War
-
RT may support Putin, but the rest is history
The media landscape in the State of Russia is controlled by its Politicians and a political class. These are disparate people in groups that are just there for hegemony that begets competitive leadership. In central office blocks populated with administrative offices and leaders meeting rooms, the narrative is guided and carefully crafted for maximum public effect.
President Putin has oversight of the total output, which ends up on stations that are watched in every Russian household, or outlets like Russia Today, which justify Russian actions to a willing audience worldwide. While native health professionals say there’s too much emphasis on media content, and not enough in-person contact, the State believes otherwise, and such a media circus is now a constant stream of vital public information.
The invasion of Ukraine is set against this backdrop, presented and narrated every hour by trained spokespeople. These graduates and business professionals know their audience and their duties as if their lives depended on it. There’s a reported ‘push’ by such media on the younger folk in particular, urging them to rationalise actions that lead to the strength of the nation over and against its adversaries.
After this war, the leadership that predominates in Moscow will regain its control over any social dynamics and all the patterns of thought and singular activity that pervade in the closed State. This is Putin’s war of externals and internals, a messy affair that yields few encouraging results on any front. Putin has panache in public forums but his nation is struggling to provide the evidence necessary to prove him correct in what he does.
-
Canada is getting stronger
Mark Carney, the ex-Governor of the Bank of England and now Prime Minister of Canada, has launched what is supposed to be a world-leading defence ‘bank’ with eight other countries, including the embattled State of Ukraine in Europe.
The initiative is different for the nominally pacifist nation, marking a significant shift toward engaging others more aggressively and potentially for real combat scenarios.
“We, the leaders of Canada, Albania, Belgium, Greece, Latvia, Luxembourg, Romania, Türkiye and Ukraine, meeting at the NATO Summit in Ankara, today announce our shared intention to establish the Defence, Security and Resilience Bank (DSRB).
[…]
By leveraging a strong credit foundation, the DSRB is designed to expand access to capital, reduce financing costs, and support expansion of industrial capacity across member countries. We emphasize that the DSRB is intended to complement, not duplicate, other national and multilateral instruments that seek to increase defence production.”
– Prime Minister of Canada/Office.
The choice of countries by Canada, its lead sponsor, is interesting considering the complex matters afoot between these powers. Although it doesn’t suggest much beyond agreeing to cooperate on some investment projects, there’s space for dialogue and even cooperation in future as a new bloc.
-
The post-Iran world settlement is much the same
The sane among us know that a ‘leader’ only has so many duties, and these are all the most crucial – and possible – ones. The rest are beholden to outside, alternative, or ancient interests. The move to get rid of rites and ceremonies is a hope to clear out and to renew partnership along more obvious lines.
As this doesn’t necessarily happen, administrators and diplomats have to settle back into their regular routine of dialogue and communication. The rhetoric rises up. The price or value inherent in things matters once more, and so this becomes the way forward, and America will realise it with Iran soon.
“From murdering newborns to our dear elderly population – & above all, the martyrdom of the peerless, unique gem of our era, our magnanimous, mujahid Leader – is each a file among thousands of major legal cases that must be earnestly pursued in domestic & international courts.”
The Supreme Leader recently approved but also condemned negotiations by his country’s politicians and their teams with their American counterparts. This is part of his plan. He won’t let the killing of his father go lightly. He says as much, still, in his calls for revenge and hope that America feels the full weight of his people’s anger.
As time progresses, more and more effort will show through across the world. Diplomatically, Iranians like to see a narrative play out. This is Shakespeare in modern times. The death throes. The speeches that matter. The new characters. They work around this ordinary activity to make a point. If successful, they’ll win the argument itself.
-
A revived Russia waits in the wings
Even as strikes hit Kyiv and Ukrainians groan for the end of a war, Russians are seeking the light at the end of the tunnel. This is their country’s conflict – launched illegally for short-sighted goals – but there’s a feeling that it’s gone on for too long. Putin’s time is up.
The economically active are vying for a return to business as usual and want things to be normal. Although their support for the President is seen as complicity, and tacit validation for engagement, the reality is the war station isn’t easy.
Throwing off constraints will come as the Presidential team flip switches and inform the regions. His orders are paramount, but will dry up. Therefore, life will bounce back to its former strength, handing over control of daily matters to lesser leaders and officials.
The total state war leveraged by Moscow leadership to re-state aims and sharpen its focus will go down here as a bad war. In history, it strikes against values of peace and harmony. In politics, it held up vital progress in other areas. It also exposed a shaky basis to modern European beliefs.
-
Russia is a fortress not easy to handle
In preparing for the war in Ukraine, Russian forces completed a number of strategic planning objectives, even before the first bullet, bomb, or drone was fired.
It’s rumoured it included plotting how to liberate a secret military base it had housed on an estate in the Kursk Oblast, where President Putin may have spent time planning the offensive.
The border region is hotly contested by Intelligence services because of its potential. It’s used for smuggling contacts, making rendezvous, and sneaking into either territory to begin extensive spying operations.
Unverified footage of a firefight near to Maryino Estate, in Rylsky District, Kursk Oblast (Credit/Source: @wars_russia/Telegram). Russia keeps itself relatively still in normal times, meaning it has strength in staying power. The effort to dismantle a military outpost – setup for the President – would involve military action to disburse surveillance-based interest in the area.
The return of the President to Moscow isn’t a momentous day, but it would mark an achievement in military planning. Putin often talks about Ukraine and says he has a “sense of the air” of it, meaning his close watches involves more than monitoring CCTV footage.
-
US and Russia have to make peace – or it’s war
The belief in Russian diplomatic circles is that America remains a key global power even in its position at the other side of the Western world. While Russians think hard about their own progress, and note that most of human endeavour comes through difficulty, they also look to the success of others.
In meeting Trump, Putin showed that this truly is a belief and that it underpins its objective view of how things need to be done. Even if the fight is against Ukraine, it ends at the doors of the White House.
Image credit: OpenAI ChatGPT. It may seem contradictory to some, but Russia regularly belittles its own neighbours. It can suffer having called America a great nation if it means others in Europe look lesser or the worse for it.
The point is not going to be that Russia and America are best friends. Again, Russia is proud of its own progress and in this lies a hint as to its real worldview. The end of the war with Ukraine is looked at hopefully as being about peace. But this isn’t guaranteed. It needs a strong partner to make it happen. 
-
Iranians can’t be forgotten in this chapter
Interventions on a scale of the US and Iran conflict can cause fear for those that don’t understand military matters. For example, the war in Afghanistan and Iraq raised fears of a reverse invasion that did not come to be actualised.
In fact, reports I’ve read say there have been remarkable improvements in living conditions and in educational environments since the end of fighting. This is due to freedom of movement and much better business prospects.
The welfare of people after a conflict determines the value of any action that was taken. This is included in modern planning. It’s not helpful for those who say no war, but that isn’t advice for those that consider these issues in reality.
Iran has struggled to understand freedom by itself. There’s a strong psychological element of control in the country that leads people to be upset about a leader who actually did little to improve their local living arrangements.
The struggle Iranians have is put on them artificially by those in leadership. There’s a lack of redress for abuses and shortfalls in care that’s expected. This is a fundamental matter. If any liberation comes, it can help to alleviate these matters for many people.
The protest movements of the world are unhelpful therefore in this regard. They don’t support the removal of those that harm people. They don’t support responsible governance afterwards. They don’t support seeing people’s lives get much better by it.
It’s not likely that Iran will have the capability to invade the UK soon. It’s not a part of the UK’s defence planning to believe so. It means we have a responsibility to contribute to reconstructive efforts. It’s our way of making peace work.
-
Lebanon is a target Israel is counting on
It’s been a long-held belief of many of Israel’s top military chiefs that Hezbollah – owned by Iran – stands in Israel’s way to lasting peace in the wider region.
The terror network isn’t a peacemaker at all. It holds a grip in Lebanon that suppresses legitimate economic activity and stifles most of its development.
The network is said to have been cored by the late Ali Khamenei, emptied of its founding doctrines and filled with his own ambition for the end of Israeli security.
The calculated mentality of its fighters shows a drivenness to expel Jews from the Middle East, a strategic goal now held by Tehran’s political and social elite.
The focus on its elimination is a military objective that may frighten some, but the daily reality of instability for all its citizens means Israel won’t let go.
-
Ukraine has shown its way with war – and it works
The State of Ukraine is beating at the gates of a country that has a full appraisal of itself in many ways. Russia has left no time to waste in covering every corner of its territory, making sure that nothing is left as a mystery to itself.
Such mastery of its own affairs is an achievement but it can only be respected by itself. The use of it, as well as the reputations of its schools of science and military affairs, draw disdain from many in the wider international community.
Ukraine has developed its own innovations at a pace, making production a cornerstone of its defensive capabilities. To do this they’ve required the input of a large number of nations. This has come about in terms of finance and firepower, often keeping the enemy at bay at needful times.
The progress of this war has been hard to follow, because it looks like a two-way fight, and precious few indicators show who’s responsible for what otherwise. We can guess the larger powers are making the most impact, but it’s left to others to tell the story about this.
Yet, in the silence of these facts it’s become a war effort of promise because Ukraine is ready for the battle as it turns on itself. The people of Ukraine have shown a willingness to keep at the frontlines and trust in the promises of others. This is a noble spirit for all to see.
The advancement of techniques in fighting has now cemented a new reaction to hostile efforts to takeover and to control. The political drive of Putin is a mania that adds complex toxicity to the battlefield, and modern technology handles this far better than human minds, which slow in the calculation of it.
In our times there’s a sense of optimism that old styles of aggression that go after things not a part of our modern hopes are not all-encompassing – or inevitable. They can be repudiated in favour of a new arrangement, idea, or concept that keeps its own ground.
-
An Iran war is a matter for Iranian people
The implications of strikes on Iran are being considered across Western media cycles, and the output seems to be a concern about shipping and something on the cost of living. There’s clearly little to nothing there for evidence to use to back up a significant claim as to the meaning of why it’s happening. These are just things that confirm it’s real.
The real story is one for the Iranian people, put there for their consideration over the lifecycle of a leader and what it means when other people are threatened. The lesson is sobering, as much as the loss of such an iconic leader is a shock. This must be the point at which thinking starts on its context, and purpose.
The further escalation of hostilities is a decision that people make with their leader, albeit in Iran it may be a much smaller number that is involved in the process. This is set in the international framework as a necessary response if things are to get worse, or deteriorate into a conflict that runs until it ends, rather than when life stops totally.
The upswell of support for the new Supreme Leader, or a wave of enrolment for local forces that offer the feeling of patriotism and a cause worth being martyred for, is set in the nervous system of the State of Iran, emerging if it feels compelling and worth doing so. This is also their side of the story, and not ours.
-
Ukraine’s safe option is to evacuate its border areas
The progress of diplomacy is slow when it comes to the stubbornness of Russia. It’s been shown that it speeds up exponentially where there is a meaningful aim in sight and something can be gained from a continuation of the talks. It has to refer directly to something that has been stated before, even if it doesn’t fully realise it’s dream.
In terms of the land that Russia wants to have in its own possession, Ukraine stands at a crossroads in its own decision-making. Its best option is to evacuate such areas and to maintain that nothing more than a small contingent should continue to live there. It gives Russia ground but deprives it of a further reach to limit closeness to Ukraine.
The evacuation of people is not a popular option, but it could be satisfied in either direction. A non-contingency zone like this could be a solution to a battle between two powers, one that has moral argument and another that has sufficient strength to resist more.
It may give Russians pride in saying that named places are ‘back’ in its own possession. However, it recognises that its own expansionism is an unpopular policy. It cannot take more to gain more in the long-term, and Ukraine has to be guaranteed its own internal security.
-
Iran has divides that cannot be overcome
Iran is usually spoken of as being one single and whole country. While this is true – and is useful in a business sense – in terms of its leadership this couldn’t be further from the truth. It’s the belief of many academics that there are artificial divisions that are somehow run through Iranian society to keep people separate.
These were built up by its former Supreme Leader and is believed to be a large part of the inheritance of the new Supreme Leader, who has to manage this new status quo.
It’s likely these lines are obvious and that many people are aware it involves more than stating facts and enforcing it by Policing. This means that while some countries have sought to develop upward, Iran has moved to press outwards. It follows in a long period of overtly proud planning and behaviour.
This causes Iran to be an increasing mystery on the world stage. As a State in the Middle East that’s choosing to
The challenge from outside to Iranian leadership is therefore not seen as being relevant. It’s also more and more difficult to challenge a human rights record where their social setup is fragmented in such a way to make it difficult to know who is responsible and how life works there.
Their opinions are probably going to be singular but their action is not going to be as predictable as we’d like it to be. It’s also not a forgone conclusion what Iran wants or what more they want to achieve.

-
Iran rarely strikes at the middle ground
Iran isn’t known for being a friend of many nations across the world. It hasn’t got a collegiate tradition or an evangelical culture in either its schools of preparation or in its fields of play.
It makes it a hard country to understand, and many fail at this as they try by themselves.
In actual fact, nations must engage and coordinate to find common understanding between each other, and in this scheme of things Iran has few partners and all of these are regional.
“Friendly and brotherly nations find each other in hard times, and the deeper the civilizational roots, the stronger this bond.”
– President Masoud Pezeshkian/X.
It also guards such relationships closely. Many top level officials concede that instead of extending a hand of friendship, they prefer to come out swinging.
If a new partnership is suggested that is too meaningful in some way, to begin with, they respond in the opposite sense.
America hasn’t got a lot of rope to use, and we definitely shouldn’t try either. The rest is internal, and many hope the matters are resolved by Iranians capable of guiding matters by themselves.
-
Westminster Week: On trial
Tuesday
“Jury trials are a cornerstone of our democracy, and Justice system,” so says Imran Hussain MP (Bradford East/Labour), passionate in his appeal to the Secretary of State for Justice. He hopes it stays, while others hope it goes.
Jim Shannon MP (Strangford/DUP) says the quality of the law is now paramount, saying “speed cannot come at the expense of fundamental rights” and jury trials must stay for the sake of it.
Wednesday
The Prime Minister says the Leader of the Opposition “totally abandoned her position” on the idea of the UK joining the US to fight Iran, calling it a “mother of all u-turns” on “one of the most important [-] decisions” a leader like him will face. The other, of course, is the one about staying or going.