{"id":3773,"date":"2026-01-07T08:42:00","date_gmt":"2026-01-07T07:42:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/johanno1.se\/oil-depot-in-russian-belgorod-is-on-fire-after-ukrainian-attack-italy-will-not-send-troops-to-ukraine-as-part-of-the-security-guarantees\/"},"modified":"2026-01-08T06:24:15","modified_gmt":"2026-01-08T05:24:15","slug":"oil-depot-in-russian-belgorod-is-on-fire-after-ukrainian-attack-italy-will-not-send-troops-to-ukraine-as-part-of-the-security-guarantees","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/johanno1.se\/en\/oil-depot-in-russian-belgorod-is-on-fire-after-ukrainian-attack-italy-will-not-send-troops-to-ukraine-as-part-of-the-security-guarantees\/","title":{"rendered":"Did Russia give Venezuela to the USA? – Oil depot in Russian Belgorod is on fire after Ukrainian attack – Italy is not sending troops to Ukraine"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Ukraine has attacked an oil depot in Belgorod<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Residents of Stary Oskol have reported that the oil depot in Belgorod is on fire. Several images and videos have been released, which can be considered as confirmation along with the local governor also reporting Ukrainian drone attacks. Read more on Kyiv Independent<\/a> as well as posts here<\/a>, and here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Italy does not plan to send soldiers to Ukraine<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The Coalition of the Willing has apparently made significant progress regarding the framework for security guarantees for Ukraine. No direct details have emerged (at least not that I have seen, if you have more information, please post in the comments). The U.S. seems even satisfied (not sure if it should be interpreted positively or negatively). However, Italy has clearly stated that they are supporting with equipment, etc. but will not send any troops to Ukraine. At least according to Reuters<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Did Russia give Venezuela to the USA in exchange for Ukraine?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

All sorts of theories are circulating about the USA and Venezuela (beyond the obvious that the USA wants to seize and control the oil).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We have the theory that the USA, Russia, and China have discussed dividing the world among themselves. The USA gets South America, Russia takes Europe, and China takes the rest of Asia. The kidnapping of Maduro went very smoothly, which could be explained by neither China nor Russia doing much to help Venezuela. Of course, it could also be explained by already having allies within Venezuela’s government and military.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Another theory is that the USA is simply trying to weaken Russia by gradually eliminating or taking over the countries close to Russia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It has now emerged that Fiona Hill, former senior advisor on Russia for the White House during Trump’s previous presidential term, already in 2019 during a congressional hearing, stated that the Russians offered the USA to do as they pleased with Venezuela in exchange for allowing Russia to do the same with Ukraine. The Russians also referred to the Monroe Doctrine at that time. The USA officially declined the proposal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The doctrine dates back to 1823 and briefly states that Europe should not interfere in North and South America, and the USA should not interfere in Europe. It has later been used by the USA to legitimize its increasing influence over the Western Hemisphere.
Trump has referred to the doctrine on several occasions, or rather to the Don-roe Doctrine as it is also called, which is Trump’s own version. It states that the USA (and only the USA) has the right to act and govern over Latin America and the Caribbean. Europe, Russia, and China should stay away and not interfere. However, what has not been clarified is whether the USA should also refrain from acting outside the Western Hemisphere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fiona Hill’s testimony can therefore be interpreted as what happened in Venezuela was an agreement between the USA and Russia, and would explain why the USA has virtually stopped supporting Ukraine. It also increases the likelihood that it is a larger agreement where China is also involved and that Taiwan is included in the trade-off. China has sharpened its rhetoric regarding Taiwan at the same time as the USA has backed down on how important it considers Asia from a security perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Regarding Taiwan, I believe that it is further down the line. The USA (and the whole world) would face enormous problems if it happened. Taiwan uses its own chip industry as security. If China attacks, the industry will be destroyed so that China cannot exploit it and continue to operate it. Then the question is whether Trump realizes the consequences if China attacks and Taiwan follows through on its threat. Perhaps it is believed that it would only be beneficial as the USA would then get rid of a competitor and could build up its own industry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These are of course just speculations, but Fiona Hill’s testimony is interesting, even if what happened was not an exchange, it has been discussed already 6-7 years ago.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Article, Kyiv Independent<\/a> and Hill’s testimony<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Russian losses<\/h2>\n\n\n\n