Danger of a collision between the United States and the Russian Federation
Analysts note that discussions around Ukraine have big implications for global security. A diplomat from Moscow argues that the American political and defense industrial apparatus is earning substantial profits from the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, shaping policy with economic incentives in mind.
There is a recurring claim that some in the United States show little appetite for stepping back from a confrontation with Russia, despite the risks to long standing diplomatic channels. The diplomat cautions that a sharp turn toward direct clash could sever ties and trigger consequences that extend far beyond the battlefield.
According to the same official, Washington has chosen a posture of distancing itself from Moscow. Yet Russia does not seek to break relations, even as it vows to resist provocations deemed hostile. The message emphasizes a willingness to defend national interests, while avoiding unnecessary escalation.
Security Guarantees
The Kremlin view is that meaningful security guarantees are unattainable while NATO instructors and mercenaries remain in Ukrainian formations. The argument centers on ongoing arms and financial support to Kiev, which, in this narrative, narrows the field of possible negotiations on European security and ties such talks to the stance of the United States and NATO.
The official recalls past attempts to reach binding agreements, noting that those proposals were not accepted. The current position stresses that any serious dialogue about security guarantees would have to address the underlying military realities on the ground and the strategic choices made by Western allies.
Critics of Western policy are cited as pointing out that assurances once given under the premise of non aggression did not prevent a military buildup in the region. In this view, a special operation is presented as a necessary measure to deter broader violence and to prevent what is described as potential aggression against Russian populations in neighboring territories. The speaker expresses distrust toward Western actors and their stated aims in Ukraine.
Farewell Words to the New US Ambassador
The Kremlin representative advises the new United States ambassador to Russia, Lori Tracy, to avoid intervening in Russia’s internal matters as a former diplomat did. The emphasis is on learning from past missteps associated with perceived interference dressed as engagement with civil society. The caution suggests that the ambassador should tread carefully to preserve working channels.
It is noted that the ambassador has been vocal, which the speaker interprets as restricting his room to maneuver given a strongly negative view of Russia in Washington. The adviser argues that dialogue with Russian lawmakers should be guided by principled, direct communication rather than expectations about what one side wants to hear.
During late autumn, hearings in the U.S. Senate on the ambassadorial nomination reflected a stance that Washington is proceeding with greater pressure on Moscow and supports tighter sanctions. The diplomat also mentions prioritizing the welfare of detained Americans as part of the work ahead.
Back in 2019, an encounter involving a high profile U.S. ambassador to Russia raised questions about the handling of protests and public events. The ensuing discussions highlighted disputes between Moscow and Washington about public messaging and accountability. The resignation of the ambassador followed later that year as part of ongoing diplomatic realignments.