Finally, Donald Trump has turned his attention to Ukraine! He has imposed sanctions on the biggest financial backers of Russian aggression – Lukoil and Rosneft!

Is this cause for celebration?

Sanctions – “Danylo didn't die – the wound killed him”?

A series of events that took place throughout October led many political analysts to believe that US President Donald Trump had finally stopped trying to lure the Russian dictator with flattery and lucrative deals and, having realized that this was not working, resorted to carrying out his threats to use the “stick.” Convinced once again that Russia's top leadership continues to lead him by the nose and will not budge an inch from its demands, Trump has struck a triple blow.

First, he provided Ukraine with long-range weapons, albeit not Tomahawks.

Second, he lifted, albeit indirectly, the ban on using these weapons to strike military targets on Russian territory. “Since we sell weapons to NATO, we are not interested in where they are used,” Trump said.

Thirdly, on October 22, the US Treasury Department imposed sanctions on Russian energy corporations Lukoil and Rosneft.

The wording of the sanctions is important, so I will quote the ministry's press release in full:

"Today, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the US Department of the Treasury is imposing additional sanctions due to Russia's lack of serious commitment to the peace process to end the war in Ukraine. Today's actions increase pressure on Russia's energy sector and undermine the Kremlin's ability to generate revenue for its war machine and sustain its weakened economy. The United States will continue to advocate for a peaceful resolution to the war, and lasting peace depends entirely on Russia's willingness to engage in good-faith negotiations. ... “Now is the time to stop the killing and immediately cease fire,” said Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. “Given President Putin's refusal to end this senseless war, the U.S. Treasury Department is imposing sanctions on two of Russia's largest oil companies that finance the Kremlin's war machine. The Treasury Department stands ready to take further action, if necessary, to support President Trump's efforts to end another war. We urge our allies to join us and adhere to these sanctions.”

As before, there is no definition of the Russian Federation as an aggressor, but it is clearly recognized that peace “depends entirely” on the Russian side. The sanctions are aimed at reducing funding both directly to the “Kremlin's military machine” and to Russia's already “weakened economy” as a whole. It is also noted that the US Treasury Department is “ready to take further measures” if these prove insufficient.

The press release lists numerous subsidiaries of companies that are also subject to sanctions. So, has the oxygen been cut off to the two giants that were among the main sources of funding for the aggressive war?

Are sanctions capable of having a full effect?

In reality, it is not that simple. Simultaneously terminating all operations with the specified companies would lead to a jump in prices for petroleum products, including gasoline at US gas stations.

Therefore, in order to mitigate the impact on the US and global markets, the US Treasury Department has introduced temporary licenses for some of Lukoil's operations until November 21, 2025 — in particular, within the framework of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium and the Tengizchevroil project.

However, a much more serious obstacle to the sanctions will be the fact that a buyer for Lukoil's assets outside Russia has already been found — Gunvor, whose majority shareholder is Gennady Timchenko, a close friend of the Russian dictator.

The US has made an exception to the sanctions for Rosneft's assets in Germany until at least April 2026.

The most important buyers of Russian energy resources — China and India — are forced to slightly reduce their purchases, but they will not stop them completely.

According to analysts, China, which remains the main buyer of Russian energy resources at preferential prices, will offer the strongest resistance to the sanctions.

The Chinese factor

CNN conducted a detailed analysis of how painful the new sanctions could be, given that China and India are the main buyers of Russian energy resources.

Here are the main conclusions:

Both countries face a difficult choice: on the one hand, they depend on cheap Russian energy and have established economic ties with Moscow; on the other hand, they depend on the US market, as President Trump has already imposed tariffs on India and China and may increase them if these countries do not comply with the sanctions regime.

Both countries are adept at circumventing sanctions through a network of “intermediaries” in third countries.

The so-called “shadow fleet” of the Russian Federation has not yet been eliminated, although the US, Britain, and the EU have already blacklisted hundreds of ships carrying Russian oil.

“Most of this sanctioned oil will end up in the opaque Chinese market or will be ‘laundered’ through trade tricks,” said Clayton Seagle, an expert in strategic studies and head of the energy and geopolitics department at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “These workarounds will still hurt Moscow's revenues, because hiding in the shadows is more expensive. The biggest X factor is not the actions of oil traders, but how Washington will enforce the law.”

Trade truce and political subtext

These conclusions were partly confirmed by Donald Trump's meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping during the ASEAN summit in Seoul on October 30.

The talks lasted about 1 hour and 40 minutes, of which the actual dialogue lasted about an hour. The Russian-Ukrainian war was probably only mentioned in passing, in the context of broader US-China relations: from the black market for fentanyl, which China supplies to the US, to trade relations, where both sides are closely intertwined.

It should be recalled that back in April, Beijing responded to the start of the trade war by refusing to buy American soybeans, dealing a blow to farmers — the Republican Party's main electoral base.

Tariffs on Chinese imports — from consumer goods to components for American electronic devices and weapons — hit end consumers through price spikes.

As a result, the parties agreed on a temporary truce:

Trump will impose only 47% of the tariffs instead of 100%, and China will resume purchasing American soybeans. The trade war has been postponed for a year.

This agreement apparently also includes energy resources: Trump refused to impose sanctions on China's purchases of Russian oil and gas.

So even if Trump seems to have moved on to implementing his threats to “strangle” the Russian economy, global market mechanisms can significantly weaken the effect of sanctions.

However, despite numerous exceptions and loopholes, the blow to the Kremlin's financial flows will still be felt.

Escalation of military confrontation
In response to Donald's policy change, the Russian Federation conducted a demonstration test of the long-range cruise missile "Burevestnik", which runs on nuclear fuel and is capable of carrying nuclear warheads.
According to numerous Russian media reports, the missile is allegedly not able to overcome up to 14 thousand kilometers and this time "successfully landed" in Kamchatka. However, the expert calls this "miracle weapon" a "flying Chernobyl", because it leaves a radioactive trace at its target of tragedy, and in the event of an accident it can cause an environmental disaster.
The US president responded sharply to Moscow's bold move.
"We don't even need to launch missiles so far to reach Russia - our two submarines are already off its shores. And Putin should focus on the achievements of the world, not on missile tests," Trump said.
Shortly after, Russia conducted another demonstration test of the nuclear-powered Poseidon underwater drone. According to the US Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, this weapon is capable of “causing radioactive waves in the ocean that would render a coastal city uninhabitable,” write Arpan Rai and Harriet Boucher in The Independent.
Added to this was another event: the day before Trump arrived at ASEAN and met with Xi Jinping, North Korea conducted another test of its long-range missile — presumably in response to Trump’s offer to hold another meeting with Kim Jong-un.
Right during his tour, on the eve of talks with Xi, Trump ordered the Pentagon to “immediately repeat” the test of its nuclear arsenal.
On his social network Truth Social, he wrote:
“The United States has more nuclear weapons than any other country. This was accomplished, solely by a complete overhaul of the existing arsenal, during my first term. Because of the sheer destructive power, I hated to do it, but I had no choice. Russia comes in second and China comes in third, but within five years they will reach our level. Because of the testing program of other countries, I have instructed the War Department to begin testing our nuclear weapons on an equal footing. The process will begin again.”

However, experts cannot even agree on whether the president meant testing nuclear delivery vehicles (missiles, launchers) or resuming underground nuclear explosions.

As Davis Winkle and Swapna Ramaswamy note in USA Today,

“It was not immediately clear from Trump’s message whether the United States would launch a nuclear warhead before Russia or China did. All three countries—and other nuclear-armed states—regularly test their delivery platforms: Russia recently tested a new nuclear-powered cruise missile and a nuclear torpedo, and the United States launched a Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile in May.”
Nuclear nonproliferation expert Andrea Stricker of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies believes that Trump “may authorize the low-yield nuclear tests that Russia and China are considering, rather than full-scale ones.” She also doesn’t rule out the White House seeking to initiate a new round of arms control talks before the current U.S.-Russia treaty expires in February 2026.
If you’re just referring to delivery vehicles, testing them is common practice. But when it comes to nuclear explosions, this is a direct violation of international agreements:
• the 1986 US-USSR Nuclear Test Ban Treaty,
• and the 2010 US-Russian Strategic Offensive Arms Reduction Treaty, which expires on February 4, 2026.
This document remains the last effective nuclear control treaty between Washington and Moscow. If it ceases to be valid, experts warn, a new nuclear arms race could begin, much more dangerous than during the Cold War, given modern technology and changed political realities.
All this has led to the resumption of discussions that have not been held for more than three decades — since the collapse of the USSR, when it seemed that the nuclear threat was a thing of the past.
As Harriet Boucher (The Independent) notes,
“Trump’s decision to resume nuclear testing in the US has sparked domestic criticism and stark warnings that it could lead to a global escalation.”
Congresswoman Dina Titus (Nevada, Democrat) has already said she intends to introduce legislation to block any such initiatives.
The director of the Arms Control Association, Daryl Kimball, said it would take the US at least three years to resume underground nuclear testing at the Nevada test site.
“Trump is misinformed and out of touch. "The United States has no technical, military or political reason to resume nuclear explosions for the first time since 1992," he said on the social network X.
Kimball also warned that such actions could "trigger a chain reaction" - that is, encourage other nuclear powers to test and undermine the system of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).
After the "sanctions turn": the world on the brink nuclear confrontation
Revival of the ghosts of the Cold War
Attempts to resume the nuclear arms race were sharply condemned by UN Secretary-General António Guterres:
“We must never forget the catastrophic legacy of more than 2,000 nuclear weapons tests conducted over the past 80 years. Nuclear tests can never be allowed under any circumstances,” he stressed (quoted by The Independent).
According to estimates by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), as of March 2025, Russia has 5,459 deployed and undeployed nuclear warheads, while the United States has 5,177. Together, they possess about 87% of the world’s nuclear arsenal, notes Associated Press journalist Emma Burrows.
Against the backdrop of these new statements, threats and demonstrations of force, the Russian Federation has sharply intensified its attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure — on thermal power plants, substations, and critical energy facilities. Every day, Ukrainian civilians, including children, are killed or maimed by Russian drones and missiles.
At the same time, Russia has intensified its provocations against NATO countries. Unmarked drones regularly violate the airspace of the Baltic states, forcing the Alliance to discuss possible responses.
Belarus has also joined in on these actions, launching balloons across the border into Lithuania — some with smuggled goods, some with “weather instruments.”
These incidents not only stir up discussions in NATO, but may also perform intelligence functions, which increases suspicions that Moscow is preparing for a new form of hybrid warfare — involving technologies and methods different from the classic scenarios of the 20th century.

The “Romanian Paradox”

Trump Weakens NATO’s Eastern Flank
Amid growing confrontation, Trump has taken a surprising decision to reduce the number of US troops in Romania, a key buffer zone for the alliance.
As British journalist Gerdana Krasteva (Metro) reports,
“The decision comes despite Russian drones and planes continuing to probe NATO airspace.”
The plans include reducing the US presence at Mihail Koghelniceanu Air Base, a strategic location due to its proximity to Ukraine. The changes will leave only about 1,000 US troops in the country.
This sets a dangerous precedent: while Washington’s rhetoric toward Moscow is getting tougher, the actual US defense presence in the region is getting weaker.
A fragile balance on the brink of disaster
The growth of mutual threats, weapons tests and demonstrations of force are pushing the world to the brink of a direct collision between the two states with the largest nuclear arsenals.
Formally, both sides control their actions, but the risk of a fatal mistake or miscalculation is becoming increasingly real.
History already knows similar examples - the mistakes of the Kremlin's special services, which underestimated the Ukrainians' ability to resist and the West's reaction, have proven that even in the 21st century, the world is not immune to the human factor.
"The duel of inflated egos - both Putin's and Trump's - against the backdrop of Ukraine's existential struggle for survival creates an ideal basis for wrong decisions and unpredictable consequences. Never before has the threat of World War III looked so real."

Is Trump driving himself - and the world - into a dead end?

Global foreign policy difficulties are only part of the problem. The situation inside the United States is getting no less acute.
The country is splitting into two opposing camps — democratic and autocratic — and this split is increasingly reminiscent of a “cold civil war.”
Analysts have long called this phenomenon the “Trump spiral” — a process of relentless growth in mutual hostility between Trump and his supporters on the one hand and his opponents on the other.
This spiral began in 2016, when suspicions arose in American society about Trump’s ties to Russian agents, which later led to the Robert Mueller investigation and the first impeachment in 2018.
In response, Trump launched the theory of a “deep state” that allegedly persecuted him politically. This rhetoric, despite its absurdity, found a strong response among some voters and the media, in particular the Fox News channel.
Later, allegations of a “stolen 2020 election” were added to it, which, despite more than 60 lost court cases, became the catalyst for the storming of the Capitol on January 6, 2021.
The defeat in the elections did not stop Trump - on the contrary, he returned with new forces and a more united team. His strategy is now simple:
• replace all potential opponents in government structures with his own people;
• punish political opponents;
• weaken the independence of the judiciary and the legislature.
As a result, the system of checks and balances, which is the foundation of American democracy, is under threat. Its defeat will mean the end of the classical model of democracy in the United States and the emergence of a new, dangerous form - the “dictatorship of the majority.”

Political Turbulence

Recent events have only deepened the crisis.
The US Department of Justice has opened criminal proceedings against several key figures - former national security adviser John Bolton, New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey.
Bolton is suspected of violating the law on the protection of state secrets; James - of mortgage fraud; Comey - of lying to Congress.
These steps look like an attempt at revenge and only fuel fears of authoritarian tendencies in Trump's policies.
Against this background, his confrontation with Russia may turn out to be not so much a show of strength as an attempt to distract attention from the internal turbulence that threatens not only the US, but also the entire global balance.
Trump's spiral: when the personal becomes global
All those accused in the new criminal cases are political opponents of Donald Trump.
Former national security adviser John Bolton, who saw the work of the Trump White House from the inside, wrote the book “The Room Where It Happened”, which became a bestseller among political analysts. It is a cautionary tale in which Bolton describes the risks that Trumpism poses to US democracy itself and the international order.
At the same time, there are clear safeguards against political persecution in the United States judicial system. American law knows the terms “selective prosecution” and “vindictive prosecution”. If the defense proves at least one of these motives in court, the case is automatically closed.
As Huffington Post columnist Brandi Bachmann notes,
“The charges leveled against President Donald Trump’s political opponents following his public call for Attorney General Pam Bondi to prosecute his enemies raise a troubling question: If the Justice Department is merely the president’s pawn, is anyone in the United States safe from its teeth?
The only legal defense for former FBI Director James Comey, New York Attorney General Letitia James, or anyone else pressured by the department is a claim of vindictive or selective motive. And while such claims rarely work, Trump’s behavior is so out of line that this time they may work.”

From the fight against criminals to the war on immigrants

Even the fight against illegal immigrants who have committed serious crimes, declared by Trump and supported by part of the electorate, acquires a clearly political color.
One of the elements of his rhetoric about the “stolen election” is the unfounded claim that “illegal immigrants voted for Democrats.”
This is legal nonsense, because only citizens registered as voters have the right to participate in the US presidential election; even green card holders do not have this right.
In my opinion, it is this false theory that pushed Trump to turn the legal fight against crime among immigrants into a full-scale war on immigration in general.
Under the pretext of “protecting the rule of law,” he allowed the practice of illegal arrests, humiliations and the use of force, as well as the introduction of the National Guard into a number of cities where this was not justified.

Democracy Under Threat

Today, the fight for the future of American democracy is ongoing.
Paradoxically, it is this system—with its independent courts, Congress, and press—that poses the greatest threat to Trump himself.
If the Democrats regain control of Congress in the 2026 midterm elections, Trump could face another impeachment or at least a series of trials, now with much more evidence.
This prospect is forcing him to take increasingly radical steps that undermine the very foundations of democracy.
The further this “Trump spiral” unfolds, the more dangerous it becomes—both for America itself and for the world.
On the Verge of Choice: Democracy or Ruin
No one can predict the end of this story now.
Possible scenarios range from a painful but peaceful compromise that would save American democracy (even at the cost of political concessions on the Trump issue) to a catastrophic development that could drag the world into a new global conflict.
If democracy survives in the United States, it will be a victory for the entire democratic world—and a chance for Ukraine to win.
If not, a third world war could deprive humanity of the very possibility of talking about democracy.