe one or two years at this rate. So there must be some impact. It can’t be negligible.

Doctorow: 4:46
Those same people who are saying what you just quoted expected that Russia would run out of artillery shells after a few months following the entry into the war in February 2022. So those same people are not to be taken as experts; they are propagandists. As regards money, as I was saying, Russia has cut off 35 billion dollars in its own military exports for a year. So what difference will a six and a half billion dollar loss [make]? And part of that is not a loss, because Russia will replace these pipeline sales by more LNG sales. The European Union imported more LNG from Russia in 2024 than in 2023. There are a lot of complications to this story, and a simple approach that Russia’s a loser is just propaganda from Kiev.

NewsX: 5:40
Ambassador Suresh Goel, I’m going to come to you next, because I really want to look at the impact that this is going to have on the rest of Europe. We saw when the war started– or when the war at least escalated past the 2014 Crimea annexation– we saw gas prices across the continent of Europe rise dramatically, and that is still being felt across Europe. But in terms of the financial impact, the EU are saying it’s not going to [be] that big of an issue. So can you provide some more context potentially on that for us?

Ambassador Goel:
My own sense is that if you look at the overall performance of pressured economy ever since the war with Ukraine began and also from the context of financial instruments to put pressure on any country, most often this pressure or the impact of any kind of financial pressures or the trade or sanctions has the impact only as far as the country subject to this pressure allows it to take it.

6:45
Let me explain what I mean. Iran, I am just giving a context here really. The USA had thought that Iran after all the trade sanctions, all the economic sanctions or the gas on the oil trade etc etc would be subjugated after some time and would actually [submit] to the USA demands on nuclear program. It didn’t happen. They continued with the nuclear enrichment, uranium enrichment.

Russia are in with the beginning of the Ukraine war there has been enormous pressure, and now there is no doubt that the Russian economy has been impacted. And it has been analyzed in the various articles of public domain, but not to the extent that the world thought it would happen.

7:39
They have been able to continue with the war effort despite all the pressure, and there are buyers of the oil, as unanticipated before. So my own sense would be that there would be an impact, but who will suffer from this? Moldova has had to cut down on their own energy xxxxxxx, and they are suffering from heat, a lack of heat. Therefore the countries which could be impacted by gas supply stoppage at this time, at this severe winter, would of course be only the also the countries who were actually buying gas earlier. Therefore, while the impact of Russia could be temporary for a few months till they find alternative buyers, impact on the European economies and people would be far more. And that is my sense.

NewsX: 8:37
Thank you very much, and we will continue to bring you the latest updates from across the Russia-Ukraine war, and any further developments that we have across the EU, with the continuation of the fuel crisis.

Transcript submitted by a reader

‘Napolitano: 0:33
Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for “Judging Freedom”. Today is Thursday, January 2nd, 2025. Happy New Year to everyone. Professor Gilbert Doctorow joins us in just a moment on how will the special military operation in Ukraine end.

2:21
Professor Doctorow, a pleasure, my dear friend. Welcome here. Happy New Year to you and your family. What do you think is the state of Russia today, its economy, its political stability, its perception of itself?

Doctorow: 2:42
Well, wars make nations, and Russia is no exception. From the start of the special military operation, there has been a dramatic change in Russia’s self-perception, that is of the large majority of the population, extending to the most critical and difficult stratum of the population, the intelligentsia. They have become patriots, which was not the case before. They have a lot of self-confidence and the economy is helping them.

I was noting with interest the usual critical remarks made about Russia, whatever they do there, in the “Financial Times” saying that Mr. Putin has a hard time recruiting people for his armed forces now, because they’ve had to raise the level of pay for odd sign-up. Yes, of course they have, because the salaries of working men have doubled in the last year. So of course they would have to make an incentive to those who are leaving work and taking on the risks of war, that much higher. The economy is doing very well. The Russian average person, as I say, is enjoying wealth that he did not have before, and that is driving inflation.

4:00
It is more money chasing– in the hands of people who spend what they receive, not save it and spend it because they always were hand to mouth. Well, now they have more in their hands and they’re spending it on goods, and the goods have not increased in volume sufficient to keep pace with the money in their hands. So that explains the inflation, which still is nine percent. There’s nothing dramatic. And the Russian central bank is doing what it can to control it.

But the mood is optimistic. The feeling is that the war is coming to its conclusion, meaning to a successful Russian victory on the ground. And there hasn’t been too much news these past couple of days because it is a holiday, because people were celebrating the New Year in Russia, which has all the power of Christmas and New Year’s combined there. But what has come out is, for example, today the announcement by the Ministry of Defense that they have taken full possession of the town of Korokulov, which was one of the important towns under contention for the last month or more. And we can see and expect that they will take the still more decisive logistical hub of Pokrovsk in the coming weeks.

5:18
What this means is, that they have crossed the 50 percent line in how much of the Donetsk region they possess, and they’re going for the finish line, which is at Dnieper River. I think that is within grasp, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they reached the Dnieper before Mr. Trump’s inauguration.

Napolitano: 5:40
President Putin has indicated a desire to speak with President-elect Trump after he’s inaugurated, and Donald Trump has indicated a reciprocal desire. What do you think Putin wants from Trump? What will he ask for? What will his goal be in whatever conversations they have?

Doctorow:
The Russian goal is to put the discussion of a peace in Ukraine in the broader context of a revised security architecture for Europe. And that can only be discussed between Putin and Trump. They do not have an interest in Moscow in talking to the European Union or NATO member states in Europe, because they consider them all to be the proxies for the United States. They consider them all to be taking direction from the United States.

So they want to go to the source, which is not surprising. If you were a student of the Soviet Union as I was, you know that the Russians never put much, had much interest in dealing with individual West European countries. They always compared themselves and looked for doing a deal, cutting a deal with the United States. That’s the case today.

I think that Mr. Putin wants to discuss with Donald Trump how, what NATO will look like going forward, how all sides, European and Russian, can find security if the role of NATO is redefined or if it’s dissolved. This will be the subject. And here, when you speak about dissolution or downscaling NATO, I think Mr. Trump is the right person.

He’s made it plain that he’s not a fan of NATO. So that is the subject. And that is why, despite everything that Mr. Kellogg has put out and other spokesmen for the incoming Trump administration have said, all of which the Russians do not take seriously, particularly the notion that a deal could be done by extending the suspension period for Ukraine’s joining NATO. Absolutely excluded. Mr. Lavrov said that flat out in his press conference last week. So that is excluded. So why would they bother to see Trump? Because they have something different to talk to him about.

Napolitano: 8:08
I guess the war cannot really be ended without a resolution of NATO’s role in Europe, without a recasting of NATO’s role in Europe. That’s how I read what you just said. And you’ve also stated, I think quite correctly, that Donald Trump is the person to do it.

Doctorow:
Yes. No, they understand that, and they’re not put off by these various proposals that have been produced by Kellogg and have gone to the press. They understand that this is not coming from number one, it’s coming from his advisors, and that in fact Mr. Trump takes counsel of himself, or perhaps with Elon Musk.

Napolitano: 9:00
You know, one wonders about General Kellogg, because he sounds as bellicose as Tony Blinken. He doesn’t hold any portfolio. He’s not even going to be nominated to a position that requires Senate confirmation.

And the soon-to-become Secretary of State, who’s still a United States Senator from Florida, Marco Rubio, hasn’t uttered a peep about any of this. Kellogg is confusing people. It doesn’t sound the way Trump sounded during the campaign, and the Russians are wise to dismiss it. One wonders why the general is a retired four-star general, why General Kellogg is even in the mix. I mean, there cannot be a resolution, a peaceful resolution of the special military operation if NATO has any future claim to Ukraine. So the idea that it ould happen in the future is just something that Lavrov and Putin won’t accept, no matter how far in the future it is. Am I right?

Doctorow: 10:06
Yes, and I don’t think they have a choice. Russia is not a dictatorship. Russia is a democracy of a sort, not the same as ours, but it is a democracy. It has votes that are not forced. It has legitimacy in casting ballots. And it also has Mr. Putin is a politician. He’s a statesman, but he’s a politician.

And he has to face pressures within his entourage and further afield. This war has gone on much longer than anybody anticipated, for a number of reasons that most of the critics in the West, including some very sincere and well-respected people like [Paul] Craig Roberts, don’t quite get: that Putin has not had a general mobilization; he has sought to carry out his special military operation with a relatively low number of troops assigned to the task. Certainly not adequate to storm Ukraine and run through it in a matter of days or weeks. No, no.

11:17
He’s doing it in a deliberate way, which keeps the public at home out of the war, in the sense that there is no draft. Mothers aren’t up in arms, Wives are not up in arms about their loved ones being sent off to the war. It is a political solution by a supremely experienced political operator, which is what Mr. Putin is. He has to consider the realities.

If he were to have a general mobilization, there would be a lot of political disturbance, just what the United States would like to happen. But he isn’t allowing that. By playing it slow, by working his way steadily with the limited forces that he can muster by means of the sign-up volunteers.

Napolitano: 12:17
So how does the war end, Professor?

Doctorow:
With the collapse of the Ukrainian army. I think that once the army goes, then the political establishment around Mr. Zelensky will crumble, and they’ll all be looking for their first plane out. They are there because the army has resisted and resisted valiantly. I think the audience has to appreciate that this is not Russia flattening Ukraine in one blow. And that the Ukrainians, despite everything, are mostly not running from the front.

Every day the Russian forces in one place or another find themselves in counter-offensive, small ones, which they defeat, and nonetheless the enemy is not running away. The enemy is being pushed back, and the momentum on the Russian side is precisely to prevent the Ukrainians from having the time or the engineering possibilities to build protections, to defend themselves through earthworks or concrete bunkers or whatever. The Russian army keeps on moving, advancing, and does not allow the Ukrainians to establish defensive positions. That is the first and most obvious reason why Russia cannot agree to a ceasefire.

Napolitano: 13:53
Can you foresee a division of Ukraine, like Germany was divided after World War II?

Doctorow;
Well, this question is very topical, and it was raised and brought to the attention of all of us in the West by Dmitry Trinin, who is a senior military analyst, think tank person, a member of the highest and most respectied consultative groups on foreign and military issues in Russia, in the Kremlin. And Trinin published an article less than two weeks ago in which he was proposing various outcomes for this war, including the division of Ukraine into a good Ukraine, which would be the territory east of the Dnieper River, minus those parts of this geography that Russia considers strategically essential for its security. And other substantial withdrawals: precisely, we’re speaking about Odessa and Nikolaevs and Kherson. These territories pose a threat to Russia if they are inhabited by hostile forces. So they would be taken out.

But what would be left in this land east of the Dnieper could be our Ukraine, a friendly Ukraine, a country with sovereignty, but disposed towards Russia and receiving assistance from Russia in reconstruction. Then all of the nasties, the neo-Nazis, the Bandera fans that are determining the policies in Kiev today, they would be pushed west into the Lvov area, the area of Ukraine that was, if you look back historically, never part of Russia. It was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and always was fomenting anti-Russian, Ukrainian nationalism from the end of the 19th century. This part of Ukraine missed her train. We could cede to, let Europeans look after it, let them pick up the pieces. We don’t want it. It costs us too much to administer, so let’s leave that alone.

16:19
Well, that is one proposal by a very well-respected and intelligent military expert, that has been making the circles of discussion. And I and some of our peers have been addressing it. My particular view is that a divided Ukraine in that respect is not workable for the same reason that you have to consider what happened to divided Germany. It reunited. So what would prevent the pro-Russian, free, independent, sovereign Ukraine to decide to reunite with the baddies on the other side of the Dnieper River? Nothing.

And so I think that is a faulty notion, that Ukraine can be divided. And as I said, the nature of Ukraine, where its borders are, is a minor part of the big story. The big story is NATO and Russia’s relations with NATO. Ukraine is a threat to Russia only if NATO exists and is able to use Ukraine against Russia as it has been doing the last 14 years.

Napolitano: 17:32
What happens if Donald Trump closes the spigot of military supplies and ammunition and cash on January 21st?

Doctorow:
I think the capitulation of the Ukrainian army would follow in a few weeks. The Europeans are in no position to provide the artillery shells, the new artillery pieces, the rapid-fire missile launchers, like HIMARS, they don’t have that. So the ability of the Ukrainian army to defend itself would be reduced to nil in a very few weeks. And the ultimate result would be capitulation.

Napolitano; 18:23
Can President Putin, excuse me, can President Zelensky survive capitulation? I mean, literally survive it? Or would he be killed or forced into exile by the nationalists?

Doctorow:
Well, I think you just identified it. It’s not a secret issue. Every time that there was a possibility of a negotiation and a peaceful solution, the people around Zelensky, these, what they call the Rednecks, the neo-Nazis, they made it plain that he would be lynched, and he’s not a stupid man. So I think that he would find his way on the first plane out, if it looked like capitulation is coming.

Napolitano: 19:14
Can you explain to us, Professor Doctorow, the situation with the Russian sale of natural gas to Europe, which passes through, I think I have this correctly, Ukraine, and which has now been turned off and which has resulted in skyrocketing petrol prices at the pump in Europe, from the people from whom President Zelensky has sought help. Is he biting the hand that he wants to feed him?

Doctorow:
Well, it is an anomaly, of course, that Ukraine continued to supply Russian gas to Europe, taking its tips. Well, the tips are not so bad. There’s about 20 percent or 15 percent tip they were getting for the transit fees. The latest estimate is that Russian gas traveling through Ukraine was being delivered to Europe at a level of six and a half billion dollars a year, of which one billion dollars, between 800 million and one billion dollars, was paid back to Ukraine for its services. As to Russia, the loss of six billion dollars in sales of gas is not a big deal. The likelihood is that some of this gas will nonetheless be delivered to Europe by further expanded LNG deliveries from Russia. Despite everything in 2024, Europe imported more liquefied natural gas from Russia than it did in 2023.

20:48
So that is … the economic loss to Russia is not great. And let’s consider going back to 2000, 2005, 2006, especially in 2009, there were very bitter conflicts between Moscow and Kiev over Ukrainians siphoning off gas from the pipelines, gas that should have been sent onto Europe and taking it into their own distribution system for their domestic needs, illegally. There was also a major dispute which caused a shutdown of Russian deliveries of gas into Ukraine over the non-payment for gas by Ukraine. So there, these relations were very difficult going back, as I say, to 2005.

But it should end now. It’s only logical. It is an anomaly for Zelensky to be demanding daily more sanctions on Russia. We shouldn’t be buying anything from them when his own country is facilitating this $6 billion sale of Russian gas.

Napolitano: 21:59
What are the consequences to consumers and industries in Europe, to Zelensky’s decision to close down that pipeline, literally in the past 48 hours?

Doctorow:
Well, the most vulnerable country is Slovakia, and That’s why Fico made this unexpected visit to Moscow– this is what, comes back a week– to discuss with Vladimir Putin what his alternative sources of gas may be and what action he could take or Russia would take to ensure that he gets gas. There are three countries in Central Europe that are affected by this. There’s Austria, Hungary, and Slovakia. Slovakia is the most exposed.

22:43
Austria has found alternative sources, mostly coming, this is LNG gas, that is sent on through the European-wide gas pipelines to Austria. Some of the same solution has been found by Mr. Orban, though he seems to be receiving substantial deliveries of Russian gas through the Turkish pipelines. I don’t know whether that can be extended to Slovakia to help Mr. Fico out of his problem.

But if there is this very big inflation in cost of gas at the pump in Europe or elsewhere, it is a speculative bubble, which I don’t believe has any justification. Because we’re speaking about a five-percent shortfall in European gas that could result from the turnoff of the Ukrainian pipelines, and that can possibly be compensated for by other means, either increased LNG deliveries for other providers.

Napolitano: 23:54
I don’t mean this to sound in a snarky way, but has the Nord Stream pipeline been repaired?

Doctorow:
I’ve seen various accounts that– they are not substantiated, and I can’t say that they are reliable– that the Russians have linked up the Nord Stream pipeline with Kaliningrad. So they would get some benefit from their own gas. Otherwise, the Nord Stream 2 pipeline is still workable. It’s the Nord Stream 1 that was destroyed, and really not destroyed in a way that is irreparable. I’ve heard your discussions that for a billion dollars or something like that, the Nord Stream 1 pipeline can be returned to service. So if and when this war ends, if and when Europeans come to their senses, if and when the elites that are presently pursuing these self-destructive policies of isolating and cutting off Russia, if one [day] they are pushed to the side, then it’s entirely thinkable that the Russian supplies of gas could be increased very substantially, very quickly.

Napolitano: 25:13
President Trump has invited President Xi of China to his inauguration. As far as I know, President Xi has not yet responded. If he invites President Putin, do you think President Putin will come?

Doctorow:
Not if he’s going to be arrested. No, the United States is not part of it, the International Court, but I don’t think that his security would be very promising, considering the state-to-state relations. But anything is possible. Mr. Trump pulls more than one rabbit out of [the hat].

Napolitano:
Professor Doctor, a pleasure my dear friend. Thank you for joining us. Happy new year to you and your family. I hope you’ll join us again next week.

Doctorow:
Well, great kind of you, and I look forward to it.

Napolitano:
All the best, and thank you. And coming up later today at one o’clock Eastern this afternoon, Scott Ritter. At three o’clock, Professor John Mearsheimer; at five o’clock, Max Blumenthal.

26:21
Judge Napolitano for “Judging Freedom”.

On this second day of the New Year, Russians are vacationing or watching the classic Soviet movies running on state television, if they are not taking the kids to see the just released blockbuster film Bogatyri, about fabled Russian heroes of yore in which all the latest Western action movie cinematic tricks are deployed.

That is to say all Russians are relaxing except those on the battlefields of the Special Military Operation. As for the soldiers, they continued their advances on the line of confrontation, taking the important logistical hub of Kurakhovo in the Donetsk republic after a couple of months of slowly pummeling the city with artillery and bombs.

However, Russia made news in our Western media today for reasons having nothing to do with the battlefield. It was rather due to the shutdown after midnight on the 1st of their gas deliveries to Ukrainian pipelines, which no longer were providing transit to Western Europe now that the 5 year contract between Russia and Ukraine had expired. In effect, Russia’s annual sales of 6.5 billion dollars of gas to its customers in Central Europe via the Ukrainian gas system came to an end. 

Zelensky claimed that this shutdown represented a major defeat for Russia. Whether that corresponds to reality was the subject of this brief panel discussion on News X, a program on India’s English language broadcaster ITV.

Translation below into German (Andreas Mylaeus)

NewsX World: Russland stoppt Gaslieferungen an die Ukraine

Am zweiten Tag des neuen Jahres machen die Russen Urlaub oder schauen sich die sowjetischen Filmklassiker im staatlichen Fernsehen an, wenn sie nicht gerade mit ihren Kindern den gerade erschienenen Blockbuster „Bogatyri“ („Bogatyr“) über die sagenumwobenen russischen Helden von einst anschauen, in dem alle neuesten filmischen Tricks der westlichen Actionfilme zum Einsatz kommen.

Das heißt, alle Russen entspannen sich, außer denen auf den Schlachtfeldern der militärischen Spezialoperation. Die Soldaten setzten ihren Vormarsch an der Konfrontationslinie fort und eroberten nach einigen Monaten, in denen sie die Stadt langsam mit Artillerie und Bomben beschossen hatten, das wichtige Logistikzentrum Kurakhovo in der Republik Donezk.

Russland machte jedoch heute in unseren westlichen Medien aus Gründen Schlagzeilen, die nichts mit dem Schlachtfeld zu tun haben. Es lag vielmehr an der Einstellung der Gaslieferungen in die ukrainischen Pipelines nach Mitternacht am 1. Januar, die nun, da der Fünfjahresvertrag zwischen Russland und der Ukraine ausgelaufen war, keinen Transit mehr nach Westeuropa ermöglichen. Damit endet Russlands jährlicher Verkauf von 6,5 Milliarden Dollar Gas an seine Kunden in Mitteleuropa über das ukrainische Gassystem.

Zelensky behauptete, dass diese Abschaltung eine große Niederlage für Russland darstelle. Ob dies der Realität entspricht, war Gegenstand dieser kurzen Podiumsdiskussion auf News X, einer Sendung des englischsprachigen indischen Senders ITV.

‘Judging Freedom’ edition of 2 January:  How the War in Ukraine Will End

The title which Judge Napolitano assigned to this chat says it all. We discussed in particular why Vladimir Putin is amenable to meeting with Donald Trump given the bellicose statements that General Kellogg and others whom Trump is bringing into his administration have been making and their nonstarter proposals for simply postponing Ukraine’s accession to NATO for some more years, which the Russians have rejected outright. 

The Russians may have no illusions about the United States but they know, as the Soviets once did, that all of the European leaders count for nothing, that they are all underlings or proxies for the USA. 

In short, the Russians can pulverize the Ukrainian army and may do so in the coming weeks before the inauguration in Washington.  But to find peace in Europe they must strike a deal with Washington over the downsizing or dissolution of NATO.

I appreciated the opportunity to remind viewers that Russia is a democracy, in its own fashion, and that Mr Putin is not only a statesman but also a politician who has to deal with pressures from various strata of the population. And that is why this war has been drawn out so long: for the Kremlin to overpower Ukraine at a stroke, they would have had to bring into play far more troops than were available in February 2022, meaning through mass mobilization.  And such a mobilization would have been very unpopular.  This political stress was avoided by using the war of attrition method that Russia has applied.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025

Translation below into German (Andreas Mylaeus)

„Judging Freedom”-Ausgabe vom 2. Januar: Wie der Krieg in der Ukraine enden wird.

Der Titel, den Judge Napolitano diesem Chat gegeben hat, sagt alles. Wir haben insbesondere darüber diskutiert, warum Wladimir Putin zu einem Treffen mit Donald Trump bereit ist, angesichts der kriegerischen Äußerungen von General Kellogg und anderen, die Trump in seine Regierung holt, und ihrer untauglichen Vorschläge, den NATO-Beitritt der Ukraine einfach um einige Jahre zu verschieben, was die Russen rundheraus abgelehnt haben.

Die Russen mögen sich keine Illusionen über die Vereinigten Staaten machen, aber sie wissen, wie einst die Sowjets, dass alle europäischen Staats- und Regierungschefs nichts zählen, dass sie alle Untergebene oder Stellvertreter der USA sind.

Kurz gesagt, die Russen können die ukrainische Armee vernichten, und das möglicherweise in den kommenden Wochen vor der Amtseinführung in Washington. Aber um Frieden in Europa zu finden, müssen sie mit Washington eine Einigung über die Verkleinerung oder Auflösung der NATO erzielen.

Ich habe die Gelegenheit genutzt, um die Zuschauer daran zu erinnern, dass Russland auf seine eigene Art und Weise eine Demokratie ist und dass Herr Putin nicht nur ein Staatsmann, sondern auch ein Politiker ist, der sich mit dem Druck verschiedener Bevölkerungsschichten auseinandersetzen muss. Und deshalb hat sich dieser Krieg so lange hingezogen: Um die Ukraine mit einem Schlag zu überwältigen, hätte der Kreml weitaus mehr Truppen ins Spiel bringen müssen, als im Februar 2022 verfügbar waren, d.h. durch eine Massenmobilisierung. Und eine solche Mobilisierung wäre sehr unpopulär gewesen. Dieser politische Stress wurde durch die von Russland angewandte Zermürbungskrieg-Methode vermieden.