Connect with us

Russia

General winter, West-Russian war and nuclear risk

Published

on

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said a war between Russia and the Alliance is “a real possibility.” In an interview with the Norwegian journalist Anne Lindmo, Stoltenberg told, “I fear that the war in Ukraine will get out of control, and spread into a major war between NATO and Russia,” adding that “such a scenario could be avoided but that the threat was there”. Russia apparently wants to take advantage of imminent winter conditions. At the same time, it becomes clear that on the eve of marking its first year, the war will go on ‘as long as the West endure.’

“We will see whether spring arrives after the end of winter,” a Presidential Security and Foreign Policy Board Member, Prof. Nurşin Güney told Harici, adding that ‘promises not to enlarge NATO were broken. Following the colorful revolutions and similar processes, we see this messy war. The West made mistakes at the start of the Ukraine War. Russia made mistakes in breaching its commitment to protecting Ukraine’s territorial integrity under the Budapest Memorandum.’

So, do these mistakes evolve into a conflict that could lead to nuclear war? How will Europe’s long winter pass? How should the NATO chief’s “concerns” be interpreted?

“Too early to end the war”

To summarize the front-line situation, the Russian army withdrew from certain parts of Donetsk and Kherson. Kerch Bridge was targeted. Russia moved up a gear after the sinking of Moscow, the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet, and the battleships in Sevastopol were attacked.

Moreover, with the help of its ever-increasing Western-origin weaponry, Ukraine started to attack the inner regions of Russia. In the first week of December, three Russian military air bases hundreds of kilometers away from the Russian-Ukrainian border were hit by Ukraine. Relatedly, US State Department Spokesperson Ned Price was forced to say, “We have not provided Ukraine with weapons to use inside of Russia. We’ve been very clear that these are defensive supplies. The President has made it clear before. We are not enabling Ukraine to strike beyond its borders; we are not encouraging Ukraine to strike beyond its borders.” Since October, Russia, on the other hand, has started particularly targeting Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure.

With the coming of the dead of winter, attacks targeting civilian infrastructure may have new consequences on the front. “Russia is trying to subvert Ukraine’s determination and capacity to fight by targeting its vital infrastructures,” Prof. Dr. Nurşin Güney commented on the Russian tactical shift.

The West’s limit to fulfilling Ukraine’s winter demands

Viewing the West in two separate clusters, Europe and the USA, Prof. Dr. Nurşin Güney made the following observation based on a recent visit to the USA:

“There is no major disturbance in the USA, and the system works out. The US doesn’t feel like there is a war in Ukraine. Russia is not dependent on the Western market. It can make up for its losses here and has the financial and natural resources necessary to be self-sufficient. More harm will befall the European Union (EU). The general population will be affected. In Europe, there are protests occasionally. There is no indication that the US will change its anti-Russian policy. The United States aims to limit Russia economically and militarily.”

Highlighting how the shale gas revolution helped the USA attain energy self-sufficiency, Güney emphasizes that the exact opposite scenario is seen for the EU. According to Güney, claiming that this war has been going on thanks to the support of the West, “the resilience of Europe and Ukraine” will be crucial to the war’s outcome. Güney stressed that Moscow has not yet utilized its total capacity in this war while stating that he disagrees with the remarks that depict Russia as a “total loser.”

Speaking at the humanitarian aid conference in Paris, Ukrainian Prime Minister Denis Shmihal requested the Patriot and other modern air defense systems be provided to his country to increase their capacity to resist and to protect their energy infrastructure. The President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, has asked Europe for six things to help the country get through the winter. On the list are requests to fix energy infrastructure, gas turbines, pistons, and help pay for 2 billion cubic meters of gas. The 6th item is coordinating the “Paris mechanism” in response to what Zelensky called “Russian energy terrorism.” Prime Minister Shmihal requested an urgent budget of $1 billion for infrastructure repairs.

How far can Russia withdraw?

The dialogue mechanisms between Brussels and Moscow became wholly broken as a result of the Ukraine War. The sabotage of the Northern Current hit a fatal blow to the economic relations that developed on the foundation of energy. The main concern now is whether this tension will expand into a Russia-West War or whether Russia will resort to tactical nuclear weapons as part of its defense doctrine.

In fact, within a “special military operation,” Russia had not attacked the civilian infrastructure until recently. However, since the four regions were formally recognized as Russian territory, tensions started to escalate in a different way. According to the Kremlin’s most recent statement, “The Ukrainian side needs to take into account these realities that have developed over all this time. And these realities say that new subjects (the Donetsk and Lugansk republics, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia) have appeared in Russia, and they appeared as a result of the referendum that took place there. Without taking into account these new realities, any kind of progress is impossible” In response to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s withdrawal proposal of the Russian troops from Ukraine, Kremlin spokesman Peskov said, “This is out of the question.”

Since Moscow now regards the four Ukrainian regions as Russian territory, its counteroffensive responses to attacks targeting these regions are changing. Given the crossing of these new red lines by the Ukrainian forces, the strikes reaching into Russia, and “no way of being defeated for Russia as a great power” coalesced, the question of whether tactical nuclear weapons will be used began to be asked more frequently.

Regarding Russia’s limits of “withdrawal” as a significant nuclear power, Prof. Güney commented, “Should loses one party at one point, it can use tactical nuclear weapons. It is not ‘not likely’ to use them. In an effort to avoid losing, these tactical nuclear powers are very possibly to resort. Ultimately realizing that everything was lost, Russia will likely turn to tactical nuclear power”.

Pointing out Russia’s “ability to challenge the status quo,” Güney added that the war has not yet ended, and NATO and Russia do not currently have any intentions to start a new war at this stage. However, as of early December, Russian leader Vladimir Putin’s warnings of a growing risk of a nuclear war threat have sparked discussions over this subject. At the Russian Human Rights Council meeting, Putin said, “If it does not use them first, then it will not be the second to use them either, because in the case of a nuclear strike on our territory, our capabilities will be significantly limited.” Following these words, an interesting analysis came from Israel.

Jerusalem Post analysis: Ukraine should not be given nuclear weapons

The article by national security analyst Ehud Eilam also served in the Israeli army for a while, is entitled “Countries shouldn’t give Ukraine any nuclear weapons.” Having published six books in security studies, Ehud Eliam explains why Ukraine should not be given tactical nuclear weapons by the US, the UK, or another NATO member. According to the Israeli security analyst, it might deter Russia from becoming more aggressive in Ukraine, let alone using nuclear weapons there, but this is extremely dangerous.

In the analysis examining extreme scenarios, it is stated that “Ukraine is quite a new state with a fragile democracy, NATO might not fully understand the Ukrainian decision-making process, and it is not clear how much Zelensky can control the military in regard to nuclear weapons.” Additionally, it is mentioned that the “frustration” in Ukraine might coerce NATO to join the fight by using nuclear weapons against Russia. According to military analyst Ehud Eilam, “The odds of a Russian attack on a NATO member would increase if NATO gives Ukraine nuclear weapons.”

In conclusion, the author warns that giving Ukraine tactical nuclear weapons without endangering NATO will foster a situation where these weapons can spread quickly. If such a step is taken, he writes, many NATO members like Poland might demand to have their own nuclear weapons due to “fear of Russia,” as well as the Arab Gulf States against Iran.

Turkey’s apparent balance policy

Turkey is trying to weather the storm at the helm of a “balance” ship. In a letter, EU High Representative Josep Borrell said, “Turkey’s policy of not joining the EU’s restrictive measures against Russia is a cause for great concern,” adding, “We expect all candidate countries, including Turkey, to comply with the agreed measures against Russia.”

Güney responds to the query of what Turkey’s limit of balance or there is really a limit is as follows:

“Turkey does not believe in sanctions, and so far, no results have been achieved with sanctions. How long have sanctions been imposed on Iran? They are now getting close to producing their own nuclear weapons. In addition, we face sanctions from our ally. Moreover, Israel and the EU also have very close ties. Israel also does not impose sanctions on Russia. Why does Israel not receive inquiries aimed at Turkey? Also, we are not an EU member. We are a candidate member. Such legal liability does not apply to us.”

Provided a step on “written security guarantees” that Russia initially raised, it is likely to sit at a negotiation table. However, it is next to impossible that Russia will send its troops on a Christmas leave, as Kyiv demands, given that Russia is at its strongest in the months of the “general winter,” its steadfast elder commander.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Russia

AmCham chief says US businesses await peace deal and sanctions relief before returning to Russia

Published

5 days ago

on

19/06/2026

By

American businesses are waiting for a peace agreement and the lifting of sanctions before committing to a broader return to the Russian market, according to Robert Agee, president and chief executive of the American Chamber of Commerce in Russia (AmCham).

In an interview with Russian business daily Vedomosti on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, Agee discussed prospects for restoring trade and economic ties between Russia and the United States.

Agee said that since February 2025, discussions have frequently focused on both a potential US mediating role in resolving the Ukraine conflict and a possible timeline for the return of American companies to Russia.

Referring to expectations that diplomatic negotiations and efforts to revive bilateral economic relations could proceed simultaneously, Agee said that despite the passage of time, neither track had produced a significant breakthrough.

The AmCham chief attributed the lack of progress to domestic and foreign policy dynamics within the United States and said American companies were now concentrating primarily on the eventual resolution of the conflict.

While describing efforts to repair economic ties as slow but steady, Agee identified the absence of a peace agreement as the principal obstacle.

“The biggest problem is that no agreement has yet been reached to resolve the conflict in Ukraine,” he said. “As a result, all US sanctions packages remain in force. We have repeatedly pushed for the removal of certain sanctions. Although I believe the new administration in Washington wants to improve relations with Russia, particularly from a trade, economic and business perspective, the continuing conflict has prevented any major breakthrough.”

‘President Trump wants to ease sanctions pressure wherever legally possible’

Addressing the future of sanctions and their impact on economic relations, Agee noted that restrictions differ according to their legal basis.

He said sanctions imposed through presidential executive orders could be eased much more quickly than those enacted through legislation.

“There are different types of sanctions. Some were introduced through presidential executive orders. Those could be removed tomorrow,” Agee said. “For example, the investment ban imposed by former US President Joe Biden. We believe that decision was entirely wrong, particularly for American business. On the other hand, there are sanctions approved by Congress, and those will be much more difficult to remove. Once the conflict ends, we know that President Donald Trump and his administration intend to reduce sanctions pressure to the maximum extent legally possible.”

Agee said the American Chamber of Commerce remained the only organisation directly advocating before US authorities for sanctions relief on behalf of American businesses.

“Companies pursue these requests exclusively through us, through the American Chamber of Commerce,” he said. “We are the only organisation trying to persuade the US government to lift certain sanctions. Our immediate priority is the removal of the investment ban. We are closely focused on sectors such as cosmetics and civil aviation. We are trying to convince the US government that sanctions in these areas can and should be eased even before the conflict is fully resolved.”

‘Russia has enormous potential to help our companies overcome global challenges’

Discussing sectors that would benefit most from renewed commercial ties, Agee said the opportunities available in Russia remained strategically important for American firms.

He pointed to Russia’s role in global supply chains and its potential contribution to addressing economic challenges.

“Russia has enormous potential to help our companies overcome many of today’s global challenges,” Agee said. “That applies both to high energy prices and to the fertiliser sector. Russia is one of the world’s largest fertiliser producers. These and similar products could easily be exported to the United States.”

He added that numerous American technology and aviation companies were closely monitoring developments.

“These are companies that previously operated here and were forced to leave. They did not want to leave. That is why they are now looking for opportunities to resume their business activities.”

Agee said future economic relations would extend beyond trade and include large-scale investment projects.

Noting that American companies had invested more than $100 billion in Russia in previous years, he said investment had traditionally formed the foundation of US economic engagement with the country.

“I think relations will develop both in terms of trade and joint projects,” he said. “But the core US approach to economic relations with Russia has always been investment. Our companies invested more than $100 billion in the Russian economy over many years.”

Some US companies chose to remain in Russia and continue operating successfully, he added, maintaining factories and employing tens of thousands of workers.

“I believe energy companies will be first in line when it comes to new investment in the Russian economy,” Agee said. “Another important area for potential cooperation and investment is the space sector. I believe there is literally trillions of dollars in potential in that field.”

‘President Trump would welcome new investment from Russia’

Asked whether the US market remained open to Russian capital, Agee said the Trump administration generally welcomed foreign investment.

Recalling previous investment projects in the aluminium and fertiliser sectors, he said opportunities for Russian investors continued to exist.

“I think the US market is open to Russian investment and would welcome it,” Agee said. “There were investment projects in aluminium and fertilisers in the past. Opportunities remain. It is difficult to judge how prepared Russian investors are given sanctions-related risks, but in general I can say that the Trump administration would welcome new investment from Russia.”

Agee said American companies were prepared to return if restrictions were eased, even if sanctions were not completely removed.

He stressed that each company would make decisions based on its own risk assessments.

“I know several companies that are ready to return to Russia and restart operations at the first opportunity,” he said. “The critical factor is ensuring that these initial returns are successful. The first companies to come back will demonstrate that everything is functioning normally, and that will encourage others to follow.”

He added that the process would not begin overnight, as technical specifications and legal documentation would first need to be prepared.

“Based on information available to me, discussions on these issues are already taking place.”

Agee also identified data centres as one of the most promising future investment areas, citing Russia’s abundant electricity supplies, cold climate and highly skilled information technology workforce.

“In my personal view, one of the most promising sectors is data centres,” he said. “These facilities require cheap electricity, which Russia has in abundance, a cold climate and a well-trained IT workforce. Russia possesses all of these advantages. I believe this sector has a very strong future, but sanctions must first be removed. After that, developments could move quickly.”

‘Commercial dialogue has become much easier under Trump’

Agee said AmCham maintained productive relations with both Russian and American authorities and continued to serve as a bridge between the two countries.

Comparing the administrations of Joe Biden and Donald Trump, he argued that maintaining commercial dialogue had become significantly easier.

“We have excellent relations with both sides,” he said. “Together with Kirill Dmitriev, head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, we serve as the only commercial bridge between Russia and the United States. It was much more difficult to preserve that bridge under the Biden administration, but the process has become much easier under President Trump.”

According to Agee, the Trump administration has demonstrated a strong commitment to improving economic dialogue with Russia.

“Today we see two channels of dialogue functioning simultaneously, both cultural and commercial,” he said. “Maintaining communication is the most important element. Under Biden, almost no channels of communication remained open. Now we are moving in the right direction and are also conducting very active cooperation with the Russian government.”

Agee argued that the priorities of the current US administration align closely with the interests of American businesses and said broader geopolitical developments were reinforcing the logic of closer economic cooperation.

He pointed to instability in the Middle East and risks to global shipping routes as factors strengthening the case for partnership.

“The administration’s priorities and the interests of business are fully aligned,” he said. “I think recent developments in the Strait of Hormuz have once again convinced Washington that Russia and the United States are natural partners. America needs what Russia has, and the same is true in reverse. America possesses technologies and products that Russia wants to buy. This is a relationship of genuine interdependence.”

As the world watches tensions escalate in the Middle East, he added, the rationale for deeper economic cooperation between Russia and the United States has become increasingly persuasive.

Concluding the interview, Agee highlighted the importance of easing visa procedures and restoring diplomatic missions between the two countries.

He said overcoming travel barriers was essential to reviving commercial ties.

“This is an extremely relevant issue that we raise constantly,” Agee said. “In the past there was at least a common understanding that diplomatic visas should be addressed first and that consulates should resume operations. We will continue recommending in both Washington and Moscow that this issue be resolved as quickly as possible. Solving it would greatly benefit the business community. We remain hopeful.”

Continue Reading

Russia

Ukraine launches largest drone attack on Moscow since start of war, Russian officials say

Published

6 days ago

on

18/06/2026

By

Ukraine’s armed forces launched a major drone attack on Moscow during the night of June 18, with Moscow Mayor Sergey Sobyanin saying that a total of 194 unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) approaching the capital were shot down.

According to figures released by Russian authorities, the attack was the largest drone assault on Moscow since the start of Russia’s military campaign against Ukraine.

The previous highest number of drones directed at Moscow in a single night was recorded on March 11, when officials said 74 UAVs had been intercepted and destroyed.

In addition, authorities reported on May 17 that air defence systems had intercepted and shot down more than 120 drones heading toward the capital over the course of a single day.

One of the targets of the overnight attack was reportedly the Moscow Oil Refinery (MNPZ) in the Kapotnya district. The facility had also come under attack two days earlier and subsequently suspended operations.

The latest strike on the refinery was reported to have triggered a major fire. According to calculations by the Ukrainian monitoring channel Exilenova+, a total of seven separate fire locations were observed within the facility’s grounds.

Some drone debris also fell in the area of the Sadovod shopping centre. One of the buildings at the complex was damaged and caught fire.

Drone fragments were also reported to have damaged the roof of the Belaya Dacha shopping centre. Moscow Region Governor Andrey Vorobyov said: “A fire broke out. Information regarding the size of the fire and possible casualties is being clarified.”

Residential high-rise buildings in the Novyye Kotelniki district of Moscow were also damaged during the attacks. Apartment buildings in Zhukovsky and Lyubertsy likewise sustained damage.

Detached houses in the village of Stepanovo near Elektrostal were reported damaged. Homes in the village of Masnovo-Zhukovo were also affected.

Private residences in Kryukovo and Pavlovsky Posad were also reported to have suffered damage as a result of the attacks.

Authorities said one woman was injured in the incidents.

Due to the scale of the attack, Russia’s Federal Air Transport Agency (Rosaviatsiya) imposed restrictions at all airports in Moscow.

Passengers were reportedly evacuated from Sheremetyevo Airport. The evacuations were said to include passengers already on board aircraft.

Aeroflot urged passengers on cancelled flights not to travel to the airport. The airline recommended that ticket refunds and rebooking procedures be completed remotely.

According to information cited by the Ostorozhno, Novosti channel, approximately 250 arriving and departing flights at Moscow airports were affected by delays.

Russia’s Interior Ministry also announced that several roads around the Moscow Oil Refinery had been closed to traffic.

Authorities further reported restrictions on traffic in both directions along a section of the Moscow Ring Road (MKAD) between Novoryazanskoye Highway (Volgogradsky Prospekt) and Kashirskoye Highway.

According to information published by VChK-OGPU, authorities also closed Red Square.

The same source reported that armed security personnel equipped with machine guns were stationed around the Kremlin’s towers and walls, as well as near Lenin’s Mausoleum.

According to the Russian Defence Ministry’s overnight summary, air defence units intercepted and destroyed a total of 555 Ukrainian drones across various regions of Russia.

The ministry said the drones were detected in the airspace of 17 different regions.

The same statement added that drone activity was also recorded over Crimea and in the airspace above the Sea of Azov.

Continue Reading

Russia

European Council opens limited contacts with Russia, Politico reports

Published

6 days ago

on

18/06/2026

By

Contacts between the European Council and Russia have begun, according to Politico, although the recent exchanges were brief and did not cover “substantive issues.”

A member of European Council President António Costa’s team who participated in the discussions told the newspaper that the contacts reflected the reality that the European Union has “concrete interests that need to be protected.”

“For that reason, it is important to establish diplomatic channels with Russia,” the official said.

The same official added that Costa is acting in close coordination with European leaders regarding possible contacts with Russia and the issues that could be addressed at an appropriate time.

The official also stressed that the European Union is not acting as a “mediator” between Ukraine and Russia.

Another EU diplomat interviewed by Politico said the European Council does not have “a mandate” to conduct such contacts.

Representatives of the European Council, spokespeople for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and a French official did not respond to Politico’s requests for comment.

Two sources cited by Politico said the question of Europe’s role in peace talks on Ukraine could be discussed at the European Union leaders’ summit in Brussels on Thursday. However, the sources said no decision is expected on who would conduct such contacts.

A day earlier, Bloomberg reported that Costa’s team was seeking to establish an informal communication channel with the Kremlin for a possible dialogue with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Ukraine.

Sources cited by the agency claimed that Costa’s chief adviser had held at least two phone calls with his Russian counterpart to lay the groundwork for broader discussions in the future.

Speaking in May, Costa said European Union member states had the “potential” to engage in negotiations with Putin. He added that he had discussed the details of any future contact with the Russian leader with the heads of government of the EU’s 27 member states.

At the same time, Costa said the European Union did not want to obstruct talks being conducted by the United States and that they had seen no indication that Moscow was ready for dialogue with Brussels.

During the same month, Putin said Russia remained open to talks with Europe. He suggested that former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder could be one of the interlocutors acceptable from Russia’s perspective.

European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas said last week that the time was not yet right for negotiations between Russia and the European Union.

Kallas said the EU was preparing its 21st sanctions package in an effort to bring Moscow to the negotiating table.

Shortly before that, Finnish President Alexander Stubb had also called for Europe to take the initiative in launching discussions with Russia on a settlement process for Ukraine.

The issue of Ukraine was also discussed at the G7 summit held in France from June 15 to 17. In addition to the G7 countries, leaders from Ukraine, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, India, South Korea, Kenya and Brazil attended the gathering. Participants discussed developing a common approach to ending the war in Ukraine.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey