Trump Sanctions and the Russian War Economy

President Trump has put the squeeze on the Russian economy with sanctions that are having an effect. Joined with his negotiating strategy the sanctions have the effect of keeping the war on a closer level of equality between Ukraine and Russia. The sanctions protract the war by making it more difficult for Russia to afford military superiority while its economy is declining and that encourages Ukraine to continue the fight hoping Russia will run out of men and supplies in a year or two. Russians so have incurred twice as many casualties as Ukraine thus far- 1.2 million to appx 600,000 for Ukraine. Six or seven million Ukrainians have left the country while the old, poor and infirm have been forced to stay.

President Trump hopes to wrap up the war by June with some kind of negotiated settlement yet he may underestimate the resolve of Zelensky and his western financiers to defeat Russia on the battlefield and develop a hardened front with western built military forces on the border. I asked AI about Russia's financial situation that I will post below.

President Trump is also pursuing stronger U.S. relations with nations on the south of Russia. It is challenging to say that the policy of winning over time in stopping the Russian economy from being able to continue the war is a humane or effective policy. The European Union in the meanwhile is working on an accelerated plan to let Ukraine have a candidate membership in the EU by 2027 that will more formally bring the EU into a direct state of war with Russia. President Trump in trying to exploit the situation to the profit of the United States may be half-minded about peace and behind the curve of the economic and political events of the war. That may lead to the dangerous situation of a more desperate Russia in 2027 facing an existential threat without Jean Paul Sartre being present to moderate that.

Gary- Is the russian economy in good enough shape that it can sustain its war for another two or three years with ukraine

Gemini-"As of February 2026, the Russian economy is in a state of stagnation and mounting strain, but most experts believe it can sustain the war effort for at least another two to three years. While the "sugar rush" from initial massive military spending has faded, causing GDP growth to plummet to approximately 0.8% for 2026, the Kremlin has successfully placed the country on a permanent war footing with a budget designed for long-term conflict. 

Economic Sustainability and Constraints

Russia's ability to continue the war relies on its transition to a hardened war economy, though this model is increasingly fragile: 

• Fiscal Resilience: The 2026 federal budget allocates an unprecedented 16.8 trillion rubles (roughly 38% of all federal spending) to defense and security. Analysts suggest that while growth is stalling, Russia still has the fiscal capacity to continue the war in the short term through domestic borrowing, tax hikes, and some remaining reserves.
• Declining Reserves: Liquid funds in the National Welfare Fund have been largely depleted to cover deficits in 2024 and 2025. Some banks estimate that by the end of 2026, only 1.6 trillion rubles may remain in the state's "safety cushion".
• Stagnating Growth: After growing at 4.3% in 2024, the economy slowed sharply to about 1% in 2025 and is projected to grow by only 0.8% in 2026. This is the lowest growth rate for Russia outside of the pandemic since 2014.
• Inflationary Pressures: To fight rampant inflation, the Central Bank of Russia has maintained record-high interest rates (peaking at 21% in 2025 and remaining high in 2026). This has discouraged private investment and eaten into corporate profits. 

Military-Industrial Status

While the economy can provide the funds, the physical ability to produce equipment is reaching critical limits: 

• Depleting Soviet Stockpiles: Much of Russia's current production relies on refurbishing old Soviet-era equipment. By early 2025, most easily restorable vehicles were depleted, and some analysts estimate these stockpiles could be exhausted by the end of 2026.
• Technological Dependency: Despite "import-substitution" claims, the defense industry remains heavily dependent on foreign components and advanced machinery. Sanctions have caused a "slow degradation" rather than an immediate collapse, leading to lower-quality military inputs.
• Manpower Shortages: Massive casualties (estimated near 1.2 million by early 2026) and mobilization have created a severe labor shortage in the civilian sector, further hindering non-war economic productivity. 

Key Factors Supporting the War Effort

Despite these strains, several factors prevent an imminent economic collapse:

• Energy Revenues: As long as Russia can sell oil at reasonable prices (even at a discount), it generates enough revenue to "muddle along". However, new U.S. sanctions in late 2025 against major companies like Rosneft and Lukoil have forced prices for Urals crude down to as low as $35 per barrel.
• International Support: Deepening economic integration with China, Iran, and North Korea has helped fill the void left by Western markets and provided crucial military supplies.
• Public Adaptation: Russian society has largely adapted to economic constraints. As of mid-2025, the share of people satisfied with their lives reached its highest level since 1993, with many in industrial regions benefiting from war-related wage increases. 

Summary of Economic Outlook (2026 Estimates)

Metric	2026 Projection	Source
GDP Growth	0.8%	IMF / Reuters
Defense Spending	16.8 Trillion Rubles (~38% of budget)	UkraineWorld
Budget Deficit	1.6% to 4.4% of GDP	Reuters / Bank of Finland
Inflation Target	4.0%	Central Bank of Russia

The 2025 U.S. sanctions, particularly the October 2025 targeting of Rosneft and Lukoil, have created a significant structural deficit that will come to a head in 2027. While Russia's economy currently remains on a war footing, these sanctions are dismantling the primary revenue engine used to sustain that footing. 

Impact on 2027 Budget Funding

By 2027, the cumulative effect of these sanctions is expected to force a "breaking point" where the Kremlin may have to choose between funding the war and maintaining domestic economic stability. 

• Projected Revenue Collapse: Russia's Finance Ministry has already slashed its long-term hydrocarbon revenue targets. For 2027, revenues are projected to be roughly 19% lower than 2024 levels. Independent analysts at the KSE Institute suggest that if discounts persist at current levels, annual oil revenues could fall to $87 billion, down from nearly $190 billion in 2024.
• The "Shadow Fleet" Crisis: The U.S. and UK have intensified the seizure of "shadow fleet" tankers, which previously allowed Russia to bypass price caps. By early 2026, over 600 vessels have been designated, significantly increasing the cost of logistics and reducing the net profit per barrel.
• Widening Budget Deficit: The deficit for 2026 is already projected to triple its original target (reaching up to 4.4% of GDP) due to these revenue shortfalls. By 2027, the cumulative deficit is expected to exceed 10 trillion rubles, leaving the government with no choice but to raid the remaining scraps of the National Welfare Fund.
• Fiscal "Desperation" Measures: To cover the 2027 gap, the Russian government is implementing aggressive tax hikes, including raising VAT to 22% and significantly increasing taxes on small businesses. These measures are expected to dampen domestic consumption and further stagnate the economy. 

Key Vulnerabilities by 2027

1. Investment Starvation: Rosneft and Lukoil, which dominate the industry, face a massive capital shortfall. Without the ability to reinvest in new drilling, Russia's upstream production is expected to begin a sharp decline by late 2027.
2. India's Pivot: Increased U.S. pressure and tariff threats have led Indian refiners to demand discounts of $25–$27 per barrel, nearly double the 2024 average. Some Indian firms have begun rejecting Russian cargoes entirely to avoid secondary sanctions.
3. End of EU Dependence: The European Commission has set a hard deadline to fully phase out all Russian fossil fuels by 2027, permanently closing Russia’s most lucrative historical market. 

Despite these pressures, some economists believe the Kremlin can "muddle through" 2027 by printing money or further nationalizing private assets, though this would likely trigger hyperinflation and end the "illusion of normality" for the Russian public. "

France Seems to have an Undeclared Naval War on Russia

 Apparently it is France that has taken upon itself the task of making clandestine naval war upon Russia. France seems to be the party that has sunk several Russian oil tankers recently, and as of now Russia hasn't attacked French ships or ports in return.

French President Macron has a smaller naval force than Russia yet it is technically modern and sophisticated, including the only European aircraft carrier. It is tempting for rulers of countries with a large, sophisticated military with a technical advantage over an enemy not to use their resources to attack.

Russia of course has several options for counterattacking should it choose to. France obviously is hiding behind the N.A.T.O. shield to engage in war at its pleasure- striking out at a powerful adversary like a cobra- an adversary that doesn't wish to expand the war to include France and potentially N.A.T.O.

The French President Macron seeks to stop Russian oil sales to China and elsewhere that is an important source of cash to fund its war stressed economy. Russia probably will do some kind of cost-benefit analysis to determine if it is a good idea to take out Marseilles and Le Havre's port infrastructures with something like submarine drones or air launched torpedoes with APR-3Es or Murena-300S etc.

The United States will certainly be tested by the new European confidence that it can attack Russian interests with impunity; America cannot be the blaster in a master-blaster Thunderdome relationship without forfeiting moral and political leadership in the relationship of N.A.T.O. treaty obligations. The idea that European nations can attack whoever they want and the United States will defend them if the countries counterattack the European aggressor is not a policy that is desirable or sustainable from an American perspective.

President Macron visited China to speak with Xi Jinping and boast how the Russians will suffer significant financial damage in the near future (from the loss of oil sales revenue). The French having rejoined the N.A.T.O. military command long after the Cold War concluded (in 2009 during the Obama administration) see only advantages in levering the anachronistic treaty that is dangerous for U.S. strategic interests now and down the road. A new international security arrangement will need to be found. The N.A.F.T.A. treaty was renegotiated by President Trump; perhaps a new N.A.T.O. treaty should be found that limits the numbers of members and requires some sort of a rational use of the joint military power such that individual members that first attack another nation, cannot use the treaty for mutual defense to expect mutual defense when they are the aggressor first striking a foreign power, as the French have on Russia.

President Trump Could Defund Ukraine War and It Would Stop Sooner

 Dividing the global economy is not in America's interest. There is no winning scenario developing western hegemony over Russia through annexing formerly Russian Ukraine entirely to the west's puppet and expanding N.A.T.O right up to Russia- it is instead the most stupid plan available. Pres. Trump can end the war by stopping America's war against Russia through the Ukraine puppet dictator.

Melania Trump could tell her husband to stop funding the war then peace could break out and issues of displaced persons would be easier to resolve. Raising the issue of misplaced war orphans now is a smokescreen for war mongers that want support from the American public to continue it. They make too much money on it. Cold warrior politicians for moving N.A.T.O. eastward never die; they just fade into Ft. Knox.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0lvZ8Xf52g

VP Vance Doesn't Understand Russia and Seems to Have Fallen Under the Military-Industrial Complex Spell

 VP Vance seems not to understand Russia history, Russian security requirements or the utility of resolving the Ukraine war directly. He believes Russia need make concessions. He is wrong about that; the administration need cut the Palestinian drag on weird multiple locations for Palestinian territories approach and draw a rational line somewhere, soon.

The U.S. isn't going to become militarily involved lest things escalate and should supply Ukraine with any military support at all; that just kicks the can down the road after the Russians roll up all of Ukraine (clue-bad time to negotiate then).  The N.A.T.O. Euro-U.S. military industrial complex legacy is a juggernaut that needs conflict. It is a raging beast with razor sharp teeth hungry for yogurt. VP Vance should not become prey to the endless agitation for eastward military expansion by the military industrial complex.

Russia is starting the slow advance moving across the Dnepr to secure Transnistria presently since Ukraine has moved troops north for photo op invasions of Russia. Recognize all of the areas Russia presently has on the East side of the Dnepr as Russian, guarantee no N.A.TO. expansion in to Ukraine, reduce Ukrainian forces to 250,000, create a no tax free trade zone 25 miles on either side of the Dnepr River for the world to invest in, end all U.S. sanctions on Russia and that would cover most of the real issues. 

Don't complicate a fairly simple situation. No war crimes trials for either side, no reparations. Just pretend a vast left-wing tornado happened in Ukraine and move on. the U.S. needs Russia to at least be neutral in regard to a possible future Chinese military adventure attacking elements of the west including Western Taiwan.

Germany's New Fuhrer; Fred Merz Hopes to Make the Dream of World War Three Come True

 Germany may not have had such a war mongering Chancellor since Adolph Hitler as Fred Mertz. He said recently that Ukraine can use Taurus cruise missiles to attack Crimea and elsewhere in Russia. The United States should let it be known they disavow such escalation and if Russia retaliates by launching missiles at Germany, the United States will merely be an interested spectator rather than partner-in-escalation that would get snared into a broader conflict under N.A.T.O. insurance with the U.S.A. When retarded robots run European politics the entire world can be left holding the bag.

https://kyivindependent.com/merz-signals-ukraine-could-use-taurus-missiles-to-target-crimea-kerch-bridge/

If the next Chancellor of Germany prompts a Russian retaliation that makes Dresden 2.0 into flaming reality he should not expect the United States to provide some sort of vengeance upon Russia. The United States is against the absolute lunacy of European escalation of the war they cannot win, and that can only result in W.W. III- probably the last one of history.

https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsZMSVtTcrAwlo1MbWH3KEIudVSE96Hi9

European leaders needs to recognize the independence of East Ukraine from the Euro puppet state of West Ukraine and get on with peace and reconstruction.

Poland Wants its Own Nukes to Attack Russia as Needed

 European leaders are swelling up to rearm better than ever in their history. That generally leads to general wars. The dynamics of power lead imbecilic leaders to bring the world to ruin in their quest for glory, promotion of fear in the populace aided and abetted by a supportive media. Russia of course is the perceptible threat enabling European rearmament to an unprecedented scale. Poland with nuclear weapons- imagine that.

https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-tusk-plan-train-poland-men-military-service-russia/

That raises the question of what if at some point when Russia has achieved its reconquista of enough historically Russian owned land in Ukraine that was given to western puppets by Western leadership carpet-baggers at the end of the Cold War 1.0 when the reemerging Russia was weak as a kitten militarily and the west under Bill Clinton had irrational exuberance; what if the Russian stop their advance, declare victory and dig in defensively to defend their position? Would or could European war mongers accept that position and quit their extreme military build up?

https://thehill.com/opinion/international/5177822-europe-is-still-dithering-about-defense/

Building more nuclear weapons and larger armies to increase international safety appears suspiciously like a retarded idiot savant President’s idea about security gained from reading a history book in elementary school thirty years ago that was written 70 years ago.

Since European leaders of the far west tend toward support of war on Russia until all an apropos belligerent attitude demanding the return of war with Russia until all Russian held or annexed areas are restored to the comedian–in-chief’s control, doesn’t that mean that a gradual upgrade to World War Three is inevitable and unavoidable? Wouldn’t it be cheaper and less time consuming to simply roll out the weapons of mass destruction presently since I for one hate suspense and even suspense movies?

https://www.udio.com/songs/tEZRmmFQq3HLxpio4afQtN

Maybe they are hoping for a miraculous intervention to roll back Russia to borders acceptable to Europeans desirous of all of Ukraine. Maybe they have not an inkling of such a thing and believe they can frighten Russia to into retreat, or alternatively that Russia will just battle with conventional weapons soldiers foregoing nukes, chemical and biological weapons because of retaliation by Poland, France and England? At least they would be lft with nuclear weapons after their glorious victory over Russia and have a credible deterrent to possible German or Russian aggression in the future.

Guarantee Ukraine Security with Peace

 European and Ukrainian security will be guaranteed with peace and renormailzed economic relations and development rather than continued adversarial relations. To draw down the knife fight both sides need put away the blades.

Deng Xiaoping compared the process of Chinese economic development to "crossing the river by feeling the stones". Developing peace is a comparable process that requires people to take an affirmative first step and continue walking across the water though they can't see what is below.

Peace between superpowers is based to a certain extent on trust. Like the value of the dollar based on nothing more than the faith and credit of the United States rather than gold or some other material, peace can only be as strong as trust and respect for other nations. One need put effort into building peace and renormalizing relations between Europe, Russia and the United States directly.

At the super-power level trust needs to be the deterrent to war. When each side can obliterate each other there is no value in engaging in battle at a conventional scale that easily can get beyond control resulting in the end of human civilization. Clemenceau wanted to guarantee the peace for ending World War One, and it wasn't, and World War Two grew to fruition. That paradigm is however anachronistic. There is no Maginot Line that will prevent World War Three.

Trump May Defeat European Russophobia

The rapid progress with the Trump administration toward renormalizing relations with Russia and ending the Ukraine War occurs in an interesting historical paradigm that John Meirsheimer reviewed in a video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKjFD9fPQxg

Some have nominated former Assistant Sect. Of State Victoria Nuland for the designer of Joe Biden Ukraine policy yet I think that is an inadequate place to lay the blame. Bureaucrats may be a focal point or catch basin for social forces desiring policy directions yet they for-themselves couldn’t bring powerful disagreeing parties like the military industrial complex to support those or other policies they felt were counterproductive to profit although they might comply if required by the chief executive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Nuland

 Mr. Zelensky is used to having his way. Perhaps he bullied Joe Biden and Kamala Harris easily. His argument with Pres Trump and VP Vance did not go the way he wanted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqOOOR7Kr-s&pp=ygUUZm9yYmVzIGJyZWFraW5nIG5ld3M%3D

Others have reported that the reason for the meeting in DC of President Macron and P.M. Starmer were to hand off supervisory custody of President Zelensky to the C.I.A. Apparently France was given custody by outgoing President Biden in order to prevent the Trump administration C.I.A. from gaining access to information that might be deleterious for the members of the Biden administration. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_UwSPnCRKA

Coca Cola is returning to Russian production.

The Problem With N.A.T.O.

 With 32 member nations N.A.T.O. is a very large military body. It can throw it’s power around such as in Ukraine, without concern for retaliation from nations it has sponsored war on. Recently met with the Zelinsky faction and guaranteed it would provide weapons and supplies to Ukraine at least until 2027. An undeclared war on Russia by the largest military alliance on Earth is a problem not only for Russia; it is a problem for the United States.

Zelinsky said the Rammstein accord will oppose the USA making Greenland part of America. He seems to want to make the U.S.A. an enemy of N.A.T.O. and to replace the U.S.A. after the U.S.A. quits the organization.

https://youtu.be/7MxDh5qKVOw?feature=shared

Russia never attacked a member of the alliance. N.A.T.O. leadership decided that it did not support any Russian claim to Ukraine or pre-emptive Russian move to defrappe its military activities in Ukraine and continued it membership build up to intimidate and threaten Russia. With plutocratic control of the press and western governance; governance bone-headed enough to believe that Ukraine war can be profitable for the west 

So instead of seeking a peaceful resolution to end the conflict and restore normal relations with Russia continued to escalate  even allowing attacks directly on Russia with N.A.T.O. weapons including missiles. Russia has yet to retaliate because it probably doesn’t ant to expand the war that would swiftly lead to a nuclear exchange.  N.A.T.O. leadership has arrogated the right to attack any nation that draws its ire despite that nation not having attacked a N.A.T.O. member nation. That is an expansion of the N.A.T.O. charter.

American Presidents that are Democrats may be sycophants of the new N.A.T.O. doctrine, or even leaders to be an 800 lb guerrilla throwing its weight around as the world’s anarchist.  Besides the United States the individual N.A.T.O. members wouldn’t have taken a belligerent stance with Russia over Ukraine. Yet as a military commune N.A.T.O. is a Don Corleone exerting its influence in a way that presets a threat even to the United States should it have strong dissension against a N.A.T.O action. There needs to be a better way to reinforce world peace and security than the N.A.T.O. alliance; once that conserves the sovereignty of the United States in foreign and domestic policy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNX8VEZZwwg

Science at War on Russian Orthodoxy

Biden is at war with Russia; lots of scientific support for that in technology. Some Catholics have been in a cold war with Orthodox Christians forever and now it’s escalated to a hot war to expand Polish Catholicism and German Lutheranism East. There is the additional prize of valuable land and minerals. Europe is atheist and scientific while Russia has reverted to Orthodoxy from atheistic socialism. So maybe science is at war with Orthodox Christians for a while.

DARPA probably supplied the new electronic warfare tech that stops Russian drones from attacking us and German tanks advancing in the Kursk region toward Moscow- so Russia reverted to using helicopters instead of using swedish at-4s on flying drones to hit tanks from just beyond the EW effective range. It’s complex.