Three meetings between delegations from Moscow and Washington between February and June resulted in prisoner exchanges, but failed to bring a ceasefire in Ukraine any closer. Now, Donald Trump hopes that a face-to-face meeting between himself and Vladimir Putin will turn the tide.

But will it?

In June, at the meeting in Istanbul, the Kremlin presented its memorandum of demands for a “final settlement,” which were unchanged from previous statements: Ukraine’s ceding to Russia the regions of Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia; agreeing to accept a position of neutrality; giving up its long-stated goal of membership in NATO; rejecting foreign military involvement; and calling for new elections. In other words, Ukraine would become a shrunken, toothless nonentity, defenseless and completely vulnerable to Russia’s future goal of reabsorbing the former Soviet republic into Putin’s new Russian Empire.

And those demands have remained unchanged, as reiterated numerous times by Putin himself (as recently as last week) and confirmed by Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, and the Russian Security Council’s notoriously hot-headed Dmitry Medvedev.

According to Russian political analyst Tatiana Stanovaya:

“The Russian side can frame this in a dozen different ways, creating the impression that Moscow is open to concessions and serious negotiation. But the core position remains unchanged: Russia wants Kyiv to surrender.” [Laura Gozzi and Vitaliy Shevchenko, BBC, August 7, 2025.]

So why should we expect a different result this time? Does Trump know something — perhaps gleaned from one of his phone calls with Putin — that he hasn’t revealed? Is Putin at last willing to offer a compromise on one or more of his demands? Or is he simply buying time, as he has done so often in the past, in order to continue his brutal attacks on Ukraine until total surrender becomes their only option?

Following Wednesday’s meeting in Moscow between Putin and U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that Washington now has a “better understanding of the conditions under which Russia would be prepared to end the war.” [Id.]

But what does that mean?

At this point, only one man knows for sure.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/7/25

The things I was going to do on Wednesday:

> Laundry
> Break down boxes for recycling
> Clean inside of microwave
> Organize photos into folders on iPhone
> Post an article on my blog

The things I actually got done on Wednesday:

> Posted an article on my blog

*. *. *

Blame it on my dreams. They’re always weird, but Tuesday night’s were so peculiar, and so detailed in their clarity, that I spent the better part of yesterday trying to analyze them.

Or blame it on the fact that the daily news was, as usual, so depressing and so repetitive that I just didn’t feel like facing it.

So I’m going to turn in early (it’s slightly after midnight Thursday, which is early for me), see what my dream world has in store for me tonight, and hope for a happy headline or two when I wake up.

But before I do, just a quick update on my favorite subject: the U.S.-Russia-Ukraine situation.

Following yesterday’s meeting between White House envoy Steve Witkoff and Vladimir Putin in Moscow, Trump’s press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, issued a statement today saying that the Russians “expressed their desire to meet with President Trump, and the President is open to meeting with both President Putin and President Zelenskyy.” [RFE/RL, August 6, 2025.]

Trump’s plan is to meet with Putin as early as next week at an as-yet-unspecified location, and to schedule a three-way meeting — for himself, Putin and Ukrainian President Zelensky — thereafter.

Yeah . . . good luck with that one. Putin has thus far refused to meet with Zelensky, because doing so would be tantamount to acknowledging Zelensky’s legitimacy as president.

And John Hardie, Deputy Director of the Russia Program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, issued this caution:

“We’ve kind of seen this movie before where Trump will threaten economic punishment if a deal isn’t made by a certain deadline, and then the Russians kind of offer some empty promise or meaningless talks, and the can gets kicked down the road. I would hope that is not going to be the case here.” [Id.]

Well, if it does turn out to be the case — again — then I know whose can I’d like to see kicked down the road. (Don’t ask.)

But we’ll see what happens in the next few days. In the meantime, good night (or good morning), and pleasant dreams.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/7/25

Trump said he could end Putin’s war against Ukraine within 24 hours of taking office in January. The world laughed at the absurdity of his claim.

The world was right.

Six months — and thousands of casualties — later, Russia’s onslaught continues to escalate.

Trump threatened; Putin shrugged. The U.S. and its NATO allies issued crippling sanctions against Russia; Russia adapted. China and India helped picked up the economic slack in Russia; Trump responded with more sanctions.

Sanctions, sanctions, sanctions. What else could we do?

Talks were held, three times, on neutral territory in Istanbul; Trump’s envoy made two trips to Moscow; Putin still refused to compromise on his demands, which would in effect leave Ukraine weak, vulnerable, and an easy target for future invasion. Trump gave him more time. The attacks increased.

Then Dmitry Medvedev inserted himself into the picture, tossing out the “N” word — the nuclear option. And everyone inhaled, held their collective breath.

Now what?

Trump responded angrily, and rightly so. This time Putin listened, advised caution; Medvedev became silent; Trump issued sanctions against India, threatened the same against China.

But Russia announced that it no longer considers itself bound by its self-imposed moratorium on deployment of nuclear-capable intermediate range missiles, citing U.S. and allied efforts to develop similar weapons for deployment in Europe and elsewhere.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry said that such efforts by the U.S. and others create a “direct threat to the security of our country [and carry] significant harmful consequences for regional and global stability, including a dangerous escalation of tensions between nuclear powers.” [Associated Press, August 5, 2025.]

And Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, when asked where and when Russia might deploy its intermediate-range weapons, replied that it’s not something to be announced in advance, saying:

“Russia no longer has any limitations, Russia no longer considers itself to be constrained by anything. Therefore Russia believes it has the right to take respective steps if necessary.” [Id.]

Welcome back to 1962.

Yesterday, envoy Witkoff headed for Moscow for the third time and met with Putin for about three hours. Trump said the meeting was “highly productive” and represented “great progress” toward a settlement of the conflict in Ukraine.

“Everyone agrees this War must come to a close, and we will work towards that in the days and weeks to come,” Trump wrote on social media. But he added that there would not be a ceasefire by his deadline of Friday, August 8th. No explanation was given. [Matthew Luxmoore, Alexander Ward and Alex Leary, The Wall Street Journal, August 6, 2025.]

Later today, a senior U.S. administration official said that Trump intends to meet soon with Putin, based on an offer allegedly made by Russia during Witkoff’s visit. Again, no details were available. [Id.]

*. *. *

To those of us who lived through it, the memories of those days of nuclear brinkmanship are all too fresh. And a repeat performance is the last thing the world needs. In the ‘60s, cooler heads prevailed, and the world was saved from annihilation.

Today, there are no cooler heads.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/6/25

First, let’s get the terminology straight: Either “platypuses” or “platypi” is a permissible plural of “platypus.” My personal preference is platypi, because it is so perfectly pretentious and peculiar.

Multiples of platypi are referred to as a “paddle.” This is not a reference to its nose/beak/snout — or whatever that particular protuberance is called. The fact is, a group of the adorably ugly little critters constitute a paddle of platypi.

And, just for fun — or your next game of Animals of Australia Trivia — a baby platypus is called either a platypup or a puggle. So a whole platoon of them would be . . . sorry . . . a Perfectly Precious Paddle of Platypus Puggles.

*. *. *

Thus ends our zoology lesson for today . . . and hopefully, also the abundance of alliterations. Now, about the Prime Minister . . .

That would, of course, be the late, great, and sometimes quirky Sir Winston Churchill. Seriously . . . what other PM would be the principal protagonist (sorry) in a tale about “an egg-laying mammal with the face and feet of a duck, an otter-shaped body and a beaver-inspired tail”? [Tiffanie Turnbull, BBC News, August 3, 2025.]

It seems that Sir Winston, in addition to big, smelly cigars, had an affinity for animals, both domestic and exotic. And in 1943, as World War II raged and crept ever closer to the shores of Australia, that nation’s Foreign Minister, H.V. “Doc” Evatt — in desperate need of support from the British motherland — thought of a way to curry favor with Churchill.

Although it was illegal to export platypi from the Australian continent, desperate times called for desperate measures. And despite the fact that no platypus had ever survived such a long journey, Evatt set about putting his plan into action. He would find a way to send Churchill a paddle of half a dozen duckbilled platypi as a gesture of good will.

Or, to be honest, a bribe.

So Evatt called upon conservationist David Fleay to assist with the mission. But Fleay, being more concerned with the welfare of the animals than Churchill’s personal menagerie, objected. Many years later, he wrote in his book Paradoxical Platypus:

“Imagine any man carrying the responsibilities Churchill did, with humanity on the rack in Europe and Asia, finding time to even think about, let alone want, half-a-dozen duckbilled platypuses.” [Id.]

Fleay couldn’t talk Evatt out of his scheme, but did manage to convince the Foreign Minister to send just one platypus instead of six. So they captured a puggle from a nearby river, named him Winston (for obvious reasons), and constructed an elaborate platypusary for the long sea voyage. It had every comfort a puggle could want: hay-lined burrows, fresh Australian creek water, some 50,000 worms (they’re voracious eaters), and special treats of duck egg custard. They also hired an attendant — a gentleman’s gentleman, if you will — to attend to Winston for the 45-day journey.

But alas! The two Winstons were not destined to be united. Winston (the duck-billed one) — after crossing the Pacific, navigating through the Panama Canal and into the Atlantic Ocean, and despite all of the care and duck egg custards — passed away in the final stretch of the voyage.

When the ship reached England, and Sir Winston (the cigar-smoking one) was delivered of the other Winston’s corpse, he wrote to Evatt that he was “grieved” to report that the platypus “kindly” sent to him had died. “Its loss is a great disappointment to me,” he wrote. [Id.]

For years, the story was kept secret in order to avoid any negative publicity. But eventually, word got out, and claims were made that the ship had encountered a German U-boat and the platypus had been shaken to death in a barrage of blasts. David Fleay later wrote:

“A small animal equipped with a nerve-packed, super sensitive bill, able to detect even the delicate movements of a mosquito wriggler on stream bottoms in the dark of night, cannot hope to cope with man-made enormities such as violent explosions.

“It was so obvious that, but for the misfortunes of war, a fine, thriving, healthy little platypus would have created history in being number one of its kind to take up residence in England.” [Id.]

*. *. *

But people are not always satisfied with the easy answer. Some 80 years later — last year, in fact — Ph.D. student Harrison Croft began an investigation to find the truth of Winston’s demise. Searching archives in both Canberra and London, and with another team working in Sydney, they found extensive records, including David Fleay’s personal papers that had been donated to the Australian Museum, and the logbook of the attendant who had been hired to accompany Winston.

What they saw after digitizing and studying the materials was an absence of any recorded explosions along the way. But there were notes of Winston’s rations having to be reduced due to the loss of some of the worms, as well as the likelihood that the ship’s environment had been too hot for the sensitive little guy.

While they don’t rule out the submarine shell-shock story, the researchers conclude that his exposure to prolonged higher temperatures alone would have been enough to kill poor Winston.

*. *. *

But, although Winston’s story had a tragic ending, that is not the last of this Platypus Presentation.

In 1947 — having successfully bred a platypus in captivity for the first time — David Fleay convinced the Australian government to allow the Bronx Zoo in New York to receive three platypi as a friendly gesture to further ties with the United States.

The three were named Betty, Penelope and Cecil. They received a huge welcome when their ship docked in Boston, and were then delivered by limousine to New York City, where the Australian Ambassador was waiting to feed them their first worms in America.

Unfortunately, Betty did not live long after arrival, and Cecil had to make do with just one wife. He and Penelope quickly became celebrities, and their wedding received tremendous press coverage. But while Cecil was raring to go, Penelope was having none of it. The media turned on her, and she was described as a “brazen hussy … one of those saucy females who like to keep a male on a string.” [Id.]

But in 1953, Penelope’s hormones must have begun to rage, because their keepers reported four days of “all-night orgies of love [fueled by] copious quantities of crayfish and worms.” [Id.]

And Penelope soon began nesting. But after four months of anxious waiting, and lavishing Penelope with the royal treatment and double rations, when zookeepers checked on her nest before a throng of reporters, they found . . .

. . . nothing. No babies. Just a “disgruntled-looking” Penelope, who immediately plunged from being the darling of platypus-lovers to a fallen woman, accused of having faked the whole thing in order to “secure more worms and less Cecil.” [Id.]

Despite the huge disappointment, life in the Bronx Zoo went along peacefully for another four years until, in 1957, Penelope somehow disappeared from her enclosure. When a weeks-long search failed to locate her, she was declared “presumed lost and probably dead.” [Id.]

And a day after the search was called off, Cecil died . . . according to the media, of a broken heart.

Although why he would grieve for such a controlling, deceptive, frigid wife, who only consummated their marriage for four days out of their ten years together, I cannot imagine.

Still, there’s no accounting for matters of the heart, is there?

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/6/25

If all y’all Republicans down there in Texas are so determined to continue with your redistricting, why not go whole hog, and gerrymander your cheatin’ selves straight back to your roots?

For those of you who skipped history class, here’s your chance to catch up. From 1821 to 1836, after Mexico gained its independence from Spain (that’s in Europe), Texas was part of Mexico. I know that’s a surprise, but it’s true.

Anyway, in 1836, the folks in Texas decided to declare their independence, and they formed the Republic of Texas. But then the United States decided it wanted Texas for itself — even before they knew about all the oil buried there — and they annexed it in 1845. Mexico and the United States went to war in 1846, and by the time it was over in 1848, Texas, and a whole lot more territory, had become part of the United States.

That’s a very simplified version of the history of your great state, but I wanted to be sure y’all understood that Texas started out in Mexico, and that all y’all Texans are really the sons and daughters of Mexican immigrants to the United States.

So I’m thinkin’ that maybe, if y’all ain’t happy with the way things are, or you’re not willin’ to do things accordin’ to our laws, you might want to consider goin’ back to Mexico and lettin’ us get on with the important things in our lives.

As for your oil, I’m sure we can make up the difference from places like Oklahoma and Alaska, and that can be our gift to Mexico for takin’ you back.

Happy trails, y’all.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/5/25

P.S. Just one more thing: To all the Texas Democrats who left the state this week to prevent a vote on an illegal redistricting measure . . . good work. I’m sure we can find jobs for you in the 49 remaining states.

On March 22, 2024, 149 people were killed and at least 600 injured in a horrific terror attack on the Crocus City Hall entertainment center outside of Moscow. Shortly afterward, the Islamic State-Khorasan, known as ISIS-K, claimed responsibility; both U.S. and French intelligence agreed that ISIS-K was solely responsible for the attack.

The following day, four Tajik nationals were arrested and accused of having committed the atrocity. The four — Dalerdzhon Mirzoyev, Shamsidin Fariduni, Muhammadsobir Faizov, and Saidakram Rachabalizoda — are shown below as they appeared in court following their arrest, obviously having been badly beaten while in custody. One appeared, in a video posted on Telegram, to have had an ear cut off.

Yesterday — more than 16 months after the attack — the four suspects were at last brought to trial, along with 15 other individuals arrested in the meantime on various charges of involvement. Not surprisingly, three of the four principal defendants pleaded guilty before a three-judge panel at the Second Western District Military Court; the fourth, Saidakram Rachabalizoda, pleaded “partly guilty.” [RFE/RL, August 4, 2025.]

From the start, human rights groups have expressed concerns that their trial would not be a fair one. One — activist Karimjon Yorov — said:

“In normal democratic countries, this would never happen — confessions were beaten out of people accused of a terrorist attack and they [the authorities] don’t even hide it.” [Id.]

And some have questioned the arrests of the other 15 charged with ancillary offenses, such as renting apartments to those actually involved in the attack . . . whether or not there was proof they had knowledge of the circumstances.

Gennady Gudkov — himself a former FSB officer and deputy in the State Duma — has said:

“In my opinion, they simply recruited scapegoats. It is difficult to understand the degree of their guilt. I have the impression that this trial is an excuse for not conducting a real investigation.” [Id.]

At Trial, in the Defendants’ Box – August 4, 2025

This has all taken place in the shadow of Moscow’s tightening of its immigration policies, the increase of ethnic profiling and arbitrary arrests of Central Asians, and the numerous instances of racist attacks by far-right nationalist groups. New legislation was enacted a year ago giving police greater powers to expel migrants without court orders.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) said in a March 2025 report: “While failing to condemn these xenophobic actions, Russian authorities have also intensified their targeting of Central Asian migrants.” [Id.]

And Russian officials say that a new system will be activated in September combining biometric registration, location tracking, and intensified police oversight to monitor migrant workers — all in the name of of national security and social order. [Id.]

*. *. *

But apparently, one set of suspects was not enough for the Kremlin. Taking advantage of an opportunity to manufacture justification for its “special military operation” against Ukraine, Russia’s Investigative Committee has promoted the theory — and claimed to have evidence — that Ukraine was behind the terror attack.

John Kirby, then White House National Security Council spokesman, said at the time that Russia’s attempt to place blame on Ukraine was “nonsense and propaganda.” Adding that Washington had sent a message to Russia’s security services two weeks before the attack occurred, and that there had been multiple such advance warnings about potential extremist attacks on concerts and other large gatherings in Moscow, he said:

“It is abundantly clear that [Islamic State] was solely responsible for the horrific attack in Moscow last week. In fact, the United States tried to help prevent this terrorist attack and the Kremlin knows this.” [RFE/RL, March 28, 2024.]

*. *. *

Are these four men from Tajikistan actually guilty of the heinous attack on March 22, 2024? We’ll never know for sure, as we have only the Russian authorities’ word as to the thoroughness of their investigation, and the methods used to elicit the guilty pleas.

What we do know is that, once charged, their fates were sealed. Now, as with every trial in Russia, the verdicts are a foregone conclusion; we only have to await news of their sentences.

As to the other 15 defendants . . . at this point, it’s anyone’s guess.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/5/25

The Russian word for “bear” is “medved ” — and it appears that the loud-mouthed “bear” in the Kremlin, Dmitry Medvedev, may finally have roared once too often for his own good.

Because it sounds, from today’s reports, as though Papa Bear Vladimir Putin is trying to do a bit of damage control after Little Dima’s latest temper tantrum.

What happened is this:

> On July 30th, in response to Donald Trump’s threat of further sanctions if Putin failed to meet an August 8th deadline, the Kremlin said they were “taking measures to counteract all of this or even turn it to our own advantage.”

> Trump called Russia’s continuation of the war in Ukaine “disgusting” and “sad.”

> Then Medvedev chimed in with an unsolicited comment that “each new ultimatum is a threat and a step towards war” — the first public use of the “W” word from the nation that still refers to its invasion of Ukraine as a “special military operation.”

> On the 31st, not satisfied that he’d sounded hawkish enough, Medvedev gave an encore performance, warning of a “dead hand” action — a reference to Russia’s codename for its retaliatory nuclear strikes control system. Suddenly, the “N” word had been dropped.

> And Trump, never to be trumped, called Medvedev “the failed former president of Russia, who thinks he’s still president,” and cautioned him to “watch his words … he’s entering very dangerous territory!” . . . later adding that “words have meaning.” (While certainly appropriate in this case, I’m sure Trump completely missed the irony of those last words issuing from a mouth that itself has no filter. But I digress.)

> Trump then, on August 1st, said he was ordering two U.S. nuclear submarines (not specifying whether they were nuclear-powered or nuclear-capable) to be repositioned in unnamed, “appropriate” locations closer to Russian territory.

Now it was becoming clear that someone had to come to their senses before the U.S. and Russia began lobbing nuclear missiles at each other across the Bering Strait. Luckily, Putin was alert to the problem, and had his spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, make a statement to the press:

“In this case, it is obvious that American submarines are already on combat duty. This is an ongoing process, that’s the first thing. But in general, of course, we would not want to get involved in such a controversy and would not want to comment on it in any way. Of course, we believe that everyone should be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric.” [Dmitry Antonov and Mark Trevelyan, Reuters, August 4, 2025.]

And, without specifically mentioning Medvedev’s comments, Peskov added that, while “in every country members of the leadership … have different points of view,” Russian policy is dictated by Putin alone. [Laura Gozzi, BBC News, August 4, 2025.]

Well said, comrades.

At this point, I would venture a guess that Dmitry Medvedev — to say the very least — is not having his best week at work. He has not publicly reacted to Trump’s last response, and has not been active on X since sending the controversial post.

In fact, if he were to ask my advice, I might recommend posting his resume on LinkedIn . . . if it isn’t already too late.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/4/25

I suppose it was just a matter of time, really, before the cracks would begin to show.

One might argue that the Feenstras of Saskatchewan had already succumbed to the lure of Vladimir Putin’s “Year of the Family” sales pitch when they moved to Russia a year and a half ago. They were intent on escaping what they considered the unhealthy “wokeness” of Canadian culture, and believed that the conservative, anti-LGBTQ, land-rich nation was the one place on Earth they would find the ideal life for the youngest eight of their nine children.

And since their arrival — though after a somewhat rocky start — they have indeed managed to build a new life on a large piece of farmland near Nizhny Novgorod. They’ve constructed — with their own hands — a big house, a barn, a workshop, a root cellar, and a nearly-completed guest house (purpose not yet revealed): found markets for their eggs and produce and home-baked goods; and begun building a herd of cows, a flock of sheep, a drove of pigs, and flocks of chickens, ducks and geese. “Old MacDonald” would have been right at home with the Feenstras.

But at what cost?

Not just dollars, or rubles. The real cost has been the sale of their souls to the man in the Kremlin. Every aspect of their busy, hard-working lives is covered by cameras and interviewers, as well as their own daily broadcasts on YouTube, Telegram, Russia’s own Rutube, and something called Boosty. And, as I have previously pointed out, each broadcast — with dad Arend Feenstra as the affable host — is peppered with subtle (and sometimes not-so-subtle) mentions of the great privilege of being allowed to live and work in Russia; the outstanding medical care; the attentiveness and assistance received from the local officials; the friendliness and generosity of everyone they have come in contact with . . . and even the occasional, shameless promotion of a commercial product or service.

Not to mention the overt invitations to people around the world who might be looking for a new home . . .

But I hadn’t realized how deeply mired the Feenstras are in the muck of Putin’s regime until yesterday, when I was watching yet another update on the construction of the guest house and learning of an upcoming “big announcement” concerning their first guest(s).

Toward the end of the video, Arend mentioned that they had been seeing YouTube channels “disappearing,” and reminded viewers that his broadcasts could also be found on the other channels — all free except Boosty — in the event they had any problems with YouTube.

And I immediately understood what was happening: Putin is known to have been actively working to block YouTube throughout the country, or at the very least to limit what is available on it, as part of his overall crackdown on independent media; and the “disappearances” of channels are no doubt a result of those efforts.

But it wasn’t clear whether Arend Feenstra was completely aware of that. Because after herding the sheep into their stalls and a flock of geese into a cozy little outbuilding of their own for the night, he signed off with a reminder about his other free media outlets . . . plus a solicitation for paid subscriptions on Boosty for those who might inclined to help support them. And what he said, in part, was:

“We are still at serious risk of losing YouTube channels because of the country we live in and the good things we say about it. That’s all I’ll say, don’t want to mess up the algorithm.”

But he sort of mumbled through it, seeming a little uncomfortable. And it struck me: He has most likely been told that other countries are cutting off Russian programming because they don’t want their people hearing positive remarks about Russia, rather than the other way around. Whether he honestly believes it, or he simply knows he has to accept it, is irrelevant . . . the damage has been done.

The Feenstra family is now part of the Russian populace, though not yet citizens. But as long as they remain there, they will not be in control of their own lives, but will belong — lock, stock and poultry — to the State. And all because they couldn’t cope with people whose beliefs and lifestyles were different from theirs.

I wonder . . . are they now fully aware of the consequences of the choice they made? And if so, do they still think it was worth it?

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/4/25

Once again, I can but quote the words of the Bard:

“O judgment! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.”

– William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act III, Scene 2

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/3/25

If you’ve read Part 1 of this tale (July 31), you may have been waiting for an explanation of how I knew about Carlos the Jackal’s background, and also wondering who in hell this Yuri Shvets guy is. And if you haven’t read the first part, you might want to do that . . . it’s up to you, of course, but it would probably be helpful.

Anyway, finding both of their names on a list of Moscow’s Patrice Lumumba University alumni was not surprising in and of itself, as Shvets has always claimed to have been a classmate of The Jackal. And while I take most of what Shvets says as questionable (at best), it appears that he may have been telling the truth about this.

But who is Shvets, and how did I come to be — through him — just two degrees of separation from The Jackal: one of the 20th century’s most notorious terrorists? It’s a long and convoluted story dating back some 30 years, when a Russian acquaintance — Valentin Aksilenko, a retired Colonel in the KGB — asked my help in finding a potential publisher for a tell-all book about the KGB being written by a colleague of his in Moscow. That colleague was Shvets, himself a Major in the KGB, and also supposedly retired.

I’ve written about that little adventure at length in the earliest chapters of my blog, so I won’t go into the grisly details again. But it did end with Shvets’ book — more of an homage to himself than anything resembling provable fact about the KGB — being written and published, and both men defecting with their families to the United States.

During the time all of this was taking place — 1993 to 1995 — it became painfully obvious to me that there were gaping holes in Shvets’ stories, and particularly those of his own past accomplishments and his final “escape” from Moscow. I expressed my misgivings to the FBI agents in charge of their resettlement, and left it to the experts to sort out.

Since then — for 30 blissfully peaceful years — I have had no contact with either Shvets or Aksilenko. I know nothing of their lives in the past three decades, other than having run across Shvets’ YouTube channel, which, after a couple of brief attempts to listen to what he had to say, I dismissed as a waste of my time.

Then — as so often occurs in the course of my online searches — I happened upon an article by Ukrainian independent news medium Babel.ua from last December, titled:

“Pseudo-expert Yuriy Shvets became famous thanks to Dmitry Gordon and Putin. He constantly makes false predictions, invents facts and mentions ‘his country’ — the Soviet Union.”

And I immediately regretted not having paid closer attention to those YouTube broadcasts. Because here were investigative reporters, some 30 years after the fact, echoing my much earlier thoughts . . . only now based on more recent data. And, of course, I wondered why.

According to the Babel report, Shvets’ entire recorded history is founded on unconfirmed, and largely unverifiable, information provided by him. (Note: What can be confirmed is the period of his service at the Soviet Embassy in Washington, D.C. (1985-87), as he was under surveillance by the FBI during that time.)

The reporters also refer to the inaccuracy of the many conspiracy theories he promotes on YouTube, with special emphasis on matters involving Ukraine.

Shvets also has his pet theories about Vladimir Putin, even alleging that he has colon cancer and suffers from a severe mental disorder; that he is fed up with the West, “serious people in the leadership of the Russian Federation” and China, because “he is always walking around with an outstretched hand with idiotic ideas.” [Sofiia Korotunenko and Kateryna Kobernyk, Babel.ua, December 2, 2024.]

I know . . . it makes absolutely no sense. But, from my own experience with Shvets, that’s not surprising.

According to the Babel report, Dmitry Gordon — a Ukrainian journalist, TV host and blogger — gave Shvets his 15 minutes of fame in 2017, when he invited the former spy for an interview and introduced him on air as a classmate of Vladimir Putin at the KGB Institute. Although not quite true — records indicate that they studied at the Institute at different times — the sound bite was picked up by Ukrainian media, and suddenly Shvets was considered “an expert on everything related to Russia and the Kremlin” . . . despite the fact that he has not been to Russia since 1993 and has no known connection to Putin. [Id.]

Babel journalist Sofiia Korotunenko says she has watched dozens of Shvets’ broadcasts and interviews, and has read his book, Washington Station: My Life As a KGB Spy In America” — which, for those who might be interested in obtaining a copy, disappeared from the shelves almost as soon as it was published and is only occasionally available from second-hand sources.

Korotunenko gives numerous examples in her article as to why Shvets’ word is not to be trusted, including his bizarre conspiracy theories and usually incorrect predictions. I won’t attempt to repeat all of her revelations here, but one point, having to do with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, is particularly notable:

“On the eve of a full-scale invasion, Shvets estimated the chances of a Russian invasion as ‘well below 50%,’ because only a ‘crazy fanatic’ would go for it, and Putin is not like that. Besides, Putin and his state are unable to fight, he said.

“Subsequently, Shvets regularly predicted the date of victory and liberation of the occupied Ukrainian territories. And he was constantly wrong.” [Id.]

Note: For those who choose to read the Babel report, let me explain the confusing references to “the Swede.” This is an obvious translation error; the Russian word for “Swede” is ... you guessed it ... “Shvets.” There is no actual Swedish person in this story.

*. *. *

Upon reading the Babel article, my reaction was strictly a personal one . . . an affirmation of what I already knew about Yuri Shvets from a different, earlier segment of my life. Then I read these statistics, which I hadn’t seen before:

> He has 1.5 million subscribers on his YouTube channel;

> Since 2021, he has released new videos almost every day, which have collected 725 million views; and

> Almost 130,000 more followers follow Shvets on TikTok, Instagram, X, and Telegram. [Id.]

At that point, I realized that — even if the numbers are exaggerated, which is entirely possible — the formidable power of social media has exposed millions of people . . . most of them lacking the knowledge or the experience to separate the truth from the bullshit . . . to this man’s alleged “expertise.”

In addition, American author Craig Unger, in his book American Kompromat — a blatant, scathing indictment of Donald Trump — relies heavily upon “information” provided by Shvets and apparently taken by Unger as gospel.

So I felt that this was an opportunity — aside from sharing a bit of personal history — to point out yet another example of the nature and extent of the misinformation — and intentional disinformation — floating around out there in cyberspace, ready to pull the innocent reader into its quagmire of lies and propaganda.

In the simplest of terms, there’s a lot of dangerous crap on the internet. It’s hard not to get sucked into it; but at least we can watch where we step.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/3/25