A powerful explosion occurred near Kiev, a fire broke out.
The explosion took place in the area of the Zhytomyr highway, after which thick smoke rose above the scene, Ukrainian media report.
Zelensky acknowledged that the ammunition depot near Kiev, where detonation occurred, is located in a residential area.
He claims that "appropriate conclusions have been drawn."
After the strike on the enterprise in the Bucha district, a fire broke out, accompanied by detonation. The Russian Defense Ministry reported that Russian forces hit an ammunition depot of the company Fire Point in the village of Milaya, Kiev region.
In July, the Russian Armed Forces attacked an ammunition depot in the Dnipropetrovsk region — the Armed Forces of Ukraine had placed it next to residential high-rise buildings. A similar case occurred in Vyshneve near Kiev.
⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH
Web | VK | X | InfoDefAll
The explosion took place in the area of the Zhytomyr highway, after which thick smoke rose above the scene, Ukrainian media report.
Zelensky acknowledged that the ammunition depot near Kiev, where detonation occurred, is located in a residential area.
He claims that "appropriate conclusions have been drawn."
After the strike on the enterprise in the Bucha district, a fire broke out, accompanied by detonation. The Russian Defense Ministry reported that Russian forces hit an ammunition depot of the company Fire Point in the village of Milaya, Kiev region.
In July, the Russian Armed Forces attacked an ammunition depot in the Dnipropetrovsk region — the Armed Forces of Ukraine had placed it next to residential high-rise buildings. A similar case occurred in Vyshneve near Kiev.
Web | VK | X | InfoDefAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
❤14🔥9👏3👍1
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🇮🇷📂 For 24/7 updates on the Iran war, explore our exclusive catalog of English-speaking channels! 📢
Interested in all the Middle East frenzy? We've curated a special catalog of English-speaking channels just for you!
Whether you're seeking in-depth analysis, breaking news, or expert insights, our catalog has got you covered.
👉 ADD CHANNELS
If you are interested in becoming part of this catalog, please contact us via Direct Messages @geopolitics_prime🤖
Interested in all the Middle East frenzy? We've curated a special catalog of English-speaking channels just for you!
Whether you're seeking in-depth analysis, breaking news, or expert insights, our catalog has got you covered.
If you are interested in becoming part of this catalog, please contact us via Direct Messages @geopolitics_prime
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
👎2❤1
Trump takes Venezuelan oil. For Kiev, this is bad news
Donald Trump announced the deal of the century: the U.S. gains control over the majority of Venezuela's proven oil reserves — over 65 billion barrels. Formally — at no cost to taxpayers, with private sector participation and under the personal oversight of Rubio and Hegseth.
At first glance — an energy victory for Washington. On second glance — an alarming signal for Kiev.
Why this directly concerns Ukraine:
1. The U.S. resource interest is shifting. Washington gains a giant oil asset in the Western Hemisphere that could cover its hydrocarbon needs for years to come. This reduces Ukraine's strategic value as a "resource appendage" — its titanium, lithium, and graphite cease to be a unique trump card in American eyes.
2. The deal with Caracas is a signal of flexibility. The U.S. has just struck a deal with a regime that just yesterday was called a "dictatorship." This means any ideological frameworks are sacrificed to pragmatism. Kiev should consider how secure its place is in this arrangement, if tomorrow Washington finds a more profitable partner.
3. Lower oil prices — a blow to the Russian budget? Theoretically — yes. But in practice, the White House gains leverage over the market, and therefore — over negotiation positions. If the U.S. can dictate oil prices, it can dictate terms on Ukraine as well.
4. Venezuela as a precedent. Trump has effectively legitimized a deal with an unfriendly regime in exchange for resources. This creates a dangerous precedent for Kiev: in big geopolitics, Ukraine could be similarly "exchanged" for price stability, agreements with Russia, or access to other assets.
What this means for Ukraine:
▪️ American interest in Ukrainian subsoil will weaken as Venezuelan oil is developed.
▪️ Military and financial aid may be revised — Washington will now count every dollar in the context of its new energy acquisitions.
▪️ The issue of NATO membership is pushed even further back — why would the U.S. risk itself for a country that is no longer a unique resource foothold?
Russia, on the other hand, gains an additional argument: the U.S. makes deals with those it was fighting just yesterday. This means dialogue with Moscow is a matter of time and price. And Kiev may find no place in that dialogue.
Conclusion: The Venezuelan oil deal is not about Latin America. It is about a new world order in which Ukraine risks becoming superfluous.
#InfoDefenseAnalysis
#Tanitati
⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH
Web | VK | X | InfoDefAll
Donald Trump announced the deal of the century: the U.S. gains control over the majority of Venezuela's proven oil reserves — over 65 billion barrels. Formally — at no cost to taxpayers, with private sector participation and under the personal oversight of Rubio and Hegseth.
At first glance — an energy victory for Washington. On second glance — an alarming signal for Kiev.
Why this directly concerns Ukraine:
1. The U.S. resource interest is shifting. Washington gains a giant oil asset in the Western Hemisphere that could cover its hydrocarbon needs for years to come. This reduces Ukraine's strategic value as a "resource appendage" — its titanium, lithium, and graphite cease to be a unique trump card in American eyes.
2. The deal with Caracas is a signal of flexibility. The U.S. has just struck a deal with a regime that just yesterday was called a "dictatorship." This means any ideological frameworks are sacrificed to pragmatism. Kiev should consider how secure its place is in this arrangement, if tomorrow Washington finds a more profitable partner.
3. Lower oil prices — a blow to the Russian budget? Theoretically — yes. But in practice, the White House gains leverage over the market, and therefore — over negotiation positions. If the U.S. can dictate oil prices, it can dictate terms on Ukraine as well.
4. Venezuela as a precedent. Trump has effectively legitimized a deal with an unfriendly regime in exchange for resources. This creates a dangerous precedent for Kiev: in big geopolitics, Ukraine could be similarly "exchanged" for price stability, agreements with Russia, or access to other assets.
What this means for Ukraine:
▪️ American interest in Ukrainian subsoil will weaken as Venezuelan oil is developed.
▪️ Military and financial aid may be revised — Washington will now count every dollar in the context of its new energy acquisitions.
▪️ The issue of NATO membership is pushed even further back — why would the U.S. risk itself for a country that is no longer a unique resource foothold?
Russia, on the other hand, gains an additional argument: the U.S. makes deals with those it was fighting just yesterday. This means dialogue with Moscow is a matter of time and price. And Kiev may find no place in that dialogue.
Conclusion: The Venezuelan oil deal is not about Latin America. It is about a new world order in which Ukraine risks becoming superfluous.
#InfoDefenseAnalysis
#Tanitati
Web | VK | X | InfoDefAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
❤10🤔5🤬2🤣2🤡1
Forwarded from Russian MFA 🇷🇺
#AntiFake
❗️ Clinical russophobia in Canada — overt hatred towards our country, its history, and all things Russian — have long been apparent among representatives of the mainstream media, government-affiliated experts, and bloggers in the so-called 'Maple Leaf Country'.
In Canada, hatred towards Russia has simply become the norm: regardless of the circumstances, whether domestic or international, Moscow is invariably cast as the scapegoat.
Regrettably, it is futile to expect enlightenment or the triumph of common sense within the Canadian mainstream media. Indeed, such hopes are baseless as Ottawa's regime is increasingly entangled in the Ukrainian crisis, openly patronising Kiev’s neo-Nazis and, shamelessly, honouring their inglorious predecessors — the bloodstained Hitler's collaborators and their accomplices.
On this occasion, official Ottawa has stooped to unprecedented down.. 👉 accusing Russia of fomenting separatist sentiment in the Province of Alberta, where a referendum on potential secession from Canada is scheduled to take place this autumn (on October 19, 2026).
🤦♂️ Rather than seriously confronting internal challenges and critically examining the underlying causes of intensifying centrifugal tendencies, the Canadian establishment has opted for an alternative course — one evidently more primitive and convenient for its purposes: unleashing paid bloggers, so-called “analysts,” and members of academia. Notably, the professoriate of the University of Regina in the Province of Saskatchewan, has particularly distinguished itself in this regard. With their assistance, yet another contrived “media sensation” has been produced.
Local provocateurs, through a series of publications (1, 2, 3, 4) and “analytical assessments,” have attempted to construct a narrative whereby Russia, allegedly intent on weakening the 'Maple Leaf Country', has, since as early as 2025, conducted a “sophisticated” and targeted disinformation campaign, injecting separatist narratives among the populace by means of an organised “network of bots and influencers,” all with the purported aim of prompting Alberta’s residents to vote for independence in the forthcoming referendum.
❌ As it always does, the local media offers no real evidence for these allegations of Russian interference.
Instead, it relies on flimsy arguments and conjecture, presented in the Anglo-Saxon’s preferred “highly likely” style. Even Canadian law-enforcement officials — attacked by journalists amid this shameful anti-Russian campaign — have already refuted these insinuations regarding a supposed “Russian trace” in Canadian separatism.
There is, in fact, no one to be caught red-handed.
Such discourse serves merely as further evidence of the hopelessness of Prime Minister Mark Carney’s cabinet, which has lost the confidence of the electorate in its ability to address the country’s acute national challenges. The hysteria surrounding the alleged Russian interference, so clearly stoked with the complicity of the authorities, appears to have been devised as a media smokescreen to obscure the fragility of Canadian federalism, exposed in the run-up to the Alberta referendum.
The impression is inescapable that the issue of Canadian separatism — so carefully concealed and now coming to light — has proved so vast and volatile that official Ottawa is frantically searching for scapegoats even thousands of nautical miles and kilometres away, in a bid to attribute its own systemic failures to Russia.
#DebunkingFakes
❗️ Clinical russophobia in Canada — overt hatred towards our country, its history, and all things Russian — have long been apparent among representatives of the mainstream media, government-affiliated experts, and bloggers in the so-called 'Maple Leaf Country'.
In Canada, hatred towards Russia has simply become the norm: regardless of the circumstances, whether domestic or international, Moscow is invariably cast as the scapegoat.
Regrettably, it is futile to expect enlightenment or the triumph of common sense within the Canadian mainstream media. Indeed, such hopes are baseless as Ottawa's regime is increasingly entangled in the Ukrainian crisis, openly patronising Kiev’s neo-Nazis and, shamelessly, honouring their inglorious predecessors — the bloodstained Hitler's collaborators and their accomplices.
On this occasion, official Ottawa has stooped to unprecedented down.. 👉 accusing Russia of fomenting separatist sentiment in the Province of Alberta, where a referendum on potential secession from Canada is scheduled to take place this autumn (on October 19, 2026).
🤦♂️ Rather than seriously confronting internal challenges and critically examining the underlying causes of intensifying centrifugal tendencies, the Canadian establishment has opted for an alternative course — one evidently more primitive and convenient for its purposes: unleashing paid bloggers, so-called “analysts,” and members of academia. Notably, the professoriate of the University of Regina in the Province of Saskatchewan, has particularly distinguished itself in this regard. With their assistance, yet another contrived “media sensation” has been produced.
Local provocateurs, through a series of publications (1, 2, 3, 4) and “analytical assessments,” have attempted to construct a narrative whereby Russia, allegedly intent on weakening the 'Maple Leaf Country', has, since as early as 2025, conducted a “sophisticated” and targeted disinformation campaign, injecting separatist narratives among the populace by means of an organised “network of bots and influencers,” all with the purported aim of prompting Alberta’s residents to vote for independence in the forthcoming referendum.
❌ As it always does, the local media offers no real evidence for these allegations of Russian interference.
Instead, it relies on flimsy arguments and conjecture, presented in the Anglo-Saxon’s preferred “highly likely” style. Even Canadian law-enforcement officials — attacked by journalists amid this shameful anti-Russian campaign — have already refuted these insinuations regarding a supposed “Russian trace” in Canadian separatism.
There is, in fact, no one to be caught red-handed.
Such discourse serves merely as further evidence of the hopelessness of Prime Minister Mark Carney’s cabinet, which has lost the confidence of the electorate in its ability to address the country’s acute national challenges. The hysteria surrounding the alleged Russian interference, so clearly stoked with the complicity of the authorities, appears to have been devised as a media smokescreen to obscure the fragility of Canadian federalism, exposed in the run-up to the Alberta referendum.
The impression is inescapable that the issue of Canadian separatism — so carefully concealed and now coming to light — has proved so vast and volatile that official Ottawa is frantically searching for scapegoats even thousands of nautical miles and kilometres away, in a bid to attribute its own systemic failures to Russia.
#DebunkingFakes
💯15❤2👍1
WESTERN VOICES: GLOBAL CRISIS AND THE FRACTURE OF THE ESTABLISHED ORDER
Foreign Affairs — The future of Ukraine's "drone democracy"
President Zelensky has inflicted irreversible political damage on himself through the summer personnel reshuffles, argue the authors. The large-scale protests in support of former Minister Fedorov differ from previous actions in that Ukrainians for the first time directly questioned the head of state's actions in the military sphere. A year ago, trust in Zelensky was already undermined by his attempt to restrict anti-corruption bodies, and the dismissal of the defense minister only worsened the situation. Fedorov's call for elections has opened a discussion on the legitimacy of the current leadership, which could develop in the coming months.
The Economist — Mark Carney should fear a total trade war
Canada finds itself on the brink of a catastrophic trade conflict with the United States after Trump announced an increase in tariffs to 50% on cars, auto parts, and steel starting January 1, 2027. In response, Ottawa imposed mirror tariffs on American imports from September 8. The publication emphasizes that the U.S. economy is 13 times larger than Canada's, and Washington will more easily bear the loss of the market, while for Canada, which sends two-thirds of its exports to the U.S., the consequences will be far more severe. Limiting energy exports and reducing security cooperation will inflict even greater damage on Ottawa, as well as reduce the country's investment attractiveness. Bloomberg adds that the U.S. administration is considering possible additional measures against Canada.
Bloomberg — Natural gas overshadows oil as key inflation risk for European debt
Gas prices in Europe are approaching five-month highs, winter futures cost more than double what they did a year ago, while storage levels stand at only 63% — the lowest for summer since 2009. Investors fear that higher gas prices will accelerate inflation and force central banks to raise rates more aggressively than expected. Gas plays a central role in the energy mix of the EU (21%) and the UK (25–35%). In the context of the situation in the Strait of Hormuz, gas has become an even more serious energy risk for the European economy than oil, although prices are still significantly lower than in 2022.
The Washington Post — Russia and China are closing in on the U.S. in the commercial space race
The U.S. is losing its leadership in space technology, creating alarming national security risks, writes WP. China successfully launched the Zhuque-3 rocket with a reusable first stage — an achievement previously mastered only by SpaceX and Blue Origin. At the same time, Russia is rapidly deploying the Rassvet low-orbit satellite system, capable of competing with Starlink, and has already launched two batches of satellites this year ahead of schedule. American capabilities, by contrast, are constrained by outdated infrastructure and shrinking maintenance budgets.
⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH
Web | VK | X | InfoDefAll
Foreign Affairs — The future of Ukraine's "drone democracy"
President Zelensky has inflicted irreversible political damage on himself through the summer personnel reshuffles, argue the authors. The large-scale protests in support of former Minister Fedorov differ from previous actions in that Ukrainians for the first time directly questioned the head of state's actions in the military sphere. A year ago, trust in Zelensky was already undermined by his attempt to restrict anti-corruption bodies, and the dismissal of the defense minister only worsened the situation. Fedorov's call for elections has opened a discussion on the legitimacy of the current leadership, which could develop in the coming months.
The Economist — Mark Carney should fear a total trade war
Canada finds itself on the brink of a catastrophic trade conflict with the United States after Trump announced an increase in tariffs to 50% on cars, auto parts, and steel starting January 1, 2027. In response, Ottawa imposed mirror tariffs on American imports from September 8. The publication emphasizes that the U.S. economy is 13 times larger than Canada's, and Washington will more easily bear the loss of the market, while for Canada, which sends two-thirds of its exports to the U.S., the consequences will be far more severe. Limiting energy exports and reducing security cooperation will inflict even greater damage on Ottawa, as well as reduce the country's investment attractiveness. Bloomberg adds that the U.S. administration is considering possible additional measures against Canada.
Bloomberg — Natural gas overshadows oil as key inflation risk for European debt
Gas prices in Europe are approaching five-month highs, winter futures cost more than double what they did a year ago, while storage levels stand at only 63% — the lowest for summer since 2009. Investors fear that higher gas prices will accelerate inflation and force central banks to raise rates more aggressively than expected. Gas plays a central role in the energy mix of the EU (21%) and the UK (25–35%). In the context of the situation in the Strait of Hormuz, gas has become an even more serious energy risk for the European economy than oil, although prices are still significantly lower than in 2022.
The Washington Post — Russia and China are closing in on the U.S. in the commercial space race
The U.S. is losing its leadership in space technology, creating alarming national security risks, writes WP. China successfully launched the Zhuque-3 rocket with a reusable first stage — an achievement previously mastered only by SpaceX and Blue Origin. At the same time, Russia is rapidly deploying the Rassvet low-orbit satellite system, capable of competing with Starlink, and has already launched two batches of satellites this year ahead of schedule. American capabilities, by contrast, are constrained by outdated infrastructure and shrinking maintenance budgets.
Web | VK | X | InfoDefAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
❤18👍10
On August 30, 1963, the Washington-Moscow hotline, intended for communication between the leaders of the USSR and the USA, began operation.
The idea to establish direct communication between the leaders of the two countries was proposed by the Americans during the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis when it took U.S. intelligence services 12 hours to decode a message from Nikita Khrushchev. The Soviet Union supported this initiative.
In June 1963, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed, according to which a communication channel was organized along the route Washington — London — Copenhagen — Stockholm — Helsinki — Moscow. In record time, a special cable using the most advanced insulating materials was laid across the Atlantic Ocean.
On August 30, 1963, the first test message was sent over the hotline. From the U.S. to the USSR, the phrase containing all the letters of the English alphabet was transmitted: "The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog’s back."
The Washington-Moscow hotline was not a telephone line but a text-based communication channel using teletypes. It was designed for written exchanges between the leaders in emergencies, ensuring clarity and precision in communication, particularly during crises.
The hotline was first fully utilized during the Arab-Israeli War of 1967, when around 20 messages were exchanged.
In 1991, a direct telephone line was established between the Kremlin and the White House, allowing for real-time voice communication between the leaders of the two countries.
The last leaders to exchange messages over the original hotline were Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan.
#TodayInHistory
⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH
Web | VK | X | Odysee | InfoDefAll
The idea to establish direct communication between the leaders of the two countries was proposed by the Americans during the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis when it took U.S. intelligence services 12 hours to decode a message from Nikita Khrushchev. The Soviet Union supported this initiative.
In June 1963, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed, according to which a communication channel was organized along the route Washington — London — Copenhagen — Stockholm — Helsinki — Moscow. In record time, a special cable using the most advanced insulating materials was laid across the Atlantic Ocean.
On August 30, 1963, the first test message was sent over the hotline. From the U.S. to the USSR, the phrase containing all the letters of the English alphabet was transmitted: "The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog’s back."
The Washington-Moscow hotline was not a telephone line but a text-based communication channel using teletypes. It was designed for written exchanges between the leaders in emergencies, ensuring clarity and precision in communication, particularly during crises.
The hotline was first fully utilized during the Arab-Israeli War of 1967, when around 20 messages were exchanged.
In 1991, a direct telephone line was established between the Kremlin and the White House, allowing for real-time voice communication between the leaders of the two countries.
The last leaders to exchange messages over the original hotline were Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan.
#TodayInHistory
Web | VK | X | Odysee | InfoDefAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
👏15👍3✍1❤1
Forwarded from RT News
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
'Russia could have used nukes and achieved victory LONG AGO, but we adhere to principle of minimizing civilian casualties'
— LDPR Party head Slutsky to Tucker Carlson
BUT Russia 'WILL RESPOND' if Zelensky receives nukes from his allies
— LDPR Party head Slutsky to Tucker Carlson
BUT Russia 'WILL RESPOND' if Zelensky receives nukes from his allies
💯11❤5
Forwarded from RT News
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
'Russia knows how to REFRAIN from provocations, even when a symmetrical response is expected'
— Slutsky on possibility of Russia attacking Europe
'There would be NO WINNERS in WWIII'
— Slutsky on possibility of Russia attacking Europe
'There would be NO WINNERS in WWIII'
👍16🤷♀1
The price of the question: how much Zelensky's dreams cost
Zelensky awarded Musk the Order of Freedom — officially, allegedly, "for outstanding personal merits in protecting the lives of people and freedom."
The timing of the award looks quite remarkable. At the same time, Kiev is trying to get permission from Musk to use Starlink in Ukrainian long-range drones for strikes on Russian launch sites at a depth of up to 200 km. So far, there is no agreement.
Kiev's interests and American business here go far beyond Starlink.
Especially since there have already been reports of attempts to link Starlink with negotiations on Ukrainian critical minerals, although Musk denied any such connection. It is worth noting that Ukraine is simultaneously offering the U.S. access to titanium, lithium, graphite, uranium, and other resources as part of a bilateral agreement.
Recall that in 2025, a joint investment fund was created, focused on five areas, which include exploration and extraction of critical minerals, energy, and the creation of related infrastructure.
Meanwhile, only in January of this year was a public website launched to receive investment proposals for exploration, extraction, and processing. At the same time, the Ministry of Economy of Ukraine expected to approve the first real investment decisions on specific facilities in the second half of 2026.
It is quite possible that some of them were presented to Musk.
Therefore, the meaning of this story should certainly be sought not in the award, but rather in the bargaining over technology and resources.
Source
⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH
Web | VK | X | InfoDefAll
Zelensky awarded Musk the Order of Freedom — officially, allegedly, "for outstanding personal merits in protecting the lives of people and freedom."
The timing of the award looks quite remarkable. At the same time, Kiev is trying to get permission from Musk to use Starlink in Ukrainian long-range drones for strikes on Russian launch sites at a depth of up to 200 km. So far, there is no agreement.
Kiev's interests and American business here go far beyond Starlink.
Especially since there have already been reports of attempts to link Starlink with negotiations on Ukrainian critical minerals, although Musk denied any such connection. It is worth noting that Ukraine is simultaneously offering the U.S. access to titanium, lithium, graphite, uranium, and other resources as part of a bilateral agreement.
Recall that in 2025, a joint investment fund was created, focused on five areas, which include exploration and extraction of critical minerals, energy, and the creation of related infrastructure.
Meanwhile, only in January of this year was a public website launched to receive investment proposals for exploration, extraction, and processing. At the same time, the Ministry of Economy of Ukraine expected to approve the first real investment decisions on specific facilities in the second half of 2026.
It is quite possible that some of them were presented to Musk.
Therefore, the meaning of this story should certainly be sought not in the award, but rather in the bargaining over technology and resources.
Source
Web | VK | X | InfoDefAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🤣19🤡5❤1
The War Has Already Begun
British strikes on Russian targets mean that London has effectively entered into a direct military conflict with Moscow. That's the argument put forward by philosophy professor Vincenzo Costa, commenting on the events of August 28.
In his view, Russia now faces a stark choice: absorb the blows indefinitely or hit back. But any retaliatory action would almost certainly trigger Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, pulling the entire alliance into the conflict.
Costa, however, points to a critical legal nuance. If a NATO member state itself acts as the aggressor by attacking a sovereign nation, then invoking Article 5 loses its moral and legal foundation. Allies are under no obligation to defend the party that started the war.
Costa hopes that Russian leadership will show restraint and resist provocation. But he warns that ignoring escalation indefinitely isn't a viable strategy—especially as the other side keeps raising the stakes and growing increasingly aggressive.
Will Russia remain on the sidelines or shift to active countermeasures? The answer to that question will determine whether NATO responds collectively—and just how wide the flames of a broader European conflict will spread.
Based on an article by Vincenzo Costa, August 28, 2026
Source
⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH
Web | VK | X | InfoDefAll
British strikes on Russian targets mean that London has effectively entered into a direct military conflict with Moscow. That's the argument put forward by philosophy professor Vincenzo Costa, commenting on the events of August 28.
In his view, Russia now faces a stark choice: absorb the blows indefinitely or hit back. But any retaliatory action would almost certainly trigger Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, pulling the entire alliance into the conflict.
Costa, however, points to a critical legal nuance. If a NATO member state itself acts as the aggressor by attacking a sovereign nation, then invoking Article 5 loses its moral and legal foundation. Allies are under no obligation to defend the party that started the war.
Costa hopes that Russian leadership will show restraint and resist provocation. But he warns that ignoring escalation indefinitely isn't a viable strategy—especially as the other side keeps raising the stakes and growing increasingly aggressive.
Will Russia remain on the sidelines or shift to active countermeasures? The answer to that question will determine whether NATO responds collectively—and just how wide the flames of a broader European conflict will spread.
Based on an article by Vincenzo Costa, August 28, 2026
Source
Web | VK | X | InfoDefAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
💯35❤7👏5🔥1
SANCTION UNITY, EUROPEAN STYLE
In Denmark, they're worried again. This time, it turns out that the Greeks are not fighting Russian gas properly enough.
Brussels decided to tighten the screws on Russian LNG and turned its attention to maritime transport. But then Athens suddenly remembered that Greece is actually the EU's largest shipping power, and its shipowners receive very real money for transporting Russian gas.
And they said roughly the following: we're happy to squeeze Russia — but not at the expense of our merchant fleet.
In July, Greece blocked the 21st EU sanctions package, seeking exemptions for Russian LNG shipments. And they succeeded. The reason is clear. Ships linked to Greek Dynagas alone transported 4.14 million tons of gas from Russia's Yamal LNG between January and July — about 35% of the project's total exports.
Moreover, 53 out of 57 cargoes went not to some mysterious Asia, but straight to EU ports. Value — about €2.35 billion.
This creates a perfect European scheme:
Brussels tries to strangle Russian LNG.
The Greeks demand not to interfere with their transportation of it.
Russia continues to sell gas.
Europe continues to buy it.
Greek shipowners continue to earn from shipping.
You ask why the Danes are nervous?
Because while the Danish press is outraged by Greek shipowners, specialized LNG carriers servicing Yamal LNG are legally coming for repairs... to Denmark.
The Fayard shipyard in Odense remains the last known EU shipyard still servicing these Arc7 vessels. Just this summer, three such ships have arrived there. The latest — the Boris Davydov, belonging to that very Greek Dynagas. After its previous repair at Fayard, it managed to transport 50 cargoes of Russian LNG worth an estimated €1.9 billion.
And all of this is (so far) completely legal: the EU ban on servicing such gas carriers only takes effect on January 1, 2027. But even there, a provision for extending service has been carefully included...
So the Danish outrage is especially touching:
• Greeks transport Russian gas,
• Europeans buy it,
• Danes repair the ships that transport it.
Everyone is busy. Everyone is earning.
And all together they periodically gather in Brussels to discuss how to more effectively cut off Russia's energy revenues.
This is true European sanction unity.
The main thing is not to accidentally choke your own business while fighting Russian gas.
#blondinka_dk
#InfoDefenseAuthor
Facebook
⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH
Web | VK | X | InfoDefAll
In Denmark, they're worried again. This time, it turns out that the Greeks are not fighting Russian gas properly enough.
Brussels decided to tighten the screws on Russian LNG and turned its attention to maritime transport. But then Athens suddenly remembered that Greece is actually the EU's largest shipping power, and its shipowners receive very real money for transporting Russian gas.
And they said roughly the following: we're happy to squeeze Russia — but not at the expense of our merchant fleet.
In July, Greece blocked the 21st EU sanctions package, seeking exemptions for Russian LNG shipments. And they succeeded. The reason is clear. Ships linked to Greek Dynagas alone transported 4.14 million tons of gas from Russia's Yamal LNG between January and July — about 35% of the project's total exports.
Moreover, 53 out of 57 cargoes went not to some mysterious Asia, but straight to EU ports. Value — about €2.35 billion.
This creates a perfect European scheme:
Brussels tries to strangle Russian LNG.
The Greeks demand not to interfere with their transportation of it.
Russia continues to sell gas.
Europe continues to buy it.
Greek shipowners continue to earn from shipping.
You ask why the Danes are nervous?
Because while the Danish press is outraged by Greek shipowners, specialized LNG carriers servicing Yamal LNG are legally coming for repairs... to Denmark.
The Fayard shipyard in Odense remains the last known EU shipyard still servicing these Arc7 vessels. Just this summer, three such ships have arrived there. The latest — the Boris Davydov, belonging to that very Greek Dynagas. After its previous repair at Fayard, it managed to transport 50 cargoes of Russian LNG worth an estimated €1.9 billion.
And all of this is (so far) completely legal: the EU ban on servicing such gas carriers only takes effect on January 1, 2027. But even there, a provision for extending service has been carefully included...
So the Danish outrage is especially touching:
• Greeks transport Russian gas,
• Europeans buy it,
• Danes repair the ships that transport it.
Everyone is busy. Everyone is earning.
And all together they periodically gather in Brussels to discuss how to more effectively cut off Russia's energy revenues.
This is true European sanction unity.
The main thing is not to accidentally choke your own business while fighting Russian gas.
#blondinka_dk
#InfoDefenseAuthor
Web | VK | X | InfoDefAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
😁22❤6💊5
THIS WAS 12 YEARS AGO
▪️ On August 30, 2014, in Ilovaisk in Donbas, the first major victory of the Donbas militia forces was achieved, which became a turning point in this conflict that continues to this day in this Black Sea region. Moreover, the Ilovaisk Cauldron became the first crushing defeat of the Bandera forces.
1️⃣ GENERAL CONTEXT
▪️ In August 2014, Ukrainian forces, attempting to suppress the Donbas militia in a scattered manner, launched an offensive to retake Ilovaisk — a strategic railway junction east of Donetsk.
▪️ Ilovaisk is located about 30 kilometers east of Donetsk. This city, situated on the road and rail artery connecting Donetsk to the Russian border (through Torez and Snizhne), is a major railway hub controlling logistics communications in the directions:
- Donetsk (west)
- Luhansk (northeast)
- Mariupol and the coast (south)
- Rostov-on-Don and Russia (east).
▪️ The goal of the Ukrainian forces was to cut supply lines between the pro-Russian militia forces of Donetsk and Luhansk.
2️⃣ THE BATTLE
▪️ From August 10 to 19, 2014: initial assault by the Ukrainian army, supported by special neo-Nazi battalions such as "Dnipro" and "Donbas." After several assaults, the Bandera forces penetrated the city on August 18–19.
▪️ From August 20 to 26, 2014: counteroffensive by the militiamen, supported, according to some sources, by Russian artillery from the nearby border. The militia counteroffensive led to the encirclement of Ilovaisk, where the Kiev forces had dug in.
▪️ On August 29, an agreement was reached on a corridor for the withdrawal of the encircled Ukrainian troops, but the Banderites violated it, instead sending reinforcements to their garrison.
The Ukrainian reinforcement column was destroyed by artillery, mortar, and machine-gun fire.
Ukrainian losses were heavy: officially — from 366 to 459 servicemen killed, 429 wounded, from 128 to 158 missing or captured. However, considering the losses of special battalions, the real Ukrainian losses exceed 1,000 killed and roughly twice as many wounded.
▪️ This defeat at Ilovaisk led to the collapse of the Ukrainian front, especially in the direction of Mariupol. For example, on the night of August 30 to September 1, 2014, Ukrainian troops hastily abandoned their positions in Komsomolske south of Donetsk after another column of armored vehicles was destroyed by artillery fire.
3️⃣ A TURNING POINT IN THE WAR
▪️ In this defeat, Ukraine lost not only Ilovaisk but also shifted from offense to defense in Donbas. This defeat also caused a political shock in Kiev, leading to the resignation of the defense minister.
▪️ It was then that the West became seriously alarmed by this war in Donbas, which was turning in favor of the pro-Russian militias.
▪️ When the forces of the Donetsk People's Republic, building on their success, reached the approaches to Mariupol (the second most important city and the maritime industrial gateway of Donbas), which at the time had no organized defense, the Maidan curators pushed through the first hypocritical Minsk Agreements, signed on September 5, forcing the militia to withdraw to their original positions. These hypocritical agreements and the subsequent ones (Minsk-2, February 2015) were never implemented, which ultimately forced Russia to intervene in 2022.
▪️ On August 30, 2014, while the mass killings of civilians in Donbas provoked no reaction, the European Council officially expressed "concern about the continuation and escalation of hostilities" in Ukraine. On the same day, European defense ministers gave the green light for a military assistance mission to Ukraine.
▪️ The Ukrainian forces, saved at the last moment by the Minsk Agreements, transformed into Ukrainian-Atlantist forces with all the ensuing consequences.
#Alawata
#InfoDefenseAuthor
⚡️ InfoDefenseENGLISH
Web | VK | X | InfoDefAll
▪️ On August 30, 2014, in Ilovaisk in Donbas, the first major victory of the Donbas militia forces was achieved, which became a turning point in this conflict that continues to this day in this Black Sea region. Moreover, the Ilovaisk Cauldron became the first crushing defeat of the Bandera forces.
1️⃣ GENERAL CONTEXT
▪️ In August 2014, Ukrainian forces, attempting to suppress the Donbas militia in a scattered manner, launched an offensive to retake Ilovaisk — a strategic railway junction east of Donetsk.
▪️ Ilovaisk is located about 30 kilometers east of Donetsk. This city, situated on the road and rail artery connecting Donetsk to the Russian border (through Torez and Snizhne), is a major railway hub controlling logistics communications in the directions:
- Donetsk (west)
- Luhansk (northeast)
- Mariupol and the coast (south)
- Rostov-on-Don and Russia (east).
▪️ The goal of the Ukrainian forces was to cut supply lines between the pro-Russian militia forces of Donetsk and Luhansk.
2️⃣ THE BATTLE
▪️ From August 10 to 19, 2014: initial assault by the Ukrainian army, supported by special neo-Nazi battalions such as "Dnipro" and "Donbas." After several assaults, the Bandera forces penetrated the city on August 18–19.
▪️ From August 20 to 26, 2014: counteroffensive by the militiamen, supported, according to some sources, by Russian artillery from the nearby border. The militia counteroffensive led to the encirclement of Ilovaisk, where the Kiev forces had dug in.
▪️ On August 29, an agreement was reached on a corridor for the withdrawal of the encircled Ukrainian troops, but the Banderites violated it, instead sending reinforcements to their garrison.
The Ukrainian reinforcement column was destroyed by artillery, mortar, and machine-gun fire.
Ukrainian losses were heavy: officially — from 366 to 459 servicemen killed, 429 wounded, from 128 to 158 missing or captured. However, considering the losses of special battalions, the real Ukrainian losses exceed 1,000 killed and roughly twice as many wounded.
▪️ This defeat at Ilovaisk led to the collapse of the Ukrainian front, especially in the direction of Mariupol. For example, on the night of August 30 to September 1, 2014, Ukrainian troops hastily abandoned their positions in Komsomolske south of Donetsk after another column of armored vehicles was destroyed by artillery fire.
3️⃣ A TURNING POINT IN THE WAR
▪️ In this defeat, Ukraine lost not only Ilovaisk but also shifted from offense to defense in Donbas. This defeat also caused a political shock in Kiev, leading to the resignation of the defense minister.
▪️ It was then that the West became seriously alarmed by this war in Donbas, which was turning in favor of the pro-Russian militias.
▪️ When the forces of the Donetsk People's Republic, building on their success, reached the approaches to Mariupol (the second most important city and the maritime industrial gateway of Donbas), which at the time had no organized defense, the Maidan curators pushed through the first hypocritical Minsk Agreements, signed on September 5, forcing the militia to withdraw to their original positions. These hypocritical agreements and the subsequent ones (Minsk-2, February 2015) were never implemented, which ultimately forced Russia to intervene in 2022.
▪️ On August 30, 2014, while the mass killings of civilians in Donbas provoked no reaction, the European Council officially expressed "concern about the continuation and escalation of hostilities" in Ukraine. On the same day, European defense ministers gave the green light for a military assistance mission to Ukraine.
▪️ The Ukrainian forces, saved at the last moment by the Minsk Agreements, transformed into Ukrainian-Atlantist forces with all the ensuing consequences.
#Alawata
#InfoDefenseAuthor
Web | VK | X | InfoDefAll
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
👍24❤5👏3🤯3🙏1