Deep strike blasts Russian bomber factory & Trump threatens Putin
Jan 21, 2025
auto_awesome
Dr. Mike Martin MP, a senior fellow at King's College London and member of the Defence Select Committee, discusses the implications of recent strikes against a Russian bomber factory. Dr. Neil Shastri-Hurst MP passionately advocates for using frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine’s reconstruction. Together, they analyze shifts in U.S. foreign policy under Trump, emphasizing the importance of European unity and collective action against Russian aggression. The conversation highlights the urgent need for strategic collaboration to ensure regional stability and moral responsibility in supporting Ukraine.
Ukraine's successful long-range strikes against critical Russian military targets indicate a shift in the strategic dynamics of the conflict.
Trump's remarks and the uncertainty surrounding US foreign aid may significantly affect Ukraine's military support amid changing political landscapes.
The British Parliament's cross-party unity and discussions on using frozen Russian assets reflect a growing urgency to bolster Ukraine's defense.
Deep dives
Strategic Military Developments
Ukraine's general staff reported successful long-range strikes against significant Russian military targets, including an oil depot in Voronezh and an aviation plant involved in producing Sukhoi fighter jets, which indicates Ukraine's capability to penetrate deep into Russian territory. These actions reflect a shift in the strategic landscape of the conflict, showcasing Ukraine's increasing confidence and operational reach despite ongoing hostilities. The conflict continues to see heavy drone activity, with the Russian Defense Ministry claiming to have intercepted numerous Ukrainian drones, although Ukraine's Air Force reported that their missile attacks inflicted injuries while miraculously avoiding civilian fatalities. Such developments underscore the volatility of the battlefield and underscore the challenges facing both sides as they adjust tactics in response to each other's capabilities.
US-Ukraine Relations Under Trump
In the early days of Trump's second presidency, there are concerns regarding a halt on foreign aid, including support for Ukraine, which has led to fears that the US may take a neutral stance in the ongoing war. Trump's inaugural address, which did not mention Ukraine, raised alarms among proponents of ongoing support, as it emphasized a reversal of what he called 'betrayals' by the previous administration in terms of military and financial assistance to foreign territories. Despite this halt, Trump's subsequent comments suggest he sees potential for negotiating a peace deal, noting that Zelensky is open to discussions while also indicating that Putin may be struggling in the conflict. This dual approach creates ambiguity about the future of American support for Ukraine in light of changing political dynamics.
Western Support and Defense Spending
Former Trump administration member Robert Wilkie highlighted the necessity for stronger defense spending among NATO allies, particularly emphasizing the need for the UK to increase its military budget to achieve a target of 3%. He critiqued the diminishing capabilities of the British military, warning that the current trajectory could leave the UK with one of the smallest naval forces in recent history. With the urgency stemming from ongoing military pressures, there's a push among parliamentarians to ensure a unified and robust Western response to Russian aggression. This includes discussions on leveraging frozen Russian state assets to fund Ukrainian defense efforts, demonstrating the interconnected nature of international security and economic stability.
Attempts to Mobilize and Support Ukraine
The British Parliament has shown a remarkable cross-party unity surrounding the necessity to support Ukraine and to seek retribution through the seizing of Russian assets. Drawing attention to the overwhelming figure of frozen Russian funds, some parliamentarians argue that these resources should be mobilized to bolster Ukraine's defense against Russia's continued aggression. As challenges in maintaining political consensus about how to address Russia linger, there is a pervasive urgency to act decisively in support of Ukraine's sovereignty. Calls for greater action highlight a broader recognition that the stability of Europe heavily relies on the outcome of this conflict and the need for assertive measures to counter Russian intimidation.
The Path Forward in European Security
There are heavy discussions on the potential implications of NATO troops on the ground in Ukraine, as these could serve both as a deterrent against Russia and a signal of commitment to collective defense. Politicians acknowledge that the current security landscape demands a reassessment of military strategies in line with rising tensions, as the prospect of conflict seems more evident. Advocates express a desire for strong collaboration among NATO allies, emphasizing that individual nations must contribute to a united front against aggressors like Russia. The sentiment echoes a growing awareness that the defense posture of European countries may need to evolve significantly to reflect the realities posed by newly emerging global threats.
Today, less than 24 hours into the second Trump Presidency, we consider in detail his and his transition team’s latest remarks about the war, and what they tell us about the approach being adopted behind closed doors. Plus we take the temperature of the British Parliament with two vocal voices on the conflict calling for further actions against Moscow.
Contributors:
Francis Dearnley (Executive Editor, Audio). @FrancisDearnley on X.
Dominic Nicholls (Associate Editor of Defence). @DomNicholls on X.
Dr Mike Martin MP (MP for Tunbridge Wells). @ThreshedThought on X.
Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst MP (MP for Solihull West and Shirley). @DrNShastriHurst on X.
Content referenced:
BBC Today interview with a member of Trump's transition team:
