Energy Sanctions, the Strait of Hormuz, and the Ukraine War

 Reliance upon Middle East oil and the imposition of sanctions on Russian oil have destabilized the global economy. Iran's tactically advantageous position on the Strait of Hormuz enables it to attack oil and gas shipping traffic to the world and potentially bring it to a standstill. Interestingly, the U.S. Navy’s substantial capability for war is not necessarily able to adequately defend oil tankers from cheap and plentiful drone and missile attacks launched from the coast, small fast-attack boats, and possibly naval drones.

Even China—the major buyer of Iranian oil—is affected by the U.S. naval counterattack on Iranian oil tankers moving through the Strait on their way to China. China will need to buy more Russian oil and gas, as will Europe, to replenish the loss of Persian Gulf state oil.

Plainly the West's decision to wage prolonged confrontation with Russia in order to expand Ukraine and NATO—that is, to refuse recognition of traditionally Russian territories and interests—is counterproductive and self-destructive, as any rational person should have anticipated. Rebuilding the Nord Stream gas pipeline from Russia and the Druzhba (“Friendship”) pipeline to Central Europe, originally built in the 1960s, would allow Europe to be liberated from the perpetual vulnerability of an oil transport corridor passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

Russia would likely be willing to settle the Ukraine conflict with the surrender of the Donbas and Zaporizhzhia regions to its slowly advancing special military operation. Land east of the Dnipro River could become largely Russian in order to reconcile historical realities with political facts. Russia's vast natural resources, combined with a cooperative Euro-American-Russian economic relationship, would provide a far more stable and affordable global fossil fuel supply. As it stands, the Ukraine war is a virtually insane luxury that Europe should not want to afford—not to mention the escalation of nuclear threats and the broader damage to the international economy.

Select irrational forces of the left will also seek to blame President Trump for the Iran war, since he determined that Iran's efforts to redevelop nuclear weapons facilities needed to be curtailed. Iran was able to leverage the Ukraine war itself to build up its nuclear capacity, knowing it possessed the strategic leverage of potentially cutting off oil supplies to much of the world. When I asked an AI system how much oil Alaska can presently produce per day—roughly 477,000 barrels (possibly increasing to around 600,000 with additional effort)—and asked something about the Iran conflict, the Gemini AI system wrote something about a pedophile causing the Iran war for no good reason. It then became evident that AI systems themselves can be influenced by ideological programmers. When I challenged the answer, it simply replied, “no document found.”

The world is in a very dangerous and strange geopolitical place today. Oil could easily rise above $200 per barrel. At the same time, China will likely continue radically increasing the production of solar technologies and electric vehicles. Businesses may also shift toward electric vehicle fleets to reduce fuel costs.

It is therefore entirely plausible that the Ukraine conflict could be settled relatively quickly through the end of sanctions on Russia and the restoration of normal political and economic relations between the West and Russia—provided Russia offers assurances that it will not advance military power beyond the territories taken during the Special Military Operation.

Even then, Persian Gulf shipping could remain vulnerable for years. Irregular attackers, rogue militias, and leftover ordnance from past conflicts could continue to threaten the region's shipping lanes long after the formal end of hostilities.

Global oil prices reached $147 per barrel in 2008 during the commodities crisis. Adjusted for inflation, that is roughly $200 per barrel, so the possibility of $200–$300 oil exists if sanctions on Russia continue and the Strait of Hormuz remains a strategic chokepoint. The Alaska oil pipeline from the North Slope was developed as a consequence of the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which caused oil prices to jump from $3 per barrel to $12 per barrel—a 300% increase.

The west needs to learn to tolerate success and victory. It failed to do that when Russia and China accepted at least capitalism after the end of the Cold War and Russia actually began implementing constitutional democracy. Political actors worked hard to restore the antipathy and could never fully actually and support rational sharing with Russia of its traditional Ukraine land and economic interests and instead expanded N.A.T.O. to Russia's borders. If the west cannot tolerate successful policy redirection from the top as President Reagan, RIchard Nixon and Henry Kissinger catalyzed it is consistent that it would compile 40 trillion dollars of public debt and build toward economic chaos globally.

Large Drone Attack Ordered by Zelensky, Starmer or Trump's Team on Putin- Ending Sanctions to Recover Trust

 Reports have circulated that a large Ukrainian drone attack—variously described as involving dozens of drones—was directed toward a site associated with President Vladimir Putin in or near Novgorod. Some accounts further claim that this occurred while President Putin was awaiting a phone call connected to President Trump, shortly after Trump met with President Zelensky in Miami. President Putin was reportedly unharmed.

At present, these claims remain difficult to independently verify. In the fog of war, information is fragmented, exaggerated, or deliberately manipulated. Nonetheless, if even parts of these reports are accurate, they raise serious questions about intelligence leakage, situational awareness, and escalation control. One possibility is that Ukrainian forces possess reliable tracking of Putin’s movements, either through their own intelligence capabilities or with assistance from allied surveillance systems. Another possibility is internal leakage within diplomatic or security circles. A third, not uncommon in wartime, is that the incident itself was exaggerated or staged to gain leverage in negotiations.

What is clear is that Ukraine’s leadership continues to pursue a strategy centered on military and economic attrition against Russia, heavily dependent on sustained Western sanctions and material support. This strategy presumes that Russia can be weakened faster than Ukraine is exhausted—a gamble that has already imposed enormous costs and risks broader escalation.

From this perspective, continued unconditional support for President Zelensky is not a pathway to peace. The conflict cannot be resolved through a British-EU-Ukraine configuration premised on indefinite economic warfare. A more effective approach would be for the United States to unilaterally remove sanctions on Russia and allow normal economic relations to resume. Doing so would undercut the central mechanism of the attrition strategy and force all parties to reassess their negotiating positions.

Sanctions relief would not reward war; it would remove the illusion that economic strangulation can substitute for diplomacy. Only by collapsing the logic of perpetual escalation can conditions for a genuine political settlement between Russia and Ukraine emerge.

It should also be noted that these events are less than twenty-four-forty-eight hours old. In such early stages, Western media coverage is typically fragmented and highly selective, particularly in conflicts where reporting norms strongly favor one side. Ukrainian claims tend to be relayed rapidly and uncritically, while information that complicates the prevailing narrative—especially incidents suggesting escalation risks or internal contradictions—is often delayed, minimized, or framed with excessive skepticism. As a result, early analysis must proceed with caution, but it cannot be suspended altogether without ceding the field to managed narratives rather than facts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubfW94vMJ-8

Zelenski Rejects US Peace Plan; Pres. Trump Should End U.S. Sanctions on Russia

 European leaders seemed determined to advance their Ukraine conflict toward World War Three. They are confident they can use 180 billion dollars of frozen Russia investments to finance another year or two of war without U.S. support. That is a very dangerous trend and one that brings on prospect for world peace in the next couple of years.

Lemmings swear oaths before heading to the edge…safety in numbers.

With Russian forces already steadily, slowly advancing across the Donbas to recover their land lost to the Clinton era redistribution of Ukraine land from Russia to western powers, a revitalization of war sponsored by Europe’s EU forces will compel Russians to advance farther west and fight for recovery of all of Ukraine in general war, otherwise they would need to remain on interior lines of defense and seek some other way to discourage European financed and directed Ukrainian military assaults upon the Russian forces in the Donbas and very likely old Russia itself including Moscow.

With European lunatics running their corrupt puppet Zelenski the Ukraine war has an excellent chance for developing into a third world war. President Trump’s only apparently effective card to play to disincentivize the European led war upon Russia would be to totally end all U.S. sanctions on Russia. With Russia free to trade with the world and generate better income the EU war on Russia would have far less prospects for success. Something needs to be done to discourage Europe’s EU leaders from puffing up the conflict- yesterday Zelenski officially rejected the U.S. Peace plan after meeting with EU leaders in London.

Ending U.S. sanctions on Russia is a best case scenario for U.S. trade and economic futures. Normalizing relations with Russia and the BRIC nations would put the U.S. on the right side of the equation. Moving away from old Europe’s war on Russia and historical trait of eastward expansion through conflict would provide a competitive trade boost against the militaristic EU economy seeking to destroy itself through war with sugarplum dreams of atheistic glory in its thought.