In his newest speak with Ray McGovern on Dialogue Works, John Helmer provides far and away the very best overview1 to this point within the wake of Ukraine assaults on bridges and civilian trains, drone assaults focusing on bombers in Russia’s nuclear deterrence forces, a failed new assault on Kerch Bridge, and cellphone discussions between Lavrov and Rubio and later Trump and Putin.
As you will notice, Helmer focuses on whether or not Russia is about to go to what he calls “the Oreshnik second,” as in a devastating non-nuclear retaliation. Putin has chosen to place the query in abeyance by depicting the assaults as terrorism, versus acts of struggle, in order to not set off an obligation to interact in a strategic response underneath Russia’s nuclear doctrine. Putin argued that escalating and breaking off negotiations would quantity to going within the path that Kiev and its backers need Russia to take, and by implication it is a lure to be prevented.2
However the concern nonetheless stays. As Helmer said in his accompanying written publish:
Now that Putin agrees that within the current struggle Russia is surrounded by enemies on all sides, and he should make the selection between the “path of battle” – since Sunday, June 1, that is now struggle on the level of nuclear arms — and the “path of conciliation” – that’s President Donald Trump’s peace phrases – what is going to Putin resolve to do? c
As Helmer explains:
That is necessary as a result of underneath the Russian nuclear doctrine of final December part 19c…an assault by a a non-nuclear state on Russia’s nuclear triad. Its functionality to discourage nuclear assault on Russia is taken into account a violation of the nuclear deterrence regime and requires underneath Russian coverage a big strategic stage of assault.
Below III. Situations for the Transition of the Russian Federation to the Employment of Nuclear Weapons, the textual content of 19c:
19. The circumstances that allow the potential of nuclear weapons employment by the Russian Federation are as follows:…
c) actions by an adversary affecting parts of critically necessary state or navy infrastructure of the Russian Federation, the disablement of which might disrupt response actions by nuclear forces
Please be aware that Ray McGovern’s view on this speak, that the Ukraine assault didn’t cross nuclear doctrine pink strains, is an excessive outlier among the many common YouTube commentators on this struggle. However since he frequently tries to object to Helmer’s well-substantiated view, that Ukraine’s assault not simply legitimated however even per Russian doctrine, demanded a strategic retaliation, let’s put paid to this matter. We’ll flip the mike over to the fabulously seasoned and cool-headed former ambassador Chas Freeman, from a latest speak on Neutrality Research, for the widely-shared evaluation:
Historically the weather of a nuclear deterrent pressure on each the American and the Soviet aspect, the Russian aspect if you’ll, have been exempt from assault for the quite simple purpose that each nations regard a an assault with typical weapons on their nuclear deterrent capability as equal to a nuclear assault and justifying a nuclear response. Either side take this very severely. In fact, Ukraine shouldn’t be a part of the SALT agreements, neither is the UK. So, they’re free, I suppose, mischievously to problem this exemption, and so they’ve carried out so, and it’s very harmful.
On this interview, Nima hoisted remarks by US envoy Keith Kellogg that confirmed this interpretation. 3 Helmer flags US effort by US officers to keep away from discussing this and the Bryansk bridge assaults, and worse from a Russian perspective, the ensuing failure to sentence them.
To return to Helmer’s theme, of how Russia will reply, he argues:
(at 10:00) Which means that Russia won’t use the Oreshnik second to assault at a strategic stage. As an alternative, it’s saying we’ll subordinate our retaliatory capability, subordinate it to the negotiations. And I’ve simply through the day spoken with my sources in Moscow and what they are saying is similar. I ask expressly on the difficulty of “Will there be an Oreshnik retaliation?” My supply ready to know mentioned the launch of the Oreshnik is unlikely [Looks at notes] I’m studying it. Maybe later “Provided that there may be certainty that Trump won’t ship. Possibly now a measured strike to assist Trump focus.”
When you learn Helmer’s article, he presents the textual content of the related part of Russia’s nuclear doctrine and lengthy type substantiates the factors:
Additionally omitted from Russian legislation is the excellence between acts of terrorism and acts of struggle… In no different state, both allied with Russia within the current struggle equivalent to China, Iran and North Korea, or allied with the US and NATO in opposition to Russia, is there a legislation differentiating between state acts of struggle and state acts of terrorism.
So the usually legalistic Putin is taking some huge definitional liberties in order to have a fig leaf for not participating in a strategic retaliation. What’s bothersome is that advocates have a tendency to start out believing what they argue on behalf of their causes. Legal professionals defending shoppers they know are responsible frequently come to imagine their innocence. Is Putin equally going to return to imagine his minimization of those assaults?
However the quick query is why Russia is holding again from establishing that it has escalation dominance with out resorting to nuclear weapons. One issue could also be, as Larry Wilkerson mentioned in a latest interview we highlighted, that the path of journey is that the US will hit the bounds of its escalation ladder (with many not even absolutely greedy that Russia each outperforms the West in most weapons classes and might drastically outproduce the West too) it is going to go for a nuclear assault, and Russia is keenly conscious of that.
Nevertheless, Helmer factors out in his associated article (and he didn’t have an opportunity to cowl this within the interview) that the Kremlin is just giving Trump the chance to ship on the most recent Russian memorandum offered in Istanbul (see the phrases right here):
The supply explains Putin’s decision-making. “The political functionaries [Kremlin, Foreign Ministry] have their deal with the Memorandum and anticipate it is going to be signed. Now we look ahead to Trump to ship. Rubio despatched [Senator Lindsey] Graham to [Vladimir] Zelensky to simply accept it. He talks greatest with Zelensky. Our aspect has some extra persistence earlier than replying to the ‘terror assaults’ [sarcastic laughter]. It is because all the reassurance we have now from the Individuals is that the result of discussions shall be constructive. A Russian navy response of huge proportions can wait. We have now persistence. It’s going to occur if [emphasis] Trump won’t ship Ukraine on Memorandum-1.” How lengthy will the Kremlin give Trump? the supply was requested. “A number of weeks, not months.”
This forbearance is unpopular inside Russia, as Helmer4 and even readers have indicated, even with the trouble to underplay its seriousness.
In our publish on Larry Wilkerson’s response to the drone strikes, we ventured that Russia wouldn’t retaliate for a number of weeks in order to let the negotiations play out. Russia has made some extent of observing kinds. Why rush when time is in its favor? A delay of weeks not solely permits them to chew up extra of Ukraine, but when they go for huge strikes, to higher pre-position troops and materiel to make the most of it.
Helmer describes what the private and non-private official Russian positions are. I’ll flip to a obvious contraction, of Helmer’s insistence on this and earlier talks, that Russia is testing the US, with the truth that he additionally factors out that Russian officers, as they’ve repeatedly said, at size, with vigor, and with receipts, that the US it completely, high to backside untrustworthy. So why hassle testing when you realize the reply?
Helmer is much too sensible to not acknowledge this conundrum, however maybe he has causes for not questioning what he had been informed. I’ll contemplating this matter after extra dialogue of the state of play, significantly the Trump name to Putin.
The responsible silence from the US aspect is telling. The State Division offered an uninformative readout save registering that Lavrov initiated the decision. The Russian readout reveals that Rubio gave his condolences for the victims of the Bryansk bridge assault. However the Lavrov name got here inside hours of the Ukraine drone assault, and the truth that Rubio took in within the wee AM is an indicator that the US knew this scheme had gone pear-shaped and it was confronted with answering to Russia one way or the other.
One is tough pressed to make any sense of what Trump says. In any case, he and Putin had name either side considered pleasant and productive on Might 19,. Lower than two weeks later, Trump is looking Putin loopy, made a risk, and pretended to not know in regards to the Putin assassination try. That was adopted by a barrage of intended-to-be-extremely severe assaults by the US proxy that fell quick.
No matter Lavrov mentioned to Rubio possible induced Trump to name:
As Larry Wilkerson factors out, Trump is performing chastened, and I put extra emphasis on “performing” that Johnson does. From his publish:
Here’s what I feel actually occurred… Lavrov, on the path of Vladimir Putin, known as Rubio to ship a stern message and a warning to President Trump….the Russian authorities was ready to take sturdy motion as a result of the assault on the airfields represented a direct risk to Russia’s nuclear capabilities… Russia goes to punish Ukraine and any nations that offered help, whether or not materiel or intelligence, to this act of struggle.
The following day, June 2nd, Russia’s lead negotiator, Vladimir Medinsky, met with Ukraine’s Protection Minister, Rustem Enverovych Umerov, upfront of the formal assembly between the delegations of the 2 nations. Medinsky delivered an ultimatum to Umerov, i.e., that is your final probability to simply accept this deal or face worse penalties.
Trump was uncharacteristically silent on social media on Monday and Tuesday. I imagine that he was alarmed by Lavrov’s message…
We received our first clue on Tuesday, when Secretary of Protection Pete Hegseth introduced he wouldn’t attend the June 4 assembly of the Ukraine Protection Contact Group (UDCG). Secretary Hegseth’s absence from the June 4, 2025, assembly in Brussels marked the primary time a US protection chief didn’t take part in a UDCG session. Hegseth didn’t attend the earlier gathering in individual, however he did make a Zoom look
This will additionally clarify the odd look of a lead Bloomberg story on June 4, Unique: US Stated to Deny Air Cowl to Europe Drive in Postwar Ukraine, Its opening paragraphs:
The US is refusing to offer air defenses to again the “reassurance pressure” the UK and France are planning in a postwar Ukraine, folks acquainted with the matter mentioned.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has insisted a US so-called backstop is important to discourage Russia from breaching any future ceasefire deal. However European allies have concluded throughout discussions with their American counterparts that President Donald Trump received’t present the ensures they’ve sought to again the Europe-led ‘coalition of the prepared,’ in keeping with the folks, who requested anonymity disclosing personal discussions.
Thoughts you, the US has already mentioned no to this form of entreaty. So why has this come up once more? It seems that these EU leaders went once more to the US, hoping that the drone assaults had been sufficient of an indication of Russian weak spot in order to influence Trump to alter his thoughts.
However how lengthy does this new-found probity final? One guesses at greatest till German Chancellor Freirich Merz visits him subsequent week.
So why is Russia going by means of this elaborate charade of treating the US as if it may ship on Russia’s calls for? As Chas Freeman mentioned,
What got here out of this assembly in Istanbul is an change of memoranda outlining the positions of the 2 sides. That makes it obvious that there’s completely no chance of a gathering of the minds.
I can not start to make sense of Trump’s remarks on Iran. Admittedly, I’m overly reliant on Professor Mirandi, however he was a part of the group that negotiated the JCPOA. Mirandi has mentioned that Iran wouldn’t need Russia to intermediate in talks with the US, and that Russia wouldn’t wish to be in that place both.
And as with the Ukraine-Russia talks, the 2 sides are at an deadlock. The Supreme Chief has rejected the US demand for no nuclear enrichment. No quantity of Putin sweet-talking, even when he had been to stoop to do this, would change issues. And why precisely ought to he do the US a stable now?
Furthermore, as Helmer identified, Russia is properly conscious of the truth that there are deep divisions within the Administration. Extra particularly, Trump put neocons in key positions and regardless of having purges underway, they’re nonetheless very influential. Take a look at how when Keith Kellogg was supposed demoted to baby-sitting Zelensky, he’s managed to turn into the important thing US advisor. Recall Steve Witkoff was displaced after Putin refused to see him. That in flip was as a result of Witkoff had turn into the bearer of the 22 level memorandum devised by Kellogg and pals, and couldn’t be seen as an emissary for Trump.
As well as, Lindsay Graham is globetrotting like a wannabe Godzilla on a world tour, threatening his bone-crushing sanctions. One has to notice that is truly progress of types. Somebody will need to have given the memo to Graham that the US can not meaningfully arm Ukraine, so not less than he’s not trumping for giant weapons packages.
Nevertheless, Graham claims he has 80 votes within the Senate. That’s sufficient to take away Trump from workplace if articles of impeachment had been to get to the Senate. That danger could seem distant now, however a whole lot of issues are going pear-shaped for Trump.
So allow us to return to the contradiction of Putin wanting to check Trump when Russia is aware of full properly that the US and much more so Trump, can’t be trusted. So what’s the level of any take a look at?
The take a look at will not be of reliability, however testing for power, as in intensifying pressures in order to see when and the place fractures happen. As an example, Trump does not like being pushed round by neocons regardless that he nonetheless lets himself be influenced by them. Enjoying the negotiation recreation flatters Trump and may assist him, even when solely on the margin, in making an attempt to cut back the neocon’s energy.
Trump already loathes European leaders for having themselves or their predecessors deal with him shabbily throughout Trump 1.0 whereas being ungrateful for US protection safety. But Trump has been threatening to go away them to their very own gadgets, navy and particularly Ukraine-wise, whereas being very gradual to take steps to operationalize that, as armed companies varieties would possibly say. The European leaders are significantly upset that the negotiations are taking place in any respect. So conserving them going, even when on life help, additionally will increase stress on the US-Europe fault line.
One more reason for Russia to proceed with attrition, albeit intensified, for just a few weeks or perhaps a bit extra, is the very Iran concern that Trump talked about. Netanyahu is simply as determined to get the US concerned on his aspect as Zelensky in Ukraine, with much better capacity to make that occur. Earlier this 12 months, when Israel was engaged on a joint US-Israel strike bundle that Trump nixed, there have been reviews that Israel noticed its window for motion as late spring-early summer season. That was linked to the expiration of the snapback provisions within the JCPOA (any process must begin earlier than the top of June in order to be accomplished earlier than the expiration date in October). That presumably means a deal must be “carried out” by then or the US loses its leverage. And Netanyahu’s ever-weakening home place additionally creates a way of urgency.
In different phrases, Putin’s lame terrorism positioning might have been his cleanest excuse to attend to see if Israel does assault Iran, since that clock could be very a lot ticking. If that’s the case, the US should Do One thing and NATO shall be roped in to help (recall that the UK and France participated within the $2.3 billion protection in opposition to Iran’s negotiated and scheduled assault on Israel that price Iran solely $90 million). So Russia would have a a lot freer hand within the scale and scope of its drone assault retaliation, and much more necessary, the way it moved floor forces to capitalize on that.
Allow us to put this one other method: Ukraine is about completed. There are gaps in its manning within the line of contact. Russia crossed the Oskil River unopposed. There are reviews of panic amongst Ukraine soliders because of the advances in Sumy. This collection of assaults are recklessly determined, wild punches by Ukraine. The one final increase it’d get is utilizing Taurus missiles, which do have an extended vary, of 500km, than earlier Western missiles.
However Germany can present solely 150. They should be air launched, presumably from F-16, which have been notably lacking in motion, apparently because of the ease of Russian interception. Sure, just a few would possibly get by means of. However it is a self-limited risk. And Russia doesn’t should precise its revenge shortly, on condition that Germany is a paper tiger.
Helmer mentioned Russia sees the US as enjoying a double recreation, as if its chaos and incompetence even rises to the extent of a recreation. Assume Russia isn’t enjoying one too? Even with Helmer having glorious sources, key truth and plans are possible very intently held.
My greatest guess is Russia acknowledges it wants to interrupt NATO and isn’t but prepared to confess to that as its actual purpose. And in any occasion, it has to interrupt Ukraine. So first issues first. The method of subjugating Ukraine will weaken NATO and can enhance all types of splits (think about the recriminations and blame shifting). Russia will get all types of knowledge from that course of as to find out how to proceed subsequent.
_____
1Helmer refers particularly to particulars of paperwork and speeches, and likewise in contrast to just about all Western YouTube commentators, has entry to high-level sources in Russia, together with on the Normal Employees.
2 The truth that Kiev would possibly suppose it is a lure in its recreation of knowledge warfare doesn’t imply that an evaluation of dangers and advantages means Russia ought to chorus from retaliation for that purpose. I can see the purpose in Scott Ritter phrases, that Russia doesn’t need Ukraine driving its OODA loop. However that doesn’t argue for no retaliation, simply no quick retaliation. Russia ought to decide advantageous occasions and means.
3 See at 28:30:
Kellogg: What occurred this weekend..folks have to know within the nationwide safety house once you assault uh an opponent’s a part of their nationwide survival system which is their triad the nuclear triad meaning your danger stage goes up since you don’t know what the opposite aspect’s going to do. You’re unsure. And that’s what they really did. And the one that actually involved me was the truth that there might have been reviews uh that they attacked the naval the northern fleet headquarters in Severomorsk . And if that’s the case, if once you assault two legs of a triad that to start with, it was a really daring assault. Um and once you do this, it’s very clear the danger ranges will go up. And I feel that’s what we’re making an attempt to keep away from. We’re making an attempt to get to a place the place the danger ranges have blown so excessive that this factor will broaden and really the place we don’t wish to be.
Helmer identified the assault on the fleet didn’t occur.
4 Helmer’s examples:
Moskovsky Komsomolets, a mass circulation newspaper and tribune of common opinion, has known as for a similar “willpower and harshness” in opposition to Ukraine as Israel has proven in opposition to Hamas. Boris Rozhin, talking for the Russian navy opinion and editor-in-chief of the extensively learn navy weblog, Colonel Cassad, mentioned: “I hope that the military-political management will discover a approach to adequately reply. The blow must be painful… So long as we’re waging a restricted struggle, the enemy is waging a complete struggle, the aim of which is the destruction of our nation and other people. And no peace talks will change this. The longer it’s in coming, the extra disagreeable surprises.”
