Articles by Alex Raufoglu

Politics

‘Okay With Me’ – Trump Signals Support for Sweeping Sanctions on Russia’s Trading Partners

WASHINGTON DC – US President Donald Trump on Sunday signaled explicit support for sweeping bipartisan legislation that would impose severe penalties on any country continuing to conduct business with Russia – marking his most definitive endorsement yet for a months-long congressional effort to aggressively choke off funding for the Kremlin. “The Republicans are putting in legislation that is very tough sanctioning, et cetera, on any country doing business with Russia,” Trump told reporters before departing Florida for the White House. “Well, I hear they’re doing that, and that’s okay with me,” he emphasized. He added that lawmakers may expand the scope of the sanctions regime to include another major US adversary. “They may add Iran to that,” Trump said, adding, “As you know, I suggested it… any country that does business with Russia will be very severely sanctioned.” Teeth of the proposal: From talk to action At the center of this renewed pressure is the Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025, introduced in April by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT). The bill, if enacted, would authorize a staggering 500% tariff on US imports originating from countries that knowingly purchase Russian oil, gas, uranium, or other energy-related products. The legislation has drawn remarkably bipartisan support, with 85 senators currently listed as cosponsors. On the House side, Representative Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) has sponsored a companion bill (H.R. 2548), which similarly prohibits imports from countries trading in Russian-origin energy. Speaking to Kyiv Post late Sunday, a senior Senate aide mentioned that the fate of the Sanctioning Russia Act currently rests in the hands of one man: Republican Leader John Thune (R-SD). “This shouldn’t be a hard task,” the aide said, adding that this measure “is not simply about punishing Moscow directly – it’s about targeting its customers.” Another congressional aide characterized the bill internally as a “bunker-buster” – a mechanism designed to inflict economic damage not only on Russia but also on the nations that are propping up key components of its war economy. Trump’s shift unlocks momentum On Capitol Hill, multiple sources believe Trump’s tacit approval, barring a later reversal, could be a game-changer. While many Republicans have aggressively pushed for sanctions, some have been hesitant, waiting for a definitive signal from the White House that the President would neither veto nor undercut such a potent measure. A senior Senate Republican aide noted the political calculus: “If the [US] President truly gets behind it, this bill has a real chance not just of passing – but of being meaningful.” Trump’s acceptance – even if couched in measured terms – underscores how deeply sanctions politics has shifted in Washington. What once might have been considered fringe, hardline rhetoric is now flirting with mainstream US foreign policy. The ultimate delivery of this policy depends on several moving parts: Will the Senate advance it? Can leadership guarantee enough votes? And most importantly, will the administration ultimately use its authority aggressively – or pull its punches?

4 hours ago

World

‘Indo-Pacific Begins in Ukraine’ – US Think Tank Head Says Trans-Siberian Strike Rewrites Global Strategy

WASHINGTON, DC – For years, Ukraine has quietly worked to drag Russia’s invasion far beyond the front lines. Last week, Kyiv’s intelligence network landed its most dramatic blow yet, striking 6,000 kilometers from the Donbas to hit the Trans-Siberian Railway. The result: The critical rail link moving North Korean arms to the front is now frozen, crippling Moscow’s vital east-to-west supply chain. Kyiv confirmed responsibility through HUR, its military intelligence agency, which said the strike in Russia’s Khabarovsk region blocked the rail lifeline Moscow uses to move munitions supplied by Pyongyang – including the ballistic missiles, rockets and the more than 20,000 containers of ammunition that North Korea has poured into Russia’s campaign. For Glen Howard, president of the Saratoga Foundation and one of Washington’s longest-watching Russia strategists, the attack is not simply another daring Ukrainian sabotage operation. It is a geopolitical wake-up call. “The recent attack more than anything symbolizes the connectivity between the Pacific and the Ukraine war,” Howard told Kyiv Post, arguing that the strike decisively disproves the idea – popular among US “restrainers” – that Europe and the Indo-Pacific are separate strategic theaters. “10,000 North Korean soldiers appearing in Kursk and fighting against Ukraine is a manifestation of this connectivity,” he said. “For North Korea the Ukraine war is its own battle lab.” The Indo-Pacific, Howard insists, now begins in Ukraine. Moscow’s East Asian supply chain, cut at the source By hitting the Trans-Siberian – the highest-capacity rail line linking Russia’s Pacific frontier to its European heartland – Kyiv expanded a sabotage campaign that began in 2023 with its audacious demolition of the Severomuysky tunnel on the Baikal-Amur Mainline (BAM). Howard chronicled that earlier strike in his 2023 analysis “Into Siberia,” noting that the BAM attack temporarily reduced Russia to a single functioning rail line to Vladivostok, pinching its trade with China and its east-to-west military logistics. Ukraine didn’t stop there. The next day, SBU operatives hit the Devil’s Bridge bypass – the only alternative to the destroyed tunnel – trapping trains and exposing the fragility of Russia’s Far Eastern infrastructure. It was, in Howard’s telling, a masterclass in strategic sequencing. This newest strike, he argues, shows Kyiv understands that Russia’s “Siberian flank is highly vulnerable” – and that Moscow still has not learned how to defend it. “It is not an operational shift but a specific Russian vulnerability that Ukraine and HUR have shown it can selectively use at the right time to wreak havoc,” Howard said. What makes this possible, he stressed, is the dormant-no-longer Ukrainian presence in the region – the so-called Green Wedge, populated by descendants of 19th-century Ukrainian settlers. Green Wedge reawakens Howard says the sabotage campaign demonstrates that the Green Wedge – long dismissed in Moscow as an ethnographic footnote – has strategic bite. “It also symbolizes the importance of the Green Wedge in Siberia and that it is real, no longer dormant, but able to surface at any time,” he said. Ukraine’s military intelligence “has utilized the Ukrainian diaspora presence in Siberia to build a viable espionage and sabotage network.” That human network matters. Ukrainian drones can strike Russian air bases. But blowing up rail lines in the Pacific wilderness is the kind of operation that requires planning, local access, and teams on the ground. “It takes very careful planning to conduct these attacks,” Howard said, emphasizing, “It also appears to indicate the Russians have not learned how to protect the rail lines effectively.” He adds that Ukraine was likely tipped off about the movement of North Korean arms by NATO allies, possibly the US, enabling HUR to position saboteurs in time. “This attack is right out of an Alistair MacLean novel… a Ukrainian version of Where Eagles Dare,” he said. Eurasian World War in slow motion For Howard, the strike also exposes a deeper truth: Russia’s “pivot to Asia,” loudly marketed as a civilizational shift, is driven by logistical desperation. Moscow needs North Korean manpower and ammunition – “cannon fodder,” as he puts it – because its war economy cannot meet battlefield demand. But that pivot comes with a geopolitical boomerang. “Moscow relying and pivoting to North Korea is doing so at the risk of damaging its relations with Beijing,” Howard said. Putin turned to Kim Jong Un precisely because China would not provide the level of military aid Moscow expected. “So he said to hell with it… It is a very Asiatic form of Russian decision-making,” he added. Beijing, he notes, has signaled discomfort. Kim Jong Un’s recent trip to China “was quite cool.” North Koreans are fighting in Kursk, not Chinese troops. DPRK munitions – not Chinese – are flowing to Russia’s front lines. The irony is sharp: China and Russia boast a partnership “without limits,” but those limits are now testing the reliability of Russia’s role as Beijing’s overland gateway to Europe. With both the BAM and Trans-Siberian proven vulnerable, Beijing is forced to reassess whether Russia can guarantee the physical security of its own Belt and Road corridor. Next front in Siberia The Trans-Siberian attack is not war-ending. But in Howard’s view, it is war-shaping. It strikes at the timing of Russia’s dependence on North Korean shells – which he says are already running low – just as Moscow tries to sustain offensive pressure on the Pokrovsk front. And it is unlikely to be the end. “Ukraine has already shown it has the capability to disrupt Russian logistical infrastructure in the Far East,” he said, noting earlier strikes on oil refineries and munitions plants deep in the Urals. “These are the twin pillars of Russian military logistical transport in the Far East… an amazing feat.” Asked what comes next, he offers a hint: not a specific target list, but a pattern. Ukraine will continue going after the infrastructure that Russia cannot easily replace — ports, refineries, pipelines, strategic factories — “deep in the heart of Siberia.” And he adds, with the enthusiasm of a Cold War thriller writer: “I just hope Budanov sells me the film rights.” War that starts in Donetsk, ends in the Pacific Ukraine’s strike on the Trans-Siberian is more than a tactical disruption. It forces Washington, Brussels and Asian capitals to confront the emerging strategic reality of the conflict: The Ukraine war is no longer a regional war. It is a Eurasian war. Its front lines run from Avdiivka to Vladivostok. And as long as North Korean shells detonate in Ukrainian cities – and Ukrainian saboteurs detonate trains in Siberia – the dividing line between Europe and the Indo-Pacific is not the Urals, nor the South China Sea. As Glen Howard argues, maps must be redrawn. The Indo-Pacific now begins in Ukraine.

5 hours ago

Technology

‘We Are Only Country Doesn’t Test’ – Trump Defends Nuclear Move Amid Global Alarm

WASHINGTON, DC – US President Donald Trump confirmed Sunday that his country would resume testing nuclear weapons, a stunning declaration that would end a three-decade-old moratorium and dramatically escalate global nuclear tensions. Trump argued that the move is necessary to keep pace with nuclear rivals he claims are already violating international norms. His comments, made in a televised interview and coming just days after directing the Pentagon to begin testing, immediately prompted a clarifying statement from a key cabinet member, who specified that the tests would not involve atomic detonations. Trump’s unapologetic stance and claims Trump was unapologetic about the directive, which he announced on social media less than an hour before a high-stakes meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping. He framed the decision as a necessary response to what he described as secret or undisclosed testing by foreign powers. “North Korea is testing constantly. Other countries are testing. We are the only country that doesn’t test. I don’t want to be the only country that doesn’t test,” he told CBS’s 60 Minutes. When pressed on whether the United States would begin detonating nuclear weapons for testing after more than 30 years, Trump replied, “I’m saying that we’re going to test nuclear weapons like other countries do, yes.” He added that both Russia and China are conducting nuclear tests in secret, accusing them of concealing their activities from the world: “Russia’s testing, and China’s testing, but they don’t talk about it,” Trump said. “You know, we’re an open society. We talk about it. We have to talk about it, because otherwise you people [the media] are going to report on it. They don’t have reporters that are going to be writing about it. We do,” he elaborated. Trump also boasted about the US nuclear stockpile, saying, “We have more nuclear weapons than any other country... We have enough nuclear weapons to blow up the world 150 times.” His assertions that Russia and China are conducting nuclear explosive tests contradict statements from his own administration’s defense officials. His nominee to lead STRATCOM, the admiral who oversees the US nuclear arsenal, told lawmakers last week that neither country is conducting nuclear explosive tests. Administration moves to clarify ‘system tests’ Facing global alarm over the potential resumption of nuclear explosions, the US administration moved quickly to narrow the scope of Trump’s remarks. Energy Secretary Chris Wright appeared on Fox News earlier Sunday and clarified that the administration is not currently planning to conduct nuclear explosions. Wright said the tests being discussed are “system tests,” not “nuclear explosions.” He explained that these are “non-critical explosions” involving “all the other parts of a nuclear weapon to make sure they deliver the appropriate geometry and set up the nuclear explosion,” but notably exclude actual atomic detonations. When asked if residents near the Nevada testing site should prepare for a “mushroom cloud,” Wright was definitive: “No, no worries about that.” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth added that the Pentagon is moving “quickly” on the directive, saying Trump “was clear: We need a credible nuclear deterrent.” Decades-old moratorium and global context The US has observed a voluntary moratorium on nuclear explosive testing since 1992, when the last test was conducted underground at the Nevada National Security Site. While Washington signed the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) in 1996, which bars all nuclear test explosions, the Senate rejected its ratification in 1999, preventing the treaty from fully entering into force. Globally, only North Korea has conducted a nuclear test detonation this century, with its last known test in 2017. Both Russia and China are currently believed to be testing only delivery systems – such as missiles – for nuclear weapons, not the warheads themselves. Despite the testing halt, the US maintains one of the world’s largest and most advanced nuclear arsenals.

Nov 3, 2025

Technology

Ambiguous Order: Trump’s Nuclear Test Directive Sparks Confusion, Congressional Scrutiny

WASHINGTON DC – US President Donald Trump’s sudden directive to resume US nuclear weapons testing – announced via social media and citing unspecified actions by other nations – has thrown Washington into turmoil and reopened debate over the country’s arms control commitments. The move, which could end a three-decade moratorium on full-scale nuclear detonations, was defended by administration officials but met with confusion among military leaders and sharp condemnation from lawmakers. At the heart of the controversy lies a simple question: What exactly did the President mean? Diplomat’s view: Confused messaging undermines power Veteran US diplomat Daniel Fried, who has advised seven administrations, told Kyiv Post the directive seemed poorly conceived and risked weakening Washington’s credibility abroad. Fried said Trump’s reference to other nations testing nuclear weapons “appears inaccurate,” noting that only North Korea has conducted such tests in recent decades. He suggested Trump may have confused Russia’s test of a nuclear-powered cruise missile with an actual nuclear detonation, which he said are “very different things.” According to Fried, Trump may have intended to warn Russia against nuclear escalation, but the vague wording “blunted the message” and clearly “caught the Pentagon off guard.” He called the episode “odd, but perhaps not without purpose.” Military leader contradicts President’s premise The ambiguity Fried described was echoed in a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, where Senator Angus King (I–ME) pressed Vice Admiral Richard Correll, Commander of US Strategic Command, for evidence that other countries were conducting nuclear tests. “Are any other countries doing explosive testing of nuclear warheads?” King asked. Correll replied, “To my knowledge, the last explosive nuclear testing was by North Korea—the DPRK—and that was in 2017.” He added that China’s last publicly acknowledged test was in 1996, confirming that neither Russia nor China has conducted an explosive test in decades. King suggested the President may have been referring to delivery systems, such as Russia’s Skyfall missile. Correll agreed that was possible, and King concluded, “We hope that is clarified in the coming days.” Administration’s defense and domestic backlash Despite the lack of recent foreign nuclear tests, Vice President J.D. Vance defended Trump’s order as necessary to ensure the US arsenal “functions properly.” Like Trump’s post, however, Vance did not clarify whether the directive involved full detonations or non-explosive trials. Speaking to reporters outside the White House, Vance said testing is vital to verify the operational readiness of US nuclear weapons. Democrats in Congress quickly condemned the move. Senator Jacky Rosen (D–NV), whose state once hosted US test sites, warned of the human and environmental toll, noting that Nevadans still live with “lasting radioactive contamination.” She argued the nuclear stockpile is already certified as safe each year and called Trump’s directive “reckless and dangerous.” Senator Mark Kelly (D–AZ) cautioned that renewed US testing could trigger a global arms race. “If we resume testing, China will likely follow,” he said. “That only helps them advance their technology.” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D–NY) called the order “a massive breach of international treaties” and “another example of Donald Trump and Republican policies being divorced from reality.” He said Democrats would instead focus on reducing living costs and repairing the health care system. Need for clarification As criticism mounted – including warnings from Russian lawmakers Leonid Slutsky and Konstantin Kosachev that the move could violate the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) – veteran diplomat Fried emphasized the need for clarity from the White House. He contrasted Trump’s confusing order with an earlier, sharper response to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s nuclear boasts. “Then, Trump told Putin to stop testing and start negotiating,” Fried said. “That was strong and clear.” This time, Fried emphasized, “no one knows what the [US] President meant—and when the message is unclear, it loses its power.” He argued that if Trump meant the US would respond only if others resumed testing, that would be reasonable. “But suggesting we might start testing without cause makes no sense and undercuts his own point,” he said. Fried concluded that clearer communication could make the statement constructive, “but as it stands, it weakens rather than strengthens America’s position.”

Oct 30, 2025