Larry Johnson – Russia, Speaking with One Voice, Warns Trump and NATO

Russian Bear Advancing on Ukraine

by Larry Johnson [10-8-2025] Larry C. Johnson(bio).

When you have President Putin, the Russian Foreign Ministry and the General of the Russian Army speaking with one voice, you better pay attention. The rainy season, aka rasputitsa, has begun, but muddy fields are not slowing down the Russian advance. At the same time, storm clouds are forming over chances for improved relations between Russia and the US.

On October 8, 2025, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov addressed the state of bilateral relations during a media briefing in Moscow, as reported by TASS and other outlets. His remarks painted a bleak picture, emphasizing deterioration, lack of reciprocity from the US, and challenges in arms control amid the broader geopolitical tensions, including the Ukraine conflict and sanctions. Specifically, there has been no progress on restoring direct flights between the US and Russia, no progress on unfreezing Russian assets, and no progress on normalizing diplomatic relations.

Ryabkov likened US-Russia relations to a “building that has cracked and is crumbling, with cracks reaching the foundation.” He attributed this solely to American actions, stating, “The Americans are to blame for this. Now the cracks have reached the foundation. I think it’s easier to destroy than to build.” He noted that “there have been no ‘factory settings’ in Russian-American relations for a long time,” indicating a permanent shift away from any pre-crisis baseline.

Ryabkov highlighted Russia’s unreciprocated initiative from President Vladimir Putin to extend compliance with the New START Treaty (set to expire in February 2026). He stated, “Russia has not received any formal response from the US side,” and added that Moscow “can do without reaction from the United States if Washington has no interest.” He urged the US to avoid “destabilizing moves in the field of offensive strategic weapons” and steps in strategic air defense that could be seen as weakening Russia’s nuclear deterrence. Russia views fulfilling obligations under the 2010 bilateral agreement on disposing of weapons-grade plutonium as more unacceptable, with a bill to denounce it already submitted to the State Duma. Ryabkov called this the latest addition to the graveyard of arms control agreements.

Ryabkov’s comments provide an exclamation point to remarks Russian President Vladimir Putin has made, starting with the Valdai Conference. Putin addressed the potential US deployment or supply of Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine multiple times this week, primarily in the context of escalating the Russia-Ukraine war. His remarks, made during the Valdai Discussion Club plenary on October 2 and in an interview published on October 5 (conducted shortly before), emphasized that such a move would severely damage US-Russia relations, mark a dangerous escalation, but ultimately fail to alter the battlefield dynamics due to Russia’s air defenses.

These statements align with broader Kremlin warnings, including from spokesman Dmitry Peskov on October 7, about nuclear-capable variants and an “appropriate” response. While not directly from Putin, spokesman Dmitry Peskov reinforced these views on October 7, calling Tomahawk supplies a “serious round of escalation” with potential nuclear implications, and stating Russia would “respond accordingly” while awaiting US clarity. This ties into Putin’s narrative of Western “militarization” provoking countermeasures.

Then there is the military assessment. Russian Chief of the General Staff Army General Valery Gerasimov made public remarks on the ongoing “special military operation” in Ukraine during a high-level meeting with President Vladimir Putin on October 7, 2025. These were the only confirmed statements from Gerasimov this week, as reported by Russian state media outlets like RIA Novosti, TASS, and Izvestia. His briefing focused on operational progress, strikes, and troop movements, portraying Russian advances as methodical and multi-directional despite Ukrainian resistance.

Gerasimov reported that Russian Armed Forces are “continuing to advance in almost every direction of the special military operation,” emphasizing steady territorial gains and the defeat of Ukrainian formations across multiple fronts. He highlighted the liberation of over 5,000 square kilometers in the past year, framing this as evidence of strategic success amid a war of attrition.

Specific Frontline Updates:

  • Battlegroup South: Advancing in the Seversk (Siversk) and Konstantinovka (Kostyantynivka) directions, with operations aimed at encircling Ukrainian positions in Donetsk Oblast.
  • Battlegroup West: Completing the defeat of Ukrainian forces in the southern districts of Kupyansk (Kupiansk), where Russian troops are pushing to secure logistical hubs.
  • Battlegroup North: Establishing a “security zone” in the Sumy and Kharkiv regions to counter Ukrainian incursions and sabotage groups, including operations near border areas like Yunakivka.

Gerasimov confirmed that Russian forces are conducting “massive strikes against military installations of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) in accordance with the plan,” including production sites for missiles, temporary deployment points for Ukrainian troops and foreign mercenaries (in 148 locations), energy and transport infrastructure, and fuel storage facilities. He noted these are high-precision operations to disrupt Ukrainian logistics ahead of winter, with the Ministry of Defense reporting the elimination of 96 artillery pieces and 29 ammunition depots in the prior week.

During an interview Pavel Zarubin, Putin was asked about further territorial ambitions, Putin, in a nuanced response, said that Russia was focusing on consolidating existing gains and preventing Ukrainian counteroffensives. He stated, “Our forces are moving forward where necessary to protect our interests and ensure stability. We don’t need more land for the sake of land; we need security for Russia and its people.” But he stopped short of saying that Russia would not occupy additional land. Instead, he linked territorial control to countering Western escalation, particularly the potential supply of Tomahawk missiles, saying, “If the West arms Ukraine with long-range weapons to strike deep into Russia, we will take measures to ensure our defenses, including in territories we control or may need to control to prevent such threats.” This suggests that additional territorial advances could be pursued reactively, based on provocations like missile deployments.

Danny Davis and I discussed Russia taking a tougher stance vis-a-vis the West:

Russia Ukraine War: All Momentum for Peace LOST /Lt Col Daniel Davis & Larry Johnson

by Daniel Davis, Deep Dive [10-8-2025].

Earlier-year Anchorage meeting between Trump and Putin raised hopes a US-Russia rapprochement could help end the Russia–Ukraine war.

Trump publicly predicted fast progress (including a Putin–Zelensky meeting and a quick end to the war), but those promises did not materialize.

Instead of improvement, the situation has worsened: momentum from Anchorage was lost and tensions may be increasing toward wider escalation between Russia and NATO/Europe.

Russian officials (e.g., Deputy FM Sergey Ryabkov) and commentators say any diplomatic settlement will be on Russia’s terms: permanent control of Crimea, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson; removal of NATO troops/advisors; Ukraine excluded from NATO and its military scaled down to a national police force.

The Russians partly blame Europeans for blocking progress but also express frustration with the U.S. (limited consular contacts, seized property still not returned, no working groups or restored travel).

The Trump administration’s internal picture is criticized: some DoD/CIA sources reportedly describe a “stalemate” or collapsing Russian economy—claims the speaker calls false and disconnected from what multiple sources in Russia report.

The conversation introduces the Tomahawk missile question: talk of supplying/using Tomahawks raises the risk of a new level of crisis because it could involve U.S. systems/assistance and heighten direct U.S. involvement—though some argue Tomahawks could be operated without U.S. personnel.

Overall tone: skepticism about U.S. claims of leverage or easy fixes, warning that missed diplomatic windows and misreadings of Russian intent could lead to deeper escalation rather than a negotiated peace.

Leave a Comment