16 Comments
User's avatar
Paulo Aguiar's avatar

That’s a sobering read, it lays bare a lot of what mainstream coverage either skips over or actively avoids. The failure of Trump’s peace initiative wasn’t just about personal blunders or lack of finesse; it was baked into the structure of the system he was trying (and probably never fully intended) to work against. The idea that one man, even a U.S. president, could reverse years of institutional inertia, entrenched strategic interests, and deeply held ideological commitments (without a total rupture) was always a bit of a fantasy.

From Europe’s need to preserve face, to Zelensky’s very real personal stakes, to the American establishment's refusal to countenance anything that even looks like defeat, the whole thing was boxed in from every side. And then there’s Russia’s position, which Western leaders still seem to fundamentally misunderstand.

That part about the US acting like a neutral party while being neck-deep in operational planning hits especially hard. You can't run the war and mediate the peace. That contradiction was always going to poison the well. And now, with the Iran-Israel flare-up pulling focus, the idea of diplomacy seems even further out of reach. What’s emerging isn’t a series of regional conflicts, but a kind of global alignment shift, and the US, instead of adapting, is doubling down.

Honestly, none of this feels like it ends soon. Everyone’s too locked into their positions, and the cost of admitting defeat (strategically, politically, psychologically) is too high. So the wars grind on, and the rest of us just try to keep track of who’s supplying what to whom. It’s not that peace is impossible, but it does feel like it’s not on the menu right now.

Expand full comment
Nakayama's avatar

There was no political solution possible given the ideological differences between the Banderite and the Russian tradition to help fellow Russians, especially in the former Novorossiya. There is no political solution possible for the Iran-Israel conflict. The US can keep Iran at bay as long as Israel does not attack Iran. Once Israel attacks Iran, the Iranians will likely unite harder, and the fight will go to the bitter end. The only way for the US to protect Israel is to destroy Iran as a nation. If you were the crown prince of KSA, what would you think? Israel wants to claim the entire former British Palestine Mandate. What if they want to claim the Tigris River basin or Lebanon?

Expand full comment
Jazzme's avatar

All all in for multipolarity

Expand full comment
Philalethes's avatar

The article contains some interesting insights, particularly on the conflicting motivations of the US leadership. However, ironically, it misses the most obvious link between the war in Ukraine and the war in Iran: by getting bogged down in Ukraine. Russia has lost its ability to bail out its clients in the Middle East: faced with the collapse of its most longstanding ally, the regime of Assad, and now the humiliation. If not the collapse, of the ayatollahs’ regime in Iran, Russia has just been able to fire … communiqués.

Expand full comment
JBS's avatar

We must foment war overseas to ensure oppression here. Next year in Moscow!

Expand full comment
Truth Seeking Missile's avatar

And now China had opened high-speed rail to Iran that cuts costly trade times by weeks and prevents western interference. Yet America clings to a unipolar world, ignoring high value relations that would benefit almost every American.

Expand full comment
Джошуа's avatar

Will be interesting to keep our eyes on China if the US gets even more involved in Iran. For the good and the not, China is a far cry from the USSR in material support for its closest allies.

Iran is at the frontline of the assault on the multipolar world order. If Iran falls, which I think is unlikely, our hopes of a more peaceful transition where US empire is less relevant is in serious doubt. I am glad Iran has shed its own doctrine of ‘strategic patience’, but hope China will do the same…

Expand full comment
Roslyn Ross's avatar

There is always a back story which explains the presenting positions. People always have reasons for what they do even if the reasons are immoral, unjust, illegal or insane.

Expand full comment
arthur brogard's avatar

We hope it's an alliance between russia, china and iran. but in fact we don't see that do we? There's enough uncertainty about what we see to allow for doubting voices we can't refute.

And the strength of Iran is an unknown quantity. Without Iran having internal cohesion and strength it cannot perform and Russia and China cannot help any more than in Syria.

This man states that Iran internally has all the problems of tribalism and 'old guard' officer corps, plus corruption.

What we do know is that strength in Tribal nations is unusual, I think, right? Tribalism itself inherently makes a State weak. Divided against itself.

And he echoes a charge heard more and more frequently in my experience around the alt media: that Putin is in fact in bed with Israel.

https://open.substack.com/pub/xxtomcooperxx/p/the-never-ending-and-very-transparent?r=b7hw3&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false

And we have to admit that senior officers etc. asleep in their beds waiting for assassination does not paint an encouraging picture.

Then Rurik here points out the incongruity, the anomaly of the Dniper Bridges, which many have done before. This points of course to Russia actually not being part of the hypothesized 'Russia, China, Iran' triad in reality.

https://open.substack.com/pub/slavlandchronicles/p/turns-out-i-agree-with-pepe-escobar?r=b7hw3&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false

And here it is claimed that Iranian forces are in a real mess and the Russia/Iran bond is so poor that back in '17 Russia actually gave codes to Israel that rendered their aircraft safe from Iran fire.

https://slavlandchronicles.substack.com/p/it-seems-like-tehran-has-already?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=795903&post_id=166149759&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=b7hw3&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Expand full comment
Jazzme's avatar

A DEI multipolar world to be specific

Expand full comment
mag. Blaž Kavčič's avatar

USA, Russia, Iran and China are partners in following Agenda2030. All wars are spectacles controlled by 1% network of maniacs. Not even mentioning The main civilizational megatrend - 4IR, Transhumanism, Technocracy, Cybernetization, elimination of normal organic life, is criminally negligent.

Expand full comment
Jazzme's avatar

As of **June 2024**, the **BRICS** alliance consists of the following **10 member countries**:

### **Current BRICS Members (Original + New Additions)**

1. **Brazil**

2. **Russia**

3. **India**

4. **China**

5. **South Africa** (joined in 2010)

6. **Egypt** (joined in 2024)

7. **Ethiopia** (joined in 2024)

8. **Iran** (joined in 2024)

9. **Saudi Arabia** (joined in 2024)

10. **United Arab Emirates (UAE)** (joined in 2024)

### **Key Points:**

- **Expansion in 2024**: BRICS admitted **5 new members** (Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE) at the start of 2024.

- **Saudi Arabia's Status**: While officially invited, Saudi Arabia has not yet finalized its membership process but is expected to do so soon.

- **Future Expansion**: More countries (e.g., Argentina initially accepted but later declined under President Milei) may join in upcoming summits.

Would you like details on observer states or recent developments?

Expand full comment
arthur brogard's avatar

I would like some information on what this portends militarily. BRICS is not a military alliance but being a Trade Alliance it naturally must have some effect on matters military.

What effects and where and when?

Expand full comment
Godfree Roberts's avatar

The SCO is China's equivalent defense project.

Expand full comment
Jazzme's avatar

Above brought to you via DeepSeek

Expand full comment
Jazzme's avatar

Add Viet Nam

Expand full comment