[🇺🇦] Monitoring Russian and Ukraine War.

[Lulldapull]

Woh raazi bhi ho jaatein hain US ki help lene ke liye, as long as their smalltime jihadi plans serve the US' much grander strategy. Unko lagta hai ki woh bhi Gulfies type swinnng in dolla and gold ho jayenge !

All muzlim jihadi on CIA/ MI-6 bhatta. Nobody admits it in public even if their lives depended upon it.

 

[Sharma Ji]

All muzlim jihadi on CIA/ MI-6 bhatta. Nobody admits it in public even if their lives depended upon it.

All ka to pta nahi, but some for sure.. famously, Regan and the Talibs "great men babla.." pta ni kya bol ra tha oval opphis me bula ke with Jalaluddin sb and frenz

To her great credit, crooked Hillary (or was it Bill?) ne sahi bola tha, about "paaloing snakes in your backyard, they'll bite you only" .. is type ka kuch.

Pak ne bhi galti kari na, shortsighted waali.. o pra, 89 - 90, when the insurgency was on a roll, Pundit exodus from valley ka zamana .. a lot of those were jobless mujh who were battle hardened from the Rambo war, their training was fresh, their ideological weirdo jihadi ideas about stuff still a boiling hot... seedhay valve khola, india/kashmir valley pe direct kar dia steam.

That's just how it goes dunia ka.. ab dekho.. ab same zehen guys causing havoc in Pakistaand.

Lanka me aag laga ke Hanuman chaley Ram Ji ke darshan kanre... or, 10 choohay kha ke billi chali Hajj ko .. US foreign policy right there.

 

[Sharma Ji]

Chechens and Somalis not on US bhatta .. Chechen Putin ke hai, Somalis ka any idea ? Udhar hi safe havens me all these Al Qaedas hiding now.. abhi ek bomb ni drop kara tha in a cave somewhere to get a HVT ? .. Musta been boots on the ground too, Tier 1 SEAL and Delta or CIA types calling it in.

 

[Sharma Ji]

Somalis gotta have a daddy too, Al Saud/Gulfie assets or just wild native jungle kallus ?

 

[Sharma Ji]

Somalis also a CIA experiment ? Tens of thousands, maybe in the multiples of it have crossed and continue to cross into Europe.. "refugees" .. EU ki buri halat hai in sab ko le k.. the migration thing is nuts, ekdum artificial, population alter krne ka (((plan))) .. Germany se Yahud ab revenge le ra ha

 

[Saif]

Mic-drop moment in Oval Office

World leaders trade zingers as Zelenskyy shuts down suit question with iconic reply.

www.thedailystar.net

Mic-drop moment in Oval Office

President Donald Trump meets with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House in Washington, DC, February 28, 2025. File photo: Brian Snyder/Reuters

There was a time when world leaders were known for their policies and governance. Now, they're known for their one-liners. Once upon a respectable time, politics was a realm of great speeches, robust debates, and grand visions. Today? It's an endless stream of meme-worthy moments, savage clapbacks, and leaders who deliver zingers instead of solutions.

In the latest episode of When World Leaders Collide, Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy sat down for what was supposed to be a diplomatic discussion that quickly turned into a masterclass in passive-aggressive exchanges. It was less of a high-stakes political meeting and more of a reality TV showdown, featuring one leader fighting for his country's survival and another fixated on optics.

Because, of course, of all the things to discuss—military aid, strategic alliances, Russia's ongoing aggression—a journalist at the meeting thought it was the perfect moment to ask, "Why don't you wear a suit?" Yes, in the middle of a conversation about a literal war, the focus shifted to Zelenskyy's attire. Because nothing says geopolitical awareness like a well-tailored blazer.

Zelenskyy's response? Iconic. "I will wear a suit when this war is finished."

Mic. Drop. Internet won.

And just like that, in one single line, he delivered a bigger statement than most politicians manage in entire speeches. Because let's be honest—what kind of question even is that? If Churchill had shown up to WWII meetings in his bathrobe, would anyone have cared? (Actually, they might have, but the man had a cigar and a war to win.)

Meanwhile, Trump—never one to let a conversation be about anything other than himself—had already managed to turn the meeting into a spectacle. Before the suit saga, he accused Zelenskyy of "gambling with World War Three." Because obviously, the leader of a country actively being invaded is the one "gambling" here. Not, say, the guy who keeps suggesting that Ukraine should just let Russia take what they want and be done with it.

It was a bizarre moment, but let's be honest—this is Trump we're talking about. This is the man who thinks diplomacy is a reality show and who once threatened nuclear war over Twitter. The idea that Ukraine should simply "negotiate" with Russia, as if Putin is a disgruntled hotel guest demanding a refund, is peak Trumpian logic.

But what makes the suit comment truly fascinating is how perfectly it encapsulates the state of modern politics. We're living in a world where aesthetics often "trump" (pun absolutely intended) actual substance. A leader can be in the middle of navigating one of the biggest conflicts of our time, and yet, what do people focus on? His outfit.

Imagine applying this same energy to other historical moments. "Mr Mandela, why didn't you wear cufflinks while dismantling apartheid?" "Mr Lincoln, that top hat is nice, but could we see you in something a little more fitted?" The absurdity of it is almost too much to process.

Zelenskyy, to his credit, handled it like a pro. He didn't roll his eyes. He didn't laugh. He didn't ask the journalist if they'd recently suffered a head injury. Instead, he gave the kind of response that reminds the world that some leaders have real priorities. He doesn't care about looking polished—he cares about winning a war.

And that, right there, is why this meeting was such a perfect display of everything wrong with how we consume politics today. While Ukraine fights for survival, the US is having its own existential crisis about whether it even wants to care. The room was less about negotiations and more about optics—Zelenskyy standing as the exhausted, battle-hardened leader trying to keep his country alive, while Trump made it clear that his main concern was how this all played for him.

At the end of the day, it's not about suits. It's about who takes this war—and by extension, democracy itself—seriously. One leader left that meeting as a man fighting for his country's existence. The other left it trying to make himself the main character.

And in the middle was this journalist who just wanted to know if Zelenskyy had considered upgrading his wardrobe.

The result? Politics is no longer about policies or governance—it's about performance. Leaders are now entertainers, their every move carefully curated for maximum virality. The more dramatic the statement, the better.

This isn't to say that politics hasn't always had its theatrics. But the difference is that now, the theatrics are the politics. We're no longer electing leaders; we're selecting the best main characters for the ongoing drama that is world affairs. And in this endless cycle of political entertainment, one thing is certain: if democracy ever collapses, at least we'll get a great headline out of it.

And what do we, the audience, do? We engage. We react. We rank presidents based on their Twitter burns and roast politicians like they're contestants on The Great British Bake Off. We consume politics the same way we consume pop culture: fast, dramatic, and with minimal emotional commitment. One day it's global conflict; the next, we've moved on to Miley Cyrus' Grammy Arms.

Barrister Noshin Nawal is an activist, feminist, and a columnist for The Daily Star.​

 

[Saif]

Ukraine needs Zelensky, Trump & Europe

The times are out of joint. That is an understatement, of course. But there's no other way of looking at the situation after the bust-up which took place at the White House last week. It is something which ought not to have happened. What happened was bizarre, with President Trump and Vice Presiden

thefinancialexpress.com.bd

Ukraine needs Zelensky, Trump & Europe
Syed Badrul Ahsan
Published :
Mar 06, 2025 22:17
Updated :
Mar 06, 2025 22:17

The times are out of joint. That is an understatement, of course. But there's no other way of looking at the situation after the bust-up which took place at the White House last week. It is something which ought not to have happened. What happened was bizarre, with President Trump and Vice President Vance taking it in turns to berate President Zelensky in the full presence of the media. There has hardly ever been a time in living memory of a visiting head of state subjected to such indignity by his hosts.

And it all began with a newsman, conveniently positioned near Trump, asking Zelensky why he was not attired in a suit. That was uncalled for and certainly premeditated. No reporter has the moral authority or should have the affront for that matter to question a dignitary on his attire, but this newsman did it. It certainly did not enhance his reputation. And it was JD Vance, the young American Vice President, who took over from there. He wondered loudly why the Ukraine leader had not demonstrated any gratitude for American support for his country in its war against Russia.

And then Donald Trump had his cue. He went on speaking over Zelensky, who was unable to get in a word edgeways. It is to the Ukrainian leader's credit that he did not lose his temper even as Trump lost his. Zelensky was fully aware of how the American President regarded him --- as a dictator holding on to power without going through an election. He also knew of the antipathy Trump's Washington had for Ukraine, a reason being the strong support Kyiv had garnered from Europe and Canada in the last three years of the military conflict with Russia. Trump accused Zelensky of gambling with World War Three, which was not true. He was indignant that Zelensky was disrespecting the United States (US) when the exact opposite was true. It was Trump and Vance subjecting Zelensky to disrespect.

In the past, there have been foreign visitors, Presidents and Prime Ministers and Foreign Ministers, who have met US Presidents in the Oval Office, exchanged pleasantries before engaging in hard closed-door negotiations. Political scruples and diplomatic convention did not allow those negotiations to dwindle into shouting matches in public. John F Kennedy knew in 1962 in advance of the Soviet missiles in Cuba and yet carried on a decent conversation with the visiting Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko. President Lyndon Johnson was unhappy that British Prime Minister Harold Wilson was not amenable to the idea of sending British troops to Vietnam. Their arguments took place away from the public eye.

On Friday last week, it was diplomacy that took a bad beating in Washington. The spectacle, culminating in President Zelensky and his delegation being asked to leave the White House, left an entire world disbelieving, unable to imagine that such a scandal had indeed taken place. And then the world spoke up, for Zelensky. French President Emmanuel Macron spoke for millions around the globe when he laid out the facts in stark, unapologetic terms: in a conflict which has gone on for three years, Russia is the aggressor, Ukraine the victim. Much as one might be critical of Ukraine's NATO ambitions and condemn the systematic way in which Moscow's adversaries have been inching their way to Russian borders, the truth is one that cannot be upended. It is that President Vladimir Putin sent his army into Ukraine in the belief that Kyiv would capitulate in a matter of days.

That has not happened. In these three years, to give Trump his due in his concerns over why nothing was done to bring the conflict to a halt, no diplomatic measures were undertaken towards a resolution of the crisis. The Biden administration, NATO and the European Union (EU) all were adamant that Ukraine be armed, that such arming could well compel Putin to walk back and concede defeat. In reality, Russia has seized chunks of Ukraine and is in little mood to give them up. And with Trump now back in power, Putin knows the pressure of the West on him has been easing to a point where he can hold on to territory his forces have already seized. Assuming Trump compels Ukraine to arrive at a settlement it is uncomfortable with, it will be a situation hardly any different from appeasement of Moscow.

So what are the stakes in the Ukraine situation today? The summit of European leaders convened by Sir Keir Starmer in London on Sunday had really nothing tough on offer. Toughness was not possible because Europe knows that to be tough with Donald Trump would be counter-productive. More crucially, any settlement of the Ukraine-Russia conflict must of necessity have the Americans taking part in the enterprise. President Trump may have decided to cut off all funding and military equipment for Ukraine, but that does not absolve him of his responsibilities in Europe. It is now up to Europe's grandees to persuade Trump, despite the humiliation President Zelensky was subjected to at the White House, to provide leadership in the search for a solution to the conflict. For Europe, for Ukraine's backers, it is an unenviable situation: they are caught between a rock and a hard place.

And from such a position Europe looks to Trump's leadership in the search for a solution to the conflict. It is a job its leaders ought to have done earlier rather than bring conditions to this pass. Now, despite everything that Trump and his team have been saying about Ukraine, despite castigating Joe Biden for everything, it is for Trump to inform the world that on his watch America is not receding into isolation, that it will abandon theatrics in favour of diplomacy in order for a rules-based world to be upheld and promoted. Of course, there is an important caveat: Washington must not begin to believe that a solution to the war can be arrived at by forcing President Zelensky from power. And then there is another caveat: while the Americans might not want Ukraine in NATO, they must at the same time reassure Europe and Ukrainians in particular that there will be iron-clad guarantees of Ukraine's security as an integral part of any solution to the crisis.

Diplomacy must be restored, both in Europe and in the new order Donald Trump and JD Vance have inaugurated in Washington. A lack of it makes for a dangerous world, obviously. Europe is in sore need of a new balance of power.​

 

[Saif]

Russia dismisses European peacekeeper idea, says Macron threatened Moscow

Russia ruled out European proposals to send peacekeeping forces to Ukraine and said on Thursday that French President Emmanuel Macron had threatened it by suggesting that Moscow was a grave menace to Europe. French President Emmanuel Macron said in a televised address to the nation on Wednesday he

thefinancialexpress.com.bd

Russia dismisses European peacekeeper idea, says Macron threatened Moscow
REUTERS
Published :
Mar 06, 2025 17:29
Updated :
Mar 06, 2025 17:29

President Vladimir Putin and French President Emmanuel Macron, attend a joint press conference, in Moscow, Russia, February 7, 2022. Photo : Thibault Camus/Pool via REUTERS/Files

Russia ruled out European proposals to send peacekeeping forces to Ukraine and said on Thursday that French President Emmanuel Macron had threatened it by suggesting that Moscow was a grave menace to Europe.

French President Emmanuel Macron said in a televised address to the nation on Wednesday he plans next week to hold a meeting of army chiefs from European countries willing to send troops to Ukraine after any eventual peace deal with Russia.

He also said France needs to be ready if the United States is no longer by its side.

President Donald Trump has upended US policy towards Ukraine and Russia and demanded a deal to end the war, berating Ukraine while discussing a renewal of ties with Moscow.

Macron said Russia was "a threat for France and Europe", that the Ukraine war was already a "global conflict" and that he would open a debate about extending the French nuclear umbrella to allies in Europe.

The Kremlin said the speech was extremely confrontational and that it was clear Macron wanted the war in Ukraine to continue while President Vladimir Putin's foreign minister said the speech amounted to a threat against Russia.

"This is, of course, a threat" against Russia, Sergei Lavrov told reporters in Moscow.

"Unlike their predecessors, who also wanted to fight against Russia, Napoleon, Hitler, Mr. Macron does not act very gracefully, because at least they said it bluntly: 'we must conquer Russia, we must defeat Russia'."

Lavrov also dismissed European ideas about sending peacekeepers from NATO member states to Ukraine, saying that Moscow would consider such a deployment to be a NATO presence in Ukraine and that Moscow would not allow it.

Russia and the United States are by far the world's biggest nuclear powers, with over 5,000 nuclear warheads each, followed by China with about 500 and then France with 290 and the United Kingdom with 225, according to the Federation of American Scientists.

Russian officials say the tough rhetoric from Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and other European powers over recent days is simply not backed up by hard military power and point to Russia's advances on the battlefield in Ukraine.

Putin last year ordered the regular size of the Russian army to be increased by 180,000 troops to 1.5 million active servicemen in a move that would make it the second largest in the world after China's.

Putin has repeatedly dismissed as nonsense Western claims that Russia could one day attack a NATO member.

Ukraine and the West say Putin is engaged in an imperial-style land grab in Ukraine, and have repeatedly vowed to defeat Russia, which currently controls just under 20 per cent of Ukraine, including Crimea and a chunk of eastern and southern Ukraine.

Putin portrays the war as part of a historic struggle with the West, which he says humiliated Russia, after the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, by enlarging NATO and encroaching on what he considers Moscow's sphere of influence, including Ukraine.​