Steve Witkoff: Attacks Starmer's Ukraine Plan.
Witkoff in Conversation with Tucker Carlson.
Sir Keir Starmer's plan for peace between Ukraine and Russia is called "The Coalition of the Willing". I am sure somewhere, the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was called that, correct me if I am wrong. I digress, this plan is backed and pushed not only by the UK, but President Macron. This plan would see European and NATO soldiers on the ground in Ukraine. Of course, you have to reach a peace deal first. Then, allowing troops on the ground from NATO could not happen if 'Vlad The Invader' wasn't accepting.
One gets the impression that in any deal, Russia would get the lion's share of the spoils. Holding onto the land it has captured from Ukraine. Russia has expressed the wish in a peace deal that Ukraine must never join NATO and must have a much-reduced military. Ukraine would get the 'fag end' of the deal. One gets the impression that the US doesn't care if Ukraine gets the worst part of the deal. The US administration, which has treated Zelenskyy like he is the bad guy, seems to favour Putin. Maybe they don't, perhaps they are being even-handed. However, looking at the Trump administration's comments, it makes you wonder.
The Europeans and the Americans agree that peace must come to this conflict. Even if their thoughts on how we get there differ. Negotiations between Ukraine and Russia are taking place in KSA (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia). The Saudis allow their country to be the venue for peace talks. Usually, there are Saudi reps present. Then there is the US delegation featuring Trump's so-called peace envoy Steve Witkoff, Marco Rubio, and other US officials. The Russians are present, as are the Ukrainians. Whether these negotiations will bear fruit and satisfy all sides remains to be seen.
Tucker Carlson interviewed Steve Witkoff. Tucker Carlson asked Mr. Witkoff about the British PM's "Coalition of the Willing" peace plan. Mr. Witkoff described Sir Keir's plan as "Posture and pose". And that Sir Keir's idea was "Simplistic". That, Sir Keir thought, all world leaders "Have got to be like Winston Churchill".
A Downing Street spokesperson said Sir Keir remained "Focused on the outcome of a durable peace in Ukraine". That Sir Keir was striding ahead on the "Planning phase of the coalition".
Questioned about a telephone call between the Prime Minister and the President, the spokesperson said the conversation was about economics. However, the spokesperson said Trump and Starmer speak often about Ukraine and Russia.
Trump has made it clear that if Putin does accept NATO troops to keep the peace, the Americans will not contribute to this. Witkoff was asked what he thought of Putin. Mr. Witkoff replied that Putin was a "straight-up guy". And that he did not necessarily see the Russian President as a "bad guy". Not surprisingly, the Trump administration, as with many right-leaning governments, sees Putin as the injured party.
Trump, Witkoff, and the whole cabal are hypocrites. They brokered a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. People in Israel and Gaza could breathe again, no firefights, no hell raining down on them from drones, missiles, and bombs. Hostages and prisoners were being swapped, and life in some respects was returning to normal. Then Trump said to Netanyahu, "Do what you want". And the Israeli Dictator, sorry, Prime Minister, did just that. The IDF is pulverising Gaza once more, not that there is much left to pulverize.
So, with this in mind, how do we know that any peace deal with Russia and Ukraine will last? Yes, like the Israeli-Hamas ceasefire, it might stick for a while. And Trump then tells Putin, "Do what you want"! And Putin, like Netanyahu, starts the war with Ukraine again. Such are the contradictory times we live in, folks.
said Trump
About the Creator
Nicholas Bishop
I am a freelance writer currently writing for Blasting News and HubPages. I mainly write about politics. But have and will cover all subjects when the need arises.
Keep reading
More stories from Nicholas Bishop and writers in The Swamp and other communities.
By Dumping Tonnes of Sand Into the Ocean for 12 Years, China Has Created Brand-New Islands From Scratch
Over the past twelve years, China has quietly carried out one of the most ambitious and controversial engineering projects in modern history: the creation of entirely new islands by dumping millions of tonnes of sand into the ocean. What began as small-scale land reclamation has evolved into a sweeping transformation of the South China Sea, reshaping geography, geopolitics, and international relations. How Artificial Islands Are Created The process behind these artificial islands is deceptively simple but technically complex. Specialized dredging ships extract sand from the seabed and pump it onto shallow reefs and submerged rocks. Over time, layer upon layer of sand is deposited, gradually rising above sea level. Once land emerges, it is reinforced with concrete, rock barriers, and infrastructure to prevent erosion. China has used this method extensively, particularly on disputed reefs and shoals. What were once barely visible features at low tide have become full-fledged islands, complete with runways, ports, radar systems, and buildings. Why the South China Sea Matters The South China Sea is one of the world’s most strategically important waterways. An estimated one-third of global maritime trade passes through it each year, carrying trillions of dollars’ worth of goods. The region is also believed to hold vast reserves of oil, natural gas, and rich fishing grounds. Multiple countries — including Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei, and Taiwan — claim parts of the sea. China, however, asserts sweeping sovereignty over most of it, marked by its controversial “nine-dash line.” The creation of artificial islands has strengthened China’s physical presence and reinforced its territorial claims. From Sandbars to Strategic Strongholds What makes China’s island-building campaign particularly significant is how quickly reclaimed land has been militarized. Satellite imagery and independent analyses show airstrips long enough to handle military aircraft, deep-water harbors capable of hosting naval vessels, and advanced surveillance systems. These installations allow China to project power far beyond its mainland coast, extending its reach across Southeast Asia. Critics argue that these islands act as unsinkable aircraft carriers, altering the balance of power in the region. Environmental Consequences Beneath the Surface While the geopolitical implications are widely debated, the environmental cost is equally alarming. The dredging process destroys coral reefs, which are among the most biodiverse ecosystems on the planet. Sediment clouds generated during sand dumping smother marine life, disrupt fish breeding grounds, and permanently alter underwater landscapes. Marine scientists warn that damage to coral reefs can take decades — if it recovers at all. For coastal communities that rely on fishing, these changes threaten livelihoods and food security. International Law and Global Pushback China’s actions have drawn sharp criticism from the international community. In 2016, an international tribunal ruled that China’s expansive claims in the South China Sea had no legal basis under international law. The ruling also stated that artificial islands do not generate territorial waters or exclusive economic zones. China rejected the decision, calling it invalid and continuing its construction activities. Meanwhile, other nations have responded with diplomatic protests and increased naval patrols, including freedom-of-navigation operations by the United States and its allies. A New Kind of Territorial Expansion Historically, empires expanded by conquering land. China’s island-building represents a new model: creating territory where none existed before. This approach blurs the line between engineering achievement and strategic maneuvering, raising difficult questions about how international law should adapt to technological capabilities. If artificial islands become widely accepted as legitimate territory, it could set a precedent for other nations to reshape oceans for strategic advantage. The Broader Global Implications Beyond Asia, China’s actions have sparked global debate about maritime governance, environmental responsibility, and the future of territorial disputes. Smaller nations fear being sidelined, while major powers worry about the erosion of established international norms. At the same time, the sheer scale of the project highlights China’s engineering capacity and long-term planning. Turning submerged reefs into permanent landmass within just over a decade is a feat few countries could replicate. Conclusion: Engineering the Future of Power By dumping tonnes of sand into the ocean for over a decade, China has not merely created islands — it has reshaped the strategic landscape of an entire region. These artificial islands stand as symbols of ambition, controversy, and a shifting world order. As technology continues to expand what is physically possible, the challenge for the global community will be ensuring that innovation does not come at the cost of environmental destruction, regional stability, and international law. The islands may be made of sand, but their impact is anything but fragile.
By Fiazahmedbrohi 4 days ago in The Swamp
"Hear Me Out"
"Hear me out, what if we ran away together?" "Where do you want to go?" "Anywhere but here. We could move to a new city or to Canada, or we could disappear from society to live in the middle of the woods. Maybe a combination of two of those things would be good. What do you say?"
By Kay Husnick6 days ago in Fiction
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.