440. Is the Tank Back? Anti-Drone Tech and Starvation in Oleshky

Battleground

The episode examines the geopolitical implications of President Trump's new sanctions authority over Russia and Iran, alongside his pressure on Ukraine to cease

Key takeaways

• The Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act grants Trump power to impose 100% sanctions on countries like China and India trading with Russia.
• Australia's Slinger anti-drone system is enabling Ukrainian armored vehicles to operate more effectively by countering FPV drones.

Main topics

• Trump's Sanctions Act
• Ukraine energy infrastructure strikes

Notable quotes

I won't be coming, but a missile will.

Conclusion

The episode underscores the complex interplay between technological in

Transcript preview

Speaker 1 (0:00) Hey friends, Americans living abroad can legally vote in the U.S. election. Register or get tailored support at VoteFromAbroad.org. Look, state deadlines are super close, so don't waste another second. Go to VoteFromAbroad.org now and click Request My Ballot. Ask to receive it by email. All you gotta do is fill it out and send it back in. Don't miss this chance to shape the future. Don't delay. VoteFromAbroad.org. Speaker 5 (0:41) Hello and welcome to Battleground with me, Saul David and Roger Morehouse. The big news this week is that President Trump signed into law the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act, giving him the power to impose sanctions of up to 100 % on countries like China and India who choose to trade with Russia. But the big question is how and when he will use this increased power, which gives Trump wide leeway over the implementation of sanctions, including which countries could face tariffs and which tariff rates could be imposed. It also gives the president sweeping discretion over whether sanctions provisions can be waived against certain countries. So we'll have to wait and see on this one, Roger. But such caveats aside, it does still seem to be very good news for Ukraine. Speaker 4 (1:25) Yes, it could be, of course. I mean, it gives Trump the power to impose those sanctions. But as we've seen before, whether he actually will do so, particularly with his pal Vladimir in the Kremlin, we shall wait and see. It does, of course, come at a time when Trump, under considerable political pressure at home, is rather desperate for Ukraine to halt its strikes on Russian oil refineries. Why is he saying that? Well, because he blames The success of that strike campaign, which has reduced Russia's refining capacity by at least 30%, for the recent hike in diesel prices, which on Monday hit $6.51 per gallon in the US, up 76 % from a year ago. In a call to Mr Zelensky earlier this week, Trump insisted that the attacks were exacerbating a global diesel shortage and causing prices to surge. What he forgot to mention is that a much bigger reason for the price surge is Trump's own war with Iran, which has limited the supply of oil through the Strait of Hormuz. In any case, limiting Ukraine's long-range strikes would deny Mr Zelensky one of the most powerful weapons and negotiating tools that he has. And for that reason, I doubt he'll be willing to go down that road, certainly not unilaterally. But nonetheless, it would appear that Zelensky is open to some sort of deal. Responding to Trump's Truth Social post on Monday that Russia had, quote, lost control of its diesel oil industry due to its war with Ukraine, Zelensky said Ukraine would take steps towards de-escalation if Russia halted attacks on its energy sector, critical infrastructure and Black Sea shipping. As you can expect, there was no response from Moscow. Speaker 5 (3:08) Yeah, no immediate response. Actually, we've had a little bit of a response now, and it's very much in the no category. But there was also a meeting on Tuesday between Trump and Zelensky on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, at which Trump was asked by reporters, Mr. President, last year at this assembly, you said you thought Ukraine could take back all of its territory. Do you still think that's the case? Or what do you think they'll have to give up in order for peace to be achieved in Ukraine? To which Trump responded. And I quote, well, I think they're going to reach a deal and I don't want to say what the deal will be. We talk a lot about it, including with President Putin, and I think something is going to happen. There's no question they're very good fighters. Really, they can be proud of themselves regardless of what happens. We'll see what happens. But these are very, very talented people. And according to Reuters, Trump also said that Putin was willing to meet to end the war. But there doesn't seem to be any prospect of that anytime soon. Speaker 4 (4:06) Indeed. Zelensky's account of his meeting is that he called on US President Donald Trump to organise a trilateral meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, saying that world leaders need to move as quickly as possible to bring an end to the war. He said on X, President Trump, our teams and I spoke about how to end the war. This is the priority. We are ready. I'm not sure Russia is ready as of today, but anyhow, we spoke about an energy ceasefire. Asked whether his comments mean he's prepared to meet directly with Putin and Trump to bring an end to the war, Zelensky replied, I'm ready. I said it. I'm ready any time when all the sides will be ready. But I doubt we should really be holding our breath on this one, Saul. After all, Russia's sham elections for the State Duma have just delivered an increased majority for the ruling United Russia Party, which now has 355 out of 450 seats, about 78%. an 8 % increase on the 315 Duma seats that it formerly held. Russian officials used those results to trumpet a successful referendum on the war in Ukraine and on Putin's broader foreign policy. In reality, as EU Foreign Policy Chief Kaya Kalas put it, the result was never in doubt, thanks to voter fraud, intimidation, and of course, the removal from the ballot paper of the Yabloko Party, the only one that was opposed to the war. So, what next? Well, many commentators suspect that Putin will use the election as an opportunity to introduce a new round of mobilisation, something we've been talking about for some months now. But will he? Well, a thoughtful piece in The Telegraph this week by veteran historian and commentator Robert Service highlighted the risks involved. Service wrote, Voluntary enlistment is reaching the limit of its effectiveness. According to Ukraine, the Russian armed forces are experiencing 30,000 casualties a month. The high command needs more men to feed into its meat grinder. North Korea is supplying some of them, but not enough to make the war winnable or sustainable. It would be a huge risk for Putin to order another mobilisation. Despite his curated public image, the master of the Kremlin is a nervous ruler, service said. Whether he will be willing to gamble again is an open question. What do you think on that, Saul? Speaker 5 (6:27) Yeah, I think Servis might be right in that he's hinting that he doesn't think he's prepared to gamble again. Just as a quick aside, Roger, we should mention that during those meetings, the side of the UN... General Assembly in New York, Zelensky was actually asked by Russian reporters when he was coming to Moscow. And this, of course, is an allusion to the fact that Putin had said if there is going to be a meeting, it has to be in Moscow. Well, Zelensky's reply was quite crisp and to the point, I won't be coming, but a missile will. So a little bit of humour there. But, you know, it's pretty mad, isn't it, if you think about it? Putin seriously imagines that Zelensky is going to put himself in his clutches by meeting in Moscow rather than in neutral venue. Well, that's clearly not going to happen. It does rather indicate that the Russians aren't looking to do a deal anytime soon. As for the mobilization, well, I've said it before on this podcast, I really think that could be the beginning of the end for Putin because it would mean that ordinary Russians, as opposed to people they're paying large sums of money for from North Korea and elsewhere, fighting on the front lines. And remember, Roger, 45,000 plus are now dying a month. The last couple of months, clearly in an attempt to make ground before the elections, they were going all out to increase their gains in the Donetsk. And as I'm about to explain now, that had very little effect on the front lines. But in a desperate attempt to convince a domestic and international audience that Russia is winning the war, Moscow continues to exaggerate the scale of its advances across the front line to, in the words of the Institute of the Study of War, construct a false narrative of Russian battlefield progress. This week, for example, the Russian Ministry of Defense claimed that Russian forces have seized over 5,300 square kilometers and more than 220 settlements in Ukraine since the start of 2026. including over 670 square kilometres and 27 settlements in September alone. Now, the ISW has looked at all of this, and it's observed evidence to assess that Russian forces have seized only 147 square kilometres. and 40 settlements and have lost a net of 20 settlements in 2026. So huge exaggerations. And in reality, Ukraine has liberated, says the ISW, at least 972.56 square kilometres and 60 settlements. So in other words, the Russians are going backwards. The ISW added Ukrainian forces have in fact successfully contested both the strategic and the operational initiative since late 2025, having held Russian forces to near zero gain since March 2026, and having conducted successful counterattacks that have liberated significant amounts of territory in the Kupyansk, Oleksandrivka, and Lyman directions. Speaker 4 (9:17) Yeah, and this is a point that we made last week on the pod, is this aspect of, you know, these sort of fictitious, mendacious Russian reports on... settlements conquered by Russian forces, for example, territory taken and so on. And even Russian mill bloggers, as we said last week, are now complaining that this gives such a sort of twisted and unrealistic view of the war to the Kremlin itself that it's actually hindering the war effort. So this is a problem for Russia, this sort of culture of lying, which is permeated right the way down and all the way up right to the very top, is actually proving to be... a problem for the Russian army itself. Just on that point about the prospect of Zelensky ever going to Moscow, as you poured scorn on the idea, and I think rightly so, but the idea of going to Moscow for negotiations, just one little historical point to raise on that. When the Soviets, for example, went into Poland at the end of World War II, 1945, and there was an initial period of collaboration, very uneasy collaboration with the Polish Home Army. And then the incoming Soviets basically said, we