In the last month or so, President Donald Trump’s on-again-off-again relationship with Ukraine — which has ranged from kicking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy out of the White House in early 2025 to promising new air defense missiles this summer — has once again run cold. Trump has excoriated Zelenskyy for successful Ukrainian strikes on Russian oil and gas infrastructure, called for Zelenskyy’s ouster, and gifted Russia a sanctions reprieve.

Trump also hasn’t had much success brokering a ceasefire, much less an end to the war (an announced “energy ceasefire” fell apart-near instantly earlier in October). First Lady Melania Trump, however, has.

She reportedly played a (limited) role in arranging a partial ceasefire for the frontline Ukrainian city of Oleshky, which has been hit especially hard by the war and is currently occupied by Russia. 

The pause, which is scheduled to run through the weekend, allows food and aid to get in and for a civilian evacuation. While limited, it also shows that both Ukraine and Russia are potentially willing to come to the negotiating table. 

After the Trump-Vladimir Putin rapprochement, though, some critics worry that the US is more likely to take Russia’s side — or at least step away from Ukraine’s — both in the war and in any possible peace talks. 

To break down what the Trumps are up to, how serious the concerns of Trump abandoning Ukraine for Putin actually are, and what could come next, Today, Explained co-host Sean Rameswaram spoke with Alex Ward, a national security reporter for the Wall Street Journal.

Below is an excerpt of Sean’s conversation with Ward, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify.

Let’s start with the most unexpected news out of this war in recent days: that Melania Trump brokered a ceasefire.

It’s possible she had a role. I’m going to personally, without too much reporting, say that it was probably more Pope Leo.

Melania stole Pope Leo’s ceasefire?

I think a little bit. Look, this ceasefire is not a small thing. It is a humanitarian ceasefire in the southern Ukrainian city of Oleshky. It allows humanitarian aid to get in. The critics would say this allows the Russians to re-arm and regroup, and I guess at the same time also the Ukrainians. 

The question is, does it actually have that much influence over the war? No, it’s a very, very small targeted ceasefire. But it is a potential signal that deals can be made. 

The Russians are very much saying, look at Melania Trump, look at how important she was to all this. And if I’m the Russians, I would love to be saying things like that because then President Trump feels like the Russians are being very generous towards my wife and to my family, and therefore I side with them. 

It feels very convenient that the Russians are pumping that up and that even the White House is pumping up Melania Trump’s influence. I don’t want to discredit her. I’m sure she did work on this.

When did she become a negotiator in this war?

From the beginning, she has been trying to get children kidnapped by Russia back to Ukraine.  That has been a major focus of hers in this war. 

Is she the driving force behind this ceasefire? Is she the number one reason it happened? It’s totally possible. There’s just a lot of skepticism out there about whether Kyiv and Moscow were brought to the table and browbeaten by the First Lady. Again, very possible, but both sides, being Ukraine and Russia, have an incentive to play up her role.

The ceasefire is just relegated to one city. How come?

That’s all they could agree to. If we’re looking at this war at a bigger scale, there’s been a massive discussion about how to get an end to the Ukraine-Russia war. 

The US last week was able to broker a commitment to have trilateral talks between the Ukrainians, Russians, and the Americans with the goal toward ending the war. And you’ve heard President Zelenskyy of Ukraine say, “We can call it ceasefire. We can call stop the killings. We can call freeze the conflict.” 

Putin goes, ‘No, thank you. I would like basically a handover of the territory that I want, even though I’ve been unable to conquer it after nearly five years.’ It’s unclear if they’re even going to get into the room for those trilateral negotiations. Even if they do, it’ll probably be at a lower technical level. 

So are we ever going to get to the point that Putin and Zelenskyy and Trump get in a room, all hold hands and say ‘war over’? I highly doubt it, but that is the goal they’re after. You see the Trump administration, the Kremlin, and Kyiv all point to this Oleshky ceasefire as, like, ‘Hey, this could be a model for the much bigger deal.’

I want to be clear that this Oleshky thing is important. It really is aimed at a humanitarian ceasefire since there’s a lot of food that isn’t getting in, a lot of people are suffering and this potentially leads to some relief. But there are a lot of people around Ukraine and many bombed-out cities that are going, “Hey, what about us? We are hungry too. We don’t have certain services.” 

Winter is coming, and the Russians have bombed out a lot of Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, which is going to make this winter potentially very brutal, as a lot of folks will not have heating or the necessities they need to survive really cold temperatures.

Steve Witkoff called Vladimir Putin a humanitarian, which had a lot of people shook because, famously, Vladimir Putin also started this war.

Yeah, it’s like calling Freddy Krueger a nails enthusiast. It doesn’t make a lot of sense. 

Has Vladimir Putin released Americans that he took hostage? Yes. Has he returned some children that his government, his forces have taken? Yes. I don’t know if that makes a humanitarian. That’s kind of like praising the arsonist for throwing a bucket of water on the house fire.

It’s not just calling him a humanitarian; it’s getting rid of the Lindsey Graham sanctions on Russia, which is essentially like handing Russia billions of dollars, right?

There’s a lot of weirdness here. First of all, on the Graham bill, it’s a weird bill, and frankly it’s a pretty bad bill despite the fact that Democrats and Republicans love it. 

What it basically calls for is tariffs on countries that purchase Russian energy. The way that Trump explains it is he waived the economic punishments, because otherwise the Russians would not have returned Stephen Hubbard and there might not have been this Oleshky ceasefire and there might not have been a bunch of other benefits.

Another argument President Trump was making for removing these tariff sanctions on Russia was that it would lower diesel costs here in the United States. Has that actually happened?

The Russians agreed to a diesel deal where they would basically export diesel to the United States. And in President Trump’s mind, that will lower costs because President Trump and political allies of his like Elon Musk of SpaceX say that is the reason diesel prices have skyrocketed across the US. 

However, when you talk to analysts and look at the data, it is the Iran war that has had a greater effect on diesel prices. Not to say that the Russia-Ukraine war hasn’t had any, but it’s much less because there is just very little Russian diesel in the American market, but also in the global market. 

What the US is receiving from Russia is not nothing, but effectively nothing because it’s just not enough to alleviate the diesel concerns across the country and to lower prices to a meaningful amount. And we can see President Trump is effectively scrambling to make good on his promises of lowering prices as the midterms approach, to the point that he’s willing to make a deal with the invading country in the war he’s trying to end in order to lower gas prices at home.

A lot of people see these developments and think that the United States’ allegiances have shifted, that we’ve maybe abandoned Ukraine at the moment. Is that fair?

I don’t think we can say that with any sense of certainty. President Trump has actually been on Ukraine’s side in certain cases, even rhetorically during a UN meeting, I believe it was last year. President Trump was presented with intelligence about how the Russians have been struggling to invade Ukraine. And then he released a statement saying basically, ‘Go Ukraine, go. Russia, you’re kind of losing here.’ And that made people go, ‘Oh, he’s on Ukraine’s side.’ 

And of course, after that whole Oval Office blowup with Zelenskyy, that relationship improved. But everyone’s always been kind of like, ‘Well, we know where Trump’s feelings are here. He wants a big deal with Russia. He wants an economic deal with Russia. He wants to improve relations with Vladimir Putin, and so he always returns to the mean, even if he flirts with Ukraine.’ 

But below President Trump’s unique style of dealmaking, the US intelligence community is helping Ukraine to defend against Russia. The US is selling weapons to Europeans for the Europeans to deliver to Ukraine. It is nowhere near the level of weapons support during the Biden administration, but that intelligence support seems to be at a higher level than during the Biden years. 

And it’s not like President Trump has purposefully hampered Ukraine’s defenses a lot. There are some questions about sudden intelligence shutoffs and delays of important weapons. I am not saying President Trump has been a staunch defender and a staunch supporter of Ukraine here. But if you look at the grand totality, Ukraine is still being defended by the United States. 

It almost seems like President Trump has an inability to pick a side. He’s playing both. In his mind, he thinks that’s the best way to get them both to the table and get a deal. But this is also the man that said he could do it in 24 hours and we’re nearly two years into his presidency. And right now the best we can get is, ‘Hey, maybe we can get the Russians, Ukrainians, and Americans to meet in a room for technical talks.’ 

It’s not nothing. And also, hey, we got a ceasefire in a town in Ukraine. It’s not nothing, but it’s nowhere near the big, potentially Nobel Peace Prize-winning deal that he’s searching for.

Putin said that he and Musk are in "close contact" about Rassvet, Russia's Starlink-like satellite connectivity project.

This story appeared in The Logoff, a daily newsletter that helps you stay informed about the Trump administration without letting political news take over your life. Subscribe here.

Welcome to The Logoff: President Donald Trump is cozying up to Russia again. 

What’s happening? On Wednesday, Russia released an American prisoner, 74-year-old retired teacher Stephen Hubbard, back to the US. The US, Trump said in a social media post, “out of respect for President Trump, was not required to give anything in return.” 

Hubbard’s release is unquestionably good news. But Trump is wrong: In just the last month, his administration has delivered for Russia in more ways than one, often inexplicably and despite bipartisan condemnation. 

What is Trump doing for Russia? Late last week, he waived upcoming economic sanctions on Russia that he had only recently signed into law after they passed Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support. He also: 

• Struck a diesel deal with Russia, temporarily lifting fuel sanctions on the country in exchange for Russia releasing a trivial amount of diesel into the global market; 
• Announced — seemingly without talking to either party — a Russia-Ukraine “energy ceasefire” favorable to Russia (which has since fallen apart); 
• Temporarily interrupted US intel sharing with Ukraine and played a role in interfering with Ukraine’s access to Starlink, which helps power the country’s drone warfare against Russia; and 
• Called on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to be replaced.

Last month, Trump also invited Russian President Vladimir Putin to the annual G20 summit later this year, which would mark Putin’s first appearance since 2019.

What does Trump get out of all of this? There’s Hubbard’s release, but taking that on Trump’s own terms (muddled though they are), the US didn’t give anything to secure it — which means that all of those favors have amounted to not much at all, other than papering over Russia’s role as an international bad actor and breaking with US allies in Europe. 

Why does this matter? Trump’s Russia embrace comes at an awful time for Ukraine, which, as the New York Times reported earlier this month, is facing a Russian campaign to “freeze Ukrainians into submission” as winter approaches. Nevertheless, on Wednesday, Trump envoy Steve Witkoff called Putin a “humanitarian.”

And with that, it’s time to log off…

I was delighted to learn about the US’s new national park yesterday, its 64th. Chiricahua National Park — until Tuesday, only a national monument — is the first new park in six years. Located in southeastern Arizona, it’s also called the “Wonderland of Rocks,” according to the Washington Post; you can read more about it here with a gift link. 

Have a great evening, and we’ll see you back here tomorrow!

This story appeared in Today, Explained, a daily newsletter that helps you understand the most compelling news and stories of the day. Subscribe here.

You can’t quite say that President Donald Trump is “turning” on Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, because he never truly seemed to have Zelenskyy’s back. 

There was that time Trump panned Zelenskyy as a “modestly successful comedian.” Or that excruciating meeting where Trump and Vice President JD Vance harangued Zelenskyy for inadequately “thanking” them.

But over the past week, Trump has dropped even the meager niceties he sort of faked before. On Monday, he blamed Zelenskyy for failing to end Russia’s invasion…and suggested it was time for “somebody else” to take over negotiations. 

Three days earlier, he delayed a package of tariffs and other sanctions designed to pressure Russia to end its four-year onslaught in Ukraine. And a week before that, Trump announced — after an apparently chummy phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin — that the US would reopen its market to Russian diesel, reversing a ban imposed shortly after the invasion. 

Go a little deeper

All this diplomatic whiplash comes as Russia continues to bombard Ukraine with drone and missile strikes, killing hundreds of civilians in September alone and leaving hundreds of thousands of people without power. The first two weeks of October ranked among the deadliest periods for civilians in the country since 2022, according to UN monitors. 

But while those escalating strikes threaten both human lives and long-standing international norms around territory and sovereignty — norms that actually matter quite a lot to American security, long-term — there’s another issue that Trump is more concerned with right now: Ukrainian strikes on Russian oil refineries. 

Those strikes drive up the cost of gas, and those prices are, of course, of profound concern to American voters, who are paying near- record highs for gasoline and diesel fuel (…primarily due to the war in Iran, I am obliged to note). More than any other issue, high living costs threaten to hamstring the GOP in next month’s midterm elections. 

Trump has, perhaps predictably, pursued a Russia policy that he says could ease prices at home. In addition to allowing imports of Russian diesel, Trump has demanded that Ukraine stop targeting Russian oil refineries and ramped up pressure on Zelenskyy to negotiate an end to the war.

According to Ukrainian officials, that campaign has lately involved disruptions to both intelligence-sharing and the US-based satellite internet service Ukraine uses to intercept Russian attacks. (On Tuesday afternoon, Zelenskyy said intel sharing — if not satellite service — had been restored again.) 

In either case, it will likely take more than arm-twisting to make the whole situation go away for good. As Vox’s Josh Keating laid out earlier this year, the US does have quite a lot of leverage over Ukraine — and Trump could very well pressure Zelenskyy to accept a peace deal with no real assurance that Russia won’t just invade again. 

But we’ve all seen this movie before, as recently as 2014: Without credible guarantees, Putin could catch his breath, regroup, and return to Ukraine in a few months or years to take even more land. 

The real, long-term threat there is that a stronger Russia would be even better positioned to menace the rest of Europe. And America’s power could suffer as its allies look elsewhere for less fair-weather friends. 

But uh…diesel might be a bit cheaper? Thank God for small mercies, I guess. 

One link for later

➨ May we suggest a truly miserable read? My colleague Marina Bolotnikova calls The Opposite of Happiness: How Bad Feelings Make and Break Us “a bracing, useful, and even comforting lens on what it means to be alive.” The recent book, by the noted economist George Loewenstein, examines the (necessary!) role of negative emotions in our lives and civilization…and suggests, albeit indirectly, some paths for making peace with them. 

Before you go…

• Did you know…that Turkey is the world capital of hair transplants? There are at least 500 clinics for that purpose in Istanbul alone, beloved by medical tourists. 
• Today’s trivia: What’s the currency of Poland? (You can find this and other brain puzzles in Vox’s daily crossword. Look for the answer in tomorrow’s edition.)
• Yesterday’s trivia: Yesterday we asked you for the mass-market beer named after a Dutch river. That would be Amstel. The city of Amsterdam is also named for a dam on the same river.

America’s descent into chaos and depravity was foretold 10 years ago at a press conference. Donald Trump, who had just been nominated for president at the 2016 Republican National Convention, issued an invitation for one of America’s foes to hack the emails of Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state and Democratic nominee for president. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he said. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

The call came only days after emails from the Democratic National Committee were released following the hacking of the organization’s computer servers, which was widely assumed to have been perpetrated by Russian agents. As would become the habit over the following decade, many dismissed Trump’s remarks as mere trolling that weren’t intended to be taken seriously. 

This was not the first time he had invoked Russia. Throughout the primary season, Trump had gushed in multiple interviews about Russian President Vladimir Putin and signaled his intentions to draw closer to Putin once in office. Trump even defended the dictator’s extra-judicial killings, blithely explaining, “Our country does plenty of killing.” But the press conference did mark the first time he enlisted Russia as his ally. 

The overtures continued throughout Trump’s first term, most infamously when he sided with Putin during a bilateral meeting over America’s own intelligence agencies, which had found that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election. The president suggested an “election integrity” sharing operation between the two countries, a proposal that made it clear Putin had Trump wrapped around his little finger. 

Then came Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. Throughout the 2024 election, Trump pledged to end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours of taking office — or of being elected. (His rhetoric often shifted.) He apparently believed that he could get on the phone with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and order him to immediately surrender or face his mighty wrath. Needless to say, this did not happen, and since then Trump has grown increasingly frustrated that he’s been shown to be nothing more than a paper tiger, a frustration that has now reached fever pitch due to his abject failure in the Iran war. Desperate for a “win” — by which he means a Russian win — the president is now in the process of completely selling out Ukraine to his good friend Vlad. 

 

In recent days, Trump has signed an executive order temporarily lifting the sanctions on Russian oil. While supposedly done to secure diesel fuel for the United States, which has seen prices skyrocket due to the president’s war of choice with Iran, the act is in practice a sign of goodwill toward Putin, America’s enemy, and will help him fund his war against Ukraine, our erstwhile ally. A few days later, Trump waived several additional sanctions that a bipartisan congressional majority had passed just a few weeks ago at the behest of the late Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who foolishly believed himself to have the president under his control. 

Worse yet, in what will go down as one of the most appalling betrayals by a U.S. president in history, Trump and his good friend Elon Musk apparently sabotaged Ukrainian intelligence by slowing the Starlink and Starshield communications systems the country relies on for its defensive and offensive weapons systems. Russia took swift advantage of the favor and unleashed one of the most massive bombardments of the war, killing civilians and hitting Ukraine’s energy sector. Trump also called for Zelenskyy’s ouster, and in an interview with Bloomberg published Sunday, the Ukrainian president accused Trump of pushing the country to surrender to Russia.

---

Want more sharp takes on politics? Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only, written by Amanda Marcotte, now also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

---

Trump has a number of apparent rationales for these moves. He wants to be seen before the midterms to be doing something about the price of gas and diesel. But that is a crisis of his own making due to his misbegotten war in Iran, for which he has no way out that will solve the problem. His ongoing war has altered the global energy markets in ways that are not easily fixed, which was the reason no president before him was stupid enough to attack Iran. So now Trump is blaming Ukraine because it is bombing Russian oil refineries and demanding they stop so that Russia can sell its diesel — and finance its war, which led to the sanctions in the first place. Not to be overlooked is that Russia is a staunch ally of Iran and is helping them fight us, which Trump has waved off as having “nothing.” Some might argue that could constitute providing “aid and comfort” to America’s enemy.

Meanwhile, fingers are being pointed in multiple directions. Musk said the government is to blame for the Starlink/Starshield gambit. According to sources in the Pentagon, the order came from the White House. Trump claimed he doesn’t know anything about it. Secretary of State Marco Rubio shrugged that “it just sort of happened.” Now, lest the Europeans get it in their heads that they should try to step up their own defenses by restricting Starlink in favor of a European-based system, the U.S. government is reportedly threatening them with “devastating” or “destructive” economic retaliation.

As a cherry on top of the administration’s full-on embrace of Russia, the Wall Street Journal reported that Putin has floated a summit with Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping to decide Ukraine’s fate. (On Monday, Trump told reporters he was open to a meeting but denied it would focus on Ukraine, saying he wanted to discuss denuclearization.) If Trump knew any history, he would know that such a meeting would prove to be his Yalta, the trilateral conference between President Franklin Roosevelt, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin that carved up Europe in the wake of World War II. The summit became widely seen by the right as “the sell-out at Yalta” because the Soviets ended up with Eastern Europe, but things have changed within the GOP. 

The summit is clearly intended to elevate Russia back to superpower status, which it is not in any economic or military sense, and to demonstrate a new order in which Trump, Putin and Xi run the world. In reality, Putin and Xi now have the United States dancing to their tune, handing them power and influence to dominate their respective spheres. 

The president’s flagrant betrayal of Ukraine is an outrage that has seemingly awakened some of the slumbering Republicans who know they are facing a drubbing at the polls in the quickly approaching midterm elections. Whether it will arouse the consciences of enough to truly step up and stop this breach of trust is unknown. But the mere fact that Trump has gone this far to salve his ego, defy his critics by embracing Putin even more fervently and drum up a lame excuse for what may be the worst national security decision in American history leaves this country weaker, poorer and more distrusted around the world. It hardly seems possible, but we have reached yet another new low.

The post Putin has Trump right where he wants him appeared first on Salon.com.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy criticized President Donald Trump’s decision to waive new sanctions against Russia on Saturday, warning that easing economic pressure would only embolden Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Trump signed an executive order Friday suspending sanctions and tariffs under the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act, which he signed into law last month. The penalties were scheduled to take effect Sunday.

“A decision was unfortunately made in America to completely disregard the Lindsey Graham Act, which was supposed to impose truly effective pressure on Russia to bring this war to an end,” Zelenskyy wrote Saturday.

Yesterday, the Russians carried out one of their largest attacks on Ukraine’s energy sector – more than 15 critical power generation and transmission facilities were targeted across different regions of Ukraine. Restoration work is ongoing, with all necessary services and all available resources of Ukrainian energy companies involved. I thank everyone working practically nonstop to restore power.

The most difficult situation was in Lutsk, Rivne, Zhytomyr, Vinnytsia, Shepetivka, Slavuta, and Netishyn. Energy facilities in the Kharkiv, Kyiv, Dnipro, and other regions were also hit. The Russians have scaled up their anti-energy operation and are trying to stretch our reserves and repair capabilities as thin as possible. Between 7 p.m. yesterday and 7 a.m. today alone, more than 320 jet-powered and gasoline-powered “shaheds,” along with loitering munitions, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles, were used against our energy sector, our cities, and our communities. And although our warriors are shooting down a significant number of them, the sheer scale and unrelenting pace of Russia’s strikes, specifically against our energy sector, are unfortunately having severe consequences.

It is important that our European partners have already prepared new support packages for Ukraine. I am grateful to them for this. And it is important that everyone in America also sees what is really happening. At a time when the Russians have carried out such a massive attack on our energy sector, a decision was unfortunately made in America to completely disregard the Lindsey Graham Act, which was supposed to impose truly effective pressure on Russia to bring this war to an end. This Act could have helped enormously – and still can! But it needs to actually work, and every voice in support of it matters.

Russia is trying to cause a blackout in Ukraine – right before winter. Russia is trying to leave millions of our people without electricity and heating. Pressure is needed to stop this. A U.S. sanctions blackout, easing pressure on the aggressor, financial rewards for Putin – all of this only encourages him to keep attacking. We must not give up ground. We must keep trying to end the war. To end it, not give Putin every reason to continue it indefinitely. I thank everyone who is truly fighting for peace and helping Ukraine!

— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) October 17, 2026

“This Act could have helped enormously — and still can! But it needs to actually work, and every voice in support of it matters,” he added.

The White House said the waiver was in the national interest. The order suspends the new penalties but leaves existing sanctions against Russia in place.

Moscow, meanwhile, welcomed the decision. Kirill Dmitriev, Putin’s investment envoy, called it an “important and truly historic moment,” suggesting it could open the door to renewed economic cooperation with Washington.

The move comes as Russia intensifies attacks on Ukraine‘s energy infrastructure ahead of winter. Zelenskyy said Russian forces targeted more than 15 energy facilities in an overnight assault. Ukraine’s air force reported 332 drones and four cruise missiles launched during the attacks.

---

Start your day with essential news from Salon.
Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course.

---

Rep. Don Beyer, D-Va., accused Trump of undermining bipartisan efforts to pressure Moscow.

“Trump’s latest surrender to Putin again betrays our Ukrainian partners and defies clear congressional intent of legislation designed to punish Russia for its illegal war of aggression,” Beyer said.

Trump just waived all of the sanctions on Russia provided for in the Lindsey Graham Sanctioning Russia Act, just as I and others warned he would.

Trump’s latest surrender to Putin again betrays our Ukrainian partners and defies clear congressional intent of legislation designed to punish Russia for its illegal war of aggression.

Trump has proven he will twist this law and abuse the powers it conferred on him, and while he has let the tariff powers lie for the moment, the law as written also empowers Trump to weaponize new trade authorities against our allies and trading partners.

Congress must fix this flawed law to stop Trump from capitulating to Putin and ensure that it truly supports Ukraine.

— Rep. Don Beyer (@RepDonBeyer) October 17, 2026

The Graham Act authorized new economic penalties, including tariffs targeting countries that purchase Russian energy, but also granted the president authority to waive them on national-interest grounds.

The post Zelenskyy: Trump is letting Putin off appeared first on Salon.com.

Earlier this month, three data centers in western Russia suddenly went dark due to a “rapid unplanned disassembly,” to use euphemistic engineering parlance. They exploded, in other words. Operated by Yandex, a Russian technology company often compared to Google that offers many similar services — a search engine, online shopping, cloud computing and the like — the centers were heavily damaged in a series of coordinated drone strikes over four days by Ukraine, which saw them as a valuable target in the country’s military campaign against Russian infrastructure.

As Russia’s war against Ukraine slogs on, both sides are increasingly adopting this strategy. While power plants and oil refineries have been hit, data centers and internet facilities are becoming the latest quarry for drone and missile strikes — and not just in Europe. Data centers operated by Amazon in Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates have also been targeted in the ongoing Iran war.

Few Americans have probably heard of Yandex, let alone use its services, and most likely didn’t notice when many of its hosted websites became inaccessible. But after Ukraine’s attacks, many people started to claim that social media was seemingly different. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was quick to suggest his country had dealt a massive blow to Russia’s online disinformation machine, saying, “It suddenly became a little easier to breathe on many social platforms. There was less hate, less division and fewer provocations.” Several reports seemed to support his claims, citing data from internet monitoring service Cloudflare, that allegedly showed “Russia’s Yandex bot traffic nearly eliminated overnight.” 

But the truth is far more complicated, as some experts have noted. Yandex did experience a crash in bot activity, but at least some of that traffic seems to be legitimate. “When Cloudflare data shows a precipitous drop in ‘bot’ traffic, that does not mean ‘automated social media troll accounts’, it means ‘software that makes automated web requests on a large scale,’” Michał ‘Rysiek’ Woźniak, an internet infrastructure expert, told The Guardian. Others noted that they haven’t seen an actual drop in online disinformation. “Our platforms are still monitoring Russian social networks across the world and there is no discernible change in their posting patterns,” said Amil Khan, the chief executive of Valent, a tech startup that tracks disinformation.

None of that has stopped Reddit and other corners of the web from celebrating and memeing the issue. If those celebrations aren’t quite justified, there’s still something to be learned from the ordeal, which digs into the so-called dead internet theory. The basic premise is that almost nothing we see online is human-generated anymore. In his 2025 book “Market-Oriented Disinformation Research,” business academic Carlos Diaz Ruiz, who has studied how disinformation spreads in social media echo chambers, describes what many of us experience online on a daily basis: “an eerie feeling that the Internet is made up of bots talking to bots, following and liking bots, and posting AI-generated content designed for machine consumption, the algorithm, not humans.”

Indeed, bot traffic makes up an increasingly large share of the internet, surpassing human traffic for the first time in history over the summer, according to a June Cloudflare report. No doubt the surge in generative artificial intelligence use is what tipped the scales, but of course, not all bots are created equal. Many have legitimate, beneficial uses, like archiving web data.

---

Start your day with essential news from Salon.
Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course.

---

Some people have wedged dead internet theory into a conspiracy theory that Diaz Ruiz divides into “weak” and “strong.” The weak version of the theory is that the internet is now little more than a hall of mirrors used to manipulate the masses into fighting a culture war instead of a class war. “The Internet drama keeps the population occupied and distracted, preventing them from resisting the elites secretly controlling the world,” as Diaz Ruiz says. “The ‘strong’ version of the dead internet conspiracy theory claims that online activity is entirely disconnected from human activity because our society ceased to exist some time ago. In some versions, a catastrophic event occurred in the past, triggering society’s collapse.”

OK, so we’re basically talking the plot of “The Matrix” here. The argument that humanity peaked in 1999 may be compelling, and I won’t argue against it. If reality truly is nothing more than a hallucination, dream or computer screensaver in the brain, why should we waste time disputing it? Proving a negative with such a lack of evidence is fruitless. The point is, some people may be taking dead internet theory a little too far, but that doesn’t change the fact that within the last week people felt like they got a taste of some version of it.

If we lift the hood on some of these conspiracies, we can understand what people are really afraid of. Last December in the journal Computer, Hal Berghel, a computer science professor at the University of Nevada, argued the dead internet is more than a conspiracy and should not be dismissed, writing, “There’s certainly evidence of the distortion of the internet from the original concept as a liberating, self-healing, packetized purveyor of useful and important information: the original commitment to net neutrality is on life support, the goal of a shared public information repository is constantly compromised by paywalls, the content has moved from valuable scholarship to a sub-cerebral landfill, and the users are subjected to a mind-numbing cacophony of digital threats: spam, phish bait, spyware, malware, online bullying, online fraud, extortion, hacking, VoIP 911-swatting, doxing, slander, pretexting, etc.”

In other words, there’s a good reason so many people find dead internet theory attractive. Once a zone of promise and connection, the web has not only rotted and enshittified, it’s turned into a literal warzone. There really are algorithms out there, unleashed by governments actively dropping bombs on one another, that are designed to infect our minds and prejudice our ability to perceive the truth. It’s one of the many ways modern warfare has become invisible, pervasive and endless. No wonder social media is making so many people depressed — it can be a form of assault.

“In tandem with proxy warfare, cyber operations have become a central pillar of modern statecraft. Cyber warfare enables states to conduct aggressive acts; espionage, sabotage, infrastructure disruption without engaging in kinetic violence,” philosophers Oluyemi Opeoluwa Adisa and Kareem Shwan Adham wrote last year in a study published in the International Journal of Scientific Research and Management. “The strategic advantage of cyber warfare lies in its stealth and ambiguity. Because it blurs the line between war and crime, attribution becomes difficult, enabling perpetrators to operate with minimal consequences.”

How do we even tell how much of the dead internet theory is true? Perhaps through that old tech-support adage: Turn it off and back on again. And no, I don’t mean bombing more data centers, though we’re likely to see more of that, for better or worse. If everything feels fake, maybe we’re better off getting outside and experiencing something real for a minute. Yeah, yeah, we’ve all been told to touch grass so much that such advice is routinely mocked, and anyway, not everyone can easily do that.

But here’s your daily reminder that humans are primates whose still-evolving brains are exponentially outpaced by technological advancement. Being in nature is essential because we are nature. There’s a certain reset available in the presence of trees, birds and clouds. Even more important is connecting with real humans: family, friends, neighbors. Socialization is the essence of the primate brain too. You don’t have to uninstall any apps or delete Facebook, though you could try it too. Off, on again. 

And when you are online, which is unavoidable for many of us, try to remember that you are probably interacting with fewer humans than you might think. So don’t take it so seriously. Temper those outrageous emotions, the ones the algorithms have gotten so good at teasing out of us. Maybe instead we can fortify them into weapons to attack the real problems we face, like widening wealth gaps, destruction of the environment and the rise of authoritarianism. 

The post The internet isn’t dead. It’s even worse appeared first on Salon.com.

This story appeared in The Logoff, a daily newsletter that helps you stay informed about the Trump administration without letting political news take over your life. Subscribe here.

Welcome to The Logoff: Is Trump turning on Ukraine? 

What’s happening? Ukraine says its access to Starlink, the satellite internet system run by Elon Musk’s SpaceX company, and Starshield, the military version of the same technology, is being throttled as President Donald Trump’s animosity toward the country mounts.

Why is Trump angry with Ukraine? Trump has been hot and cold on Ukraine since he returned to office, but his current anger is driven by oil prices and successful Ukrainian strikes on Russian oil refineries — particularly ahead of the US midterm elections. 

Last week, Trump announced a US-Russia diesel deal, which has elicited bipartisan anger and probably won’t do much, if anything, for diesel prices in the US. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has criticized the deal, leading Trump to lash out and call for Zelenskyy’s replacement.

Over the weekend, Trump also announced an “ENERGY CEASEFIRE” between Ukraine and Russia that doesn’t really seem to exist. “Both parties have agreed,” he wrote. “Do not break it!” (Russia appears to have broken it the same day, while Ukraine is complying for now.)

Is Ukraine actually to blame for high oil prices? Partially, but not primarily; as the BBC explains, while Ukrainian refinery strikes play a role, ongoing disruptions to the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf oil industry from Trump’s war with Iran have had a greater impact (though Trump has tried to shift the blame to Ukraine).

Why is Starlink so important? Starlink and Starshield provide vital communications infrastructure in Ukraine, especially on the battlefield. The technology is also used to control offensive and defensive Ukrainian drones, which have emerged as a key part of Ukraine’s military efforts against Russia.

What’s next? Despite the fact that neither Russia nor Ukraine seemingly signed on to Trump’s “ENERGY CEASEFIRE” and Russia is still attacking Ukrainian energy facilities, Trump is trying to bind Ukraine to it: The US has reportedly threatened to suspend US intelligence sharing, which has helped give Ukraine early warning of Russian missile attacks, if Ukraine strikes more Russian refineries.

And with that, it’s time to log off…

I appreciated this New York Times story, pegged to Pope Leo XIV’s diagnosis yesterday, about all of the ways that science has made lung cancer massively more survivable than in years past, with a fatality rate half of what it was in the 1990s. You can read it here with a gift link.

Thanks for reading, have a great evening, and we’ll see you tomorrow!

A battlefield dominated by fully autonomous drones capable of selecting and engaging targets without human intervention sounds like a dystopian sci-fi plot. And while that scenario has not yet arrived, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine has moved modern warfare a notch down that road.

The post Russia‑Ukraine war is accelerating the dangerous race toward fully autonomous drones appeared first on Salon.com.

The U.N. General Assembly in New York this week honed in on global conflicts, especially the Ukraine-Russia war and the U.S.-Israel war against Iran. On Tuesday, Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian gave a speech describing his nation as “victims of terrorism” by the U.S., emphasizing that Iran was “hit” but “we did not bend the knee.” He held up images of more than 120 children killed by a U.S. missile strike in the early days of the war, actions described last week by a U.N. fact-finding mission as “reasonable grounds” for war crimes. 

“It must be understood by Mr. Trump and those who seek to bully us that we are ready for dialogue and diplomacy and negotiations without accepting the language of force,” Pezeshkian said. It was, as the Associated Press put it, “a striking instance of a foreign leader addressing the world body while their country is at war with the host nation.” A U.S. representative at the U.N. walked out during Pezeshkian’s speech.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio dismissed Pezeshkian’s speech, telling reporters afterward “I don’t know what standing Iran has to lecture anyone on human rights or the international system when they habitually violate it.” 

“They violate the sovereignty of every one of their neighbors by sponsoring terrorist organizations that reside in the borders of those countries. They slaughter their own people,” Rubio added.

During his own speech the day before, Trump continued to mull the idea of escalating the Iran war, which has seen global energy prices spike to unprecedented levels and killed between 1,800 to 3,000 civilians across the Middle East. The Washington Post reported last week that the Pentagon is also not disclosing the true number of U.S. soldiers who have died in the war. The Pentagon’s public database cites 18 servicemember deaths, but officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the figures, said the true number could be as high as 23. 

---

Start your day with essential news from Salon.
Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course.

---

“I have a big decision to make,” Trump said Tuesday. “Will a deal be made with Iran that lets them rebuild and create a far greater country than it ever was before, maybe one of the greatest in the Middle East or even the world. Or do I annihilate the Islamic Republic and do it quickly, never giving them a chance to kill and destroy people and countries again?”

Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy delivered remarks Wednesday urging the world to keep up the economic pressure on Russia to impede their ability to wage war against Ukraine. “When someone gives Russia more money through trade, they give this war more time. And that is exactly why we insist on limiting trade with the aggressor, and why we are burning Russia’s revenues ourselves,” he said, describing Russian President Vladimir Putin as unable to embrace peace. Russia will address the assembly Saturday.

“Can you even imagine him without war? He is ‘Patient Zero’, the one from whom war keeps spreading further,” Zelenskyy said. “‘Patient Zero’ must be stopped.”

Additionally, Japan’s prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, called on the U.N. to stop using references to former Axis powers as “enemy states” in its charter, a World War II-era designation that the New York Times reports China and Russia have recently used to attack Japan. “Japan feels a sense of responsibility to safeguard the ideals of the United Nations as our beacon of hope,” Takaichi said on Tuesday. 

The post Trump admin spars with Iran at UN meeting appeared first on Salon.com.