\n@bears_with<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n
President Vladimir Putin has given instructions to accept the Trump Administration\u2019s demand that in exchange for lifting sanctions against Russia, US capital must return to Russia on preferential terms as soon as possible.<\/p>\n
For the new round of negotiations in Geneva later this week, Putin has replaced Admiral Igor Kostyukov, the military intelligence chief, as head of the Russian negotiating team with Vladimir Medinsky, a lower ranking Kremlin official. \u00a0Medinsky\u2019s instructions are that the military terms of settlement on the Ukraine battlefield, insisted on by Kostyukov at the Abu Dhabi talks, be subordinated to the terms negotiated by Kirill Dmitriev, Putin\u2019s principal negotiator with the White House.<\/p>\n
The change in the Kremlin line is reported in the Russian media as the \u201cAnchorage formula\u201d and the \u201cDmitriev plan\u201d.<\/p>\n
This has been publicly criticized by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in \u00a0coded attacks in media interviews and a speech last week to the State Duma,\u00a0declaring<\/u><\/a>\u00a0\u201cthe reality is quite the opposite.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Lavrov \u2013 Moscow sources say \u2013 was reflecting the consensus of the General Staff, the Foreign and Defense Ministries.<\/p>\n Putin reacted through spokesman Dmitry Peskov in defence of the Anchorage formula. \u201cThe spirit of Anchorage\u201d \u2013 Peskov\u00a0told<\/a>\u00a0Tass \u2013 \u201creflects a set of mutual understandings between Russia and the United States that are capable of bringing about a breakthrough, including in the settlement between Moscow and Kiev\u2026[and] are fundamental.\u201d<\/p>\n Faction-fighting around the Kremlin over what this means has triggered dismay among those Russian businessmen who have acquired their new economic power with takeovers of foreign assets released by the exit of US and European corporations since 2022. These Russian sources report resentment at the backing which Putin has given to Russian Central Bank (CBR) Governor Elvira Nabiullina\u2019s continuing high-interest rate policy for Russian borrowers in parallel with Dmitriev\u2019s plan for low-interest rate US investors to re-enter Russia, recover their former market share, and generate the appearance of an investment stimulus in the run-up to the the State Duma elections on September 20.<\/p>\n Nabiullina and Dmitriev have combined to persuade Putin to allow them to make these Anchorage formula concessions to US negotiators Steven Witkoff, Jared Kushner, and Joshua Gruenbaum. Their last session in Miami on\u00a0January 31<\/u><\/a>\u00a0also included US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.<\/p>\n What makes these concessions a \u201cfundamental breakthrough\u201d, as Peskov calls them, has been revealed in a memorandum of conversation published on February 12 by Bloomberg. This reports a \u201chigh-level memo which was drafted this year\u2026which was circulated among senior Russian officials\u201d. No author, date, subject line, distribution list, or any other detail of the document has been reported by Bloomberg to authenticate it, or to indicate whether it was leaked by the Witkoff side or the Dmitriev side after the\u00a0Miami talks<\/u><\/a>.<\/p>\n The published summary has seven points, listed without quote marks. They indicate \u201cUS participation in Russian manufacturing\u201d in the Russian aviation sector; \u201callow American firms to recover past losses\u201d in the Russian oil and gas sector, \u201cincluding offshore and hard-to-recover reserves\u201d; \u201cpreferential conditions for US companies to return to the Russian consumer market\u201d; \u201ccooperation on nuclear energy, including for AI ventures\u201d; \u201cRussia\u2019s return to the dollar settlement system, including possibly for Russian energy transactions\u201d; \u201ccooperation on raw materials such as lithium, copper, nickel and platinum\u201d; and \u201cworking together to push fossil fuels as an alternative to climate-friendly ideology and low-emission solutions that favour China and Europe\u201d.<\/p>\n There was no mention of Dmitriev in the Bloomberg report.<\/p>\n The next day Putin\u2019s spokesman was asked to respond. He then identified Dmitriev by name. \u201cA group on economic issues is working. On our side, it is headed by my colleague [Kirill] Dmitriev,\u201d Peskov\u00a0said<\/u><\/a>. \u201cIndeed, issues of trade and economic cooperation \u2013 both potential and proposed \u2013 are on the agenda, and they are being discussed. We hope these discussions will continue. At the moment, the\u00a0de facto<\/em>\u00a0situation is such that, in practice, until, let\u2019s say, a Ukrainian settlement is reached, it is hardly possible to talk about anything concrete, and for now this is limited to discussions.\u201d<\/p>\n Peskov\u00a0acknowledged<\/u><\/a>\u00a0to Tass that he was \u201ccomment[ing] on a Bloomberg report about a \u2018Kirill Dmitriev plan\u2019 that envisions the possibility of establishing joint ventures with the US and settlements in dollars.\u201d<\/p>\n Peskov did not deny the plan\u2019s points which had been reported. He also explicitly endorsed one of the\u00a0points<\/u><\/a>. \u201cRussia has never abandoned the dollar; the US restricted its use for transactions, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said at a briefing. \u2018After all, no one abandoned the use of dollars. It was the issuing country, the United States, that restricted a number of countries\u2019 right to use the dollar. And these countries, naturally, are using alternative payment methods, alternative forms. If the dollar is attractive, then, of course, everyone will return to using it, including alongside other currencies.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n Explaining Peskov\u2019s endorsement of the Dmitriev plan, sources in Moscow believe Putin has been persuaded by Nabiullina of the CBR and other economic advisors that unless he agrees to the Dmitriev plan very soon, the Russian economy faces recession conditions before the September 20 national parliamentary elections. \u00a0Nabiullina\u2019s refusal to lower the CBR\u2019s key rate more than 50 basis points to 15.5%, announced on February 13, came with several warnings that Russia\u2019s GDP is slipping below the 1% growth rate officially\u00a0reported<\/u><\/a>, and thus into recession. \u201cWe have revised our 2026 investment forecast slightly downwards,\u201d Nabiullina said, \u201cthe gradual slowdown in economic activity is accompanied by labour market easing\u2026The situation for Russian exporters is complicated by sanctions. In view of the global market trends, we have reduced our forecast of oil prices for the next three years. Accordingly, we have also adjusted the forecast of the value of Russian exports.\u201d<\/p>\n The CBR\u2019s \u201cbaseline scenario\u201d forecast is for GDP growth this year of between plus 1% and plus 2%. The \u201crisk scenario\u201d\u00a0forecast<\/u><\/a>\u00a0is for GDP decline of between minus 6% and minus 7%. The deciding factor between the two outcomes in Nabiullina\u2019s calculation is Trump strategy: \u201cThe risk scenario assumes escalation of international trade tensions, intensification of deglobalisation processes, import tariff increases worldwide above the levels predicted in the baseline scenario, and a sharp decline in the growth rates of the largest economies.\u201d<\/p>\n In advance of the Bloomberg disclosure of the Dmitriev plan, there has been sharp reaction to Putin\u2019s concessions to the US from Russia\u2019s strategic allies \u2013 China, India, and Iran. \u00a0The first signal of disagreement with Putin came from President Xi Jinping following their video conference on February 4. According to the\u00a0readout<\/u><\/a>\u00a0from Putin\u2019s national security adviser Yury Ushakov, \u201cVladimir Putin and Xi Jinping also exchanged views on their countries\u2019 relations with the United States. Their approaches almost fully coincide.\u201d \u00a0\u00a0This is diplo-speak for its opposite: it means Xi and Putin are unhappy with each other\u2019s separate \u00a0deal with Trump.<\/p>\n A well-informed source in Delhi said in anonymity: \u201cSo while [Indian] nationalists are calling out the Modi government out for betrayal of multipolarity by agreeing to Trump\u2019s demand not to buy oil from Russia or from the pirate fleet, \u00a0Putin has quietly surrendered to the Americans himself.\u201d<\/p>\n A Dubai source engaged in trade payment arbitrage adds: \u201cEven after the [Russian] Central Bank made the renminbi a reserve currency, the trade in renminbi has carried heavy costs for Russians, and many Chinese exporters simply refuse to do settlements in RMB.\u00a0 With India, the Central Bank never looked at Indian rupees as a reserve currency and has been very lukewarm. Russian Big Business more so. Their only interest with India has been in making large profits in trade and nothing else. No investment, no joint\u00a0production. So Putin\u2019s backing for Nabiullina and Dmitriev means fixation on the US dollar and submission to US hegemony. By the way, this is egg on the face of every podcaster talking of BRICS currency and Russia\u2019s Eastern Pivot as gamechangers in multipolarity.\u201d<\/p>\n A Moscow source adds that the Dmitriev plan reported by Bloomberg leaves out a major Putin concession allowing the privatization of the $300 billion in CBR reserves in a US-Russian \u201cdevelopment fund\u201d to be directed by family members of Trump and Witkoff, alongside Dmitriev. For more details,\u00a0click to read<\/u><\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cThere is a crisis of decision-making around Putin now,\u201d claims a Moscow source in a position to know. \u201cIf Putin breaks all his undertakings with the BRICS allies, especially China and India, and subordinates the military conditions for the Ukraine battlefield to ingratiating with Trump\u2019s capital, then what is silent now will grow very loud and very soon.\u201d<\/p>\n The history of the Dmitriev plan in Moscow began in this report of\u00a0January 23, 2025<\/u><\/a>. \u00a0\u00a0Proposed Russian concessions were identified then in aviation, oil and gas, the US dollar payment system, and the role of the United Arab Emirates for crypto concealment of bribes to the Trump and Witkoff families.<\/p>\n For the full archive on Dmitriev,\u00a0click to read<\/u><\/a>.<\/p>\n The first report of Dmitriev\u2019s agreement with Witkoff and Kushner on the privatization of the CBR\u2019s frozen reserves into an \u201cinternational development fund\u201d was published on\u00a0February 2, 2026<\/u><\/a>. \u00a0\u00a0The proposal was discussed in Miami on January 31.<\/p>\n In outline, the scheme was also discussed with Putin and Dmitriev when Witkoff, Kushner, \u00a0and Gruenbaum were at the Kremlin on\u00a0January 23<\/u><\/a>. \u201cImportantly, the participants in the conversation between the President of Russia and the Americans reaffirmed the fact that bringing about a lasting settlement would be unlikely without addressing the territorial issue based on the formula as agreed in Anchorage,\u201d Ushakov told the press immediately afterwards.<\/p>\n Ushakov went on to clarify the Anchorage codeword: \u201cWhile exchanging views on the [Gaza] Board of Peace, we emphasised our readiness to transfer US$1 billion to its budget from Russia\u2019s assets frozen under the previous US administration. The remaining part of the Russian assets frozen in the US can be used for rebuilding the territories damaged during the hostilities after a peace agreement is signed between Russia and Ukraine. Discussions of this issue will continue in the bilateral economic group\u2026further development of bilateral Russian-US relations was discussed at the conceptual level, considering the huge potential of our countries for cooperation in various spheres. American representatives are already considering certain plans that could be implemented after the settlement of the Ukraine crisis.\u201d<\/p>\n Moscow sources claim that in the outcome of Kostyukov\u2019s negotiations in Abu Dhabi, Putin has been persuaded that the military outcome the General Staff is pursuing for capitulation of the regime in Kiev will be a Pyrrhic victory if it cannot relieve the Russian economy of the impact of the US-led sanctions war, including the escalating US and NATO war against the Russian maritime fleet. \u00a0Putin had believed \u2013 the sources add \u2013 that in the Anchorage formula, Trump had agreed to Russian military success on the Ukrainian battlefield, and in parallel he would lift sanctions by halting their enforcement.<\/p>\n That was on August 15, 2025. Instead, nine weeks later on October 22, Trump ordered new measures to stop China and India buying oil from Rosneft and Lukoil.<\/p>\n US and NATO preparations for a naval blockade of Russian tanker deliveries followed, \u00a0starting with Operation Southern Spear in the Caribbean on\u00a0November 13<\/u><\/a>.\u00a0\u00a0The first US seizure of a Russian-flagged tanker was on January 7, 2026.<\/p>\n The most recent US operations have included seizures of the Russian-owned\u00a0Aquila II<\/em>\u00a0in the eastern Indian Ocean on\u00a0February 9<\/u><\/a>, \u00a0\u00a0followed by the\u00a0Veronika III,<\/em>\u00a0also in the Indian Ocean, on\u00a0February 15<\/u><\/a>. \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0For a review of the applicable maritime law, read\u00a0this<\/u><\/a>.<\/p>\n The Pentagon has made clear it is extending its blockade of Venezuela to Iran and to\u00a0Russia<\/u><\/a>. \u201cNo other nation has the reach, endurance, or will to do this. International waters are not sanctuary. By land, air, or sea, we will find you and deliver justice. The Department of War will deny illicit actors and their proxies freedom of movement in the maritime domain.\u201d<\/p>\n Moscow sources now claim Trump has been encouraged by Dmitriev\u2019s negotiations with Witkoff to escalate the sanctions war at sea and to toughen the terms for Putin to accept the US corporate return to Russia. \u00a0Lavrov has publicly\u00a0responded<\/u><\/a>: \u201cthis means that the Americans have set themselves the task of achieving economic domination. Furthermore, while they ostensibly made a proposal regarding Ukraine and we were ready to accept it (now they are not), we do not see any bright future in the economic sphere either. The Americans want to take control of all the routes for providing the world\u2019s leading countries and all continents with energy resources. On the European continent, they are eyeing the Nord Streams, which were blown up three years ago, the Ukrainian gas transportation system and the TurkStream. This illustrates that the US objective \u2013 to dominate the world economy \u2013 is being realised using a fairly large number of coercive measures.\u201d<\/p>\n Anticipating direct military contact between Russian and US forces at sea, Putin has refused Russian Navy, General Staff, \u00a0and Security Council recommendations for Russian military response to US and European attacks on the Russian trade routes and\u00a0tanker fleet<\/u><\/a>.<\/p>\n The evidence of the role the Central Bank is playing in Putin\u2019s acceptance of the Dmitriev plan can be found in Nabiullina\u2019s public\u00a0explanation<\/u><\/a>\u00a0last week for her refusal to lower the CBR\u2019s key rate by more than fifty basis points to 15.5%.<\/p>\n \u201cThe economic situation has been developing generally in line with our baseline scenario,\u201d Nabiullina\u00a0said<\/u><\/a>, adding there are risks of a worsening of the forecasts from inflation above the baseline; \u201cmoderating\u201d(contraction) \u00a0in the economic growth rate, in \u201cconsumer activity\u201d, in \u00a0\u201cinvestment dynamics\u201d and in \u201cdemand for housing mortgage loans\u201d. Other negative risks include \u00a0\u201clabour market easing\u201d and \u201ctrade disputes and global market fragmentation.\u201d<\/p>\n Nabiullina\u2019s mention of the baseline scenario refers to the CBR\u2019s strategy paper issued on\u00a0November 27, 2025<\/u><\/a>. \u00a0\u00a0These are the three scenarios:<\/p>\n Nabiullina\u2019s announcement last week that \u201cour GDP growth forecast in the baseline scenario has remained unchanged\u201d means she has been telling Putin that there is no likelihood of any improvement in the economy between now and the elections in September.<\/p>\n In her risk warnings, however, Nabiullina was saying there is increasing likelihood of what she\u00a0called<\/u><\/a>\u00a0\u201cproinflationary risks\u201d; in CBR-speak that means \u201cexternal conditions\u201d which is the official euphemism for Trump sanctions. \u201cCrude oil prices also involve serious risks. If oil prices do not rebound from their current levels to those assumed in our baseline scenario, this might accelerate inflation through the exchange rate channel.\u201d<\/p>\n The average oil price for this year in the CBR baseline scenario is $55 per barrel, rising to $60 in 2027. In the risk scenario, the forecast oil price is $55 this year, the same next year. But Russian oil market sources believe the price trajectory this year will be much worse with the actual, after- discount price already one-third lower than the CBR levels.<\/p>\n Nabiullina has not been asked by the press or by Duma deputies to comment on White House and US Treasury policy to drive the discounted price of sanctioned Russian oil downwards, and trigger a combination of domestic inflation and public discontent when Russian voters go to the polls in the autumn.<\/p>\n Market reports in January indicate that Russian oil is being sold at the steepest discount on record as the Urals crude marker has now dropped to an average of\u00a0$37.50<\/u><\/a>. \u00a0The oil market forecast is for deepening discounts as Indian oil orders dwindle and China\u2019s refineries \u00a0reach their limit in accumulating Russian\u00a0oil stocks<\/u><\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cThe key trends in the economy have generally stayed the same\u201d \u2013 Nabiullina\u2019s public reassurance last week is a political shot aimed at Putin\u2019s election campaign calculation. The Dmitriev plan is his only option for preserving domestic stability, Nabiullina is saying.<\/p>\n View now or listen to the hour-long discussion of the Kremlin crisis provoked by the Dmitriev plan. Glenn Diesen invited the discussion in his\u00a0Greater Eurasia Podcas<\/u><\/a>t and recorded it on Saturday morning (Moscow time). \u00a0\u00a0In the first segment, Diesen and I discussed the disclosures in the Epstein files which have been released by the US Department of Justice. The evidence of the Trump Administration\u2019s cover-up of Epstein\u2019s financial schemes was then put into the context of the US war plan against Russia.<\/p>\n When the podcast is published, \u00a0click on this link<\/a>.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/johnhelmer.net\/wp-content\/webpc-passthru.php?src=https:\/\/johnhelmer.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/ushakovnabiullina.png&nocache=1\")
<\/a><\/figure>\nLeft to right: Putin and Dmitriev; Dmitriev and Nabiullina (January 29, 2026).<\/code><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/johnhelmer.net\/wp-content\/webpc-passthru.php?src=https:\/\/johnhelmer.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/ustreasury.png&nocache=1\")
<\/a><\/figure>\nSource:\u00a0https:\/\/home.treasury.gov\/news\/press-releases\/sb0290<\/u><\/a>\u00a0<\/code><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/johnhelmer.net\/wp-content\/webpc-passthru.php?src=https:\/\/johnhelmer.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/routemarinera.png&nocache=1\")
<\/a><\/figure>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/johnhelmer.net\/wp-content\/webpc-passthru.php?src=https:\/\/johnhelmer.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/zagogulina.png&nocache=1\")
<\/a><\/figure>\nSource:\u00a0https:\/\/www.cbr.ru\/eng\/press\/event\/?id=28304<\/u><\/a>\u00a0\u2013 with English translation in voiceover.<\/code><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/johnhelmer.net\/wp-content\/webpc-passthru.php?src=https:\/\/johnhelmer.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/riskscenrio.png&nocache=1\")
<\/a><\/figure>\nSource: \u00a0https:\/\/www.cbr.ru\/eng\/about_br\/publ\/ondkp\/on_2026_2028\/<\/u><\/a>\u00a0\u201cThe main risks to the development of the Russian economy are related to both internal and external conditions. In view of this, the Bank of Russia considers two unfavourable alternative scenarios. The proinflationary scenario assumes a combination of internal and external factors, which will be the reasons why demand will be higher and supply will be lower than predicted in the baseline scenario. Due to tightening sanctions, the growth rate of production capacities will be lower than in the baseline scenario. Tighter sanctions will also lead to Russian crude prices stabilising at lower levels. To prop up the economy, the Russian Government will expand subsidised lending programmes and strengthen protectionist measures aimed at encouraging import substitution. However, supply will still be lagging behind rising demand, which will amplify inflationary pressures. Prices will also be affected by heightened inflation expectations as they will be declining more slowly and be more responsive to all proinflationary factors. \u00a0The risk scenario assumes escalation of international trade tensions, intensification of deglobalisation processes, import tariff increases worldwide above the levels predicted in the baseline scenario, and a sharp decline in the growth rates of the largest economies. Combined, these factors will entail a global financial crisis, the scale of which might be comparable with the 2007\u20132008 crisis. The sanction pressure on the Russian economy is likely to strengthen in this scenario as well. According to the Bank of Russia\u2019s estimates, the materialisation of risks in these two scenarios will speed up inflation in the next few years and require tighter monetary policy, as compared to the baseline scenario. Inflation will return to the target later than in the baseline scenario\u201d \u00a0-- page 3.<\/code><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/johnhelmer.net\/wp-content\/webpc-passthru.php?src=https:\/\/johnhelmer.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/brenturals.png&nocache=1\")
<\/a><\/figure>\nSource:\u00a0https:\/\/finance.yahoo.com\/news\/steepest-ever-discounts-russian-oil-160942772.html<\/u><\/a>\u00a0<\/code><\/p>\n