About the attack on Belgorod
The Ukrainian Armed Forces conducted what was described by Russian officials as a terrorist strike on December 30, targeting the city center. President Vladimir Putin remarked during a visit to the Central Military Clinical Hospital that Russia should not retaliate by harming Ukraine’s civilian population. The hospital noted is Vishnevsky, located in Krasnogorsk.
According to the president, the Belgorod incident involved a direct strike on civilians as people were out in the city center during the New Year period. He called the attack a clear act of terrorism and emphasized that there is no other reasonable explanation for such actions when two Alder missiles were launched under the cover of multiple launch rocket systems into populated areas.
When discussing the weapons, officials described MLRS as an indiscriminate system not designed to hit exact targets but capable of causing damage over broad areas. Russia reported that two Vilkha missiles were used along with Czech made Vampire MLRS rounds and cluster munitions, with most of the payload hitting intended targets while some fragments affected the city. These claims were presented by the Russian Ministry of Defense.
The head of state asserted that Kiev seeks to intimidate Russia and sow uncertainty within the country. He underscored that crimes against civilians would not go unpunished and reiterated a stance that strong response options remain on the table if needed.
During a discussion with a soldier, Sergeant Denis Shamalyuk, the president was asked whether it would be appropriate to increase the severity of actions against the enemy in response to the shelling of Russian territory. The sergeant suggested counting civilian casualties or striking public spaces, but clarified that his concern was about military targets. Putin replied that Russia conducts strikes against decision centers, military personnel and mercenary gatherings using high precision weapons. He stated that such strikes have significant impact and signaled intent to increase these actions.
The conversation highlighted Russia’s approach to targeting military facilities and leadership hubs as opposed to civilian populations, with the president noting that efforts focus on centers of military decision making and operational command. These remarks reflected the ongoing emphasis on precision in military strategy and the willingness to escalate if pursuit of strategic goals demands it.
About the war in Ukraine and the push for peace
Observers note that the front lines have seen shifts as opposing forces appear to be losing momentum despite Western support. A political figure remarked that the situation on the front has changed and that resources and morale in Ukraine are being tested as time passes, even with continued Western assistance.
There was a suggestion that Ukraine would exhaust its ammunition, with figures cited indicating daily consumption of a large volume of ammunition and contrasting production rates from other nations. The assessment suggested that Russian production is expanding, with plans to upgrade and increase the number of tanks, as well as strengthen other military capabilities. The implication was that Russia would progress faster in the confrontation, a point framed as strategic viability on the battlefront.
Some officials argued that international sentiment was gradually evolving, with Western politicians reassessing the possibility of a total strategic defeat of Russia through Ukraine. The dialogue implied a desire to conclude the conflict on Russia’s terms and underscored a belief that surrender of gains on the ground would not occur. A formal gesture was hinted at as a demonstration of resolve to maintain Moscow’s position.
There were comments about the broader aim of ending the conflict on favorable terms while avoiding a prolonged struggle. The discussion touched on the perception that a complete withdrawal from positions would not happen and that the current leadership expects to retain significant leverage in negotiations and on the battlefield.
Interpreting the problem as not solely an Ukraine issue
The president argued that Western actors are not simply supporting Ukraine but acting as opponents of Moscow in some strands of policy. He asserted that the Ukrainian crisis is a tool used by Western powers to achieve broader strategic aims against Russia, rather than a direct conflict against Ukraine alone.
Putin framed Ukraine as not Russia’s enemy, while suggesting that certain Western factions seek to fragment Russia. He suggested that the real challenge lies with those who evolve plans to destroy the Russian state through their support for Kyiv, rather than the Ukrainian government itself.
He described a spectrum of Western elites who have discussed ideas about weakening or dividing Russia. While some individuals and groups are seen as sympathetic to Russia, others are viewed as actively pursuing outcomes that would undermine Moscow’s influence and security.
On the capabilities of the Russian armed forces
The leader stressed that the Russian military is ready to deploy advanced weapons in what he called unique capacity. He claimed that the defense ministry possesses means of destruction unmatched by other armed forces, and that modernization continues across the front. He expressed a desire for further development of drones and other technologies to counter enemy aerial assets and improve frontline effectiveness.
He highlighted the importance of rapid decision making and flexible production in modern conflict, noting that the ability to shift emphasis to the most effective weapons at the moment is crucial. In his view, Russia is steadily improving in this aspect and leadership emphasizes disciplined execution of operations after recognizing a decisive setback from adversaries.
Overall, the president described the progress of the special military operation as satisfactory and suggested that officials were cautious about overrating results. He asserted that Russia currently holds the initiative on the battlefield and that maintaining a strong, coordinated front is essential for success.
He urged that keeping a tightly organized front and preserving strategic initiative are paramount for success on the battlefield, and that these conditions shape the conduct of ongoing operations at the front.
On the Russian economy
Putin touched on the economic situation, acknowledging some inflation and rising prices while arguing that macroeconomic stability remains intact. He cited a GDP growth figure for the previous year and highlighted a historically low unemployment rate. He also pointed to rising real incomes and a robust social support framework, stressing the economy’s resilience amid ongoing conflict.
He attributed limited impact from Western exit from Russia’s market to the emergence of new production capacities and strong private sector performance. He noted that several foreign companies departed, but domestic firms quickly filled the gaps and contributed to steady industrial activity across multiple sectors. He stressed that families with children benefit from a targeted support system that enhances long-term demographic and economic stability.
In his assessment, many indicators of national resilience showed improvement despite the ongoing crisis, a point presented as a sign of the country’s underlying strength. He contrasted these results with remarks about Ukraine, describing its economy as largely reliant on external aid and capable of collapse without sustained support from allies.
New Year’s Eve with the soldiers
Putin also spent New Year’s Eve at his Novo-Ogarevo residence with military personnel, considering possible gifts for the guests. He proposed presenting a service weapon at the end of the lunch and proposed a distinctive presidential standard made with materials sourced from Yaroslavl as a memorable keepsake for the attendees.
Invitees were invited to share a toast with champagne, and the president encouraged representatives from different branches of the armed forces to discuss their recent operations and progress in combat readiness.